EMPIRE LOGISTICS



Team Number 1Team Members: Grant McNulty and Evan Johnston Section: 01Search Terms: “air pollution,” “air particulate,” and “particulates”Sample Size: 213______________________________________________________________________________________________________Report Information from ProQuestMarch 17 2013 23:03_______________________________________________________________17 March 2013 ProQuestTable of contents1. SMOG IN L.A. IS STILL TOPS IN NATION; The metropolitan area averages more than 140 days a yearwith dangerous ozone..................................................................................................................................... 12. Small railroad is on track to go green; A $6.7-million state grant helps a Modesto firm buy locomotiveswith lower emissions........................................................................................................................................ 23. CALIFORNIA; Port pollution limits sought; Air quality board seeks to enforce voluntary reductions andimpose fines..................................................................................................................................................... 44. CALIFORNIA; Traffic pollution speeds hardening of arteries; Study finds artery walls thicken twice as fastin people who live near freeways.................................................................................................................... 65. EPA proposes tough new smog rules.......................................................................................................... 76. Santa Monica Airport a major pollution source............................................................................................. 97. THE NATION; EPA agrees to set air pollution rules by 2011; Oil- and coal-fired power plants would beforced to reduce mercury emissions................................................................................................................ 118. A CLOSER LOOK: AIR POLLUTION; Spewing out some more bad news; Consequences of breathingpolluted air include appendicitis and ear infections, new studies indicate....................................................... 139. EPA proposes new rule to help curb smog; The regulation, to be the focus of a hearing in L.A. today,would increase monitoring of nitrogen dioxide................................................................................................ 1510. CALIFORNIA; Concerns about smog drop in state; A smaller proportion of residents, especially in L.A.County, see air pollution as 'a big problem,' a poll finds.................................................................................. 1611. THE NATION; U.S. and California rules will reduce ship emissions; The required use of cleaner fuels isexpected to improve coastal air quality........................................................................................................... 1812. Bill aims to improve local air quality............................................................................................................ 2013. CALIFORNIA; Bakersfield is No. 1 in fine-particle pollution....................................................................... 2214. Downturn a boon for China's air quality; The shutting of factories and drops in production have keptalive pollution gains made during Olympics.................................................................................................... 2315. EPA wants cuts in air pollution from ships.................................................................................................. 2516. Medicine; There's a chance of migraine in the forecast............................................................................. 2717. Low-level ozone exposure found to be lethal over time; An 18-year study links long-term pollution levelsto a higher annual risk of death from respiratory ills........................................................................................ 2818. TRANSPORTATION; Cleanup at ports starts to pay off; Older polluting trucks are being barred or finedand electric ones rolled out as emissions plan gains momentum................................................................... 3019. The Nation; Cleaner air seen boosting life span......................................................................................... 3220. CALIFORNIA BRIEFING / SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY; Environmental groups sue EPA.............................. 3421. THE REGION; Pollution saps state's economy, study says; Deaths, illnesses linked to particulates andozone cost $28 billion yearly, Cal State Fullerton report shows...................................................................... 3522. PORTS; Agency objects to clean truck program; The Federal Maritime Commission seeks to eliminateparts of the anti-pollution effort........................................................................................................................ 3723. THE REGION; State rules aim to drive down big-rig pollution................................................................... 3924. The World; Pollution still shrouds its moment in the sun............................................................................ 4017 March 2013 ii ProQuestTable of contents25. Lovely, but loaded with pollutants; Fireworks displays spew metals, carbon, fuels and other toxics thatcan linger for days or even longer................................................................................................................... 4226. EPA's air tests to be challenged; Environmental groups plan to sue in an effort to get air qualitymonitored along Southland freeways.............................................................................................................. 4527. More deaths in state are linked to air pollution........................................................................................... 4728. Pittsburgh tops L.A. in one pollution measure; But a new report shows Southland still ranks high in foulair..................................................................................................................................................................... 4829. Plant said to emit toxic dust; Air regulators believe a cement factory near Riverside is the source of apotent carcinogen............................................................................................................................................ 5030. Ports unveil cleanup plan; A $19-million proposal seeks to cut pollution by persuading shippers to burncleaner fuel near the coast.............................................................................................................................. 5331. Train, ship pollution targeted by EPA......................................................................................................... 5532. Pollution rules will put a damper on fireplace use...................................................................................... 5733. THE NATION; Limits on ship exhaust rejected; Appeals court says California needs U.S. permission toregulate pollution from ports of L.A. and Long Beach..................................................................................... 5934. Study to gauge LAX's role in pollution; Unprecedented project will examine cities around the airport...... 6135. Long Beach port faces suit threat; Two environmental groups say the facility must reduce dieselemissions in 90 days to avoid federal court..................................................................................................... 6336. It's worse than dirty Dirty air has toxic components; L.A.'s notorious air pollution is hardest on kids. Thecloser to a freeway they live, play or attend school, the more likely it is that their developing lungs' capacitywill be reduced................................................................................................................................................. 6537. Do your part to breathe easier, indoors and out; Protective measures include checking the air quality,keeping the windows closed and driving less often......................................................................................... 6938. Long Beach joins port ban on old trucks.................................................................................................... 7139. SOUTHLAND BLAZES: AIR QUALITY; FEDERAL RESPONSE; The air won't do you good; Anyoneplanning outdoor activities should think twice. Small children are particularly vulnerable............................... 7340. SOUTHLAND BLAZES: ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES; Southland residents waiting to inhale; Unhealthfulair is expected to hang around even after fires and winds die. Stay indoors, experts advise......................... 7541. SOUTHLAND BLAZES; Wherever the fire, Long Beach gets smoke; Santa Ana winds carry pollutioneven from far-off inland flames to the coastal city........................................................................................... 7842. Brown to broaden fight over dirty air; The attorney general and environmental groups will ask the U.S. toregulate the emissions of ocean-going ships................................................................................................... 7943. Hearth healthy; The wood-burning fireplace is taking a back seat to gas as pressure mounts for cleanerairstandards.................................................................................................................................................... 8244. Black-hearted ruling; The latest in a series of decisions gutting coal mining regulations will devastatemountain ecosystems...................................................................................................................................... 8545. Ozone obligation; The EPA should follow its own scientific panel's recommendation and tighten airqualityrules...................................................................................................................................................... 8646. Vote could speed 11 new power plants in Southland; The AQMD allows developers to buy credits tooffset pollution released by the facilities. Critics call the plan a sellout........................................................... 8817 March 2013 iii ProQuestTable of contents47. Air board cracks down on diesel; State regulators adopt tough rules requiring huge cutbacks in fumesfrom construction industry equipment. Next up: big trucks.............................................................................. 9048. Pollution-cholesterol link to heart disease seen; The combination activates genes that can causeclogged arteries, UCLA researchers say......................................................................................................... 9249. Keep the home fires burning...................................................................................................................... 9450. Clean air plan OKd by Southland regulators; If fully implemented, fireplace use could be severelyrestricted. Several officials express reservations about those parts of the proposal....................................... 9651. The State; Plan to clean air may kill ambience; Regulation would limit wood-burning fireplaceconstruction and use....................................................................................................................................... 9852. Judge strikes down tough rules on diesel; The Southland's smog- fighting agency had ordered railroadsto cut emissions, but is told that it lacks the authority to do so........................................................................ 10053. 2 ports aim to slash diesel exhaust; Such pollution by trucks on trips near the L.A. and Long Beachfacilities would fall 80%, draft plan says. Industry fears business may drop................................................... 10254. State air board requests extension of federal deadline to reduce soot; Critics say the request for fivemore years -- to 2020 -- will mean more asthma and other health problems forresidents.................................... 10555. The World; Asian air pollution affects our weather; Scientists report more clouds, stronger storms in thePacific region................................................................................................................................................... 10756. Train, ship soot to be cut 90% by 2030; The EPA proposes tougher regulations on nitrogen oxide andfine particulate matter, but the AQMD is critical of the long phase-in.............................................................. 10957. Rick Wartzman / CALIFORNIA & CO.; Airing a pollution solution for the ports.......................................... 11258. Mobile lab to scope out air hazards; A specially equipped car will measure pollution levels in severalSouth Bay communities to help fill gaping holes in environmental data.......................................................... 11459. FREEWAY AIR DAMAGES YOUNG LUNGS; Children living nearby show signs of lifelong harm, USCstudy finds........................................................................................................................................................ 11760. Region seeks more power to fight pollution; The South Coast air board says state and federalregulators are not doing enough to clean up trains, cargo ships andairplanes............................................................... 11961. As you live and breathe.............................................................................................................................. 12162. EPA shortens science reviews, angering some......................................................................................... 12363. Dire health effects of pollution reported; Diesel soot from construction equipment is blamed for illnessesand premature deaths..................................................................................................................................... 12564. Another Hollywood production: smog; UCLA report says the movie and TV industry is a major generatorof Southland pollution. An economist cautions that more rules may drive filming out of state........................ 12865. Trucks targeted in clean-air drive; Bond funds may boost a plan by the Long Beach and L.A. ports toreplace older diesels, but more money is needed. Who will pay? It's still a bit hazy....................................... 12966. EPA Criticized for Not Toughening Soot Law; Up to 24,000 lives could be saved annually in the U.S.,and savings on healthcare and in other areas would outweigh the costs, a panel says................................. 13267. New EPA Rules on Soot and Dust Set; Widespread criticism greets the standards for human exposureto particulates. Some say ideas from scientific advisors were ignored........................................................... 13517 March 2013 iv ProQuestTable of contents68. Natural Gas From Overseas Sources Is Raising Concerns; Critics say imported LNG burns hotter andpollutes more than the domestic product......................................................................................................... 13769. California's dust bowl; Left in the Dust How Race and Politics Created a Human and EnvironmentalTragedy in L.A. Karen Piper Palgrave Macmillan: 224 pp., $24.95................................................................. 14070. Skies Clear, EPA Rules; The agency says soot levels in the Central Valley have fallen and no newcleanup is needed. Activists and others are skeptical..................................................................................... 14371. Plan May Ease Air Pollution at Ports; Stricter international freighter rules would make L.A. and LongBeach facilities safer........................................................................................................................................ 14572. Once Rivals, Local Ports Clear Air in Partnership; With a joint plan to stem pollution, Long Beach andL.A. harbors chart a new cooperative course.................................................................................................. 14873. United on clean ports.................................................................................................................................. 15174. Shipping Line Acts for Cleaner Air at L.A. Harbor; Maersk, with the busiest container terminal, breakswith the industry by saying all of its vessels calling at state ports will use low-sulfur fuel............................... 15375. THE NATION; On a Clear Day, You Can't See the Pollution; Views are improving at some nationalparks as ozone is worsening. Grand Canyon, Sequoia and Death Valley are among those affected............ 15576. Suit Demands GE Modify Its Romoland Power Plant................................................................................. 15777. A Trade Boom's Unintended Costs; Neighborhoods such as West Long Beach seek a balance betweena thriving port and health concerns................................................................................................................. 15878. THE WORLD; Mexico City a Living Laboratory for Smog Study; Atmospheric scientists are studying thereach and repercussions of pollution in the capital, thought by many to have the dirtiest air in world............ 16279. A Valley's Smog Toll Tallied; In the San Joaquin, resulting health costs are $3.2 billion a year, a CalState Fullerton study finds. That much would be gained by cleaner air.......................................................... 16480. Study Doubles Estimate of Smog Deaths; USC researchers amass measurements of lethal particulatematter from hundreds of locations in the L.A. Basin. State may raise its official figures................................. 16681. Refineries Lose Appeal of AQMD Rule; Court tells Southland's biggest oil facilities to install newcontrols on soot. Compliance will be costly and have little or no benefit, a groupsays................................................ 16982. Unique Power Plant Called Dirty; A poor Riverside County area would be hurt by the project now underconstruction, says a coalition filing notices of intent to sue............................................................................. 17083. Curbs on Dust in the West Targeted; The EPA wants to drop the clean- air rules for rural areas. Anofficial with the air quality district for Owens Valley calls it 'outrageous.'......................................................... 17284. The State; Gov.'s Growth, Clean Air Plans Said to Clash.......................................................................... 17585. EPA Issues New Plan to Limit Soot; Critics say the revised standard is too weak to properly protect thepublic from health dangers caused by breathing particulates......................................................................... 17786. Study Links Diesel Fumes to Illnesses; State air board focuses on the cargo industry -- concentratedaround major seaports -- and proposes spending billions to cutemissions....................................................... 18087. State Seeking Ways to Speed Cargo; Officials in Sacramento are working on a plan to move productsmore swiftly through the state while also addressing pollution concerns........................................................ 18217 March 2013 v ProQuestTable of contents88. Diesel Fumes From Ports Raising Cancer Risk in Region, Study Says; Pollution from L.A. and LongBeach harbors is cited in findings released by Air Resources Board.............................................................. 18489. THE STATE; L.A. Could Use Breath of Fresh Air...................................................................................... 18790. New Harbor Panel Aims to Cut Pollution While Expanding Port................................................................ 18991. Study Links Freeways to Asthma Risk; USC research adds to evidence that air pollution can causerespiratory problems........................................................................................................................................ 19192. Outage Sparks New Air Quality Worries; A long-running debate over pollution is intensified when oilrefineries lose power and burn gases as a safety precaution......................................................................... 19393. Wines Fail the ... Smog Test?; Controls are proposed to curb ethanol, a pollutant, from San JoaquinValley vintners................................................................................................................................................. 19694. 2 Ports Split on How to Clear the Air; L.A. and Long Beach share a bay but fight pollution in differentways. Environmentalists and area residents express their concerns.............................................................. 19895. CALIFORNIA; Panel Backs Plan to Curb Pollution at Port; Industry and regulatory representatives meetto address emissions from ships, trucks and trains......................................................................................... 20196. Port Clean-Air Plan Nearly Set; Experts ready proposals for pushing pollution back to 2001 levels withstrict rules, growth cap..................................................................................................................................... 20397. It's Not All Blue Skies for Drilling Project; Expansion of gas wells in Rocky Mountain states will degradethe air at several national parks....................................................................................................................... 20598. Los Angeles; Plans for L.A. Port Focus on Pollution; Mayor's task force hears several environmentalmeasures designed to cut levels of toxic emissions........................................................................................ 20899. Plan to Cut Port Smog to Be Unveiled; Potential new rules and initiatives to reduce air pollution couldrequire widespread changes and cost billions of dollars................................................................................. 210100. Drugs May Offer Shield From Pollution's Harm; Researchers find that two types of medications takenfor high blood pressure can apparently block the deadly effects of air contaminants..................................... 213101. Study Finds Smog Raises Death Rate; Scientists researching pollution's short-term health effects in 95U.S. urban areas link mortality rates to higher daily ozone levels................................................................... 215102. BEHIND THE WHEEL; Stuck on the Freeway? Here's Something Else to Fume About; Recent studiessuggest that exposure to air pollution in stop-and-go traffic could increase cardiovascular risks................... 217103. The State; State Money Helped Dairies Dirty the Air; Angelides freezes future loans after saying bondswere used to build bigger, smoggier farms...................................................................................................... 219104. Air Quality Improves Markedly; Officials credit cooler weather for less ozone. But Southern California isstill failing to meet federal standards............................................................................................................... 223105. AQMD Critical of Port Plan to Grow; The agency says Long Beach officials have underestimated theamount of smog likely to result from added berths.......................................................................................... 225106. Los Angeles; Port's Effort to Cut Smog Is Criticized; Some Long Beach council members react afterresidents say that a report on an expansion project underestimates emissions............................................. 227107. Kids Face Danger in the Air...................................................................................................................... 229108. Smog Harms Children's Lungs for Life, Study Finds; Eight years of research yield the most definitiveevidence yet that dirty air stunts lung growth.................................................................................................. 23117 March 2013 vi ProQuestTable of contents109. Los Angeles; Long Beach Port Goes "Green"; The pollution-reduction program, thought to be the firstin the U.S. for visiting oil tankers, aims to switch them from diesel to electricity............................................. 234110. The State; State May Put Time Limit on Idling Trucks; Pollution officials are expected to pass a rulebarring large diesel- powered vehicles from leaving engines running more than five minutes........................ 236111. Los Angeles; Ships Are Single Largest Polluter of Air at Port of L.A., Study Finds................................. 238112. Clean-Air Order Undercut......................................................................................................................... 240113. Regulators Order L.A., Orange Counties to Cut Fine-Particle Pollution................................................... 242114. THE STATE; Court Upholds Imperial County Clean Air Rules; U.S. justices reject contention byfarmers and the EPA that Mexico is source of pollution.................................................................................. 244115. AQMD Moves to Corral Cow Pollution..................................................................................................... 246116. The State; As Smog Thickens, So Does the Debate................................................................................ 248117. The Region; Smog District Will Not Back Down in Pushing Fleet Rules; Air pollution officials say courtruling does not prevent them from imposing standards on publicly owned and contractor vehicles............... 251118. Study Details Port Pollution Threat; Environmental groups' U.S. report, which ranks L.A. and LongBeach in the middle, calls for stricter regulation.............................................................................................. 253119. Trains Are Targeted in Smog Fight; As more cargo leaves ports by rail, the AQMD seeks fines on dirtylocomotives. Railroads tout voluntary plans for cleaner engines..................................................................... 256120. The Nation; EPA's 9/11 Air Ratings Distorted, Report Says.................................................................... 259121. The State; San Joaquin Valley Air Board OKs Plan to Reduce Diesel Smoke, Dust; In submitting therules to state regulators, the panel says it had to act to meet federal deadlines. Activists say they are nottough enough................................................................................................................................................... 261122. The Region; Plowing Under Southland Dairies Gets Environmental Agencies' OK; Regulators welcomeremoval of farms that produce noxious fumes in combination with the pollution produced by traffic.............. 263123. Air Particles Linked to Cell Damage; An L.A.-area study finds the tiniest pollutants disrupt basic cellularfunctions, likely causing a host of diseases..................................................................................................... 265124. Farm Loyalist's Proposal to Curb Smog Is Heresy to Big Agriculture...................................................... 268125. Debris Fire Burns Unchecked in Fresno; Schools keep students indoors as blaze casts a smoky pallover city. State, U.S. agencies join efforts to douse it..................................................................................... 271126. Hold Firm on Diesel Rules........................................................................................................................ 273127. Los Angeles; Solis Seeks Better Monitoring of Pollution From Gravel Pits; Citing a new congressionalreport, legislator calls for closer scrutiny of the mining operations' effects on air and water........................... 275128. Clearing the Air at the Ports..................................................................................................................... 277129. SUNDAY REPORT; A Bumper Crop of Bad Air in San Joaquin Valley; Growth brings more smog andhealth woes. Cleanup seems a low priority for officials................................................................................... 278130. NAFTA; Emissions by the Truckload........................................................................................................ 285131. Asia's Wind-Borne Pollution a Hazardous Export to U.S.; Air: Dust, chemicals travel a long way. 'We'rea small world,' one scientist says..................................................................................................................... 287132. 2nd Suit Filed Over Air From S.F.Bay Area Smog................................................................................... 29017 March 2013 vii ProQuestTable of contents133. Ventura County Had Few Smog Days This Year; Pollution: Region exceeded federal ozone standardon two days, down from 122 in 1974............................................................................................................... 292134. Cozy Domestic Symbol Takes Heat in Berkeley; Air: New law aims to stem pollution from fireplaces,wood-fired ovens. Critics protest infringement on a way of life........................................................................ 293135. Air Pollution Harmful to Babies, Fetuses, Studies Say; Health: Smog is linked to stillbirths, infantdeaths and low birth weight............................................................................................................................. 296136. The State; San Joaquin Valley Placed on List of Smoggiest Areas; Air: Under the threat of lawsuits,the EPA says the region has made inadequate progress in tackling theproblem................................................ 299137. THE STATE; EPA Blames Emissions From Mexico for Dusty Air in Imperial County; Pollution:Agency's decision spares area growers from sanctions. Environmentalists sharply criticize ruling................ 301138. AMERICA ATTACKED; ENVIRONMENTAL NIGHTMARE; Experts Differ on Peril From Smoke;Health: EPA says the cloud rising from the ruins is not toxic, but others aren't so sure. Rescuers are most atrisk for possible ill effects................................................................................................................................. 303139. THE NATION; State Losing Ground in War on Dirty Air; Environment: Growth, lax enforcement areblamed for rising smog levels in some areas.................................................................................................. 305140. THE NATION; A Shroud on Sequoia's Scenery; Pollution: The park's air quality is among the worst inthe national system. Evidence suggests that plants and animals are being harmed...................................... 308141. THE STATE; The New NIMBYs Are Taking Back Their Back Yards--and Their Air................................ 310142. Inland Empire Activists Seek to Curb Warehouse Boom; Business: Group says fumes from trucksserving distribution centers imperil health. Others say job creation cuts commutes....................................... 313143. California and the West; As Las Vegas Grows, 'Sin City' Looks More Like 'Smog City'; Pollution: Rapidgrowth, lax enforcement of environmental laws and its desert location give the metropolis some of thedirtiest air in the West...................................................................................................................................... 316144. There's Hope in the Air; L.A. Is Winning the Smog War, Though Battles Remain................................... 319145. California and the West; U.S. OKs Rules to Cut Diesel Fumes by 95%; Smog: The national order is abreakthrough for clean air advocates and a boost for truckers, who already face tough standards inCalifornia.......................................................................................................................................................... 323146. Study Links Deaths to Airborne Particles; Health: Dust and soot contribute to toll of 20 to 200 peopledaily, researchers find, in examining urban areas........................................................................................... 325147. Driving in Front on Diesel Control............................................................................................................. 327148. Diesel's Free Ride Is Ending.................................................................................................................... 329149. Pollution Rules Tighten Squeeze on Power Supply................................................................................. 330150. California and the West; State Plan Would Require Diesel Soot Traps; Pollution: Air board calls forordering the costly retrofitting of 1.25 million engines. A trucking group endorses the proposal.................... 332151. THE CUTTING EDGE: FOCUS ON TECHNOLOGY; Auto Industry Teams With Clean- Air Groups toCut Sulfur in Diesel.......................................................................................................................................... 335152. Fleets to Stop Buying Diesel Buses, Trash Trucks; Pollution: Board order affects MTA and otheragencies. Panel to reconsider if engine emissions are slashed...................................................................... 33717 March 2013 viii ProQuestTable of contents153. California and the West; Central Valley Looking for Ways to Fight Air Pollution; Environment: Officialsbegin a $44.5-million search for solutions to smog that grips a vast area. Seven of the nation's 20 dirtiestspots are in the region..................................................................................................................................... 339154. Studies Link Heart Attacks to Moderate Air Pollution; Health: Particles apparently can alter rhythms inweak or diseased hearts, even at levels common in L.A., other cities............................................................ 342155. California and the West; Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Clinton's Anti-Smog Plan; Ecology: Paneldecides to hear case next year on proposal to force a 10% reduction in air pollution.................................... 345156. Diesel Buses: a Step Backward............................................................................................................... 347157. California and the West; EPA Calls for Trucks, Buses to Be Smoke- Free by 2007; Energy: Newstandards for cleaner diesel fuel unveiled by Clinton administration would dramatically reduce emissions.Oil companies opposeplan................................................................................................................................... 349158. Air Pollution Is Stifling Precipitation, Study Finds; Weather: Tiny particulates inhibit rain and snowfall,with major implications for the Southland, experts say.................................................................................... 352159. World Perspective; ENVIRONMENT; Little by Little, Breathing Easier in Mexico City; The air in 1999was the least dirty of the decade. Data suggest that even Third World cities, with determination, can cleanup..................................................................................................................................................................... 354160. Emissions of Coke Dust Spur Probe, Lawsuit; Industry: D.A. investigates whether facilities at ports areviolating pollution standards. Meanwhile, a Terminal Island customs worker takes his case to court............ 356161. Vehicles Blamed for a Greater Share of Smog........................................................................................ 358162. Plan to Require Cleaner Diesel Trucks Unveiled..................................................................................... 361163. California and the West; Tire Fire Casts Worrisome Pall in Central Valley Town; Air quality: A sootyblaze in a mountain of scrap rubber has citizens concerned about health...................................................... 364164. California and the West; Tire Fire Spews Hazardous Smoke; Pollution: Mammoth dump catches fire innorthern San Joaquin Valley. Residents are warned to stay indoors.............................................................. 366165. Rapidly Growing Phoenix Finds Dust Unsettling; Sprawl: Development run amok is leading to dirty air,creating serious health and environmental problems...................................................................................... 368166. Smoke From Wildfires Chokes N. California; Health: Smog levels, respiratory problems and energyuse soar. High temperatures compound difficulties......................................................................................... 372167. The City With the Grittiest Air on Earth; China: Breathing in Lanzhou is like smoking a pack ofcigarettes a day. Officials have started to realize the costs............................................................................. 374168. California and the West; Burning of Waste by Farmers Raises Concerns; Ecology: Few peoplecomplain, but air quality experts say the time-honored torching of plant material is polluting the San JoaquinValley............................................................................................................................................................... 377169. Air Board OKs New Limits on Pollution in Harbor Area; Environment: Measure seeks to curb emissionsof coal, coke and sulfur. Impact on industry could reach $65 million.............................................................. 379170. Air Inside Cars Found Dirtier Than Outside.............................................................................................. 381171. SUNDAY REPORT; Diesel--the Dark Side of Industry; Emissions from trucks, trains and machinespose a serious threat, clogging lungs, damaging airways and triggering allergies. But regulating the problemis a contentious issue. Series: DIRTY EXHAUST: America's Unhealthy Reliance on Diesel . First of twoparts.. 38417 March 2013 ix ProQuestTable of contents172. Air Quality Standards Rejected by Appeals Court; Environment: EPA construed Clean Air Act tooloosely in setting rules for smog and soot, judges say. Ruling is seen as setback for Clinton administration. 389173. COLUMN ONE; Fouled Air a Major Pet Peeve for Mexico City; In the Federal District alone, 2 milliondogs deposit 353 tons of waste a day. The dried dust mixes with other particulates to form a vicious brewthat contaminates food and scars lungs.......................................................................................................... 392174. Arco Discloses Development of Decisively Cleaner Diesel Fuel.............................................................. 395175. Smog Study of Children Yields Ominous Results.................................................................................... 397176. CALIFORNIA; EPA Seeks Same Rules for Light Trucks; Pollution: Proposal, echoing state's measure,would equalize emission standards and require cleaner gasoline by '04........................................................ 400177. California and the West; CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS / PROPOSITION 7; Should Tax Breaks HelpClean Air?; Smog: Backers say incentives will help reduce old diesel trucks and buses from the road.Detractors say it will take away from other programs...................................................................................... 402178. Nothing to Sneeze At; Air--free of smog or alergens--is a precious commodity in L.A. Here's wherehome buyers can findit.............................................................................................................................................. 405179. California and the West; Board Declares Diesel Soot a Cancer-Causing Pollutant; Health: Thecompromise comes after a years-long debate. It sets in motion a process to try to figure out how to dealwith the emissions of the toxicparticulates............................................................................................................. 408180. California and the West; Accord Near on Hazards of Diesel Exhaust; Pollution: Panel is expected todeclare soot a carcinogen rather than targeting all exhaust components....................................................... 410181. California and the West; Crestline's Air Quality May Take Breath Away; Pollution: Surprisingly, the SanBernardino mountain community reigns No. 1 in the area on AQMD's ozone charts..................................... 413182. The Color of Summer............................................................................................................................... 415183. Fires Shroud Mexico in Hazardous Haze; Environment: Smoke exacerbating pollution, health woeshas spread to U.S............................................................................................................................................ 418184. Air Board Targets Utility Vehicles, Minivans, Pickups; Pollution: Unprecedented state proposal wouldrequire them to adhere to passenger car emission standards by 2004. Auto industry attacks plan atworkshop......................................................................................................................................................... 420185. A Quiz For Deep Breathers...................................................................................................................... 423186. California and the West; Air Officials Urge Smog Alerts at Lower Pollution Levels................................. 425187. Study Correlates Smog to Heart, Lung Ailments; Health: L.A. Basin study finds that hospitalizationsrise along with pollutants, especially coarse particles, in the air..................................................................... 427188. SMALL BUSINESS; Firms Push for Some Breathing Room.................................................................... 429189. California and the West; Fire's Ash Poses Hazards for Those With Ailing Lungs.................................... 431190. Dithering Over Dirty Air............................................................................................................................. 433191. Pollution Link to SIDS Is Probed; Health: Government research indicates that tiny particulates maycontribute to deadly syndrome. Babies in highly polluted regions could be at greater risk............................. 435192. L.A. Loses Battle With Owens Valley; Pollution: Board orders city to mount costly campaign involvingreturn of water to curtail severe dust storms from dry lake. Officials here vow to sue.................................... 43717 March 2013 x ProQuestTable of contents193. New Smog Rules Easier--and Harder; Air: A key deadline will be extended and a major pollution limitwill be raised. Nonetheless, the region faces an enormous challenge............................................................ 441194. California and the West; Mayors Oppose EPA's New Smog Limits; Conference: They adopt aresolution against stricter standards that they believe will harm business. Clinton is expected to decide soonon the proposal................................................................................................................................................ 443195. Soot Cleanup Is Essential; EPA must consider science first in new air particle rules.............................. 445196. Tougher Air Standards Pose Quandary for White House; Pollution: It is caught between environmentalofficials holding line on limits and GOP lawmakers and business pressing for less stringent rules................ 447197. Experts Split Over Peril of Particulates..................................................................................................... 449198. Beijing Is New 'Air Apparent' as Smog Capital......................................................................................... 453199. The Logical Next Step.............................................................................................................................. 456200. AQMD Rule Makes Dust-Busting a Must; Air: Cities to improve street sweeping, control particles onunpaved roads................................................................................................................................................. 458201. EPA Chief Says Air Rules Won't Jeopardize Backyard Barbecues......................................................... 461202. EPA Proposal to Toughen Air Quality Rules Faces Strong Opposition................................................... 463203. Proposed Clean-Air Standards Kick Up a Storm in Congress.................................................................. 464204. AQMD's Smog Plan for L.A. Basin OKd; Air: Environmentalists criticize scaled-back plan as being tooweak. The rules are designed to cut emissions by targeting a variety of pollution sources............................ 466205. Clean-Air Debate Pits Economics, Science.............................................................................................. 468206. AQMD adopts disputed plan for clean air................................................................................................. 470207. 9 AQMD advisors quit in protest of new smog plan.................................................................................. 472208. AQMD to drop several anti-smog regulations........................................................................................... 475209. Grit in L.A. air blamed in 6,000 deaths yearly........................................................................................... 476210. Smog plan would shift emissions to winter............................................................................................... 477211. Stricter curbs on tiny airborne particles sought........................................................................................ 479212. Regulators shift focus to tiny air pollutants............................................................................................... 480213. Smog agency seeks to put lid on restaurant broilers................................................................................ 48117 March 2013 xi ProQuestDocument 1 of 213SMOG IN L.A. IS STILL TOPS IN NATION; The metropolitan area averages more than 140 days ayear with dangerous ozone.Author: Roosevelt, MargotPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 28 Apr 2010: AA.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: A proposed ballot initiative, sponsored by oil companies and conservative activists, would suspend thestate's climate law, which targets carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases but could effectively curbtraditional air pollutants such as ozone and particles.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Metropolitan Los Angeles, extending to Riverside and Long Beach, remains the smoggiest city in theUnited States, with an average of more than 140 days a year of dangerous ozone levels, the American LungAssn. reported Wednesday in its annual assessment. All of the nation's 10 smoggiest counties are in California,with San Bernardino, Riverside, Kern, Tulare and Los Angeles leading the pack. And the state's cities andcounties, with their ports, refineries, power plants and crowded freeways, rank near the top for particle pollution."This is not just a nuisance or a bother," said Bonnie Holmes-Gen, the lung association's California policydirector. "Thousands of people are being rushed to emergency rooms. Thousands of people are dying early asa result of air pollution. . . . It is a crisis." The report comes at a time of conflict over the state's efforts to slashemissions. Citing the recession-battered economy, trucking and construction firms are seeking to delayCalifornia's rules to limit diesel pollution from operating big-rigs, forklifts and other equipment. A proposed ballotinitiative, sponsored by oil companies and conservative activists, would suspend the state's climate law, whichtargets carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases but could effectively curb traditional air pollutants such asozone and particles. Jane Warner, president and chief executive of the California branch of the lungassociation, urged state officials to maintain proposed curbs on diesel emissions and to step up efforts topromote electric cars. "We also call on Californians to reject the Texas oil companies' attempt to undoCalifornia's clean air and clean energy laws," Warner said. The ballot initiative to delay AB 32, the GlobalWarming Solutions Act, is spearheaded by San Antonio-based Valero Energy Corp. and Tesoro Corp., whichoperate major refineries and hundreds of gas stations in California. Despite its grim overall statistics, the reporttook note of remarkable progress in some areas: The number of high-ozone days has dropped by 25% inmetropolitan Los Angeles and by 57% in metropolitan San Francisco, which includes Oakland and San Jose,since 2000. Ground-level ozone, or smog, forms when nitrogen oxide gases and volatile organic compounds,such as gasoline vapors, react in the sunlight and heat. Inhaling ozone, which is colorless and odorless, cancause asthma and shorten lives. Particle pollution, also known as fine particulate matter, combines soot, dustand aerosols and often contains mercury and other toxic substances. It causes respiratory disease, heartattacks and premature deaths. The report found that high air pollution levels threaten the health of 175 millionpeople, about 58% of the population. But in California, the proportion is far higher: 91% of state residents, morethan 33 million people, live in counties with poor air quality, especially in Southern California and the CentralValley. Annually, California's dirty air is estimated to cause 19,000 premature deaths, 9,400 hospitalizations and300,000 respiratory illnesses. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is weighing tighter limits on ozone andparticles, and Congress is considering Clean Air Act amendments to further cut emissions from coal-fired powerplants. Other issues under consideration: whether federal construction projects should use only clean-dieselequipment and whether the federal government should finance retrofits of operating diesel trucks, as Californiahas. Only two cities appear on all three of the lung association's lists of cleanest cities -- for ozone, for year-17 March 2013 Page 1 of 483 ProQuestround particles and for short-term measures of particles: metropolitan Fargo, N.D., which also includesWahpeton, Minn.; and Lincoln, Neb. The report is interactive: readers can go to state , type inZIP Codes and find out how neighborhoods rank. -- margot.roosevelt@ Illustration Caption:GRAPHIC: Smoggiest California cities; CREDIT:Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC: Unhealthful; CREDIT:LosAngeles TimesSubject: Coal-fired power plants; Greenhouse gases; Industrial plant emissions; Air pollution; SmogLocation: Los Angeles CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: AA.1Publication year: 2010Publication date: Apr 28, 2010Year: 2010Section: LATExtra; Part AA; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 193750890Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2010 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-07-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 2 of 213Small railroad is on track to go green; A $6.7-million state grant helps a Modesto firm buy locomotiveswith lower emissions.Author: Sbranti, J NPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 13 Apr 2010: B.4.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The U.S.-made locomotives, which have energy-efficient engines that spew far less pollution into theair, are replacing all the railroad's old locomotives. [...] they arrive, the M&ET is leasing five low-pollutingengines, which went into service this winter. Besides their precise handling and smooth ride, what makes thenew R.J. Corman Railpower 2,000-horsepower diesel genset locomotives so special is their energy-efficient17 March 2013 Page 2 of 483 ProQuestdesign, DeYoung said.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The Modesto &Empire Traction Co. is being called the "greenest" short-line railroad in North America.The century-old, locally owned railroad is completing the purchase of five new "ultra clean" locomotives, fundedlargely by a $6.7-million state grant. The U.S.-made locomotives, which have energy-efficient engines that spewfar less pollution into the air, are replacing all the railroad's old locomotives. Until they arrive, the M&ET isleasing five low-polluting engines, which went into service this winter. "We retired all of our old stinkers made inthe 1940s and 1950s," Chief Executive Joe Mackil said. "The old ones just belched the junk out. These newthings are very clean." The switch will make a difference in air quality, which is what persuaded the state to payfor the replacements, said Todd DeYoung, program manager for the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution ControlDistrict. "The impacts will be immediate," he said. "The benefits will be realized locally. It's very cost-effective interms of the emission reductions we'll get." Each new locomotive costs about $1.5 million, of which $1.35 millionwill come from the state's Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment Program. The M&ET will coverthe rest of the price tag. DeYoung said it's good news for the northern San Joaquin Valley to get state money topay for the locomotives: "We're always fighting for the valley's share of statewide funds." The new engines costless to operate and maintain, reducing the cost of doing business in Modesto, Mackil said. The old locomotives"probably are going to be exported to a Third World country where they will still be useful, or they will be partedout" as replacement parts, he said. The railroad's 16 engineers are also thrilled by the modernization. "The oldlocomotives, with all the heat, exhaust fumes and noise they created, were not a friendly environment to workin," said Ron "Pete" Peterson, the M&ET's manager of safety and training. "They were very rugged." Petersonsaid some of the old engines were "like driving a Model A." The new locomotives, however, are more like aLexus. "They're a lot easier to operate," he said. "The computer brings on only the power we need, and it turnsoff what we don't need." The old locomotives required skilled engineers to maneuver through Modesto's 2,000-acre Beard Industrial District, where the M&ET hauls products to and from about 65 companies, including Frito-Lay and Del Monte. That requires lots of starting and stopping. Peterson said the old models were slippery onthe tracks, but the new ones operate "like a cat clawing up a tree." "That old one rides like a buckboard down adirt road," Peterson said. "These new engines feel like they float." Besides their precise handling and smoothride, what makes the new R.J. Corman Railpower 2,000-horsepower diesel genset locomotives so special istheir energy-efficient design, DeYoung said. "They are the cleanest technology available in diesel engines rightnow," he said. The locomotives can turn each of their three engines on or off depending on need. If a 100-cargrain train is being hauled, all three engines are activated. But when the train pauses, two of those enginesautomatically shut down. "That saves them a ton of fuel. The less fuel used, the less greenhouse gases," saidConnie Nordhues, Railpower's national salesperson. Compared with the old locomotives the M&ET had usedthrough last fall, the new ones reduce particulate matter emissions 90% and oxide of nitrogen emissions 80%,she said. Those two elements cause air pollution, which is linked to health problems, including asthma andcancer. The "M&ET's entire fleet of locomotives now is the cleanest fleet anywhere in the United States andCanada," Nordhues said. Credit: J.N. Sbranti writes for the Modesto Bee.Subject: Outdoor air quality; Greenhouse gases; Air pollution; Emission standardsPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.4Publication year: 2010Publication date: Apr 13, 201017 March 2013 Page 3 of 483 ProQuestYear: 2010Dateline: MODESTOSection: Business; Part B; Business DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422314146Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2010 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-07-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 3 of 213CALIFORNIA; Port pollution limits sought; Air quality board seeks to enforce voluntary reductions andi mpose fines.Author: Sahagun, LouisPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 06 Mar 2010: AA.4.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The so-called backstop rules, unveiled during a South Coast Air Quality Management Districtgoverning board meeting in Long Beach, would enable regulators to enforce the voluntary pollution reductiontargets set by the ports to control soot and smog over the next decade and impose financial penalties if needed.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Southern California air regulators proposed tougher rules Friday to ensure that the ports of LosAngeles and Long Beach reduce their share of deadly emissions from ships, trains, big rigs and cargo-handlingequipment, prompting harsh objections from harbor officials. The so-called backstop rules, unveiled during aSouth Coast Air Quality Management District governing board meeting in Long Beach, would enable regulatorsto enforce the voluntary pollution reduction targets set by the ports to control soot and smog over the nextdecade and impose financial penalties if needed. Each year, pollution from the movement of goods through theregion contributes to an estimated 2,100 early deaths, 190,000 sick days for workers, and 360,000 schoolabsences, according to the California Air Resources Board. More than 40% of all containerized cargo enteringthe United States flows through the adjacent ports. "The purpose of the backstop rule is to provide a safety netfor the region in the event that the ports fall behind in implementing their own voluntary clean air plans, or evenabandon them," said Barry Wallerstein, executive officer of the AQMD. "If the region does not have a17 March 2013 Page 4 of 483 ProQuestmechanism in place to correct its own clean air plans and keep them on track, the federal government couldstep in and adopt its own rules for us." "The federal government has the power to cut off federal transportationfunding," he added. "So either we create a backstop rule, or the federal government adopts regulations for us.Which one do the ports prefer?" But Geraldine Knatz, executive director of the Port of Los Angeles, said, "Wedon't think we need a backstop rule and we are not willing to support financial penalties. They want us toimpose fines on our customers and that is not something we are willing do in the middle of an economicdownturn." Port officials said they are ahead of schedule in reducing regional air pollution under their voluntaryClean Air Action Plan. The plan's achievements over the last four years include the replacement of 6,300 old,dirty diesel trucks with newer, cleaner models, an increase in vessels using low-sulfur fuel and a 20% reductionin diesel particulates. The backstop rule's enforcement mechanisms will be determined in future hearings,AQMD officials said. As it stands, maximum penalties for violation of air pollution laws range from $25,000 perday per infraction up to $1 million a day, officials said. The backstop rule was supported by environmentaljustice activists in the dense corridor that runs from the massive port complex through working-classneighborhoods that line the 710 Freeway: Wilmington, Carson, Compton, Huntington Park and Commerce."Without the backstop rule, the ports will continue to operate on a hope and a dream," said Angelo Logan,executive director of East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice. "We prefer clarity and consequences." -- louis.sahagun@latimes. comSubject: Fines & penalties; Outdoor air quality; Air pollution; PortsLocation: CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: AA.4Publication year: 2010Publication date: Mar 6, 2010Year: 2010Section: LATExtra; Part AA; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422287331Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2010 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-07-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand17 March 2013 Page 5 of 483 ProQuest_______________________________________________________________Document 4 of 213CALIFORNIA; Traffic pollution speeds hardening of arteries; Study finds artery walls thicken twice asfast in people who live near freeways.Author: Roosevelt, MargotPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 14 Feb 2010: A.46.ProQuest document linkAbstract: According to co-author Howard N. Hodis, director of the Atherosclerosis Research Unit at USC's KeckSchool of Medicine, the findings show that "environmental factors may play a larger role in the risk forcardiovascular disease than previously suspected."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Los Angeles residents living near freeways experience a hardening of the arteries that leads to heartdisease and strokes at twice the rate of those who live farther away, a study has found. The paper is the first tolink automobile and truck exhaust to the progression of atherosclerosis -- the thickening of artery walls -- inhumans. The study was conducted by researchers from USC and UC Berkeley, along with colleagues in Spainand Switzerland, and published this week in the journal PloS ONE. Researchers used ultrasound to measurethe carotid artery wall thickness of 1,483 people who lived within 100 meters, or 328 feet, of Los Angelesfreeways. Taking measurements every six months for three years, they correlated their findings with levels ofoutdoor particulates -- the toxic dust that spews from tailpipes -- at the residents' homes. They found that arterywall thickness in study participants accelerated annually by 5.5 micrometers -- one-twentieth the thickness of ahuman hair -- more than twice the average progression. According to co-author Howard N. Hodis, director of theAtherosclerosis Research Unit at USC's Keck School of Medicine, the findings show that "environmental factorsmay play a larger role in the risk for cardiovascular disease than previously suspected." UC Berkeley co-authorMichael Jerrett noted that "for the first time, we have shown that air pollution contributes to the early formationof heart disease, known as atherosclerosis, which is connected to nearly half the deaths in Western societies. . .. By controlling air pollution from traffic, we may see much larger benefits to public health than we previouslythought." The study comes at a time of growing alarm over the effects of freeway pollution on nearby schoolsand homes. In the four-county Los Angeles Basin, 1.5 million people live within 300 meters, or 984 feet, ofmajor freeways. The Natural Resources Defense Council is battling in federal court to overturn the caps onmotor-vehicle emissions set by Southern California air quality officials, saying that they fail to account for higherpollution near freeways. And Los Angeles and Long Beach residents are fighting expansion of the truck-clogged710 Freeway, saying it will lead to higher rates of asthma, heart disease and cancer in densely populated areas.In July, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency launched a major study of traffic pollution near Detroitroadways to examine whether it leads to severe asthma attacks in children. More than a third of Californiansreport that they or a family member suffer from asthma or respiratory problems, according to a survey last year.The Obama administration is proposing tighter standards for two vehicle-related pollutants: nitrogen dioxide(NO2) and ground-level ozone, the chief component of smog. -- margot.roosevelt @Subject: Cardiovascular disease; Outdoor air quality; Nitrogen dioxide; Veins & arteries; Air pollutionLocation: Los Angeles BasinPublication title: Los Angeles Times17 March 2013 Page 6 of 483 ProQuestPages: A.46Publication year: 2010Publication date: Feb 14, 2010Year: 2010Section: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422450083Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2010 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-07-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 5 of 213EPA proposes tough new smog rulesAuthor: Tankersley, Jim; Roosevelt, MargotPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 08 Jan 2010: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Besides ratcheting up pressure on highly polluted parts of Southern California and the Central Valley,the revised standard would require several new areas to take measures to slash air pollution, including parts ofthe northern Sacramento Valley and the Central Coast that have been in compliance under the previousstandards.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The Environmental Protection Agency proposed the nation's strictest-ever smog limits Thursday, amove that could put large parts of California and other states in violation of federal air quality regulations. TheEPA proposed allowing a ground-level ozone concentration of between 60 and 70 parts per billion, down fromthe 75-ppb standard adopted under President George W. Bush in 2008. That means cracking down further onthe emissions from cars, trucks, power plants, factories and landfills. The emissions bake in sunlight and formsmog. "All Californians should applaud the crackdown, given overwhelming scientific evidence of the lungdamage and premature deaths linked to ozone," said Bonnie Holmes-Gen, a spokeswoman for the AmericanLung Assn. in California. Obama administration officials and environmental groups say the new standard aligns17 March 2013 Page 7 of 483 ProQuestwith the level scientists say is needed to safeguard against increased respiratory diseases, particularly inchildren and the elderly. Though complying with the standards could cost up to $90 billion nationwide, accordingto the EPA, it could also save $100 billion in health costs over time. A 65-ppb standard -- the middle of theproposed acceptable range -- would avert 1,700 to 5,100 premature deaths nationwide in 2020 compared withthe 75-ppb standard, the EPA estimates. The agency projects the stricter standard would also prevent anadditional 26,000 cases of aggravated asthma compared with the Bush-era standard, and more than a millioncases of missed work or school. In California, which harbors some of the nation's dirtiest air, an estimated19,000 people die prematurely each year as a result of pollution from ozone and particulates. Of those, about6,500 are in the Los Angeles area. No urban area of California meets even the 1997 federal standard of 80parts per billion. If states fail to meet federal standards, the government can withhold highway funding. Althoughsuch punishment is rare, "it's the hammer that drives planning at the state level," Holmes-Gen said. Besidesratcheting up pressure on highly polluted parts of Southern California and the Central Valley, the revisedstandard would require several new areas to take measures to slash air pollution, including parts of the northernSacramento Valley and the Central Coast that have been in compliance under the previous standards. UnlikeEastern and Midwestern states, where much of the pollution comes from coal-fired power plants, three-quartersof California's ozone-forming emissions are from mobile sources such as cars, trucks, trains, ships, planes andconstruction equipment. In the last three years, the state has adopted the nation's strictest rules to controlpollution from diesel engines in trucks and construction equipment, which emit nitrogen oxides, a precursor tosmog. The EPA's new standard could force the state to crack down further on vehicle pollution, on refineriesand power plants, and even on volatile organic compounds coming from consumer products such as hair spray.Air districts also would be likely to increase efforts to control sprawl and force more concentrated landdevelopment. Statewide, the number of car trips has been growing faster than the population. "This is going torequire us to look for new solutions," said Leo Kay, a spokesman for the California Air Resources Board. "Onthe ground we will be looking for where we can tighten the screws." As for how exactly that will be done, heacknowledged, "We don't have all the answers yet." The EPA also proposed setting a "secondary standard" toprotect plants and trees from repeated smog exposure during growing season, a move environmentalists saidwould help national parks, forests and sensitive ecosystems. Trees and other vegetation absorb heat-trappingcarbon dioxide from the atmosphere, making them an important check against global warming. In announcingthe proposals, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said the agency was "stepping up to protect Americans fromone of the most persistent and widespread pollutants we face. . . . Using the best science to strengthen thesestandards is a long-overdue action that will help millions of Americans breathe easier and live healthier."Environmentalists praised the agency for proposing regulations that match the unanimous recommendations ofan EPA science advisory committee. "We applaud EPA for listening to health professionals and scientists andproposing a rule that provides real protection for millions of people," said Bruce Nilles, director of the SierraClub's Beyond Coal campaign, adding, "This rule will help ensure that all major sources of pollution get cleanedup." Industry groups warned that the regulations would increase business costs. The new standard "lacksscientific justification," the American Petroleum Institute charged, calling it "an obvious politicization of the airquality-standard-setting process that could mean unnecessary energy cost increases, job losses and lessdomestic oil and natural gas development and energy security." The proposal now enters a public commentphase, which will include open hearings next month in Arlington, Va., Houston and Sacramento before the EPAmakes its final decision. -- jtankersley@ margot.roosevelt@ Illustration Caption:GRAPHIC: Smog standard change (includes map of the Western United States); CREDIT: Raoul Ranoa LosAngeles Times; GRAPHIC: State of smog; CREDIT: Los Angeles TimesSubject: Coal-fired power plants; Outdoor air quality; Environmental protection; Respiratory diseases; Trucks;Environmentalists; Industrial plant emissions; Construction equipment; Air pollution17 March 2013 Page 8 of 483 ProQuestCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency--EPA; NAICS: 924110Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Publication year: 2010Publication date: Jan 8, 2010Year: 2010Dateline: WASHINGTON AND LOS ANGELESSection: Main News; Part A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422266881Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2010 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-07-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 6 of 213Santa Monica Airport a major pollution sourceAuthor: Weikel, DanPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 19 Nov 2009: A.12.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The study, released Wednesday, shows that ultrafine particle emissions were 10 times higher thannormal about 300 feet downwind of the runway's east end, where takeoffs generally start.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: UCLA scientists have found that people who live and work near Santa Monica Airport are exposed tohigh levels of air pollution -- a significant health concern that has been largely associated with major commercialairports such as LAX. The study, released Wednesday, shows that ultrafine particle emissions were 10 timeshigher than normal about 300 feet downwind of the runway's east end, where takeoffs generally start. Thelevels were 2.5 times higher than normal at a distance of about 2,000 feet. A tiny fraction of the width of ahuman hair, ultrafine particles can travel deep into the lungs, penetrate tissue and travel to the brain. Studies17 March 2013 Page 9 of 483 ProQuestshow that elevated exposure to the particles presents a health risk for children, older adults, and people withrespiratory and cardiovascular diseases. Although the research focused on Santa Monica, the study may havebroader implications for regional and municipal airports that serve private planes and corporate jets. Many suchairfields in Southern California are in densely populated areas. "Our research shows the potential impacts ofsmaller airports on residential areas and that we ought to have more of a buffer around airports," said UCLAprofessor Suzanne E. Paulson, an atmospheric chemist who worked on the study. "This is not just happening atSanta Monica." The Santa Monica Airport sits on a plateau surrounded by businesses and homes, some lessthan 300 feet from the runway. For years, nearby residents and business owners have complained aboutaircraft emissions and the growing use of corporate jets. "It's just horrible," said Virginia Ernst, who lives about300 feet from the runway's east end. "They line the planes up and the fumes just invade your home. Sometimesyou have to leave because it is so bad." The study -- one of only a handful to explore airborne pollutants neargeneral aviation airports was released Wednesday in the journal Environmental Science and Technology,published by the American Chemical Society. UCLA's findings are consistent with a study yet to be published bythe South Coast Air Quality Management District, which found that levels of ultrafine particles were significantlyelevated near the Santa Monica runway. Officials for the Federal Aviation Administration said that air trafficcontrol at Santa Monica has taken several steps to limit emissions from taxiing and departing aircraft. Theyinclude positioning planes so their exhaust is directed away from neighborhoods and instructing pilots not tostart their engines until five or 10 minutes before they are cleared for takeoff. But Martin Rubin, a communityactivist involved in airport issues, disputes the effectiveness of those procedures. Aircraft are still idling for up to30 minutes, he said, and wind can send emissions into neighborhoods despite a plane's position on the runway.-- dan.weikel@Subject: Airports; Airborne particulates; Outdoor air quality; Studies; Environmental science; Air pollutionCompany / organization: Name: Santa Monica Airport-California; NAICS: 488119Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.12Publication year: 2009Publication date: Nov 19, 2009Year: 2009Section: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422282300Document URL: March 2013 Page 10 of 483 ProQuestCopyright: (Copyright (c) 2009 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 7 of 213THE NATION; EPA agrees to set air pollution rules by 2011; Oil- and coal-fired power plants would beforced to reduce mercury emissions.Author: Geiger, Kim; Tankersley, JimPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 24 Oct 2009: A.14.ProQuest document linkAbstract: According to a 2004 study by a group of Northeast air quality agencies, the new rules could result in a90% reduction in mercury emissions.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The Environmental Protection Agency would require oil- and coal-burning power plants to dramaticallyreduce hazardous air pollution under an agreement announced Friday that ends a long-standing lawsuit filed byenvironmentalists. The agreement -- which would probably boost electricity prices but could potentially savethousands of lives -- commits the EPA to set pollution standards by 2011 for the power plants that areresponsible for nearly half of all emissions of mercury, which can harm brain development in fetuses andchildren. Once the EPA sets the standards, many power plants would be forced to install pollution scrubbersthat capture heavy metals such as mercury -- along with particulates such as soot. Currently, less than one-thirdof those plants employ scrubbers. Environmentalists hailed the decision and equated it, in environmentalprotection terms, with EPA moves this year to begin limiting greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles, factories,power plants and other major emitters. "This is the Holy Grail for pollution control," said Jim Pew, an attorney atEarthjustice, one of the groups that brought the suit. The effect of the new rules is expected to be greatest in theEast and Midwest where coal-fired power plants are most common. On the West Coast, such plants are rare,and though California gets large amounts of power from coal-fired plants in Nevada, pollution tends to spreadover less populated areas to the east. Environmentalists estimate that the new rules could save 35,000 liveseach year by 2025. Those projections are based on an EPA analysis of the effects of a similar proposed lawregulating sulfur dioxide, a pollutant that lodges deep in the lungs, causing premature heart attack, stroke andcardiac arrest. Installing scrubbers would reduce most emission of air toxins, including sulfur dioxide. Accordingto a 2004 study by a group of Northeast air quality agencies, the new rules could result in a 90% reduction inmercury emissions. "This power-plant rule could reduce sulfur dioxide levels by 80% to 90%," said John Walke,clean air director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, another party to the suit. The scrubbers are "notcheap, but you see the health benefits." Representatives of the power industry said that by setting targets thatwould apply to all plants -- including smaller plants used only intermittently -- the new standards would pushelectricity prices up and encourage industrial consumers to move abroad in search of weaker, less expensiveemission standards. Industry lobbyists said Friday that they were unable to estimate the exact cost increasesbut predicted they would be high. The EPA had been required under the Clean Air Act of 1990 to issue its rulesby the end of 2002, but the Bush administration argued at the time that such rules were unnecessary. Theenvironmental groups that brought the suit say that the EPA has been stalling. The agency said in a statementthat "addressing hazardous air pollutant emissions from utilities is a high priority," adding that it began the rulemakingprocess in July and plans to issue proposed standards by March 2011. "The agency is committed to17 March 2013 Page 11 of 483 ProQuestdeveloping a strategy to reduce harmful emissions from these facilities, which threaten the air we all breathe,"said the EPA. The power plant industry has spent years trying to find an alternative to the looming EPA rulemaking,whereby standards would be set based on the current emission rates of the cleanest 12% of coal- andoil-fired plants. With the backing of the Bush administration in previous years, the industry has been pushing tocreate an emissions market in which plants could trade emissions allowances instead of being forced to hit settargets. That approach, known as the Mercury Rule, was proposed by the EPA under the Bush administration,but it was struck down by the courts, which ruled that it did not comply with the Clean Air Act. "Obviously, wewanted the [Mercury Rule] to go forward because the rule would have given us more flexibility," said FrankMaisano of the law firm Bracewell &Giuliani, which represents power plant operators. "The Clean Air Act justdoesn't have the flexibility to allow us to do this creative thinking." Maisano also said that the Obamaadministration is more in line with the environmentalists' goals. "This really seems to be the environmentalistsnegotiating with themselves," he said. "Because the new EPA is certainly much more in agreement with theenvironmental community than they had been in the last eight years." -- kim.geiger@jtankersley@Subject: Emission standards; Environmental protection; Coal-fired power plants; Pollution control; Air pollution;Hazardous air pollutants; Environmentalists; Litigation; Industrial plant emissionsCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency--EPA; NAICS: 924110Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.14Publication year: 2009Publication date: Oct 24, 2009Year: 2009Dateline: WASHINGTONSection: Main News; Part A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422272450Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2009 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand17 March 2013 Page 12 of 483 ProQuest_______________________________________________________________Document 8 of 213A CLOSER LOOK: AIR POLLUTION; Spewing out some more bad news; Consequences of breathingpolluted air include appendicitis and ear infections, new studies indicate.Author: Adams, Jill UPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 12 Oct 2009: E.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: In addition to respiratory effects, research has established that air pollution increases the risk ofcardiovascular events such as arrhythmia, heart attack and stroke, and the incidence of certain cancers. Aninherent weakness in both the ear infection and appendicitis studies -- and in many air pollution studies, for thatmatter -- is that air quality data for a geographical area are used as an estimate of what an individual actuallyinhales, says Derek Shendell, a public health researcher at the University of Medicine and Dentistry, NewJersey, in Piscataway.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: It's easy to see how air pollution would affect respiratory disease: You breathe in smog-filled miasmaall day and the ozone, other noxious gases and small particulate matter therein can make you wheeze andcough. Pollutants can trigger asthma attacks and bronchitis in susceptible individuals. But it's harder at firstblush to understand links to other conditions. In two studies reported last week, bad air was associated withhigher rates of appendicitis and ear infections. The new reports have been met with surprise because neitherhealth problem seems obviously linked with the airway or bloodstream. At the same time, they represent a trendtoward broadening the research scope of air pollution and health. "People are looking at everything and airpollution these days," says Francine Laden, an epidemiologist at Harvard School of Public Health in Boston.Research on air pollution has been conducted worldwide for decades and is part of the basis for governmentregulation of air quality. Study after study has found more hospitalizations and higher death rates when certainpollutants are high. In addition to respiratory effects, research has established that air pollution increases therisk of cardiovascular events such as arrhythmia, heart attack and stroke, and the incidence of certain cancers.In the appendicitis study, published Oct. 5 in the Canadian Medical Assn. Journal, researchers examinedrecords for 5,191 adults admitted to Calgary hospitals for appendicitis from 1999 to 2006. The dates of thepatients' admissions were compared to air pollution levels in the preceding week, using data from three airquality surveillance sites in the city. The scientists found a significant effect of pollutants on appendicitis rates inthe summer months among men, but not women. The risk of going to the hospital with appendicitis more thandoubled when summer pollution was at its highest, says study lead author Dr. Gilaad Kaplan, a physicianresearcherat the University of Calgary. The strongest effects were found when high pollution days precededhospital admission by at least five days rather than a shorter period. This suggests there is a certain lag timebetween pollutant exposure and the development of appendicitis. The study did not examine how pollutionmight cause appendicitis, but Kaplan speculates that inflammatory processes are involved. Substances thebody produces to ramp up inflammation are implicated in appendicitis. Other research has found thesesubstances in healthy volunteers after they breathed diesel exhaust. A similar argument is used to explaincardiovascular risk factors associated with air pollution: that substances involved in blood clotting are producedafter exposure to bad air. In the ear infection study, presented at the annual meeting of the American Academyof Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery in San Diego, researchers compared prevalence of the disease in126,060 children with trends in air pollution from 1997 to 2006. Health information came from the NationalHealth Interview Survey, administered by the U.S. Census Bureau, and air quality data came from U.S.17 March 2013 Page 13 of 483 ProQuestEnvironmental Protection Agency records. Four pollutants -- carbon monoxide, nitrous dioxide, sulfur dioxideand particulate matter -- decreased nationwide over the 10-year period. The number of children reported ashaving more than three ear infections in a year also declined. Again, the study cannot say air pollution causesear infections, only that the two are associated. And it did not investigate how pollutants affect the ear canal.But it's not a stretch to go from respiratory illness to ear infection, says lead author Dr. Nina Shapiro, a pediatricotolaryngologist at UCLA School of Medicine. Pollutants have been shown to damage cilia -- tiny little hairs thatline many of the body's passageways. If that occurs in the ear, Shapiro says, then the cleansing process isdamaged or slowed, which could set the stage for infection. Study coauthor Dr. Neil Bhattacharyya found asimilar association between air pollution and sinus infection in adults in an earlier investigation published inLaryngoscope in March. An inherent weakness in both the ear infection and appendicitis studies -- and in manyair pollution studies, for that matter -- is that air quality data for a geographical area are used as an estimate ofwhat an individual actually inhales, says Derek Shendell, a public health researcher at the University ofMedicine and Dentistry, New Jersey, in Piscataway. Air quality measured at a site may not represent whatsomeone living in that neighborhood is actually breathing. It will depend on levels they encounter in their houseor workplace. And even within a given neighborhood, pollution will be greater near busier roads. Researchersmust also be on the lookout for other unrelated factors that may affect the health condition being measured. Forexample, Shapiro notes, there was a decline in cigarette smoking during the time period covered by her earinfectionstudy. If the children also had less exposure to secondhand smoke -- a known risk factor for earinfections -- that could account for some of the decline in disease. Pneumococcal vaccine, introduced in 2000 --the middle of Shapiro's study period -- has also been credited with declining rates of ear infections. In fact, boththe new studies are just first steps. They are sure to stimulate more research on how air pollution might triggerthese conditions as well as other nonrespiratory diseases. -- health@ Illustration Caption: PHOTO:BILLOWING: A weakness in many air-pollution studies is that they don't measure what individuals actuallyinhale.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Olivier Morin AFP/Getty ImagesSubject: Outdoor air quality; Risk factors; Respiratory diseases; Pollutants; Appendicitis; Air pollution; Personalhealth; Medical researchPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: E.1Publication year: 2009Publication date: Oct 12, 2009Year: 2009Section: Health; Part E; Features DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 42222875317 March 2013 Page 14 of 483 ProQuestDocument URL:: (Copyright (c) 2009 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 9 of 213EPA proposes new rule to help curb smog; The regulation, to be the focus of a hearing in L.A. today,would increase monitoring of nitrogen dioxide.Author: Roosevelt, MargotPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 06 Aug 2009: A.13.ProQuest document linkAbstract: In an effort to clean the air along the nation's choked highways, the federal Environmental ProtectionAgency has proposed a major regulation to control nitrogen dioxide, a key factor in respiratory illness.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: In an effort to clean the air along the nation's choked highways, the federal Environmental ProtectionAgency has proposed a major regulation to control nitrogen dioxide, a key factor in respiratory illness. The newEPA rule will be the subject of a public hearing today in Los Angeles, a region where the air is among theunhealthiest in the nation. Imposed under court order, it is the first to address the dangerous gas in 35 years."We're updating these standards to build on the latest scientific data and meet changing health protectionneeds," EPA administrator Lisa Jackson said in announcing the proposal last month. More than a third ofCalifornians reported that they or an immediate family member suffer from asthma or respiratory problems,according to a recent survey by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California. In San Bernardino andRiverside, crisscrossed by traffic from the ports, the proportion reached 44%. Nitrogen dioxide, or NO2, spewsfrom power plant smokestacks and from the tailpipes of automobiles and trucks, along with ozone andparticulates, two other substances that attack the lungs. It is particularly concentrated along highways. The newEPA rule would require stronger monitoring near roadways, a key provision for many of the mainly poor andminority communities that hug the freeways in Los Angeles and other big cities. The new regulation would retaincurrent annual limits of 53 parts per billion, considerably higher than California's state standard of 30 ppb. Butfor the first time, it would establish a one-hour federal standard of between 80 and 100 ppb, stricter thanCalifornia's current hourly limit of 180 ppb. That would prevent NO2 levels from spiking during shorter periodssuch as rush hour. At a Washington hearing this week, the American Petroleum Institute, an industry group,opposed the proposed standard as excessive. Public health organizations said it should be tougher. TheAmerican Lung Assn. and others advocated an annual limit as strict as California's, and an hourly limit of nomore than 50 parts per billion, about half of what EPA proposes. "The news has been dominated in recentweeks by healthcare reform," said Frank O'Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch, an advocacy group. "Dirty airis the forgotten topic when it comes to healthcare reform. It will cost a lot less to keep people out of theemergency rooms. And one way to do this is to reduce dangerous nitrogen dioxide pollution." The hearing willbegin at 9 a.m. today at the Sheraton Los Angeles Downtown at 711 S. Hope St., Los Angeles. --margot.roosevelt@17 March 2013 Page 15 of 483 ProQuestSubject: Environmental regulations; Emergency medical care; Public hearings; Smog; Air pollutionLocation: United States--USCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency--EPA; NAICS: 924110Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.13Publication year: 2009Publication date: Aug 6, 2009Year: 2009Section: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422253685Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2009 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 10 of 213CALIFORNIA; Concerns about smog drop in state; A smaller proportion of residents, especially inL.A. County, see air pollution as 'a big problem,' a poll finds.Author: Roosevelt, MargotPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 30 July 2009: A.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: In the case of global warming, the softening of support for regulation may be linked to the pooreconomy, but it also comes at a time of fever-pitch rhetoric over whether a national climate law, passed by theHouse and awaiting Senate action, will damage U.S. industry and cost consumers money.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The percentage of Californians who believe air pollution is a "big problem" has dropped precipitously inrecent years, especially in Los Angeles County and the Central Valley, among the nation's dirtiest regions,according to a new survey. At the same time, the poll by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California17 March 2013 Page 16 of 483 ProQuestfound that support for the state's landmark 2006 law to slash greenhouse gases has declined, and fewer peoplethink that global warming is a serious threat to the economy and quality of life of the state. "Californianscontinue to care about environmental issues," said Mark Baldassare, president and chief executive of thepolling group, which found strong majorities in favor of pollution and global warming laws. "But less so than twoyears ago, perhaps because of the economy and the partisan discussion in Washington around environmentalpolicy." Air quality in Southern California, the Central Valley and the state overall has improved dramatically inthe last two decades, despite a growing population, according to the Air Resources Board. But three-fourths ofresidents still live in areas that violate health standards for ozone, which causes respiratory disease. And largeswaths of the Inland Empire have 40 to 80 days a year that exceed the federally designated safe level forozone, a colorless gas. About half the state, including major portions of Los Angeles, San Bernardino andRiverside counties, exceeds the health standard for fine particulates, which are linked to cancer, heart diseaseand other ailments. And more than a third of Californians report that they or an immediate family member sufferfrom asthma or other respiratory problems. Nonetheless, the survey found that only 23% of Californians saw airpollution as "a big problem" in their region, an 11-point drop since last year. In Los Angeles County, thatsegment dropped 17 points, to 30%, and in the Central Valley, it sank 15 points, to 36%. Baldassare suggestedthat the sharp drop this year could be attributed partly to the fact that wildfire-related air pollution is down, withfewer fires so far this year than last. "The poll results would likely have been different if the public was moreaware that 5,000 Southern Californians are estimated to die each year due to air pollution," said BarryWallerstein, executive officer of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, a regional agency. "Muchmore needs to be done to increase public awareness." Nonetheless, the survey found strong support fortougher pollution standards on cars, diesel trucks and buses, on commerce and industry, and on agriculture.More than three-fourths of Californians say the state should focus transportation dollars on public transit, whilejust 18% want more freeways. In the case of global warming, the softening of support for regulation may belinked to the poor economy, but it also comes at a time of fever-pitch rhetoric over whether a national climatelaw, passed by the House and awaiting Senate action, will damage U.S. industry and cost consumers money.Two-thirds of Californians still support the state's comprehensive global warming law, the first in the nation, butthat's significantly less than the 78% who endorsed it in 2007. The partisan divide has widened, with only 43%of Republicans supporting it, compared with 57% two years ago. The California survey echoes results of aMarch Gallup poll that suggested that skepticism about global warming was rising nationally, with only 60%viewing it as a problem they worried about "a great deal" or "a fair amount." "We see declining interest inenvironmental initiatives -- or anything else that implies new investment -- whenever the economy is in trouble,"said Air Resources Board Chairman Mary D. Nichols, who oversees the state climate plan. "But peopleunderstand that economic recovery depends on reducing our dependence on petroleum and developing newtechnologies." On the petroleum issue, 51% of Californians favored expanding oil drilling off the coast,compared with 43% that opposed it. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger sought to insert a drilling provision into thebudget, but environmental groups objected strenuously and the measure failed to pass the Legislature. --margot.roosevelt@ Illustration Caption: GRAPHIC: Pollution poll; CREDIT: Los Angeles TimesSubject: Outdoor air quality; Polls & surveys; Greenhouse gases; Global warming; Air pollutionLocation: CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Public Policy Institute of California; NAICS: 813410Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.3Publication year: 200917 March 2013 Page 17 of 483 ProQuestPublication date: Jul 30, 2009Year: 2009Section: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422404714Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2009 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 11 of 213THE NATION; U.S. and California rules will reduce ship emissions; The required use of cleaner fuelsi s expected to improve coastal air quality.Author: Littlefield, AmyPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 02 July 2009: A.13.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The use of cleaner fuel will yield immediate reductions in harmful air pollutants such as dieselparticulate matter, sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides, according to the California Air Resources Board, whichissued the regulations.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Targeting one of the biggest sources of air pollution, federal and state regulators moved forwardWednesday with plans to slash emissions from big diesel-powered ships entering U.S. coastal areas. Underrules that took effect Wednesday, the roughly 2,000 ocean-going vessels that enter California ports each yearmust switch to fuel with lower sulfur content before coming within 24 nautical miles of the state's coast. The useof cleaner fuel will yield immediate reductions in harmful air pollutants such as diesel particulate matter, sulfuroxides and nitrogen oxides, according to the California Air Resources Board, which issued the regulations. Thestate plan will mandate an even cleaner fuel starting in 2012. California, home to some of the dirtiest air districtsin the nation, has traditionally led the U.S. in innovative pollution rules, not only affecting ships but alsoautomobiles and power plants. About 40% of the nation's imported goods move through the ports of LosAngeles and Long Beach, creating massive emissions from trucks and vessels. "This new measure will helpcoastal residents breathe easier and reduce pollution in our oceans and waterways at the same time," Gov.17 March 2013 Page 18 of 483 ProQuestArnold Schwarzenegger said. Also Wednesday, the federal Environmental Protection Agency proposed longanticipatedstandards on the engines and fuel of U.S.-flagged vessels, which would lower fuel sulfur contentbelow 1,000 parts per million -- matching California's 2012 requirement -- within 200 miles of the U.S. coast,starting in 2015. The proposal is part of an international effort to reduce shipping emissions under the MarinePollution Treaty. The EPA proposal would also mandate improved engine technology to decrease emissions ofnitrogen oxides. National environmental groups applauded the federal proposal. "These ships are like giantsmokestacks on the sea," said Frank O'Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch. "They cause pollution and publichealth problems not only for coastal communities but for millions who live inland." The California rules, whichkick in before the federal standards, apply not only to U.S.-flagged ships but to all ships entering state waters."We need the health benefits in the interim," said Mike Scheible, the air board's deputy executive officer. Anestimated 3,600 premature deaths will be avoided under the state regulations between now and 2015. Theshipping industry has objected to regulation by states, arguing that international bodies should establishmaritime rules. But T.L. Garrett, vice president of the San Francisco-based Pacific Merchant Shipping Assn., analliance of more than 60 industry organizations, said Wednesday that the group's members were "fully preparedto comply" with the new California rules. The shipping alliance had filed a lawsuit against the Air ResourcesBoard, saying state attempts to regulate shipping violated federal law. A federal judge Tuesday upheld thestate's ability to set its own rules regarding clean fuel. Still, the group favors international standards that "willbring uniform and meaningful emission reductions" rather than a "random patchwork of local regulations," JohnMcLaurin, president of PMSA, said in a written statement. -- amy.littlefield@Subject: Environmental regulations; Sulfur content; Outdoor air quality; Marine pollution; International standards;Industrial plant emissions; Alliances; Emission standards; Shipping industryLocation: United States--US, CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.13Publication year: 2009Publication date: Jul 2, 2009Year: 2009Section: Main News; Part A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422290622Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2009 Los Angeles Times)17 March 2013 Page 19 of 483 ProQuestLast updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 12 of 213Bill aims to improve local air qualityAuthor: Roosevelt, MargotPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 01 June 2009: A.8.ProQuest document linkAbstract: In addition to slowing global warming, greenhouse gas cleanup would reduce the particulates andtoxic gases that cause cardiovascular and respiratory diseases.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Legislation to use California's crackdown on global warming emissions as a lever to attack industrialair pollution is to be debated in the state Assembly this week. The bill, AB 1404, is an opening salvo in astruggle that has been brewing since 2006 when California passed a sweeping law to control greenhouse gasesthat trap heat in the atmosphere. At issue: whether low-income neighborhoods that suffer disproportionatelyfrom dirty air can benefit from regulations to control climate change. "This may be the single most importantopportunity to clean L.A.'s dirty air in my career," said Assemblyman Kevin de Leon (D-Los Angeles), a coauthorof the bill whose district includes a cement plant and chrome plating facilities and is criss-crossed by sixfreeways. A report released last week by researchers at USC and UC Berkeley, notes that poor people, Latinosand African Americans would suffer disproportionately from intensified heat waves, droughts and floods that areexpected as the Earth warms. "People of color will be hurt the most -- unless elected officials and otherpolicymakers intervene," said Rachel Morello-Frosch, a UC Berkeley associate professor and co-author of thereport. African Americans living in Los Angeles have a projected heat-wave mortality rate nearly twice that ofother L.A. residents, according to the report. And in many of the neighborhoods that suffer the worst air qualityin the nation, including those in L.A. and the San Joaquin Valley, the population is predominantly Latino. Publichealth groups want to force companies to spend their money close to home by retrofitting their facilities. Inaddition to slowing global warming, greenhouse gas cleanup would reduce the particulates and toxic gases thatcause cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. But companies want to avoid some cleanup expenses through"offsets" -- paying for cheaper projects to reduce greenhouse gases elsewhere in California or in other statesand countries. For example, a refinery in Los Angeles could pay a rancher in Northern California to reforestrange land because trees absorb carbon dioxide. Or a cement plant in Riverside County could compensate acompany in Asia for controlling methane emissions from a pig farm. The California conflict echoes a parallelfight in Congress, where a bill allowing industry to use extensive offsets is to be debated in the House thissummer. Under preliminary guidelines adopted by the California Air Resources Board, up to 49% of greenhousegas pollution from power plants and other industrial facilities could be reduced through offsets. But AB 1404would limit offsets to 10% of emissions and assess fees to fund careful verification of offset projects. Phonyoffsets, in which companies pay for projects that in fact do not reduce emissions, have been the subject ofinvestigations in the United States and abroad. "The oil industry wants to place these offsets offshore in Brazilor Indonesia where California regulators can't verify if they are real or permanent," De Leon said. "Butcompanies shouldn't be able to buy their way out of controlling their pollution here in California." The legislationis backed by more than 60 California public health groups and labor unions who see it as a way to maintainpollution-abatement jobs in California. "We shouldn't be outsourcing our public health and air quality benefits to17 March 2013 Page 20 of 483 ProQuestother states and countries," said Bonnie Holmes-Gen, Sacramento lobbyist for the California Lung Assn. ThirtyCalifornia counties fail to meet federal health standards for fine particulates, the most dangerous of lungdamagingpollutants. But industry groups oppose the bill, saying it will limit their flexibility in meeting greenhousegas targets. "An arbitrary limit . . . would result in higher costs for energy and infrastructure providers that wouldbe passed along to state and local governments," the Western States Petroleum Assn., the California Chamberof Commerce and other business groups wrote in a letter to legislators. The political sensitivity of the issue wasunderscored May 22, when the Air Resources Board appointed a 16-member committee headed by StanfordEconomist Lawrence H. Goulder to make recommendations on the design of cap-and-trade regulations. In aletter to the board, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last week signaled his opposition to handing out freeallowances to emit greenhouse gases, as in proposed federal legislation. Instead, he urged the board toconsider "returning the value of allowances back to the people, including through an auction of allowances anddistribution of auction proceeds in the form of a rebate or dividend." According to the "Climate Gap"researchers, offering fewer free pollution permits to oil facilities, which are mostly located in low-incomeneighborhoods such as Wilmington in Southern California and Richmond in Northern California, would beparticularly effective in cleaning up unhealthy air. -- margot.roosevelt @Subject: Global warming; Air pollution; Climate change; Neighborhoods; Proposals; Outdoor air quality;Greenhouse gases; Legislation -- California; Pollution controlLocation: CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Assembly-California; NAICS: 921120Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.8Publication year: 2009Publication date: Jun 1, 2009Year: 2009Section: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422259952Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2009 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand17 March 2013 Page 21 of 483 ProQuest_______________________________________________________________Document 13 of 213CALIFORNIA; Bakersfield is No. 1 in fine-particle pollutionAuthor: Roosevelt, MargotPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 29 Apr 2009: A.11.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Bakersfield had the worst level of fine-particle pollution in the nation last year -- a toxic mix of soot,diesel exhaust, chemicals, metals and aerosols that contribute to heart attack, stroke and lung disease,according to the American Lung Assn.'s annual State of the Air report.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Bakersfield had the worst level of fine-particle pollution in the nation last year -- a toxic mix of soot,diesel exhaust, chemicals, metals and aerosols that contribute to heart attack, stroke and lung disease,according to the American Lung Assn.'s annual State of the Air report. The San Joaquin Valley city displacedLos Angeles, which fell to the third spot in the category of year-round particle pollution, behind second-placePittsburgh-New Castle, Pa. The lung association report is based on data from local governments' air monitoringstations and statistics gathered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Los Angeles-Long Beachretained its spot as the worst ozone-polluted metropolitan area, despite a slight improvement in its air in the lastyear. San Bernardino ranked as the nation's worst county for ozone pollution. Ozone causes wheezing andasthma attacks, and can shorten lives. -- State of the Air report margot.roosevelt@Subject: Ratings & rankings; Airborne particulates; Air pollutionLocation: Bakersfield CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: American Lung Association; NAICS: 813910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.11Publication year: 2009Publication date: Apr 29, 2009Year: 2009Section: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 42225182217 March 2013 Page 22 of 483 ProQuestDocument URL:: (Copyright (c) 2009 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 14 of 213Downturn a boon for China's air quality; The shutting of factories and drops in production have keptalive pollution gains made during Olympics.Author: Tran, TiniPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 12 Apr 2009: A.10.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The global economic slowdown is helping to accomplish what some in China's leadership have strivento do for years: rein in the insatiable demand for coal-powered energy that has fed the country's breakneckgrowth but turned it into one of the world's most polluted nations. "[...] if taken as an opportunity to do more interms of energy efficiency and clean technology, then it can have a long-term effect in improving air quality,"said Chan, a professor at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Last summer, Xu Demin struggled to cut emissions from his coal-fired factories as part of China's allouteffort to clean the air for the Beijing Olympics. He could have simply waited six months. This spring,overseas demand for his farming and construction machinery has plummeted, forcing him to close two plantsand lay off 300 workers. The global economic slowdown is helping to accomplish what some in China'sleadership have striven to do for years: rein in the insatiable demand for coal-powered energy that has fed thecountry's breakneck growth but turned it into one of the world's most polluted nations. Beijing, China's normallysmog-choked capital, is breathing some of its cleanest air in nearly a decade, as pollution-control efforts get asizable boost from a slowing economy. "It's like the sky I saw overseas. I can see clouds. I've seen days herelike I've seen in Europe or the U.S.," Xu says, his voice echoing in the cavernous space of his idle factoryoutside Beijing. An Associated Press analysis of government figures backs up his observations: In the secondhalf of last year, a period that included the Olympics in August, Beijing recorded its lowest air pollution readingssince 2000, according to data from the Ministry of Environmental Protection. The average monthly air pollutionindex was 74, about 25% lower than in the previous seven years. Earlier data were not available. Experts seeseveral reasons for the improvement, including the relocation of some of Beijing's dirtiest factories outside thecity and the partial continuation of traffic limits imposed for the Olympics. Perhaps most significant has been theeconomic downturn. Even elsewhere in China, where no Olympic pollution measures were imposed, the level ofdirty air is down. Chak Chan, who has published studies on China's air quality, warns that the relief offered bythe slump is temporary. "But if taken as an opportunity to do more in terms of energy efficiency and cleantechnology, then it can have a long-term effect in improving air quality," said Chan, a professor at Hong KongUniversity of Science and Technology. For now, the cleaner air is a vindication of sorts for Beijing. China won itsbid to host the Olympics partly on the promise that it would lead to a cleaner capital. The government spentbillions of dollars to clean up the air. It followed that spending with two months of drastic measures, temporarilyshutting factories across five provinces, suspending construction in the capital, and ordering drivers to idle their17 March 2013 Page 23 of 483 ProQuestcars every other day from July to September. The results were dramatic, with the air pollution index hittingrecord lows in August and September. Viewers around the world watched some sporting events take placeunder crystal blue skies. In an assessment released in February, the U.N. Environment Program said carbonmonoxide levels fell 47% and sulfur dioxide 38% during the two-week Olympics. Even Beijing's worst pollutant --tiny particles of dust, soot and aerosol known as particulate matter 10 -- was reduced by 20%. The U.N. reportpraised China for investing in long-term solutions such as public transport, urban parks and renewable-energyvehicles. City officials also kept some traffic limits in place after the Olympics. Car owners are banned fromdriving one day a week, depending on their license plate numbers. Air pollution, while not as low as in Augustand September, when the harshest restrictions were in place, has remained far below recent years. FromOctober through February, the average monthly pollution index was 82. On a recent sunny morning, Li Heng,66, joined dozens of seniors in Beijing's Ritan Park for a daily round of tai chi, the slow breathing exercises. "Ithink the air is much better recently. We can take very deep breaths and the air feels fresh," he said, inhalingand exhaling loudly before thumping his chest. It's not just Beijing. Southern China, home to many exportproducingfactories, has seen clear improvement. Many cities in Guangdong province, where 62,400businesses closed last year, have seen a drop in the number of badly polluted days, according to data on theGuangdong Provincial Environmental Protection Bureau website. For example, the factory city of Dongguanreported more than a dozen days in the first half of 2008 when the air pollution index topped 100, a levelconsidered unhealthy for sensitive groups including infants and the elderly. But in the second half of the year,there were only two such days. Not all cities saw improvements. But across a sampling of seven key cities, theaverage number of badly polluted days halved between the first and second half of 2008. A similar phenomenonwas seen when the Soviet Union collapsed, causing the industrial haze over the Arctic to drop by nearly 50%,said Kenneth Rahn, an atmospheric chemist from the University of Rhode Island who has studied air quality inChina. "In principle, a reduction in economic activity can and will reduce air pollution," he wrote in an e-mail. "Iwould expect something similar for China but of lesser magnitude." During boom times, demand for electricitywas so high in Guangdong's Pearl River Delta that companies often endured rotating blackouts. Some installedtheir own generators, which burned low-grade, dirty fuel. But since last fall, blackouts have been few, andgenerators are seldom used. Environmental advocates say the downturn presents an opportunity for thegovernment to move more aggressively to shut the dirtiest plants and enact stricter emissions regulations. "Thefact that the economy has slowed down has made it easier to stick to their plans to consolidate and closeplants," said Deborah Seligsohn, director of the China climate program for the U.S.-based World ResourcesInstitute. Seligsohn said she is encouraged by the fact that China's $586-billion economic stimulus plan includesfunding for better technology and infrastructure that could benefit the environment. In Guangdong, theslowdown could spur long-held plans to transform the region from dirty, labor-intensive manufacturing to cleanerhigh-tech industries. Wang Xiaoming, director of communication for the Beijing Environmental ProtectionBureau, said he hopes firms will take advantage of the slowdown to install more energy-efficient and cleanertechnology. "This period is an opportunity for each factory to adjust their production methods. If they wereoperating at full capacity, they would never have the time for this," he said. It's advice that Xu, 59, has taken toheart as he seeks to reinvent Beijing Famed Machinery, his 2-decade-old company. With production down 75%this year, he has now decided to focus his energy on what had largely been a side project: making and sellingmachines that turn agricultural waste into what he calls "green coal" -- fuel pellets that burn more cleanly thancoal. "It's up to us whether we can turn crisis into opportunity," he said. "This is a good time for our biomassproduct." The longtime business owner even draws inspiration from the late founding father of communistChina: "As Chairman Mao said, under certain circumstances, the bad thing can lead to a good result." -- APwriter William Foreman in Guangzhou and researchers Xi Yue and Yu Bing contributed to this report. Credit:Tran writes for the Associated Press. Illustration Caption: PHOTO: A CAPITAL DAY: Traffic crowds a highwaythrough Beijing. City officials have kept in place some limits on vehicle circulation instituted for last year's17 March 2013 Page 24 of 483 ProQuestSummer Games.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Andy Wong Associated PressSubject: Air pollution; Olympic games-2008; Factories; Environmental economics; Energy efficiencyPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.10Publication year: 2009Publication date: Apr 12, 2009Year: 2009Dateline: BEIJINGSection: Main News; Part A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422268265Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2009 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 15 of 213EPA wants cuts in air pollution from shipsAuthor: Sahagun, LouisPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 31 Mar 2009: A.10.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The Environmental Protection Agency said Monday that it has submitted a proposal to theInternational Maritime Organization that would create tougher emission standards for foreign vessels in thecoastal waters and ports of the United States and Canada.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The Environmental Protection Agency said Monday that it has submitted a proposal to the InternationalMaritime Organization that would create tougher emission standards for foreign vessels in the coastal watersand ports of the United States and Canada. The proposal would create a 230-mile Emissions Control Areaalong the nations' coastlines as a "step to protect the air and water along our shores, and the health of the17 March 2013 Page 25 of 483 ProQuestpeople in our coastal communities," EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said at a news conference in New Jersey.The International Maritime Organization is the United Nations agency concerned with maritime safety andsecurity and the prevention of pollution from ships. The proposal could have a significant effect on air pollutionin Southern California, where the Los Angeles and Long Beach port complex remains the region's major sourceof carcinogenic diesel emissions. Port authorities in Los Angeles and Long Beach endorsed the action. "Itsounds to me like the EPA is rising up from the dead and beginning to live again," said S. David Freeman,president of the Los Angeles Board of Harbor Commissioners. "In the meantime, we'll continue to do things ourway. We've gotten a lot done already, but if we can get help from the EPA, well, that's a change for the better."However, foreign ships, which account for 95% of all calls to port nationwide, are largely beyond thejurisdictional reach of state and federal air pollution regulations. This plan would regulate the emissions offoreign vessels under the auspices of the U.N. agency. The 360 ports along the Atlantic, the Great Lakes, theGulf of Mexico and Pacific coasts drive both local and global economies, moving billions of dollars in rawmaterials and products, and creating thousands of jobs. Some of these ports, including the Los Angeles-LongBeach complex, are expecting to double their traffic in coming years. Yet more than 40 U.S. ports inmetropolitan areas fail to meet federal air quality standards, officials said. As a result, cities that rely on port andshipping industries tend to experience inordinately high rates of cancer, asthma and other illnesses, Jacksonsaid. Under the proposal, beginning in 2011, nitrogen oxide emissions would be cut by 20% from vessels builtsince 1990. By 2016, new engines would see a cut of 80%. By 2015, sulfur emissions from fuel would be cut95%, and small particulate matter by 85%. "EPA's announcement today is music to my ears because it meansthe United States is stepping forward to take a strong leadership role on clean air around ports," Sen. BarbaraBoxer (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, said. EPAspokeswoman Cathy Milbourn said the U.N. agency would begin reviewing the proposal in July. --louis.sahagun@Subject: Emission standards; Environmental regulations; Air pollution; Emissions controlCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency--EPA; NAICS: 924110Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.10Publication year: 2009Publication date: Mar 31, 2009Year: 2009Section: Main News; Part A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422259914Document URL: March 2013 Page 26 of 483 ProQuestCopyright: (Copyright (c) 2009 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 16 of 213Medicine; There's a chance of migraine in the forecastAuthor: Engel, MaryPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 16 Mar 2009: E.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: In a large study published online March 9 in the journal Neurology, researchers from Boston's BethIsrael Deaconess Medical Center and the Harvard School of Public Health decided to explore the role ofpollution in headaches, because fine-particulate pollutants cause or complicate other health problems, such asheart attacks, stroke, congestive heart failure and asthma.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: A variety of headache triggers are relatively well-known: red wine, chocolate, soft cheese and thebeginning of the menstrual cycle. But although weather, especially changes in air pressure, is frequently citedas a headache trigger, the connection has not been shown in a large, well-designed study. Now researchershave found that high temperatures and low air pressure can indeed trigger migraines but that there doesn'tseem to be a clear association between such severe headaches and air pollution. In a large study publishedonline March 9 in the journal Neurology, researchers from Boston's Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center andthe Harvard School of Public Health decided to explore the role of pollution in headaches, because fineparticulatepollutants cause or complicate other health problems, such as heart attacks, stroke, congestive heartfailure and asthma. The study included 7,054 headache patients of both genders and varying ages and ethnicgroups who were seen at the medical center's emergency room between May 2000 and December 2007.Researchers looked at temperature levels, barometric pressure, humidity, fine-particulate matter and otherpollutants during the three days before each patient was seen in the ER and for a control day, in which thepatient did not report a severe headache. A rise in temperature was strongly associated with headaches: Anincrease of 5 degrees Celsius (or 9 degrees Fahrenheit) increased the risk of migraine by 7.4%. Low airpressure, which often precedes storms, played a smaller role. "This study provides pretty rigorous scientificproof that changes in temperature are migraine triggers, and that's something that's not been known before,"said Dr. Richard Lipton of the Montefiore Headache Center in New York City. Knowing what triggers an attackgives migraine sufferers a measure of control, said Lipton, who was not associated with the study. One of hispatients, for example, moved from New York to Arizona because air pressure in the Southwest is lesschangeable. Triggers often work in concert. So migraine sufferers could, for example, be especially careful toavoid red wine and chocolate on hotter days or when a storm is forecast. Lipton was less convinced by thestudy's finding on ambient air pollution, which, he said, was harder than temperature to measure over a largeregion. But he also said that a similar study that found a correlation between particulate matter and asthma alsoused a central monitoring site. The migraine study did find a borderline association between headaches andlevels of nitrogen dioxide, found in smog and car exhaust. Given the role of fine-particulate matter incardiovascular disease, the researchers called for additional study on this. -- mary.engel@17 March 2013 Page 27 of 483 ProQuestSubject: Outdoor air quality; Air pollution; Temperature; Atmospheric pressure; Studies; Migraine; MedicalresearchPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: E.3Publication year: 2009Publication date: Mar 16, 2009Year: 2009Section: Health; Part E; Features DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: FeatureProQuest document ID: 422231968Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2009 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 17 of 213Low-level ozone exposure found to be lethal over time; An 18-year study links long-term pollutionl evels to a higher annual risk of death from respiratory ills.Author: Maugh, Thomas H, IIPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 12 Mar 2009: A.17.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Low-level ozone exposure found to be lethal over time; An 18-year study links long-term pollutionlevels to a higher annual risk of death from respiratory ills.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Ozone pollution is a killer, increasing the yearly risk of death from respiratory diseases by 40% to 50%in heavily polluted cities like Los Angeles and Riverside and by about 25% throughout the rest of the country,researchers reported today. Environmental scientists already knew that increases in ozone during periods ofheavy pollution caused short-term effects, such as asthma attacks, increased hospitalizations and deaths fromheart attacks. But the 18-year study of nearly half a million people, reported today in the New England Journalof Medicine, is the first to show that long-term, low-level exposure to the pollutant can also be lethal. Current17 March 2013 Page 28 of 483 ProQueststandards for ozone pollution cover only eight-hour averages of the colorless gas, but even with that relativelyrelaxed rule, 345 counties with a total population of more than 100 million people are out of compliance. TheEnvironmental Protection Agency "has already said that it will revisit the current ozone standards in thecountry," said Dan Greenbaum, president of the Boston-based Health Effects Institute, one of the study'ssponsors. "Undoubtedly, when it happens these results are going to be a very important part of that review,"said Greenbaum, who was not involved in the study. The EPA may need to implement an annual standard, saidUniversity of Ottawa environmental health scientist Daniel Krewski, one of the paper's authors. CoauthorMichael Jerrett of UC Berkeley said the findings could have profound implications because they show thatozone worsens conditions that already kill a large number of people. Deaths from respiratory diseases, such aschronic obstructive pulmonary disease, emphysema and pneumonia, account for about 8.5% of all U.S. deaths,an estimated 240,000 each year. Worldwide, such conditions account for 7.7 million deaths each year. Ozone iswhat is known as a secondary pollutant. It is not formed directly by the burning of fossil fuels. Rather, nitrogenoxides produced by such combustion react in the presence of sunlight to form ozone. It is thus the biggestproblem in areas that are sunny and hot, Jerrett said. As an oxidizing agent, ozone reacts with virtually anythingit comes into contact with. In particular, it reacts with cells in the lungs, causing inflammation and a variety ofother effects that lead to premature aging. Jerrett and his colleagues studied 448,850 people over age 18 in 96metropolitan regions who enrolled in the American Cancer Society Cancer Prevention Study II in 1982 and1983. The subjects were tracked for an average of 18 years. During that follow-up period, there were 48,884deaths, 9,891 of them from respiratory diseases. The researchers found that every increase of 10 parts perbillion (ppb) in average ozone concentrations was associated with about a 4% increase in dying from respiratorycauses. Riverside had the highest ozone average (104 ppb), and the risk of dying from respiratory causes was50% greater than it would have been if there were no ozone. Los Angeles had the second-highest ozone leveland a 43% increase in risk. In contrast, San Francisco had the lowest average ozone level (33 ppb) of the 96regions studied and only a 14% increased risk, probably because of the fog and prevailing winds, which reduceozone formation. The Pacific Northwest also had low levels of ozone, again because of rain and cool weather.Cities in the East like New York and Washington had an average increased risk of about 25% to 27%. Theresearchers found no increase in deaths from cardiovascular disease associated with ozone levels -- thosedeaths are caused primarily by the fine particulates present in air pollution. They also found no increase inoverall mortality, suggesting that ozone is causing deaths in people who were probably going to die in anotheryear or two anyway, according to epidemiologist Joel Schwartz of the Harvard School of Public Health, who wasnot involved in the study. "We do know that ozone is particularly dangerous for people living with existingasthma or lung disease," Jerrett said. And it didn't matter what someone's weight, income or education was. "Itseems to affect a lot of people relatively equally." -- thomas.maugh@Subject: Studies; Environmental health; Air pollution; Ozone; Respiratory diseasesLocation: Los Angeles California, Riverside CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.17Publication year: 2009Publication date: Mar 12, 2009Year: 2009Section: Main News; Part A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLC17 March 2013 Page 29 of 483 ProQuestPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422241960Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2009 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 18 of 213TRANSPORTATION; Cleanup at ports starts to pay off; Older polluting trucks are being barred orfined and electric ones rolled out as emissions plan gains momentum.Author: White, Ronald DPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 23 Feb 2009: C.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: [...] it took weeks longer than anticipated to put in place. [...] Wednesday, all trucks carried stickers andhad to be monitored visually at the gates by attendants.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: An ambitious plan to clean up once-filthy air around the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach hasshifted into high gear. Hundreds of 1988-and-older trucks have been banned since October. Others that don'tmeet 2007 air pollution standards began paying a $70 fee last week each time they haul cargo to and from theports. This week, the first of a fleet of electric trucks will debut. And within three years, most ships will be able toplug into the ports' electrical grid and turn off their exhaust-belching diesel engines. For more than a decade,South Bay and Long Beach residents have complained about pollution from the ports, and 1,200 annualpremature deaths have been linked to the ports' air pollution problems. But in October, the ports launched thecleanup, and it's beginning to pay off. "This is the No. 1 health issue in our city," said Long Beach Mayor BobFoster, who was pleased with the new truck fees introduced last week. "By paying these fees, the people whobenefit from the goods-movement industry have become part of the solution to cleaning the air." Los AngelesMayor Antonio Villaraigosa agreed. The new fee collection "marks a milestone in our efforts to clean up theports as we roll ahead with taking 16,800 dirty-diesel trucks off the road for good." The National ResourcesDefense Council, long one of the ports' toughest critics, was impressed. It praised the step in October to removeabout 2,000 trucks that were at least 20 years old. As a result, the group estimated that diesel particulatesemissions may have been reduced 50%. "These are the dirtiest ports in the nation, with the worst air pollution,but if this program survives its legal challenges, the changes these ports are making now could be adoptedthroughout the country," said David Pettit, senior attorney for the resources council. Experts say no other part of17 March 2013 Page 30 of 483 ProQuestthe nation has taken such broad steps to reduce the effect their ports have on health. "This is putting theSouthern California ports at the forefront. Port trucks are going to be cleaner than any other trucks in the regionthat are hauling cargo, and that is huge," said Kristen Monaco, a logistics and port trucking expert at Cal StateLong Beach. "This will be used as a template for ports around the nation." About 3,000 new clean diesel truckshave already joined the fleet, which is well above the 2,000 new trucks both ports said that they had hoped tohave in place by now. "Everybody said that this would never work, but it is not just working, it's thriving,"Villaraigosa said. Other cleanup efforts underway include: * Ports have earmarked more than $20 million inincentives that are encouraging more than a dozen of the world's biggest shipping lines to switch to cleanburningfuels as they approach Southern California. * Nearby harbor areas have also become testing groundsfor the latest technology, such as compressed natural gas trucks that will be moving cargo containers betweenthe San Pedro Bay ports and nearby freight-consolidation yards. * Los Angeles and Long Beach have becomenew technology incubators, with seed money for projects such as the world's first electric-diesel hybrid tugboat,which was delivered this month. That includes Balqon Corp., the electric truck manufacturer. On Wednesday,amid confusion and traffic jams, officials launched a much-delayed effort to assess a $70 fee on all trucks thatdo not meet 2007 air pollution standards each time they haul cargo containers to and from the ports. The feeswill be used to help subsidize truckers so that they can lease from the port new low-emissions diesel or naturalgas trucks. Under the plan that is expected to start in the coming weeks, truckers would pay 50% to 60% of thetruck leases and the fees would cover the rest, plus maintenance. The timing is crucial because Dec. 31 is thenext deadline for eliminating or retrofitting 2003 and older trucks. It hasn't been a smooth road. An electronicsystem is finally in place at the ports to determine which trucks meet the new requirements. But it took weekslonger than anticipated to put in place. Until Wednesday, all trucks carried stickers and had to be monitoredvisually at the gates by attendants. Retailers have threatened to take their business elsewhere, but it is not clearhow much business might have been lost. Lawsuits filed by the American Trucking Assn. and the FederalMaritime Commission to block various parts of the clean truck program are pending. Port traffic was snarledWednesday when hundreds of trucks were turned away from the terminal gates because they did not have theproper credentials for the fee collection. There were fewer problems and delays Thursday and Friday. It was "arealization for a lot of people that we are serious about doing this. It's like tax day. People will wait for the lastminute to do what they have to, but you cannot wish it away; it is here," said Dick Steinke, executive director ofthe Port of Long Beach. S. David Freeman, chairman of the Port of Los Angeles' board of harborcommissioners, said, "The miracle is we are ahead of schedule despite all the thrashing and whooping andhollering that has gone on." Bruce Wargo, president and chief executive of PortCheck, the organization set upto handle the fee collections, said that the first few days went off better than expected. "Only about 10% of thetrucks today were turned away at the gates," Wargo said. "I was expecting it to be about 20%." Not everyonewas pleased. Dwight Robinson is vice president of the Los Angeles Harbor Grain Terminal, a longtime localbusiness that helps exporters move their grains and other agricultural goods overseas by transferring them tocargo containers. One of Robinson's drivers showed up in a 2009 natural gas truck, only to be turned away fromboth ports because his truck tags were faulty. But officials at the Terminal Island Clean Truck Center later toldhim the tags were fine, after he had waited in line for three hours. But others, including San Pedro residentKathleen Woodfield, were ecstatic. "It gives me a feeling of great hope that these air pollution issues will beresolved and that we will be breathing cleaner air in the very near future," she said. Geraldine Knatz, executivedirector of the Port of Los Angeles, said she had already heard from officials at some of the nation's other portswho were anxious to know how it was going. "I think we're off to a great start," she said. --ron.white@ Illustration Caption: PHOTO: LINE: Trucks that don't meet air pollution standards beganpaying a $70 fee last week each time they haul cargo to and from the ports. Above, Port of L.A. Clean TruckCenter.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Bob Chamberlin Los Angeles Times17 March 2013 Page 31 of 483 ProQuestSubject: Fees & charges; Diesel engines; Trucking; Vehicle emissions; Shipping; Air pollution; Emissionscontrol; PortsLocation: CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Port of Los Angeles; NAICS: 488310, 925120; Name: Port of Long Beach-California; NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: C.1Publication year: 2009Publication date: Feb 23, 2009Year: 2009Section: Business; Part C; Business DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422257780Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2009 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 19 of 213The Nation; Cleaner air seen boosting life spanAuthor: Maugh, Thomas H, IIPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 22 Jan 2009: A.8.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The reductions in pollution accounted for about 15% of a nearly three-year increase in life expectancyduring the two decades, said epidemiologist C. Arden Pope III of Brigham Young University, lead author of thestudy appearing today in the New England Journal of Medicine.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: For those wondering just how much effect cleaning up the air can have, researchers now have a muchfuller picture. Reductions in particulate air pollution during the 1980s and 1990s led to an average five-month17 March 2013 Page 32 of 483 ProQuestincrease in life expectancy in 51 U.S. metropolitan areas, with some of the initially more polluted cities such asBuffalo, N.Y., and Pittsburgh showing a 10-month increase, researchers said Wednesday. The reductions inpollution accounted for about 15% of a nearly three-year increase in life expectancy during the two decades,said epidemiologist C. Arden Pope III of Brigham Young University, lead author of the study appearing today inthe New England Journal of Medicine. It is well known that particulate air pollution reduces life expectancy, saidenvironmental epidemiologist Joel Schwartz of the Harvard School of Public Health, who was not involved in thestudy. But public policy makers "are interested in the question of, 'If I spend the money to reduce pollution, whatreally happens?' " he said. Schwartz reported two years ago that a study in six cities revealed increased lifeexpectancy was associated with reductions in particulate pollution. Pope and his colleagues expanded on thatconnection, finding that in a large fraction of the U.S. population "the more particulate pollution went down, themore life expectancy went up." Their finding "greatly strengthens the foundation of the argument for air qualitymanagement," wrote environmental health scientist Daniel Krewski of the University of Ottawa in an editorialaccompanying the report. The particulates in question are called fine particulates because they are smaller than2.5 microns in diameter, allowing them to burrow deep into the small air passages of the lung. They haverepeatedly been shown to produce cardiovascular and pulmonary disease. Larger particulates, which causevisibility problems, have a much smaller effect on health. The fine particulates are produced by cigarettes,gasoline and diesel engines, coal power plants, foundries and a variety of other urban sources. Pope and hiscolleagues studied two sets of data collected in 214 counties, comprising 51 metropolitan areas, in 1980 and2000, comparing reductions in particulate levels and increases in life expectancies. They used a variety ofadvanced statistical methods to try to eliminate effects linked to changes in population, income, education,migration and demographics. They concluded that for every decrease of 10 micrograms per cubic meter ofparticulate pollution in a city, average life span increased a little more than seven months -- about the sameamount seen in previous, smaller studies. "We are getting a return on our investment to improve air quality,"Pope said. Overall, the average life span in the 51 areas increased 2.7 years over the two decades, with themajor share of the increase attributed to reductions in smoking and changes in socioeconomic factors. LosAngeles, and Southern California in general, had large increases in life expectancy during the period, eventhough pollution levels did not drop as much as in other cities. Pope attributed the increase in life span to astring of smoking bans begun in 1994. Pope thinks there is room for further improvement. The averagecountrywide fine-particulate concentration in the early 1980s was about 20 micrograms per cubic meter, andthat dropped to about 14 micrograms by 2000. "It's reasonable to expect that we could reduce it by that muchagain, but then we reach a point of substantially diminishing marginal returns," he said. --thomas.maugh@Subject: Air pollution; Studies; Pollution control; Outdoor air quality; Life expectancyPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.8Publication year: 2009Publication date: Jan 22, 2009Year: 2009Section: Main News; Part A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United States17 March 2013 Page 33 of 483 ProQuestISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422199579Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2009 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 20 of 213CALIFORNIA BRIEFING / SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY; Environmental groups sue EPAAuthor: Roosevelt, MargotPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 10 Jan 2009: B.2.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Community groups, public health advocates and environmentalists filed suit against the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency Friday to overturn an October 2007 rule that allowed San Joaquin Valleyofficials to declare victory in a long battle against the airborne dust technically known as coarse particulatematter (PM-10).Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Community groups, public health advocates and environmentalists filed suit against the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency Friday to overturn an October 2007 rule that allowed San Joaquin Valleyofficials to declare victory in a long battle against the airborne dust technically known as coarse particulatematter (PM-10). According to Earthjustice, the environmental law firm that filed the suit in the 9th District Courtof Appeals, air quality monitors in the Valley show that federal standards are not being met. The EPA and thelocal air district say that the recurring violations are natural ones that do not need to be addressed throughfurther controls. "At the time of the finding, we said it was either a miracle or they were lying," said Kevin Hall ofthe Fresno Sierra Club. "As more data came in, we became convinced it was the latter." Much of the pollution inthe Valley is due to agriculture, whether from plowing fields, harvesting crops or truck traffic along unpaved farmroads. Agribusiness, which has been chafing under air pollution rules, is the most politically influential industry inthe Valley. The region includes more than 1,000 giant dairy farms, many of which house more than 1,500 cowseach. Recently, the Bush administration exempted factory farms nationwide from some reporting requirementsfor ammonia, one of the precursors to fine particle pollution. -- Margot RooseveltSubject: Outdoor air quality; Environmental protection; Air pollution; Environmentalists; Dairy farmsPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.2Publication year: 200917 March 2013 Page 34 of 483 ProQuestPublication date: Jan 10, 2009Year: 2009Section: California; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422275988Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2009 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 21 of 213THE REGION; Pollution saps state's economy, study says; Deaths, illnesses linked to particulatesand ozone cost $28 billion yearly, Cal State Fullerton report shows.Author: Sahagun, LouisPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 13 Nov 2008: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: None available.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The California economy loses about $28 billion annually due to premature deaths and illnesses linkedto ozone and particulates spewed from hundreds of locations in the South Coast and San Joaquin air basins,according to findings released Wednesday by a Cal State Fullerton research team. Most of those costs, about$25 billion, are connected to roughly 3,000 smog-related deaths each year, but additional factors include workand school absences, emergency room visits, and asthma attacks and other respiratory illnesses, said teamleader Jane Hall, a professor of economics and co-director of the university's Institute for Economics andEnvironment Studies. The study underscores the economic benefits of meeting federal air quality standards at atime when lawmakers and regulators are struggling with California's commitment to protecting public health in aweak economy. The $90,000 study does not propose any particular action. But in an interview, Hall said, "Weare going to pay for it one way or the other. Either we pay to fix the problem or we pay in loss of life and poorhealth. . . . This study adds another piece to the puzzle as the public and policy-makers try to understand wheredo we go from here." The California Air Resources Board is scheduled to vote Dec. 11 on whether to adoptbroader rules that would force more than 1 million heavy-duty diesel truckers to install filters or upgrade their17 March 2013 Page 35 of 483 ProQuestengines. Truckers and agribusiness have argued against stricter regulation, saying it is too expensive for themto invest in clean vehicles at a time of economic uncertainty. Mary Nichols, chairman of the air resources board,said the findings will "be useful to all of us. Our board members hear on a regular basis from constituents whoare concerned about the costs of regulations, and seldom hear from people concerned about their healthbecause they are collectively and individually not as well organized." In the meantime, the two regions continueto pay a steep price for generating air pollution ranked among the worst in the country. In the South Coastbasin, that cost is about $1,250 per person per year, which translates into a total of about $22 billion in savingsif emissions came into compliance with federal standards, Hall said. In the San Joaquin air basin, the cost isabout $1,600 per person per year, or about $6 billion in savings if the standards were met. The savings wouldcome from about 3,800 fewer premature deaths among those age 30 and older; 1.2 million fewer days of schoolabsences; 2 million fewer days of respiratory problems in children; 467,000 fewer lost days of work and 2,700fewer hospital admissions, according to the study. The study noted that attaining the federal standard forexposure to particulates would save more lives than lowering the number of motor vehicle fatalities to zero inmost of the regions examined. The hardest hit were fast-growing communities in Kern and Fresno counties,where 100% of the population was exposed to particulate concentrations above the average federal standardfrom 2005 to 2007. High rates of exposure were also found in San Bernardino and Riverside counties, wherediesel soot is blown by prevailing winds and then trapped by four mountain ranges. Considered the most lethalform of air pollution, microscopic particulates expelled from tailpipes, factory smoke stacks, diesel trucks andequipment can penetrate through the lungs and enter the bloodstream. Exposure to these fine particles hasbeen linked to severe asthma, cancer and premature deaths from heart and lung disease. "In the South Coastbasin, an average 64% of the population is exposed to health-endangering annual averages of particulates,"Hall said, "and in the most populated county -- Los Angeles -- it is 75%. "In most years, the South Coast andSan Joaquin basins vie with the Houston, Texas, area for the worst air pollution trophy, but this year we took itback," she said. "That's not a prize you want to be handed. Essentially, imported T-shirts and tennis shoes arebeing hauled to Omaha and the big-rig diesel pollution stays here." Nidia Bautista, community engagementdirector for the Coalition for Clean Air, described the findings as "staggering, and a reminder that health is toooften the trade-off when it comes to cleaning the air." Angelo Logan, spokesman for the East Yard Communitiesfor Environmental Justice, put it another way: "At a time when government is handing out economic stimuluspackages, we could use an economic relief package to help us deal with environmental impacts on our health,families and pocketbooks." Hall agreed. "This is a drain that could be spent in far better ways," she said. --louis.sahagun@ Credit: Sahagun is a Times staff writer. Illustration Caption: PHOTO: SERIOUSSMOG: Diesel trucks are a major contributor to ozone and particulate pollution. The South Coast air basin isone of the most polluted areas in California.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Al Seib Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC: Theproblem of particulate pollution; CREDIT: Paul Duginski Los Angeles TimesSubject: Air pollution; Studies; Airborne particulates; MortalityLocation: CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Publication year: 2008Publication date: Nov 13, 2008Year: 2008Section: California; Part B; Metro Desk17 March 2013 Page 36 of 483 ProQuestPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422373321Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2008 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 22 of 213PORTS; Agency objects to clean truck program; The Federal Maritime Commission seeks toeliminate parts of the anti-pollution effort.Author: White, Ronald DPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 30 Oct 2008: C.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Geraldine Knatz, executive director of the Port of Los Angeles, said port officials were "confident thatthe federal court in the District of Columbia will reject the Federal Maritime Commission's attempt to block theclean truck program and allow the most ambitious air pollution cleanup initiative in the nation to continue to takedirty diesel trucks off the road and remove harmful emissions from our air."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The Federal Maritime Commission said Wednesday that it would ask a U.S. District Court to strikedown parts of a landmark pollution-control program at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, the nation'sbusiest international cargo complex. Elements of the ports' clean truck program "are likely, by a reduction incompetition, to produce an unreasonable increase in transportation cost or unreasonable reduction in service,"the commission said in a statement. Among the provisions to which the commission objects is the Los Angelesport's requirement that truck drivers work for approved concessionaires. Before the program began Oct. 1, porttruck transportation was dominated by thousands of independent owner operators. Long Beach still allowsindependent truckers to work at its port. The commission's 2-1 vote Wednesday to ask a federal court inWashington to issue an injunction against parts of the ports' program puts the anti-pollution effort in jeopardydespite legal victories in a separate federal court battle in California brought by the American Trucking Assn.The normally low-profile commission is perhaps one of the most powerful regulatory entities in Washington thatmost Americans have never heard of. Under the federal Shipping Act of 1984, the agency has the right tointervene when it thinks unfair competitive restrictions or unduly expensive mandates have been placed oninternational commerce. But the commission also made it clear Wednesday that it wasn't seeking to overturn17 March 2013 Page 37 of 483 ProQuestevery aspect of the plan that began this month with barring of the oldest and dirtiest trucks built before 1989. In2012, only trucks that meet 2007 emissions standards will be allowed to enter the ports. "The commissionbelieves that the surgical removal of substantially anti-competitive elements of the agreement, such as theemployee mandate, will permit the ports to implement on schedule those elements of the CTP that produceclean air and improve public health," the commission majority wrote. The goal of the clean truck program is toeliminate tons of particulates and other pollution from local skies. It is a major component of the Clean Air ActionPlan designed to slash overall emissions at the ports by 45% by 2012. Officials of the twin ports hope that thepollution-control efforts will persuade environmentalists to stop throwing legal roadblocks in the way ofexpansion projects. Supporters of the clean truck program reacted angrily to the maritime commission'sdecision. "The commission is siding with a filthy industry and blocking the path to clean air and public health,"said Peter Lehner, executive director of the Natural Resources Defense Council. Carl Pope, executive directorof the Sierra Club, said, "Two commissioners in Washington, D.C., should not make a decision behind closeddoors to ruin clean air for all Southern Californians." Geraldine Knatz, executive director of the Port of LosAngeles, said port officials were "confident that the federal court in the District of Columbia will reject theFederal Maritime Commission's attempt to block the clean truck program and allow the most ambitious airpollution cleanup initiative in the nation to continue to take dirty diesel trucks off the road and remove harmfulemissions from our air." Long Beach port spokesman Art Wong said he couldn't comment on the maritimecommission's move until he saw what the agency filed in court. "We're just not sure how this will affect us,"Wong said. At least one community activist wasn't optimistic that the cleaner trucks would reduce pollution inthe long run because independent owner operators would have trouble making enough money to maintain theirvehicles properly. "That might work for a few years, but then we would be right back where we started," saidKathleen Woodfield, vice president of the San Pedro and Peninsula Homeowners Coalition. --ron.white@ Credit: White is a Times staff writer. Illustration Caption: PHOTO: MOVING CARGO:Trucks are driven near the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. The clean truck program that began thismonth bars the oldest and dirtiest trucks.; PHOTOGRAPHER:David McNew Getty Images; PHOTO: NATION'SBUSIEST: Officials at the twin ports hope pollution-control efforts will persuade environmentalists to stopthrowing roadblocks in the way of expansion projects.; PHOTOGRAPHER:David McNew Getty ImagesSubject: Litigation; Public health; Federal courts; Air pollution; Trucks; Outdoor air quality; Emission standardsLocation: Los Angeles California, Long Beach CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Federal Maritime Commission; NAICS: 926120Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: C.1Publication year: 2008Publication date: Oct 30, 2008Year: 2008Section: Business; Part C; Business DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 0458303517 March 2013 Page 38 of 483 ProQuestSource type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422246009Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2008 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 23 of 213THE REGION; State rules aim to drive down big-rig pollutionAuthor: Roosevelt, MargotPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 25 Oct 2008: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: [...] the San Joaquin Valley and Los Angeles areas are violating federal air quality standards, whichcannot be met without stricter overall truck emission rules, air officials say.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: California's Air Resources Board on Friday released long-awaited draft rules to clean up big-rigpollution that can aggravate asthma, cancer and heart disease. The statewide rules, which are scheduled totake effect in 2010, would apply to more than 1 million heavy-duty diesel trucks, many of which transportmerchandise from the ports of L.A. and Long Beach. Diesel truck transport is the state's largest source of smogformingnitrogen oxide emissions and toxic particulates. Southern California ports recently banned the dirtiestolder trucks. But the San Joaquin Valley and Los Angeles areas are violating federal air quality standards,which cannot be met without stricter overall truck emission rules, air officials say. Truckers and agribusinessinterests have tried to soften the regulations, saying it is too expensive for truckers to invest in clean vehicles ata time of economic woes. The air board is scheduled to vote Dec. 11 on whether to adopt two broader rules thatwould affect all big rigs crossing the state. One would force truckers to install filters or upgrade their engines,and another would require using existing technology to reduce planet-warming greenhouse gases. --margot.roosevelt@ Credit: Roosevelt is a Times staff writer.Subject: Emission standards; Environmental regulations; Greenhouse gases; Air pollution; TrucksCompany / organization: Name: Air Resources Board-California; NAICS: 924110Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Publication year: 2008Publication date: Oct 25, 2008Year: 200817 March 2013 Page 39 of 483 ProQuestSection: California; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422242290Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2008 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 24 of 213The World; Pollution still shrouds its moment in the sunAuthor: Demick, BarbaraPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 29 July 2008: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: "Beijing's air quality is not up to what the world is expecting from an Olympic host city; the sportsteams have reason to be concerned," said Lo Sze Ping, Greenpeace's campaign director in Beijing, during anews conference Monday. Even over the weekend when traffic was at a minimum, the air pollution level aroundthe Olympic stadium fell into a category that the Chinese government terms "unhealthful for sensitive groups,"with inhalable particulates at two to three times the standard set by the World Health Organization.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Despite removing 1.5 million cars from the roads, shutting down hundreds of factories and constructionsites and bringing much of the city's economic life to a standstill, Beijing remains stubbornly shrouded in apersistent, gray haze on the eve of the Summer Olympics. The poor air quality just 11 days before the openingceremonies has left Chinese government officials scrambling for explanations that include statistical anomaliesand the 90-plus-degree heat. The state-run China Daily reported Monday that the Chinese government may beforced to implement an "emergency plan" if air quality hasn't improved 48 hours before the Games begin Aug.8. One possible measure would expand the recently implemented system that allows cars on the road only onodd or even days, depending on license plate numbers, to a ban of up to 90% of private traffic. "Beijing's airquality is not up to what the world is expecting from an Olympic host city; the sports teams have reason to beconcerned," said Lo Sze Ping, Greenpeace's campaign director in Beijing, during a news conference Monday.He blamed the bad air on what he characterized as a "develop first, clean up later" approach by the Chinesegovernment. "It is not good enough," Lo said. Beijing's pre-Olympic clampdown on pollution has alreadyseriously crimped economic life in the capital region. Along with the license-plate-based restrictions that took17 March 2013 Page 40 of 483 ProQuesteffect July 20, the city has banned many out-of-town cars and trucks from its streets and suspended allconstruction work. Factories up to hundreds of miles away have been closed. But the air quality levels haven'timproved at all and for the last few days have been worse. Even over the weekend when traffic was at aminimum, the air pollution level around the Olympic stadium fell into a category that the Chinese governmentterms "unhealthful for sensitive groups," with inhalable particulates at two to three times the standard set by theWorld Health Organization. On Monday, air pollution was barely within the "acceptable" level. Beijing calculatesits daily air pollution index from 1 to 500 based on measures of four pollutants. Days on which the index is under100 are said to be acceptable. The Chinese government says air quality has greatly improved since 2001, whenBeijing won its bid to host the Games with promises to clean up the local atmosphere. Since then, Beijing hastightened emissions standards, built four new subway lines and spent a reported $16 billion on air qualityimprovement. "Indeed we have reached our commitment to make sure air quality is satisfactory for the Games,"Beijing environmental protection official Du Shaozhong told reporters Saturday. So far this year, he said, 70% ofdays had acceptable levels of pollution, an increase of 20 percentage points over last year. But Steven Q.Andrews, a U.S. environmental consultant who analyzed Beijing's figures, contends that the Chinese havetweaked the data. He notes that two air monitoring stations in congested parts of downtown have been droppedfrom the government's calculations for the air pollution index, while monitors in the outskirts have been added.The Chinese government also fails to measure ground-level ozone, a major component of smog. And itcalculates inhalable particulate matter using a largely discredited measurement that looks primarily at largerparticles, rather than the tiny particles more damaging to lungs. "They are manipulating the way they measureand what they measure so much that you cannot say the air quality is improving," Andrews said. "But theirinsistence that air quality has improved takes the pressure off of local officials and factory owners to runemissions control technology and do what they really need to do." Beijing's pollution woes are a product of bothgeography and its booming economy. The city sits in a basin surrounded by three mountains that trappollutants. In addition, the number of automobiles here has roughly doubled since 2001. In theory, the odd-evenlicense plate system would ban half of Beijing's 3.3 million cars from the roads on any given day. The realimpact is more complicated. In a city where many companies have fleets of cars, they simply use those whoselicense plates correspond to the day. Furthermore, Beijing has set aside two of the Second Ring Road's sixlanes for exclusive use by Olympic VIPs, creating greater traffic jams on the city's most important thoroughfare.With so many cars spewing fumes while idling in traffic, parts of the city are suffering from even worse-thannormalexhaust. But many Beijing residents resent the foreign focus on their air. Under the best ofcircumstances, they say, blue skies are rare here this time of year, the rainy season in most of Asia. With airquality the main small talk in town, there are frequent spats between Beijingers and visitors about whether theproblem is wuran, pollution, or just mai, haze. Chinese environmental officials argue that poor visibility does notalways mean the air is bad to breathe. "You might not be able to see things in a steamy bathroom, but youwould not necessarily say it is pollution," Du told reporters. Whatever the cause, there is little dispute thatBeijing's air in recent days has been unpleasant and certainly not a photogenic backdrop for television crewsarriving from around the world. Beijing's showcase architecture -- part of China's $43-billion investment in theOlympics -- looks ghostly under the veil of haze. Athletes have warned that they will wear masks to protect theirlungs while in Beijing, possibly even while competing. And several Olympic teams are conducting their pre-Olympic training in Japan and South Korea to minimize exposure to the host city's air. The Chinese governmenthas already said its scientists have been devising a way to artificially induce rainstorms to clear the air beforethe opening ceremonies. But Chinese environmentalists worry less about the Olympics than they do theaftermath. They fear that, once the Olympic moment passes, authorities will lose the political will to take toughermeasures. "Beijing has missed a golden opportunity to use the Olympics as a platform for more ambitiousprograms to clean up the air," said Lo of Greenpeace. -- barbara.demick@ -- (BEGIN TEXT OFINFOBOX) Unhealthful air Since winning its bid to host the 2008 Olympic Games, China has struggled to17 March 2013 Page 41 of 483 ProQuestreduce Beijing's air pollution. Levels of particulate matter (measured in 2004) for Summer Olympics host citiessince 1980* (in micrograms per cubic meter) Beijing: 89 Athens: 43 Seoul: 41 Barcelona: 35 Los Angeles: 34Moscow: 21 Sydney: 20 *Average annual concentrations in residential areas Note: Data for Atlanta (1996) isunavailable. Source: The World Bank Credit: Times Staff Writer Illustration Caption: PHOTO: A PAIN IN THELUNGS: Thick smog has the Chinese authorities considering a ban on up to 90% of private traffic in the last twodays before the Summer Olympics begin Aug. 8.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Andrew Wong Getty ImagesSubject: Outdoor air quality; Emissions control; Host country; Air pollution; Olympic games-2008Location: Beijing China, ChinaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Publication year: 2008Publication date: Jul 29, 2008Year: 2008Dateline: BEIJINGSection: Main News; Part A; Foreign DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422273165Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2008 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 25 of 213Lovely, but loaded with pollutants; Fireworks displays spew metals, carbon, fuels and other toxics thatcan linger for days or even longer.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 04 July 2008: B.1.ProQuest document link17 March 2013 Page 42 of 483 ProQuestAbstract: During a fireworks show in Indio in 2004, particulate measurements peaked at 847 micrograms percubic meter of air, nearly six times the federal health standard.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: When the rockets and the bombs burst in the air tonight, spectators will experience more than aspectacular show celebrating America's birthday. When their blends of black powder, metals, oxidizers, fuelsand other toxic ingredients are ignited, traces wind up in the environment, often spreading long distances andlasting for days, even months. Although pyrotechnic experts are developing environmentally friendly fireworks,Fourth of July revelers this year will be watching essentially the same high-polluting technology that theirgrandparents experienced decades ago. Throughout the Los Angeles region, concentrations of fine particles, orcarbon soot, skyrocket for up to 24 hours after the Independence Day shows, reaching levels as high as thosefrom wildfires. Public health officials warn that people with heart problems or respiratory diseases, such asasthma, should avoid the smoky celebrations, staying upwind or indoors. "I enjoy a fireworks display as muchas anyone else, but we do have concerns about exposure to high levels of smoke and particles," said JeanOspital, health effects officer for the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Also, traces of poisonousmetals, which give fireworks their bright colors, and perchlorate, a hormone-altering substance used as anoxidizer, trickle to the ground, contaminating waterways. One Environmental Protection Agency study found thatperchlorate levels in an Oklahoma lake rose 1,000-fold after a fireworks display, and they stayed high in someareas for up to 80 days. European chemists Georg Steinhauser and Thomas Klapotke wrote in a recentscientific journal that "several poisonous substances are known to be released in the course of a pyrotechnicapplication" and that they are dispersed over a large area. "It is clear from a vast array of studies that traditionalpyrotechnics are a severe source of pollution," they wrote. The black powder, or gunpowder, used in mostfireworks has an extremely high carbon content; when ignited, it fills the air with fine particles capable ofinflaming airways and lodging in lungs. Every July 4 and 5, the Los Angeles region suffers "generally poor airquality for particulates," said Philip Fine, the AQMD's atmospheric measurements manager. Particulates cancause coughing, sore throats and burning eyes. For people with asthma or other respiratory or cardiovascularconditions, the effects are much worse. Hospital admissions and deaths from asthma, heart attacks andrespiratory disease increase whenever particulate levels rise. In the areas around fireworks displays, particulatelevels increase about 100-fold and don't return to normal until around midday on July 5, according to AQMDdata. During a fireworks show in Indio in 2004, particulate measurements peaked at 847 micrograms per cubicmeter of air, nearly six times the federal health standard. Particulate readings are averaged over a 24-hourperiod, so that was not technically a federal violation. Metals in the air also surge, although they do not exceedstate health guidelines. Nonetheless, they build up in waterways and soil. Ironically, green-colored fireworks arethe least "green" because the metal that produces the color, barium, is highly poisonous. Scientists in Indiafound that airborne barium increased by a factor of 1,000 after a huge fireworks display there. Strontium, whichcreates red, and copper, which forms a blue hue, can also be toxic. "The use of heavy metals like barium orstrontium should be reduced or, if possible, avoided," said Karina Tarantik, a chemist at the University ofMunich in Germany whose lab is working on cleaner pyrotechnics. Much of the new research has beenpropelled by concern over perchlorate, which has been used since the 1930s to provide oxygen for pyrotechnicexplosions. Perchlorate, which has contaminated many drinking water supplies from military and aerospaceoperations, can impair the function of the thyroid gland by blocking the intake of iodide. Fetuses are most at risk,because thyroid hormones regulate their growth. Scientists have made significant advances in low-smoke andperchlorate-free technologies, prompted by the military, which uses flares and other pyrotechnics, and by WaltDisney Co., which stages about 2,000 fireworks displays a year. In the late 1990s, Disney approached the LosAlamos National Laboratory with a request to develop cleaner fireworks to reduce smoke at Disneyland, whichwas prompting complaints to the AQMD from neighbors in Anaheim. Instead of carbon-based materials,17 March 2013 Page 43 of 483 ProQuestscientists there experimented with nitrogen atoms, which produced far less soot and smoke. "In addition,because the high-nitrogen materials burn more cleanly, you could use less coloring agents. We were able to getmuch nicer colors with . . . less metals," said David Chavez, a materials chemist at Los Alamos. Based on thoseexperiments, Los Alamos chemists Michael Hiskey and Darren Naud took an entrepreneurial leave and foundedDMD Systems. Their fireworks use nitrocellulose, which is inexpensive and plentiful, and they emit water,nitrogen and carbon dioxide instead of smoke and perchlorate, Hiskey said. The metal content has beenreduced by about 90%, he said. The cost is about the same as for other U.S.-manufactured fireworks. DisneyWorld in Florida has used his company's comets for about six months. Disneyland developed aerial launchersthat replaced black powder with compressed air in 2004.The resort puts on more than 200 fireworks showseach year, burning about 60,000 pounds of fireworks, far more than all the other theme parks and stadiums inthe region combined. "Now we're on a path toward creating the next generation of fireworks," said DisneyImagineering spokeswoman Marilyn Waters. She said that other ultra-low-smoke and perchlorate-freetechnologies are already used in some Disney shows in Anaheim, Florida and Hong Kong and that aninternational team of vendors and scientists is testing more innovations. But municipalities and civic groups,which buy inexpensive fireworks from China, can't afford the cleaner ones for their Independence Daycelebration. So far, they cost about 10 times more than the Chinese-made ones. "Everything they get is fromChina," Hiskey said. "It's going to be very difficult to break the China habit." But John Conkling, an adjunctprofessor of chemistry at Washington College in Maryland and former executive director of the AmericanPyrotechnics Assn., is confident that environmental concerns are driving the industry. "Certainly if we canreplace perchlorates, the world will be a better place," he said. "I'm optimistic that we will have fireworks showsdown the road with much less perchlorate, if any, and we'll still have the spectacular shows we've always had,"Conkling said. "I expect even by next season there will be less perchlorate in fireworks. Within a five- to 10-yearperiod, we'll see major, major changes." In the meantime, Hiskey has some Fourth of July advice: Where there'ssmoke, there are toxic substances. "If I'm having trouble seeing things because it's so smoky, if the smoke isheaded toward the crowd, that really stinks," he said. -- marla.cone@ Credit: Times Staff WriterIllustration Caption: PHOTO: CLEANER FIREWORKS: Sleeping Beauty's Castle at Disneyland glows under apyrotechnic display. Disney Co. is working toward less toxic displays at its theme parks.;PHOTOGRAPHER:Lori Shepler Los Angeles TimesSubject: Outdoor air quality; Metals; Fireworks; Pollution; Hazardous substancesPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Publication year: 2008Publication date: Jul 4, 2008Year: 2008Section: California; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: English17 March 2013 Page 44 of 483 ProQuestDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422199847Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2008 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 26 of 213EPA's air tests to be challenged; Environmental groups plan to sue in an effort to get air qualitymonitored along Southland freeways.Author: Sahagun, Louis; Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 29 May 2008: B.2.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The measurements, known as "motor vehicle emissions budgets," were recently approved by the EPAfor use in developing a sweeping regional clean air plan to meet federal air quality standards and acquire criticaltransportation project funding.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: A coalition of environmental groups plans to sue the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today toforce it to overturn motor vehicle emissions limits for Southern California, charging that the targets fail toaddress hazardous pollution faced by 1.5 million people who live next to freeways. In a petition to be filed in theU.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, the Natural Resources Defense Council is demandingcomprehensive monitoring of air quality along freeways, including the 710 Freeway, where traffic flow averages12,180 vehicles per hour -- more than 25% of them diesel trucks. Of particular concern to the coalition aremeasurements taken by South Coast Air Quality Management District monitors that are far from heavily traveledroadways where cancer risks from diesel particulates are greatest. Federal policy prohibits local air regulators,including the AQMD, from using measurements near a known large pollution source, in this case a truckcloggedfreeway that serves the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, to calculate regional air pollutionamounts. Regional air and transportation officials said they sympathized with the environmental groups butwere worried such a lawsuit could cost Southern California billions in federal transportation funds, includingmoney earmarked for expansion of the 710 Freeway to speed up idling diesel trucks. "They're potentiallyopening up a Pandora's box that may jeopardize regional transportation funding" by delaying the process, saidBarry Wallerstein, executive officer of the AQMD. Air districts in the Coachella Valley, Atlanta and elsewherehave lost such funds for not setting vehicle emission levels in time, he said. Wallerstein added that the localdistrict would begin monitoring diesel particulate pollution on freeways this summer. The EPA also rejectedtougher motor vehicle emissions limits proposed by the local district and the state air board, Wallerstein said.He said suing to overturn the renegotiated levels could allow EPA to weaken them even further. "The Bushadministration has already tried to weaken these once," he said. The measurements, known as "motor vehicleemissions budgets," were recently approved by the EPA for use in developing a sweeping regional clean airplan to meet federal air quality standards and acquire critical transportation project funding. David Pettit, asenior attorney for the resources defense council, said the budgets overlook those most affected by these17 March 2013 Page 45 of 483 ProQuestemissions. "Millions of people in and around Los Angeles breathe air so dirty it flunks federal standards.""Those living near freeways breathe the dirtiest air," he said, "and EPA's own data show the cleanup plan it justapproved won't protect them from risk of cancer, asthma and other diseases. That's against the law. . . . Theclean air plan was designed to protect everyone, not just those lucky enough to escape the reach of deadlydiesel fumes." Angelo Logan of East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice agreed with Pettit. During atour of a neighborhood of modest stucco homes a stone's throw from the 710 Freeway in Commerce, he said,"It's as though they are saying the 1.5 million people who live along the freeways don't matter; that their livesaren't as valuable as other peoples'." The home where Bob Eula, former mayor of Commerce, has lived for 65years is framed by rail yards, the 710 Freeway and congested Washington Boulevard. Standing in the shade ofa pine tree in his frontyard, Eula nodded toward a column of soot rising from a nearby diesel-powered crane."It's hell," he said. "This whole neighborhood should be eliminated and its people moved to a safer place. Letthe freeway and railroads have it." Matt Haber, a spokesman for the EPA, acknowledged that "we don't have ananswer yet" for protecting people who reside near freeways. "It's a huge issue in which science is not as goodas it is for the general population," he said. Studies have increasingly zeroed in on the harmful effects of dieselsoot, especially fine particulates. -- louis.sahagun@ janet.wilson@ Credit: Times StaffWriters Illustration Caption: PHOTO: TRUCKS ON THE 710 FREEWAY: Traffic on this freeway, the artery thatleads from the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, averages 12,180 vehicles per hour, more than 25% ofthem heavy-duty diesel trucks. A suit will seek monitoring of nearby air.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Bryan Chan LosAngeles Times; PHOTO: DIRTY AIR: Smog tinges Los Angeles on May 21, 2003. The Natural ResourcesDefense Council, in a suit to be filed today, seeks comprehensive monitoring of air quality along freeways.;PHOTOGRAPHER:David McNew Getty ImagesSubject: Air pollution; Transportation planning; Traffic flow; Roads & highways; Federal court decisions;Environmental justice; DistrictsPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.2Publication year: 2008Publication date: May 29, 2008Year: 2008Section: California; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422210398Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2008 Los Angeles Times)17 March 2013 Page 46 of 483 ProQuestLast updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 27 of 213More deaths in state are linked to air pollutionAuthor: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 22 May 2008: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The studies, including one by USC tracking 23,000 people in greater Los Angeles, and another by theAmerican Cancer Society monitoring 300,000 people across the United States, have found rates of heartattacks, strokes and other serious disease increase exponentially after exposure to even slightly higheramounts of metal, dust or other fragments from tailpipes and smokestacks.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: As many as 24,000 deaths annually in California are linked to chronic exposure to fine particulatepollution, triple the previous official estimate of 8,200, according to state researchers. The revised figures arebased on a review of new research across the nation about the hazards posed by microscopic particles, whichsink deep into the lungs. "Our report concludes these particles are 70% more dangerous than previouslythought, based on several major studies that have occurred in the last five years," said Bart Croes, chiefresearcher for the California Air Resources Board. Croes will present his findings at a board meeting in Fresnothis morning. The studies, including one by USC tracking 23,000 people in greater Los Angeles, and another bythe American Cancer Society monitoring 300,000 people across the United States, have found rates of heartattacks, strokes and other serious disease increase exponentially after exposure to even slightly higheramounts of metal, dust or other fragments from tailpipes and smokestacks. It is difficult to attribute individualdeaths to particulate pollution, Croes conceded, but he said long-term studies that account for smoking, obesityand other risks have increasingly zeroed in on fine particulate pollution as a killer. "There's no death certificatethat says specifically someone died of air pollution, but cities with higher rates of air pollution have much greaterrates of death from cardiovascular diseases," he said. Californians exposed to high levels of fine particulateshad their lives cut short on average by 10 years, the board staff found. Researchers also found that whenparticulates are cut even temporarily, death rates fall. "When Dublin imposed a coal ban, when Hong Kongimposed reductions in sulfur dioxide, when there was a steel mill strike in Utah . . . they saw immediatereductions in deaths," Croes said. More measures will be needed, air board officials said, including eventuallylowering the maximum permissible levels of soot statewide. California already has the lowest thresholds in theworld, at 12 micrograms per cubic meter, but researchers say no safe level of exposure has been found. Moreregulations are being drafted, including one requiring cleaner heavy-duty trucks. "We must work even harder tocut short these life-shortening emissions," Air Resources Board Chairwoman Mary Nichols said in a statement.Clean air advocates said they would be watching closely. "These numbers are shocking; they're incredible,"said Tim Carmichael, senior policy director for the Coalition for Clean Air, a statewide group. He and others saidthe board must strengthen a soot clean-up plan submitted to them by the San Joaquin Valley Air PollutionControl District. A hearing and vote on the plan is scheduled for today. Numerous Central Valley public healthgroups wrote Nichols this week, urging bans on the use of industrial equipment on bad air days, toughercontrols on boilers and crop drying equipment, and other action. The economic cost attributed to prematuredeaths and illnesses linked to particulate exposure in the Central Valley has been estimated at $3 billion a year,17 March 2013 Page 47 of 483 ProQuestand $70 billion statewide, according to separate studies. Those figure are expected to be revised upward basedon the new report. "We must clean up the air. We cannot afford further delay," the group wrote. Agricultural andconstruction industry groups have fought such provisions, saying that they could cripple the region's economy,but have not publicly complained about the plan as proposed. Board spokesman Leo Kay said that given thenew mortality findings, "I certainly don't expect a rubber-stamp approval." -- janet.wilson@ Credit:Times Staff WriterSubject: Pollution control; Air pollution; Airborne particulates; MortalityLocation: CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Publication year: 2008Publication date: May 22, 2008Year: 2008Section: California; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422214840Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2008 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 28 of 213Pittsburgh tops L.A. in one pollution measure; But a new report shows Southland still ranks high infoul air.Author: Abdollah, TamiPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 01 May 2008: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Particle pollution refers to a mixture of tiny solid and liquid particles in the air that get released, forexample, from diesel exhaust, coal-fired power plants and burning wood, fields or forests.17 March 2013 Page 48 of 483 ProQuestLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: CORRECTION: SEE CORRECTION APPENDED; Air quality study: An article in Thursday's Californiasection about the American Lung Assn.'s "State of the Air" study said Visalia-Porterfield was one of California'stop eight metropolitan areas listed as most polluted. The name of the area is Visalia-Porterville. Mayor AntonioVillaraigosa strolled to the microphone, his jacket slung over his shoulder, a broad smile on his face. "What awonderful day," he said to the reporters and American Lung Assn. members gathered in Echo Park. "All thesecameras, all these good people here to celebrate good news. Put a smile on your faces, everybody. . . . "TodayI'm proud . . . to say for the first time, it feels good to be No. 2." After nearly a decade at the top, the LosAngeles region has been "bested" by the Pittsburgh metropolitan area for the No. 1 spot on the "Top 10 U.S.Cities Most Polluted by Short-Term Particle Pollution." From 2004 to 2006, the area from Los Angeles east toRiverside and south to Long Beach had far fewer 24-hour periods of unhealthy particulate readings than theSteel City. But the region still was the worst offender in the nation for ozone levels and yearly overall particlepollution readings, according to the American Lung Assn.'s annual "State of the Air" study released Wednesday."But we're still on the list," said Villaraigosa, who mentioned that he recently suffered a bout of bronchitis, one ofthe ailments the Lung Assn. cited in its "F" grade for nearly all of Southern California. "Moving forward, we stillhave our work cut out for us," he said. The study tracked ozone as well as daily and annual readings for smallparticles in cities and counties across the country. The rest of the state did not fare well, either: Five of the eightmetropolitan areas listed as most polluted by all three measures used by the association were from California.These included Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside and the Central Valley areas of Bakersfield, Fresno, Visalia-Porterfield and Hanford-Corcoran. The San Diego metropolitan area made the list of top 25 most ozone-pollutedcities at No. 12. In all, 26 of the 52 counties monitored in the state received "F" grades, for having the mostunhealthy high-ozone days or particle-pollution days. Nineteen counties, primarily coastal, received "A" grades.And Salinas, Redding and the San Luis Obispo region were among the top 25 cleanest U.S. cities for long-termparticle pollution. An "F" grade is equivalent to nine or more days of air quality at the level defined as"unhealthy" by the Environmental Protection Agency. Ozone is the primary ingredient in smog and is formedwhen sunlight and heat react with chemicals released from tailpipes, smokestacks or other things burning fossilfuels. The effect of ozone on the lungs can be severe. "Imagine putting acid right on your eye," said Dr. TonyGerber, a volunteer with the lung association. "It is that corrosive." Particle pollution refers to a mixture of tinysolid and liquid particles in the air that get released, for example, from diesel exhaust, coal-fired power plantsand burning wood, fields or forests. These particles can get trapped in the lungs. Both ozone and particulatepollution have been linked to serious respiratory ailments and premature deaths. About 8,800 deaths inCalifornia can be tied to ozone and particle pollution, according to Dr. Sonal Patel, an allergist and pediatricianwith White Memorial Medical Center in East L.A.. San Bernardino, Riverside, Los Angeles and Orange countiesall received failing grades for unhealthy ozone and particle-pollution days. San Bernardino County, the worstoffender in high-ozone days in the country, averaged 90 per year, followed by Kern with 83, Riverside with 77,Tulare with 68, and Los Angeles with 65. Orange County, which did not make the top 25 list, averaged sevenunhealthy ozone days. The failing grades for ozone were improvements over last year. The study did not usenewly tightened EPA standards for ozone exposure, which would have added to tallies of unhealthful air days.Over the last decade, California particle pollution levels have dropped by nearly a third. The association creditedthat drop primarily to tighter engine and emission standards at the state and federal level. "As the Los Angelesmetropolitan area really continues what has been our tradition -- aggressive air pollution control -- sooner orlater other cities that have not been so aggressive are going to start popping up as No. 1 from time to time,"said Sam Atwood, a spokesman for the South Coast Air Quality Management District. If the trend continues,Pittsburgh will top Los Angeles in both long- and short-term particle pollution lists next year, said Janice Nolen,assistant vice president of national policy and advocacy for the American Lung Assn. Villaraigosa touted theClean Air Action Plan, passed in November 2006 and which addresses port-related pollution, as key to17 March 2013 Page 49 of 483 ProQuestcontinuing the progress, as well as a city effort to invest in renewable energy. "In a city known for smog andsprawl, we've made some significant progress," Villaraigosa said. "But we still have work to do . . . so in thecoming years Los Angeles is completely off the list." -- tami.abdollah@ -- (BEGIN TEXT OFINFOBOX) Bragging rights? The Los Angeles Basin dropped from the top of a list of worst offenders by onemeasure of pollution, but topped the list by other measures in an American Lung Assn. annual report.Metropolitan areas with worst short-term particulate pollution (small particles): 1. Pittsburgh-New Castle, Pa. 2.Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside 3. Fresno-Madera 4. Bakersfield 5. Birmingham-Hoover- Cullman, Ala.Worst year-round small-particulate pollution: 1. Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside 2. Pittsburgh-New Castle,Pa. 3. Bakersfield 4. Birmingham-Hoover- Cullman, Ala. 5. Visalia-Porterville, Calif. Worst ozone: 1. LosAngeles-Long-Beach-Riverside 2. Bakersfield 3. Visalia-Porterville, Calif. 4. Houston-Baytown- Huntsville,Texas 5. Fresno-Madera Source: American Lung Assn. Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Pollution control; Emission standards; Ratings & rankings; Coal-fired power plants; Air pollution; FossilfuelsLocation: California, Los Angeles California, Pittsburgh PennsylvaniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Publication year: 2008Publication date: May 1, 2008Year: 2008Section: California; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422193511Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2008 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 29 of 213Plant said to emit toxic dust; Air regulators believe a cement factory near Riverside is the source of apotent carcinogen.17 March 2013 Page 50 of 483 ProQuestAuthor: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 15 Apr 2008: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Barry Wallerstein, chief executive of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, said months ofsampling and lab work showed that so-called clinker dust piles at TXI Riverside Cement in the Rubidoux areanear the Riverside-San Bernardino County line were the source of high levels of airborne hexavalent chromiumdetected at sites in the area, including a uniform factory directly across the street.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: A cement factory near Riverside is emitting high levels of hexavalent chromium, a toxic carcinogen,from enormous outdoor dust piles blowing downwind across an industrial area and a residential community, theregion's top air regulator told The Times on Monday. Barry Wallerstein, chief executive of the South Coast AirQuality Management District, said months of sampling and lab work showed that so-called clinker dust piles atTXI Riverside Cement in the Rubidoux area near the Riverside-San Bernardino County line were the source ofhigh levels of airborne hexavalent chromium detected at sites in the area, including a uniform factory directlyacross the street. "We're not aware of any previous reports that a cement factory would have this level ofhexavalent chromium-related risk, but the fact of the matter is we have sampled downwind of the facility, we'vesampled upwind of the facility, we cross-checked and did backward calculations using air quality modeling, andit's our best professional opinion that this is coming from the Riverside cement plant," said Wallerstein. "Theyhave very large piles of cement material . . . and we believe that the dust from these piles is causing adownwind hexavalent chromium condition." A company official said TXI had been talking with air quality officialsabout the readings, but maintained that the company's plant had not officially been identified as the source ofthe emissions. "We're obviously just as concerned as the district is," said Frank Sheets, a spokesman for TXIRiverside Cement. "I think the key here is verification . . . They're making an assumption, we believe at thispoint in time, that we're the source of that high concentration, and we need to go through a verification process,to verify their findings." Wallerstein said that under California's toxic hot-spots law, the facility's owners would berequired to notify the public of the emissions and take steps to mitigate them. He added that AQMD attorneyshad advised him that the agency was not required to notify the public of the readings until the source ofemissions had been confirmed. The district had been in contact with TXI about the readings for about a month,according to the company. Long-term exposure to airborne hexavalent chromium, also known as chromium 6,has been repeatedly linked in studies to terminal nasal and lung cancer. Recent studies, including one by theNational Toxicological Program last year, have linked it to cancer in every major organ of the body in laboratoryanimals that drank contaminated water. The toxic metal is widely used in metal plating, the aerospace industry,stainless steel processing and dye manufacture. It also can be found in rocks and other raw material used incement production. Chromium 6 was at the center of a drinking-water contamination case in Hinkley, Calif.,made famous by the movie "Erin Brockovich." Wallerstein said he did not know how long the carcinogenic dusthad been blowing from the factory's outdoor areas, but that his staff had first become aware of a potentialproblem in November when they noticed slightly elevated levels of hexavalent chromium at a regionalmonitoring station. That data was collected in 2005 and 2006 but not compiled and studied until late last year,he said. The levels found across the street from the plant are 10 times higher than typical amounts found in air,according to Wallerstein. A state health official said long-term exposure to those levels could lead to anadditional 480 cases of cancer in 1 million people. That is far higher than the 10-per-million level that triggersthe state's toxic hot-spots law. Sheets, the TXI spokesman, said the clinker dust piles were part of a recyclingoperation that may have been in place since the 1960s. He thought it was possible that such dust piles could becovered or cleaned up, if they were proved to be a risk. Sheets said officials at the 100-year-old plant previouslyhad notified potentially affected neighbors of possible hazardous emissions, as required by the toxic hot-spots17 March 2013 Page 51 of 483 ProQuestlaw. But in an e-mail, he said the levels that they calculated would come from the factory and its operationswere below the reporting threshold set by the state. Records show the factory has complied with federalenvironmental reporting standards. In 2006, the most recent year for which data were available, they reported 7pounds of hexavalent chromium emissions. Dr. Robert Blaisdell, chief of exposure modeling for the airtoxicology and epidemiology branch of the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment,cautioned that it would take years of continuous exposure to cause illness. But he said the local air district"should follow up on it . . . hexavalent chromium is a potent carcinogen, and the concern here would be withlong-term exposure." Some questioned why it took so long to figure out the source of the chromium and notifythe public. In a March 14 letter, Wallerstein informed Riverside County officials that the tests taken directlyacross the street from the TXI cement factory in February and March showed levels of the carcinogen were onaverage 10 times higher than typical amounts in the region's air. But in the same letter, citing an ongoinginvestigation, Wallerstein asked them to "please maintain the confidentiality of this information to the extentpossible." Documents obtained by The Times show that AQMD tests in January also found elevated levels ofthe carcinogen at a dozen sites near the cement plant, including a park, two water facilities, a self-storagebusiness and other factories. Under one state law, any government official who learns that hazardous waste isbeing released must notify county officials within 72 hours or face up to three years in prison and stiff fines.Those officials must in turn notify the public "without delay." Wallerstein said it would have been wrong to alarmmembers of the public without positively identifying a source of the emissions. That source was not sufficientlydetermined until he ordered additional tests over the weekend, after The Times contacted him about reports ofhigh chromium readings near the plant. Riverside County Health Officer Eric Frykman said Friday that when thecounty received the March letter and a one-page report, he checked with his internal agency expert, who saidthat based on the levels reported, there was insufficient risk to warrant notifying the public. Richard Drury, anattorney who has successfully sued polluters over hexavalent chromium emissions, said he was less troubledby the lack of public notification than by evidence that high levels were detected in 2005 but not furtherinvestigated. "That's absurd," he said. "The air district should have investigated immediately. If you have a peakof hexavalent chromium, you want to find out where it's coming from. It should not take three or four years. . . . Itseems like someone's been asleep at the switch over at the air district." -- janet.wilson@ Credit:Times Staff WriterSubject: Carcinogens; Dust; Airborne particulates; Cement plants; Air pollutionLocation: Riverside CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: TXI Riverside Cement; NAICS: 327310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Publication year: 2008Publication date: Apr 15, 2008Year: 2008Section: California; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 0458303517 March 2013 Page 52 of 483 ProQuestSource type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422325395Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2008 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 30 of 213Ports unveil cleanup plan; A $19-million proposal seeks to cut pollution by persuading shippers toburn cleaner fuel near the coast.Author: Sahagun, LouisPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 19 Mar 2008: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: None available.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: CORRECTION: SEE CORRECTION APPENDED; Port pollution: Photographs with an article inWednesday's California section about a $19-million plan to cut pollution at local ports were identified as showingthe Port of Long Beach. They showed the Port of Los Angeles. The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach onTuesday unveiled a $19-million plan to persuade shippers to burn cleaner fuel when vessels are near theCalifornia coast, a move expected to slash local air pollution by 11%. Cargo ships, some of which can emitmore diesel exhaust per day than 12,000 automobiles, are responsible for much of the air pollution in theregion. They are a leading source of nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides and particulate matter, which have beenlinked to premature deaths, respiratory illnesses and global warming. The proposal, which may go into effect assoon as July 1, would rely on financial incentives to encourage most of the 5,000 ships that berth at local portseach year to use much cleaner low-sulfur diesel fuels in their main propulsion engines. For example, the portswould pay the difference between the costs of highly polluting bunker fuel and low-sulfur distillate fuel for aslong as a year. The money would be drawn from revenues collected from terminal operators under existinglease arrangements, authorities said. The incentive program comes after a federal court last month rebuffedattempts by state regulators to impose limits on ship emissions in California waters, saying the state first mustseek permission from the federal Environmental Protection Agency. The California Air Resources Board isexpected to file for such a waiver or appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. "This is a one-year program,"said Long Beach port spokesman Art Wong. "Next year, state regulations are expected to require these ships touse low-sulfur fuel in their main engines." To qualify for the incentives, the ships must participate in the ports'voluntary vessel speed reduction program, limiting speeds to 12 knots during the switch to low-sulfur fuel. Theyalso must burn low-sulfur fuel in their electricity-generating auxiliary engines while at berth. If successful, theproposal would cut sulfur oxides by 11% and diesel particulate matter by 9% almost overnight. "This proposalwould immediately improve the air quality of Southern California," said Long Beach Mayor Bob Foster. "It is a17 March 2013 Page 53 of 483 ProQuestcollaborative and creative effort to tackle the single largest source of pollution from these two ports and is a bigstep forward in our efforts to clean the air." The proposal was supported by the Pacific Merchant ShippingAssn., an independent trade association representing terminal operators and owners of cargo and passengervessels. Although the organization is urging its members to switch to cleaner-burning fuels, associationspokeswoman Michele Grubbs said Tuesday that using low-sulfur fuel, which has a higher viscosity than bunkerfuel, could create problems for some ships, including "a potential risk of high temperatures that could sparkfires." For some others, the conversion could invalidate engine warranties, she said. Maersk, the largestshipping line in the world, came up with its own plan for cleaner air. Two years ago, the Danish shipping giantbegan converting its 37 cargo ships that serve California ports to allow them to use low-sulfur fuel within 24miles from the coast. Under increasing pressure from area residents, port authorities and state regulators havebeen enacting a series of limits on pollution from ships and the trucks and trains that service their cargo. Thosecritics came out in force at a local park Tuesday to voice opposition to controversial proposals to expand trainyard operations in a west Long Beach area where cancer rates from diesel soot are already among the highestin the state. John Cross, vice president of the West Long Beach Homeowners Assn. and an organizer of theSilverado Park meeting, said residents were worried about the proposals because railroads "have not beengood neighbors in the past." When the Union Pacific yard was approved in 1982, port authorities said that itseffect on local air quality would be minimal. Later, "when we went to them with a problem, they said, 'Callheadquarters in Omaha,' " Cross said. "Now, they're coming up with all these ideas about so-called greengrowth. But if they're so concerned about pollution, why don't they clean up the yards they have before buildingnew ones?" Union Pacific railroad wants to nearly double the number of cargo containers handled annually atits Intermodal Container Transfer Facility. Despite the rise from 725,000 to about 1.5 million containers, UnionPacific officials promise to reduce diesel emissions by 50% by using more efficient equipment, electric cranesand cleaner fuels. A block away, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway is seeking permission to build a 300-acre facility near homes, day-care centers and eight schools. Burlington is spending close to $1 million a yearon lobbyists and public relations firms to push its project, according to Los Angeles City Ethics Commissionreports. Similarly, Union Pacific officials have launched their own public relations campaign. Union Pacificofficials said that with technological changes and the pending port and state air restrictions, their facilityeventually would reduce pollution. For the near term, however, they acknowledged that doubling truck trafficwould increase overall emissions in adjacent neighborhoods. That kind of talk worried Jesse Marquez,executive director of the Coalition for a Safe Environment, who was among approximately 100 residents at themeeting. "In other words, they want to make us a hot spot community and a sacrificial lamb for the region andthe state," he said. "Our target is near zero emissions. We think that is a reasonable goal."louis.sahagun@ Times staff writer Janet Wilson contributed to this report. Credit: Times Staff WriterIllustration Caption: PHOTO: STACKED: A container ship plies the waters near Long Beach. The programwould use financial incentives to encourage ships to use much cleaner low-sulfur diesel fuels in their mainpropulsion engines.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Richard Hartog Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: CARGO: A containership is tied up near a row of cranes in Long Beach. Some cargo ships emit more diesel exhaust per day than12,000 automobiles.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Richard Hartog Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC: MAP: Proposed railyard; CREDIT: Los Angeles TimesSubject: Ships; Public relations; Emissions; Diesel fuels; Shipping industry; Ports; Air pollution; EnvironmentalpolicyLocation: Los Angeles California, Long Beach CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.117 March 2013 Page 54 of 483 ProQuestPublication year: 2008Publication date: Mar 19, 2008Year: 2008Section: California; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422202452Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2008 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 31 of 213Train, ship pollution targeted by EPAAuthor: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 15 Mar 2008: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The air pollution rules won rare, uniform praise from several national environmental and industrygroups, but did nothing to satisfy Southern California air regulators struggling with pollution from the nation'slargest port complex.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Diesel-powered ships and trains must cut soot emissions by as much as 90% by 2030, underregulations signed Friday by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency administrator Stephen Johnson. "TodayEPA is fitting another important piece into the clean diesel puzzle by cleaning emissions from our trains andboats," Johnson said by telephone from the Port of Houston, where he made the announcement. "This will helpAmerica's economic workhorse become its environmental workhorse as well." The air pollution rules won rare,uniform praise from several national environmental and industry groups, but did nothing to satisfy SouthernCalifornia air regulators struggling with pollution from the nation's largest port complex. "It's too little, too late,"said Barry Wallerstein, executive officer of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. "Every year theydelay . . . is another year that Southern Californians die needlessly from air pollution from ships andlocomotives." Because the new rules will take decades to implement, and do not target large marine vessels,the AQMD will not be able to reach a 2015 federal deadline to bring deadly fine particulate exposure down to17 March 2013 Page 55 of 483 ProQuestlegal amounts, Wallerstein said. Large, ocean-going vessels are linked to about 800 premature deaths in theregion each year. More than 40% of all retail goods shipped to the U.S. come through the ports of Los Angelesand Long Beach. Under the new rules, locomotives, harbor tugs, barges, ferries and recreational boats will berequired to use cleaner fuel, to retrofit existing equipment and to replace older models with new, cleanerengines. When fully implemented, the new standards are projected to reduce fine particulate soot by 90%, andnitrogen oxide emissions by 80%. Nitrogen oxides are key ingredients in both soot and smog, and have beenlinked to global warming. Nationwide, the regulation could help prevent 1,400 premature deaths and 120,000lost workdays annually by 2030, saving as much as $12 billion, Johnson said. Johnson moved up the startdates for control of nitrogen oxide emissions by two years from his original proposal: to 2014 for marineengines, and 2015 for locomotive engines. Executives for the railroads and for GE, the nation's largestlocomotive manufacturer, said that the technology to comply with the advanced, cleaner engine requirementsdoes not exist but that they support the new regulations. That was a marked change for GE in particular, whichobjected strenuously to tougher controls when they first were proposed. "We welcome the new emissionstandards," said company spokesman Stephan Koller, who added that the company worked closely with federalstaff and customers to reach consensus. "We don't just live in the past." Meeting the new standards "will be aserious challenge," but it will be done, said Edward R. Hamberger, president and chief executive of theAmerican Assn. of Railroads, in a statement. "The railroads will need to develop an infrastructure to handle[different] fueling of locomotives . . . and maintain diesel particulate filters so heavy that cranes likely will beneeded to remove and reinstall them," Hamberger said. Many environmental groups welcomed the action as a"breath of fresh air" after other recent decisions by Johnson. On Tuesday he announced that he disagreed withhis science advisors' recommendations, and only marginally tightened limits on ozone, a key ingredient insmog. Johnson brushed off months of mounting criticism from environmentalists and Democratic lawmakersFriday, saying "being EPA administrator is not a popularity contest." Echoing many groups, EnvironmentalDefense Fund attorney Janea Scott said that the "EPA deserves praise for issuing a final rule that is strongerthan its original proposal." Johnson said the EPA was working closely with international maritime regulators totry to impose tougher emission limits on the giant vessels that transport the globe's retail goods. --janet.wilson@ Credit: Times Staff Writer Illustration Caption: PHOTO: POLLUTION SOURCE: NewEPA rules will require harbor tugs, barges, ferries and recreational boats to use cleaner fuel.;PHOTOGRAPHER:Lori Shepler Los Angeles TimesSubject: Environmental regulations; Air pollution; Trains; Ships; Environmentalists; Emission standardsCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency--EPA; NAICS: 924110Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Publication year: 2008Publication date: Mar 15, 2008Year: 2008Section: California; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 0458303517 March 2013 Page 56 of 483 ProQuestSource type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422212208Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2008 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 32 of 213Pollution rules will put a damper on fireplace useAuthor: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 08 Mar 2008: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Citing public health concerns in the heavily polluted Los Angeles Basin, the South Coast Air QualityManagement District board voted unanimously to impose fines on homeowners who burn wood in fireplaces orat outdoor sites on high-pollution days during winter months -- about two dozen days in a typical year. Theagency deleted a provision that Realtors said would have further hurt an already sagging real estate market:requiring wood-burning fireplaces to be removed or blocked off when a home was sold.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Curling up in front of a cozy wood fire on a nippy night will be banned in many parts of SouthernCalifornia on bad air days under new regulations passed Friday by regional air regulators. Citing public healthconcerns in the heavily polluted Los Angeles Basin, the South Coast Air Quality Management District boardvoted unanimously to impose fines on homeowners who burn wood in fireplaces or at outdoor sites on highpollutiondays during winter months -- about two dozen days in a typical year. "This is a fair trade-off," districtExecutive Director Barry Wallerstein said. "To get to clean air in Southern California, we all have to individuallytake greater responsibility for the air pollution we cause." Builders will be prohibited from installing wood-burningfireplaces in new homes, and it will be illegal to install one when remodeling. Gas-burning fireplaces will beallowed. Restaurants with wood-fired ovens, such as California Pizza Kitchen, will not be affected by daily bans.Nor will homeowners who rely on a fireplace for heat or have properties at an elevation above 3,000 feet.Coastal areas that don't experience as many high-pollution days probably will be unaffected. Beach fires andceremonial fires used by tribes will be allowed. Fireplaces are used in about 1.4 million of the 5 millionhouseholds governed by the district, producing on average 6 tons a day of particulate soot in the air basin,according to the district. Numerous studies have linked fine particulate matter, which sinks deep into the lungs,to increased lung and respiratory problems. State officials say an estimated 5,000 premature deaths each yearin the region are linked to fine particulate exposure. About 106 tons of fine particulate soot is emitted every dayin the Los Angeles area, according to the district. The new regulations will reduce that by an average of about 1ton a day. The winter wood-burning ban will apply in areas where forecasts show federal daily limits for fineparticulate matter will be exceeded. That will amount to about two dozen days from November to March each17 March 2013 Page 57 of 483 ProQuestyear, regulators said. Residents most likely to be affected include those in the Inland Empire and the SanGabriel Valley, where soot carried by prevailing winds is trapped by mountains. Some people see any kind ofban as an invasion of home and hearth. "You're not going to regulate my chimney," Stewart Cumming of SanBernardino told the board during a heated public hearing in Diamond Bar. He vowed to continue using hisfireplace as he chose. He and others said it made no sense for the district to pursue such a small pollutionsource while its other policies allow large polluters to buy exemptions from stiff air pollution limits. "But you'regoing to come into my house and tell me where, when and how I can burn wood in my fireplace?" Cummingasked. "I'm not really following the contradiction here very well." "This is personal for a lot of people," saidBurten Carraher, who builds custom fireplaces and chimneys. "Fireplaces are not used that often in LosAngeles. But for people who do, it's a place of comfort. "It's a place where they relax, and I cannot imagine thenumber of fireplaces used for that purpose should be addressed in this major, major manner. . . . This is apersonal pleasure. It's one of the few things they can enjoy -- besides a television, I guess -- that makes it ahome." Southland regulators said federal and state laws require them to go after every possible pollutionsource. More than a dozen other air pollution districts in California already have fireplace restrictions in place.Some homeowners and health organizations wanted stricter bans, saying they were sick of choking onneighbors' smoke, which aggravates asthma and other potentially deadly health conditions. One Redlandswoman at the hearing described coughing and "expectorating" every evening during a regular walk through herneighborhood when wood fires are burning. "This is very tame; this is really the minimum we need to be doing,"said Martin Schlageter of the Coalition for Clean Air. District enforcers said they would count on peevedneighbors as the front line in enforcing the new rules, with inspectors responding to phone complaints of illegalsmoke. Fines will run as high as $500 per violation. The agency deleted a provision that Realtors said wouldhave further hurt an already sagging real estate market: requiring wood-burning fireplaces to be removed orblocked off when a home was sold. Colleen Callahan of the American Lung Assn.'s Los Angeles office arguedunsuccessfully that the board should restore the measure. "When a potential homeowner is seeking topurchase a home, they're not going to say, 'Where's the wood?' They're going to say, 'Where's the clean air inSouthern California?' " she said. Board members also granted a request by home builders to hold off onenforcing the construction ban for a year. District officials estimate the cost of installing a natural-gas fireplace isabout $500 more than a traditional wood-burning one. The overall ban on wood burning will begin in November2011, to give the public time to learn about the program. The board also approved a $500,000 program to givecash incentives to homeowners who replace polluting fireplaces with cleaner natural-gas models. The district isseeking proposals from large home-improvement chains to design and implement that program. Salesmen fornatural gas fired hearth and barbecue grills were on hand at the hearing and outside displaying their wares."This is not the end of using your fireplace by any means," said John Crouch of the Hearth, Patio and BarbecueAssn. For more details, go to rules/proposed /445/PR445_Version_E.pdf. --janet.wilson@ Credit: Times Staff Writer Illustration Caption: GRAPHIC: MAP: South Coast AirQuality Management District; CREDIT: Los Angeles TimesSubject: Bans; Fines & penalties; Air pollution; FireplacesLocation: Southern CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA; NAICS:924110Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Publication year: 200817 March 2013 Page 58 of 483 ProQuestPublication date: Mar 8, 2008Year: 2008Section: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422243371Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2008 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 33 of 213THE NATION; Limits on ship exhaust rejected; Appeals court says California needs U.S. permissionto regulate pollution from ports of L.A. and Long Beach.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 28 Feb 2008: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: A federal appeals court Wednesday rejected a state regulation that reduced emissions from ships,dealing a blow to California's attempt to combat one of the major sources of smog-forming pollution in the LosAngeles region.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: A federal appeals court Wednesday rejected a state regulation that reduced emissions from ships,dealing a blow to California's attempt to combat one of the major sources of smog-forming pollution in the LosAngeles region. The ruling means that the state must seek federal approval before imposing pollution limits onthe thousands of cargo ships, cruise ships and other marine vessels that visit its ports. The U.S. 9th CircuitCourt of Appeals in San Francisco ruled that California's new regulation is preempted by federal law. The CleanAir Act allows California to set its own standards for various vehicles and engines if it receives waivers from theU.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The state argued that in this case it didn't technically need a waiver, butthe judges disagreed. Ships sailing into the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles are considered a majorsource of particulates, nitrogen oxides and sulfur, pollutants that cause the region to frequently violate federalhealth standards. Microscopic soot from diesel engines can lodge in lungs, triggering heart attacks, asthma andother cardiovascular and respiratory problems, scientists say. Diesel exhaust has also been linked to lung17 March 2013 Page 59 of 483 ProQuestcancer. The ruling is the second setback in two months to California's efforts to combat air pollution rather thanwait for federal action. For four decades, the state has adopted its own regulations for cars, trucks, factories,consumer products and other sources of air pollution, often prompting the federal government to set similarstandards. Since the 1970s, the EPA has granted California hundreds of waivers allowing it to set its ownemission standards. But in December, the agency denied the state's request to impose standards to reducegreenhouse gases from automobiles. The EPA administrator has argued that, unlike smog and diesel fumes,climate change is a global problem, not a state one. The California Air Resources Board immediately stoppedenforcing the ship rule Wednesday as its attorneys debated their options. They will either appeal to theSupreme Court or seek a waiver from the EPA. Air board officials said the court ruling will delay, but not stop,emission limits on the ships. "This is critical to protecting public health, particularly around ports," said air boardspokeswoman Gennet Paauwe. "It is part of our large plan to cut emissions, particularly for the ports andgoods-movement sectors." The ship rule was adopted by the air board in 2005 and implemented last year. Itaddressed the use of auxiliary diesel engines within 24 nautical miles of the coast. Such engines, which oftenrun on highly polluting bunker fuel, provide power for onboard electricity. The engines emit an estimated 1,400tons a year of particulates in the L.A. Basin and account for about 15% of the region's diesel emissions,according to a 2005 air board report. The Pacific Merchant Shipping Assn., a San Francisco-based group ofshipping companies, filed suit to block enforcement of the rule. A federal district court sided with the associationin August, and Wednesday's ruling reaffirms that decision. In June, the air board is scheduled to consider aseparate regulation for the main engines that propel ships. The court ruling could mean that California wouldfirst have to seek EPA authorization. John McLaurin, president of the shipping association, said the industryprefers federal or international standards, "which will ensure consistent application of air quality rules andmeaningful emissions reductions throughout the world." Some shipping companies have already complied withthe rule by switching to low-sulfur fuels, lowering speeds voluntarily or using shore-side electrical power. In2004, nearly 10,000 oceangoing ships visited California ports, half of them container ships. "This lawsuit wasnot about whether emissions from vessels should be reduced but about who should have the jurisdiction toimpose and enforce requirements on international trade," McLaurin said. Attorneys for the air board contendedthat the regulation applied only to old engines, not to new ones, so they argued that they did not need EPAauthorization because it was not an emissions standard. Two environmental groups, the city of Long Beach andthe South Coast Air Quality Management District intervened in the case in support of the state board. "Our staffdecided to go ahead and regulate because we felt we did have regulatory authority," Paauwe said. The courtrejected that argument, calling the regulation an emissions standard and citing similar rulings by other courts.State officials do not know whether the EPA is likely to approve a waiver for the ship rule. State and local controlof air pollution from ships, airplanes and railroads has long been controversial because of laws safeguardinginterstate commerce and concerns that such rules should be international. -- marla.cone@ Credit:Times Staff Writer Illustration Caption: PHOTO: PORT TRAFFIC: The ship engines targeted by California's ruleaccount for about 15% of the Los Angeles region's total diesel emissions, according to a 2005 state air boardreport.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Gina Ferazzi Los Angeles TimesSubject: Litigation; Regulation; Interstate commerce; Greenhouse gases; Federal court decisions; Air pollution;Shipping industryLocation: CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Publication year: 200817 March 2013 Page 60 of 483 ProQuestPublication date: Feb 28, 2008Year: 2008Section: NewsPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422190867Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2008 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 34 of 213Study to gauge LAX's role in pollution; Unprecedented project will examine cities around the airport.Author: Abdollah, TamiPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 26 Feb 2008: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: None available.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The Los Angeles Board of Airport Commissioners unanimously agreed Monday to spend $2.2 millionto look at the effect of airport pollution on communities around LAX. The ambitious study, said to be the largestof its kind, will monitor Westchester, El Segundo, Inglewood and Lennox to identify the sources of pollutionthere and determine how much of it can be attributed to airport activities. "This is the most comprehensive airquality study that's ever been taken on by an airport in the United States," said Roger Johnson, deputyexecutive director for environmental services at Los Angeles World Airports, the agency that runs the airport.Some of the airport's toughest community critics, who have been battling the airport commission over expansionand renovation plans, praised the decision to begin the study as "trailblazing." "It's critical to understand thatwhat they're doing is useful for not only this airport, but for all airports," said Denny Schneider, vice chair of theLAX-Community Noise Roundtable and president of the Alliance for a Regional Solution to Airport Congestion."The United States has been delinquent in assessing how to reduce the impact of environmental pollution fromairports." The first two phases of the study, expected to cost about $2.2 million, will develop an inventory ofpotential air pollution sources and monitor and analyze emissions on the airfield. Those phases should befinished by the end of the year, officials said. A third phase would involve yearlong monitoring of as many as 1117 March 2013 Page 61 of 483 ProQuestsites in the communities and is expected to cost an additional $3 million to $5 million. "Obviously we don't knowuntil it comes in what it gives us," said Alan Rothenberg, airport commission president. "It's an incrediblycomplex issue to find out what pollutants come from what sources, but the attempt to seriously measure it iscommendable. And I hope that we can show the way to airports everywhere and other public entities that arefaced with situations where pollutants are from multiple sources." A UCLA study commissioned by the CaliforniaAir Resources Board about three years ago and released last year also looked at the airport's effect on airquality. That study, however, was done on a smaller scale, analyzing ultra-fine particulates. The study will beindependent of the environmental impact report currently underway that includes possible reconfiguration of theairport's northern runways. It also satisfies a number of the airport's previous agreements with localcommunities, including the community benefits agreement in late 2004, which set aside $500 million to be spenton projects to help those living near LAX. Environmental activists say there is ample anecdotal evidence thatincreased pollution from the airport has caused a higher incidence of asthma and other respiratory illnesses inneighboring communities. But airport officials say offshore shipping, freeway and roadway traffic, among othersources, may play greater roles. Martin Rubin, 61, who lives about five miles north of the airport in Los Angeles,said on some nights the odor of jet exhaust is pervasive. "Somehow in this process, it'd be valuable to followwhere the odors go," said Rubin, director of Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution. "Actually, I'm a bitproud that Los Angeles is taking leadership in this. In many studies around the country, they have missed themark." Although air quality studies have been performed at airports in Chicago, New Jersey and Rhode Island,they have not been as comprehensive as the one proposed by this plan, Johnson said. The study is acoordinated effort that involves the California Air Resources Board, the South Coast Air Quality ManagementDistrict, Federal Aviation Administration and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "If we have theknowledge we'll be able to develop policy tools to mitigate those effects," said Laurie Kaye, a policy analyst forEnvironmental Defense and a member of the LAX Coalition for Economic, Environmental and EducationalJustice. "But right now we can't tell the airport to do anything because we can't tell what caused it; we don'tknow what's out there." The study has been in the planning stages for more than a decade but was put on holdafter Sept. 11, 2001, when funding dried up for all nonessential projects, officials said. The three-year contractwas awarded to Jacobs Consultancy. -- tami.abdollah@ Credit: Times Staff Writer IllustrationCaption: PHOTO: (ORANGE COUNTY EDITION) AIRBORNE: Officials say that until pollution sources areinventoried and monitored, it's impossible to know the extent to which air quality is affected by auto traffic, shipsand planes.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Glenn Koenig Los Angeles TimesSubject: Community; Studies; Airports; Air pollutionLocation: Southern CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Airport Commission-Los Angeles CA; NAICS: 921110; Name: Los AngelesInternational Airport; NAICS: 488119Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Publication year: 2008Publication date: Feb 26, 2008Year: 2008Section: NewsPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLC17 March 2013 Page 62 of 483 ProQuestPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422193940Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2008 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 35 of 213Long Beach port faces suit threat; Two environmental groups say the facility must reduce dieselemissions in 90 days to avoid federal court.Author: Sahagun, LouisPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 07 Feb 2008: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The 13-page ultimatum from the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Coalition for a SafeEnvironment is a prerequisite for a lawsuit that is likely to ignite a protracted battle over how to manage thepotentially cancer-causing pollution spewed into the air from ships, big rigs and locomotives at one of thenation's busiest ports.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Two environmental groups on Wednesday gave the Port of Long Beach 90 days to reduce diesel sootand smog or face a lawsuit in federal court. The 13-page ultimatum from the Natural Resources DefenseCouncil and the Coalition for a Safe Environment is a prerequisite for a lawsuit that is likely to ignite a protractedbattle over how to manage the potentially cancer-causing pollution spewed into the air from ships, big rigs andlocomotives at one of the nation's busiest ports. The letter of intent to sue was hand-delivered to Long BeachMayor Bob Foster, Long Beach Board of Harbor Commissioners President Mario Cordero and port ExecutiveDirector Richard Steinke. "We want the court to take over the whole thing at once in order to enforce a newpriority of public health over profit," said David Pettit, senior attorney for the defense council. "We think that willrequire court appointment of a port czar to force the port to use currently available technology to fix the problem."If it works here," he added, "it will work at every port in the nation where there's a diesel pollution problem."Foster defended his city's track record on pollution. "We are very serious here about making sure the air iscleaner, and doing it as quickly as possible," he said. "It's the No. 1 health issue in Long Beach." Theenvironmental groups' strategy differs radically from previous legal challenges against the port that targetedspecific polluters or flaws in environmental impact reports. Instead, it seeks to have the port complex, asprawling $105-billion operation that supports nearly 230,000 jobs in Los Angeles County, treated as a single17 March 2013 Page 63 of 483 ProQuestentity subject to court-monitored benchmarks and progress reports. The groups chose not to sue the adjacentPort of Los Angeles, pending resolution of ongoing negotiations. The lawsuit would be brought under the federalResource Conservation and Recovery Act, which was designed to protect the public from harm by sitescontaminated with hazardous waste. In this case, the waste in question includes thousands of tons ofmicroscopic diesel particulates emitted each year by freight haulers. "The argument that dangerous materialsreleased into the air would be subject to the RCRA seems to be a plausible and innovative way to try to dealwith the issue. I suspect it is untested," said Sean Hecht, executive director of the UCLA Environmental LawCenter. "No one knows, however, whether a court will find this is such an urgent problem that it is willing tofashion the remedy and timetables the petitioners are asking for." In an interview, Cordero said the legal actiondidn't make sense, given that the Los Angeles and Long Beach port officials a year ago approved a Clean AirAction Plan to slash port-generated pollution 45% by 2012. Implementation of that plan, aimed at reducingemissions from its fleet of 16,800 heavy-duty diesel trucks, is a year behind schedule. "We have the mostprogressive and aggressive environmental plan in the nation when it comes to air quality," Cordero said. "Butwe're not finished with it yet. We plan to be finished with this plan very soon. So I'm surprised by this actionbeing taken." Jack Kyser, chief economist with the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp.,expressed dismay over the legal tactic, which he warned "could choke off a lot of international trade" and resultin price hikes of imported goods. "Sometimes, people don't understand the ultimate consequences of what theydo," he said. "Start stocking up on your tennis shoes and other necessities." Environmental attorneys, however,argued that the port plan, while "well-written," lacked enforceable deadlines. Studies estimate that dieselexhaust from freight transport contributes to 2,400 premature deaths statewide each year -- with 50% of thosedeaths occurring in the South Coast Air Basin. Of particular concern are diesel particulates, which carrycarcinogenic hydrocarbons and heavy metals easily inhaled into the lungs. "Port-related diesel emissions causethousands of preventable hospital visits for asthma, heart attacks, strokes and other ailments every year,including many that prove fatal," said Jesse Marquez, chair of the Coalition for a Safe Environment. "Butbecause the victims of pollution die quietly, nobody pays attention to them. This has got to stop." The letterurged Long Beach authorities to immediately require that vessels switch to low-sulfur diesel fuel, a move thatcould result in higher costs the industry has warned would be passed on to consumers of imported goods. Italso called on them to limit expansion projects until port authorities can prove to the satisfaction of a federaljudge that such activities would not "at any time increase the level of hazardous diesel particulates emanatingfrom the port." -- louis.sahagun@ Credit: Times Staff Writer Illustration Caption: PHOTO: LONGHAUL: Thousands of tons of microscopic diesel particulates are emitted each year by freight haulers at the Portof Long Beach. Two environmental groups in a letter to Long Beach and port officials are seeking to place"public health over profit" by requiring court-monitored benchmarks and progress reports.;PHOTOGRAPHER:Rick Loomis Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: CONSEQUENCES: Studies estimate that dieselexhaust from freight transport contributes to 2,400 premature deaths statewide each year, with half occurring inthe South Coast Air Basin.; PHOTOGRAPHER:; GRAPHIC: Map: Cancer risk from diesel emissions;CREDIT:PAUL DUGINSKI Los Angeles TimesSubject: Litigation; Air pollution; Environmental law; Environmental impact; Economic developmentcorporations; Diesel fuels; Emission standardsCompany / organization: Name: Natural Resources Defense Council; NAICS: 813312; Name: Port of LongBeach-California; NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.317 March 2013 Page 64 of 483 ProQuestPublication year: 2008Publication date: Feb 7, 2008Year: 2008Section: NewsPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422169376Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2008 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 36 of 213It's worse than dirty Dirty air has toxic components; L.A.'s notorious air pollution is hardest on kids.The closer to a freeway they live, play or attend school, the more likely it is that their developingl ungs' capacity will be reduced.Author: Erin Cline DavisPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 10 Dec 2007: F.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: For kids who already live in an area with high levels of pollution, living near a freeway is "adding insultto injury," says Dr. John Balmes, professor of medicine at UC San Francisco and professor of public health atUC Berkeley.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Everyone is familiar with the gray-brown haze that often blankets Los Angeles, and the fact that thecity consistently ranks as one of the most polluted in America. But what many may forget is that the dismalreports of L.A.'s air pollution only capture the average amounts of toxins in the air, and that some places withinthe urban sprawl are far dirtier than others. Official numbers do not take into account the fact that pollutants areat much higher levels within a few hundred feet of the freeways that crisscross the city -- and for the adults andkids who live, work or go to school there, the effects add up. For kids, whose lungs are still growing, theseeffects can be especially damaging. Mounting scientific evidence reveals that exposure to air pollution interfereswith the development of children's lungs, reducing their capacity to breathe the air they need. Although the longtermconsequences aren't known, it is known that growth in lung function is nearly complete by the end of17 March 2013 Page 65 of 483 ProQuestadolescence. Because lung capacity diminishes as people grow older, children exposed to air pollution mayenter adulthood with the deck stacked against them. Proximity to freeways appears to matter. Recently, studieshave shown that the lung capacity of children who live within 500 meters (1,650 feet) of a freeway is significantlyreduced compared with those who live more than 1,500 meters (4,950 feet) away. For kids who already live inan area with high levels of pollution, living near a freeway is "adding insult to injury," says Dr. John Balmes,professor of medicine at UC San Francisco and professor of public health at UC Berkeley. To help protectchildren from the heightened effects of this extra dose of air pollution, California passed a law in 2003prohibiting schools from being built within 500 feet of major roadways. Districts are allowed to build within thisbuffer zone only if space limitations leave no option or the district can find ways to mitigate the increased airpollution. Yet a September article in The Times reported that the L.A. Unified School District was building fiveschools within 500 feet of a freeway and had plans for two more. The district is now reconsidering its plans andworking on new policies aimed at limiting students' exposure to pollution at schools built near freeways, butsuch laws can do only so much. Even if they aren't going to school near a freeway, children may still be walkingdown the street or playing in their backyard near one. Thousands will still be exposed to dangerous levels of airpollution. -- Stunted lung development In 2004, USC researchers reported that children living in areas withhigher pollution, such as San Dimas and Riverside, had stunted lung development compared with children livingin areas with lower pollution, such as Atascadero and Alpine. The findings came from the Children's HealthStudy, which in 1993 recruited about 1,700 fourth-graders from 12 California communities and studied their lungfunction over eight years. The effects on children's lungs were both statistically and clinically significant: Theproportion of children with low lung function was 4.9 times greater in the community with the highest level offine-particle pollution (Mira Loma) compared with the community (Lompoc) with the lowest levels (7.9% versus1.6%). Results were similar when the researchers looked at other categories of pollution, such as nitrogendioxide and elemental carbon. In February, the USC group published another report, in the journal the Lancet,showing that living near a freeway could further affect a child's lung development. As in the 2004 study,researchers followed the group of fourth-graders recruited in 1993, as well as a later group recruited in 1996. Inthis study, however, the children in each city were further subdivided into those who lived close to (within 500meters) or far (more than 1,500 meters) from a freeway or other major road. As in the other study, researcherswould visit the children every year at their schools and measure with a device called a spirometer how muchand how fast each child could exhale. They found that children who lived close to a freeway in a low-pollutioncommunity had about a 4% decrease in their lung function compared with children living in the same communitybut far from a freeway. This decrease was similar to that seen in children who lived in highly pollutedcommunities but far from a major road. The results were worst for the children who lived near a freeway within apolluted city. They had the greatest reduction in lung function over the course of the eight years each child wastracked -- about 9%, compared with the kids in clean cities who lived at least 1,500 meters from a major road.Lung development is nearly complete by age 18 -- meaning that someone with a deficit in lung function at theend of adolescence will probably continue to have less than healthy lung function for the rest of his or her life.And that could lay the adult open to a variety of maladies. "Poor lung function in later adult life is known to be amajor risk factor for respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, as well as for mortality," said W. JamesGauderman, an epidemiologist at the USC Keck School of Medicine and leader of both studies. The results ofthe USC study make sense, given what scientists know about the concentrations of tailpipe pollutants nearmajor roads. Jean Opital, an officer for the South Coast Air Quality Management District who evaluates studieson the health effects of air pollution, says that pollution concentrations are highest in the first 150 meters of alarge road but then start to drop off. But calculations predict that to get down to the levels seen upwind of afreeway, you have to get about 1,000 meters (3,300 feet) away. "Though we in L.A. don't have the best airquality, proximity to sources does matter, " he says. -- Taking in more pollutants Children are especiallyvulnerable to air pollution because they breathe more rapidly than adults relative to their body weight and lung17 March 2013 Page 66 of 483 ProQuestsize. This results in exposure to a relatively larger dose of any air pollutants. Kids also spend a lot of timeengaged in vigorous physical activity, leading to even heavier breathing. When they play hard, they tend tobreathe more through their mouths, bypassing the natural filtering effects of the nose, allowing more pollutantsinto their lungs. And unlike adults, who are likely to stop their activities when effects of pollution such aswheezing and coughing set in, children often keep going -- continuing to expose themselves to pollution. Theheady brew they are exposed to has various toxic components -- carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogendioxide -- and the two that pose the greatest threat to human health: ground-level ozone and particulate matter.Ground-level ozone is formed by a chemical reaction between volatile organic compounds and oxides ofnitrogen emitted by cars and other sources such as power plants that takes place in the presence of sunlight. InL.A., the onshore breeze usually pushes the ingredients of ozone farther inland. But calm days provide theperfect conditions for a blanket of ozone to cover the city. Exposure to ozone can cause immediate effects suchas coughing, throat irritation and difficulty breathing. It can also worsen asthma attacks and increase thesusceptibility of the lungs to infections, allergens and other air pollutants -- making exposure especially risky forthose with asthma and other lung conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Particulate matterin the air is a mixture of solids and liquid droplets that vary in size. Particles larger than 10 microns (about onetenththe diameter of a human hair) do not usually reach a person's lungs, but they can irritate the eyes, noseand throat. Exposure to "coarse" particles (in the range of 2.5 to 10 microns in diameter) and "fine" particles(less than 2.5 microns in diameter) can aggravate heart and lung diseases. A study of more than 4,000 Swissadults ages 18 to 60 during the course of 11 years, which appeared last week in the online edition of the NewEngland Journal of Medicine, has shown that the inevitable decline in lung function seen in adults is lessened inthose who are exposed to reduced levels of particle pollution. The smallest particles of all -- so-called "ultra-fine"particles -- are of increasing concern to air pollution experts. Air levels of these tiny bits of air pollution, whichmeasure less than 0.1 micron or one-thousandth the diameter of a human hair, are not regulated by state orfederal agencies, and their health effects are only now beginning to be understood. What researchers do knowis that ultra-fine particles travel far deeper into the lungs than other types of particle pollution. They can evenpass through the lining of the lungs, gaining access to the bloodstream. This allows them to travel to otherorgans and possibly interfere with their function. Ultra-fine particles might also make their way into the brain,USC's Gauderman says. He says there is some suspicion in the research community that they can actuallytravel straight to the brain through the olfactory nerve at the top of the nasal passage. They are so small thatstandard air filters cannot remove them. "They act like a gas, getting in around doors and windows,"Gauderman says. When pollutants are inhaled, gases such as ozone and the chemicals stuck to the surfaces ofvarious sizes of particulate matter react with molecules in the lungs, injuring cells. The body's response to thisinjury is inflammation, which causes the airways in the lungs to constrict. Children have narrower airways thanadults, so pollution that might cause only a mild inflammatory response in an adult can significantly constrict theairways in a young child. This can be especially dangerous for children with asthma. Long-term exposure to airpollution can cause chronic inflammation. In response, the body will attempt to wall off the damaged parts of thelungs, creating tissue that's less pliable than healthy tissue. That, Balmes says, explains why decreased lungfunction like that seen in the Children's Health Study comes about. "It's basically a scarring process," he says. --Reducing risks at schools Angelo Bellomo, head of the Office of Environmental Health and Safety for the LosAngeles Unified School District, says his office is taking the dangers posed by freeway pollution seriously."We've got to do everything we can do that is within our power to reduce that risk," he says. As a start, his officehas begun taking ultra-fine particles, which were not previously considered, into account when analyzing newlocations for schools. There are more than 70 district campuses within 500 feet of freeways, housing more than60,000 students. Bellomo's office is compiling a list that ranks the schools by level of risk based on the numberof students, the number of years students spend at the school, distance to freeways and the volume of dieseltrucks that travel the nearby freeways. The office will be developing a range of options and associated costs for17 March 2013 Page 67 of 483 ProQuestupgrades to existing schools that would reduce school occupants' exposure to nearby sources of air pollution.Its report is due at the beginning of March. Bellomo says his office will be looking at all options, including somepromising new filtration technologies. He admits that the school district can't do much to reduce the risks of airpollution when children are outside, but he aims to reduce the risks indoors enough so as to offset the outdoorexposure. The district will do what it can, Bellomo says, but the most effective way to reduce the risk fromfreeway pollution for children would be for state and federal regulators to enact rules that reduce pollution at thesource. Angela Beach, 41, of Sherman Oaks, will be following the district's progress. Her 6-year-old son, whosuffers from chronic asthma, attends Hesby Oaks School, a recently reopened campus in Encino that is within500 feet of the 101 Freeway. Firmament Avenue, a bit of greenbelt and a sound wall are all that stand betweenthe athletic fields and the constant rush of cars on the 101 and 405 interchange. Beach says her son's asthmawas well controlled when he was in preschool. He didn't have trouble playing outside like all the other children.But now, she says, "he just can't do it." The effects of the pollution near the freeway aren't just physical for herson, Beach says. He doesn't understand why he can't play at school. He gets frustrated and angry when he hasto abandon basketball practice because he can't get the air he needs. Beach has had to explain to his coachthat it isn't that he doesn't want to play, it's that he's isn't able to. Beach says her daughter, who is 8 and doesnot have asthma, has also commented on the changes on her body since she started at her new school, eventhough the issue of air quality is never discussed with her. She comes home from school, Beach says, and tellsher mother how she struggles on the playground, complaining, "It's harder here," comparing Hesby to herprevious school, Sherman Oaks Elementary, which is just shy of a mile from the 101 and 405 freeways. Beachwants the district to do all it can with filtration systems at Hesby and other schools. She is also lobbying the cityand school district to plant trees behind Hesby because some research has shown that they could absorb someof the pollution that is flowing into the outdoor hallways and lunchroom of the campus. "These," Beach says,"are problems that affect the lives of every child, forever." -- (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX) Trees may help fightpollution Can trees help fight smog? Thomas Cahill, a professor of physics and atmospheric sciences at UCDavis, has results suggesting they can reduce levels of ultra-fine particle pollution near freeways. He has foundthat in windy conditions, trees along the side of a freeway can help mix the air and dilute the concentration ofultra-fine particles. In calm conditions, trees seem able to capture the particles, preventing them from travelingto nearby homes or schools. Cahill says that once ultra-fine particles stick to the leaves of trees, they will notblow off. Instead, they will remain on the tree until the leaves drop or they are washed away in the rain. He saysthat other researchers have not been interested in looking at trees as mitigation for ultra-fine particles becauseolder research had shown that trees could not block fine particles (which are about 25 times larger than ultrafineparticles) from blowing off roadways. Cahill says it's important to use the right trees to block ultra-fineparticles. Some trees may not absorb enough particles. Others emit chemicals that can contribute to ozoneformation. Trees with lots of needles, such as redwoods and deodar cedars, he says, are best. -- Erin ClineDavis Credit: Special to The Times Illustration Caption: PHOTO: L.A. HAZE: As bad as the overall air pollutionin Los Angeles seems, in some areas of the city it's worse than average, particularly close to freeways.;PHOTOGRAPHER:David McNew Getty Images; PHOTO: RISKY: The nose's natural filter is bypassed whenkids play hard and breathe through the mouth.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Ricardo DeAratanha Los Angeles Times;PHOTO: LOCATION, LOCATION: The Perez Alfonso Special Education Center is by a freeway ramp. A 2003California law limits schools' proximity to major roadways.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Brian VanderBrug Los AngelesTimes; PHOTO: INHALING EXHAUST: Pollution concentrations are higher in neighbohoods close to largethoroughfares.; PHOTOGRAPHER:REED SAXON Associated PressSubject: Lungs; Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; Schools; Power plants; Nitrogen dioxide; Mortality;Community; Carbon monoxide; Adults; Air pollution; Roads & highways; Children & youth17 March 2013 Page 68 of 483 ProQuestPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: F.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Dec 10, 2007Year: 2007Section: Health; Part F; Features DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422173141Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 37 of 213Do your part to breathe easier, indoors and out; Protective measures include checking the air quality,keeping the windows closed and driving less often.Author: Erin Cline DavisPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 10 Dec 2007: F.7.ProQuest document linkAbstract: None available.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: If you live in L.A., there's really no avoiding air pollution. But there are a few things you can do toprotect yourself and your family from its harmful effects, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. *Plan activities based on the air quality. Experts advise that children and adults limit outdoor activities on dayswhen air pollution levels are high. The Air Quality Index can be used as a guide. This is calculated each day bythe EPA for the five major air pollutants that are regulated by the Clean Air Act: ground-level ozone, fineparticulate matter, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide. The AQI often will be included in thelocal weather report. You can also find the AQI for your area at . The individual pollutant withthe highest value determines the AQI value for the day. When the AQI for one of these pollutants is above 100,17 March 2013 Page 69 of 483 ProQueststate and local agencies are required to report which groups of people are at heightened risk. For example, ifthe AQI for particulate matter is 150, people with heart or lung disease, older adults and children will be advisedto reduce prolonged or heavy exertion. When the AQI reaches 300, the air is considered hazardous to allgroups. On days when the AQI indicates unhealthful levels of air pollutants in your area, avoid strenuousexercise outdoors. Take a walk instead of a jog to reduce the amount of air you are inhaling, or take yourroutine indoors to the gym or simply walk around the mall. People with heart or lung disease should beespecially careful, limiting their activities and exposure to outdoor air at even lower levels of pollution than thegeneral population. * Keep the indoor air clean. If you take steps to keep the indoor air quality good, stayinginside and avoiding outdoor activities can help reduce your exposure to air pollution. Keep doors and windowsclosed to limit the amount of outside air pollution that makes its way inside. Use standard air filters: these canremove larger particles from the air, although they are not effective at removing ultra-fine particles or toxicgases. Replacing air filters with electrostatic drop-in filters, available at hardware stores, may help with ultra-fineparticles, according to preliminary research from the laboratory of UC Davis professor Thomas Cahill. And don'tsmoke or allow smoking in your home. Researchers have found that the body responds to cigarette smoke andparticle pollution in the same way. * Do your part to reduce pollution. When levels of ozone or particulate matterare predicted to reach unhealthful levels, everyone can help improve the air quality by using their cars lessfrequently. It will also help if people conserve electricity; refuel cars and trucks after dusk; limit engine idling; usehousehold chemicals in ways that keep evaporation to a minimum, or try to delay using them until air qualityimproves. When particle pollution is high, reduce or eliminate fireplace and wood stove use; avoid using gaspoweredlawn and garden equipment. Barbecues are out too: According to the lung health advocacy groupBreathe California of Los Angeles County, smoke, airborne ash and particulate matter from barbecues are justas toxic as smoke from wildfires. Credit: Special to The TimesSubject: Indoor air quality; Outdoor activities; Pollutants; Older people; Nitrogen dioxide; Lawn & gardenequipment; Hardware stores; Forest & brush fires; Carbon monoxide; Air filters; Air pollution; DiseasepreventionPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: F.7Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Dec 10, 2007Year: 2007Section: Health; Part F; Features DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: FeatureProQuest document ID: 42222049617 March 2013 Page 70 of 483 ProQuestDocument URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 38 of 213Long Beach joins port ban on old trucksAuthor: Sahagun, LouisPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 06 Nov 2007: B.4.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Against a backdrop of massive cranes unloading a freighter as it spewed dark columns of dieselsmoke, the often rival leaders embraced during a news conference held after the Long Beach Board of HarborCommissioners agreed to a progressive truck ban identical to one approved last week by the adjacent Port ofLos Angeles.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: CORRECTION: SEE CORRECTION APPENDED; Port trucks: An article in Tuesday's Californiasection about a plan to replace old trucks at the Port of Long Beach with newer, cleaner models said the planneeded to be approved by the Long Beach City Council. Actually, the effort requires only the approval of theLong Beach Board of Harbor Commissioners, which ratified it Monday. In a rare display of partnership, LosAngeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Long Beach Mayor Bob Foster on Monday touted a joint plan to scrapold diesel rigs and replace them with newer, cleaner models as part of an effort to slash port-related pollutionlinked to 2,400 premature deaths a year. Against a backdrop of massive cranes unloading a freighter as itspewed dark columns of diesel smoke, the often rival leaders embraced during a news conference held afterthe Long Beach Board of Harbor Commissioners agreed to a progressive truck ban identical to one approvedlast week by the adjacent Port of Los Angeles. For the time being, however, it's a ban with out animplementation plan. Unless the ports can reduce pollution, expansion projects likely to produce thousands oflocal jobs will face protracted legal challenges. With so much on the line, Villaraigosa and Foster turned fromcompetition to cooperation. "For the longest time, we were working on separate tracks," Villaraigosa told acrowd of about 75 truckers, environmentalists and shipping company representatives. "Let's join hands andwork together." "Long Beach and Los Angeles," Foster added, "continue to lead the world in pushing for cleanerair and healthier environment with our shared goal of having the cleanest ports in the world." However, leadersfrom both cities forecast intense negotiations as port authorities, truckers, environmentalists, shippers andhealth officials begin devising a plan to implement the program, which calls for replacing the port complex's fleetof 16,500 trucks by 2012. Now the big question is who will pay to own, operate and maintain the new trucks,worth an estimated $1.6 billion. Many of the fleet's mostly low-income, Spanish-speaking independent contracttruckers insist they cannot afford to buy new trucks, let alone maintain them. They want trucking companies andshippers to buy the trucks and hire the truckers to drive them. Trucking companies and shippers argue that theports lack the legal authority to force them to purchase the fleet. Employing drivers also would attract unionorganizers, something most port businesses would oppose. "Ultimately, the consumer will pay for it -- a nickelon a pair of tennis shoes and a quarter on every television set," said S. David Freeman, president of the Los17 March 2013 Page 71 of 483 ProQuestAngeles Board of Harbor Commissioners. "So let's get on with it." The truck ban, which still must be approvedby both city councils, is scheduled to begin Oct. 1, 2008. On that day an estimated 3,000 trucks built before1989 would be denied access to the nation's busiest port complex. "In just 11 months the people of theSouthland can begin breathing easier," Villaraigosa said in a prepared statement. "We will no longer sacrificepublic health for the sake of adding a few pennies to the profit margins." Pressure to reduce port pollution hasbeen motivated in part by booming trade. Annual trade at the ports, currently about $305 billion, is expected todouble by 2020, port authorities said. Cleaner trucks would save up to $5.9 billion in health costs to workers andlocal residents, according to an economic impact study commissioned by the Port of Los Angeles. The studypredicts the cleanup also would clear the way for port expansion projects that could generate 300,000 to600,000 jobs by 2025. But because the ports account for 25% of diesel particulate emissions in the Los AngelesBasin -- and more particulate-forming nitrogen oxide emissions than all 6 million cars in the region -- neither porthas been able to complete an environmental impact report for any infrastructure improvement project in sixyears. The Coalition for Clean and Safe Ports, one of several environmental groups at the news conference,said port authorities and trucking firms are to blame for the delays. "The port trucking system is a relic of the20th century that is both plagued by massive inefficiencies and has created the environmental and public healthcrisis we now face," the group said in a prepared statement. "Without reform, the Los Angeles and Long Beachports remain unprepared to meet ever-increasing trade demands, and they will be unequipped to compete intoday's rapidly changing global economy." But Julie Sauls of the California Trucking Assn. said the truck ban,which is only a portion of the landmark Clean Air Action Plan endorsed by the two ports a year ago, would onlyimprove air pollution by less than 10% during the next five years. Also, the plan "does not spell out how to coverthe tremendous costs associated with such a transition," she said in a prepared statement. "If there are notenough trucks to pick up or deliver cargo, goods won't get to their destinations, to manufacturers, to retailers orto consumers. When this happens, everyone gets hit in the pocketbooks." Long Beach Harbor CommissionerJames Hankla believes a compromise is inevitable. "How are we going to pay for all this?" he said. "I don'tknow. But I believe we will find a way, not that it's going to be free or cheap, because if we are not able to growgreen, we will not see a million new jobs created for this region." -- louis.sahagun@ Credit: TimesStaff WriterSubject: Ports; Trucking; Television sets; Public health; Diesel engines; Economic impact; Trucks; Air pollutionCompany / organization: Name: Port of Long Beach-California; NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.4Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Nov 6, 2007Year: 2007Section: California; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 0458303517 March 2013 Page 72 of 483 ProQuestSource type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422168851Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 39 of 213SOUTHLAND BLAZES: AIR QUALITY; FEDERAL RESPONSE; The air won't do you good; Anyoneplanning outdoor activities should think twice. Small children are particularly vulnerable.Author: Pierson, David; Cone, Marla; Winton, RichardPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 27 Oct 2007: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Whether the activity is youth sports, a hike, a bike ride or simply running errands, the region's airpollution is forcing people to adjust their routines -- and in many cases, stay indoors as much as possible.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Lenore Hittelman is in a quandary faced by many this weekend. With the air still hazy with soot fromthe wildfires, do you allow your children to go play? The choice is made that much harder for the Irvine motherbecause her oldest daughter's soccer team is scheduled to play a crucial match Sunday that could determinewhich division their squad will land in next season. "We know the air quality is bad, but if the team needs you,what do you do?" Hittelman said as she and her children drove to Tarzana to stay with family to escape OrangeCounty's poor air. "It's a difficult decision." Whether the activity is youth sports, a hike, a bike ride or simplyrunning errands, the region's air pollution is forcing people to adjust their routines -- and in many cases, stayindoors as much as possible. Since Sunday, the air throughout nearly all of the Los Angeles Basin has hadunhealthful concentrations of particulates spewed by the fires and spread by strong winds. By today, air qualityis expected to improve to moderate in L.A. County, except Santa Clarita. However, it will remain unhealthful forchildren and other sensitive people in much of Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties, according to theSouth Coast Air Quality Management District. In those areas, children, the elderly and anyone with respiratoryor cardiac disorders such as asthma should not exert themselves, the AQMD said. Small children areparticularly vulnerable because they have narrower airways and smaller lungs, and they inhale more pollutantsthan adults. "We've entered a period with the wildfires where some judgment is required," Sam Atwood, anAQMD spokesman, said Friday. Tiny particulates, whether from wildfire smoke, diesel exhaust or some othersource, are a serious health threat because they can lodge deep in lungs. When particulates reach hazardouslevels, hospitalizations, even deaths, increase from asthma, pneumonia, bronchitis, heart attacks and otherrespiratory and cardiovascular diseases. For many people, the risk is temporary -- headaches, stuffy noses,stinging eyes, coughs and shortness of breath. But for others, it can be life-threatening. Studies show that in thedays after wildfires, hospitalizations from asthma, pneumonia, bronchitis and heart attacks rise. Even healthy17 March 2013 Page 73 of 483 ProQuestpeople often cough and experience headaches, stinging eyes, stuffy noses and flu-like symptoms. The air isworst in the fire zones, which include Orange County's Saddleback Valley, the San Bernardino Mountains, theSan Bernardino Valley from Fontana to Yucaipa, and Riverside County between Corona and Temecula. Inthese areas, the AQMD has classified the air as unhealthful, meaning no one should exert themselves, andchildren, the elderly and people with asthma and other disorders should all remain indoors. Any place wheresmoke can be smelled should also be considered unhealthful. Many youth sports activities have been canceledclose to the fire zones, but others are still scheduled for the weekend. In Bellflower, Lorenzo Quezada wasrelieved when St. John Bosco High School's game against Mater Dei High School was canceled. His 15-yearoldson, Steve, is a Bosco linebacker and has been feeling the effects of the bad air all week. "The kids hadbeen complaining about being out of breath, irritations of the throat and headaches even while running inside,"he said. The levels of particulates in much of the L.A. Basin this week were many times higher than they are oneven highly polluted days when there are no fires. Because of winds driving smoke many miles away, the areaswith the worst problems included Long Beach, Simi Valley, Riverside and parts of Orange County. FrankSalisbury doesn't know if his sons' flag football games have been canceled today or not, but he's alreadydecided that the boys won't go. "The air's too heavy," Salisbury, 62, of Ladera Heights, said. "I wouldn't wantthem to play. If you don't have to, why do it? It's a health risk to go outside and do any activity." Adults,particularly those who enjoy outdoor activities on weekends, face their own dilemma. After much uncertainty,the San Diego Chargers announced Friday that the team would play its 1 p.m. Sunday home game against theHouston Texans as scheduled at Qualcomm Stadium. The Chargers have been practicing in Tempe, Ariz.,since Wednesday because the stadium was being used as an evacuation center. Yashar Kafi, 31, of Pasadenahad just finished a six-mile run around the Rose Bowl on Friday afternoon and said he'd seen only half the usualnumber of runners outside the stadium in recent days. The typical scene of mothers pushing their children instrollers was absent. He said he found it harder to warm up and harder to breathe. Christine Walker was sittingin a Pasadena park watching her 2-year-old son, Ryan, run circles in the grass. It was a relief to be outdoorsafter spending so much time in her home, she said. "If I were in Orange County, I probably wouldn't go outsidewithout a mask," said Walker, 30, who is pregnant. "But we can't stop going to the park and we can't stop livingjust because there's a fire going on." A massive tree-planting drive scheduled for today was postponed in L.A.because of health concerns but will go on in parts of Orange, San Bernardino and Riverside counties. Theevent, organized by United Voices for Healthier Communities, was two years in the making and aimed to put6,500 new trees into the ground. But organizers had to heed the warning of one of the event's sponsors, theAQMD. "The whole point was to clean the air," said the organization's chairman, Andy Trotter, laughing in slightdisbelief at the irony. "A whole lot of people had already dug holes. Certainly the timing wasn't very good."Whether events are canceled or not, organizers have been forced to address the air quality issue. "Obviouslywe're very concerned," said Muna Coobtee, who organized an antiwar protest in downtown L.A. still scheduledfor today. "We'll provide a lot of water and first aid just in case. But I think people want to be there anyway." ForHittelman, the Irvine mother, the smoky air has changed many plans. A book fair at a school library, a meetingof mothers from the school of one of her daughters and a Halloween costume party were all canceled Friday.She said she's been stir-crazy staying at home and feels even worse for her oldest daughter Kimberly, 13, whois athletic and isn't used to having to pass all her time surfing the Internet and playing video games. "She hasn'tbeen sleeping well," Hittelman, 37, said. "She isn't getting her regular exercise." Of course, many parents saidit's also important to put the bad air in perspective. Susan Hetsroni, 46, who lives on L.A.'s Westside, said thedisappointment of having sporting events for her three children canceled paled in comparison with the hardshipfaced by those who lost homes in the wildfires. "Given what people are going through, this is a time to countyour blessings," she said. "Your eyes may sting and you have to stay inside, but some people are desperatelyhurting." -- david.pierson@ marla.cone@ richard.winton@ Times staff writerAshley Powers contributed to this report. -- (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX) Health tips in smoky conditions Pay17 March 2013 Page 74 of 483 ProQuestattention to local air quality reports. If you are advised to stay inside, keep indoor air as clean as possible. Keepyour windows and doors closed -- unless it's extremely hot outside. Run your air conditioner, if you have one.Keep the fresh-air intake closed and the filter clean to prevent bringing additional smoke inside. If you don'thave an air conditioner, staying inside with the windows closed may be dangerous in extremely hot weather. Inthese cases, seek alternative shelter. When indoors, avoid smoking and using wood-burning fireplaces, gaslogs, gas stoves, candles and the vacuum. If you have asthma or another lung disease, make sure you followyour doctor's directions about taking your medicines and following your asthma management plan. Call yourdoctor if your symptoms worsen. Source: EPA Credit: Times Staff Writers Illustration ; Caption: PHOTO:LETTING LOOSE: With smoke rising Friday from the Santiago fire, a youth rides a skateboard in Rancho SantaMargarita. Some games have been canceled across the Southland, while others will continue as planned.;PHOTOGRAPHER:Mark Boster Los Angeles TimesSubject: Outdoor activities; Children & youth; Public health; Air pollution; Forest & brush firesLocation: Orange County CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Oct 27, 2007Year: 2007Section: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422151559Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 40 of 213SOUTHLAND BLAZES: ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES; Southland residents waiting to inhale;Unhealthful air is expected to hang around even after fires and winds die. Stay indoors, experts17 March 2013 Page 75 of 483 ProQuestadvise.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 25 Oct 2007: A.24.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Even when the fires are extinguished and the Santa Ana winds that carried their smoke die down, thetiny particles suspended in the air could remain in hazardous concentrations "into next week," said MaryNichols, chair of the California Air Resources Board.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The state's smog czar warned Wednesday that unhealthful conditions caused by smoke from wildfiresare likely to persist throughout much of Southern California until next week. Even when the fires areextinguished and the Santa Ana winds that carried their smoke die down, the tiny particles suspended in the aircould remain in hazardous concentrations "into next week," said Mary Nichols, chair of the California AirResources Board. "Our advice for everybody's health, even for people who are healthy, is they should be takingit easy and staying indoors," Nichols said. Pollution measurements throughout much of the Los Angeles Basinand San Diego County have peaked at levels up to 10 times higher than levels deemed safe by national healthstandards. Such extreme concentrations of particulates, even if they last a few hours or less, are consideredhazardous, capable of causing immediate breathing problems even for healthy people. In Escondido just aftermidnight Tuesday, fine particulates reached 325 micrograms per cubic meter of air, according to a California AirResources Board website. The federal government's health standard for acceptable exposure over 24 hours is35 micrograms per cubic meter of air. The state air board put mobile monitors in five fire areas in San DiegoCounty shortly after the fires erupted this weekend to detect the highest concentrations. On Monday inNorco/Corona and Lake Elsinore, levels reached concentrations exceeding 200 micrograms per cubic meter,according to data from the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Particulates are microscopic pieces ofsoot, smoke, dust or other materials capable of lodging deep in lungs. Because of strong Santa Ana windsmoving toward the coast, some of the worst smoke is accumulating many miles from fires, including in LongBeach, Simi Valley and the Riverside area. Pollution concentrations were decreasing region-wide Wednesday,but many areas still exceeded health standards. "The air quality is officially designated as unhealthful," Nicholssaid. "There is widespread exposure. . . . This is something that everybody should be paying attention to."Particulates in the smoke aggravate asthma, emphysema, heart disease and other respiratory andcardiovascular conditions. They also can irritate healthy lungs and airways, causing coughing and shortness ofbreath, stinging eyes, headaches and stuffy noses. State and local health officials are urging people throughoutthe fire region to stay indoors with windows shut, use air conditioning if possible and avoid strenuous outdooractivity. Some hospital officials reported a moderate increase in patients with respiratory problems. TravisHenson, an emergency room physician at Providence Holy Cross Medical Center in the northeast SanFernando Valley community of Mission Hills, said larger-than-normal numbers of patients with asthma, chronicbronchitis and emphysema had shown up this week. Henson said he noticed a relatively high number ofchildren with cold symptoms and respiratory problems. Some of these young patients, he said, "maybe havenever had asthma before." Cheryl Evans-Cobb, director of emergency services at West Hills Hospital andMedical Center in the west San Fernando Valley, said she had noticed a slight upturn as well. And among thestaff, "lots and lots of people have their fire cough," she said. Studies show that deaths and hospitalizationsfrom lung and heart diseases, particularly bronchitis, asthma and pneumonia, increase in the days afterwildfires. "Our first concern is individuals with pre-existing chronic conditions like heart disease, chronic lungdisease like emphysema, and intermittent diseases and conditions like asthma," said Dr. Mark Horton, thestate's Public Health director. "Smoke can certainly exacerbate those conditions." In addition to particulates,17 March 2013 Page 76 of 483 ProQuestsmoke from wildfires carries a mix of toxic substances, including carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogenoxides and traces of heavy metals from the Earth's crust. The fires also are emitting large volumes of carbondioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, which have been linked to global warming. Tom Bonnicksen, a forestry andwildfire expert who is a professor emeritus at Texas A&M University, estimates that 19 million tons ofgreenhouse gases have been emitted by this week's fires. That is equivalent to 3.5% of annual emissionsgenerated statewide from all sources. Nichols said the state's greenhouse gas inventory already builds inestimates for wildfires. This year's total, however, could exceed that estimate, given the size of the Zaca fire inthe Los Padres National Forest this summer and this week's blazes. -- marla.cone@ Times staffwriter Stuart Silverstein contributed to this report. Credit: Times Staff Writer Illustration ; Caption: PHOTO:DANGER IN THE AIR: A California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection firefighter warns a colleagueabout the rising flames along East Grade Road on Mt. Palomar early Wednesday.; PHOTOGRAPHER:WallySkalij Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: GHOSTLY SCENE: The Poomacha fire rages on the La Jolla Indianreservation near Mt. Palomar, threatening to merge with the Witch fire at the San Diego/Riverside county line.;PHOTOGRAPHER:Luis Sinco Los Angeles TimesSubject: Hospitals; Airborne particulates; Emergency services; Air conditioning; Forest & brush fires; Airpollution; Public healthLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.24Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Oct 25, 2007Year: 2007Section: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422198764Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand17 March 2013 Page 77 of 483 ProQuest_______________________________________________________________Document 41 of 213SOUTHLAND BLAZES; Wherever the fire, Long Beach gets smoke; Santa Ana winds carry pollutioneven from far-off inland flames to the coastal city.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 24 Oct 2007: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Particulates, mainly microscopic pieces of soot, smoke and dust, can trigger asthma episodes,bronchitis, pneumonia, heart attacks, strokes and other life-threatening problems.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Long Beach is more than 40 miles from the nearest wildfire raging in Southern California. But its airpollution levels surged in recent days beyond the "unhealthy" level set by air-quality regulators. Because ofSouthern California's quirky topography and wind patterns, neighborhoods with no danger of wildfires are oftenthe ones most affected by wind-driven smoke. Long Beach sits at the neck of a wind "funnel" that, during strongSanta Ana conditions, carries smoke and ash to the coast from fires in distant mountain and desert areas. Sincethe wildfires ignited Sunday, the city has suffered some of the region's worst levels of airborne particulates.Clouds of smoke "carry enormous amounts of matter, and they fumigate in the area where it is cooler: right nextto the ocean," said Joseph Cassmassi, a meteorologist at the South Coast Air Quality Management District."You can see plumes of smoke from Santa Barbara all the way to the Mexican border, blowing from the east tothe west offshore. It's very dramatic." Particulates, mainly microscopic pieces of soot, smoke and dust, cantrigger asthma episodes, bronchitis, pneumonia, heart attacks, strokes and other life-threatening problems.Particulates from wildfire smoke tend to be very small and capable of lodging deep in lungs. Monday's levellingered in the unhealthful range in Long Beach, with a noontime peak of 161 on the national air pollution index,before subsiding to moderate levels Tuesday. The trigger for "unhealthy" is 150. The Norco-Corona arearegistered near 500 before dawn Monday, although its readings dropped to moderate levels later in the day andcontinued to be moderate Tuesday, according to the AQMD. A level of 200 is considered hazardous, capable ofcausing immediate breathing difficulties. Although everyone in the Los Angeles Basin "gets a little dab here andthere," Cassmassi said, the smoke from wildfires driven by Santa Ana winds "tends to wind up in Long Beach ata fairly good frequency." Similar pollutant levels are likely from Torrance to Huntington Beach, although thereare no air-quality monitors there. "With all the windblown dust and smoke, we can run into situations where themonitors can read up to 900. We've seen numbers as high as that," Cassmassi said. Other nearby areas, hesaid, may experience lower levels because they lie in a topographic "wind shadow." When Santa Ana conditionsdie down, particulate pollution will concentrate in a more typical pattern, closer to mountain ranges and awayfrom shore areas. Forecasters expect the winds to die down today. In the meantime, health officials haveadvised residents of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties to avoid exercise or exertionoutdoors. Children, the elderly and people with respiratory or cardiovascular diseases should take moreprecautions, remaining indoors if possible. Schoolchildren in Long Beach were in virtual lockdown for a secondday Tuesday. As she picked up her fifth-grade daughter after school at Lowell Elementary School, about half amile from the ocean, Madonna Cavagnaro said, she saw many of the children lift their shirts to cover theirnoses. "The look on the children's faces was like they were coming out of a bomb shelter," Cavagnaro said."There is debris all over our yards, the sky is gray, the air has a stink of fire, and there is a thick layer of graysoot all over the plants, the shrubs and the patio furniture." During the 16 days after the region's wildfires in2003, hospitalizations for asthma in Southern California increased 34%, according to a new study by UC Irvine17 March 2013 Page 78 of 483 ProQuestenvironmental epidemiologist Ralph Delfino. In addition, bronchitis increased in preschool-age children and theelderly, and pneumonia cases were up, Delfino's study showed. Hospitalizations from cardiovascular problemsalso increased, although not as much as respiratory ailments. Symptoms can come days later, when thecumulative effects take a toll on airways, lungs or hearts. In Long Beach, particularly near the ocean, somepeople said they coughed, had headaches and felt their eyes burning just from walking their dogs around theblock. Joanne Irish, who lives about half a mile from the ocean in Long Beach, said her children, ages 10 and13, "had horrible headaches yesterday, starting about midday." Dr. Helene Calvet, Long Beach health officer,warned residents, especially those with asthma, other lung diseases or respiratory allergies, to take extraprecautions during the fires. Youth sports practices were canceled Monday and Tuesday. The EnvironmentalProtection Agency advises people in smoky areas to close windows, run air conditioners, use air filters andavoid using gas stoves or burning wood or candles, which increase particulates. -- marla.cone@Credit: Times Staff Writer Illustration ; Caption: GRAPHIC: Where there's smoke; CREDIT: Los Angeles TimesSubject: Heart attacks; Air pollution; Wind; Forest & brush firesLocation: Long Beach CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Oct 24, 2007Year: 2007Section: California; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422173553Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 42 of 21317 March 2013 Page 79 of 483 ProQuestBrown to broaden fight over dirty air; The attorney general and environmental groups will ask the U.S.to regulate the emissions of ocean-going ships.Author: Roosevelt, MargotPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 03 Oct 2007: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: [Jerry Brown]'s petition to the EPA acknowledges that the landmark 1970 law does not give theagency "an unqualified mandate" to regulate non-road engines, such as those in ships. But given the act'sgeneral directive to "protect public health and welfare," he contends that the EPA "must regulate, or producewell-supported reasons . . . as to why it refuses to regulate, this large, almost completely uncontrolled source ofgreenhouse gas emissions." Also filing a petition today are the nonprofit groups Friends of the Earth,Earthjustice, Center for Biological Diversity and Oceana. "The global shipping industry is incredibly powerful,"said Michael F. Hirshfield, Oceana's chief scientist. "They've been able to avoid doing anything about airpollution for years." Brown, whose activism on the issue rivals that of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, said he didnot check with the governor before filing today's petition. "I'm the cop on the beat, and the beat is theenvironment of California," he said. "Every week a new dire report comes out on effects of climate change. Thisis a national imperative, and we cannot allow petty politics to stand in the way."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: State Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown, joining with national environmental groups, will petition the Bushadministration today to crack down on global warming emissions from ocean-going vessels, which make morethan 11,000 calls at California ports each year. The petition opens a new front in the battle by California andother states to force the federal government to regulate greenhouse gases. Until now, the focus had been onemissions from cars, trucks, power plants and other U.S.-based industries. Regulating planet- warmingpollutants from ships presents a tougher challenge because more than 90% of vessels that bring goods to theU.S. fly foreign flags and traditionally fall under international jurisdiction. "Climate change represents a potentcatastrophe and an irreversible risk to California as well as to the rest of the world," Brown said in an interview."Who comes into American ports is a matter for Americans to decide." Ocean-going vessels account for anestimated 2.7% to 5% of the world's greenhouse gases, roughly equivalent to the carbon dioxide emissions ofall U.S. cars and trucks. And emissions from ships are likely to grow by 75% in the next two decades, accordingto studies by the German-based Institute of Atmospheric Physics and the oil giant BP, which owns tankers. TheUnited Nations' International Maritime Organization, which is charged with regulating ocean-going vessels, hasdiscussed global warming emissions for several years but has yet to adopt rules. It has also postponedproposals to effectively control conventional pollutants, including particulates and ozone-forming gases thatcause respiratory diseases and cancer. The U.N. agency is hampered by opposition from Panama, Liberia andother nations that profit from registering ships, which environmentalists say makes U.S. intervention all the moreurgent. Overall, the Bush administration opposes mandatory curbs on global warming emissions and hasdeclined to sign on to the Kyoto Protocol, the international agreement on climate change. That resistancesuffered a setback earlier this year when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Environmental ProtectionAgency has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.Brown's petition to the EPA acknowledges that the landmark 1970 law does not give the agency "an unqualifiedmandate" to regulate non-road engines, such as those in ships. But given the act's general directive to "protectpublic health and welfare," he contends that the EPA "must regulate, or produce well-supported reasons . . . asto why it refuses to regulate, this large, almost completely uncontrolled source of greenhouse gas emissions."An EPA spokeswoman said the agency planned to draft regulations this year to cut gasoline emissions fromcars and trucks. But she declined to comment on the issue of planet-warming pollutants from ships. Also filing a17 March 2013 Page 80 of 483 ProQuestpetition today are the nonprofit groups Friends of the Earth, Earthjustice, Center for Biological Diversity andOceana. "The global shipping industry is incredibly powerful," said Michael F. Hirshfield, Oceana's chiefscientist. "They've been able to avoid doing anything about air pollution for years." In California, the PacificMerchant Shipping Assn. is battling the Air Resources Board in federal court over the board's 2005 rulerequiring ships to switch to cleaner fuel as they approach the California coast. That rule would probably havelittle effect on global warming emissions, however, because it takes more energy to refine cleaner diesel than itdoes to use "bunker" fuel, a dirtier fuel, potentially offsetting the climate benefits of switching. Industryspokesmen in Washington and Long Beach declined to comment on Brown's petition or on the regulation ofgreenhouse gases generally. However, the Air Resources Board is considering rules to require that ships pluginto electrical outlets while they unload. Because electrical power in California is more cleanly generated, thatchange would lower carbon dioxide emissions. And the Port of Los Angeles is requiring ships to reduce speedas they near the shore, which would also cut global warming emissions. Board chairman Mary Nichols notedthat the U.S. government has avoided imposing unilateral shipping standards, preferring to work through theU.N. agency. "Shipping is one of those areas where countries either find a way to cooperate, or historically, theygo to war," she said. As for Brown's petition, "This is exactly the kind of activism on global warming he promisedwhen he ran for the office of attorney general," she said. Brown has vowed to file suit against the Bushadministration if it fails to grant a waiver allowing California to regulate carbon dioxide from cars and trucks. Andin the case of ships, he said, "I don't believe the Bush administration can continue to thumb their noses at thelaws of the U.S. There is a pattern here. The law is absolutely clear that the EPA has a responsibility to act." Inrecent months, Brown has required San Bernardino County and other counties to account for greenhousegases in their growth plans and has challenged oil refineries and other industrial projects to mitigate or offsetcarbon dioxide emissions. Brown, whose activism on the issue rivals that of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, saidhe did not check with the governor before filing today's petition. "I'm the cop on the beat, and the beat is theenvironment of California," he said. "Every week a new dire report comes out on effects of climate change. Thisis a national imperative, and we cannot allow petty politics to stand in the way." --margot.roosevelt@ Times staff writer Janet Wilson contributed to this report. Illustration Caption:PHOTO: CLEAN AIR: California Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown will petition the federal government today to crack downon global warming emissions from ocean-going vessels, most of which sail under foreign flags.;PHOTOGRAPHER:Mel Melcon Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Shipping industry; Global warming; Ports; Federal regulation; Ships; Emission standards; Air pollutionLocation: CaliforniaPeople: Brown, Edmund G Jr (Jerry)Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Oct 3, 2007Year: 2007Section: California; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.17 March 2013 Page 81 of 483 ProQuestCountry of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422189494Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 43 of 213Hearth healthy; The wood-burning fireplace is taking a back seat to gas as pressure mounts forcleaner-air standards.Author: Bonker, DawnPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 23 Sep 2007: K.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: "I like the smell of natural wood fires," said [Frances Macias], while browsing the John Laing Homesmodel one recent weekend. "Oh, I guess they have their reasons from a health standpoint. But it's too bad." "Igrew up in Upland, and we kept our wood outside, and I was panicked about having to go out there and bringlogs in," [Colleen Dyck] said. "You know, it's California and there are black widows out there." "Anywhere we goto present our plan, people zoom in and we hear, 'Stay away from my fireplace!' or 'Stop the insanity and stopburning wood!' " the AQMD's [Laki Tisopulos] said. "There's nobody in the middle. It's one extreme or the other."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: IN the model home dubbed "The Pioneer," a rambling house tucked into a Corona subdivisionspringing up among the last dairy farms of Riverside County, is a fireplace unlike anything the early settlers evergathered around on a chilly night. Sleek glass doors front a metal insert that holds ceramic "logs." Built-in gasjets stand ready to send up flickering flames. And, in the most dramatic departure from tradition, a deep transomdisplay shelf and window span the area where a chimney normally would be. For regional air-quality officials, it'sone example of what they may allow in newly built homes and in permanently installed patio versions as part ofa stepped-up effort for cleaner air. But to new- home buyer Frances Macias of Chino Hills, the trend away fromwood- burning fireplaces is a slightly sad fact of modern life. "I like the smell of natural wood fires," said Macias,while browsing the John Laing Homes model one recent weekend. "Oh, I guess they have their reasons from ahealth standpoint. But it's too bad." Health and air pollution were exactly what the South Coast Air QualityManagement District had in mind early this summer when the agency proposed regulations that would haveforced no-burn days on the region's smoggiest areas and put wood-burning-fireplace restrictions on remodelsand new homes. After the plan sparked a public outcry, officials last month backed off from any rules that wouldaffect existing homes -- at least for now. A subcommittee is studying options including incentive programs thatwould cough up cash or utility rebates for homeowners who scrap old wood-burning stoves or modify traditional17 March 2013 Page 82 of 483 ProQuesthearths to include permanent gas fixtures. The fireplace rules are a small part of a comprehensive plan thattackles all of the region's sources of air pollution -- from restaurant charbroilers to automobiles -- in anaggressive effort to meet a Federal Clean Air Act deadline set for 2014. To help meet that goal, more restrictiverules will likely be imposed on new home construction, AQMD officials said. But the district is not expecting thenew-construction restrictions to be hugely controversial, said Laki Tisopulos, assistant deputy executive officerfor planning rule development and area sources. Indeed, say developers in the South Coast AQMD, whosejurisdiction includes all of Orange and most of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino counties, theproposals largely reflect what homeowners already prefer and what other California air districts have adopted. Afireplace is an amenity desired by 90% of consumers, according to the National Assn. of Home Builders.Whether that fireplace is gas or wood-burning is less of an issue, developers say. What's in that smoke "Theidea of wood-burning fireplaces tends to be a little more romantic in nature than reality," said Les Thomas,president of Shea Homes California. Most homeowners don't have the inclination to buy and store wood andsweep up ashes, said Colleen Dyck, vice president of sales and marketing for John Laing Homes, whichswitched to gas-fireplace inserts in almost all of its homes about eight years ago. Wood-burning fireplaces "aremessy, and they make your carpets smell," Dyck added. And there's the spider thing. "I grew up in Upland, andwe kept our wood outside, and I was panicked about having to go out there and bring logs in," Dyck said. "Youknow, it's California and there are black widows out there." But it's poisonous air that makes AQMD officialscringe. Wood smoke contains gases and tiny particulates that contribute to poor air quality and are smallenough to lodge in lungs and cause a host of respiratory ailments, from asthma to lung cancer, air regulatorssay. The fireplace rules were a relatively small part of the massive plan, but they roused considerable attention."Anywhere we go to present our plan, people zoom in and we hear, 'Stay away from my fireplace!' or 'Stop theinsanity and stop burning wood!' " the AQMD's Tisopulos said. "There's nobody in the middle. It's one extremeor the other." Kurt Lorig was among those who wanted the district to reconsider the wood-burning rules. Lorigowns Anaheim Patio &Fire and has sold hearth supplies for 51 years. Most people opt for the convenience andever-increasing variety of gas-fireplace logs available for new and older homes, he said. But why deny a few,maybe 5% of his customers, who love the homey crackle of embers and aroma of wood smoke? The healthconcerns of wood smoke are overblown, he said, when compared to the pollution spewed out daily on theregion's roads and highways. "What about all the cars?" Lorig asked, pointing toward the busy Santa AnaFreeway near his Irvine store. Most of the comprehensive plan does address vehicle and industrial sources ofair pollution. But the region has just seven years to meet a federal deadline for healthier air, so officials say nosource of pollution is too small to chase. Tisopulos said he is confident the subcommittee can satisfy bothcamps and craft a compromise plan. It's likely, though, that the final proposals will recommend only EPAapprovedfireplace fixtures in new developments, he said. Rules in effect elsewhere Meanwhile, dedicated gasfireplaces, which typically feature gas flames burning around an arrangement of ceramic, pumice or lava logshoused in a permanent insert, are the norm in most new homes. Models meeting EPA standards are commonthroughout the San Joaquin Valley, San Luis Obispo County and the Bay Area, where air districts have alreadyadopted burning restrictions. Wood-smoke reduction rules also are in effect in parts of New Mexico, Idaho,Oregon, Washington and Montana. "In Southern California, we're one of the last ones to get with the program,"said Don Bowker, Riverside division manager for Fireside Hearth &Home, a Minnesota-based supplier for homebuilders. Five years ago, 75% of its business was in wood-burning fireplaces, Bowker said. Now 60% of salesare gas-only products. Still, Melvin Rosenbaum hasn't noticed a downturn in firewood sales at his lot,Rosenbaum Ranch in San Juan Capistrano. But he does know that new homes are shunning traditionalhearths. "You can't beat a wood fireplace, but it is a lot of work," Rosenbaum said. With new-style fireplaces notrequiring chimneys, architects can get creative. The fireplaces are vented outdoors by small openings similar tothose attached to gas dryers, and everything from shelving to big-screen televisions gets popped into the spotabove the fireplace. At "The Pioneer" in the Steeplechase development, the area above the fireplace is17 March 2013 Page 83 of 483 ProQuestdominated by windows. Another model includes a gas fireplace that almost functions as a room divider, withopen shelving above. No chimneys dot the neighborhood roof lines. Frances Macias may be nostalgic for thewood fires of her childhood in San Gabriel, where a fire was a real treat on the occasional chilly night. But shelooks forward to using the gas one in her new house, just a few blocks from the model home she was prowlingfor decorating ideas. So as wood-burning fireplaces go the way of front-door mail slots, will traditional brickchimneys and fireplaces typical in established neighborhoods take on a certain cachet or become a specialselling point? Possibly for some buyers, but not for most, said John Hickey, president of the Pasadena-FoothillsAssn. of Realtors and an agent with Dilbeck Realtors in La Caada Flintridge. "There really aren't that manyconsumers that would make that the final deciding point of their decision," Hickey said. "For some people, theimagined benefits of the roaring fire and the Christmas yule log and the notion that they can't have that issomething they couldn't get past. But most people will be able to." Illustration Caption: PHOTO: CHIMNEYGONE: Yessele Macias, 1, sits next to a gas fireplace with a window above it instead of traditional flue housing.;PHOTOGRAPHER:Ricardo DeAratanha Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: ROMANTIC? Southern California airqualityregulators would like wood- burning models to be banned or modified.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Los AngelesTimes; PHOTO: SNUG FIT: Open shelving occupies the space above a gas fireplace in a John Laing Homesmodel house in Corona. Many builders have switched -- often quite creatively -- to cleaner-burning hearths.;PHOTOGRAPHER:Ricardo DeAratanha Los Angeles Times Credit: Special to The TimesSubject: Public health; Interior design; Fireplaces; Air pollutionPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: K.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Sep 23, 2007Year: 2007Section: Real Estate; Part K; Features DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: FeatureProQuest document ID: 422209416Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand17 March 2013 Page 84 of 483 ProQuest_______________________________________________________________Document 44 of 213Black-hearted ruling; The latest in a series of decisions gutting coal mining regulations will devastatemountain ecosystems.Publication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 31 Aug 2007: A.30.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The Office of Surface Mining has, under the Bush administration, been chipping away at the landmarkregulations established by Congress three decades ago to protect the environment from the most abusivemining practices. Last week, this culminated in a decision that would obliterate the 1983 stream buffer zonerule, which forbids mining activities within 100 feet of a river or stream. This has always been an unclear law,subject to interpretation, but it at least served as a slight brake on the practice of dumping mine debris in nearbycanyons and valleys, burying streams and devastating mountain ecosystems. The mining agency's decision,which will be finalized after a 60-day comment period, "clarifies" the rule by gutting it.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Coal is one of the most environmentally destructive substances on Earth. Coal-fired power plants,which produce more than half the nation's electricity, are the biggest source of airborne toxic substances in theU.S. and are responsible for about half the particulate matter polluting our skies. They are also often fingered asthe biggest contributors to global warming because of the greenhouse gases they emit. What is less discussedis the horrifying damage wrought by coal even before it makes its way to the power plant -- damage that maysoon grow even worse thanks to a disgraceful decision by mining regulators. The Office of Surface Mining has,under the Bush administration, been chipping away at the landmark regulations established by Congress threedecades ago to protect the environment from the most abusive mining practices. Last week, this culminated in adecision that would obliterate the 1983 stream buffer zone rule, which forbids mining activities within 100 feet ofa river or stream. This has always been an unclear law, subject to interpretation, but it at least served as a slightbrake on the practice of dumping mine debris in nearby canyons and valleys, burying streams and devastatingmountain ecosystems. The mining agency's decision, which will be finalized after a 60-day comment period,"clarifies" the rule by gutting it. Mining industry officials claim that it would be all but impossible to mine for coalwithout destroying streams because all mines, and especially the mountaintop strip mines in the Appalachiaregion, produce dirt and rubble, and the only place to dump it is in canyons. This is patently untrue. Lessindustry-friendly administrations have required mining companies to construct fill areas away from headwatersand truck the debris there; somehow, the industry managed to survive. What the rule change is really about ismaking coal cheaper. It costs more to mine in an environmentally responsible way, and that in turn raises theprice of coal. But everyone is burdened by the costs of the industry's bad practices, in such forms as higherhealthcare bills, cleanup costs for water polluted by mines and the expense of rebuilding infrastructuredestroyed by a changing climate. Coal should not be cheap. The only way to encourage cleaner alternatives isto make coal producers and the consumers of coal- fired power pay the true cost of their pollution. It's clear thatwon't happen at the behest of the Bush administration, which is why Congress must exercise much strongercoal industry oversight and strengthen laws that protect the environment from unsupervised miners.Subject: Coal mining; Federal regulation; Coal-fired power plants; Air pollution; Greenhouse gases; Globalwarming; Environmental protection; Creeks & streams; Editorials -- Coal miningLocation: United States, US17 March 2013 Page 85 of 483 ProQuestPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.30Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Aug 31, 2007Year: 2007Section: Main News; Part A; Editorial_pages DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: EditorialProQuest document ID: 422261002Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 45 of 213Ozone obligation; The EPA should follow its own scientific panel's recommendation and tighten air qualityrules.Publication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 30 Aug 2007: A.20.ProQuest document linkAbstract: EPA rules allow a concentration of 84 parts per billion of ozone in the air. The agency hasrecommended changing it to 70 to 75 parts per billion. That's a disappointment, given that the EPA's own CleanAir Scientific Advisory Committee, after reviewing the available research on ozone, unanimously ruled that theexisting standard doesn't protect public health and urged lowering it to between 60 and 70 parts per billion. Andbowing to complaints from industry, the EPA also has given itself a way to avoid doing anything at all: Amongthe options to be discussed today will be leaving the standard as it is.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: That stuff you're breathing could be killing you. Most Angelenos refer to the brown haze blanketing thecity as smog, but more technically it's a noxious mix of particulate matter and gases, the prime ingredient beingozone. Most of our ozone comes from cars, trucks and other vehicles, but it's also produced by smokestacks,wet paint and other sources. It makes asthma worse and might even cause it; ozone also irritates the lungs and17 March 2013 Page 86 of 483 ProQuestcan kill those with respiratory problems, especially children and the elderly. The federal governmentstrengthened its ozone standard in 1997, but a decade of research has shown that the rules still aren't strictenough. So the Environmental Protection Agency has proposed tightening them, and will hold a daylong publichearing on the issue today in Los Angeles. EPA rules allow a concentration of 84 parts per billion of ozone inthe air. The agency has recommended changing it to 70 to 75 parts per billion. That's a disappointment, giventhat the EPA's own Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, after reviewing the available research on ozone,unanimously ruled that the existing standard doesn't protect public health and urged lowering it to between 60and 70 parts per billion. And bowing to complaints from industry, the EPA also has given itself a way to avoiddoing anything at all: Among the options to be discussed today will be leaving the standard as it is. California ishome to eight of the 10 counties with the highest concentration of ozone in the United States, according to theAmerican Lung Assn. (L.A. is No. 4 on the list, with San Bernardino County having the dubious honor of beingNo. 1.) The state already has an ozone standard of 70 parts per billion, but the rule has no regulatory teeth. TheEPA can order counties to submit plans for how they'll reach compliance and cut off federal funds if they fail todo so. The EPA under the Bush administration has long been trying to shrug off its obligation to regulate ozone,and the proposed standard was developed only after the agency was successfully sued by the American LungAssn. If it fails to crack down, it clearly will be violating its legal responsibility to protect public health.Subject: Ozone; Air pollution; Environmental regulations; Editorials -- OzoneLocation: United States, USCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910;Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.20Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Aug 30, 2007Year: 2007Section: Main News; Part A; Editorial_pages DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: EditorialProQuest document ID: 422089148Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)17 March 2013 Page 87 of 483 ProQuestLast updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 46 of 213Vote could speed 11 new power plants in Southland; The AQMD allows developers to buy credits tooffset pollution released by the facilities. Critics call the plan a sellout.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 04 Aug 2007: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: "I have a lot of ambivalence," he said. "We are happy the board recognizes the need for additionalpower generation.... However, they put so many restrictions on us ... it could potentially kill the project." "As ourregion continues to grow, we will need more clean energy to prevent rolling blackouts," board Chairman WilliamA. Burke said. "Today's measures will help minimize the impact of new power plants, especially in low-income,environmental justice communities and other areas already subject to high levels of air pollution." "These ruleswill allow more annual carbon dioxide emissions than what is generated by 107 countries around the world,"said Angela Johnson Meszaros, an attorney with California Communities Against Toxics. "The impacts of theserules are staggering in terms of human health, local air quality and global climate."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Southern California air quality regulators approved rule changes Friday that could speed theconstruction of 11 or more power plants across the region -- a decision that could bring an estimated $419million to public coffers. The South Coast Air Quality Management District board, in an 8-3 vote, gave powerplant developers the opportunity buy credits to offset the pollution that would be released by the new facilities.The credits were originally intended for schools, hospitals and other emergency agencies. The vote came aftermonths of lengthy, contentious hearings -- including six hours of testimony Friday -- and appeared to satisfyneither environmentalists nor plant developers. "It's outrageous. Our air district has assumed the role of polluterproponent. They seem to have forgotten they are the air quality district, in charge of protecting public health andthe environment," said Tim Grabiel, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council. Dozens ofcommunity members picketed outside the board's headquarters in Diamond Bar before the meeting. Manytestified that their potentially affected neighborhoods were already suffering from asthma, lung cancer and otherrespiratory ailments from industry. But Mike Carroll, an attorney representing half a dozen of the proposedpower plants -- including a fiercely contested 943- megawatt facility in Vernon -- said the conditions placed oncredits by the board could make it too costly to build some of the plants. "I have a lot of ambivalence," he said."We are happy the board recognizes the need for additional power generation.... However, they put so manyrestrictions on us ... it could potentially kill the project." The plants also need approval from state energyregulators. Other communities where plants are proposed include Victorville, Carson, Industry, El Segundo,Grand Terrace, Riverside and Sun Valley. The board is considering using the profits to fund alternative- energyincentives and studies on pollution health risks, but put off that decision. Developers would be required to pay$92,000 per pound of coarse particulates they would emit and $34,000 per pound of sulfur oxide. Bothsubstances contribute to air pollution that plagues the Los Angeles Basin. Plant owners also would be requiredto buy enough pollution credits to offset cancer risks at a higher rate than is required under federal or state law,Carroll said. Former state Sen. Martha Escutia, who lobbied board members in favor of allowing the Vernonpower plant to buy the credits, praised the decision. "It's basically a vote to ensure energy reliability in the17 March 2013 Page 88 of 483 ProQuestregion," she said. Board members voting in favor of the credits sale agreed with her and AQMD staff that newplants would help prevent electricity outages and might replace older, dirtier power plants. "As our regioncontinues to grow, we will need more clean energy to prevent rolling blackouts," board Chairman William A.Burke said. "Today's measures will help minimize the impact of new power plants, especially in low-income,environmental justice communities and other areas already subject to high levels of air pollution." But boardmember Jane Carney, an attorney from Riverside who voted against the rule changes, said, "There is nocurrent evidence I've heard that there is a need for [large] plants.... There is no crisis." Representatives from twostate agencies testified that there was no immediate need for additional power, but that there could be incoming years as older plants break down or are retired. The nonprofit California Independent System Operatorfound that about 10,000 megawatts are needed in the Los Angeles Basin, and that about 12,000 megawatts areavailable. The California Energy Commission found that about 400 additional megawatts will be neededannually in coming years. New power plants are "needed as a preventive measure. Even though we may not bein a power crisis today, it takes at least four to five years to plan for and construct a power plant, and thus wecan't afford to wait until we're in a crisis to take steps to increase generating capacity," said AQMD spokesmanSam Atwood. A backdrop for the hearing was the battle over what type of electricity will replace coal power,which is being phased out under state law. Natural gas-fired plants are a proven technology but still emitgreenhouse gases; wind, solar and other renewable sources are less reliable but cleaner. "These rules willallow more annual carbon dioxide emissions than what is generated by 107 countries around the world," saidAngela Johnson Meszaros, an attorney with California Communities Against Toxics. "The impacts of these rulesare staggering in terms of human health, local air quality and global climate." Under the rules, she said, AQMDwill allow more than 35 billion pounds per year of carbon dioxide emissions -- the greenhouse gas believed tobe the biggest contributor to global warming. Even some who voted for the credit program expressed concernsabout the Vernon project in particular, and the use of power from fossil fuel in general. "Don't think you guys arethe heroes here.... I think you're trying to create a cash cow for your city that will impact the health of yourneighbors downwind," Chino Mayor Dennis Yates, a board member, said to Vernon officials, noting that the citystood to reap hefty profits by selling surplus power. -- janet.wilson@ Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Carbon offsets; Public opinion; Electric power plants; Air pollutionLocation: Southern CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA; NAICS:924110; DUNS: 01-598-6159Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Aug 4, 2007Year: 2007Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United States17 March 2013 Page 89 of 483 ProQuestISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422153052Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 47 of 213Air board cracks down on diesel; State regulators adopt tough rules requiring huge cutbacks in fumesfrom construction industry equipment. Next up: big trucks.Author: Roosevelt, MargotPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 27 July 2007: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: "This is a very progressive rule with a lot of flexibility," said board Chairwoman Mary Nichols."Beginning in 2010, we will be breathing far less of the smog and fine particulates that are so damaging to ourhealth." The building industry hotly contested the rule, saying it would cause job losses, increase highwayconstruction costs and damage the state's economy. Michael Lewis, a lobbyist for the industry-led Coalition toBuild a Cleaner California, said industry could not afford the retrofits. "And a regulation that is not achievable willnot save one life," he said. "This was a great debut by Chairwoman Nichols," said Kathryn Phillips, a lobbyist forEnvironmental Defense. "It shows that science and public health are still the main forces that drive the agency."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: California's diesel-powered bulldozers, scrapers and other heavy construction equipment must beretrofitted or replaced over the next 13 years to reduce the air pollution that sickens tens of thousands ofresidents every year, state regulators decided Thursday. Under tough new rules adopted by the Air ResourcesBoard, California is the first state to make construction companies fix existing diesel-powered machines. Heavyequipment can last 30 years or more, so without the new mandate, it would take decades for fleets to upgradeto cleaner equipment. Although the fumes are most often associated with big trucks and buses, 20% ofCalifornia's diesel pollution comes from the construction industry. Building, mining and airport vehicles areresponsible for an estimated 1,100 premature deaths statewide every year and more than 1,000 hospitalizationsfor heart and lung disease, along with tens of thousands of asthma attacks, scientists say. The air board's newrules will slash diesel soot -- also known as particulate matter -- from construction equipment by 92% over 2000levels. Smog-forming nitrogen oxides will be cut by more than a third. And greenhouse gases, a byproduct offuel burning, also will drop as a result of a ban on idling equipment. "This is a very progressive rule with a lot offlexibility," said board Chairwoman Mary Nichols. "Beginning in 2010, we will be breathing far less of the smogand fine particulates that are so damaging to our health." The building industry hotly contested the rule, saying itwould cause job losses, increase highway construction costs and damage the state's economy. Michael Lewis,17 March 2013 Page 90 of 483 ProQuesta lobbyist for the industry-led Coalition to Build a Cleaner California, said industry could not afford the retrofits."And a regulation that is not achievable will not save one life," he said. The new regulation signaled a comebackfor the powerful board, whose reputation was damaged in the wake of the recent firing of its former chairman,Robert Sawyer, by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, and allegations that the governor's staff had tried to weakenproposed pollution standards. Nichols, an environmental lawyer appointed by Schwarzenegger to replaceSawyer, took an aggressive stance during Thursday's daylong board meeting, opposing an industry proposal todelay enforcement. The diesel rule, the result of three years of debate, drew applause from environmentalgroups. "This was a great debut by Chairwoman Nichols," said Kathryn Phillips, a lobbyist for EnvironmentalDefense. "It shows that science and public health are still the main forces that drive the agency." The rule,which air board staff say will cost the industry up to $3.4 billion, is one of the most expensive adopted by theboard. As part of an aggressive diesel cleanup, the board has also adopted restrictions on garbage trucks,buses and ships. Next on the agenda: heavy-duty trucks, which could cost even more to clean up thanconstruction equipment. The building industry operates 180,000 pieces of diesel machinery statewide. It costsup to $40,000 to buy particulate filters for a single million-dollar scraper. Overall, contractors contended, thecost of the rules could reach $13 billion and boost the price of homes, highways and commercial buildings. Thediscrepancy in the estimates of the cost to industry caused the board to delay action in May to allow staff toevaluate new economic data. In the last two months, air board economists and individual board members helddozens of meetings with industry groups and examined the financial records of companies. Industry figureswere based on an exaggerated rate of equipment turnover, among other factors, staffers told the board. On avote of 6 to 3, with Nichols leading the opposition, the board defeated an effort by industry groups to extend thecompliance schedule. It maintained annual reduction targets for soot, rather than moving enforcement to athree-year schedule, which staff said could cut health benefits by as much as 12%. In addition to an overallstate standard, the board adopted a provision that will allow Los Angeles and nearby counties, the San JoaquinValley and other particularly polluted regions to accelerate the diesel equipment cleanup schedule in theirdistricts. "It's a good day for clean air," said Barry Wallerstein, executive officer of the South Coast Air QualityManagement District. Wallerstein said the region must achieve twice the amount of construction pollution cutsas the overall state goal in order to meet federal standards. The region, one of the dirtiest in the country, isunder a strict mandate to improve its air by 2015. The AQMD will offer construction companies $120 million inincentives to purchase particulate filters or buy new machines. To soften the economic hardship on mom-andpopbusinesses, the new rule gives small fleets until 2015 to begin compliance, while large fleets must begin in2010. margot.roosevelt@ Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Construction industry; Regulation; Air pollution; Diesel fuelsLocation: CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Air Resources Board-California; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 62-691-2737Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Jul 27, 2007Year: 2007Dateline: SACRAMENTO17 March 2013 Page 91 of 483 ProQuestSection: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422161501Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 48 of 213Pollution-cholesterol link to heart disease seen; The combination activates genes that can causeclogged arteries, UCLA researchers say.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 26 July 2007: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: "Their combination creates a dangerous synergy that wreaks cardiovascular havoc far beyond what'scaused by the diesel or cholesterol alone," said Dr. Andre Nel, chief of nanomedicine at the David GeffenSchool of Medicine at UCLA and a researcher at UCLA's California NanoSystems Institute. He led a team of 10scientists who conducted the study, published in an online version of the journal Genome Biology. "The levelswere high, but they came from real freeway exhaust so they were not artificially high," Nel said. "It was almostwithin the realm of what we are exposed to." The smaller the particle, the more harm it can cause. More arteryclogginggenes were activated in mice exposed to the ultra-fine particles in diesel exhaust than in thoseexposed to larger particles in the air. Smaller particles generally come from sources of combustion -- mostlyvehicles.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Strengthening the link between air pollution and cardiovascular disease, new research suggests thatpeople with high cholesterol are especially vulnerable to heart disease when they are exposed to diesel exhaustand other ultra-fine particles that are common pollutants in urban air. Microscopic particles in diesel exhaustcombine with cholesterol to activate genes that trigger hardening of the arteries, according to a study by UCLAscientists to be published today. "Their combination creates a dangerous synergy that wreaks cardiovascularhavoc far beyond what's caused by the diesel or cholesterol alone," said Dr. Andre Nel, chief of nanomedicineat the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and a researcher at UCLA's California NanoSystems Institute.He led a team of 10 scientists who conducted the study, published in an online version of the journal Genome17 March 2013 Page 92 of 483 ProQuestBiology. Although diet, smoking and other factors contribute to the risk of cardiovascular disease -- the leadingcause of death in the Western world -- scientists have long believed that air pollution, particularly tiny pieces ofsoot from trucks and factories, plays a major role, too. For years, scientists around the world have reported thaton days when fine-particle pollution increases, deaths from lung diseases, heart attacks and strokes risesubstantially. Riverside County and the San Gabriel Valley have among the worst fine-particle pollution in thenation. The scientists say their study, conducted on human cells as well as on mice, is the first to explain howparticulates in the air activate genes that can cause heart attacks or strokes. The researchers exposed humanblood cells to a combination of diesel particles and oxidized fats, then extracted their DNA. Working together,the particles and fats switched on genes that cause inflammation of blood vessels, which leads to cloggedarteries, or atherosclerosis. The team then duplicated the findings in living animals by exposing mice to a highfatdiet and freeway exhaust in downtown Los Angeles. The same artery-clogging gene groups were activatedin the mice. The scientists reported that diesel particles may enter the body's circulatory system from the lungs,and then react with fats in the arteries to alter how genes are activated, triggering inflammation that causesheart disease. Other research has shown similar inflammatory damage in lungs exposed to fine particles. Dieselexhaust has also been linked to lung cancer, asthma attacks and DNA damage. "Our results emphasize theimportance of controlling air pollution as another tool for preventing cardiovascular disease," said Ke Wei Gong,a UCLA cardiology researcher who was one of the study's authors. In many urban areas, including the LosAngeles region, ultra- fine particles are the most concentrated near freeways, mostly from diesel exhaust, whichis spewed by trucks, buses, off-road vehicles and other vehicle engines. For decades, California and local airqualityregulators have been ratcheting down particulate emissions from trucks and other sources, but theairborne levels in most of the Los Angeles region still frequently exceed federal health standards. "There are afew hot spots throughout the country that compete with Los Angeles from time to time, but in general, we tendto have the highest levels here," Nel said. Exposed in a mobile laboratory moving down the freeway, the micebreathed a concentration of fine particles, 362 micrograms per cubic meter of air. That was five times higherthan the peak that people in the San Gabriel Valley were exposed to last year. However, humans breathepolluted air every day for decades, whereas the mice in the study were exposed five hours per day, three daysper week, for eight weeks. "The levels were high, but they came from real freeway exhaust so they were notartificially high," Nel said. "It was almost within the realm of what we are exposed to." Diesel particles containfree radicals, which damage tissues, and so do the fatty acids in cholesterol. The study aimed to find out whathappened when these two sources of oxidation came in contact. In the cells exposed to just the cholesterol orjust the diesel, the effects on the genes were much less pronounced. More than 1,500 genes were turned on,and 759 were turned off, when diesel particles were combined with the fats. "Now that we see this geneticfootprint, we have a better understanding of how the injury occurs due to air pollution particles," Nel said. TheUCLA scientists hope to transform the gene changes to a biomarker, which experts can then use to predictwhich people are most susceptible to heart disease from air pollution. The smaller the particle, the more harm itcan cause. More artery- clogging genes were activated in mice exposed to the ultra-fine particles in dieselexhaust than in those exposed to larger particles in the air. Smaller particles generally come from sources ofcombustion -- mostly vehicles. -- marla.cone@ Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Diesel engines; Medical research; Cardiovascular disease; Cholesterol; Air pollutionCompany / organization: Name: University of California-Los Angeles; NAICS: 611310; DUNS: 00-398-5512Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 017 March 2013 Page 93 of 483 ProQuestPublication year: 2007Publication date: Jul 26, 2007Year: 2007Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422151392Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 49 of 213Keep the home fires burningAuthor: Schickel, ErikaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 12 June 2007: A.21.ProQuest document linkAbstract: I've inhaled enough wood smoke to know that the AQMD has a point. It's pretty harsh stuff. But I amsorry we've arrived at the point in our evolution where fire has become bad for us. It has been our historicalfriend and is part of who we are on a primal level. The AQMD's proposed rules -- which must be voted on oneby one to become law -- are all very moderate and common-sensical. But it isn't hard to imagine a day comingwhen there's an outright law against fires, such as the one in the San Joaquin Valley, which fines violators$300. Also, isn't there something harebrained in plugging our flues while the hills around us burn? When I askedan AQMD spokesman about how much particulate matter wildfires contribute to air quality, he came up empty.Could we be missing out on an opportunity here? Maybe we could harvest all that dried brush, bundle it withyellow caution tape, throw in a fire voucher and sell it as "The L.A. Brush Fire- Starter Kit."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: I GREW UP IN Manhattan, in the glow of the WPIX-TV yule log, so when I bought my home in LosAngeles, I made darn sure that it had a working fireplace. Most winter nights find my family gathered before acrackling hearth, playing cards, reading or just staring, hypnotized, into the flames. Fire is, after all, the originalhominid home entertainment center. Turns out this creature comfort could make me a gross polluter in the eyesof the South Coast Air Quality Management District. My fireplace, along with the 1.9 million others, dump tons of17 March 2013 Page 94 of 483 ProQuestparticulate matter into the air, which leads to 5,400 premature deaths a year in Southern California. Particulatematter also makes compliance with the federal Clean Air Act nearly impossible. Regional air quality managerslast week approved a plan containing 30 measures limiting pollution caused by wood smoke, including a ban onfires on days when the air quality is unhealthful, a ban on installing wood-burning fireplaces in new houses andrequirements for homeowners to replace wood stoves and fireplaces with gas log inserts upon sale of theirhome. I've inhaled enough wood smoke to know that the AQMD has a point. It's pretty harsh stuff. But I amsorry we've arrived at the point in our evolution where fire has become bad for us. It has been our historicalfriend and is part of who we are on a primal level. Of all the elements, fire is the only one humans can make.We have used it to our advantage for millenniums. A whiff of wood smoke in the night air evokes comfort andsecurity. It is a Proustian call to our primal selves. For wherever we humans have roamed and homed - - in caveor castle, campsite or condo -- fires have been at the center, warming us, feeding us, protecting us from animalsand evil spirits. From this perspective, the Bic lighter can be seen as one of the most sublime expressions of theopposable thumb. Maybe we've simply evolved right past fire. It's been replaced by central heating andtelevision. In temperate Los Angeles, a fire is mostly a luxury item, like a bubble bath. It's little more than anelement-based mood enhancer. Frankly, I was surprised by the AQMD's grim statistics -- wood fires add 7 tonsof particulate matter to the air each day -- as I was under the impression that fire-making was becoming a lostart. So many hearths these days seem to be stuffed with candles or dried flowers, or most obscene of all, TVs.Any honyock can fall asleep with a burning cigarette and start a brush fire, but building and tending a controlledwood fire is a craft that requires study, practice and a grasp of basic physics. Like being able to drive a stickshift, fire-building is an essential life skill. My children are encouraged (and supervised) in their fire play. Thisweekend, we are celebrating the end of the school year with a ritualistic bonfire of their old school papers in ourbackyard fire bowl. Hold your breath, neighbors. The AQMD's proposed rules -- which must be voted on one byone to become law -- are all very moderate and common-sensical. But it isn't hard to imagine a day comingwhen there's an outright law against fires, such as the one in the San Joaquin Valley, which fines violators$300. Also, isn't there something harebrained in plugging our flues while the hills around us burn? When I askedan AQMD spokesman about how much particulate matter wildfires contribute to air quality, he came up empty.Could we be missing out on an opportunity here? Maybe we could harvest all that dried brush, bundle it withyellow caution tape, throw in a fire voucher and sell it as "The L.A. Brush Fire- Starter Kit." What the AQMDwould really like to see us do is curl up in front of a hissing, odorless gas log. Personally, I get the same thrillfrom a gas fire that I do watching water boil on my stove. Fire is not simply about light and heat, it's aboutcombustion -- logs rubbing together, popping and releasing smoke and heat. A fire has a dramatic story arc:from wood to ember to ash. A fire has a smell, which we have a prehistoric jones for. Otherwise we might aswell just settle for the televised yule log. Or, I know, we could get one of those blowers with the tissue-paperflames. Then we could live like a wax museum diorama of what life looked like back in the olden days whenhome fires were still legal. Credit: ERIKA SCHICKEL is the author of the memoir "You're Not the Boss of Me:Adventures of a Modern Mom."Subject: Air pollution; Airborne particulatesCompany / organization: Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA; NAICS:924110; DUNS: 01-598-6159Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.21Number of pages: 0Publication year: 200717 March 2013 Page 95 of 483 ProQuestPublication date: Jun 12, 2007Year: 2007Section: Main News; Part A; Editorial Pages DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: CommentaryProQuest document ID: 422165848Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 50 of 213Clean air plan OKd by Southland regulators; If fully implemented, fireplace use could be severelyrestricted. Several officials express reservations about those parts of the proposal.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 02 June 2007: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: "Point of sale enforcement is the slowest, most inefficient method that the district could choose toreduce fine particles emitted by older wood stoves and fireplace inserts," [Carla Walecka] said. The approachwould "complicate tens of thousands of property transfers" in an already cooling market, she said. "Air pollutionhas created a silent epidemic responsible for up to 5,400 premature deaths each year" in Southern California,said William Burke, board chairman of the agency that oversees air quality in L.A. and Orange counties andportions of Riverside and San Bernardino counties. "We must go beyond business-as-usual solutions to achievehealthful air for Southland residents." "I got a text message from my [business] partner in the middle of themeeting saying 'Save My Fireplace,' " laughed Burke. "Now that's intense lobbying."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Southern California air regulators Friday approved a comprehensive clean air plan that, if fullyimplemented, could place stringent restrictions on home fireplaces. But individual elements of the plan,approved unanimously by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, must be separately passed by theboard in order to become law. A September vote on the fireplace measure is scheduled, but several memberswho approved the larger plan say they may not ultimately support those restrictions. "We all have to do our part,including ... the citizens of this region ... but I do not believe that we can have a Gestapo approach to17 March 2013 Page 96 of 483 ProQuestfireplaces," said Riverside County Supervisor Roy Wilson, whose district could be hit hardest if the proposalspass. Those proposals include a ban on wood-burning fireplaces in all new homes in Los Angeles, Orange andportions of San Bernardino and Riverside counties and a ban on wood-fueled fires in some areas during winterpollution spikes. It would also require homeowners in the most highly polluted areas of the Inland Empire toremove or close off fireplaces and wood stoves, or install costly pollution control devices on them, before sellinga house. Carla Walecka, head of the Realtors Committee on Air Quality advising the agency, said the homesale provision could snarl sales in western Riverside and San Bernardino counties. "Point of sale enforcementis the slowest, most inefficient method that the district could choose to reduce fine particles emitted by olderwood stoves and fireplace inserts," Walecka said. The approach would "complicate tens of thousands ofproperty transfers" in an already cooling market, she said. Board members said it was vital to take every stepnecessary to clear the region's air, the worst in the nation. "Air pollution has created a silent epidemicresponsible for up to 5,400 premature deaths each year" in Southern California, said William Burke, boardchairman of the agency that oversees air quality in L.A. and Orange counties and portions of Riverside and SanBernardino counties. "We must go beyond business-as-usual solutions to achieve healthful air for Southlandresidents." The fireplace regulations as currently proposed would reduce a small portion -- an estimated 7 tonsa day on average -- of the 192- ton-a-day reductions in nitrogen oxides necessary to bring the region intocompliance with the federal Clean Air Act. Nitrogen oxides are a key ingredient in both smog and particulatepollution. Burke and other board members said they had been ordered by the California Air Resources Board todevelop regulations on commercial charbroilers and fireplaces and were required to do so under state lawbecause other air districts have done so, including the San Joaquin, Sacramento and Bay Area districts. Burkesaid he thought public attention to and dismay over the fireplace portions of the mammoth plan were"misplaced. This document is 1,600 pages long, and they want to focus on fireplaces.... We're at a crossroadshere on public health." The plan approved Friday also contains requirements for reducing soot and otherpollutants from cars, trucks, refineries and other industrial sources. Local officials said these measures would dofar more than fireplace restrictions and urged the state and federal government to join the agency in pushing foreven more aggressive reductions in those areas. Still, Burke said, it's tough asking ordinary people to makechanges that hit close to home to protect the larger environment. "I got a text message from my [business]partner in the middle of the meeting saying 'Save My Fireplace,' " laughed Burke. "Now that's intense lobbying."-- janet.wilson@ Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Clean Air Act-US; Environmental policy; Air pollutionLocation: Southern CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA; NAICS:924110; DUNS: 01-598-6159Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Jun 2, 2007Year: 2007Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLC17 March 2013 Page 97 of 483 ProQuestPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: FeatureProQuest document ID: 422149155Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 51 of 213The State; Plan to clean air may kill ambience; Regulation would limit wood-burning fireplaceconstruction and use.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 01 June 2007: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: "A home is an emotional buy," said [Barbara Burner], who works for Century 21 in Thousand Oaksand has three wood-burning fireplaces in her own home. "A fireplace -- especially a beautiful fireplace, and whatpeople normally mean by that is a wood-burning fireplace -- it's the thing people like to have." "Our governingboard will consider adopting their air quality plan, which includes more than three dozen measures," air districtspokesman Sam Atwood said. "One of those measures would be for the first time to have a program that wouldreduce pollution from residential fireplaces and wood stoves." A fireplace is "a popular feature. People want tobe able to have a wood fire at certain times of year, and the AQMD did not bring to us any data that woulddemonstrate that wood smoke emissions are significant," Grey said. "From the statistics that we can see, most... homes burn wood in their fireplaces twice a year -- on Christmas Eve and during the Super Bowl."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Throwing a few logs on the fire on a nippy evening, or boosting a home's market appeal by advertisingits wood-burning fireplace, could go the way of the coal chute and the ice box for many Southern Californians ifnewly proposed air quality regulations are adopted. As part of air pollution plans designed to meet federaldeadlines, South Coast Air Quality Management District officials have proposed a ban on wood-burningfireplaces in all new homes in Los Angeles, Orange and portions of Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Inaddition, on winter days when pollution spikes, wood-fueled blazes in all fireplaces would be banned in highlyaffected areas. That could amount to about 20 days a year, district officials said. Another measure that wouldrequire closing off wood fireplaces or installing $3,600 pollution control devices before a home could be soldhad been dropped as of late Thursday, an AQMD spokesman said. Regulators say that with an estimated 5,400premature deaths attributable to soot each year in the region, no source is too small to target. Numerous17 March 2013 Page 98 of 483 ProQueststudies have shown that the fine particulate matter in soot sinks deep into the lungs, causing serious healthproblems. But critics, including homebuilders and real estate agents, say the regulations could hurt sales byrobbing homes of one of their most enjoyable features. Air district staffers say a daily reduction of 192 tons ofnitrogen oxides, an ingredient in harmful particulate pollution, is needed across the region to meet the Clean AirAct requirements, and that 7 tons of that could come from restrictions on fireplaces. Barbara Burner, a Realtorfor 25 years, said that with such a small amount of pollution at issue, she doesn't think the restrictions aremerited. "A home is an emotional buy," said Burner, who works for Century 21 in Thousand Oaks and has threewood-burning fireplaces in her own home. "A fireplace -- especially a beautiful fireplace, and what peoplenormally mean by that is a wood-burning fireplace -- it's the thing people like to have." The fireplace rules areone piece of a plan also designed to reduce soot from diesel engines and ozone smog that AQMD's board willvote on today. "Our governing board will consider adopting their air quality plan, which includes more than threedozen measures," air district spokesman Sam Atwood said. "One of those measures would be for the first timeto have a program that would reduce pollution from residential fireplaces and wood stoves." The plan alsoincludes truck-only lanes on the 710 and 15 freeways, and electric rail lines from Los Angeles' Westside toOntario airport and from the ports to Inland Empire warehouses. Reducing paint thinner emissions and gasstation and refinery leaks is also part of the host of proposed measures. If the overall plan is approved, anothervote is scheduled for September to finalize the fireplace regulation. "There aren't any easy rules left in terms ofsubstantially reducing" fine particulate air pollution, said Jane Carney, a Riverside attorney and an AQMD boardmember. Riverside and other Inland Empire communities would likely be targeted by fire bans during cold wintermonths. Carney said there are "pretty obvious adverse impacts of wood smoke on pollution. If you stand closeto a wood fire and breathe, you can feel it in your throat and in your lungs." Carney said that while she wouldlisten to comments from the public and the building industry, attractive alternatives to wood fireplaces areavailable. "Let me tell you, the natural gas logs are wonderful," she said. Carney also said she would considereven tougher measures to clean up fireplace pollution, such as a complete regional wintertime ban on woodfires. Air pollution regulations on fireplaces have been adopted in an estimated 50 counties, air districts or citiesacross the West, particularly in colder areas, said John Crouch of the Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Assn.Numerous trade groups oppose the fireplace measures. Mark Grey, environmental director for the BuildingIndustry Assn. of Southern California, said the group would especially oppose any ban on wood- burningfireplaces in new homes. A fireplace is "a popular feature. People want to be able to have a wood fire at certaintimes of year, and the AQMD did not bring to us any data that would demonstrate that wood smoke emissionsare significant," Grey said. "From the statistics that we can see, most ... homes burn wood in their fireplacestwice a year -- on Christmas Eve and during the Super Bowl." There are an estimated 1.9 million homes withfireplaces in Southern California out of about 5 million total housing units, regulators said. Environmentalist TimCarmichael, who heads the Coalition for Clean Air, said that while it was important to take every step possible toclean the region's air -- still the most polluted in the nation -- it would be difficult if not impossible to enforce anysort of ban on wintertime fires. "At some level we believe these sorts of controls need to be looked at, but ... thebig question is, is it enforceable?" Carmichael said. "Could you really get people to stop doing this?" Atwood,the air district spokesman, said that with about 100 inspectors responsible for pollution sources ranging from oilrefineries to gas stations, enforcement would be tough. But Crouch, of the hearth and patio association, said,"Given how far out of attainment the South Coast is for fine particulates, and the fact that wood burning is not assignificant in Southern California as it is in, for instance, in Seattle or Denver or someplace colder, I thinkthey've charted a reasonable regional path here." * janet.wilson@ Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Wood; Environmental regulations; Air pollution; FireplacesLocation: Southern California17 March 2013 Page 99 of 483 ProQuestCompany / organization: Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA; NAICS:924110; DUNS: 01-598-6159Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Jun 1, 2007Year: 2007Section: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422150380Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 52 of 213Judge strikes down tough rules on diesel; The Southland's smog- fighting agency had orderedrailroads to cut emissions, but is told that it lacks the authority to do so.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 03 May 2007: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: "The rules at issue in this case are exactly the type of local regulation that Congress intended topreempt ... in order to prevent a 'patchwork' of ... local regulation interfering with interstate commerce," [John F.Walter] wrote in an opinion released Tuesday. "The court does not arrive at its decision lightly, and recognizesthat there is a serious problem with the air quality problem in the basin which needs to be addressed." "Thecourt has recognized the importance of having consistent nationwide regulation of rail operations. This enablesrailroads to improve air quality while efficiently moving the goods that propel California's economy," said BNSFspokeswoman Lena Kent. "The railroads are already the most fuel-efficient and environmentally friendly modeof overland transportation and have been working to reduce emissions to even lower levels." "I'm very17 March 2013 Page 100 of 483 ProQuestdisappointed," he said. "The fact is that people are dying in our community from the diesel exhaust from theselocomotives and other railroad equipment. The railroads are acting like it's still the 1800s, not 2007. The valueof one human life should supersede interstate commerce."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Southern California air regulators cannot require railroads to shut down idling locomotives or obeyother local laws designed to clean up deadly diesel pollution, a federal judge ruled this week. The decisioninvalidates action taken last year by the South Coast Air Quality Management District to reduce a major sourceof air pollution in the Southland. Locomotives are responsible for more than 32 tons per day of pollutants, anamount equal to that produced by 1.4 million cars, according to figures compiled by state and regional agencies.The state air board estimates that 5,400 premature deaths annually in Southern California can be linked to airpollution, and studies have found that the sooty particulates put out by trains are particularly harmful. AQMDofficials last year passed three regulations designed to cut idling time and measure health risks inneighborhoods near rail yards, asserting their authority to regulate emissions under the federal Clean Air Actand state policing laws. Two railroads and a trade group filed suit, saying that under special exemptions passedby Congress more than a century ago, they do not have to abide by local laws that could interfere with interstatecommerce. Officials at Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway and Union Pacific said they are spending billionsto replace older, dirtier equipment, and have voluntarily cut idling times. U.S. District Judge John F. Walter,based in Los Angeles, acknowledged the region's dismal air quality but nevertheless ruled in favor of therailroads. "The rules at issue in this case are exactly the type of local regulation that Congress intended topreempt ... in order to prevent a 'patchwork' of ... local regulation interfering with interstate commerce," Walterwrote in an opinion released Tuesday. "The court does not arrive at its decision lightly, and recognizes thatthere is a serious problem with the air quality problem in the basin which needs to be addressed." He urged thetwo sides to work together on a voluntary basis to reduce pollution. Unlike the regional air quality board, stateair regulators have operated on the assumption that they have no right to govern the railroads. Instead, stateofficials have negotiated voluntary pollution reduction agreements. But AQMD officials have said that thevoluntary agreements are too weak, and that railroads voluntarily agreed only to measures designed to cutcosts or meet federal laws. AQMD spokesman Sam Atwood said the board would discuss at its Friday meetingwhether to appeal the decision. The district has already spent more than $3 million in legal fees on the case."We are disappointed that the court did not agree with our legal experts' opinion that AQMD has the authority toregulate these emissions," said a statement from Barry Wallerstein, the local district's executive officer.Spokesmen for the railroads expressed satisfaction with the victory and said they would continue to replace orretrofit older, dirtier locomotives, use low-sulfur diesel fuel and take other steps to reduce harmful emissions.They said they hoped to work with the local air district. "The court has recognized the importance of havingconsistent nationwide regulation of rail operations. This enables railroads to improve air quality while efficientlymoving the goods that propel California's economy," said BNSF spokeswoman Lena Kent. "The railroads arealready the most fuel-efficient and environmentally friendly mode of overland transportation and have beenworking to reduce emissions to even lower levels." Angelo Logan, head of the East Yard Communities forEnvironmental Justice, represents the Bandini neighborhood, which sits between Union Pacific and BNSF railyards. "I'm very disappointed," he said. "The fact is that people are dying in our community from the dieselexhaust from these locomotives and other railroad equipment. The railroads are acting like it's still the 1800s,not 2007. The value of one human life should supersede interstate commerce." Logan said he did not believethe railroads' reports that they are switching to "environmentally friendly" equipment. "I can take you to the localneighborhood where locomotives 10- plus years old are spewing out black soot within 20, 30 feet of homes," hesaid. One study near the Roseville rail yard in Central California showed alarming increases in cancer risk fornearby residents. Under their voluntary agreement, the state air board and railroads have been conducting17 March 2013 Page 101 of 483 ProQuesthealth risk assessments next to all major Southern California rail yards. The public release of their findings hasbeen delayed for months, but an air board spokeswoman said Tuesday that they would be released soon. *janet.wilson@ Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Federal court decisions; Emission standards; Railroads; Air pollutionCompany / organization: Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA; NAICS:924110; DUNS: 01-598-6159Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: May 3, 2007Year: 2007Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422135442Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 53 of 2132 ports aim to slash diesel exhaust; Such pollution by trucks on trips near the L.A. and Long Beachfacilities would fall 80%, draft plan says. Industry fears business may drop.Author: Wilson, Janet; White, Ronald DPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 14 Apr 2007: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Under the plan, posted online Friday, all 16,000 short-haul trucks that move goods from the wharvesto nearby rail yards or warehouses would be scrapped or retrofitted, starting next year, at a cost of $1.8 billion.Their drivers -- mostly low-paid independent contractors -- would be employed by companies that would bid on17 March 2013 Page 102 of 483 ProQuestport concession contracts containing stiff environmental, equipment maintenance and workplace requirements.[Barry Broad] of the Teamsters reacted angrily, saying the current shipping companies were "bottom of theswamp" operations that moved in 25 years ago after port trucking was deregulated, firing drivers overnight toavoid paying decent wages or insurance and relying on poorly paid immigrant labor using decades-old,dangerous trucks. "It remains to be seen how they are going to do this. The port has obviously done quite a bitattempting to get shippers to change their behavior to align with environmental norms," said Joshua Schaff,ports analyst for Moody's Investment Service. "It's a sensitive issue. There is a lot of demand for the servicesthese ports provide, and we just don't know what the price elasticity is, how high the price can go before youhave some defection from customers."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, the nation's busiest seaport complex, are proposing an"unprecedented" overhaul of dockside trucking that officials say would slash diesel pollution from trucks by 80%in five years while improving domestic security and working conditions for drivers. The draft plan drew ravereviews from environmentalists and labor groups but was criticized by industry groups, which said that lawsuitscould be filed and that the booming ports could lose business to other states and countries if they press forward.More than 40% of all goods imported to the United States move through the two neighboring ports. Under theplan, posted online Friday, all 16,000 short-haul trucks that move goods from the wharves to nearby rail yardsor warehouses would be scrapped or retrofitted, starting next year, at a cost of $1.8 billion. Their drivers --mostly low-paid independent contractors -- would be employed by companies that would bid on port concessioncontracts containing stiff environmental, equipment maintenance and workplace requirements. Numerousstudies have shown elevated levels of diesel particulates and other harmful air pollutants on docks and inneighborhoods near truck-laden highways and freight rail yards. The cost of replacing the current, aging truckswould be funded largely by per-trip fees of $34 to $54 assessed on the licensed firms, with some matching statebonds and taxpayer money. A second portion of the plan would impose a $26 fee on every container of goodsmoved through the ports to help fund rail and highway improvements. Both measures are part of the ports' jointclean-air action plan, which aims to reduce deadly air pollution from all sources -- including ships, trains andtrucks -- by 45% in five years. The plan is "a model for seaports around the world ... the boldest air qualityinitiative by any seaport," according to the online draft. S. David Freeman, president of the Los Angeles Boardof Harbor Commissioners, said consumers would pay just pennies more for goods moving off the docks. Hesaid replacing the trucks is vital to improving public health in neighborhoods near the ports. "If you just look atthe difference between the emissions of one of these dirty trucks and a new, cleaner one -- and do the math --this is one of our biggest opportunities to get clean air," said Freeman, who along with other port officialsunveiled the proposal Thursday at a closed-door meeting with industry, labor and environmental groups. "Wecan make major advances by replacing them." Environmental, labor and community groups that fought morethan a year for the plan praised it. "It's a huge, huge step forward in our quest for clean air," said Melissa LinPerella of the Natural Resources Defense Council. "Usually governments just nibble around the edges of amajor social problem," said Barry Broad, a state director for the Teamsters union. "This is an example of notone but two governments coming together ... to solve a problem in a truly comprehensive way." But industryrepresentatives saw it differently. Business groups, including the National Retail Federation, have arguedstrenuously for a market-based, voluntary approach and new statewide emissions standards for trucks. Thegroups argued that money could be raised quickly to improve the condition of port truck fleets. On Friday, thefederation said there should be "serious concerns" about the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach losingbusiness under the new plan. "We don't think that a private, local standard is the way to proceed," said ErikAutor, vice president and international trade counsel for the federation. "And we are not sure how the state andfederal governments are going to view this." Shippers who would foot the bill for the multibillion-dollar plan,17 March 2013 Page 103 of 483 ProQuestwhich could go into effect Jan. 1, say it could end up being challenged in court. "We are looking at it now fromour lawyers' point of view to see what we might do. I think we might challenge that," said Curtis Whelan,executive director of the Intermodal Motor Carriers Conference for the 38,000-member American TruckingAssn. "By definition, these containers represent interstate commerce. It would impact interstate commerce in adramatic way. Can a port authority do that?" Whelan added that the plan could drive out dozens of smallercompanies currently handling port trucking. But Broad of the Teamsters reacted angrily, saying the currentshipping companies were "bottom of the swamp" operations that moved in 25 years ago after port trucking wasderegulated, firing drivers overnight to avoid paying decent wages or insurance and relying on poorly paidimmigrant labor using decades-old, dangerous trucks. Under the plan, drivers would get workers' compensationand other benefits. They also would undergo criminal background checks, drug and alcohol testing and identityscreening aimed at tightening port security. Wall Street analysts who rate the ports' bonds and otherinvestments said they would be watching closely. "It remains to be seen how they are going to do this. The porthas obviously done quite a bit attempting to get shippers to change their behavior to align with environmentalnorms," said Joshua Schaff, ports analyst for Moody's Investment Service. "It's a sensitive issue. There is a lotof demand for the services these ports provide, and we just don't know what the price elasticity is, how high theprice can go before you have some defection from customers." Responding to industry concerns, Freemansaid, "Of course I worry .... We are completely open to suggestion as we move forward aggressively with thisplan ... but eternal happiness for everyone is not one of the criteria. We're going to get cleaner air out of this,and a more stable, reliable workforce and better homeland security. Eternal happiness is above my pay grade."Public hearings on the plan will be set, officials said. Boards of the two ports are expected to vote on a finalversion in July. * janet.wilson@ ron.white@ Illustration Caption: PHOTO: CARGO:Trucks are loaded with containers at the Port of Los Angeles. It and the Long Beach port plan to slash dieselpollution.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Carlos Chavez Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WritersSubject: Diesel engines; Strategic planning; Air pollution; Trucks; PortsLocation: Los Angeles California, Long Beach CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Apr 14, 2007Year: 2007Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 42214614317 March 2013 Page 104 of 483 ProQuestDocument URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 54 of 213State air board requests extension of federal deadline to reduce soot; Critics say the request for fivemore years -- to 2020 -- will mean more asthma and other health problems for residents.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 20 Mar 2007: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: "California's problem is unique in the nation," with greater Los Angeles facing "the biggest challenge"in meeting the deadline with annual average measurements for soot exceeding national limits by 50%,Katherine Witherspoon, executive director of the state Air Resources Board, wrote in a March 12 letter to theU.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In her letter, Witherspoon blamed the timing of the EPA's new dieselengine standards, which were announced in draft form on March 3 after years of delay. She said the phase-inperiod for the rules between 2010 and 2017 "comes too late" to meet the 2015 soot- reduction deadline.Witherspoon has drawn the wrath of Southern California air officials and environmentalists in the past by signingvoluntary agreements with railroads to reduce pollution without holding public hearings or seeking input fromaffected districts first.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Declaring that California cannot meet federal soot reduction standards by a 2015 deadline, the stateair board has asked for a five-year extension that critics say will cut short lives and aggravate asthma and otherhealth problems. "California's problem is unique in the nation," with greater Los Angeles facing "the biggestchallenge" in meeting the deadline with annual average measurements for soot exceeding national limits by50%, Katherine Witherspoon, executive director of the state Air Resources Board, wrote in a March 12 letter tothe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In her letter, Witherspoon blamed the timing of the EPA's new dieselengine standards, which were announced in draft form on March 3 after years of delay. She said the phase-inperiod for the rules between 2010 and 2017 "comes too late" to meet the 2015 soot- reduction deadline. Dieselsoot, also known as fine particulate matter, lodges deep in the lungs when inhaled, and has been linked to heartand respiratory disease, cancer, asthma and other illnesses. It spews from trucks, ships, trains, constructionequipment and anything else that uses a combustion engine. Witherspoon could not be reached for comment.But air board spokeswoman Gennet Paauwe said the state was simply trying to "give another option" to theSouth Coast Air Quality Management District, which oversees greater Los Angeles, because it was so far awayfrom attainment. She said Witherspoon and San Joaquin Valley air officials thought that they would meet thedeadline, but that the AQMD would require at least an additional three years. "We really don't feel that SouthCoast at this point with that 50% hanging out there can meet that deadline," Paauwe said, "so that additionalfive years will give them a chance." Thanks but no thanks, said AQMD Executive Director Barry Wallerstein,adding that he had not been consulted before the letter was sent and did not agree. "This is not being done onour behalf.... This letter completely undercuts the public process," Wallerstein said. "This means higher pollution17 March 2013 Page 105 of 483 ProQuestemissions from cars, trucks, ships, locomotives, [construction] engines and other mobile sources for anadditional five-year period or more. It takes the pressure off the U.S. EPA and state Air Resources Board to dotheir fair share of pollution cleanup in Southern California." Although air quality in Southern California hasimproved dramatically in the last three decades, the region still experiences 5,400 premature deaths a yearbecause of air pollution, the state estimates. Others said Witherspoon was "jumping the gun" because thedeadline for air districts to submit cleanup plans is April 2008. "It's shortsighted and defeatist.... They're throwingin the towel too soon," said state Sen. Dean Florez (D-Shafter), chairman of the Senate Select Committee onAir Quality in the Central Valley. He said he would order state air officials to appear before the committee todiscuss the extension request. Tim Carmichael, president of the Coalition for Clean Air, said, "Any delay willnegatively impact the health of millions of Californians ... from difficulty breathing to premature death." If thestate does not meet the deadlines or an extension is not granted, federal transportation funds could be at risk.Last year, California received about $4 billion in such funds. In an e-mail, EPA spokesman John Millett said theagency "will review and consider the request." He added that "federal funding has only rarely been in jeopardy -- only one or two instances in the history of the program. Funding is linked to state planning, not the air qualitystatus of an individual jurisdiction." He also defended the diesel engine proposals, saying that when fullyimplemented they would cut particulate emissions by 90%. Carmichael and others said they feared thatWitherspoon and the governor's office were bowing to pressure from the powerful construction, trucking and railindustries. But Adam Mendelsohn, Gov. Schwarzenegger's communications director, said the state air board'saction was taken "without consultation of Cal EPA or the governor's office.... We believe staff acted prematurelyand are reviewing options in terms of additional steps to rectify the situation." State air board staff are finalizingseparate rules that would limit diesel soot emissions from construction equipment. Industry officials haveprotested loudly and are calling for a delay, saying that air officials lack accurate information about heavy-dutyequipment. Witherspoon has drawn the wrath of Southern California air officials and environmentalists in thepast by signing voluntary agreements with railroads to reduce pollution without holding public hearings orseeking input from affected districts first. janet.wilson@ Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Deadlines; Regulatory agencies; Airborne particulates; Air pollutionLocation: CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910;Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910; Name: Air Resources Board-California; NAICS: 924110;DUNS: 62-691-2737Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Mar 20, 2007Year: 2007Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United States17 March 2013 Page 106 of 483 ProQuestISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422097252Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 55 of 213The World; Asian air pollution affects our weather; Scientists report more clouds, stronger storms inthe Pacific region.Author: Robert Lee HotzPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 06 Mar 2007: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Asia's growing air pollution -- billowing plumes of soot, smog and wood smoke -- is making the Pacificregion cloudier and stormier, disrupting winter weather patterns along the West Coast and into the Arctic,researchers reported Monday. "The pollution transported from Asia makes storms stronger and deeper andmore energetic," said lead author Renyi Zhang at Texas A&M University. "It is a direct link from large-scalestorm systems to [human-produced] pollution." At low altitudes, the haze of aerosol particles reflects the sun'senergy back into space, cooling Earth's surface slightly. At the same time, the particles help form brighter lowaltitudeclouds that also shield the surface from solar heat.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Asia's growing air pollution -- billowing plumes of soot, smog and wood smoke -- is making the Pacificregion cloudier and stormier, disrupting winter weather patterns along the West Coast and into the Arctic,researchers reported Monday. Carried on prevailing winds, the industrial outpouring of dust, sulfur, carbon gritand trace metals from booming Asian economies is having an intercontinental cloud-seeding effect, theresearchers reported in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The study is the first large-scaleanalysis to draw a link between Asian air pollution and the changing Pacific weather patterns. "The pollutiontransported from Asia makes storms stronger and deeper and more energetic," said lead author Renyi Zhang atTexas A&M University. "It is a direct link from large-scale storm systems to [human-produced] pollution."Satellite measurements reveal that high-altitude storm clouds over the northern Pacific have increased up to50% over the last 20 years as new factories, vehicles and power plants in China and India spew growingamounts of microscopic pollutant particles into the air. The resulting changes have altered how rain dropletsform and helped foster the creation of imposing formations over the northern Pacific known as deep convectiveclouds. The clouds create powerful updrafts that spawn fiercer thunderstorms and more intense rainfall,particularly during the winter, the researchers said. Only a decade ago did scientists in the University ofCalifornia's Pacific Rim Aerosol Network help discover that the pollution crossing the Pacific from Asia was17 March 2013 Page 107 of 483 ProQuestworse than suspected, with millions of tons of previously undetected contaminants carried on the wind. In fact,on any spring or summer day, almost a third of the air high over Los Angeles, San Francisco and otherCalifornia cities can be traced directly to Asia, researchers said. "More stuff starting up over there means morestuff ending up over here," said UC Davis atmospheric scientist Steven Cliff. Usually, dust and industrialpollutants take from five days to two weeks to cross the Pacific to California. Zhang and his colleaguesconducted their three-year study by comparing satellite imagery of the Pacific region taken from 1984 to 1994with imagery of the same area from 1994 to 2005. The study, funded by NASA and the National ScienceFoundation, found that deep convective clouds had increased between 20% and 50%. Convective cloudsinclude cumulonimbus clouds, which can be many miles thick with a base near Earth's surface and a topfrequently at an altitude of 33,000 feet or more. The research team, which included atmospheric scientists fromCaltech, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and UC San Diego,linked the changing cloud patterns to the increasing pollution through a series of computer studies. Thescientists also examined satellite data from the Atlantic region during the same periods, since pollution fromNorth America follows the prevailing winds to Europe. But they did not find any similar pattern of cloud changesor increase in storm intensity. The Pacific pollution also may affect other pervasive patterns of air circulation thatshape world climate. "If the trend to intensified storms in this region persists, it will likely have profoundimplications on climate change," said Robert McGraw, a senior atmospheric chemist at Brookhaven NationalLaboratory on Long Island, who was not involved in the study. Among other consequences, the more energeticPacific storm track could be carrying warmer air and more black soot farther north into the Canadian Arctic,where it may accelerate the melting of polar ice packs, the researchers said. The researchers emphasized thatit would take much more sustained study to understand the international climate ramifications. Until recently,most scientists believed that, with its adverse effects on health and plant life, such aerosol pollution was mostlya local problem. If anything, it helped rather than hindered the climate -- at least in terms of global warming -- byoffsetting the heat-trapping effects of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane. At low altitudes,the haze of aerosol particles reflects the sun's energy back into space, cooling Earth's surface slightly. At thesame time, the particles help form brighter low-altitude clouds that also shield the surface from solar heat. Butonce these tiny particles reach the upper atmosphere, they generate fierce downpours from super-cooleddroplets and ice particles instead of gentle warm showers. At monitoring sites along the U.S. West Coast,scientists have been detecting pollutants that originated from smokestacks and tailpipes thousands of miles tothe west. Recently, researchers at the University of Washington have captured traces of ozone, carbonmonoxide, mercury and particulate matter from Asia at monitoring sites on Mt. Bachelor in Oregon and CheekaPeak in Washington state. Cliff and his colleagues have been picking up the telltale chemical signatures ofAsian particulates and other pollutants at several monitoring sites north of San Francisco and, during the lastyear, around Southern California. The pollutants, however, are suspended at high altitude. It is unclear howmuch of them reach ground level or what their direct effect on local weather might be. "The air above LosAngeles is primarily from Asia," Cliff said. "Presumably that air has Asian pollution incorporated into it." *lee.hotz@ Illustration Caption: PHOTO: SPEWING: Cyclists pass a factory east of Beijing lastsummer. Scientists say it takes five days to two weeks for air pollutants from Asia to reach California.;PHOTOGRAPHER: Peter Parks AFP/Getty Images Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Storms; Studies; Air pollution; WeatherLocation: West coast, AsiaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.117 March 2013 Page 108 of 483 ProQuestNumber of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Mar 6, 2007Year: 2007Section: Main News; Part A; Foreign DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422105423Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 56 of 213Train, ship soot to be cut 90% by 2030; The EPA proposes tougher regulations on nitrogen oxide andfine particulate matter, but the AQMD is critical of the long phase-in.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 03 Mar 2007: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Greater Los Angeles is exposed to pollution from diesel engines more than anywhere in the nation,with 40% of all goods shipped to the U.S. funneled through the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach on dieselpoweredships and trains. The air that Southern Californians breathe contains more than half of all the dieselparticulate emitted in the U.S. each year. Air regulators estimate that 2,400 lives are cut short annuallystatewide because of pollution from the movement of goods. Absent from the EPA proposals are regulations onlarge diesel engines in ocean-going vessels. EPA officials said they are trying to negotiate internationalstandards for those heavily polluting vessels, and are still studying whether national regulations could legally beplaced on foreign-flagged vessels entering American ports. Ferries, tugboats, yachts and marine auxiliaryengines would be covered under the new rules, however. He said the lack of regulations on marine vessels was"unfinished business" that must be addressed. As for the AQMD's concerns, he said, "well, it does take time forthe manufacturers to retool." He said he thought most emissions reductions would be achieved by 2015, beforeCalifornia has to meet EPA deadlines.17 March 2013 Page 109 of 483 ProQuestLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: CORRECTION: SEE CORRECTION APPENDED; Diesel regulations: An article in the March 3California section about proposed federal regulations to reduce soot from diesel locomotives erred inparaphrasing a statement by Union Pacific spokesman Mark Davis. Davis said the company had worked foryears with manufacturers to develop cleaner technology for locomotives, not that it would take years to developtechnology to meet the proposed new rules. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Friday unveiledproposals to slash diesel soot from freight trains and marine vessels by 90% by 2030, winning guarded praisefrom environmentalists, but a scathing rebuke from Southern California's top air quality regulator. Under rulesannounced by EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson, existing and new train locomotives would have to meetincreasingly tougher controls on emissions of nitrogen oxide and fine particulate matter. Both substances lodgedeep in people's lungs and have been linked in numerous studies to respiratory disease, cancer and otherserious health problems. Johnson said the regulations, which he would push to have completed by year's end,would result in thousands of saved lives and substantial healthcare cost savings by 2030, while costing industryabout $600 million. "By tackling the greatest remaining source of diesel emissions, we're keeping our nation'sclean-air progress moving full steam ahead," he said. "This will ensure that black puff of smoke from diesellocomotives goes the way of the steam engine." But South Coast Air Quality Management District ExecutiveOfficer Barry Wallerstein said the region was "being thrown table scraps" with rules designed to benefit industry,which will allow thousands of Californians to continue to die prematurely for decades. Greater Los Angeles isexposed to pollution from diesel engines more than anywhere in the nation, with 40% of all goods shipped to theU.S. funneled through the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach on diesel-powered ships and trains. The airthat Southern Californians breathe contains more than half of all the diesel particulate emitted in the U.S. eachyear. Air regulators estimate that 2,400 lives are cut short annually statewide because of pollution from themovement of goods. State air officials also questioned the lengthy phase-in, saying it would not help them meetlooming air-quality deadlines imposed by the EPA. "We are grateful ... but we are disappointed in their timing. Itmakes it really hard for us to meet federal attainment requirements," said Mike Scheible, deputy executiveofficer of the state Air Resources Board. William Wehrum, acting assistant administrator of the EPA's office ofair and radiation, responded to that criticism by noting that existing engines that are rebuilt would be required toreduce emissions as soon as next year, and by 2010 at the latest. "Then our standards get increasinglystringent, with the most stringent standards effective on all new engines as of 2015," he added. "We're going tobegin seeing improvements very quickly, substantial improvements." Both Wehrum and Johnson acknowledgedthat because locomotives can last as long as 40 years, it could take until 2030 for the full benefits of the newrules to be seen. Absent from the EPA proposals are regulations on large diesel engines in ocean-goingvessels. EPA officials said they are trying to negotiate international standards for those heavily pollutingvessels, and are still studying whether national regulations could legally be placed on foreign-flagged vesselsentering American ports. Ferries, tugboats, yachts and marine auxiliary engines would be covered under thenew rules, however. Manufacturers and trade groups said the technology to meet the new rules does not yetfully exist but is being actively researched. They insisted they want further reductions in emissions and said the2030 timeline for final compliance would help. "There are some concerns about whether the locomotivemanufacturers will be able to meet ... the standards, but we are committed to working with the locomotivebuilders and after-market manufacturers to do everything practical to reduce locomotive emissions," saidBurlington Northern Santa Fe spokeswoman Lena Kent. But Wallerstein said that the technology does exist,and that the industry groups were dragging their heels to save money at the expense of public health. "InEurope they are putting particulate filters on locomotives today," he said, adding that the AQMD is fundingdemonstration programs of the technology on commuter trains because the freight railroads "have delayed anddelayed and delayed.... this is a technology transfer, not the creation of new technology." Mark Davis, aspokesman for Union Pacific, said the company is already replacing most of the "switcher" engines in Los17 March 2013 Page 110 of 483 ProQuestAngeles- area rail yards with a new technology using truck engines, but said it would take years to develop newtechnology for long-haul locomotives. Environmentalists who have fought for three years for the rules largelycheered the news. Fred Krupp, president of Environmental Defense, who stood at Johnson's side as heannounced the regulation at Port Elizabeth in New Jersey, said later, "It's very good, it's very strong, and itwould take an enormous amount of ... pollution out of the air. We were there to thank Steve Johnson and theEPA for getting on the right track." He said the lack of regulations on marine vessels was "unfinished business"that must be addressed. As for the AQMD's concerns, he said, "well, it does take time for the manufacturers toretool." He said he thought most emissions reductions would be achieved by 2015, before California has tomeet EPA deadlines. Others said they would keep a close eye on the proposals as they move through publichearings and rewrites. "There are many details of this proposal yet to be worked out -- and we hope EPA canaccelerate the pace of cleanup -- but this proposal is a giant step in the right direction," said Frank O'Donnell ofClean Air Watch in Washington, D.C. Representatives of international marine shippers did not return callsseeking comment. janet.wilson@ References Message No: 11903 Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Regulatory agencies; Trains; Ships; Air pollution; Airborne particulatesLocation: Southern CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910;Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910; Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-LosAngeles County CA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 01-598-6159Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Mar 3, 2007Year: 2007Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422078986Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand17 March 2013 Page 111 of 483 ProQuest_______________________________________________________________Document 57 of 213Rick Wartzman / CALIFORNIA &CO.; Airing a pollution solution for the portsAuthor: Wartzman, RickPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 23 Feb 2007: C.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Sometime in March, port officials say, they will begin to make public the nitty-gritty of how they'd like toimplement the truck portion of the Clean Air Action Plan, which was approved by both ports in November. Thehistoric accord aims to approximately halve port-related emissions of diesel particulates, nitrogen oxide andsulfur oxide over the next five years. Choking soot from the harbor complex is a major cause of illness anddeath, including from cancer, in the L.A. Basin. The 49-year-old father of three drives for a Carson companycalled Southern Counties Express Inc., one of about 600 trucking outfits that operate at the ports. Because ofhis contractor status, [Luis Ceja] must pay for his fuel, insurance, taxes, licensing and repairs. He figures that,when all is said and done, he nets about $8 an hour, typical of many port truckers. Here, in a nutshell, is howthat might look: The ports would put out bids and establish direct contractual relationships with truckingcompanies, spelling out what's expected of them. If they hoped to pick up loads at the harbor, the trucks they'ddispatch would have to be in compliance with environmental rules and their drivers would have to be full-fledgedemployees -- ending the shadowy arrangements that have relegated truck cabs, in the words of a researcher, to"sweatshops on wheels."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Luis Ceja's orange Freightliner is rumbling down Ferry Street near the Port of Los Angeles, spewingdiesel fumes. As a tiny, plastic hula girl shimmies on the dashboard, Ceja starts fuming too -- about how hardhis job is, about how little he earns and about the fact that he and his fellow truckers can't bear the burden ofimproving the air quality here. "I hate that my truck pollutes," he says. "But I don't have the money to retrofit it orreplace it. If they put the bill on us, it's just not going to happen." In the coming weeks, you're going to starthearing a lot more about folks such as Ceja, who move a good portion of the more than $300 billion (andgrowing like mad) worth of merchandise that passes through the ports of L.A. and Long Beach each year.Sometime in March, port officials say, they will begin to make public the nitty-gritty of how they'd like toimplement the truck portion of the Clean Air Action Plan, which was approved by both ports in November. Thehistoric accord aims to approximately halve port-related emissions of diesel particulates, nitrogen oxide andsulfur oxide over the next five years. Choking soot from the harbor complex is a major cause of illness anddeath, including from cancer, in the L.A. Basin. The details to be put forth are "fairly dramatic," says S. DavidFreeman, president of the Los Angeles Board of Harbor Commissioners and an ally of Mayor AntonioVillaraigosa. That could well be an understatement. If Freeman and his commission colleagues go as far asthey should, it would mean a total transformation of the way truckers do business at the ports, turning them fromoutside contractors to company employees and requiring the firms that hire them to meet new environmentaland labor standards. Those who profit from the current system will, of course, cry foul. But nothing short of an18-Wheel Revolution is needed to fix the problem. The Clean Air Action Plan doesn't take aim at dirty trucksalone. It will also tackle pollution from ships, trains, cargo-handling equipment and harbor craft. But the trucks,about 16,000 of them, are the trickiest to deal with because of the way the industry has been structured since itwas deregulated in 1980. Perversely, the system makes those with the shallowest pockets responsible forabsorbing most of the costs. In all, the antipollution plan is expected to require up to $2 billion for the purchaseof new, clean-burning trucks (as much as $120,000 a pop) or to retool existing ones (by adding, say, a $20,00017 March 2013 Page 112 of 483 ProQuestfilter system). The ports, along with the South Coast Air Quality Management District, have promised $200million toward the effort. There's also the possibility of obtaining state bond funds to help. And state Sen. AlanLowenthal, a Long Beach Democrat, is expected today to introduce a bill -- similar to one the governor vetoedlast year -- that would raise about $500 million annually by imposing a $30 fee on each container shippedthrough the ports. Half of that would go to mopping the air, the other half to upgrading infrastructure. Yet that'sstill not enough to completely clean up the trucking fleet. So who will pay for the rest? And once these vehiclesare all in compliance, who will service them? Right now, such expenses fall to guys like Ceja, who is technicallyan "independent contractor" but might as well wear the mantle of "minimum wage worker." The 49-year-oldfather of three drives for a Carson company called Southern Counties Express Inc., one of about 600 truckingoutfits that operate at the ports. Because of his contractor status, Ceja must pay for his fuel, insurance, taxes,licensing and repairs. He figures that, when all is said and done, he nets about $8 an hour, typical of many porttruckers. In fact, study after study has found that many truckers work exceedingly long hours -- often 60, 70 ormore a week -- to bring in a mere $25,000 to $30,000 a year. They have no pensions or health coverage."You're a slave to the truck," says Ceja, who began driving at the waterfront 25 years ago. To try to changethings, Ceja has become part of the Coalition for Clean and Safe Ports, which includes community and religiousorganizations, environmental groups and labor unions. It has been lobbying government officials to address"persistent structural problems" in the trucking industry, as it states in a filing. Achieving "meaningful, long-termsolutions" for air quality, the alliance says, demands "a new business model." Here, in a nutshell, is how thatmight look: The ports would put out bids and establish direct contractual relationships with trucking companies,spelling out what's expected of them. If they hoped to pick up loads at the harbor, the trucks they'd dispatchwould have to be in compliance with environmental rules and their drivers would have to be full-fledgedemployees -- ending the shadowy arrangements that have relegated truck cabs, in the words of a researcher, to"sweatshops on wheels." The advantages are numerous. Even if the drivers continued to own their own trucks,they'd be on sounder financial footing as employees because they'd not only collect rent on their rigs but drawregular salaries. That would make it easier to maintain their vehicles. At the same time, the revenue generatedfrom the contracts could provide additional funding to help cleanse the air. This setup would also spark newefficiencies and make it a lot easier to keep track of who is going in and out of the ports -- a much-neededsecurity enhancement. Not everybody is ready to swallow this strategy, and the fight is sure to be fierce. Onetrucking company owner I spoke with contends that it's all a backdoor attempt by the Teamsters to organize thedrivers. Matt Schrap, a regulatory specialist with the California Trucking Assn., says that any attempts by theports to mandate a contracting relationship with the companies could trip over federal law. He also says it'ssimplistic to assume that having more truckers become company employees would make for better conditions.Some, he says, are thrilled at being independent and setting their own hours. With unending gridlock at theports, Schrap adds, the companies aren't raking in big bucks either. "It's not these motor carriers lining theirpockets with gold on the backs of immigrant labor," he says. "Nobody is getting rich doing this." Plenty of theparticulars still need to be sorted out, including finding ways to make the shipping firms and those that own thecargo (the Wal-Marts of the world) pay their fair share of the clean-air plan. Meanwhile, Freeman clearly isn'tfazed by the idea of a fundamental restructuring of the trucking sector. It's "one approach," he says, "that seemsto have a lot going for it." It may be the only way, really, to get this important environmental initiative out of firstgear. Rick Wartzman is an Irvine senior fellow at the New America Foundation. He is reachable atrick.wartzman@. Illustration Caption: PHOTO: MOVING GOODS: Truckers who serve the portcomplex contribute to foul air but are ill-equipped to solve the problem.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Lori Shepler LosAngeles Times Credit: Rick Wartzman is an Irvine senior fellow at the New America Foundation. He isreachable at rick.wartzman@.Subject: Air pollution; Ports; Trucks; Diesel engines; Emissions control; Vehicle emissions17 March 2013 Page 113 of 483 ProQuestLocation: Southern CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Port of Long Beach-California; NAICS: 488310; Name: Port of Los Angeles;NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: C.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Feb 23, 2007Year: 2007Section: Business; Part C; Business DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: CommentaryProQuest document ID: 422162237Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 58 of 213Mobile lab to scope out air hazards; A specially equipped car will measure pollution levels in severalSouth Bay communities to help fill gaping holes in environmental data.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 05 Feb 2007: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: STUDY: The car lab, a modified electric Toyota RAV- 4, drives from USC to Pasadena, left. UCLASchool of Public Health doctoral student [Kathleen Kozawa], right, checks the measuring equipment. Californiaair board scientists have equipped the car to measure diesel soot, greenhouse gases and other noxiouspollutants along freeways.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Photographs by Francine Orr Los Angeles Times; STUDY: Thecar lab, a modified electric Toyota RAV-4, drives from USC to Pasadena, left. UCLA School of Public Healthdoctoral student Kathleen Kozawa, right, checks the measuring equipment. California air board scientists haveequipped the car to measure diesel soot, greenhouse gases and other noxious pollutants along freeways.17 March 2013 Page 114 of 483 ProQuestLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Determined to pinpoint what kind of pollution is swirling in the air around the region's ports, a crew ofscientists this week will begin cruising Southern California streets and freeways in a one-of- a-kind mobileresearch lab. In a car equipped with $450,000 worth of the world's most sophisticated air monitors and a windsensor protruding like a giant metal claw from the roof, researchers Tuesday will begin sampling the air inseveral South Bay communities, examining exhaust from cars, trucks and other sources. "We want real-lifeconditions, and if real-life conditions means people in traffic, then that's what we want," said Kathleen Kozawa,28, a UCLA School of Public Health doctoral student who was at the wheel of the mobile lab on a recentweekday. Chasing pollution in a laboratory on wheels helps fill gaping holes in data about what we breathe insprawling Southern California, which has just 35 fixed air-monitoring stations spread across 10,743 squaremiles. The scientists, from the California Air Resources Board, completed a similar study a few years ago,showing how much bad air we breathe in our cars. The publicly funded researchers learned that commuters onthe Harbor and Long Beach freeways ingested half of their daily pollution while on the road -- even though mostpeople spend just 6% of their day driving. "We're taking the instruments to where people live and where peoplespend their time -- in their cars and their neighborhoods," said Scott Fruin, an air resources board pollutionspecialist who helped design and build the mobile lab and is now a USC assistant professor. For the latestexperiment, Fruin and other air board staff borrowed a discontinued model of an electric Toyota RAV-4 (so theywouldn't be measuring their own exhaust), ripped out the back seats and sawed, nailed, clamped and bungeecordedto the innards a dozen sophisticated monitors, a police "stalker vision" video camera, five marinebatteries weighing a combined 400 pounds and a tangle of extension cords. On the roof they glued the giantclaw to locate wind direction and plumes and a jumbo antennae to track humidity and temperature. For the firststudy, completed in 2004 in a nearly identical lab, the scientists drove and re-drove a 75-mile freeway loopbetween Pasadena and Long Beach. They learned that the air in a moving vehicle can change dozens of timesin an hour, even if the windows are closed. Drivers breathe four to eight times as much of the carcinogenbenzene as found in normal air levels, five to 15 times as much choking diesel soot and 50 to 100 times asmuch butadiene, which is used in automobile tires and has been linked to cancer, especially in women. On ahazy afternoon last month, with the downtown skyline and San Gabriel Mountains looking like they'd beenrinsed in dirty dishwater, Kozawa and Fruin took a reporter on a portion of the route used during the first study.The research vehicle, with two large dryer hoses affixed to the back windows to catch outside air, merged ontothe Harbor Freeway near USC. Inside, the needles on a laptop monitor began jiggling upward, measuring blackcarbon from diesel trucks, nitrogen oxide from hot rods and other toxins. The chemical levels climbed inexorablyas the vehicle headed under the four-level interchange. When a dingy white panel truck lumbered by in the rightlane, a black carbon meter jumped from 430 to 7,608 micrograms per cubic meter. "That's a pretty good one,"Kozawa said. Black carbon is a strong indicator of fine particles, or soot, which lodge deep in the lungs and canlead to premature death from heart attacks, strokes and other diseases. The scientists say their own chestsgrow tight and their throats sore after a typical 150-mile day in traffic, but they shrug it off as the cost ofresearch. The meters spiked upward as a wide Chrysler sedan with a stained tailpipe pulled in front. "That'spretty gross," Kozawa said. The needles danced in the medium high range as traffic flowed sluggishly underStadium Way, then through four tunnels. Trucks lined the onramps, traffic idled at the exit for the Golden StateFreeway. It was difficult to maneuver the heavy, equipment-packed vehicle, which drew the occasional obscenegesture from fellow motorists, but also curiosity. One pickup truck driver honked loudly after Kozawaunintentionally cut him off, scowled as he pulled alongside, then gaped in amazement. As the mobile labreached the historic, leafy section of the highway past Via Marisol, the glut of traffic opened up. The needlesdrooped as the air freshened. Near Avenue 60, a Chevy Trailblazer zipped past in the fast lane. The nitrogenoxide sensor leaped from 27 to 108 parts per cubic meter. A key component of smog, nitrogen oxide can causeasthma and other respiratory problems. The drivers of such cars don't have to breathe their own fumes, Fruin17 March 2013 Page 115 of 483 ProQuestsaid. It's those downwind who catch the noxious stream. Keeping your windows closed won't help, he said. Carsare not designed to be airtight. They leak around every joint, especially at high speed. Using recirculation blockssome soot, but then carbon monoxide can build up, making drivers sleepy. The monitors barely murmured asthe test drive concluded on a quiet Pasadena side street. The PAH carcinogen needle was at 1.8 nanograms,the lowest level of the day. That night, at a community meeting in Wilmington, Kozawa paints a different picturefor poorer neighborhoods south of the city. She has already zeroed in on a side street that hugs the truck-ladenLong Beach Freeway. On a preliminary prowl, she found astoundingly high levels of ultra-fine particulates. It iswell-known that sooty fine particles wreak havoc in our bodies, but now ultra-fine particles one hundredth thesize have been uncovered and are considered "even more potent," Fruin said. They are a hot new researcharea, intriguing because they billow up quickly to staggeringly high levels, then dissipate just as fast. No oneknows why. Kozawa, for example, recorded 228,000 ultra-fine particles per cubic meter one morning, but by thenext day, the levels had sunk to 20,000. At the meeting, she shows graphs of the sharp peaks and dips to theaudience, asking for help. Representatives of refineries and shipping firms sit mum. But longtime residents andcommunity activists shout out ideas. "What day of the weeks were they? You can find out which days the shipscome in ... and the trucks will be going nonstop to move the cargo out," pipes up Jesse Marquez of Wilmington."I think the Santa Ana winds were blowing one of those days," offers John Cross from West Long Beach. "Didyou check?" It is exactly the sort of information that may help solve the mystery. Fruin and Kozawa urge theaudience to e-mail other clues. "It's exciting, and a little scary, too," she says of the community meetings. "Westay in our little scientific bubble most of the time ... but you hear how passionate people are, and you realize it'snot just numbers. These are people's lives." janet.wilson@ Illustration Caption: PHOTO: STUDY:The car lab, a modified electric Toyota RAV- 4, drives from USC to Pasadena, left. UCLA School of PublicHealth doctoral student Kathleen Kozawa, right, checks the measuring equipment. California air board scientistshave equipped the car to measure diesel soot, greenhouse gases and other noxious pollutants along freeways.;PHOTOGRAPHER: Photographs by Francine Orr Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: STUDY: The car lab, a modifiedelectric Toyota RAV-4, drives from USC to Pasadena, left. UCLA School of Public Health doctoral studentKathleen Kozawa, right, checks the measuring equipment. California air board scientists have equipped the carto measure diesel soot, greenhouse gases and other noxious pollutants along freeways. Credit: Times StaffWriterSubject: Laboratories; Environmental monitoring; Air pollution; PortsLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Feb 5, 2007Year: 2007Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 0458303517 March 2013 Page 116 of 483 ProQuestSource type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422129671Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 59 of 213FREEWAY AIR DAMAGES YOUNG LUNGS; Children living nearby show signs of lifelong harm, USCstudy finds.Author: Maugh, Thomas H, IIPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 26 Jan 2007: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: "If you live in a high-pollution area and live near a busy road, you get a doubling" of the damage, saidlead author W. James Gauderman, an epidemiologist at the Keck School of Medicine of USC. In the new study,Gauderman and his colleagues found that by their 18th birthday, children who lived within 500 yards of afreeway had a 3% deficit in the amount of air they could exhale and a 7% deficit in the rate at which it could beexhaled compared with children who lived at least 1,500 yards, or nearly a mile, from a freeway. The effect wasindependent of the overall pollution in their community. "Even if you are in a relatively low regional pollutionarea, living near a road produces [lung problems]," Gauderman said.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: In the largest and longest study of its kind, USC researchers have found that children living near busyhighways have significant impairments in the development of their lungs that can lead to respiratory problemsfor the rest of their lives. The 13-year study of more than 3,600 children in 12 Central and Southern Californiacommunities found that the damage from living within 500 yards of a freeway is about the same as that fromliving in communities with the highest pollution levels, the team reported Thursday in the online version of themedical journal Lancet. "If you live in a high-pollution area and live near a busy road, you get a doubling" of thedamage, said lead author W. James Gauderman, an epidemiologist at the Keck School of Medicine of USC."Someone suffering a pollution-related deficit in lung function as a child will probably have less than healthylungs all of his or her life," he said. The greatest damage appears to be in the small airways of the lung and isnormally associated with the fine particulate matter emitted by automobiles. "This tells me that I wouldn't want tobe raising my children near a significant source of fine-particle air pollution," said economist C. Arden Pope III ofBrigham Young University, an expert on air pollution and health who was not involved in the study. "I, myself,would want to be living in areas where the exposure is lower." The research is part of an ongoing study of theeffects of air pollution on children's respiratory health. Previous findings have detailed how smog can stunt lunggrowth and how living close to freeways can increase the risk of children being diagnosed with asthma. Thislatest study of freeway proximity and lung capacity was funded by the California Air Resources Board; the17 March 2013 Page 117 of 483 ProQuestNational Institute of Environmental Health Sciences; the Environmental Protection Agency; the National Heart,Lung and Blood Institute; and the Hastings Foundation. Gauderman and his colleagues recruited groups offourth-grade students, average age 10, in 1993 and 1996. Their schools were scattered from Atascadero in SanLuis Obispo County to Alpine in San Diego County. The team collected extensive information about each child'shome, socioeconomic status and other facts that might impinge on health. Once each year, the team visited theschools and measured the children's lungs, assessing how much air could be expelled in one breath and howquickly it could be expelled. These cohorts of children "are truly an important resource because the study hasbeen going on so long," said epidemiologist Jonathan Samet of Johns Hopkins University's Bloomberg Schoolof Public Health, who also did not take part in the study. The size and scope of the study make it very difficult toreplicate, he said. Results from the study reported in 2004 indicated that children in the communities with thehighest average levels of pollution suffered the greatest long-term impairment of lung function. In the new study,Gauderman and his colleagues found that by their 18th birthday, children who lived within 500 yards of afreeway had a 3% deficit in the amount of air they could exhale and a 7% deficit in the rate at which it could beexhaled compared with children who lived at least 1,500 yards, or nearly a mile, from a freeway. The effect wasindependent of the overall pollution in their community. Gauderman had no estimate for the percentage ofpeople in Southern California living within 500 yards of a freeway, but he noted that in a typical city such asLong Beach, it is about 17%. The most severe impairment was observed in children living near freeways in thecommunities with the highest average pollution -- Upland, Mira Loma, Riverside and Long Beach. Thosechildren had an average 9% deficit in the amount of air they could expel from the lungs. "Even if you are in arelatively low regional pollution area, living near a road produces [lung problems]," Gauderman said. About onethirdof the children moved during the course of the study but stayed in the same community. Lung impairmentwas smaller among those who moved farther from the freeways. The finding is important "because it shows thatwithin communities, some children are at higher risk than others," Dr. Thomas Sandstrom and Dr. BertBrunekreef wrote in an editorial accompanying the paper. "Thus, environmental equity is an issue of local ratherthan regional dimensions." The results were also independent of the children's initial health and whether theywere smokers. "This suggests that all children, not just susceptible subgroups, are potentially affected by trafficexposure," Gauderman said. Although the deficit in lung growth seems small, it could have long-term effects,Samet said. "The concern is that the exposure leaves young adults with smaller lungs than they might have hadotherwise," he said. That could leave them more vulnerable to lung diseases and more susceptible to theeffects of pneumonia and other infections. All the researchers conceded that there is little that can be done tomitigate the effects of the traffic pollution now. But when local governments are planning new schools and newhousing developments, Gauderman said, "this should be taken into account." thomas.maugh@Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Roads & highways; Studies; Lungs; Air pollution; Public health; Child developmentLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Jan 26, 2007Year: 2007Section: Main News; Part A; National Desk17 March 2013 Page 118 of 483 ProQuestPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NEWSPAPERProQuest document ID: 422213282Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 60 of 213Region seeks more power to fight pollution; The South Coast air board says state and federalregulators are not doing enough to clean up trains, cargo ships and airplanes.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 20 Jan 2007: B.4.ProQuest document linkAbstract: [William Burke] said the AQMD board will ask Congress to amend the Clean Air Act to force the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency and the California Air Resources Board to enact every available, feasiblecontrol on mobile sources, which he said are responsible for 80% of the region's smog. The AQMD also wantsexpanded authority to regulate mobile sources, arguing that its current powers over vehicle fleets, for instance,are not enough. The AQMD maintains that the state air board's plan for regulating mobile sources falls short by100 tons a day in needed reductions of nitrogen oxides, key ingredients of smog. The agency also faults thestate board for signing secret voluntary agreements with BNSF Railway and Union Pacific, which the AQMDsays don't require the railroads to do anything new. Working alone, the South Coast agency is not going to beas successful, said John White, a former AQMD lobbyist who as a state legislative aide helped craft languagecreating the air district. "For California to be successful in terms of reducing tons of air pollution, we have tohave the governor and the air board also working together," said White. Still, he and others said it was not likelythat the AQMD would win special amendments in the federal Clean Air Act.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Insisting there is no other way to meet looming federal deadlines to clean up the nation's dirtiest air,Southern California air regulators will seek greater authority to regulate ships, trains and other large sources ofair pollution. "We're at the end of our rope," said William Burke, chairman of the South Coast Air QualityManagement District board. "The state and federal governments simply have not acted quickly enough toaddress the public health crisis." Burke said the AQMD board will ask Congress to amend the Clean Air Act toforce the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the California Air Resources Board to enact every17 March 2013 Page 119 of 483 ProQuestavailable, feasible control on mobile sources, which he said are responsible for 80% of the region's smog. TheAQMD also wants expanded authority to regulate mobile sources, arguing that its current powers over vehiclefleets, for instance, are not enough. The nation's two largest railroads have sued the district for trying to imposetougher anti-idling laws on locomotives in the Los Angeles Basin than elsewhere, saying it cannot do so underfederal law. The Clean Air Act largely gives responsibility for such pollution sources to federal and stateregulators, while local air districts oversee stationary sources such as oil refineries and power plants. Butregional air quality officials said the EPA has repeatedly postponed tougher regulations on locomotives, cargoships and airplanes. An EPA spokesman said new regulations should be ready "sometime this year." The EPAhad previously said technology to retrofit locomotives was not yet available. Environmental groups haveaccused the agency of stalling to aid industry. To help its cause, the AQMD has hired two high-profileWashington lobbyists, while in Sacramento it renewed a lobbying contract to pursue new state laws ifnecessary. At its January meeting, the board approved a one-year, $115,000 contract with Sen. DianneFeinstein's longtime chief of staff and former legislative director, Mark Kadesh, and his firm, and a one- year,$99,000 contract with Tony Podesta, a Democratic lobbyist in Washington, D.C. The agency last monthrenewed contracts totaling $369,000 with former state Sen. Richard Polanco (D-Los Angeles) and asubcontractor for lobbying in Sacramento. "We need all the help we can get," said AQMD spokesman SamAtwood. The agency's officials face a daunting task in bringing the Los Angeles region into compliance withtough standards for diesel soot and ozone by 2015 and 2020, respectively. Although air quality here hasimproved dramatically in the 30 years since the AQMD was created, Southern California still experiences 5,400premature deaths a year because of air pollution, according to state estimates. The AQMD maintains that thestate air board's plan for regulating mobile sources falls short by 100 tons a day in needed reductions ofnitrogen oxides, key ingredients of smog. The agency also faults the state board for signing secret voluntaryagreements with BNSF Railway and Union Pacific, which the AQMD says don't require the railroads to doanything new. BNSF spokeswoman Lena Kent said both railroads will spend $260 million on new locomotivesand other technologies to reduce California emissions. California Air Resources Board spokesman Jerry Martinsaid the state's railroad agreements are already producing substantial emissions reductions, while the AQMDhas accomplished nothing other than racking up huge legal bills from the railroads' lawsuit. State air board staffalso said there have been significant cuts in diesel particulates in the last five years. But they said many of themeasures recommended by the AQMD were not technically feasible or could cripple industry in the state. Martinsaid that although the AQMD might not be able to make the 2015 deadline for soot, "we think they can do it ...probably by 2017 or 2018." Working alone, the South Coast agency is not going to be as successful, said JohnWhite, a former AQMD lobbyist who as a state legislative aide helped craft language creating the air district."For California to be successful in terms of reducing tons of air pollution, we have to have the governor and theair board also working together," said White. Still, he and others said it was not likely that the AQMD would winspecial amendments in the federal Clean Air Act. "I am very sympathetic," he said, "but I'm not sure a regionalagency is going to be granted broad new powers." White said, however, that the aggressive effort could pay offby pushing EPA "to the wall" by using pressure from Democratic members of Congress to take action on largepollution sources. * janet.wilson@ * (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX) Southland pollution AQMDofficials say they need more power over mobile pollution sources, such as trains, to lower future pollution levelssignificantly. They now regulate mostly stationary commercial sources such as oil refineries. Sources of NOx*(2002) Mobile sources: 91.8% Stationary consumer sources: 4.4% Stationary commercial sources: 3.8% *Nitrogen oxides, key ingredients of smog, emitted in the Los Angeles air basin in summertime. Source: SouthCoast AQMD Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Local government; Transportation; Air pollution17 March 2013 Page 120 of 483 ProQuestLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.4Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Jan 20, 2007Year: 2007Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422131060Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 61 of 213As you live and breatheAuthor: Ulin, David LPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 14 Jan 2007: R.7.ProQuest document linkAbstract: What is it that defines the air in California? Unfortunately, [David Carle] reminds us, today it's not somuch [Lawrence Weschler]'s "uncanny stillness" as the particulates we leave behind. "It ought to be easy totake California's air for granted," he writes in the opening lines, before acknowledging the influence of ozonewarnings and smog alerts. Such a perspective marks much of the book, especially its history of the state's 15different "air basins" -- among them San Diego County, the San Joaquin Valley, Lake Tahoe and the Salton Sea- - and its discussion of emission sources and clean-air programs, including renewable energy resources suchas windmills and solar power.Links: Check Find It for Availability17 March 2013 Page 121 of 483 ProQuestFull text: IN his 1998 essay "L.A. Glows," Lawrence Weschler described the "incredible stability" of the air inSouthern California, a phenomenon that has everything to do with thermal inversion, the way the mountains trapocean breezes in the L.A. Basin beneath desert currents from the east. It's a terrific detail, scientific and yet atthe same time cultural, and I couldn't help remembering while reading David Carle's "Introduction to Air inCalifornia" (University of California Press: 250 pp., $16.95 paper). The latest volume in the California NaturalHistory Guides series (which also includes Carle's "Introduction to Water in California"), "Introduction to Air inCalifornia" is a book that, in its own way, conflates science and culture as well. Elegantly written, copiouslyresearched and illustrated, this is a Baedeker of the atmosphere, a guide not just to the sky's corpus but also toits soul. What is it that defines the air in California? Unfortunately, Carle reminds us, today it's not so muchWeschler's "uncanny stillness" as the particulates we leave behind. "It ought to be easy to take California's airfor granted," he writes in the opening lines, before acknowledging the influence of ozone warnings and smogalerts. Such a perspective marks much of the book, especially its history of the state's 15 different "air basins" --among them San Diego County, the San Joaquin Valley, Lake Tahoe and the Salton Sea - - and its discussionof emission sources and clean-air programs, including renewable energy resources such as windmills and solarpower. As to why this is important, Carle offers a direct, and highly sobering, point of view. "AlthoughCalifornians can take pride in the progress made fighting air pollution and in leading the nation to face suchchallenges," he writes, "the majority of Californians still breathe air with unhealthy levels of pollutants.... Studiessuggest that breathing air in parts of Southern California can reduce one's life expectancy by more than twoyears." -- David L. Ulin Credit: david.ulin@Subject: Nonfiction; Air pollution; Books-titles -- Introduction to Air in CaliforniaPeople: Carle, DavidPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: R.7Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2007Publication date: Jan 14, 2007Year: 2007Section: Book Review; Part R; Features DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: Book Review-FavorableProQuest document ID: 422122415Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2007 Los Angeles Times)17 March 2013 Page 122 of 483 ProQuestLast updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 62 of 213EPA shortens science reviews, angering someAuthor: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 08 Dec 2006: A.38.ProQuest document linkAbstract: It also follows controversial decisions this fall by EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson in which criticssaid he had ignored scientific counsel on tightening standards for deadly soot. Dr. Bernard Goldstein, a formerEPA assistant administrator appointed by President Reagan and a former member of the agency's scienceadvisory panel, said he was concerned about the changes announced Thursday, especially when coupled withJohnson's decision not to follow his own scientists' advice on deadly fine particulate matter, or soot. TheAmerican Petroleum Institute this year wrote the EPA saying the long-established staff paper on each keypollutant should not be a science-based document but "is a policy document, and as such should have inputfrom senior EPA management."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday streamlined the way it updates regulations forthe nation's worst air pollutants, a move that drew immediate charges that officials are trying to quash scientificreview to benefit industry at the expense of public health. The changes, some of which closely mirror requestsby the American Petroleum Institute and Battery Council International industry groups, include shortening whatis now an exhaustive scientific review, and replacing recommendations prepared by career scientists andreviewed by independent advisors with a "policy paper" crafted by senior White House appointees at theagency. EPA officials said the changes were made in part at the request of its science advisors, who havecomplained that the process for reviewing new health standards is overwhelming. The agency regularly missesdeadlines for updating health standards, which has led to numerous lawsuits by environmental groups. "EPA isbringing air rule-making into the 21st century ... with a timely and transparent process that uses the most up-todatescience," said Deputy Administrator Marcus Peacock, who approved the new procedures. "Everyone hasfound the current process is inefficient, and current delays are unacceptable." The pollutants covered by thechanges include ozone and diesel soot, both of which continue to plague Greater Los Angeles, making it thenation's worst spot for deadly air pollution. Other affected pollutants include sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide,nitrous oxides and lead. Thursday's announcement came two days after the agency announced it would studywhether lead should be taken off the list of the most serious pollutants. It also follows controversial decisionsthis fall by EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson in which critics said he had ignored scientific counsel ontightening standards for deadly soot. For 30 years under the Clean Air Act, agency scientists have reviewed andrecommended health standards for six major air pollutants: ozone, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, carbonmonoxide, nitrous oxides and lead. The standards, which limit amounts of the pollutants that can be releasedinto the air, are designed to protect children, the elderly and other "sensitive" populations, and curtail damage toanimals, crops, vegetation, views and buildings. Congress members, environmentalists and past EPA staff fromRepublican and Democratic administrations swiftly condemned this week's actions, saying they couldundermine public health protections. "EPA is downgrading the role of its own career experts and making surethat political appointees are running the show from the beginning," said Frank O'Donnell of Clean Air Watch in17 March 2013 Page 123 of 483 ProQuestWashington. "It is little wonder that the oil industry pushed for exactly this sort of 'reform' to the process."O'Donnell called the lead assessment "a political gift to the lead-smelting lobby.... It could threaten thousands ofchildren who breathe toxic lead fumes." Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles), incoming chairman of theGovernment Reform Committee, said in a statement Thursday, "EPA's efforts to roll back ... the mostfundamental provisions in the Clean Air Act make no sense, and fly in the face of last month's elections." OnWednesday, Waxman wrote to Johnson regarding the study of lead, urging him to "renounce this dangerousproposal immediately. This deregulatory effort cannot be defended." The Chicago-based Battery CouncilInternational asked the EPA in July to delete lead from the list of "criteria" pollutants, which are subject to toughhealth standards. The council said other existing regulations would preserve protection. Emissions of lead havedeclined by 96% since its use in gasoline was banned. Agency staff this year found only two sites in the countrywhere lead emissions still exceeded limits, both near smelting facilities used as part of battery manufacturing.Recent studies have suggested that lead is more harmful than previously thought. But EPA staffers said in adraft paper this week that they would assess whether tough health standards could be revoked. The ban onleaded gasoline will continue no matter what, agency staff said, as will other rules. "We need to evaluatewhether there's a better way, a more effective regulation or way to better protect the public from lead exposure,"EPA Press Secretary Jennifer Wood said. Dr. Bernard Goldstein, a former EPA assistant administratorappointed by President Reagan and a former member of the agency's science advisory panel, said he wasconcerned about the changes announced Thursday, especially when coupled with Johnson's decision not tofollow his own scientists' advice on deadly fine particulate matter, or soot. During his time, administrators had"always taken the advice of their scientists," in fact choosing their most stringent recommendations, saidGoldstein. He said that though the regulatory process could be streamlined, it shouldn't be done by eliminatingthe core scientific recommendations. John Walke, a former EPA attorney who is now clean-air director for theNatural Resources Defense Council, said, "Obviously the intended impact is to introduce industry desires ... intothe process." The American Petroleum Institute this year wrote the EPA saying the long-established staff paperon each key pollutant should not be a science-based document but "is a policy document, and as such shouldhave input from senior EPA management." On Thursday, the agency eliminated the staff papers and replacedthem with a separate science assessment that will no longer include policy recommendations, and a "policyassessment" to be prepared by senior EPA managers. Neither the battery council nor the petroleum institutereturned phone calls and e-mails requesting comment. Acting Assistant Administrator Bill Wehrum, who helpedformulate this week's changes, said the charges of industry influence were "silly" and "false." He and Peacockdefended the changes, saying that the new process, with its separate science and policy assessments, wouldmake clearer what scientific research showed, and what politically appointed policy makers were seeking.janet.wilson@ Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Regulation; Standards; Disputes; Air pollution; Environmental policy; Public healthCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910;Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.38Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Dec 8, 2006Year: 200617 March 2013 Page 124 of 483 ProQuestSection: Main News; Part A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422131987Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 63 of 213Dire health effects of pollution reported; Diesel soot from construction equipment is blamed fori llnesses and premature deaths.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 06 Dec 2006: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Calling the timing coincidental, the California Air Resources Board on Monday released a draft of newregulations for older engines. The proposal would require all construction, mining and other industrial off-roadequipment to be replaced or retrofitted between 2009 and 2020 as part of an effort to reduce diesel particulateemissions by 85% and nitrogen oxide, a key ingredient in smog, by 70%, said Erik White, chief of the board'sheavy-duty diesel branch. Public workshops on the plan will be held this month, and the board is expected tovote next spring. John Hakel, vice president of the Associated General Contractors, which representsconstruction equipment fleet owners and general contractors, said late Tuesday that he had just received thereport and could not comment on specifics. But he said the industry is dedicated to cleaning up equipment. Heagreed it would be a costly and lengthy process and said state officials and the Union of Concerned Scientistsreport appeared to underestimate the sheer volume of construction equipment, which he estimated at 250,000to 300,000 machines. The second study found that for every additional 10 micrograms of soot in a cubic meterof air, there was a 4.5% increase in heart attacks. In areas like Salt Lake City or Greater Los Angeles, whichcan experience wide swings in air quality based on weather patterns, the risk of heart attack can be 10 timeshigher than normal on a bad air day, said Pope, who has done extensive research on the health effects of fineparticles produced by diesel engines. Coauthor Dr. Jeffrey Anderson, a cardiologist whose patients were amongmore than 12,000 people with heart disease who participated in the short-term exposure study, said he wasalready changing his advice to patients based on the results, urging them to stay inside on bad air days or, insevere cases, to move to a more favorable climate.17 March 2013 Page 125 of 483 ProQuestLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The effects of air pollution from construction equipment in California are "staggering," according to areport by the Union of Concerned Scientists. The environmental group concluded that at least 1,100 prematuredeaths and half a million work and school absences in 2005 were caused by people breathing emissions fromolder tractors, bulldozers and other diesel equipment -- at an estimated public health cost of $9.1 billion. Thereport was one of two studies released Tuesday on the severe health hazards of exposure to the soot in dieselemissions. "This is the first time the health and economic impacts of construction-related air pollution inCalifornia have ever been analyzed," said Don Anair, author of the report by the Union of Concerned Scientists.The report urged state regulators to quickly require owners to retrofit or replace older equipment. "Constructionequipment being used to build our hospitals shouldn't fill them up.... This is a bill being footed by everyone inCalifornia, and particulate pollution is a silent killer," Anair said, citing asthma attacks, cancer and heart disease.The Los Angeles air basin fared the worst among 15 statewide, with 731 estimated premature deaths, both inthe city and in suburban areas such as Santa Clarita, Temecula and Murietta, where there has been large-scaleconstruction to accommodate fast-growing populations. Heavily populated and fast-growing parts of the SanFrancisco Bay Area, San Diego and the San Joaquin and northern Sacramento valleys also experienced highhealth costs from construction equipment, the union of scientists' report found. The second study, by BrighamYoung University professor Arden Pope and a team of doctors, found a sharply elevated risk of heart attacks forpeople with clogged arteries after just a day or two of exposure to diesel soot pollution. The study was publishedin Cardiology, the nation's leading peer- reviewed journal of heart science. One coauthor said the results shouldprompt heart doctors to advise those with coronary disease to stay indoors as much as possible on particularlysooty days, or even to change jobs or move. The fine particulate matter that is spewed from diesel engines andtailpipes lodges "like tiny razor blades" deep in human lungs, said Kevin Hamilton, a Fresno-based respiratorytherapist who reviewed the findings. Clouds of soot emitted by 750-horsepower excavators can travel downwindfor miles, then drift into heavily populated areas, Anair said. An estimated 70% of California's constructionequipment is currently not covered by federal and state regulations because it is too old, state officials said.Although federal rules adopted in 2004 require cleaner-emitting new equipment, the regulations don't coverexisting engines. Anair said an average excavator or tractor can last 20 or 30 years, meaning it could bedecades before all the dirty equipment is replaced. Calling the timing coincidental, the California Air ResourcesBoard on Monday released a draft of new regulations for older engines. The proposal would require allconstruction, mining and other industrial off-road equipment to be replaced or retrofitted between 2009 and2020 as part of an effort to reduce diesel particulate emissions by 85% and nitrogen oxide, a key ingredient insmog, by 70%, said Erik White, chief of the board's heavy-duty diesel branch. Public workshops on the plan willbe held this month, and the board is expected to vote next spring. White said estimated compliance costs couldtop $3 billion over 11 years but maintained that the $60 billion-a-year construction industry "is certainly capableof absorbing the impacts." He added, however, that both cost and a lack of readily available retrofitting devices -- combined with the need to include smog- reduction as well as soot-control devices -- meant cleanup wouldoccur gradually. John Hakel, vice president of the Associated General Contractors, which representsconstruction equipment fleet owners and general contractors, said late Tuesday that he had just received thereport and could not comment on specifics. But he said the industry is dedicated to cleaning up equipment. Heagreed it would be a costly and lengthy process and said state officials and the Union of Concerned Scientistsreport appeared to underestimate the sheer volume of construction equipment, which he estimated at 250,000to 300,000 machines. The second study found that for every additional 10 micrograms of soot in a cubic meterof air, there was a 4.5% increase in heart attacks. In areas like Salt Lake City or Greater Los Angeles, whichcan experience wide swings in air quality based on weather patterns, the risk of heart attack can be 10 timeshigher than normal on a bad air day, said Pope, who has done extensive research on the health effects of fineparticles produced by diesel engines. Coauthor Dr. Jeffrey Anderson, a cardiologist whose patients were among17 March 2013 Page 126 of 483 ProQuestmore than 12,000 people with heart disease who participated in the short-term exposure study, said he wasalready changing his advice to patients based on the results, urging them to stay inside on bad air days or, insevere cases, to move to a more favorable climate. "By a more favorable climate," Anderson said, "I don't meanSouthern California. I mean in terms of air pollution, a less- polluted environment." * janet.wilson@The construction pollution report can be found online at clean_vehicles The draft regulationscan be found at * (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX) Underconstruction A report released Tuesday found serious health damage tied to construction related air pollutionfrom diesel powered equipment. Health damage from construction pollution in the South Coast Air Basin:(estimated number of cases in 2005) Premature deaths: 731 Respiratory hospitalizations: 383 Cardiovascularhospitalizations: 274 Asthma and other lower respiratory symptoms: 20,941 Acute bronchitis: 1,729 Lost workdays: 123,439 Minor restricted activity days: 959,839 School absences: 175,339 Cities* in South Coast countiesin the top 10% for risk of health damage from pollution caused by construction equipment: Los Angeles - LongBeach - Los Angeles - Santa Clarita --- Orange - Irvine - San Clemente --- Riverside - Corona - Murrieta -Riverside - Temecula --- San Bernardino - Chino - Fontana - Rancho Cucamonga - San Bernardino --- * Listedin alphabetical order by county Source: Union of Concerned Scientists Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Environmental impact; Studies; Air pollution; Construction equipmentLocation: CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Dec 6, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422171796Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand17 March 2013 Page 127 of 483 ProQuest_______________________________________________________________Document 64 of 213Another Hollywood production: smog; UCLA report says the movie and TV industry is a majorgenerator of Southland pollution. An economist cautions that more rules may drive filming out of state.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 14 Nov 2006: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The report found that the film and television industry emits a whopping 140,000 tons a year of ozoneand diesel particulate pollutant emissions from trucks, generators, special effects earthquakes and fires,demolition of sets with dynamite and other sources. "Without having seen the report, it's very hard to respond toany specifics. This is an issue the film industry cares about, and many of our studios have individual programsaimed at recycling, preventing air pollution and conserving natural resources," said Kori Bernards,spokeswoman for the Motion Picture Assn. of America, based in Encino. The industry tops hotels, aerospace,and apparel and semiconductor manufacturing in traditional air pollutant emissions in Southern California,according to the study, initially prepared for the Integrated Waste Management Board, and is probably secondonly to petroleum refineries, for which comparable data were not available. The entertainment industry ranksthird in greenhouse gas emissions.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Hollywood is creating a film of a different kind over Greater Los Angeles: smog, soot and greenhousegases, according to a UCLA report due out today. The report found that the film and television industry emits awhopping 140,000 tons a year of ozone and diesel particulate pollutant emissions from trucks, generators,special effects earthquakes and fires, demolition of sets with dynamite and other sources. "Given theimportance of the movie and TV industry in Southern California, we thought this was something the publicshould know," said Mary Nichols, head of the UCLA Institute of the Environment. Nichols, a law professor andpast secretary of the California Resources Agency, said researchers found that although individual productionsand studios are taking steps to minimize environmental damage, the industry's "structure and culture hamperthe pace of improvements." The report noted, for instance, that dozens of contractors with different practiceswork on a single set, making it tough to regulate. Industry representatives reached late Monday said they hadnot seen the report, but said they were concerned about environmentally sound practices. "Without having seenthe report, it's very hard to respond to any specifics. This is an issue the film industry cares about, and many ofour studios have individual programs aimed at recycling, preventing air pollution and conserving naturalresources," said Kori Bernards, spokeswoman for the Motion Picture Assn. of America, based in Encino.Bernards said the association and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers found in 2006 thattheir members had successfully kept 64% of studio sets and other industry waste out of landfills. "We'll keepdoing our part to make the environment pristine," she said. The industry tops hotels, aerospace, and appareland semiconductor manufacturing in traditional air pollutant emissions in Southern California, according to thestudy, initially prepared for the Integrated Waste Management Board, and is probably second only to petroleumrefineries, for which comparable data were not available. The entertainment industry ranks third in greenhousegas emissions. State air regulators and some who work with the industry said that diesel engines and fuels arealready heavily regulated, and that permits are required for dust control on specific projects. Still, "we're alwayslooking at new research. It's certainly something we're not going to ignore," said spokeswoman Gennet Paauweof the California Air Resources Board, the state's lead air quality regulator. She said the agency works withother industries, imposing voluntary practices as well as traditional laws. Jack Kyser, chief economist for the Los17 March 2013 Page 128 of 483 ProQuestAngeles County Economic Development Corp., cautioned against additional regulation, saying it could drivemovie and TV production elsewhere. "There would be a risk because you have other states out there quiteanxious to get a piece of the film industry," he said. "This would just be another nudge ... if they impose somestrict air quality regulations." The entertainment industry generates a combined $29 billion in revenue andemploys 252,000 people in the Greater Los Angeles region, Kyser said. But he said that industrywide, bettervoluntary practices were a must for everything, including so-called star wagon trailers, remote set generatorsand caterers baking bread for huge casts. "I think if you talk to the industry, they would be willing to make somemoves to clean up," Kyser said. "This is an industry that is very, very environmentally conscious. This is justsomething they may not really be aware of." * janet.wilson@ Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Airborne particulates; Motion picture industry; Air pollutionLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Nov 14, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422082184Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 65 of 213Trucks targeted in clean-air drive; Bond funds may boost a plan by the Long Beach and L.A. ports toreplace older diesels, but more money is needed. Who will pay? It's still a bit hazy.Author: Wilson, Janet17 March 2013 Page 129 of 483 ProQuestPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 12 Nov 2006: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Tuesday's approval by voters of Proposition 1B, combined with an aggressive clean-air plan due to bevoted on by local officials this month, could help replace more than 16,000 trucks with new ones within fiveyears. Indeed, within 20 years, many short-haul trucks could be replaced by conveyor belts, electric "maglev" --magnetic levitation -- trains and other "clean" technology. Port officials want to replace all trucks built before1993 and retrofit those built between 1993 and 2003, at a cost of about $1.8 billion. They say a 2005 surveyfound about 16,800 trucks that would qualify. The ports have pledged $200 million, and the South Coast AirQuality Management District has allocated $48 million. That local money could help in winning a large chunk ofthe $1 billion that Proposition 1B designates for reducing emissions from cargo movement, because stateofficials often require matching funds. UNHEALTHFUL: Air board inspector Paul Leon prepares to test theemissions of a diesel truck. Studies have estimated that 2,400 people die annually statewide because of chronicdiesel exhaust exposure, particularly in heavily traveled transportation corridors.; PHOTOGRAPHER: BobChamberlin Los Angeles Times; SMOG CHECK: [Jose Gonzales], an independent driver, submits to a surpriseemissions test by inspector Jose Andujar. He paid $10,000 for the used vehicle. When asked if he would accepta new truck financed with public dollars or private fees, he replied: "In a heartbeat."; PHOTOGRAPHER:Photographs by Bob Chamberlin Los Angeles Times; PROBE: A device records diesel exhaust emissions.Gonzales' truck, though dirtier than a new one would be, still passed.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Around the corner they rumbled, hundreds of aging tractor- trailers gunning to get another load intoTerminal S at the Port of Long Beach. But on a recent weekday, air brakes hissed as drivers were pulled overby air pollution enforcement crews. The short-haul diesel trucks, which ferry cargo between the docks, rail yardsand area warehouses, are one tiny leg in the global journey of goods between Asia and the United States.Their drivers are among the lowest-paid workers at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach -- the nation'sbusiest, which handle $360 billion in annual trade. Officials say the trucks are a leading cause of deadlypollution at the ports and need to go. "Residents around here call this the diesel death zone," said California AirResources Board spokesman Jerry Martin. Tuesday's approval by voters of Proposition 1B, combined with anaggressive clean-air plan due to be voted on by local officials this month, could help replace more than 16,000trucks with new ones within five years. Indeed, within 20 years, many short-haul trucks could be replaced byconveyor belts, electric "maglev" -- magnetic levitation -- trains and other "clean" technology. "That is the longtermgoal, to shovel the cargo with new technology," said Paul Johansen, assistant director of environmentalmanagement at the Port of Los Angeles. Jose Gonzales, 60, a Carson resident originally from Mexico, stood byhis 1989 engine as inspectors went under the hood. He paid $10,000 for the dingy beige tractor with a ricketytrailer. Asked if he would like to replace his truck, which could cost as much as $180,000, he said there was noway he could afford it. At first he didn't understand when asked if he would accept a new truck financed withpublic dollars or private fees, then replied, "In a heartbeat." Gonzales said he knows clean air is important. Heput nearly $300 into repairs after being cited for air violations earlier in the month, a big expense on weeklywages of $1,000. "The mechanic told me everything is outstanding now," he said. "Hardly," said the inspector,taking readings on a portable "smoke meter" stuck into the innards of the exhaust pipe. Gonzales' truck didpass, but it is still emitting 34% more soot than a new truck. The push to replace the trucks is part of thestruggle to clean up stubbornly dirty Southland air while the amount of goods shipped through the portsskyrockets. Local trucks are only one piece of the problem, and the easiest to pick on, some say. "It's inherentlyunfair to target this sector.... The independent harbor truckers are seen as low-hanging fruit. They can'torganize, they can't push back," said Ezra Finkin, legislative director for the Waterfront Coalition, a Washington,D.C.-based group of big-box retailers, including Wal-Mart, and other cargo importers. Environmental and labor17 March 2013 Page 130 of 483 ProQuestgroups recently formed an alliance to help the drivers. "The problem is that if you give a poor truck driver aclean truck, he needs to be able to afford maintaining it," said Melissa Lin Perrella, staff attorney with theNatural Resources Defense Council's Santa Monica office. "Only through improving the wages can you ensurethat a clean truck is going to stay clean for the long run." The ports' clean-air action plan draft, releasedMonday, proposed charging "polluter pays" impact fees to help pay for the new trucks. It said the fees should beassessed not on drivers but "as close as possible" to the firms that own the cargo. Not surprisingly, cargoowners disagree. Finkin said the plan was a poor one, and that "if California thinks they have an air pollutionproblem," the state should pass laws to tax long-haul corporate trucking companies. Lin Perrella, of the naturalresources council, said it was disappointing that cargo owners "would take a position that seems to deny thepollution and public health impacts caused from goods movement.... The problem is undeniable." She saidimposing clean-air fees would add "pennies to the cost of a VCR and about half a penny on the cost of a Barbieto the consumer." Studies have estimated that 2,400 people die annually statewide because of chronic dieselexhaust exposure, many along transportation corridors. Freight locomotives also emit diesel exhaust, andinternational marine vessels cause more than half of all port-related air pollution. Rail and marine officials saythey are voluntarily making improvements, but they claim interstate and international immunity from Californiaair pollution laws. Port officials say they can win changes from marine shippers and some rail companiesthrough lease negotiations. State officials said they need stronger federal laws. At one point, three truckinspectors turned and pointed at a locomotive on tracks just across the road belching thick black smoke. "Lookat that!" they shouted in frustration before turning to the next semi lined up at the curb. Port officials want toreplace all trucks built before 1993 and retrofit those built between 1993 and 2003, at a cost of about $1.8billion. They say a 2005 survey found about 16,800 trucks that would qualify. The ports have pledged $200million, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District has allocated $48 million. That local money couldhelp in winning a large chunk of the $1 billion that Proposition 1B designates for reducing emissions from cargomovement, because state officials often require matching funds. "We told them we'd take the whole $800million" left after the ports' $200-million pledge, said Johansen, of the Los Angeles port. But local officials facestiff competition statewide for the funds, from Oakland, Sacramento and others. California air board DeputyExecutive Officer Mike Scheible said state environmental officials agree that replacing Southland port trucks is"a top priority," but added that his staff had found about 12,000 trucks there needed help, not 16,800. He saidmany could be retrofitted with new filters at lesser cost. The ports are examining several ways of getting new,cleaner trucks to drivers, including lease-to-buy programs or low-interest loans. Officials pointed to a smallerprogram administered by a regional nonprofit organization using state motor license fees that has helped 500drivers buy new trucks. Several truckers said they had not heard of the program, and one air board inspectorsaid the convoluted application process was "brutal." Port officials said they would issue fliers and use othermeans to get out the word on any future program. "Our intent isn't putting anybody out of business," said Port ofLong Beach spokesman Art Wong. "Our intent is to replace the dirty trucks." janet.wilson@ *(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX) Emissions Port officials want to replace more than 16,000 aging short-haul trucks,just one source of air pollution there. Particulate emissions from diesel engines, by source Ocean-goingvessels: 59% Cargo-handling equipment: 14% Harbor craft: 11% Short-haul trucks: 10% Locomotives: 6%Source: Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, 2001-02 Illustration Caption: PHOTO: UNHEALTHFUL: Airboard inspector Paul Leon prepares to test the emissions of a diesel truck. Studies have estimated that 2,400people die annually statewide because of chronic diesel exhaust exposure, particularly in heavily traveledtransportation corridors.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Bob Chamberlin Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: SMOG CHECK:Jose Gonzales, an independent driver, submits to a surprise emissions test by inspector Jose Andujar. He paid$10,000 for the used vehicle. When asked if he would accept a new truck financed with public dollars or privatefees, he replied: "In a heartbeat."; PHOTOGRAPHER: Photographs by Bob Chamberlin Los Angeles Times;PHOTO: PROBE: A device records diesel exhaust emissions. Gonzales' truck, though dirtier than a new one17 March 2013 Page 131 of 483 ProQuestwould be, still passed. Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Trucks; Emission standards; Ports; Air pollution; Diesel engines; ReferendumsLocation: Los Angeles California, Long Beach CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Nov 12, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422127849Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 66 of 213EPA Criticized for Not Toughening Soot Law; Up to 24,000 lives could be saved annually in the U.S.,and savings on healthcare and in other areas would outweigh the costs, a panel says.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 07 Oct 2006: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: [Stephen Johnson] did significantly tighten daily exposure amounts to soot, cutting the allowable levelfrom 65 to 35 micrograms, which electric industry representatives in particular had criticized as being ofunproven need and costly. The same analysis released Friday shows as many as 13,000 lives will be saved asa result of that change, at a cost of $5 billion annually, with $9 billion to $76 billion in social benefits. Johnsonwas not available for comment Friday. He said at the time of his decision that "reasonable minds can disagree"and that there was disagreement among scientists on the evidence concerning annual particulate exposure.17 March 2013 Page 132 of 483 ProQuest[Bart Ostro] said the science panel had set risk percentages of increased illness and mortality, which the EPAthen converted into possible deaths based on U.S. population and total death rates. Under a limit of 14micrograms, those estimates found a range of lives saved from 2,200 to 24,000, or an average 13,000 annually.In all cases, the highest number of deaths avoided would be in California. Acting assistant EPA administratorWilliam Wehrum, who worked with Johnson on the new rules, said Friday that the new analysis was not readywhen Johnson made his decision, so it was not included as part of that process. But it would be helpful in futureregulations, he said, adding that Johnson and agency staff "absolutely considered impacts to human health."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: As many as 24,000 lives -- a large number of them Californians' - - could have been saved each year ifthe head of the Environmental Protection Agency had tightened soot standards by one microgram per cubicmeter annually, according to an analysis released Friday. The cost-benefit analysis also shows that althoughthe tab for power plants, refineries, auto manufacturers and other industry for such a change would be about$1.9 billion a year -- or about $15 per household -- the savings in healthcare costs, work and school attendanceand other benefits would be between $4.3 billion and $51 billion. Exposure to soot, or fine particulate matter,has been repeatedly linked to respiratory and cardiac illness and premature death. Southern California and theSan Joaquin Valley have the worst fine particulate pollution in the nation, largely because of diesel- poweredvehicles. The estimates found as many as 6,400 lives would be saved annually in California. By law, the EPA isnot allowed to consider the costs of a new regulation. But it, along with all other federal agencies, is required tocalculate them. The agency is required to consider health benefits. EPA administrator Stephen Johnson hasbeen harshly criticized by medical groups, environmentalists and his own science advisors for his Sept. 21decision to retain a standard allowing annual exposure of 15 micrograms per cubic meter, rather than tighteningit to 14 micrograms or fewer. The American Medical Assn., the American Lung Assn., pediatric andenvironmental groups and scores of doctors and academics who specialize in heart and lung disease hadasked Johnson to set a standard of between 12 and 14 micrograms per cubic meter of air for fine particulates,saying that study after study had shown a correlation between increased exposure to soot and higher numbersof illnesses and deaths. Friday's online posting unleashed a new round of criticism. "It's pretty sobering andshocking stuff to realize the agency concluded the human cost of refusing to strengthen these air qualityprotections was going to be [thousands of lives] lost each year," said attorney John Walke, the clean air directorfor the Natural Resources Defense Council. Walke said that although the cost to industry "is not insignificant ...it pales in comparison to the $50 billion annually that they project will be incurred in healthcare costs as a resultof the failure to upgrade the standards." "It's pretty darned obvious that better standards would mean fewerpremature deaths," said Frank O'Donnell of Clean Air Watch. Industry representatives could not be reached forcomment late Friday. Johnson did significantly tighten daily exposure amounts to soot, cutting the allowablelevel from 65 to 35 micrograms, which electric industry representatives in particular had criticized as being ofunproven need and costly. The same analysis released Friday shows as many as 13,000 lives will be saved asa result of that change, at a cost of $5 billion annually, with $9 billion to $76 billion in social benefits. Johnsonwas not available for comment Friday. He said at the time of his decision that "reasonable minds can disagree"and that there was disagreement among scientists on the evidence concerning annual particulate exposure.But the analysis released Friday shows that every member of a 12- member panel of scientists convened at therequest of the White House Office of Management and Budget and National Academy of Sciences found thatthousands of additional lives could be saved if the tougher annual standard were adopted. The panel was madeup of authors of the studies that Johnson used and specialists picked by their peers as the leading experts inparticulate pollution. All reviewed the available literature on soot illness and death and primarily relied on thesame two studies that Johnson did in making their estimates. "I feel that he didn't really take into account thebest available science, which is now saying very clearly that there are very significant health effects related to17 March 2013 Page 133 of 483 ProQuestthis longer-term exposure," said Dr. Bart Ostro, one of the 12 panelists and chief of the air pollutionepidemiology section for the California EPA. Ostro said the science panel had set risk percentages of increasedillness and mortality, which the EPA then converted into possible deaths based on U.S. population and totaldeath rates. Under a limit of 14 micrograms, those estimates found a range of lives saved from 2,200 to 24,000,or an average 13,000 annually. In all cases, the highest number of deaths avoided would be in California. Ostrosaid that because California has the most fine particulate pollution and a large population, "we would see alarge chunk of the benefits" if the standard were set at 14 micrograms. "We're talking about ... hospitalizationand emergency room visits, asthma attacks and work loss as well as mortality," he said. Acting assistant EPAadministrator William Wehrum, who worked with Johnson on the new rules, said Friday that the new analysiswas not ready when Johnson made his decision, so it was not included as part of that process. But it would behelpful in future regulations, he said, adding that Johnson and agency staff "absolutely considered impacts tohuman health." janet.wilson@ Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Air pollution; Public health; Airborne particulates; Benefit cost analysisLocation: United States, US, CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910;Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Oct 7, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: FeatureProQuest document ID: 422104424Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________17 March 2013 Page 134 of 483 ProQuestDocument 67 of 213New EPA Rules on Soot and Dust Set; Widespread criticism greets the standards for humanexposure to particulates. Some say ideas from scientific advisors were ignored.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 22 Sep 2006: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The EPA strengthened the standard that governed people's daily exposure to fine particles, or soot,but left unchanged one that deals with annual exposure. Also, the EPA scrapped another standard for coarseparticles that are found in dust. A scientific panel established by Congress had strongly urged tightening annualsoot standards to levels that members said could protect thousands more lives. U.S. Sen. James M. Inhofe (ROkla.),chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, also expressed concern: "I am disappointedthat EPA is tightening the particulate matter standard in today's final rule. Recognizing that Administrator[Stephen Johnson] is a scientist himself, I respect his judgment and his command of the science, but Irespectfully disagree that this new rule meets the threshold burden of proof necessary to impose these costlyrequirements on our nation's economy." Attorneys David Baron and Paul Cort of Earthjustice, in a statement,said: "Unfortunately for those who are most at risk -- young children, those with asthma and the elderly -- EPA islistening to the polluters' cries and not doing the job of protecting public health. It's time EPA stopped playingpolitics and started cleaning up our air."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday announced new rules for controlling soot anddust that plague large areas of California, imposing one tougher safety standard but rejecting therecommendations of scientific advisors to strengthen others. At a news conference, EPA Administrator StephenJohnson touted the rules as "the most protective air quality regulations in U.S. history" and said, "All Americansdeserve to breathe clean air. That's exactly what we're doing today." The EPA formulated the rules in responseto a looming court deadline for updated standards in the settlement of a lawsuit by the environmental groupEarthjustice. Johnson's announcement of the rules drew harsh criticism from all sides of a long-running debateover how best to control some of the most harmful airborne contaminants. Those critics included industriesfaced with complying with the regulations, members of Congress and environmental groups. After hearing someof the criticism, Johnson said that the Clean Air Act authorized him "to do what is requisite to protect publichealth ... neither more nor less stringent than necessary ... that's exactly what I did." The EPA strengthened thestandard that governed people's daily exposure to fine particles, or soot, but left unchanged one that deals withannual exposure. Also, the EPA scrapped another standard for coarse particles that are found in dust. Ascientific panel established by Congress had strongly urged tightening annual soot standards to levels thatmembers said could protect thousands more lives. The new regulations pertain to fine and coarse particulatematter that is expelled from tailpipes, factory smokestacks, farm equipment and other sources and when inhaledcan penetrate deep into the lungs. Exposure has been linked to severe asthma and premature deaths fromheart and lung disease. The Los Angeles Basin, especially the Riverside area, and the Owens Valley in theeastern Sierra Nevada have the worst particulate pollution in the nation. The problem in urban areas is largelyattributable to exhaust from trucks and other diesel-powered vehicles. The Owens Valley is prone to major duststorms. Rogene Henderson, head of the EPA's scientific panel that was in charge of reviewing the agency'sproposals, said the panel's recommendations to better protect public health were ignored. "We are, of course,very disappointed," she said. Henderson said Johnson's decision to eliminate regulation of annual exposure tocoarse particulate, or dust, is a step backward and would hinder attempts by researchers to study the health17 March 2013 Page 135 of 483 ProQuesteffects. In an unprecedented action, the panel had earlier publicly urged Johnson to adopt tougher standards tosave more lives and reduce chronic illness. Johnson said Thursday that Henderson's panel was divided andsaid "it's a complicated issue. Reasonable minds can agree to disagree." Henderson retorted that all but two of22 panel members wanted tougher standards. Spokesmen for electric utilities and manufacturers said that therules would cost billions of dollars to implement, and that the agency had shown no clear evidence that thestandards were necessary. "The electric power sector is in the midst of implementing a series of majoremissions cuts that will reduce power plant emissions associated with particulate matter," said Dan Reidinger ofthe Edison Electric Institute, which represents U.S. shareholder- owned power companies that produce nearly60% of the nation's electricity. "We think EPA has jumped the gun by adopting a more stringent fine particlestandard before the existing standards have been given a chance to work.... The industry will spend more than$50 billion to cut emissions. Our hope, obviously, is that these reductions will provide a real health benefit,though EPA hasn't adequately made that case." Reidinger said "EPA persists in overemphasizing studies thatsuggest a possible benefit to tightening the air quality standard, while downplaying those suggesting that doingso may not." U.S. Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee,also expressed concern: "I am disappointed that EPA is tightening the particulate matter standard in today'sfinal rule. Recognizing that Administrator Stephen Johnson is a scientist himself, I respect his judgment and hiscommand of the science, but I respectfully disagree that this new rule meets the threshold burden of proofnecessary to impose these costly requirements on our nation's economy." Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)lambasted the decision, saying that "once again, this administration has shown its true colors by choosingpolluters over the people and setting new air standards on toxic dust that fail to protect public health. Thisdecision, which flies in the face of science, should not stand. I hope that EPA reconsiders this misguided anddangerous decision. If not, it should be struck down by the courts." Attorneys David Baron and Paul Cort ofEarthjustice, in a statement, said: "Unfortunately for those who are most at risk -- young children, those withasthma and the elderly -- EPA is listening to the polluters' cries and not doing the job of protecting public health.It's time EPA stopped playing politics and started cleaning up our air." The American Medical Assn., theAmerican Lung Assn., pediatric and environmental groups, and scores of doctors and academics whospecialize in heart and lung disease had implored Johnson to set an annual standard of between 12 to 14micrograms per cubic meter of air for fine particulates, saying that study after study had shown a correlationbetween increased exposure to soot and more illness and death. Johnson instead retained a standard of 15micrograms, saying that scientists disagreed about long-term exposure amounts. He significantly tightened dailyexposure amounts to fine soot, cutting the allowable level from 65 to 35 micrograms. "The evidence was clearthere, and we took clear action," he said. California air officials had mixed reactions, praising Johnson forsignificantly strengthening daily soot standards, but saying that the elimination of federal standards for dustwould hamper the state's efforts to reduce air pollution. California has tougher exposure levels for both coarseand fine particulate, but those goals lack enforcement power, as opposed to the federal standards, which ifunmet can lead to the loss of highway funds and other federal money. "We don't have that big stick that thefederal government does, the ability to withhold funds," California Air Resources Board spokesman Jerry Martinsaid. Johnson backed away from an earlier proposal to exempt rural areas and mining and agriculture industriesfrom standards governing larger coarse particles. William Wehrum, the EPA's acting deputy director of airquality, said that "within days" the agency planned to adopt companion rules requiring extensive additionalmonitoring of coarse particulate in rural and urban areas to aid research efforts and further regulatory reviews inthe future. janet.wilson@ Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Environmental regulations; Air pollution; Outdoor air quality; Litigation; Clean Air Act-US; Airborneparticulates; Pollution control17 March 2013 Page 136 of 483 ProQuestLocation: United States, USCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910;Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Sep 22, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422092091Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 68 of 213Natural Gas From Overseas Sources Is Raising Concerns; Critics say imported LNG burns hotter andpollutes more than the domestic product.Author: Douglass, ElizabethPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 21 Sep 2006: C.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The natural gas in Southern California -- culled from in-state fields and carried into the state bypipeline from the Rocky Mountains, the Southwest and Canada -- carries an average Wobbe number of 1332 inthe territories served by the Gas Co. and SDG&E. The proposal from the gas companies would establish amaximum Wobbe number of 1400. "Sempra is seeking to establish a broader band [of Wobbe numbers] thanhas historically been used," said Stephen Pickett, a senior vice president for Southern California Edison. Thecompany told regulators that its new Mountainview power plant in Redlands could be damaged or forced offlinerepeatedly by wide swings in the heat content of the fuel. IN THE FRAY: Public Utilities Commission President17 March 2013 Page 137 of 483 ProQuest[Michael R. Peevey], left, who favors changes in the gas requirements, with Edison International Chairman andChief Executive John E. Bryson.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Mark Boster Los Angeles Times; POSSIBLE THREAT:Southern California Edison is concerned that differences in natural gas from other parts of the world coulddamage its new Mountainview power plant in Redlands, above.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Mark Boster Los AngelesTimesLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: State utility regulators are embroiled in a debate over new kinds of natural gas that opponents contendwould worsen air pollution, trip up power plants and make gas stoves, water heaters and other equipment moreprone to fires. The dispute concerns foreign liquefied natural gas, which could begin flowing into local pipelineswithin two years. The gas from other continents is chemically different and burns hotter than most U.S. naturalgas. And that worries an unusual collection of critics, including environmentalists, air quality regulators,appliance specialists and Southern California Edison. Critics point to a rash of pipeline leaks and a houseexplosion in Maryland last year, which the local utility blamed on the ill effects of gas from overseas."Everything we have here in California is geared toward North American natural gas," said Rory Cox, Californiaprogram director for Pacific Environment, a group opposed to the importation of liquefied natural gas. The hotterforeign gas, he added, "can lead to the erosion of pipeline seals, damage the internal workings of power plantsand can affect people's home appliances" by damaging them or causing gas leaks. Sempra Energy and othercompanies that plan to supply imported natural gas to California dispute that. San Diego-based Sempra saysthe new gas won't cause problems, and it is pushing the state Public Utilities Commission to clear the way forthe "hot gas" by loosening existing gas quality specifications. The commission could vote as early as today.The commission's decision would affect consumers and industrial users of natural gas statewide and wouldhave implications for companies planning to build liquefied natural gas import terminals along the Pacific Coast.Arguments over the issue have taken place out of the limelight and involved only limited input on behalf ofconsumers. But it's the state's homeowners and business owners with water heaters and other gas-firedequipment that would suffer the consequences if the commission enacts gas rules that cause problems in yearsto come, critics say. "Like many things in the regulatory arena, it's hard for the average consumer to keep trackof, much less understand the ramifications of it," said Loretta Lynch, a former California utility commissioner.On the hot-gas issue, she said, "the consumers are outmanned and outgunned ... but they'll be paying the bill atthe end of the day." The Assn. of Home Appliance Manufacturers is concerned about the expected wave of newgas and is pushing federal regulators to establish nationwide standards instead of letting regions set their ownlimits. "If you have a high flame temperature, higher than what the product was designed to deal with, you canget a fire hazard," said Joseph McGuire, the Washington-based trade group's president. "Our concern is that ifthe consumer angle isn't fully understood and addressed, it's going to be impossible to go out and retrofit themillions and millions and millions of installed products already in place that present the bulk of the potentialsafety and performance concerns," McGuire said. Last year alone, Californians installed more than 850,000 gasclothes dryers -- nearly 60% of yearly shipments nationwide -- and 790,000 gas ranges, or about 20% of thenationwide total, according to figures from the group. Current LNG formulations now flowing through pipelines inother parts of the U.S. have been treated or blended with other gas to more closely mimic traditional gassupplies, McGuire said. Future supplies, however, are expected to "go outside the range that we view to be safefor product safety and for avoiding performance issues." Last month, an administrative law judge issued aproposed decision that called for no change in California's existing gas- quality standards until after a study ofthe ramifications is conducted. Michael R. Peevey, president of the state Public Utilities Commission, wrote analternative proposed decision that would allow hotter gas than what is now used in the state -- a position backedby natural gas producers, Sempra and other companies involved in plans for importing natural gas. Theproceeding also deals with several other natural gas issues, including storage and pipeline capacity. "We've17 March 2013 Page 138 of 483 ProQuestbeen investigating and studying what might occur should large volumes of LNG reach our service area," saidLee Stewart, senior vice president of gas operations for Southern California Gas Co. and San Diego Gas&Electric Co., both subsidiaries of Sempra. "It will work fine for our system overall and for our customers'equipment." At least five projects are still on the drawing board; Sempra's Baja California terminal is underconstruction and could begin operations in 2008. The facilities are aimed at filling a widening gap betweendomestic production and U.S. demand for natural gas. Some believe the imports will make up as much as 15%of nationwide gas consumption by 2025. Although the details vary by project, the LNG plants would take insuper-cooled liquefied gas shipped from Russia, Australia and elsewhere, return it to gaseous form and send itto customers through the state's existing natural gas pipeline system. For years, the controversy surroundingthose projects has stemmed from community safety concerns and the possible pollution from the re-gasificationprocess. Now other issues have emerged. The South Coast Air Quality Management District has warnedregulators that Sempra's proposed changes to natural gas rules would boost pollution in a region that can illaffordincreases. "The danger that we are most concerned with is a worsening of air quality in this area, both bythe creation of additional ozone and by additional fine particulates that are unhealthful," said Mohsen Nazemi,assistant deputy executive director at AQMD. AQMD and Pacific Environment, among others, back theadministrative law judge's proposed ruling. Nazemi said the wide latitude sought by Sempra was unnecessarysince rival companies already had pledged to abide by limits backed by air quality regulators. Stewart, theexecutive for the Gas Co. and SDG&E, rejects the notion that the gas represents a threat to air quality. Thecompanies' own studies showed that "there is really no significant impact on NOX emissions ... it's extremelysmall," Stewart said. At issue is an arcane indicator known in the industry as the Wobbe index, a number usedto measure the heat value of natural gas. The higher the number, the greater the heating value of the gas. Thenatural gas in Southern California -- culled from in-state fields and carried into the state by pipeline from theRocky Mountains, the Southwest and Canada -- carries an average Wobbe number of 1332 in the territoriesserved by the Gas Co. and SDG&E. The proposal from the gas companies would establish a maximum Wobbenumber of 1400. No one knows what will happen as the state's gas pipelines begin to deliver large amounts ofimported gas with the higher number. "Sempra is seeking to establish a broader band [of Wobbe numbers] thanhas historically been used," said Stephen Pickett, a senior vice president for Southern California Edison. Thecompany told regulators that its new Mountainview power plant in Redlands could be damaged or forced offlinerepeatedly by wide swings in the heat content of the fuel. Federal regulators looked into the gas-quality issue,but in June decided against setting a national standard. The Gas Appliance Manufacturers Assn. told theFederal Energy Regulatory Commission last month that national gas-quality standards "are essential to ensurethat end-use gas appliances will continue to operate safely and reliably." * elizabeth.douglass@Illustration Caption: PHOTO: IN THE FRAY: Public Utilities Commission President Michael R. Peevey, left, whofavors changes in the gas requirements, with Edison International Chairman and Chief Executive John E.Bryson.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Mark Boster Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: POSSIBLE THREAT: SouthernCalifornia Edison is concerned that differences in natural gas from other parts of the world could damage itsnew Mountainview power plant in Redlands, above.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Mark Boster Los Angeles TimesCredit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Imports; Air pollution; Public utilities; LNGLocation: CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Public Utilities Commission-California; NAICS: 926130; DUNS: 15-593-4557Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: C.117 March 2013 Page 139 of 483 ProQuestNumber of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Sep 21, 2006Year: 2006Section: Business; Part C; Business DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422101601Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 69 of 213California's dust bowl; Left in the Dust How Race and Politics Created a Human and EnvironmentalTragedy in L.A. Karen Piper Palgrave Macmillan: 224 pp., $24.95Author: Marjorie Gellhorn Sa'adahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 23 July 2006: R.4.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Construction, industry, agriculture and cars' tailpipes all create, stir up or emit PM-10. Because of thesignificant adverse health and environmental effects, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sets air qualitystandards for acceptable levels of PM-10, and the state Health and Safety Code sets the laws governing itsprevention and mitigation. Developers grading the landscape to make way for tract homes and industrial parksmust have a water truck spraying down the dust behind every piece of equipment that scrapes at the earth.When the Santa Ana winds kick up, a man on the nightshift at Santa Anita Park circles and circles the dirtracetrack with a water truck. In an interview at DWP's Los Angeles headquarters, [Karen Piper] introducesherself only as a professor from the University of Missouri. She doesn't tell the DWP executive that she "took aninterest in Owens Lake because of eighteen years' worth of dust embedded in my lungs." She stifles her cough-- she has another bout of pneumonia -- and when the executive tells her, "The only thing worse than the DWPin the Owens Valley would be no DWP," she coaches herself to smile "the way a perfectly healthy womanshould smile." Piper adds dust to the long history of DWP's real and imagined foes -- farmers who dynamitedthe aqueduct as their livelihood flowed south, striking aqueduct builders and DWP employees, Paiute tribes that17 March 2013 Page 140 of 483 ProQuestrefused to leave their land, Owens Valley activists, as well as potential terrorists the DWP patrols against today.(At the aqueduct's head, she met a DWP employee armed with a shotgun and a growling Rottweiler.) "Dust,"she writes, "is the new financial drain and saboteur."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: CORRECTION: SEE CORRECTION APPENDED; Owens Lake dust: In the July 23 Book Review, areview of the book "Left in the Dust" said incorrectly that when L.A. Aqueduct water was diverted in 2001 tocontrol dust, "for the first time since farmers dynamited the aqueduct in 1927, water flowed into the OwensValley." The reference should have been to Owens Dry Lake: It was the first time since 1927 that water hadbeen diverted into the lake, except for storm overflows. The channel is 233 miles long, not 223 as stated, andnot all the land it traverses is owned by Los Angeles' water agency, as the review said. A majority of it is ownedby the U.S. government.; Owens Lake dust: A July 23 review of the book "Left in the Dust" said incorrectly thatwhen L.A. Aqueduct water was diverted in 2001 to control dust, "for the first time since farmers dynamited theaqueduct in 1927, water flowed into the Owens Valley." The reference should have been to Owens Dry Lake: Itwas the first time since 1927 that water had been diverted into the lake, except for storm overflows. The channelis 233 miles long, not 223 as stated, and not all the land it traverses is owned by Los Angeles' water agency, asthe review said. A majority of it is owned by the U.S. government. PARTICULATE matter 10, or PM-10, is dust.It is sometimes called "respirable particulate matter," indicating that it is fine enough to be inhaled. "You breathethis dust in, but you don't breathe it out," writes Karen Piper, in "Left in the Dust: How Race and Politics Createda Human and Environmental Tragedy in L.A." Piper is a native of Ridgecrest, Calif., the first city downwind ofOwens Lake, a 110-square-mile dry lake covered in PM-10; she likens it to "a giant bowl of fresh talcumpowder." As a child, she saw dust clouds that "hung in the air like fog" and days when "the sun disappeared andit was hard to breathe." Like asbestos, PM-10 infiltrates lung tissue, causing and exacerbating respiratoryillnesses and autoimmune reactions. PM-10 is also called fugitive dust, a name that implies it has outwittedhuman efforts to contain it. Construction, industry, agriculture and cars' tailpipes all create, stir up or emit PM-10. Because of the significant adverse health and environmental effects, the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency sets air quality standards for acceptable levels of PM-10, and the state Health and Safety Code sets thelaws governing its prevention and mitigation. Developers grading the landscape to make way for tract homesand industrial parks must have a water truck spraying down the dust behind every piece of equipment thatscrapes at the earth. When the Santa Ana winds kick up, a man on the nightshift at Santa Anita Park circles andcircles the dirt racetrack with a water truck. What settles dust is the weight of water. The Owens Lake dust oncewas covered in brine, populated by tule grass and salt shrimp and traversed by steamboats. When the LosAngeles Aqueduct began diverting the lake's water in 1913, arsenic, cadmium, nickel and other naturallyoccurring toxic metals were left concentrated in the dry dirt. The Sierra Nevada range that borders the valleyacts as a funnel: Wind lifts the dust and carries it in ominous opaque clouds, south through the Owens Valley,through Piper's hometown, across the high desert and toward Los Angeles. The dry Owens Lake is the largestsource of PM-10 pollution in the United States, according to the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution ControlDistrict, the air quality district for three High Sierra counties. To see the dry lake for yourself, you could takeHighway 395 north from Los Angeles County, along the eastern side of the Sierras. Or you could follow the 223-mile-long aqueduct, but that would be trespassing -- the land around it is owned by Los Angeles' Department ofWater and Power. At the top of the aqueduct, "a simple concrete barrier ... funnels the [Owens] river into theaqueduct channel." Without its source water, the lake went completely dry. When the DWP began pumpingadditional groundwater, lowering the water table below the roots of trees, the land went barren. Not until 1987did the EPA mandate that the DWP clean up the resulting dust for air quality violations that were "twenty-sixtimes the federal standards set by the Clean Air Act." In an interview at DWP's Los Angeles headquarters, Piperintroduces herself only as a professor from the University of Missouri. She doesn't tell the DWP executive that17 March 2013 Page 141 of 483 ProQuestshe "took an interest in Owens Lake because of eighteen years' worth of dust embedded in my lungs." Shestifles her cough -- she has another bout of pneumonia -- and when the executive tells her, "The only thingworse than the DWP in the Owens Valley would be no DWP," she coaches herself to smile "the way a perfectlyhealthy woman should smile." But science considers one woman with a cough to be an anecdote. Although therisks of particulate air pollution have been documented in the scientific literature, there are no epidemiologicalhealth studies and no statistics on how many Owens Valley residents have become ill or died because of thedust. After the U.S. Navy, whose pilots couldn't see to land their planes, and area residents grew more vocal,studies were done -- but on the feasibility of ameliorating the dust, not the dust's health effects. Even thesestudies, Piper writes, were the result of hard-fought state legislation requiring Los Angeles "to undertakereasonable measures ... to mitigate the air quality impacts of its activities in the production, diversion, storage,or conveyance of water." The city of Los Angeles' mitigation effort from 1987 to 1996 was to fund the GreatBasin district to study the effectiveness of "planting saltgrass, spraying chemicals on the surface of the lake,layering it with tires, building fences to stop the sand, and tilling the surface of the lake." The district trieddigging wells to cover it with ground water. District officials considered gravel blankets. When the districtdetermined that the only feasible solution was to return water to Owens Lake, the DWP "cut off the salaries ofthe members of the Great Basin APCD." Piper adds dust to the long history of DWP's real and imagined foes --farmers who dynamited the aqueduct as their livelihood flowed south, striking aqueduct builders and DWPemployees, Paiute tribes that refused to leave their land, Owens Valley activists, as well as potential terroriststhe DWP patrols against today. (At the aqueduct's head, she met a DWP employee armed with a shotgun and agrowling Rottweiler.) "Dust," she writes, "is the new financial drain and saboteur." Beyond the eco-thrilleraspects of this book, Piper is exploring something far more complicated than a villain and victim, a city's thirst, avalley's dust; she is using the water to ask questions about the notion of development and Americanassumptions about progress toward the public good. In her previous book, "Cartographic Fictions: Maps, Race,and Identity," Piper considered cartography from the perspective of people at the margins of maps; shecontinues this method of inquiry in "Left in the Dust," examining native Paiutes, Japanese and JapaneseAmerican World War II internees at nearby Manzanar, destitute people on Los Angeles' skid row whose accessto potable water is curtailed, and others who bear the history of Los Angeles' development as toxicity in theirbodies. Piper also sets the aqueduct's history in the context of American "empire building," citing the unilateraluse of presidential powers (by Theodore Roosevelt, which led to the aqueduct's approval) that gave privateinterests great gain from public expenditures to provide water to Los Angeles. All of this has strong echoes forthe foot soldiers and bill payers of today's American empire. In 2001, for the first time since farmers dynamitedthe aqueduct in 1927, water flowed into the Owens Valley. The DWP diverted some of the water to create ashallow 12-square-mile lake. "Owens Lake," Piper writes, "is now a living experiment in what returning water willdo to a decimated ecosystem. It is also an experiment in what losing water will do to Los Angeles." We all getour water from someone, somewhere. Tap-turning Americans would do well to give this history a close read. *References Message No: 39330 Illustration Caption: PHOTO: TRICKLE DOWN: What remained of the LowerOwens River in 1984 meanders south from the snow-capped Eastern Sierra.; PHOTOGRAPHER: ThomasKelsey Los Angeles Times Credit: Marjorie Gellhorn Sa'adah is a writer in Los Angeles.Subject: Nonfiction; Environmental impact; Politics; Air pollution; Water supply; Lakes; Books-titles -- Left in theDust: How Race and Politics Created a Human and Environmental Tragedy in L.A.Location: Owens LakePeople: Piper, KarenPublication title: Los Angeles Times17 March 2013 Page 142 of 483 ProQuestPages: R.4Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Jul 23, 2006Year: 2006Section: Book Review; Part R; Features DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: Book Review-FavorableProQuest document ID: 422084010Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 70 of 213Skies Clear, EPA Rules; The agency says soot levels in the Central Valley have fallen and no newcleanup is needed. Activists and others are skeptical.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 07 July 2006: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The response of environmentalists to the EPA declaration was "really unfortunate," said [SeyedSadredin]. "This is a major accomplishment that has come at great costs.... To try and nitpick it because ofsome unreliable monitors not even intended to measure for these purposes is ... really harmful to the cause," hesaid, adding, "it erodes confidence in our strategies if we say all the millions of dollars the community andbusiness have put in has not produced some results." Paul Cort, an attorney with Earthjustice in Oakland whohas brought numerous lawsuits to force a cleanup of Central Valley air, said litigation was responsible for theimproving quality. He vowed to sue again if the EPA formally declares the region in attainment. A spokesmanfor the EPA in San Francisco said the agency had informed the judge that a decision by them was imminent,and pointed out the judge had stated in the ruling that if the EPA declared the region in attainment, additionalmeasures would not be needed.17 March 2013 Page 143 of 483 ProQuestLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said Thursday that air quality in California's smoggyCentral Valley has improved substantially in the last three years and proposed declaring it "in attainment" withkey federal soot standards. The declaration would mean that costly cleanup measures would not be required,beyond what has been done. The EPA will make a formal decision after 30 days of public comment. Local airregulators were jubilant, saying it was proof that hundreds of new air quality regulations, many of themcontroversial, were working. "It's a major accomplishment for the region ... including manufacturers whoinvested hundreds of millions of dollars in new combustion technology ... and the general public that went alongwith a regulation for wood-burning fireplaces that they were not very happy with," said Seyed Sadredin,executive director of the San Joaquin Valley Air Quality Control District. But environmentalists and public healthadvocates scoffed at the declaration, saying air quality officials were ignoring data from their own monitors that,as recently as November, showed unhealthful, illegal levels of soot that lingered for nearly a week. "It's either amiracle or a lie," said Kevin Hall of the Sierra Club in the Central Valley, of the assertion that levels of coarseparticulate matter have not exceeded legal limits even once for three straight years, which is required for aregion to be in compliance with the Clean Air Act. "If we can't trust the agency to adequately monitor the airpollution, then we can't trust their declarations of attainment, and the bottom line for people in the valley is thelevel of suffering continues." The Central Valley has struggled for years with some of the nation's worst airquality, caused by factors such as diesel- powered farming equipment, oil refineries, a construction boom andtraffic on two major highways. Coarse particulates, which lodge in the lungs, have been shown to contribute toasthma and impaired lung function. The Central Valley region must still clean up air pollution known as fineparticulate matter and ozone that have been linked to a host of other serious health problems. The response ofenvironmentalists to the EPA declaration was "really unfortunate," said Sadredin. "This is a majoraccomplishment that has come at great costs.... To try and nitpick it because of some unreliable monitors noteven intended to measure for these purposes is ... really harmful to the cause," he said, adding, "it erodesconfidence in our strategies if we say all the millions of dollars the community and business have put in has notproduced some results." He said a monitor showing high readings in Corcoran last November was not asaccurate as more sophisticated monitors next to it that registered less pollution. "The bottom line is the air forCentral Valley residents is cleaner today," he said. Paul Cort, an attorney with Earthjustice in Oakland who hasbrought numerous lawsuits to force a cleanup of Central Valley air, said litigation was responsible for theimproving quality. He vowed to sue again if the EPA formally declares the region in attainment. Cort alsoaccused the federal agency of "trying to make an end- run" around a federal judge's ruling Wednesday thatadditional measures must be put in place if the region's soot pollution was not brought into attainment.However, a spokesman for the EPA in San Francisco said the agency had informed the judge that a decision bythem was imminent, and pointed out the judge had stated in the ruling that if the EPA declared the region inattainment, additional measures would not be needed. Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Environmental impact; Public health; Air pollution; Smog; Environmental cleanupLocation: Central ValleyCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910;Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 017 March 2013 Page 144 of 483 ProQuestPublication year: 2006Publication date: Jul 7, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422096335Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 71 of 213Plan May Ease Air Pollution at Ports; Stricter international freighter rules would make L.A. and LongBeach facilities safer.Author: Weikel, DanPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 06 July 2006: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Almost 5,800 ships called at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach last year, releasing roughly14,000 tons of air pollutants. In 2004, more than 7,200 ships sailed past Santa Barbara and Ventura counties,releasing almost 16,000 tons of pollutants. For the first time, Vagslid said, the IMO will consider regulatingparticulates and whether to require ships built before 2000 to retrofit their main engines with air pollutioncontrols, such as scrubbers and catalytic converters. The current standards apply only to new ships and thosebeing refitted with new engines. Besides the proposed clean-air plan, both ports have established speedreductionprograms to cut emissions from ships coming into port. In addition, both ports are beginning to supplyonshore sources of electricity to ships so they won't have to run their auxiliary engines.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Even before the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach unveiled an ambitious clean-air plan last week,an international agency that regulates the global shipping industry was considering whether to strengthenoutdated emissions standards for cargo vessels -- a move that could significantly improve air quality. "Thereshould be more stringent standards," said Eivind Vagslid, an environmental official with the InternationalMaritime Organization, which began considering a revision of its 1997 regulations in April. "The levels of the17 March 2013 Page 145 of 483 ProQuestpast were set quite leniently to get nations to ratify them and to make them technically achievable." Over theyears, the world fleet of cargo vessels has emerged as a leading source of sulfur oxides, particulates andnitrogen oxides. Many ships emit as much exhaust per day as 12,000 cars. The emissions have been linked toglobal warming, respiratory illnesses and premature deaths. In the Los Angeles area, studies show that dieselexhaust from trucks, locomotives, heavy equipment and ships causes cancer and is responsible for 70% ofpollution- related health problems and hundreds of deaths every year. If tougher maritime organizationstandards are adopted, they could reduce a large source of air pollution for the Los Angeles- Long Beachharbor complex, Santa Barbara and Ventura counties, which are next to a main shipping lane, and Bay Areaports such as Oakland. Almost 5,800 ships called at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach last year,releasing roughly 14,000 tons of air pollutants. In 2004, more than 7,200 ships sailed past Santa Barbara andVentura counties, releasing almost 16,000 tons of pollutants. Air quality officials in Santa Barbara and Venturacounties fear that projected growth in ship traffic will erase gains they have made in cutting pollution fromonshore sources such as automobiles, manufacturers and businesses. "It's good to see the talks are going on,"said Tom Murphy, a manager at the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District. "The current IMOstandards are nonstandards." Based in London, the International Maritime Organization develops internationalstandards for ship safety, security, vessel design, environmental protection and crew training. It has 166member nations, including the United States. The agency's rules are enforced by port authorities, coast guardsand maritime agencies around the world. The organization could adopt revised standards as early as next July.Rather than wait for the maritime association to act, port officials in Los Angeles and Long Beach have forgedahead with their own clean-air plan -- a draft of which was announced at a June 28 news conference. The $2-billion, five-year proposal seeks to reduce sooty diesel emissions from cargo ships, trains and trucks by morethan 50%. Harbor officials hope to achieve those goals by specifying conditions in terminal leases, revising portrules and adjusting harbor fees as an incentive. The plan, expected to be approved by both harbor commissionsin September, calls for international cargo ships to use low-sulfur fuel within 20 nautical miles of local ports andto cut nitrogen oxide emissions by 45%. Meanwhile, the maritime agency will continue formulating newemissions standards to significantly reduce sulfur oxides, particulates and nitrogen oxides from oceangoingvessels. Tougher measures to limit air pollution from incineration of shipboard waste and from tanker operations-- such as the loading and unloading of crude oil, petroleum products and hazardous chemicals -- also are onthe agenda. For the first time, Vagslid said, the IMO will consider regulating particulates and whether to requireships built before 2000 to retrofit their main engines with air pollution controls, such as scrubbers and catalyticconverters. The current standards apply only to new ships and those being refitted with new engines. Vagslidsaid the effort is the result of pressure from European nations interested in improving the maritime agency'scurrent fuel and emissions standards, which have been widely viewed as ineffective. Those regulations wereformulated in 1997, but it took eight years for member nations to ratify them. They finally went into effect in May2005. The 1997 regulations set the sulfur content for ship fuel at 4.5% -- noticeably above the 3% sulfur contentof fuel generally available worldwide. The current International Maritime Organization standards also call for a25% to 30% reduction in nitrogen oxides in new engines placed in ships starting in 2000. But environmentalistsand the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency question whether those regulations will be effective. "No onetakes these regulations seriously," said Teri Shore, a campaign director for Bluewater Network, anenvironmental group involved with marine issues. "Ship air pollution is growing, and growing faster than otherpollution sources." The 1997 rules, however, allow ratifying nations to establish special zones with morestringent sulfur standards for fuel. Two have been set up, in the North Sea and the Baltic Sea. The UnitedStates, which is close to ratifying the 1997 regulations, is studying such a zone for North America. Becauseshipping is a global industry, there is widespread agreement among maritime organization member states toestablish uniform standards. But the agency's proceedings are complicated by various competing interests: shipowners, regulatory agencies and maritime nations with differing views about how far air quality standards should17 March 2013 Page 146 of 483 ProQuestgo. Some IMO member states are Third World countries with ship registries that make it possible for vesselowners to avoid taxes, labor laws and the tougher regulations of developed nations. Political pressure, however,has been mounting around the globe to have the maritime organization take a tougher stance on air pollutionfrom main engines. EPA officials say they want to see significant reductions in emissions from foreign-flaggedvessels and regulations for engines on older ships. "We want IMO standards that reflect the EPA's view ontechnology and limits," said Margo Oge, the agency's director of transportation and air quality. In April, themonth the IMO talks began, the International Assn. of Ports and Harbors called on the organization to establishmore stringent air quality standards. "Unfortunately, the IMO, because it works on a consensus basis, can fallprey to the lowest common denominator," said Geraldine Knatz, director of the Port of Los Angeles. "But thereare too many things happening worldwide this time to have the IMO sit back and do nothing." The talks also areovershadowed by recent developments at Maersk Inc., the world's largest shipping line. In May, the Danishcompany announced that all of its ships would switch to clean-burning low- sulfur fuel within 24 miles ofCalifornia ports. Maersk further revealed that it is testing pollution controls for ship engines that can reducenitrogen oxide emissions by roughly 90%. "Maersk can put pressure on the proceedings," Vagslid said. "Itshows that shipping lines can be profitable and protect the environment." Port officials in Los Angeles and LongBeach questioned whether the IMO could develop new standards soon enough and strong enough to satisfyport officials and state air quality regulators. Though harbor authorities don't have the legal authority to regulateforeign-flagged ships, they are devising alternative strategies to deal with the vessels while they are in port.Besides the proposed clean-air plan, both ports have established speed-reduction programs to cut emissionsfrom ships coming into port. In addition, both ports are beginning to supply onshore sources of electricity toships so they won't have to run their auxiliary engines. "We'd like to see voluntary efforts as much as we can,"said Bob Kanter, director of planning and environmental affairs for the Port of Long Beach. "We've got toconvince terminal operators and shipping lines that it is in their best interests to do these things." Credit: TimesStaff WriterSubject: Air pollution; Emission standards; PortsLocation: Los Angeles California, Long Beach CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Port of Long Beach-California; NAICS: 488310; Name: Port of Los Angeles;NAICS: 488310; Name: International Maritime Organization; NAICS: 926120Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Jul 6, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: Newspapers17 March 2013 Page 147 of 483 ProQuestLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422105116Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 72 of 213Once Rivals, Local Ports Clear Air in Partnership; With a joint plan to stem pollution, Long Beach andL.A. harbors chart a new cooperative course.Author: Newton, JimPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 04 July 2006: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: With [S. David Freeman]'s enthusiastic endorsement, the commission hired the former No. 2 official ofthe Long Beach port, Geraldine Knatz, as executive director of the Los Angeles port. In years past, that mighthave contributed to the rivalry. But in this case, Knatz, who took over the Los Angeles port in January, hasserved as a bridge. Knatz downplays her role in producing the new comity between her current and formeremployers -- she worked at the Port of Long Beach for 23 years before moving back across the harbor to LosAngeles, where she had worked from 1977 to 1981 -- saying that there were moments of cooperation before hermove. The ports, for instance, worked together in the development of the so-called Intermodal ContainerTransfer Facility in the 1980s and also on the Alameda Corridor in the 1990s. But those strands of commoninterest were overshadowed by rivalry as the two ports competed for customers and sniped at one anotheracross the bridge between them. From potshots to partnership (includes MAP); CREDIT: Los Angeles Times;LEADERS: Geraldine Knatz, left, the L.A. port's executive director, and S. David Freeman, L.A. harborcommission president.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Bob Chamberlin Los Angeles Times; HUSTLE AND BUSTLE: ThePort of Long Beach, above, the nation's second-largest commercial port, and the Port of Los Angeles haveagreed to require that ships, trains and trucks that use the ports reduce air pollution by more than 50% inexchange for growth incentives. The L.A. complex is the nation's largest commercial port.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Mel Melcon Los Angeles TimesLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: It was just over a year ago that the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach were engaged in a testystandoff with far-reaching implications for Southern California: Members of their governing commissions refusedto attend each other's meetings and could not even agree on a baseline year for analyzing pollution caused bytheir facilities. Last week, those same leaders announced a joint air-quality plan that reflected a significantly newapproach to stemming pollution and profoundly changed the relationship between the historic antagonists thatcommand the nation's first- and second-largest commercial harbors. Many factors have contributed to the turnfrom competition to cooperation. The rising influence and changing views of labor, the growing power ofenvironmental interests and the shifting winds of local politics all have played a part. The result, said leaders of17 March 2013 Page 148 of 483 ProQuestboth ports and some outsiders, is a newly minted cooperation between two entities whose leaders haveregarded each other with suspicion for decades. Indeed, when the two commissions met a few months ago, itwas the first such joint session since 1929. Those leaders now are attempting to chart a common course inenforcing pollution controls and other regulations on their customers -- one key plank of which was unveiled lastweek with their far-reaching proposal to reduce pollution from trains, ships and trucks that use the port by morethan 50%. Among the proposed requirements: Ships that use either the Long Beach or Los Angeles port willhave to use cleaner fuels and electricity rather than diesel when tied up; in return, the two ports promiseexpansions that will allow shippers to increase their business in the region. "Historically," Los Angeles MayorAntonio Villaraigosa said last week, "what we've been doing with Long Beach ... was in competition." BobFoster, the new mayor of Long Beach, agreed: "There has been some tension." That tension reflects thecompetition between the two ports and the different place each holds in its city. Los Angeles' port, the nation'slargest, encompasses 43 miles of waterfront and features 26 massive cargo terminals. It is a bustling and oftengritty complex, through which moved nearly 7.5 million 20- foot equivalent containers last year. But it isappended to the rest of the city by the thin band of Los Angeles that reaches down to the coast. Long Beach, bycontrast, is nestled directly next to its booming port, which shipped 6.7 million of those same containers in 2005.It covers 3,200 acres and is responsible for about one of every eight jobs in the city. Together, the shippingcenters generate more than 500,000 Southern California jobs, dwarfing other major industries in the region. Butthe ports also cough up pollution: Trucks stream in and out of the complexes, and the cargo ships that moorthere bellow thick smoke, heavy with particulates. A single tanker that burns dirty fuel can produce as much airpollution as 12,000 cars. That pollution wafts across the entire region, with Long Beach being especially hardhit.Faced with growing community concern about that pollution and with the realization that neither port, actingalone, could arrest it, the two began to send out cooperative feelers last year. Officials and others said one earlyand important move was Villaraigosa's selection of S. David Freeman, formerly the head of the Los AngelesDepartment of Water and Power and a fervent environmentalist, to lead Los Angeles' Board of HarborCommissioners. Villaraigosa staffed the balance of the commission with advocates for labor, the environmentand the community. With Freeman's enthusiastic endorsement, the commission hired the former No. 2 official ofthe Long Beach port, Geraldine Knatz, as executive director of the Los Angeles port. In years past, that mighthave contributed to the rivalry. But in this case, Knatz, who took over the Los Angeles port in January, hasserved as a bridge. Richard Steinke, once Knatz's boss at the Port of Long Beach, said he viewed herdeparture as a loss to Long Beach but a boon to regional cooperation. "It was our contribution to the greatergood," he said. The colorful Freeman, who at 80 still sports a cowboy hat and speaks in a Tennessee drawl,describes Knatz as "110 pounds soaking wet" and admires her work ethic: "She gets up at 4:45 in the morning,and kicks butt all day." By all accounts, Knatz has energized the Los Angeles port and solidified its relationswith her former employer in Long Beach. Knatz downplays her role in producing the new comity between hercurrent and former employers -- she worked at the Port of Long Beach for 23 years before moving back acrossthe harbor to Los Angeles, where she had worked from 1977 to 1981 -- saying that there were moments ofcooperation before her move. The ports, for instance, worked together in the development of the so-calledIntermodal Container Transfer Facility in the 1980s and also on the Alameda Corridor in the 1990s. But thosestrands of common interest were overshadowed by rivalry as the two ports competed for customers and snipedat one another across the bridge between them. The demand for a comprehensive program on air quality,however, forced the two entities to deal with each other. "One could gain a competitive advantage over theother if we had different standards," said Steinke, executive director of the Long Beach port. Instead, the newrules will apply to any company doing business with either port. And the effect of union participation may spreadthe deal's impact even further, as leaders of the longshoremen's union have pledged to pressure other WestCoast ports to adopt similar regulations. There, too, Villaraigosa's mark is evident, as he helped persuade unionleaders that tougher environmental standards were important to their workers, since they handle the cargo at17 March 2013 Page 149 of 483 ProQuestthe ports and thus are the people most often affected by pollution there. After this week's announcement of theair quality regulations, labor was quick to offer its support. The proposals, International Longshore andWarehouse Union President James Spinosa said in a statement, deserve to be "replicated at ports all along theWest Coast, throughout the U.S. and the world." The coalition of labor and environmental interests is a hard oneto beat in Southern California's current political climate, where the two camps hold the best cards of anyone atthe table. Against them, business forces have a harder time being heard. But in this case, the shippers' optionsare limited. In the case of the ports, for instance, shippers could move goods through Oakland or Seattle, bothmajor West Coast ports. But those facilities are crowded and much farther from commercially vital SouthernCalifornia. Instead, long-reticent shippers are giving in to the combined approach of Los Angeles and LongBeach. Only last month, the largest shipping company in the world, Maersk Inc., announced that its vessels thatserve California ports would begin burning cleaner fuel. Maersk, which operates the largest container terminal atthe Los Angeles port, said it was initiating tests of other air quality improvements. The company's move broke itfrom the rest of the industry and offered the potential for gigantic reductions in emissions at the ports. Thecleaner fuels produce 90% less sulfur oxide and 73% less particulate matter than the dirty fuels they arereplacing. Moreover, the Long Beach and Los Angeles port operators have attempted to sweeten the deal witha gift to shippers and big labor: Whereas dirty ports are difficult to expand -- neighbors object, local air qualityregulations interfere -- cleaner ones may be able to grow, supplying more space for goods and more jobs forthose who load and unload ships. "Neither port has certified an EIR [Environmental Impact Report] for a majorproject for six years," Knatz said. That stasis has been bad for business as well as labor, as both benefit from agrowing port. Because community opposition has formed around growth that contributes to pollution, the onlyroute toward more business is to do it more cleanly, Knatz and others said. Altogether, those developmentshave left longtime observers of the ports impressed by the recent turn of events. State Sen. Alan Lowenthal (DLongBeach) has been working in and around the ports for more than a decade. In 1992, when he walked hisLong Beach district in search of votes for his first City Council campaign, neighbors complained of soot on theirwindows and voiced fear over the health implications of the air they breathed. He won that race, and since haswatched as the two ports fought through lawsuits and over business, elbowing for the honor of being the biggestand cutting deals to make that happen, often at the expense of the other. But recent events seem more basedon a common conception of the ports' mission and responsibility, he said. They suggest the glimmers of realchange, not just another ephemeral agreement. "They have come to realize," Lowenthal said, "that they eithersink or swim together." * (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX) From potshots to partnership Los Angeles operates thenation's largest port, with Long Beach second. Taken together, the side-by-side shipping centers rank as theworld's fifth-busiest complex behind Singapore, Hong Kong, Shanghai and Shenzhen, China.*--* Los Angeles Long Beach Size7,500 acres 3,200 acres 270 berths80 berths Top trading China, Japan, Taiwan, China, Japan,partners South Korea, Thailand South Korea, Taiwan,Malaysia Top imports Furniture, apparel, toys Machinery,electrical and sporting goods, machinery,vehicles, vehicles and vehicle toys and sportsparts, electronics equipment, bedding Top exports Paperproducts, Machinery, plastic, fabrics, petand electrical machinery, animal feed,17 March 2013 Page 150 of 483 ProQuestIllustration Caption: GRAPHIC: From potshots to partnership (includes MAP); CREDIT: Los Angeles Times;PHOTO: LEADERS: Geraldine Knatz, left, the L.A. port's executive director, and S. David Freeman, L.A. harborcommission president.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Bob Chamberlin Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: HUSTLE ANDBUSTLE: The Port of Long Beach, above, the nation's second-largest commercial port, and the Port of LosAngeles have agreed to require that ships, trains and trucks that use the ports reduce air pollution by more than50% in exchange for growth incentives. The L.A. complex is the nation's largest commercial port.;PHOTOGRAPHER: Mel Melcon Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Air pollution; Ports; Politics; Environmental protection; Emissions controlLocation: Los Angeles California, Long Beach CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Port of Los Angeles; NAICS: 488310; Name: Port of Long Beach-California;NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Jul 4, 2006Year: 2006Section: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422065251Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 73 of 213synthetic vehicles, organic resins, fruits andchemicals vegetables__ Sources: Port of Los Angeles, Port of Long Beach17 March 2013 Page 151 of 483 ProQuestUnited on clean portsPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 03 July 2006: B.14.ProQuest document linkAbstract: EVERYONE IN LOS ANGELES may breathe a little easier someday thanks to the clean-air planproposed last week by the ports of L.A. and Long Beach. The remarkable plan for the first time unites both portswith the state and federal regulators that oversee air quality, putting them all on the same page of a five-yeareffort to cut diesel particulate emissions in half. The ports are the biggest sources of pollution in Los Angeles,and diesel emissions have been clearly linked to cancer and other ailments. The plan also would significantlycut emissions of other toxins and greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: EVERYONE IN LOS ANGELES may breathe a little easier someday thanks to the clean-air planproposed last week by the ports of L.A. and Long Beach. The remarkable plan for the first time unites both portswith the state and federal regulators that oversee air quality, putting them all on the same page of a five-yeareffort to cut diesel particulate emissions in half. The ports are the biggest sources of pollution in Los Angeles,and diesel emissions have been clearly linked to cancer and other ailments. The plan also would significantlycut emissions of other toxins and greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. Of course, it's a cinch todraft a plan; much harder will be coming up with the money to implement and enforce it. Particularly hard hit willbe the truckers who pick up containers at the ports and shuttle them across the state or nation. The plan callsfor phasing out older, more polluting trucks, replacing them with vehicles that run on clean diesel or alternativefuels. This will cost an estimated $1.7 billion over five years, of which the ports plan to kick in about $200million. The rest will be paid by the truckers or their employers, who will be encouraged to retrofit their vehiclesthrough incentives -- such as express "green lanes" for clean trucks -- or penalties, such as higher fees for dirtytrucks. Shippers and rail operators also will face onerous restrictions and costs. Container ships, the biggestsource of emissions at the ports, will have to switch to low-sulfur fuel while operating in port, slow down whilewithin 40 nautical miles and either plug in to shore power while idling or use new technologies to reduce theiremissions. Railroads will have to switch to clean locomotives. And the ports and private operators will faceheavy costs to replace harbor craft and cargo-hauling equipment with cleaner models. That's one good reasonvoters should take a careful look at the transportation infrastructure bond coming up on the November ballot.The bond would include $1 billion to improve air quality at the ports. As for the shippers and railroads, they'll beoffered incentives - - or face penalties -- just like the truckers to ensure compliance. That will doubtless createplenty of grumbling, but not all the news is bad for business. Many of these companies have long sought toexpand but, nervous about lawsuits or trouble with regulators, the ports haven't certified an environmental studyfor a new project in six years. Now that all sides have signed on to the clean-air plan, these projects finally havea chance to get off the ground. As long as it's clean, harbor business can continue to grow and flourish.Subject: Ports; Emissions control; Air pollution; Public health; State regulation; Federal regulation; Shippingindustry; Editorials -- PortsLocation: Los Angeles California, Long Beach CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.14Number of pages: 0Publication year: 200617 March 2013 Page 152 of 483 ProQuestPublication date: Jul 3, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Editorial Pages DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: EditorialProQuest document ID: 422186301Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 74 of 213Shipping Line Acts for Cleaner Air at L.A. Harbor; Maersk, with the busiest container terminal, breakswith the industry by saying all of its vessels calling at state ports will use low-sulfur fuel.Author: Weikel, DanPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 27 May 2006: B.4.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Maersk plans to shift from dirty bunker fuel to low-sulfur fuel in all of its 37 cargo ships that serveCalifornia ports. Already, 70% of the company's vessels are switching to the cleaner-burning fuel 24 miles fromport. In contrast, the sulfur content of the cleaner-burning fuel is 0.2%. Maersk, which is working withenvironmental engineers at UC Riverside, estimates that the change could reduce sulfur oxides by 92%,particulate matter by 73% and nitrogen oxides by 10%. Along with the clean-fuel initiative, Maersk has outfittedone of its ships with catalytic converters that have removed up to 90% of nitrogen oxides during testing. [GenePentimonti] said the system, which cost about $300,000 to install, is not ready for widespread application.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Bucking the maritime industry, the largest shipping line in the world took a critical step Friday towardreducing air pollution in Los Angeles Harbor by vowing to use clean-burning, low-sulfur fuel in all its cargovessels that call at California ports. Officials for Maersk Inc., which operates the busiest container terminal inLos Angeles, also announced that the company has been testing new pollution controls for cargo ships thathave the potential to greatly reduce nitrogen oxides, a key component of smog. Cargo ships -- some of whichdischarge more exhaust per day than 12,000 cars -- are responsible for much of the air pollution in the ports ofLos Angeles and Long Beach. Largely unregulated, the world's fleet of cargo vessels has emerged as a leading17 March 2013 Page 153 of 483 ProQuestsource of nitrogen oxides and sulfur oxides, which have been linked to global warming, respiratory illness andpremature deaths. "Protecting the environment where we live and work is a priority at Maersk," said GenePentimonti, a senior vice president for the company. "This program will provide immediate benefits to the city ofLos Angeles and the state of California at no cost to the taxpayer." Maersk plans to shift from dirty bunker fuelto low-sulfur fuel in all of its 37 cargo ships that serve California ports. Already, 70% of the company's vesselsare switching to the cleaner-burning fuel 24 miles from port. Bunker fuel is a remnant of the refining process forgasoline and diesel fuel. With a sulfur content up to 3%, it is so dirty that its emissions can legally contain 3,000times more sulfur than the fuel used in new diesel trucks. In contrast, the sulfur content of the cleaner-burningfuel is 0.2%. Maersk, which is working with environmental engineers at UC Riverside, estimates that the changecould reduce sulfur oxides by 92%, particulate matter by 73% and nitrogen oxides by 10%. The world sulfurstandard set by the International Maritime Organization is 4.5%, a limit critics view as useless because theaverage sulfur content of bunker fuel is about 3%. The maritime organization, which is composed of the world'sshipping nations, is considering a revision of its air pollution regulations this year. Pentimonti said that low-sulfurfuel is about twice as expensive as bunker fuel and that the program has cost Maersk about $2 million to $3million so far. Along with the clean-fuel initiative, Maersk has outfitted one of its ships with catalytic convertersthat have removed up to 90% of nitrogen oxides during testing. Pentimonti said the system, which cost about$300,000 to install, is not ready for widespread application. The International Maritime Organization's currentregulations call for a 30% reduction in nitrogen oxide from new ships or those being refitted with new engines.Maersk's voluntary actions represent a significant break with the maritime industry, which has been questioningthe availability of low-sulfur fuel and the potential cost of outfitting cargo ships with emission-control technology.Recently, shipping lines threatened to sue the California Air Resources Board after it adopted plans in April toregulate emissions from auxiliary engines, which are used on ships to generate electricity while in port. "Thisraises the bar for everyone," said Geraldine Knatz, director of the Port of Los Angeles. "Maersk has gone outand done this on its own without anyone forcing it upon them. It's above and beyond what's now beingdiscussed." In the last several years, port officials, state regulators and environmental groups have beenformulating plans to greatly improve air quality throughout the Los Angeles-Long Beach harbor complex, whichhandles more than 40% of the nation's international trade. They are especially concerned because cargovolumes in both ports are expected to double -- maybe triple -- in the next 20 years. The proposals apply toauxiliary engines and heavy equipment powered by diesel engines, including trucks, cranes, cargo-handlingvehicles, locomotives and small craft such as commercial fishing boats and charter vessels. Maersk, which ispart of A.P. Moller-Maersk in Denmark, announced its air pollution initiative during a news conference at Pier400, the giant terminal it operates in Los Angeles Harbor. Attending the event were Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa,state Sen. Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach) many government officials and state air quality regulators. "For theports to grow appropriately and to be the gateway for the nation, we've got to grow green. We've got to growsmart," Villaraigosa said. "By converting to cleaner fuels, Maersk is demonstrating bold leadership."Environmental groups, including the Coalition for Clean Air and the Natural Resources Defense Council, alsopraised Maersk's efforts to lead the industry in controlling air pollution from ships. "For five years, we had to suethe Port of Los Angeles to get any measures implemented," said Julie Masters, an attorney for the naturalresources group. "Now, the biggest shipping line in world is stepping up to the plate and putting low-sulfur fuelin their main engines. Maersk is proving the naysayers wrong." Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Maritime industry; Environmental protection; Air pollution; ShipsLocation: Los Angeles CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: A P Moller-Maersk Group; NAICS: 551112Publication title: Los Angeles Times17 March 2013 Page 154 of 483 ProQuestPages: B.4Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: May 27, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422085035Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 75 of 213THE NATION; On a Clear Day, You Can't See the Pollution; Views are improving at some nationalparks as ozone is worsening. Grand Canyon, Sequoia and Death Valley are among those affected.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 23 May 2006: A.5.ProQuest document linkAbstract: New National Park Service data show that while visibility at some parks in the West has improved,ozone pollution has worsened significantly between 1995 and 2004 at 10 of them: Canyonlands, Craters of theMoon, Death Valley, Glacier, Grand Canyon, Mesa Verde, North Cascades, Rocky Mountain, Sequoia-KingsCanyon and Yellowstone. "The federal government's own monitors show that America's crown jewels likeYellowstone, Rocky Mountain and Grand Canyon national parks are at risk from worsening air pollution," saidEnvironmental Defense senior attorney Vickie Patton. "We need thoughtful clean- air action to protect thisprecious legacy for our children and grandchildren." Ozone is a colorless, odorless pollutant, making it possiblefor visibility to improve sharply in Yellowstone National Park, for instance, even as ozone levels climb steadily.Brown haze and other visible smog has decreased in many parks because of a 1999 Environmental ProtectionAgency edict, [John Bunyack] said, which has led to stiffer controls on industries that produce visible particulatepollution.17 March 2013 Page 155 of 483 ProQuestLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Views are getting better at some of America's national parks, but that doesn't mean visitors willnecessarily breathe easier. New National Park Service data show that while visibility at some parks in the Westhas improved, ozone pollution has worsened significantly between 1995 and 2004 at 10 of them: Canyonlands,Craters of the Moon, Death Valley, Glacier, Grand Canyon, Mesa Verde, North Cascades, Rocky Mountain,Sequoia-Kings Canyon and Yellowstone. The park service did not publicize the new findings, posted on itswebsite, but a national environmental group said that, with summer visits by millions of Americans approaching,it was important to get the word out. Breathing ozone can cause asthma attacks, lung inflammation and otherrespiratory illnesses. Ozone pollution also damages plants, including giant sequoias, other native vegetationand crops. "The federal government's own monitors show that America's crown jewels like Yellowstone, RockyMountain and Grand Canyon national parks are at risk from worsening air pollution," said EnvironmentalDefense senior attorney Vickie Patton. "We need thoughtful clean- air action to protect this precious legacy forour children and grandchildren." John Bunyack of the National Park Service's air resources division, based inDenver, said the report showed various trends in air quality, depending on what was being measured. "Someparks are going up in some areas, and some are improving in other areas," he said. "There are some areasgetting worse and worse. Most people think they're going to go to a national park and experience clean, fresh,clear air, and that is not the case in many places. We're trying very hard to improve it, and I think we're makingprogress in some areas." Ozone is a colorless, odorless pollutant, making it possible for visibility to improvesharply in Yellowstone National Park, for instance, even as ozone levels climb steadily. Brown haze and othervisible smog has decreased in many parks because of a 1999 Environmental Protection Agency edict, Bunyacksaid, which has led to stiffer controls on industries that produce visible particulate pollution. But Patton andBunyack said that huge increases in oil and gas drilling in interior western states -- along with emissions fromcoal-fired power plants, cars and other sources -- were causing ozone to drift across some of the nation's mostfamous parks. "We don't have any control over external sources," Bunyack said. "Although we do contributewith traffic ... most of the sources are outside the parks." Environmental Defense and three other groups havesued the federal government in U.S. District Court to try to force air quality improvement changes in the PowderRiver Basin in Wyoming and Montana. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management has authorized 33 million acresof new oil and gas development there, with as many as 165,000 new coal-bed methane wells, despite testimonyfrom other federal and state agencies that the project would lead to serious air pollution at Yellowstone, GrandTeton, Theodore Roosevelt, Wind Cave and other parks. "There are immediate, cost-effective controls to limitpollution from the massive oil and gas activity across the West," Patton said. "They are proven, they're used in anumber of technologies, but the BLM is not asking any of the proponents ... to thoughtfully mitigate the seriousair pollution impacts." In addition to parks with worsening conditions, Joshua Tree National Park was amongthose whose unhealthy air pollution levels remained constant. The full report is available atwww2.nature.air. Illustration Caption: PHOTO: LONG VIEW: Grand Canyon National Park is amongthose where visibility has improved but ozone has worsened. Here, a tourist watches the sunset from HopiPoint.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Paul Connors Associated Press Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Environmental impact; National parks; Ozone; Air pollutionLocation: United States, USCompany / organization: Name: National Park Service-US; NAICS: 924120Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.5Number of pages: 017 March 2013 Page 156 of 483 ProQuestPublication year: 2006Publication date: May 23, 2006Year: 2006Section: Main News; Part A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422063698Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 76 of 213Suit Demands GE Modify Its Romoland Power PlantAuthor: Cho, Cynthia HPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 26 Apr 2006: B.5.ProQuest document linkAbstract: "GE says the plant is the latest and greatest in technology, but we can't let them set a precedent thatincreased pollution is OK," said [Marc C. Joseph], who also represents the California Unions for Reliable Energyand other environmental groups. The suit alleges that the Energy Center, a GE subsidiary, will remain inviolation of the Clean Air Act unless it modifies the plant or stops construction. The South Coast Air QualityManagement District is also named as a defendant for issuing the construction permit.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: A coalition of environmental groups and a local school district filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday to forceGeneral Electric to modify a $1-billion power plant under construction in Romoland, an unincorporated area thatalready has one of the highest levels of particulate pollution in California. Romoland Elementary School, whichhas about 800 students, is about 1,100 feet from the Inland Empire Energy Center in Riverside County. "Weagreed to participate in this action to remedy the situation so that the final power plant built there doesn't poseany safety issues or harm to our students or families in the area," said Roland Skumawitz, superintendent of theRomoland School District. Marc C. Joseph, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said the plant would release triple theamount of downwind particulate matter -- soot, smoke and chemical pollutants -- allowed by federal law. "GEsays the plant is the latest and greatest in technology, but we can't let them set a precedent that increased17 March 2013 Page 157 of 483 ProQuestpollution is OK," said Joseph, who also represents the California Unions for Reliable Energy and otherenvironmental groups. The suit alleges that the Energy Center, a GE subsidiary, will remain in violation of theClean Air Act unless it modifies the plant or stops construction. The South Coast Air Quality ManagementDistrict is also named as a defendant for issuing the construction permit. Dennis Murphy, spokesman for GEEnergy, said the plant was "a state-of-the-art, advanced gas turbine technology that has unprecedentedefficiency levels and reduced emissions." Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Litigation; Air pollution; Electric power plants; Area planning & development -- Romoland CaliforniaLocation: Romoland CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: General Electric Co; Ticker: GE; NAICS: 332510, 334290, 334512, 334518;DUNS: 00-136-7960Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.5Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Apr 26, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422095091Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 77 of 213A Trade Boom's Unintended Costs; Neighborhoods such as West Long Beach seek a balancebetween a thriving port and health concerns.Author: Wilson, Janet17 March 2013 Page 158 of 483 ProQuestPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 23 Apr 2006: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: They say a new statewide emissions-reduction plan approved by the California Air Resources Boardon Thursday, meant to minimize pollution caused by the skyrocketing goods movement, is unfunded, containsno new mandatory controls of polluters and would still result in an estimated 800 premature deaths andhundreds of thousands of lost school and work days each year from exposure to diesel soot, ozone and otherpollutants. Other than injurious particulate matter emitted by trucks, which is expected to drop as new state andfederal standards kick in, the largest sources of harmful pollution from goods movement are the 1,900 oceanvessels that steam into the ports each year, powered by filthy, low-cost "bunker fuel," aging main engines andauxiliary engines they use to idle at port while unloading. RISKY PLAYGROUND: A power plant complexoverlooks the playground of Hudson Elementary in Long Beach, where pollution- related ailments are common.;PHOTOGRAPHER: Rick Loomis Los Angeles Times; HAZARD: Children play tetherball during recess atHudson Elementary School. Directly behind the recreation area, hundreds of trucks pass by on their way to andfrom the Port of Long Beach.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Rick Loomis Los Angeles TimesLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: On a sunny spring day at Hudson Elementary School in Long Beach, the gleeful shrieks of children onthe playground almost drowned out the dull roar of truck traffic. A third-grader raced into school nurse SuzanneArnold's office. "Ambrosia's chest is hurting, she's lying down," she announced. The nurse sighed as she tuggedout an old green wheelchair. "Ambrosia is one of my regulars. Last week, she had an asthma attack on theschool bus and had to be taken to the emergency room." Hudson Elementary is tucked in the crook ofCalifornia's busiest industrial arm. A few miles from the booming ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, itsplayground backs up to the truck-clogged Terminal Island Freeway, flaring refineries and double-stacked freighttrains powered by belching locomotives. More than 40% of retail goods imported to the U.S. funnel past thispoor but tidy neighborhood. Soon, a global truck and train off-loading center may be built less than 1,000 feetfrom the schoolyard. It is designed to speed up freight transport and improve regional air quality by pullingdiesel trucks off the freeways, and would add 1 million more truck trips a year to local streets. "What's beingproposed is sacrificing this neighborhood for the greater good," said Patrick Kennedy, director of the GreaterLong Beach Interfaith Community Organization. Community activists worry that scenario may be repeated alongshipping corridors across the state, from West Oakland and Roseville north of Sacramento to Commerce andthe Inland Empire. They say a new statewide emissions-reduction plan approved by the California AirResources Board on Thursday, meant to minimize pollution caused by the skyrocketing goods movement, isunfunded, contains no new mandatory controls of polluters and would still result in an estimated 800 prematuredeaths and hundreds of thousands of lost school and work days each year from exposure to diesel soot, ozoneand other pollutants. The freight transportation corridors "are not located in isolated industrial areas, but in factpass through hundreds of cities, millions of residential homes," Jesse Marquez, executive director of theCoalition for a Safe Environment, said in a recent speech in Wilmington. "It is the local communities that dealwith daily bumper-to- bumper traffic congestion ... that have to breathe the diesel fuel exhaust from ships,trucks, trains and yard equipment every day. It is our children that are suffering from an asthma crisis.... It is ourfriends and family members who are dying." Studies back him up. Students less than a quarter of a mile frommajor freeways are 89% more likely to suffer from asthma. Children in Long Beach and other industrial citiesare three times more likely to suffer decreased lung development. Workers at ports and freight yards and arearesidents experience higher cancer risks and heart disease. "Californians who live near ports, rail yards andalong high traffic corridors are subsidizing the goods-movement sector with their health," said Andrea Hricko,associate professor of preventive medicine at the Keck School of Medicine at USC, which has done several ofthe studies. Hricko noted that the air board's own study estimated 2,400 people die each year in some of17 March 2013 Page 159 of 483 ProQuestCalifornia's poorest communities from causes tied to goods-movement air pollution. "That constitutes a publichealth crisis. Can you imagine if 2,400 deaths annually were attributed to avian flu? And if state officials said,'We have a plan to reduce that to 800 deaths, in 15 years?' Every expert in the world would be working on it.These communities deserve the same treatment." California air board members and port and industry officialsacknowledge that eliminating "toxic hot spot" communities is a stubborn challenge, but say that the technologyto reduce much of the pollution exists or is rapidly being developed. "We need to do as much as possible asquickly as possible. Our whole plan is structured to do that," said air board executive officer CatherineWitherspoon. The proposed loading facility behind Hudson Elementary is a case in point, she said. Stateofficials say the facility is "vital for relieving congestion and reducing emissions." In exchange, rail officials havepledged to make the yard "green," with electric cranes and other equipment emitting no soot or other airpollution. As for the aging, short-haul trucks that would ferry goods between the docks and the site,Witherspoon and her staff said up to $400 million in public funds should be allocated to buy 10,000 cleanreplacement trucks. But trucking officials say the cost would actually be $1.2 billion. Even if new trucks arebought, Witherspoon acknowledged that "there will always be some residual emissions.... We can bring the riskdown substantially, I'm hesitant to say to completely acceptable levels, but to substantially lower levels." Back atthe nurse's office, Ambrosia, a slight 9-year-old with long, dark pigtails, slumped at the table. Her skin wasashen and she breathed in shallow bursts. "I can't see," she said, her brow furrowed. Arnold handed her anasthma inhaler. "Were you playing tetherball again?" she asked. The girl nodded as she puffed. "She lovestetherball, but when she plays, she can't breathe," Arnold said. Outside, afternoon tractor-trailer traffic thickenedon the freeway. Last year, a volunteer group of mothers did traffic counts next to the school with USCresearchers, tallying 580 trucks in an hour. Goods movement into Southern California is exploding by 1.4 millioncontainers a year and is expected to triple by 2020, if infrastructure can be built. After hearing from China andother Asian trading partners that the flow of DVDs, sneakers and other goods was bottlenecked in SouthernCalifornia, and being confronted with mounting evidence that air pollution cuts lives short and costs billions inhealthcare and lost productivity, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger 18 months ago ordered his business,transportation and environmental agencies to draft a joint plan. The goal is to improve the flow of goods whilerolling back harmful air pollution to 2001 levels -- a target the state must meet under approaching federal CleanAir Act deadlines. The emission reduction plan approved last week was the first step. A second plan onstreamlining goods movement is due out in June. But funding is up in the air. The governor's ambitiousinfrastructure bond proposal, which included $1 billion for air quality, failed to make it onto the June ballot, andits chances in November are uncertain. The air board's piece alone would cost $6 billion to $10 billion toimplement. Some legislators, led by Sen. Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), say a per-container fee of $30 to $60should be imposed on vessel operators and shippers. Foreign vessel operators, like interstate rail companies,say they are not subject to state or local law. State air officials have adopted controversial voluntary plans withrail companies to clean up dirty locomotives and reduce idling, and may consider similar agreements withmarine operators. Other than injurious particulate matter emitted by trucks, which is expected to drop as newstate and federal standards kick in, the largest sources of harmful pollution from goods movement are the 1,900ocean vessels that steam into the ports each year, powered by filthy, low-cost "bunker fuel," aging main enginesand auxiliary engines they use to idle at port while unloading. Environmentalists, including attorneys with theNatural Resources Defense Council, say the state has plenty of power to regulate foreign vessels, and theywant mandatory controls. The Port of Los Angeles, the nation's largest, is already quietly renegotiating leaseswith foreign-flagged companies to force cleanup and changes. Marine business groups are coming up with theirown plan, saying they would contribute $15 billion in start-up costs and new technology if they could establish avoluntary credit program that would require them to reduce emissions, but do it in market-based ways."Something needs to be done, and it needs to be done now," said Robert Wyman, an attorney with Latham&Watkins who is promoting the marine industry plan. He said neighborhoods like West Long Beach, where17 March 2013 Page 160 of 483 ProQuestHudson School is located, would benefit fastest because industry would make reductions first in public healthrisk zones identified by the air board. Many experts credit the new health studies, combined with vocal protestsby community groups, for successfully pushing industry and government officials to act. The studies show $19.5billion in costs annually to the state from deaths, lost workdays and healthcare costs. "Those studies were theimpetus for change.... We're beginning to look at the public health costs, and it's either pay now or pay later,"said Wally Baker of the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. Neighborhoods like West LongBeach are not only recipients of freight air pollution, but also home to the workforce that staffs the trucks,warehouses and other shipping jobs, he said. "The poorest communities have been the stomping grounds formost industrial facilities and most toxins. Because of the health studies ... and the growing political voice ... it'sbecoming socially unacceptable, and businesses in Southern California recognize that." But Baker said it willnever be possible to eliminate the serious health risks for Hudson Elementary and similar facilities. He said theschool should not have been built where it was, and should be moved. . Dr. Robert Sawyer, chairman of thestate air board, agreed: "Where schools are already located ... where there are legitimate health concerns ... wereally think relocation is an option." Easier said than done, said Long Beach Unified School District officials, whosaid that it is extremely difficult to find school sites in built-out urban environments, and that Hudson Elementaryand a new high school a block away serve their communities well. They hope to collaborate with industry, portand air officials to have an indoor gymnasium built at Hudson and perimeter air-quality monitors added. Theschool already goes into a lockdown mode -- keeping children inside -- several times a year when a nearbyrefinery flares excessively. South Coast Air Quality Management District officials recently approved pilot fundsto test an air-filtration system at the school. On the same day Ambrosia went to the nurse's office, four morestudents complained of chest pains. As she phoned the parent of one, the school nurse offered her own take onhealth conditions there. "I just have one question for all of them," Arnold said, referring to industry andgovernment officials. "Would they send their children to school here?" Illustration Caption: PHOTO: RISKYPLAYGROUND: A power plant complex overlooks the playground of Hudson Elementary in Long Beach, wherepollution- related ailments are common.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Rick Loomis Los Angeles Times; PHOTO:HAZARD: Children play tetherball during recess at Hudson Elementary School. Directly behind the recreationarea, hundreds of trucks pass by on their way to and from the Port of Long Beach.; PHOTOGRAPHER: RickLoomis Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Neighborhoods; Emissions control; Ports; Air pollution; Public healthLocation: Long Beach CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Port of Long Beach-California; NAICS: 488310; Name: Port of Los Angeles;NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Apr 23, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.17 March 2013 Page 161 of 483 ProQuestCountry of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422080599Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 78 of 213THE WORLD; Mexico City a Living Laboratory for Smog Study; Atmospheric scientists are studyingthe reach and repercussions of pollution in the capital, thought by many to have the dirtiest air inworld.Author: Enriquez, SamPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 31 Mar 2006: A.20.ProQuest document linkAbstract: [Sasha Madronich] and colleagues from U.S. and Mexican universities and labs have collectedenough pollution data to keep them busy for years -- compiling, comparing and double-checking. They expect toannounce their findings in 2007 or 2008, said Luisa Molina, an MIT chemist and one of the study's organizers.He spoke from the roof of the Technological University of Tecamac, where he pointed out some of the exoticgear that to the layman -- and probably to customs officials -- looked sinister: sun photometers, cloud cameras,ambient particulate samplers, aerosol samplers and devices to measure solar radiation, ozone, temperature,humidity, wind and particles smaller than the width of a human hair. Chika Minejima tinkered with her thermaldecomposition laser- induced fluorescence device set up on the roof of a nearby trailer. It looked like a prop in asci-fi thriller, but in fact measured trace amounts of a rare nitrate gas that neutralizes some pollutants overnight.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Whether this city has the most polluted air in the world is a matter of debate: Indignant Mexicanofficials lobbied to have it stricken from the Guinness Book of World Records this year after it held the title twoyears running. What's not in question is its attraction for the hundreds of atmospheric scientists who arewrapping up a monthlong study of the reach and repercussions of Mexico City's pollution: Where does it go?What does it become? What is its effect on climate and weather? The answers could prove useful in cleaningup the air in other smog capitals, such as Cairo, Beijing, New Delhi and Los Angeles. "We don't want to say thatMexico City is polluting the whole world," said Eric Hintsa of the National Science Foundation, one of thesponsors of the $25-million study. "But together, all the mega- cities are having an impact." Picking Mexico Citywas a no-brainer, scientists say. The air here stinks. Like a giant San Fernando Valley, Mexico City issurrounded by mountains. This valley, though, is 7,000 feet closer to the sun -- better to cook the effluence ofan estimated 9 million vehicles, oil refineries, a volcano and hundreds of thousands of leaky propane tanks17 March 2013 Page 162 of 483 ProQuesthooked to stoves. More than 20 million people are crammed into the greater Mexico City metropolitan area. Bycomparison, Los Angeles County is about twice as large but has only about half as many people. Andeverybody here seems to be burning something. Tiny particles lodge under contact lenses and deep in lungs,stoking allergies and worse. Colds last longer. And asthma sufferers really suffer. It's got the whiff of the familiarto chemist Jeffrey Gaffney, 56, who grew up in Riverside and is here studying how soot affects weather for theU.S. Energy Department. Mexico City, he said, is a lot like Los Angeles in the 1960s and 1970s. Although it hasimproved in the last few years, Mexico City's air quality most days still falls short of basic standards. This,despite the cleansing effect of a rainy season that runs from June to September. Scientists already havetracked urban pollution as it moves from continent to continent -- from China to the West Coast of the UnitedStates, and from the Eastern Seaboard to Europe. This study examines regional movement. Scientists andgraduate students have been working 14-hour days to measure the giant plume of gases, dust and particlesthat rises out of Mexico City each day and generally drifts to the northeast, sometimes as far as the Gulf ofMexico. Over the course of hours, the emissions mix and are altered by sunlight to create so-called secondarypollutants -- some only irritating, others carcinogenic. Using instrument readings from ground equipment,weather balloons, airplanes and NASA satellites, scientists hope to figure out how they form and how far theytravel. "I'm sure we'll learn things we didn't expect, answer some hypotheses and in some cases end up withmore questions," said Sasha Madronich, a chemist from the National Center for Atmospheric Research inBoulder, Colo. Madronich and colleagues from U.S. and Mexican universities and labs have collected enoughpollution data to keep them busy for years -- compiling, comparing and double-checking. They expect toannounce their findings in 2007 or 2008, said Luisa Molina, an MIT chemist and one of the study's organizers.Getting lab-quality measurements in the field was one of daunting tasks for the project, whose unwieldy nameshortens to the acronym MILAGRO -- miracle in Spanish. But the first job was moving the equipment across theborder. "We got all the stuff to the border a month early but it was still delayed four to six weeks," said BarryLefer, a geosciences professor at the University of Houston, who worked at a measurement site about an hour'sdrive north of Mexico City. He spoke from the roof of the Technological University of Tecamac, where hepointed out some of the exotic gear that to the layman -- and probably to customs officials -- looked sinister: sunphotometers, cloud cameras, ambient particulate samplers, aerosol samplers and devices to measure solarradiation, ozone, temperature, humidity, wind and particles smaller than the width of a human hair. Some aremade by specialty manufacturers, others by hand. Chika Minejima tinkered with her thermal decompositionlaser- induced fluorescence device set up on the roof of a nearby trailer. It looked like a prop in a sci-fi thriller,but in fact measured trace amounts of a rare nitrate gas that neutralizes some pollutants overnight. "I've beenworking on this for 3 1/2 years with another graduate student, who had been working on it three or four yearsbefore me," said Minejima, 28, who is studying at UC Berkeley's College of Chemistry. "I inherited it and made itmore sensitive." It was unique, until a second one was built by scientists in Japan. "But ours is better," saidMinejima, who also built its wooden shipping container for the trip south. In the equipment-packed trailer nextdoor, Peter McMurray, head of mechanical engineering at the University of Minnesota, collected data forstudying the transformation of airborne particles. Clouds form when water condenses on these tiny specks.McMurray and others want to understand how pollutants create new particles over the course of a day and to beable to predict, for example, whether they will trigger more or less rain in a region. "My life's dream is to explainthese processes," he said. Some of the work was more old-school. Robert Long, a graduate student inmeteorology at Penn State University, was inflating an oversized weather balloon to carry an ozone monitorpacked in a plastic foam six-pack holder sealed with duct tape. "It will go up a little more than 20 miles and thatwill take about two hours," he said. "It will end up over the Gulf of Mexico." The midday launch attracted a smallgroup. When the balloon inflated to a diameter of about 8 feet, the plastic foam box was tied on with string. Atthe count of three, the balloon was released and flew skyward. And the box fell to the ground with a thud. Thescientists gathered briefly and came to a consensus: It needed stouter string. "Let's try it again," Long said.17 March 2013 Page 163 of 483 ProQuestCredit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Studies; Smog; Air pollutionLocation: Mexico City MexicoPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.20Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Mar 31, 2006Year: 2006Dateline: MEXICO CITYSection: Main News; Part A; Foreign DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422035326Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 79 of 213A Valley's Smog Toll Tallied; In the San Joaquin, resulting health costs are $3.2 billion a year, a CalState Fullerton study finds. That much would be gained by cleaner air.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 30 Mar 2006: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: He said air regulators in the Los Angeles Basin in particular were "under enormous pressure" in thelate 1980s from manufacturers and other industries threatening to move away if they were required toimplement costly air pollution control measures until [Jane Hall]'s study provided a counterbalance showingsubstantial economic benefits to reducing air pollution. "I think we've turned that corner in that the businessesand industry in the San Joaquin Valley understand that they play an important role in cleaning up the air," she17 March 2013 Page 164 of 483 ProQuestsaid. "But where we are now because of the unique topography and weather issues in the valley is we needmore controls than the local air district has the authority to adopt. The bulk of the emissions, especially when wetalk about summertime pollution, is from mobile sources, from cars and trucks." Sam Atwood, spokesman forthe South Coast Air Quality Management District, said Hall's study of the Los Angeles Basin "was really one ofthe first times we had a very scientific and methodical approach to quantifying the health benefits of cleaning upthe air."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Smog in the San Joaquin Valley is responsible for $3.2 billion annually in health costs, according tofindings released Wednesday by a Cal State Fullerton team. The lion's share of those costs -- an estimated $3billion -- is tied to 460 smog-related deaths each year. Other major factors are school and work absences,hospital admissions and treatment for bronchitis and other illnesses. The team concluded that the valley -- withair quality that ranks among the worst in the nation, along with Los Angeles and Houston -- would save morethan $3 billion if it came into compliance with federal and state ozone and particulate standards. "The resultsare important because it gives people a concrete sense of what price people pay for dirty air, and the flip side ofthat is the economic benefits of moving more quickly to achieve ... air quality standards," said the study's leadauthor, Jane Hall, a professor of economics and co-director of the Institute for Economics and EnvironmentalStudies at Cal State Fullerton. Savings would come from 188,000 fewer school absences, an equal number ofreduced-activity days for adults, 23,000 fewer asthma attacks, and reductions in hospital admissions, acutebronchitis and other health problems. The study found that although the entire valley suffered from bad airthroughout the year because of its unique topography and weather, poor communities in Kern and Fresnocounties were hit hardest by pollution and its costs. Major sources of the air pollution include agriculturalequipment as well as truck and car traffic along the 99 and 5 freeways. The research team did similar studies onthe economic benefits of reducing air pollution in the Los Angeles Basin 18 years ago, and in Houston and SanFrancisco since then. The bulk of the savings comes from preventing premature deaths from cancer, heartattack and other ailments from chronic exposure to particulates, according to study coauthor Victor Brajer, aneconomics professor at Cal State Fullerton. Brajer said longtime workplace studies show that wages are higherwhere there is a greater risk of death. He also said other studies indicate that people spend more on consumersafety products where mortality risks are greater. Such costs are averaged together to arrive at an overall percapitafigure. Similar estimates are now also used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and others inresearch on costs and benefits of reducing air pollution. Air regulators said the studies have been widely used tocounteract claims by businesses that controlling air pollution costs too much and would lead to catastrophiceconomic losses. "A large part of the economic consequences of air pollution come from Jane Hall, from thestudies that she and her staff have done over the years," said California Air Resources Board spokesman JerryMartin. He said air regulators in the Los Angeles Basin in particular were "under enormous pressure" in the late1980s from manufacturers and other industries threatening to move away if they were required to implementcostly air pollution control measures until Hall's study provided a counterbalance showing substantial economicbenefits to reducing air pollution. Additionally, he said the state air board in the mid-1990s faced "draconian"proposals by the federal government that could have cost billions more to implement, but that Hall's workshowed the state plan was the most cost-effective. Kelly Morphy, spokeswoman for the San Joaquin Valley AirPollution Control District, said the study could still be helpful to her agency's efforts to secure tougherregulations from state and federal air regulators of vehicle emissions in the valley. "I think we've turned thatcorner in that the businesses and industry in the San Joaquin Valley understand that they play an important rolein cleaning up the air," she said. "But where we are now because of the unique topography and weather issuesin the valley is we need more controls than the local air district has the authority to adopt. The bulk of theemissions, especially when we talk about summertime pollution, is from mobile sources, from cars and trucks."17 March 2013 Page 165 of 483 ProQuestSam Atwood, spokesman for the South Coast Air Quality Management District, said Hall's study of the LosAngeles Basin "was really one of the first times we had a very scientific and methodical approach to quantifyingthe health benefits of cleaning up the air." He said the district's 2003 air pollution control plan, now in effect,found average yearly benefits of complying with state and federal air standards to total an estimated $6.4 billion,while total costs were $3.25 billion. Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Studies; Air pollution; Smog; Health care expendituresLocation: San Joaquin ValleyPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Mar 30, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422049142Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 80 of 213Study Doubles Estimate of Smog Deaths; USC researchers amass measurements of lethalparticulate matter from hundreds of locations in the L.A. Basin. State may raise its official figures.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 25 Mar 2006: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The other studies include one by researchers at Harvard University who found that as soot pollutiondeclined in six northeastern cities, related deaths declined as well. The other, a recent study by Loma Linda17 March 2013 Page 166 of 483 ProQuestUniversity, found increased coronary deaths among women exposed to both fine particulate matter and ozone.The highest death rates from smog-related illnesses in the USC study were found in the Inland Empire, wherediesel soot is blown by prevailing winds. In western Riverside and San Bernardino counties, the soot is trappedby four mountain ranges. The current mortality estimate is based on a 2002 national study of 500,000 peoplethat found a 6% increased risk of death with each additional 10 micrograms of fine particulate per cubic meter ofair. But the national study used just three monitors in the L.A. basin, missing major pockets of pollution,according to [Michael Jerrett].Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The number of deaths from breathing sooty smog in California may be more than twice as high aspreviously estimated, based on a recent USC study that examined the risk of such deaths in the Los AngelesBasin. A team of researchers headed by Michael Jerrett, associate professor of preventive medicine, found twoto three times greater risk of mortality from heart attacks, lung cancer and other serious illness tied to chronicexposure to fine particulate matter than did previous studies. The study looked at specific soot measurementsand deaths in hundreds of neighborhoods -- rather than relying on citywide annual averages used in the past --and detected the largest increased risks in the Inland Empire, Jerrett said. Fine particulate matter spewed outby cars, trucks, locomotives, ships, planes, refineries and other sources lodges deep in the lungs and is widelyconsidered the most lethal form of air pollution. The staff of the California Air Resources Board said this weekthey are considering boosting statewide death estimates based on the USC data, pending independent review."I think candidly it's likely," said Michael Scheible, deputy executive director of the board. "The researchsuggests we will end up raising our estimates ... but we want to be cautious." Currently, state officials estimate9,000 Californians die annually from diseases caused or aggravated by air pollution, more than half of them inSouthern California. That number could double or even triple if the Air Resources Board incorporates the USCdata into its estimates, Scheible said. He said the board decided Thursday that the USC study and two othersexamining the effect of air pollution on mortality should undergo one more layer of review to determine the bestpossible way of applying them statewide. That review could be completed by the end of summer. The otherstudies include one by researchers at Harvard University who found that as soot pollution declined in sixnortheastern cities, related deaths declined as well. The other, a recent study by Loma Linda University, foundincreased coronary deaths among women exposed to both fine particulate matter and ozone. The Timesreported earlier this week that one in every 15,000 Californians -- about 66 per million -- is at risk of contractingcancer from breathing chemicals in the air over his or her lifetime, according to the U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency's recent National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment. The study was based on emissions of 177chemicals in 1999. "The more we learn about particulate, the worse the news is," said Jerry Martin, aspokesman for the Air Resources Board, who added that as recently as 10 years ago, ozone and toxics wereconsidered the problem. "Part of that is the technology for looking at very fine particles keeps improving.... Afine particle is less than one-twenty-eighth the size of a human hair. At that size, it can actually permeate rightthrough your lungs into your bloodstream and cause heart problems." Other air regulators and clean-airadvocates said the USC study points to the need to toughen national standards for fine particulate. "The studyunderscores the extremely grave severity of the threat from air pollution," said Frank O'Donnell of Clean AirWatch in Washington, D.C. "It draws a huge line under the need for the federal government to take aggressiveaction against existing sources of diesel soot." Sam Atwood, spokesman for the South Coast Air QualityManagement District, said the agency's chief health expert "considers it a significant study that bolsters theneed to strengthen particulate matter standards." EPA administrator Stephen L. Johnson has drawn criticism forproposing new standards for particulates considered too lax by his own scientific advisory panel. He is facing acourt-ordered September deadline to make a final decision. The highest death rates from smog-related illnessesin the USC study were found in the Inland Empire, where diesel soot is blown by prevailing winds. In western17 March 2013 Page 167 of 483 ProQuestRiverside and San Bernardino counties, the soot is trapped by four mountain ranges. "Somebody living in SanBernardino is two or three times more likely to die from smog during a given period than someone in Venice,"Jerrett said. The risk of fatal heart attacks tied to soot was as much as 39% higher in the smoggiest areas.Deaths from diabetes, though few, were twice as high in those areas. The current mortality estimate is based ona 2002 national study of 500,000 people that found a 6% increased risk of death with each additional 10micrograms of fine particulate per cubic meter of air. But the national study used just three monitors in the L.A.basin, missing major pockets of pollution, according to Jerrett. He said the new study, co-written by the leadresearcher on the 2002 work, found sharply higher rates of risk, between 11% and 17%, because it analyzedsoot measurements and deaths in 269 ZIP Codes and 23 monitoring sites across the basin. He saidresearchers studied nearly 23,000 Los Angeles-area residents who are part of a long-term study of the effectsof air pollution begun by the American Cancer Society in 1982. He said more than 40 variables, includingsmoking habits and diet, were taken into consideration. A separate USC study published this week inEnvironmental Health Perspectives Journal found that ozone, a different type of air pollution, reduced spermcounts in Los Angeles men. Other pollutants did not affect sperm counts. "The data indicated that for every 14parts per billion increase in ozone, we had an approximate drop of 3 million sperm per millimeter," said leadauthor Rebecca Sokol, a USC endocrinologist. That is about a 3% drop in sperm as the ozone level rose,especially on smoggy summer days. The smoggiest day measured was 50 parts per billion, but she said thatsuch heavy smog days were rare. "These changes are not going to put men in the infertile scenario," she said.Still, she noted that all the days measured had smog levels below the current California legal standard of 80parts per billion. More than 5,000 samples from men known to be fertile were taken. Next, the researchers planto study the possible relationship between ozone and infertile men. Illustration Caption: GRAPHIC: MAP: Lethalsoot; CREDIT: Lorena Iniguez Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Studies; Heart attacks; Lung cancer; Air pollution; MortalityLocation: Los Angeles CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Mar 25, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 42205274817 March 2013 Page 168 of 483 ProQuestDocument URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 81 of 213Refineries Lose Appeal of AQMD Rule; Court tells Southland's biggest oil facilities to install newcontrols on soot. Compliance will be costly and have little or no benefit, a group says.Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 02 Mar 2006: B.4.ProQuest document linkAbstract: "This court ruling is good news for the region and especially communities surrounding oil refineries,"said AQMD Executive Officer Barry Wallerstein in a statement Wednesday. "Oil refineries are the largestregulated source of particulate matter emissions, emitting more than 400,000 newer, diesel-powered schoolbuses." The six refineries affected by the rule are those run by ExxonMobil in Torrance, BP in Carson, Chevron-Texaco in El Segundo and Shell, ConocoPhillips and Valero in Wilmington. Chevron has already added the newequipment, [Cathy Reheis-Boyd] said, but each refinery is designed differently. Refineries that do not complyface fines or possible shutdown. AQMD spokesman [Sam Atwood] said such penalties are rarely applied,because when legal challenges are settled, polluters usually comply.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: A state appeals court has ordered Southern California's largest oil refineries to install technology thatwill reduce unhealthful smog emissions. The Western States Petroleum Assn. sued to overturn the newregulation by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, arguing that the rule would cost hundreds ofmillions of dollars, was not feasible at some plants and would provide little to no public benefit. In an opinionissued last month, Judge Earl Johnson Jr. of the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles rejected thosearguments and ordered the refineries to comply. "This court ruling is good news for the region and especiallycommunities surrounding oil refineries," said AQMD Executive Officer Barry Wallerstein in a statementWednesday. "Oil refineries are the largest regulated source of particulate matter emissions, emitting more than400,000 newer, diesel-powered school buses." But Cathy Reheis-Boyd, chief operating officer of the refineriesorganization, said, "We are very disappointed. We continue to believe our case is meritorious. "If you're going torequire expensive controls which could ultimately impact the price of the product, and therefore the price at thepump, you should be suggesting those improvements that will result in substantial air quality benefits," she said.She could not specify what price increases might occur for consumers but said compliance would make itharder to control such increases. AQMD spokesman Sam Atwood said the agency's studies had found that theupgrade would add less than a 10th of a cent to gas prices. He added, "I would vigorously disagree with theassessment that half a ton a day of particulate reduction, plus an additional 2 tons reduction from ammoniaemissions, is little to no benefit to public health." About 300 tons a day of particulate matter is emitted by allsources in the region. Numerous studies have shown that breathing the soot reduces lung capacity and causesor aggravates asthma, heart disease and other health problems. Reheis-Boyd said the refineries group woulddecide soon whether to appeal to the state Supreme Court. "Any time you have a decision of this magnitude,17 March 2013 Page 169 of 483 ProQuestyou worry about its implications, not only for California but for the rest of the nation," she said. The six refineriesaffected by the rule are those run by ExxonMobil in Torrance, BP in Carson, Chevron-Texaco in El Segundoand Shell, ConocoPhillips and Valero in Wilmington. Chevron has already added the new equipment, Reheis-Boyd said, but each refinery is designed differently. "It's not one size fits all," she said. Under the rule, refineriesmust reduce emissions from their fluid catalytic cracking units by year's end, although they can request two-yearextensions. The units "crack" heavy crude oil into lighter products, including gasoline, butane and propane.Refineries that do not comply face fines or possible shutdown. AQMD spokesman Atwood said such penaltiesare rarely applied, because when legal challenges are settled, polluters usually comply. Credit: Times StaffWriterSubject: Technology; State court decisions; Petroleum refineries; Air pollution; Emission standardsLocation: Southern CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA; NAICS:924110; DUNS: 01-598-6159Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.4Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Mar 2, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422076091Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 82 of 213Unique Power Plant Called Dirty; A poor Riverside County area would be hurt by the project nowunder construction, says a coalition filing notices of intent to sue.17 March 2013 Page 170 of 483 ProQuestAuthor: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 23 Feb 2006: B.9.ProQuest document linkAbstract: "Any power plant built so near schools and families must follow clean air laws and not make our airquality any worse," said Roland Skumawitz, superintendent of the Romoland School District. He said herecognized the need for power in the fast-growing Inland Empire, but preferred that GE and another companythat has applied to build a second plant nearby help pay to move the school to a new site. Late Wednesday, thecoalition mailed 60-day notices of intent to sue for violation of the Clean Air Act to the GE subsidiary building the$1-billion plant and to the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which in August issued a permit for theplant. But the group's attorney, Marc Joseph of Adams, Broadwell, Joseph &Cardozo in South San Francisco,said it would prefer not to sue and just wants the project changed.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: A power plant touted by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and General Electric for its ability to reduce airpollution will actually spew nearly three times more unhealthful particulate matter into the air than older facilities,a coalition of environmental and labor groups said Wednesday. The plant, under construction in theimpoverished, largely Latino Riverside County community of Romoland, will sit 1,000 feet from an elementaryschool, in a region that already suffers from the highest soot levels in the state. "Any power plant built so nearschools and families must follow clean air laws and not make our air quality any worse," said RolandSkumawitz, superintendent of the Romoland School District. He said he recognized the need for power in thefast-growing Inland Empire, but preferred that GE and another company that has applied to build a second plantnearby help pay to move the school to a new site. "This whole area is being targeted for these kinds offacilities," said Penny Newman, executive director of the Center for Community Action and EnvironmentalJustice in Riverside. She said GE's application to the regional air district showed that while the new, so-calledH-style turbine plant might reduce greenhouse gas- causing emissions slightly, it would nearly triple particulateemissions. "You can't trash a local community just because you may save a little somewhere else," she said.Riverside County already suffers from some of the state's highest levels of particulate pollution, which studieshave found can cause or worsen lung disease, childhood asthma and other illnesses. Late Wednesday, thecoalition mailed 60-day notices of intent to sue for violation of the Clean Air Act to the GE subsidiary building the$1-billion plant and to the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which in August issued a permit for theplant. But the group's attorney, Marc Joseph of Adams, Broadwell, Joseph &Cardozo in South San Francisco,said it would prefer not to sue and just wants the project changed. "We would be very happy if GE's claim thatthis is a power plant that's good for the environment were true, but at the moment, it's not. What we are seekingis for GE to live up to its advertising.... The technology exists to have power plants which don't increasedownwind pollution illegally." Spokesmen for both General Electric and the air district said they had not receivedthe complaint and could not comment. GE Energy spokesman Dennis Murphy said the Romoland facility wasthe first of its kind in North America, and the second globally after a similar plant in Wales. He said it was ademonstration plant to show that greenhouse gas emissions could be cut by increasing the efficiency of naturalgas used. "We're very optimistic about the future of the technology," he said. "The project is designed to bemore environmentally compatible." Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Environmental impact; Litigation; Elementary schools; Electric power plants; Air pollution; Areaplanning & development -- Riverside County CaliforniaLocation: Riverside County CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: General Electric Co; Ticker: GE; NAICS: 332510, 334290, 334512, 334518;DUNS: 00-136-796017 March 2013 Page 171 of 483 ProQuestPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.9Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Feb 23, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422142482Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 83 of 213Curbs on Dust in the West Targeted; The EPA wants to drop the clean- air rules for rural areas. Anofficial with the air quality district for Owens Valley calls it 'outrageous.'Author: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 18 Jan 2006: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Some said the EPA should continue to regulate dust in rural areas. And all panelists said the EPAshould continue to monitor the level of particles. Under the proposal, the EPA would stop monitoring in ruralareas. He and others disputed the EPA's contention that health studies have shown inconclusively that largeparticledust from mining or agriculture is dangerous. In some parts of the West, including the Owens Valley, thesoil contains arsenic, sulfur compounds and toxic metals that can make dust clouds a potential health hazard."Dust is dust. If you're doing agriculture in an area with high natural dust, you can have problems. If you're doingspraying of pesticides, and using cyanide in mining, they can be toxic too ... in dust," [John Balbus] said.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Bush administration officials are moving to strip significant clean-air protections from broad areas ofCalifornia and other Western states, saying that rural areas should no longer have to meet federal rules for17 March 2013 Page 172 of 483 ProQuestwindblown clouds of dust, and that mining and farming operations also should be exempt. The proposed ruleswere published in the Federal Register on Tuesday by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. They wouldbecome final later this year after a public comment period. In contrast to rural areas, the proposal wouldtoughen rules on so-called coarse particulates in urban areas, including parts of Southern California. InRiverside and San Bernardino counties, dust from roads and construction sites has been a major contributor tosmog. That part of the proposal has not been a subject of major controversy. The pullback in rural areas, whichdrew praise from the mining industry and condemnation from air regulators and environmentalists, wouldparticularly affect places such as the Owens Valley, which has the worst dust storms in the nation -- a product ofLos Angeles' draining of Owens Lake. The head of the regional air pollution control agency there called theadministration's proposal "outrageous." Although the rule would apply nationwide, its greatest impact would bein the Western states because the West has much larger rural areas and because dust is a greater concern inarid regions. In a written statement to The Times, EPA spokesman John Millett said the new rule was based on"thorough consideration of thousands of studies of the health effects of particulate matter." "The evidence todate does not support a national air quality standard that would cover situations where most coarse particles inthe air come from sources like windblown dust and soils, agricultural sources and mining sources." Millett saidthe EPA's science advisory panel supported the policy. But the advisory commission's report to EPAAdministrator Stephen Johnson showed a difference of opinion among members. Some said the EPA shouldcontinue to regulate dust in rural areas. And all panelists said the EPA should continue to monitor the level ofparticles. Under the proposal, the EPA would stop monitoring in rural areas. California air pollution regulatorsdisputed the EPA position. "They're saying that what's in windblown dust and soil, what's being emitted fromdirt, basically, is not bad for you. And we just don't know that," said Richard Bode, chief of the Health andExposure Assessment Branch of the California Air Resources Board. State air board officials said they wereparticularly concerned that the change in federal policy could harm air quality in the Owens Valley and threeother parts of the state: the Salton Sea, where a water diversion program is set to begin that could create newair pollution headaches; northern Sacramento County; and the Calexico border region. All four areas havelevels of dust that sometimes violate current federal rules but would be exempt under the proposal becausethey are rural. Under the plan, the EPA would continue to regulate so-called fine particulate matter -- tinyparticles from soot and other sources that can penetrate deep into the lungs. Those particles are closely tied totruck traffic and have become a major problem in Southern California. In rural areas, regulation of coarseparticles would fall to individual states. California is the only state with its own rule. And even in California, airregulators said, the absence of federal rules would weaken their ability to force industries to clean up. "WhatEPA has done is unprecedented" by giving exemptions for certain parts of the country and certain industries,said William Becker, executive director of an association representing state and local air pollution controlofficials across the United States. Exempting farming and mining "ties the hands of most states," he said. TedSchade, head of the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, which oversees air quality at Owens andMono lakes, called the EPA proposal "a real slap in the face." Federal regulations have more teeth than staterules, carrying the possibility of fines for polluters and a loss of transportation funds for state governments ifpollution levels are not brought down, Schade and state air regulators said. The administration's move "wouldtake away that federal hammer," Schade said. Schade said that it was unfair to eliminate protections for moresparsely populated areas, and that federal regulators appeared to be ignoring visitors to four national parks andthree wilderness areas that are sometimes hit by dust storms that start around Owens Lake. He and othersdisputed the EPA's contention that health studies have shown inconclusively that large-particle dust from miningor agriculture is dangerous. In some parts of the West, including the Owens Valley, the soil contains arsenic,sulfur compounds and toxic metals that can make dust clouds a potential health hazard. Air regulators citedstudies in the Coachella Valley and elsewhere that have shown that coarse dust can clog lungs and causeasthma, heart disease and other health problems. They said that although fewer studies had been done in rural17 March 2013 Page 173 of 483 ProQuestareas than in urban regions, the lack of data should be a reason to maintain standards and continue studies, noteliminate the rules. In August, the California Air Resources Board wrote to the EPA to object to a draft of thecurrent proposal. "We do not agree ... that the available evidence is adequate to conclude there are few, if any,adverse health effects associated with coarse particles originating in rural areas," the California regulatorswrote. "Although there are only a few studies to date ... there is sufficient evidence to conclude they can induceadverse effects." Both industry and environmental groups have sued the EPA in the past over dust and sootrules. Dr. John Balbus, who works for Environmental Defense, a national environmental organization, said hisgroup would evaluate its options. "Dust is dust. If you're doing agriculture in an area with high natural dust, youcan have problems. If you're doing spraying of pesticides, and using cyanide in mining, they can be toxic too ...in dust," Balbus said. Luke Popovich, a spokesman for the National Mining Assn., said that the Clinton andBush administrations had endorsed exemptions for the industry because mining emits few coarse particulates."It's such a negligible impact given the overall sources," he said. "We're talking about, largely, clouds of dustraised at mining sites deep in the middle of nowhere by haul trucks. These hardly constitute a threat to publichealth. We think the country's got far, far bigger problems to worry about." In addition to the 90-day publiccomment period, the EPA will hold three public hearings on the proposed rules, including one on an unspecifieddate in February in San Francisco. The agency is under court order to complete work on particulate standardsby Sept. 27. Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Environmental policy; Rural areas; Dust; Air pollution; Environmental protectionLocation: United States, US, California, Western statesPeople: Bush, George WCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910;Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Jan 18, 2006Year: 2006Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422084629Document URL: March 2013 Page 174 of 483 ProQuestCopyright: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 84 of 213The State; Gov.'s Growth, Clean Air Plans Said to ClashAuthor: Jeffrey L. Rabin and Deborah SchochPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 07 Jan 2006: A.18.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The issue came to a head in mid-December, when environmentalists on a task force set up to draft thegovernor's plans for speeding the movement of goods through California balked at certain port and highwayexpansion projects. They said those projects, which are likely to be included in the governor's proposed publicworks program, lacked adequate protections against increased air pollution from diesel-powered ships, trucksand trains. "Southern California has the worst air pollution in the nation, and recent studies repeatedly havelinked that pollution with illnesses and premature deaths," said Andrea Hricko, a task force member andassociate professor of preventive medicine at the USC Keck School of Medicine. "Yet the main thrust of the[Arnold Schwarzenegger] transportation expansion plan is to build more freeways, larger ports and more railyards. That is not how we protect public health." Hricko said she was shocked at the administration's draft planin mid-December and was further disappointed by the governor's speech. "Preventing disease and death fromair pollution must be paramount, not a footnote to the Schwarzenegger administration's transportationexpansion plans," she said.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: In his State of the State speech Thursday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger declared war on dirty air. "Airpollution decreases our productivity and increases our healthcare costs," the governor said. "It is time toconsider clean air as part of our critical infrastructure." But for weeks, environmentalists had been warningadministration officials that key aspects of the governor's strategic growth plan could lead to worse air quality.The issue came to a head in mid-December, when environmentalists on a task force set up to draft thegovernor's plans for speeding the movement of goods through California balked at certain port and highwayexpansion projects. They said those projects, which are likely to be included in the governor's proposed publicworks program, lacked adequate protections against increased air pollution from diesel-powered ships, trucksand trains. "Southern California has the worst air pollution in the nation, and recent studies repeatedly havelinked that pollution with illnesses and premature deaths," said Andrea Hricko, a task force member andassociate professor of preventive medicine at the USC Keck School of Medicine. "Yet the main thrust of theSchwarzenegger transportation expansion plan is to build more freeways, larger ports and more rail yards. Thatis not how we protect public health." Hricko said she was shocked at the administration's draft plan in mid-December and was further disappointed by the governor's speech. "Preventing disease and death from airpollution must be paramount, not a footnote to the Schwarzenegger administration's transportation expansionplans," she said. Environmentalists were angry at a Dec. 20 draft "goods movement plan" that included suchprojects as expansion of the Long Beach Freeway, replacement of the Gerald Desmond and Schuyler Heimbridges in Long Beach and construction of a new rail yard in Long Beach. Sunne Wright McPeak, secretary ofthe state's Business, Transportation and Housing Agency and co-chair of the task force, defended thegovernor's approach. She said Schwarzenegger was committed to a 50% reduction in air pollution by 2020.17 March 2013 Page 175 of 483 ProQuestMcPeak said the goods movement plan, to be finished in June, will call for "continuous and simultaneousimprovement" in environmental quality and infrastructure. Julie Masters, a senior attorney with the NaturalResources Defense Council in Los Angeles, gave the governor credit for recognizing in his speech "the need toimprove air quality and human health." But Masters, also a member of the goods movement task force, said the$2 billion the governor proposed to spend to improve air quality statewide is "not nearly enough." Indeed, a plandrawn up by former L.A. Mayor James K. Hahn put the cost of reducing pollution associated with just the Port ofLos Angeles at $11 billion to $14 billion over 20 years. A state Air Resources Board study concluded last yearthat air pollution generated by California's cargo industry would result in 750 premature deaths in 2005 andgenerate tens of billions of dollars in related healthcare costs over the next 15 years. "Californians who live nearports, rail yards and along high- traffic corridors are subsidizing the goods-movement sector with their health,"the study warned. Particulates, primarily from diesel engines, are associated with premature death, increasedrisk of cancer and heart disease, asthma and other respiratory illnesses, according to the report.Schwarzenegger's proposals for traditional infrastructure come as L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and hisharbor commission president are moving in a different direction -- toward alternative fuels and new technologysuch as monorail-type systems fueled by electricity. "Putting in a truck lane doesn't eliminate the air pollution --at least, the last time I checked, it didn't," said S. David Freeman, president of the Los Angeles HarborCommission, on Friday. "We need to be investing in 21st century technology, not 19th or 20th centurytechnology." Schwarzenegger and other officials contend that, despite environmentalists' concerns, air pollutioncan be reduced by building projects that speed movement of goods and reduce traffic congestion. On Friday,the governor visited El Monte to underscore his support for a key project to speed the movement of cargo fromthe ports. The $950-million Alameda Corridor East project would separate trains from auto traffic and speed themovement of rail cargo through the San Gabriel Valley and on to distribution sites in the Inland Empire.Although Schwarzenegger did not specifically tout the project's environmental benefits, he did repeat areference from Thursday's address: "It's inexcusable that in the Central Valley, one out of six students go toschool with breath inhalers" because of air pollution. Its proponents contend that the construction of the new 35-mile- long corridor would eliminate more than 280 tons of air pollutants annually. But environmentalists fear itwould just allow a greater volume of diesel-spewing trains and trucks, overwhelming any benefits of the project.Some environmentalists indicated Friday that the administration had misled them. The task force process was"absolutely" a sham, said Penny Newman, a prominent environmental activist in the Inland Empire whoparticipated. "I think they brought who they had to bring to that table to bring some legitimacy, while all the timeknowing where they were going," Newman said. Times staff writer J. Michael Kennedy contributed to this report.Credit: Times Staff WritersSubject: Infrastructure; Diesel engines; Public health; Speeches; Public works; Air pollution; TransportationplanningLocation: CaliforniaPeople: Schwarzenegger, Arnold, Hricko, AndreaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.18Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2006Publication date: Jan 7, 2006Year: 200617 March 2013 Page 176 of 483 ProQuestSection: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422081162Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2006 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-30Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 85 of 213EPA Issues New Plan to Limit Soot; Critics say the revised standard is too weak to properly protectthe public from health dangers caused by breathing particulates.Author: Miguel Bustillo and Marla ConePublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 21 Dec 2005: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: In a study published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Assn., lab mice developedclogged arteries when they breathed amounts of particulates that are commonly found throughout the LosAngeles region and other urban areas. Heart disease was particularly severe in mice fed a high-fat diet, thoughall mice that breathed the fine particles developed more plaque in their arteries than those breathing purified air.On normal diets, aortas of the exposed mice were 19.2% filled with plaque, compared with 13.2% for thosebreathing the particulate- free air. Among those fed high-fat diets, the exposed mice had arteries that were41.5% obstructed by plaque, compared with 26.2% for the mice breathing the filtered air. Eating a high-fat dietand breathing particulate pollution in places such as Los Angeles "is a really bad combination," said Dr. NinoKuenzli, a USC associate professor and environmental epidemiologist. Last year Kuenzli reported similarfindings in people living in the Los Angeles region. Those who lived in areas with the highest particulate levelshad more constricted arteries.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Federal air quality officials on Tuesday proposed tighter limits on a pollutant especially prevalent in theLos Angeles region, but environmentalists and some scientists said the changes would do little to preventthousands of Americans from dying prematurely from breathing the tiny particles of soot. The U.S.Environmental Protection Agency's proposed new standards for fine particulate matter are substantially weakerthan what the agency's own staffers and a scientific advisory panel recommended after reviewing about 2,000new studies on the pollutant's health effects. Many environmental scientists say there is overwhelming evidence17 March 2013 Page 177 of 483 ProQuestthat particulates are making people susceptible to heart disease and triggering deadly heart attacks, asthmaattacks and strokes in those who already have cardiac or respiratory diseases. On the day the EPA's proposalwas announced, scientists reported new research offering some of the most compelling evidence yet that longtermexposure to particulates at levels that satisfy federal health standards causes heart disease. In a studypublished Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Assn., lab mice developed clogged arteries whenthey breathed amounts of particulates that are commonly found throughout the Los Angeles region and otherurban areas. Heart disease was particularly severe in mice fed a high-fat diet, though all mice that breathed thefine particles developed more plaque in their arteries than those breathing purified air. The Los Angeles Basin,especially the Riverside area, has the worst particulate pollution in the nation, largely due to exhaust from trucksand other diesel-powered vehicles. Even coastal areas of the Los Angeles region regularly exceed theparticulate levels that caused heart disease in the mice. The EPA's proposed rules, which would take effect nextyear, target fine particles of 2.5 micrometers -- roughly onethirtieth the diameter of a human hair. Currentstandards adopted in 1997 that limit annual average concentrations to 15 micrograms per cubic meter of airwould remain intact. But standards limiting daily concentrations would be tightened from 65 micrograms to 35micrograms. In June, the EPA's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee recommended stronger fine-particulatestandards than those the agency wound up proposing: a daily limit of 35 to 30 micrograms and an annual limitof 14 to 13 micrograms. EPA officials estimated Tuesday that 191 counties around the country would be inviolation of the new standards, up from 116 that violate existing limits. Nearly all of Southern California isalready in violation. In Riverside, the pollution reached a daily peak of 93.8 micrograms per cubic meter of air in2004 -- almost three times the amount that would be allowed under the new proposal. Under the new standards,EPA staff estimated that 1,265 Los Angeles residents would still die prematurely every year from prolongedexposure to particle-laden air. Under the current standard, 1,507 would die earlier than normal. Nevertheless,EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson said Tuesday that the total body of scientific evidence does not clearlysupport a standard tougher than the one the agency has proposed. "What I need to consider is, is there a clearbasis, or clear evidence, to make a decision, and this choice requires an interpretation of the evidence,"Johnson said. Environmental and public health organizations, which had sued the EPA to force a revision offine-particle rules based on updated science as required by law, immediately condemned the agency's newrules, calling them far too weak and an early Christmas present to polluting industries. "This may be the mostimportant decision that the Bush administration makes on air pollution, but the White House has chosen todisregard its own science advisors under pressure from the electric-power industry and other special interests,"said Emily Figdor of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group. Industry organizations opposed the change,contending that they already have made substantial cuts in particulate emissions from industrial plants andvehicles. "New particulate matter standards may be premature in that EPA and the states are just nowimplementing the revisions from 1997," the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council, a group representing coalfiredpower plants, said in a statement. "It is hard to see the justification for ratcheting the national particulatematter standard lower at this point." Counties are supposed to clean up particle pollution by 2015 or face federalpenalties, including possibly losing transportation money. "It will be a significant challenge in Southern California... but we should not allow difficulty to set the bar," said Barry Wallerstein, executive officer of the South CoastAir Quality Management District, the region's main air pollution regulator. "We should set the bar wherever itneeds to be to protect public health." Though the Los Angeles region has made great progress in reducingsome types of air pollution -- most notably ozone, the main ingredient of smog -- improvement has been slowerwith particulates. That is due in large part to the steady growth of cargo shipments in the region, particularly atthe twin ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, and the diesel exhaust emitted by ships, loading machinery, andtruck and rail traffic in and around the ports. Experts have estimated that particulate pollution may causethousands of deaths per year in the United States from heart attacks, strokes, asthma attacks and otherrespiratory diseases. Dozens of studies around the world have documented increased hospitalization and death17 March 2013 Page 178 of 483 ProQuestrates among people with heart and lung diseases on days when particulate levels rose. The research releasedTuesday suggests that long-term, chronic exposure can be dangerous too, with years of exposure makingpeople susceptible to developing cardiovascular disease. The scientists, from the New York University Schoolof Medicine, Mount Sinai School of Medicine and University of Michigan, said they found a clear cause andeffect between breathing particulates and atherosclerosis, the hardening and clogging of blood vessels. Longtermexposure to the microscopic bits of soot and smoke spewed by vehicles and industries causes immunecells to build up and inflame vital arteries, they reported. For six months, mice that were bred to be susceptibleto developing cardiovascular disease breathed air containing 15 micrograms of fine particles per cubic meter,the same as the federal standard. Last year, most of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardinocounties averaged 16 to 22 micrograms. Overall, the mice that breathed the polluted air fared worse in an arrayof cardiovascular tests than those that breathed filtered, particulate-free air. But mice that were fed a high-fatdiet showed even more dramatic effects. On normal diets, aortas of the exposed mice were 19.2% filled withplaque, compared with 13.2% for those breathing the particulate- free air. Among those fed high-fat diets, theexposed mice had arteries that were 41.5% obstructed by plaque, compared with 26.2% for the mice breathingthe filtered air. Eating a high-fat diet and breathing particulate pollution in places such as Los Angeles "is areally bad combination," said Dr. Nino Kuenzli, a USC associate professor and environmental epidemiologist.Last year Kuenzli reported similar findings in people living in the Los Angeles region. Those who lived in areaswith the highest particulate levels had more constricted arteries. The mouse study is "very important because itconfirms that the type of air pollution we inhale on an everyday basis has definite effects and it occurs at levelswe accept as a given," Kuenzli said. "It is very clear that we do not have standards yet that would protecteveryone's health," he added. "That is the opinion probably of the vast majority of scientists." Credit: Times StaffWritersSubject: Air pollution; Environmental regulations; Airborne particulates; Health hazardsLocation: United States, US, Los Angeles CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910;Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2005Publication date: Dec 21, 2005Year: 2005Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: News17 March 2013 Page 179 of 483 ProQuestProQuest document ID: 422041905Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2005 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-31Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 86 of 213Study Links Diesel Fumes to Illnesses; State air board focuses on the cargo industry -- concentratedaround major seaports -- and proposes spending billions to cut emissions.Author: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 03 Dec 2005: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The report is the first of its kind to document and assess the illnesses linked to freight movement inCalifornia. It also proposes a wide-ranging $3-billion to $6-billion pollution-reduction plan through 2020,including requiring diesel-electric hybrid engines and cleaner-burning fuels. New policies would also be neededto halt emissions growth. It blames 2005 cargo-related pollution for a list of health problems this year: 290hospital admissions, 18,000 asthma attacks, 160,000 lost days of work, 1.1 million days of restricted activitiesand 350,000 school absences. Ship pollution is largely unregulated, and nitrous oxides alone are expected togrow over the next 15 years to 223 tons of daily emissions, the report states. By comparison, trucks produced129 tons of nitrous oxides each day in the state in 2001, and railroad locomotives produced 77 tons.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Air pollutants generated by California's cargo industry will result in about 750 premature deaths thisyear and tens of billions of dollars in related healthcare costs over the next 15 years, a new study concludes.Diesel-burning ships, trains and trucks tied to the state's explosive international trade industry, concentratedmostly around major seaports such as the Los Angeles-Long Beach complex, are largely responsible for thepollution problem, according to the study by the state Air Resources Board staff. Healthcare costs this yearalone linked to transportation emissions are estimated at $6.3 billion and could total $70 billion by 2020."Californians who live near ports, rail yards and along high- traffic corridors are subsidizing the goodsmovementsector with their health," the study warns. The report is the first of its kind to document and assessthe illnesses linked to freight movement in California. It also proposes a wide-ranging $3-billion to $6-billionpollution-reduction plan through 2020, including requiring diesel-electric hybrid engines and cleaner-burningfuels. New policies would also be needed to halt emissions growth. The study sets four specific goals: * Reducecargo-related pollution levels to 2001 levels by 2010. * Continue to roll back pollution levels so they meet statestandards. * Slash diesel-related health risks 85% by 2020. * Ensure that adequate pollution cuts occur inspecific communities affected by pollution. The study is part of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's campaign toboost the state's cargo industry by rebuilding aging roads and other infrastructure. Schwarzenegger has said hisproposed public works program could be financed with a $50-billion bond sale. Local business leaders haveexpressed concern that the pollution problem could stymie growth in a region increasingly dependent oninternational trade, primarily from China and other Asian countries. Wally Baker, a senior vice president at theLos Angeles Economic Development Corp., said companies that ship goods should help find a solution.17 March 2013 Page 180 of 483 ProQuest"Retailers, wholesalers and manufacturers have to believe that solving this problem is their responsibility,"Baker said. "They can demand that their vendors get in a room and figure this out. They haven't, and that'swrong." Industry and environmental representatives had mixed reactions to the report, with some wonderinghow the state could achieve the pollution curbs needed to protect human health. Particulate matter, primarilyfrom diesel engines, and pollutants that form ozone in the atmosphere are key pollutants associated withpremature death, cancer risk, increased risk of heart disease, and asthma and other respiratory illnesses,according to the report. It blames 2005 cargo-related pollution for a list of health problems this year: 290hospital admissions, 18,000 asthma attacks, 160,000 lost days of work, 1.1 million days of restricted activitiesand 350,000 school absences. The rate of premature deaths is expected to rise to 920 a year in 2025 unlesspollution is reduced, the report warns. The air board staff estimates that about 9,000 people die prematurely inthe state each year from exposure to particulate matter and ozone. The study's findings are based on medicalrecords as well as computer predictions of growth in pollution and population, said air board spokesman JerryMartin. The pollution is most pronounced near the state's major ports and along rail lines and freeways leadinginland. "The further away you are from the sources, the less impact," Martin said. As in earlier reports, the newstudy found that the worst polluters are the oceangoing ships that, in 2001, produced eight tons of particulatematter and 94 tons of nitrous oxide statewide each day. Ship pollution is largely unregulated, and nitrous oxidesalone are expected to grow over the next 15 years to 223 tons of daily emissions, the report states. Bycomparison, trucks produced 129 tons of nitrous oxides each day in the state in 2001, and railroad locomotivesproduced 77 tons. In the last two years, the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland have launchedprograms to reduce air pollution. New federal, state and regional efforts are expected to result in cleaner truckand rail operations. But industry and government experts have cautioned against a piecemeal approach toCalifornia's pollution problems, warning that tangled regulations and conflicting standards could discouragecompanies from investing in cleaner engines and other technology. A spokesman for the Pacific MerchantShipping Assn., which represents West Coast shippers, terminal operators and other maritime interests, saidFriday that the group recognizes the importance of improving air quality. "This is our No. 1 priority right now, tofigure out how to do that effectively and as quickly as practical," said Tupper Hull. But he also expressedconcern about how the state board staff tallied air pollution levels in the study, saying it used a 2001 baselinethat did not take into account some major industry measures to clean the air. Public hearings on the proposedsteps to reduce pollution will be held throughout California in early 2006. Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Fatalities; Studies; Shipping industry; Cargos; Ports; Diesel fuels; Air pollution; IllnessesLocation: California, Los Angeles California, Long Beach CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Port of Los Angeles; NAICS: 488310; Name: Port of Long Beach-California;NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2005Publication date: Dec 3, 2005Year: 2005Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLC17 March 2013 Page 181 of 483 ProQuestPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422041660Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2005 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-31Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 87 of 213State Seeking Ways to Speed Cargo; Officials in Sacramento are working on a plan to move productsmore swiftly through the state while also addressing pollution concerns.Author: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 31 Oct 2005: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The [Arnold Schwarzenegger] administration is briskly completing an ambitious but controversial planto boost cargo shipments throughout California while curbing toxic air pollution from ships, trucks and trains. Arelated air board report released in early October found that diesel fumes generated within the boundaries of theports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are elevating the risk of cancer as far as 15 miles inland. The study didnot account for pollution from trains and trucks outside the ports. Diesel fumes, which are carcinogenic, havealso been linked to lung ailments such as asthma and to heart disease. They point to the infamous cargo jam infall 2004 at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, the nation's two largest container ports. A confluence ofproblems such as labor and rail car shortages caused dozens of ships to wait in line offshore, a financial fiascothat stirred concern in China and other Asian countries.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The Schwarzenegger administration is briskly completing an ambitious but controversial plan to boostcargo shipments throughout California while curbing toxic air pollution from ships, trucks and trains. The plancould affect the number of trucks on Los Angeles and Bay Area freeways, the growth of cargo-related jobs inthe Inland Empire and Central Valley, and the amount of air pollution along freeway and rail corridors statewide.State officials hope to finish the plan in December so it can be included in Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Stateof the State address in January. It may also be a topic during his trade mission to China in mid-November.Business and community interests are divided on the project, with many shippers applauding it as a sorelyneeded blueprint to increase trade and ease traffic congestion. Critics, however, say the administration isramrodding the plan through without sufficient study of how air pollution currently affects residents near thestate's freeways, ports and rail lines. The debate underscores California's growing stature as the largest U.S.17 March 2013 Page 182 of 483 ProQuestentryway for Asian imports arriving by ship and transported across the country by trains and trucks. The planwill establish how California's transportation network can be expanded and improved to speed cargo movementand prevent bottlenecks. It will also outline financing strategies and ways to rein in air pollution. In a letterFriday, the executives of the state's two leading smog-fighting agencies and several environmental groupsappealed to state officials to roll back the December deadline so that health concerns could be studied morethoroughly. The back-and-forth is expected to continue this week in a series of public meetings today throughFriday in Sacramento. In coming weeks, officials will review $47.3 billion in potential construction projects --including highways, bridges and rail yards -- and choose those they believe are most needed to ease trafficcongestion and ensure the smooth flow of cargo. The list will pinpoint "the things that are really important to do,that we need to do, sooner rather than later," said Barry Sedlick, undersecretary at the state Business,Transportation and Housing Agency, which is charged with crafting the plan in tandem with the state AirResources Board. "This plan is overdue," said T.L. Garrett, vice president of the Pacific Merchant ShippingAssn., adding that anyone who drives Los Angeles freeways "realizes we've neglected our infrastructure far toolong." But in the Friday letter, critics assert that planners are moving too quickly. "We need a clear response thatexpansion of the goods movement system will be linked to implementation of a comprehensive mitigation planto fully address community, environmental and health impacts," states the letter, co-signed by Barry Wallerstein,executive officer of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, and Jack Broadbent, executive officer ofthe Bay Area Air Quality Management District, along with leaders of several environmental groups. The lettercontends that working groups reviewing the plan are heavily stacked in favor of industry, and that public healthscientists and community groups should be represented. At a meeting Saturday in Los Angeles, Melissa LinPerella, a staff attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council, urged the state to make public a longawaitedassessment of how cargo transport currently affects public health in the Los Angeles area. The counciland other clean-air organizations have asserted that the Schwarzenegger administration has withheld thatassessment for months Mike Scheible, deputy executive director of the state air board, said Saturday that theagency's staff would produce "at least a draft" of a comprehensive health assessment by the end of Novemberand hoped to follow in mid-December with a draft plan for reducing air pollution. Critics say that is too late formeaningful review. A related air board report released in early October found that diesel fumes generated withinthe boundaries of the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are elevating the risk of cancer as far as 15 milesinland. The study did not account for pollution from trains and trucks outside the ports. Diesel fumes, which arecarcinogenic, have also been linked to lung ailments such as asthma and to heart disease. State officials saytheir goods movement plan will include ways to reduce emissions to 2001 levels by 2010 and to then imposefurther cuts. The so-called goods movement industry supports one of every seven California jobs andcontributes more than $200 billion annually to the state economy, says the first part of the plan, released inSeptember by the state Business, Transportation and Housing Agency and the state Environmental ProtectionAgency. The boom in imports from Asia is expected to continue, with shipments of cargo containers projected todouble by 2015 and perhaps even triple by 2025, the report states. Business leaders say highway expansionand other projects are sorely needed to maintain California's role as a juggernaut of global trade. They point tothe infamous cargo jam in fall 2004 at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, the nation's two largestcontainer ports. A confluence of problems such as labor and rail car shortages caused dozens of ships to wait inline offshore, a financial fiasco that stirred concern in China and other Asian countries. The new plan could helpCalifornia obtain more federal transportation funds because it would identify the most important projects forcargo movement, rather than having a barrage of interests fend for themselves, some officials said. "We needto speak with one voice," said Arthur B. Goodwin, planning director at the Alameda Corridor TransportationAgency. He said that in Washington, "They don't understand what 'No. 1' is, because they hear about 'No. 1s'from everybody." The cargo boom has been blamed for increased levels of diesel particulate matter andnitrogen oxides, which recent health studies have linked to health problems such as stunted lung growth in17 March 2013 Page 183 of 483 ProQuestchildren in highly polluted areas of Southern California. Those studies have caused concern among residentsnear the Los Angeles-Long Beach port complex and along truck corridors and rail yards as far east as SanBernardino County. Similar concerns have surfaced in neighborhoods near the Port of Oakland, the state'sthird-largest seaport. Public meetings on the plan will begin at 9 a.m. today and continue all week at Cal-EPAheadquarters in Sacramento. More information and webcasts are available at the air board website,arb.. Other meetings on the plan are set for 10 a.m. Saturday at the Faulkner Gallery in SantaBarbara and 10 a.m. Nov. 12 at Central Park Senior Citizen Center in Rancho Cucamonga. More discussion isexpected Friday when the board of the South Coast Air Quality Management District holds a special meeting inLong Beach to report on the scope of port-related air pollution, discuss potential solutions and hear from thepublic. The meeting will begin at 9 a.m. at Long Beach City Hall. Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Traffic congestion; Trucking; Railroads; Ships; Cargos; Air pollution; Shipping industry; TransportationplanningLocation: CaliforniaPeople: Schwarzenegger, ArnoldPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2005Publication date: Oct 31, 2005Year: 2005Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422033825Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2005 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-31Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 88 of 21317 March 2013 Page 184 of 483 ProQuestDiesel Fumes From Ports Raising Cancer Risk in Region, Study Says; Pollution from L.A. and LongBeach harbors is cited in findings released by Air Resources Board.Author: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 05 Oct 2005: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: "What we are saying is that on top of that, 100 [in the study area] are going to have cancer for noother reason than the diesel pollution from the ports," [Jerry Martin] said. He said lung cancer is the primary riskfrom diesel fumes. Lung cancer is usually fatal. "Diesel PM emissions from the ports result in elevated cancerrisk levels over the entire 20-mile by 20-mile study area," the study states. It determined that the Port of LosAngeles emitted 965 tons of diesel particulate matter in 2002, while the Port of Long Beach emitted 795 tons.The health effects of diesel fumes from the two ports extend beyond cancer, the report states. It estimates thatsuch pollution each year causes 29 premature deaths of people aged 30 and older, 750 asthma attacks, 6,600lost workdays and 35,000 days of minor restricted activity.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Diesel fumes from the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are elevating the risk of cancer not onlyadjacent to the ports but many miles inland, a new study shows. It is the first state study that shows that airpollution from the ports is increasing cancer risk in the Los Angeles Basin, said Jerry Martin, spokesman for theCalifornia Air Resources Board, which released a draft of the study Tuesday. The study concludes that potentialcancer risk from port-related diesel fumes exceeds 50 additional cases of cancer per million people for residentswithin 15 miles of the two ports. Two million people live within the study area, which includes southern LosAngeles County and western Orange County. Studies show that one in four Californians will get some form ofcancer from all causes, including diet, lifestyle and environmental causes, amounting to a cancer risk of 250,000in a million, regulators say. "What we are saying is that on top of that, 100 [in the study area] are going to havecancer for no other reason than the diesel pollution from the ports," Martin said. He said lung cancer is theprimary risk from diesel fumes. Lung cancer is usually fatal. The 53,000 people who live nearest the twoseaports face a risk exceeding 500 in a million from port pollution alone, according to the study. Under statelaw, fixed facilities such as refineries and dry cleaners must post warnings if the potential cancer risk exceeds10 additional cases of cancer per million people. In the Los Angeles area, polluters must prepare detailed plansand slash emissions if the risk exceeds 25 cases per million. The sources of much of the diesel exhaust,however, are not covered by those rules because ships, trains, trucks and cargo equipment are considered"mobile sources" that are regulated less stringently. That distinction has handcuffed local and state regulatorswho are attempting to reduce port pollution. Air experts call the latest study the most thorough to date of thepotential health problems caused by pollution at the adjacent seaports, the two largest in the nation. Earlierresearch had found that diesel fumes accounted for 71% of the cancer risk associated with air pollution in theLos Angeles region. Other reports have looked at cancer risk from a variety of sources. But the state study isthe first comprehensive look at the cancer risk of diesel fumes generated within the ports. The fumes areespecially harmful to children and the elderly. "I'm not aware of any other assessment on emissions and risksfrom the ports that have been done in so much detail," said Jean Ospital, health effects officer at the SouthCoast Air Quality Management District, which regulates air quality in the Los Angeles Basin. One surprise in thestudy is that pollution from within the two ports extends so far inland, Ospital said. The new study pays closeattention to the particulate matter in diesel emissions, made up of soot as well as particles that can form fromnitrogen oxides released from diesel engines. Such particles can exacerbate lung and cardiovascular diseaseand have been linked to an increased risk of lung cancer. "Diesel PM emissions from the ports result in elevatedcancer risk levels over the entire 20-mile by 20-mile study area," the study states. It determined that the Port of17 March 2013 Page 185 of 483 ProQuestLos Angeles emitted 965 tons of diesel particulate matter in 2002, while the Port of Long Beach emitted 795tons. The health effects of diesel fumes from the two ports extend beyond cancer, the report states. It estimatesthat such pollution each year causes 29 premature deaths of people aged 30 and older, 750 asthma attacks,6,600 lost workdays and 35,000 days of minor restricted activity. Some activists say the study seriouslyunderestimates the medical impact of port-related emissions because it fails to consider truck and train activitythat extends beyond the ports' boundaries. The study does not include such emission sources as the truckclogged710 Freeway and the sprawling rail yards of Los Angeles and Commerce. Air Resources Board staffmembers Tuesday said several upcoming health assessments would look at other pollution sources outside theports. The study released Tuesday focused on pollution produced within the ports because the board will bereviewing proposed rules dealing with ships and cargo equipment in coming months. Both ports have launchedprograms to reduce emissions. Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has named an all-new Board of HarborCommissioners and vowed to make port air pollution a top priority. The board is expected to set guidelines forcurbing emissions at a meeting next Wednesday. Many harbor-area residents are expected to protest aproposed Port of L.A. rail yard at a Thursday night meeting at Silverado Park in Long Beach, and activiststhroughout the region are challenging a proposed memorandum of understanding between the state board andtwo major railroads. It would require the railroads to conduct their own health-risk assessments for individual railyards and advance the deadline for using low-sulfur diesel fuel. Community groups say the proposed pact is tooweak. The two ports are expected to triple their activities by 2020, which could increase diesel emissions by60% without stepped-up pollution controls, the study states. Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Studies; Public health; Air pollution; Diesel engines; Cancer; PortsLocation: Los Angeles California, Long Beach CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Port of Los Angeles; NAICS: 488310; Name: Port of Long Beach-California;NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2005Publication date: Oct 5, 2005Year: 2005Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422024445Document URL: March 2013 Page 186 of 483 ProQuestCopyright: (Copyright (c) 2005 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-31Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 89 of 213THE STATE; L.A. Could Use Breath of Fresh AirAuthor: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 01 Oct 2005: A.21.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Wildfires produce smoke thick with tiny particles and potentially toxic gases that can aggravatebreathing problems, [Ed Avol] said. The fire itself produces particles much like the particulate matter emitted bycar engines, Avol said. The particles irritate the throat and lungs and cause other problems. Those at greatestrisk include people with heart or lung diseases such as asthma, emphysema and chronic lung problems,cautioned officials at the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services. The elderly are also sensitive tosmoke, so relatives and friends should check with them to ensure they are not having problems.CORRECTION: SEE CORRECTION APPENDED; Air quality -- An article in Saturday's Section A about smokefrom wildfires said that air samples collected Thursday near the Rocketdyne facility west of Chatsworth showedunusually high levels of contaminants. In fact, the samples did not show unusually high levels of contaminants.In addition, Dr. Jonathan Fielding, the Los Angeles County health officer and director of public health, wasmisidentified as the county health director. Wildfires produce smoke thick with tiny particles and potentially toxicgases that can aggravate breathing problems, [Ed Avol] said. The fire itself produces particles much like theparticulate matter emitted by car engines, Avol said. The particles irritate the throat and lungs and cause otherproblems. Smog officials issued an advisory Friday morning, warning that smoke from the wildfires was harmingair quality in a wide swath across the Los Angeles Basin, from the San Fernando Valley east to the western SanBernardino Valley.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: CORRECTION: SEE CORRECTION APPENDED; Air quality -- An article in Saturday's Section Aabout smoke from wildfires said that air samples collected Thursday near the Rocketdyne facility west ofChatsworth showed unusually high levels of contaminants. In fact, the samples did not show unusually highlevels of contaminants. In addition, Dr. Jonathan Fielding, the Los Angeles County health officer and director ofpublic health, was misidentified as the county health director. Wildfires spewed smoke across much of the LosAngeles Basin on Friday, and air experts warned residents to limit activities, stay indoors and keep the airconditioning running. People with health problems such as heart and lung disease were most at risk, butofficials cautioned that no one in smoky areas should exercise vigorously outdoors. "You don't want to berunning a track meet," said air pollution expert Ed Avol, professor of preventive medicine at the USC KeckSchool of Medicine. Schools in the San Fernando Valley suspended outdoor athletic activities through Monday,and the Los Angeles Unified School District advised all schools in areas affected by smoke to restrict studentoutdoor activity. "Kids' lungs are still growing," said county health director Dr. Jonathan Fielding, "and you don'twant them breathing anything more than they already are -- which is Los Angeles air." Health officials urgedadults and children with asthma to keep their inhalers and medication with them, because smoke can trigger anasthma attack. The elderly also were advised to take precautions. Propelled by ocean winds, the smoky airshould start moving east and dissipate over the weekend, a National Weather Service spokesman said.17 March 2013 Page 187 of 483 ProQuestWildfires produce smoke thick with tiny particles and potentially toxic gases that can aggravate breathingproblems, Avol said. The fire itself produces particles much like the particulate matter emitted by car engines,Avol said. The particles irritate the throat and lungs and cause other problems. Larger pieces of soot and ashcan also be an irritant: "They don't get very far into your airways, but they can get into your nose and eyes andclog up things. They're a nuisance," Avol said. In general, residents in smoky areas should stay indoors, keepwindows and doors closed, use air conditioning and place the system on "recirculation mode" to avoid suckingsmoke into homes, officials with the South Coast Air Quality Management District said. Those at greatest riskinclude people with heart or lung diseases such as asthma, emphysema and chronic lung problems, cautionedofficials at the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services. The elderly are also sensitive to smoke, sorelatives and friends should check with them to ensure they are not having problems. Smog officials issued anadvisory Friday morning, warning that smoke from the wildfires was harming air quality in a wide swath acrossthe Los Angeles Basin, from the San Fernando Valley east to the western San Bernardino Valley. Smokyconditions could last for days, and weather conditions will dictate how swiftly the smoke dissipates, said AQMDspokesman Sam Atwood. The AQMD reported Friday afternoon that air in the San Fernando Valley is expectedto remain unhealthful today. In other areas, sensitive people should avoid extensive activity outdoors today,AQMD officials said. Those areas include downtown and central Los Angeles; the Westside, Malibu andTopanga areas; the west San Gabriel Valley; and the Santa Clarita Valley. Air samples collected Thursday nearthe Rocketdyne facility west of Chatsworth did show unusually high levels of contaminants, but air officials saidFriday that they will continue tests to ensure that hazardous materials weren't released when flames reachedthe facility. References Message No: 53167 Illustration Caption: PHOTO: BREATHING EASIER: Deputy MikeThibodeaux wears a mask while talking to a motorist in Calabasas.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Al Seib Los AngelesTimes Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Forest & brush fires; Air pollution; Public healthLocation: Los Angeles CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.21Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2005Publication date: Oct 1, 2005Year: 2005Section: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 42203990517 March 2013 Page 188 of 483 ProQuestDocument URL:: (Copyright (c) 2005 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-31Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 90 of 213New Harbor Panel Aims to Cut Pollution While Expanding PortAuthor: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 29 Sep 2005: B.6.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Commissioners are grappling with a Pandora's box left by former Mayor James K. Hahn: a reportconcluding that 2,200 premature deaths from port-related air pollution could be avoided by 2025 throughtechnological fixes and other measures to reduce pollution. In the last decade, emissions have transformed theLos Angeles- Long Beach port complex into the single largest air polluter in the Los Angeles Basin. People wholive near the ports and related transportation corridors -- especially the Long Beach Freeway and rail hubs in theInland Empire -- have grown increasingly angry about pollution, which many blame for cancer, asthma andother illnesses in their neighborhoods. Recent scientific studies have found evidence that pollution nearfreeways may be linked to higher levels of asthma and stunted lung growth in children. Some shippers, skittishabout a possible repeat of a major 2004 cargo logjam, have rerouted freight to Seattle and other ports. Otherswarn that they are increasingly troubled by recent turnover among port senior staff and by the prospect thatenvironmental concerns have trumped the port's commitment to cargo growth. That situation alarms businessleaders who call the port an integral economic engine for the region.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Los Angeles harbor commissioners zeroed in Wednesday on what promises to be one of the toughestchallenges facing Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa: how to expand the nation's largest seaport while slashing airpollution that threatens the health of residents who live near the port. The panel's new president, S. DavidFreeman, sternly told port managers to accelerate efforts to pinpoint new ways to cut emissions from ships,trains and trucks serving the port. "Start acting like our lives are depending on it, because our lives do dependon it," he said. Commissioners are grappling with a Pandora's box left by former Mayor James K. Hahn: a reportconcluding that 2,200 premature deaths from port-related air pollution could be avoided by 2025 throughtechnological fixes and other measures to reduce pollution. But those improvements could cost more than $11billion, and shippers fear that they would bear much of the cost. Hahn, who set up a task force to craft thereport, left office before acting on its recommendations. The new commission asked the port staff at its firstmeeting Sept. 14 to report back Wednesday night on which measures in the Hahn plan could be put in placenow. In response, port environmental director Ralph Appy promised that the staff would start looking at all newtechnology -- including fuel cells on ships and biofuel-powered trucks -- to achieve dramatic emissionsreductions. The port also may be able to speed up current plans with more conventional technology, such asusing cooler-burning dock tractors and powering ships with electricity while at shore, Appy said. The port couldincrease its spending from $17.3 million to $23 million this year and budget an additional $53.4 million for nextyear to move those plans forward, he said. This was only the second meeting of the five commissioners picked17 March 2013 Page 189 of 483 ProQuestby the new mayor and headed by Freeman, a former general manager of the city Department of Water andPower. In the last decade, emissions have transformed the Los Angeles- Long Beach port complex into thesingle largest air polluter in the Los Angeles Basin. People who live near the ports and related transportationcorridors -- especially the Long Beach Freeway and rail hubs in the Inland Empire -- have grown increasinglyangry about pollution, which many blame for cancer, asthma and other illnesses in their neighborhoods. Recentscientific studies have found evidence that pollution near freeways may be linked to higher levels of asthma andstunted lung growth in children. Some shippers, skittish about a possible repeat of a major 2004 cargo logjam,have rerouted freight to Seattle and other ports. Others warn that they are increasingly troubled by recentturnover among port senior staff and by the prospect that environmental concerns have trumped the port'scommitment to cargo growth. That situation alarms business leaders who call the port an integral economicengine for the region. Freeman has promised a "green-green" agenda for the port, reducing pollutants andsimultaneously promoting new business. Hahn charged a 28-member task force with crafting a blueprint tomake good on his 2001 promise to hold the line on port pollution. That plan, completed in June, is designed toreduce emissions to 2001 levels. But with the boom in Asian imports, port emissions have soared 60% since2001, a point that Freeman has raised repeatedly as commission president. He said the city should insist onfurther rollbacks.. A detailed study prepared by the state Air Resources Board to determine the public healthbenefits of reducing Port of Los Angeles pollution to 2001 levels found that in the next 20 years the proposed"no net increase" plan would curb particulate matter pollution enough to prevent 2,200 premature deaths.Particulate matter from diesel fumes is a carcinogen and has been tied to exacerbating respiratory illnesses.Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Expansion; Ports; Emissions control; Air pollutionLocation: Los Angeles CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Harbor Commission-Los Angeles CA; NAICS: 926120; Name: Port of LosAngeles; NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.6Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2005Publication date: Sep 29, 2005Year: 2005Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 42200365917 March 2013 Page 190 of 483 ProQuestDocument URL:: (Copyright (c) 2005 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-31Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 91 of 213Study Links Freeways to Asthma Risk; USC research adds to evidence that air pollution can causerespiratory problems.Author: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 21 Sep 2005: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The closer that children live to Southern California freeways, the greater their risk of being diagnosedwith asthma, USC researchers have found in a study that bolsters growing evidence that air pollution can causeasthma. Earlier studies have demonstrated a relationship between children's asthma and traffic exposure, butresults have not been consistent as to whether air pollution causes asthma, according to the article by a team ofseven researchers at the USC Keck School of Medicine. Researchers also found that air pollution fromfreeways influenced nitrogen dioxide levels more strongly than pollution from smaller roads. [JamesGauderman] said that the current findings do not allow researchers to determine at what distance from afreeway children can avoid an increased asthma risk.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The closer that children live to Southern California freeways, the greater their risk of being diagnosedwith asthma, USC researchers have found in a study that bolsters growing evidence that air pollution can causeasthma. Children who lived a quarter mile from a freeway, for example, had an 89% higher risk of asthma thanchildren living about a mile from a freeway, according to the new research. Even in areas such as Santa Maria,with generally good air quality, the researchers found that the risk of asthma increased for children who livednear freeways. Separately, a different team of University of Southern California researchers has concluded thatthe chronic health effects of smog among adults are two to three times greater than earlier research showed.The team pinpointed a link between the tiny particles contained in air pollution and increased deaths from heartdisease. Articles on the two studies, conducted in Southern California, appear in the November issue of thejournal Epidemiology. USC released the findings Tuesday. The freeway article is part of an ongoing landmarkstudy of how air pollution affects children's respiratory health. That study, which began in 1993, producedfindings last fall that showed smog can permanently stunt lung growth in children and lead to lifelong healthproblems. Dr. Elisa Nicholas, project director for the Long Beach Alliance for Children with Asthma, called thefreeway study significant. "There's increasing evidence demonstrating a link between air pollution and thedevelopment of asthma," Nicholas said Tuesday. "The more evidence we have, the more political will there willbe to clean up emissions from the freeways." Earlier studies have demonstrated a relationship betweenchildren's asthma and traffic exposure, but results have not been consistent as to whether air pollution causesasthma, according to the article by a team of seven researchers at the USC Keck School of Medicine. Nor hasresearch been conducted in Southern California, said lead author James Gauderman, a USC associateprofessor of preventive medicine. So researchers tracked 208 children living in 10 cities in the region, including17 March 2013 Page 191 of 483 ProQuest31 children, or 15%, with asthma. They installed air samplers outside the children's homes to measure nitrogendioxide for two-week periods in the summer and fall of 2000. Nitrogen dioxide is produced by pollutants fromcars and trucks. Researchers measured the distance between each home and freeways, and counted howmany vehicles traveled within 164 yards of the homes. They found that children with higher levels of nitrogendioxide near their homes were more likely to have asthma. For each increase of 5.7 parts per billion of thepollutant, the risk of asthma increased by 83%, the study states. The researchers have not determined thatnitrogen dioxide is causing asthma, but it is found with other pollutants -- including particulate matter that hasbeen tied to other diseases. Researchers also found that air pollution from freeways influenced nitrogen dioxidelevels more strongly than pollution from smaller roads. Gauderman said that the current findings do not allowresearchers to determine at what distance from a freeway children can avoid an increased asthma risk. Heemphasized that the study does not show that every child living near a freeway gets asthma. "We have torealize that even for a kid to live very close to a freeway, odds are that they're not going to get asthma. There'sonly a fraction of kids that get asthma," he said Tuesday. Gauderman also said the study does not provide thetype of information that researchers can use to advise individual parents. "The message is probably moregeneral, in terms of thinking about not planning tracts or schools close to a major freeway," he said. Thefindings might also be useful for government regulators studying the impacts of air pollution. "From a regulatorystandpoint, it might suggest that we need to look not only at background air quality but also the more localexposures that one might have by living next to a major roadway," Gauderman said. The study involved childrenliving in the cities of Alpine, Atascadero, Lake Elsinore, Lancaster, Long Beach, Mira Loma, Riverside, SanDimas, Santa Maria and Upland. Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Studies; Air pollution; Asthma; Roads & highwaysLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2005Publication date: Sep 21, 2005Year: 2005Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422040036Document URL: March 2013 Page 192 of 483 ProQuestCopyright: (Copyright (c) 2005 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-31Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 92 of 213Outage Sparks New Air Quality Worries; A long-running debate over pollution is intensified when oilrefineries lose power and burn gases as a safety precaution.Author: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 19 Sep 2005: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Although last week's flaring was a one-day curiosity for most Angelenos, it's a familiar sight atrefineries. The flames emerge from tall stacks designed to vent gases. Pilot lights at the top of the stacks ignitethe gases to prevent them from wafting into nearby neighborhoods. Flares at the two ConocoPhillips refineriesin Wilmington and Carson together produced 496 tons of sulfur oxide emissions in 2003. The next largestamounts: 121 tons at Valero-Ultramar in Wilmington, 75.6 tons at the BP refinery in Carson and 23.7 tons atShell's Equilon refinery in Wilmington. ConocoPhillips has agreed to install a vapor recovery system to sharplyreduce its emissions, an air district spokeswoman said. Flaring up; CREDIT: PAUL DUGINSKI Los AngelesTimes; PRESSURE BUILDS: When the Valero-Ultramar refinery and others in Wilmington lost power on Sept.12, they burned off gases, sending flames and billowing black smoke into the air and adding fuel to an airquality debate over curbs on the practice of flaring.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Richard Hartog Los Angeles TimesLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The flames and black smoke that rose from three oil refineries after last week's Los Angeles blackouthave stirred up the debate over how to stem the pollution that comes from burning excess gases. The Sept. 12blackout caused three Wilmington refineries to shut down abruptly. The plants then used open flames or flaresas safety measures to reduce pressure. The result produced the eerie spectacle of leaping flames and billowingblack smoke captured by television news helicopters. The vivid pollution has hardened the resolve of someharbor-area residents to press for strong curbs on flaring. Wilmington activist Jesse Marquez took photographsof the flames and is mounting a door- to-door effort to document any health problems residents experienced."People here were really worried, really upset," Marquez said. Joe Sparano, president of the Western StatesPetroleum Assn., an industry trade group, said the flares are a safety measure to prevent pressure from buildingdangerously in the plants. "The flares did exactly what they're supposed to do," he said "They did their jobsplendidly." But Southern California air quality regulators believe that curbs are needed on nonemergencyflaring, the most common flaring use in the region. They have drafted a proposal they say would remove morethan two tons of air pollutants emitted daily by the 27 flares at eight Los Angeles-area refineries and two otherplants. The oil industry is guardedly optimistic about the proposal, but environmental activists claim that recentrevisions weakened it so much that they cannot support it. Although last week's flaring was a one-day curiosityfor most Angelenos, it's a familiar sight at refineries. The flames emerge from tall stacks designed to ventgases. Pilot lights at the top of the stacks ignite the gases to prevent them from wafting into nearbyneighborhoods. Harbor-area residents fear the practice close to their homes is releasing dangerous amounts ofchemicals into the air. The area also gets air pollution from ships, trucks and trains moving cargo in and out ofthe port complex. Flaring can lead to the release of sulfur oxides, hydrocarbon gases, nitrogen oxides andparticulate matter. Air regulators are focusing on sulfur oxides, which can cause breathing problems, aggravate17 March 2013 Page 193 of 483 ProQuestasthma and chronic bronchitis and mix with other pollutants to create a more potent health risk. The eightrefineries in southern Los Angeles County make up the largest cluster of them on the West Coast, with three inWilmington alone. The forced shutdown of the ConocoPhillips, Equilon and Valero- Ultramar refineries last weekwas expected to reduce gasoline supplies statewide by at least 8%, according to the California EnergyCommission. Flaring at Los Angeles refineries emitted two tons of sulfur oxides each day in 2003, or as muchas all large diesel trucks in Southern California, according to the South Coast Air Quality Management District,which regulates air quality in the region. Air quality district records show that most area refineries reduced sulfuroxide emissions significantly between 2001 and 2003, dropping from 1,793 tons to 735 tons annually. Amountsvary widely among refineries. Flares at the two ConocoPhillips refineries in Wilmington and Carson togetherproduced 496 tons of sulfur oxide emissions in 2003. The next largest amounts: 121 tons at Valero-Ultramar inWilmington, 75.6 tons at the BP refinery in Carson and 23.7 tons at Shell's Equilon refinery in Wilmington.ConocoPhillips has agreed to install a vapor recovery system to sharply reduce its emissions, an air districtspokeswoman said. The air district conducted tests in Wilmington during last week's flaring, with most samplesshowing hydrocarbon concentrations "well within expected levels." But heightened levels of hydrogen sulfide, agas that smells like rotten eggs, were found downwind of the ConocoPhillips refinery, in an amount that couldproduce reports of headaches and nausea, district experts said. District officials are still investigating theWilmington flaring. A ConocoPhillips spokesman said Friday that air samples conducted by refinery health andsafety staff "registered no readings that would have adverse health effects to our employees, contractors andsurrounding neighbors." Emergencies like the power outage account for only 4% of flaring at refineries in theLos Angeles area, according to figures from 1999 to 2003 that the air district's staff analyzed. That compares to4% for maintenance, 5% for planned shutdowns and start-ups, 35% for unknown reasons and 45% fornonemergency events that did not require recordkeeping, the staff found. "Basically they use the flares like a bigwastebasket," said Julia May, a Bay Area environmental consultant working for Communities for a BetterEnvironment, an activist group with offices in Huntington Park and Oakland. She wants the refineries to recyclemore of their gases rather than burning them off with flares. Sparano said the industry turns to flaring as a lastresort. "Refiners don't flare as a matter of practice because, if nothing else, it's money up the stack," he said."There is a basic premise in every business where you don't want to waste your product." Flaring attracted littleattention until the late 1990s. "It's like a lot of other things that have slipped through the regulatory cracks," saidBahram Fazeli, a policy advisor for Communities for a Better Environment. "There was a community outcry overthe fact that there are these big flare events happening, and there's really no accountability or serious regulatoryability to reduce flaring." The industry has been studying how to reduce flaring, said Ron Chittim, senior refiningassociate at the American Petroleum Institute. "Just like improvements in a lot of technologies, there have beenimprovements in flaring technologies," he said. The South Coast air district staff began monitoring flaring in1999. Although emissions have dropped considerably, the staff believes emissions need to be controlled. InSeptember 2004, the air quality district board directed the staff to draw up a rule. Industry and communityrepresentatives have monitored the evolution of that proposed rule in a series of meetings. That process getshigh marks from Sparano at the petroleum association, who has been deeply involved in the talks. "Refinershave not fought having a rule. We have been embedded in the process," he said. "This is one of the mostintense and effective collaborations that I've seen for a long time." The rule would add more monitoringrequirements and require certain improvements, such as video cameras to record flaring. Each refinery wouldbe assigned a specific standard to meet in reducing flaring. It would cut emissions of all pollutants at countyrefineries, with daily sulfur oxide emissions dropping to 1.5 tons by 2006 and 0.7 tons by 2010. Somecommunity and environmental activists, however, say they want the district to devise a rule similar to oneadopted in July by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District That rule requires each refinery to draw up aplan showing how it will reduce emissions. A similar provision was dropped from the proposed South Coast rulethis summer, riling environmentalists. May, of Communities for a Better Environment, is also concerned that17 March 2013 Page 194 of 483 ProQuestrefineries would be allowed to flare for "essential operational needs," which she dismisses as a grab bag ofexcuses that provides refineries with a major loophole. But an air quality district official involved in designing therule says that requiring each refinery to design a plan would be cumbersome and difficult to enforce. Sparanodeclined to discuss specific concerns his group has with the proposed rule, saying he does not want tonegotiate in public. But Fazeli said the current version is fraught with loopholes. "We cannot support it in itscurrent form," he said. * (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX) Flaring up During last week's blackout, some Angelenoswere worried by large flames and smoke rising from refinery stacks that are designed to be relativelysmokeless. Here is what happens in emergencies: 1. Excess pressure forces gases through spring-loadedvalves and into a network of pipes. 2. Pressure builds and forces the flammable gases to break through thewater seal and flow to the stack. 3. Pilot lights ignite the gases. A large release of gases, as happened duringthe blackout, produces flame and smoke. * Source: Western States Petroleum Assn. Graphics reporting byCheryl Brownstein-Santiago Illustration Caption: GRAPHIC: Flaring up; CREDIT: PAUL DUGINSKI Los AngelesTimes; PHOTO: PRESSURE BUILDS: When the Valero-Ultramar refinery and others in Wilmington lost poweron Sept. 12, they burned off gases, sending flames and billowing black smoke into the air and adding fuel to anair quality debate over curbs on the practice of flaring.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Richard Hartog Los Angeles TimesCredit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Air pollution; Outdoor air quality; RefineriesLocation: Wilmington CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2005Publication date: Sep 19, 2005Year: 2005Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422030879Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2005 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-31Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand17 March 2013 Page 195 of 483 ProQuest_______________________________________________________________Document 93 of 213Wines Fail the ... Smog Test?; Controls are proposed to curb ethanol, a pollutant, from San JoaquinValley vintners.Author: Bustillo, MiguelPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 22 Aug 2005: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The San Joaquin Valley's 109 wineries emit 788 tons a year of smog-forming gases, air pollutionofficials estimate. The vintners - - which include E.&J. Gallo, Ironstone and Bronco -- are some of the world'sbiggest winemakers, producing more than 300 million gallons of wine annually. The largest valley wineriesmass-produce a wide array of red, white and blush wines, but their biggest volume is in inexpensive table winessold in bulk sizes. In exchange for not installing the equipment on fermentation tanks, large wineries would haveto make similar pollution reductions elsewhere in the San Joaquin Valley, such as reducing emissions from theirdelivery truck fleets or paying to curtail air pollution from other businesses, said Seyed Sadredin, the district'sdeputy air pollution control officer. The San Joaquin Valley's 18 largest wineries are responsible for 95% of thesmog-forming gases that the region's wineries emit during fermentation, regulators estimate.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Uncork a bottle of fine California wine and the delightful aroma it exudes is called bouquet. But multiplythat bottle by the millions produced in the Central Valley, and regulators refer to those same wine gases by aless pleasant name: smog-forming pollution. By the standard the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency uses togauge the severity of smog, the San Joaquin Valley in recent years has surpassed Los Angeles and Houston tobecome America's bad air capital. Charged with cleaning up the country's dirtiest air, the San Joaquin Valley AirPollution Control District is preparing to adopt the nation's first air quality restrictions on winemaking. The gaseswafting from the valley's sprawling wineries, which produce most of the wine made in America, do not rank withcar exhaust or cow flatulence as leading causes of the region's thickening air pollution. But regulators maintainthat the wineries are giving off far more than a subtle hint of unhealthful air. The San Joaquin Valley's 109wineries emit 788 tons a year of smog-forming gases, air pollution officials estimate. The vintners - - whichinclude E.&J. Gallo, Ironstone and Bronco -- are some of the world's biggest winemakers, producing more than300 million gallons of wine annually. The largest valley wineries mass-produce a wide array of red, white andblush wines, but their biggest volume is in inexpensive table wines sold in bulk sizes. The district is scheduled toapprove the proposed regulations before the end of the year. As it stands, the rules would require massproducers of wine to install on their fermentation tanks the pollution controls that are typically used in oilrefineries and steel mills. The equipment, which could cost each large winery millions of dollars, would be usedprimarily to catch wayward emissions of ethanol, alcohol produced during the fermentation of wine. Ethanol isconsidered a volatile organic compound, one of two major classes of pollutants that combine to create smog.Winemakers say that they are willing to help clean the valley's air but are concerned that ill-conceived pollutioncontrols could collect bacteria and contaminate their carefully crafted Pinot Grigios, Merlots and Chardonnays."The industry in general is for clean air. We are environmentally conscious, we have a code of sustainable winegrowing practices," said Chris Indelicato, chief executive of Delicato Vineyards and scion of one of California'soldest wine families. "The problem here is that this is going to cost millions of dollars, and it's not even proven towork," he said. "And there would not even be that much of a benefit, because we really are not gross polluters."Industry lawyers and winemaking engineers say that by sucking wine vapors from the fermentation tanks likevacuums, the pollution controls could even harm the smell and taste of wines, one of California's most17 March 2013 Page 196 of 483 ProQuestcelebrated exports. "It's technology that is used on refineries. But you don't drink gasoline," said Wendell Lee,an attorney for the Wine Institute, a trade association representing more than 800 California wineries. "We wantto help improve air quality, but not in a way that compromises the winemaking tradition." Acknowledging that thepollution controls have the potential to affect food sanitation and the flavor of wines, San Joaquin air officialssaid last week that they are considering revisions to their proposed rule that would allow wineries to effectivelybuy their way out of the requirements. In exchange for not installing the equipment on fermentation tanks, largewineries would have to make similar pollution reductions elsewhere in the San Joaquin Valley, such as reducingemissions from their delivery truck fleets or paying to curtail air pollution from other businesses, said SeyedSadredin, the district's deputy air pollution control officer. "The old days when we just copied the rules" of LosAngeles-area smog regulators "are long gone," Sadredin said. "We are leading the world in developingsolutions to our own problems, which in many ways are now worse than the problems in Southern California."Though the region is rapidly becoming urbanized, much of its pollution comes from its large agribusinessoperations. As a result, air quality officials have begun proposing a series of groundbreaking rules to slash airpollution from previously unregulated sources, such as dairy cows, and are offering incentives to replace olddiesel-burning water pumps and farm tractors with cleaner, more modern equipment. Households are alsobeing required to cut back the pollution they emit with a rule that prohibits the burning of logs in fireplaces ondays when smog reaches unhealthful levels. "What we're seeing in the valley is what you probably saw in L.A.in the early '70s, where people are being asked to change their lifestyle, and businesses are being asked tochange what they do," said state Sen. Dean Florez (D-Shafter), author of a law that eliminated an exemptionthat had allowed agriculture to escape air pollution regulations. "That's still new to people here, but the airquality problem has gotten to a point where everyone will have to do their part." "Everyone" should certainlyinclude wineries, Florez said. Napa and Sonoma may garner the praise of the gastronomes, but the inlandcounties of the Central Valley are California's true winemaking workhorses. The region is responsible forroughly 70% of the table wines produced in California, according to federal statistics, making it the nation'sleader. Most of that wine is grown by fewer than two dozen winemakers, including the massive Gallo Winery inFresno, Livingston and Modesto and the Mission Bell Winery in Madera, which is owned by ConstellationBrands, the world's largest wine company. The San Joaquin Valley's 18 largest wineries are responsible for95% of the smog-forming gases that the region's wineries emit during fermentation, regulators estimate. Theethanol emissions also help form another type of air pollution: particulate matter, or tiny airborne flecks thathave been linked to a wide array of respiratory problems. San Joaquin Valley air officials promised the EPA theywould reduce particulate pollution from the wineries as part of a blueprint for compliance with the Clean Air Act.As a result, they are required to pass rules restricting winery pollution by year's end. "Wine fermentation shouldhave been regulated years ago," said Brent Newell, an attorney with the Center on Race, Poverty &theEnvironment who has pushed San Joaquin Valley regulators for years to crack down on air pollution. "The factthat it is 2005 and it has yet to happen reflects the district's traditional deference to agriculture." Credit: TimesStaff WriterSubject: Smog; Environmental impact; Emissions control; Ethanol; Air pollution; Wineries & vineyardsLocation: San Joaquin ValleyCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910;Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 017 March 2013 Page 197 of 483 ProQuestPublication year: 2005Publication date: Aug 22, 2005Year: 2005Section: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421997661Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2005 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-31Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 94 of 2132 Ports Split on How to Clear the Air; L.A. and Long Beach share a bay but fight pollution in differentways. Environmentalists and area residents express their concerns.Author: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 13 Mar 2005: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Port air pollution is attracting considerable attention, especially in the wake of studies showing a highrisk of respiratory ailments in the port area. Rapid growth at both ports, spurred largely by imports from Asia,has increased emissions of particulate matter and nitrogen oxides from ships, trains and trucks. The problem isincreasing not only near the port but also along freeways and near warehouses as far east as Riverside andSan Bernardino counties. Long Beach council members -- clearly wary of trailing Los Angeles -- grilled their portrepresentatives last week to explain how their new "green port" policy compared with L.A.'s. Some werepuzzled by the absence of concrete pollution reduction goals, a concern echoed by environmentalists andresidents in the audience. Air district officials cite, by way of example, the Los Angeles proposal that shipsarriving at the port slow down 40 miles offshore to reduce air pollution, a measure that could becomemandatory. Both ports now ask ships to voluntarily slow down 20 miles away.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The nation's two largest seaports are pursuing different strategies to reduce air pollution, worryingenvironmental officials and residents who say that the lack of coordination could harm efforts to clean the airthroughout the Los Angeles Basin. Some fear the division will lead to conflicting regulations and a scenario in17 March 2013 Page 198 of 483 ProQuestwhich dirtier ships could choose the port with weaker standards. Taken together, the ports of Los Angeles andLong Beach, which are side by side in San Pedro Bay, are the largest source of air pollution in SouthernCalifornia. And the decades-old rivalry between them is evident as they forge separate plans to clean the air.The two ports recently conducted expensive surveys of the pollution they produce, using the same consultingfirm. But one port chose to study the year 2001, and the other 2002, making comparisons impossible. The portsare using different methods to measure pollution. And Los Angeles has asked regional air regulators to helpcraft its plan, while Long Beach has not. In the most dramatic sign of bad communication, Long Beach declineda recent invitation from Los Angeles to join in its much- publicized clean-air effort, spurning the opportunity todevelop a unified approach. The gulf between the ports became clear last Tuesday as Long Beach City Councilmembers struggled to decipher the air-pollution plan forged by a Los Angeles task force five days earlier. Noone from the port or city of Long Beach attended the task force's sessions, which had been held six miles away.The lack of coordination is frustrating residents and environmental officials, who point out that the tons of dieselfumes and nitrogen oxides from the two ports do not respect geographic boundaries; together they cause lifethreateningrespiratory problems across the region. "It all goes into the same air," said Peter M. Greenwald,senior policy advisor at the South Coast Air Quality Management District. He said he fears that shippers woulduse whatever port has less- stringent rules, undermining his agency's clean-air efforts. San Pedro activist JanetGunther implored Long Beach officials last week to work with Los Angeles. "To continue denying you are oneport becomes a little bit ridiculous. Look at a map! It's just one port." Some observers, however, think thevariances between the approaches taken by the two ports are largely cosmetic. "For the most part, I wouldargue that the differences are very minor," said T.L. Garrett, vice president of the Pacific Merchant ShippingAssn., which represents owners and operators of U.S. and foreign vessels operating in the Pacific Basin. "I dothink that the programs are in sync with one another," said Garrett, who until January was in charge of the airresources section in the environmental planning division at the Port of Los Angeles. Neither port has formallycompared evolving plans, although Long Beach planners are assembling a point-by-point comparison inresponse to a City Council request. But officials are nonetheless sparring over who has the better plan. LongBeach port officials are dismissive of much of the Los Angeles plan, saying it contains many measures that arelikely to become state or federal regulations. But Los Angeles officials bristle at that comment, contending thatthey will put these measures in place regardless of whether they become law. In addition, Long Beach officialssay their plan is more realistic. "It's my opinion that we're less words and more action," said Robert Kanter, LongBeach port planning director. For example, he said, Los Angeles planners are eyeing the potential forelectrifying the Alameda Corridor to reduce railroad emissions. Neither port has the power to accomplish such aproject, he said. "There are some radical ideas, pie-in-the-sky ideas, that I don't think are likely to take place inthe near term," he said. That characterization irks Ralph Appy, director of port environmental management inLos Angeles, who notes that his port invited its rival to join its six-month planning effort. "If they thought this wasall pie in the sky, they should have been over here. They could have set us all straight," he said. Port airpollution is attracting considerable attention, especially in the wake of studies showing a high risk of respiratoryailments in the port area. Rapid growth at both ports, spurred largely by imports from Asia, has increasedemissions of particulate matter and nitrogen oxides from ships, trains and trucks. The problem is increasing notonly near the port but also along freeways and near warehouses as far east as Riverside and San Bernardinocounties. Ports and shippers are adopting cleaner methods of moving cargo, but those advancements areoutstripped by growth, and cargo shipments are expected to triple by 2025. Staff members at both ports saythey work together frequently, as in their current effort to bring cleaner-burning locomotives to the ports. Still, thetwo remain fierce competitors, and Los Angeles recently edged ahead of Long Beach to seize the title of thenation's largest seaport. Los Angeles wooed the shipping giant Maersk Sealand away from Long Beach in2002, and its rival scored a coup a year later by bringing Carnival Cruise Lines to Long Beach. Now that rivalryis surfacing again. Los Angeles Mayor James K. Hahn last summer charged a task force with reducing port17 March 2013 Page 199 of 483 ProQuestpollution to 2001 levels. The draft plan approved March 3 would employ 65 measures to reach the 2001 goalsometime between 2009 and 2011. The group is still researching the costs of those measures and whatlegislation would be needed to implement them. The Long Beach policy, by contrast, does not list specific antismogmeasures but outlines major goals that the port has set, including "protect the community from harmfulside effects of port operations" and "employ best available technology to minimize environmental impacts." Atthe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Matt Haber, deputy director of the regional air division, said thatalthough the two ports are pursuing different approaches, their objectives are the same. He commended thenew Long Beach policy, noting the emphasis on "best available technology." But Long Beach council members -- clearly wary of trailing Los Angeles -- grilled their port representatives last week to explain how their new"green port" policy compared with L.A.'s. Some were puzzled by the absence of concrete pollution reductiongoals, a concern echoed by environmentalists and residents in the audience. "The report I heard tonight has nosense of urgency or immediacy," complained Regina Taylor, a resident of Long Beach's Wrigley area. Councilmember Rae Gabelich asked port representatives to explain why they did not accept the invitation from LosAngeles. One official responded that she was unaware an invitation was delivered. Another said he did notknow about the meeting last week. Gabelich was not appeased. "If we can't even keep track of each other'smeetings," she retorted, "how are we going to keep track of goals and objectives?" A Long Beach port officialpromised Friday that a representative would attend the next meeting of the Los Angeles task force. Some LongBeach critics also point out that the Los Angeles port invited the regulatory "heavies" -- the Air QualityManagement District, the state Air Resources Board and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency -- toparticipate. The agencies, whose support could be crucial in implementing plans, played a major role inreviewing technologies and crafting measures. "It's pretty clear that the port of L.A. has involved us to a greaterdegree in their decision-making. We think that's a good thing," the AQMD's Greenwald said. He added that he isseriously concerned that the absence of coordination will lead to unequal standards. "We do think it canundermine the controls to have differing levels of stringency," he said. Air district officials cite, by way ofexample, the Los Angeles proposal that ships arriving at the port slow down 40 miles offshore to reduce airpollution, a measure that could become mandatory. Both ports now ask ships to voluntarily slow down 20 milesaway. The Los Angeles plan would subsidize cleaner vehicles using both ports. The port already has allocatedmore than $21 million to a regional program that has replaced 350 trucks. The Long Beach port has notcontributed. Clean-air activists say that places the burden unfairly on Los Angeles, because many of theparticipating truckers serve both ports. Long Beach port spokesman Art Wong said the port had planned tocontribute to the program to offset emissions from a pier expansion that has been delayed. He did not rule outfuture support. "These are things we are exploring," Wong said. "This 'green' policy says we want leadership inenvironmental protection, and we have to figure out how to do that." Illustration Caption: GRAPHIC: MAP: LongBeach; CREDIT: Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: PLANNING IN L.A.: Drafting a plan to reduce Port of L.A.pollution are, from left, Barry Wallerstein, AQMD executive officer; Norm Tuck of the International Longshoreand Warehouse Union; and attorneys Cynthia Burch and Gail Ruderman Feuer.; PHOTOGRAPHER: KarenTapia- Andersen Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Environmental cleanup; Ports; Air pollutionLocation: Los Angeles California, Long Beach CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Port of Los Angeles; NAICS: 488310; Name: Port of Long Beach-California;NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.117 March 2013 Page 200 of 483 ProQuestNumber of pages: 0Publication year: 2005Publication date: Mar 13, 2005Year: 2005Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422012805Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2005 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-31Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 95 of 213CALIFORNIA; Panel Backs Plan to Curb Pollution at Port; Industry and regulatory representativesmeet to address emissions from ships, trucks and trains.Author: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 04 Mar 2005: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: A sweeping plan to slash air pollution caused by the Port of Los Angeles was endorsed Thursday by ablue-ribbon panel in what some experts are calling a historic first step in controlling pollution from the ships,trains and trucks serving California's fast-growing cargo industry. The preliminary plan approved unanimouslyThursday consists of 65 proposed methods to clean the air, including such measures as requiring low-sulfur fuelfor ships and trains, subsidizing truckers' purchase of cleaner-burning vehicles and making ships calling at theport plug into onshore power sources instead of idling their diesel-burning engines. DRAFTING PROPOSAL:Lauren Dunlap, left, and Noel Park react during meeting with regulators and industry representatives. The taskforce was appointed by Mayor [James K. Hahn] last summer to hold the line on pollution at the Port of LosAngeles.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Photographs by Karen Tapia-Andersen Los Angeles Times; WEIGHINGOPTIONS: Christopher Patton listens during the two-day task force meeting in San Pedro.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Karen Tapia-Andersen Los Angeles TimesLinks: Check Find It for Availability17 March 2013 Page 201 of 483 ProQuestFull text: A sweeping plan to slash air pollution caused by the Port of Los Angeles was endorsed Thursday by ablue-ribbon panel in what some experts are calling a historic first step in controlling pollution from the ships,trains and trucks serving California's fast-growing cargo industry. The draft plan created by air-quality expertsand regulators is a response to public concerns about the damaging health effects of diesel fumes and othercontaminants generated by the nation's largest seaport and by increasing rail and truck traffic crisscrossing theLos Angeles Basin. The experts said they believed that the blueprint could help drive a nationwide cleanup ofships, trains and trucks, much as California has led the country in other clean-air measures since the 1960s."We are out front. These really will have pretty significant impacts nationally," said Daniel E. Donohoue, chief ofthe emissions assessment branch of the California Air Resources Board, which helped formulate the plan. MattHaber, deputy director of the regional air division for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, said theapproach used in Los Angeles might become the "gold standard" for cleaning up ports nationwide. "We want todo what we can to have it replicated at other West Coast ports," he said. The preliminary plan approvedunanimously Thursday consists of 65 proposed methods to clean the air, including such measures as requiringlow-sulfur fuel for ships and trains, subsidizing truckers' purchase of cleaner-burning vehicles and making shipscalling at the port plug into onshore power sources instead of idling their diesel-burning engines. Somemeasures would rely on cleaner-burning ship and rail technology that is not yet commercially available -- whatengineers call "technology forcing" measures. The task force still needs to study how much the measures willcost and how they can be implemented. The preliminary plan of technological measures will be forwarded toMayor James K. Hahn, and a final plan incorporating costs and legal steps will go to the mayor's office thisspring. Deputy Mayor Doane Liu said Thursday evening that as Hahn moves to implement the plan, he will needto look at funding sources and possible new legislation as well as meeting with industry. The mayor "has metalready with a number of shipping lines and rail lines. They knew this is coming, it's going to take cooperationon their part," Liu said. The plan could spur new businesses focused on environmental technology in the area,he said. The task force was appointed by Hahn last summer to carry out his 2001 pledge to hold the line onpollution at the port, which, together with the Port of Long Beach, has become the single worst air polluter inSouthern California. But the port has grown so rapidly that even the lineup of measures developed this winterwill not reduce the two pollutants of most concern -- particulate matter and nitrogen oxides -- until 2010 or later.Barry Wallerstein, chief of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, attended the two-day session inSan Pedro and took an active role in shaping the plan. Without it, he warned, "the region will be doomed to dirtyair for the next 10 to 15 years." The task force includes representatives of the shipping industry, railroads,unions and environmental and community groups, as well as the three regulatory agencies -- the state airboard, EPA and AQMD - - that helped draft the measures reviewed during a two-day meeting. The most vocalopponents of the plan have been two railroad giants, Burlington Northern and Union Pacific, who say it dependstoo much on costly and untested technology for things like new locomotives that have yet to be developed. "It'sa real stretch when you consider these things don't exist," said Union Pacific attorney Carol Harris. Task forcemember Michele Grubbs, vice president of the Pacific Merchants Shipping Assn., said the group still had workahead to deal with the financial and legal implications. Illustration Caption: PHOTO: DRAFTING PROPOSAL:Lauren Dunlap, left, and Noel Park react during meeting with regulators and industry representatives. The taskforce was appointed by Mayor James K. Hahn last summer to hold the line on pollution at the Port of LosAngeles.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Photographs by Karen Tapia-Andersen Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: WEIGHINGOPTIONS: Christopher Patton listens during the two-day task force meeting in San Pedro.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Karen Tapia-Andersen Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Task forces; Air pollution; Emission standardsLocation: Los Angeles California17 March 2013 Page 202 of 483 ProQuestCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910;Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910; Name: Port of Los Angeles; NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2005Publication date: Mar 4, 2005Year: 2005Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422138724Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2005 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-31Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 96 of 213Port Clean-Air Plan Nearly Set; Experts ready proposals for pushing pollution back to 2001 levels withstrict rules, growth cap.Author: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 03 Mar 2005: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: A road map to cleaner air in and around the Port of Los Angeles could be crafted today as a highpoweredpanel of experts wrestles with how to roll back air pollution to 2001 levels at the country's largestseaport. "That's the ultimate backstop," said port environmental expert Christopher Patton. He is helping leadthe task force appointed last summer by Mayor James K. Hahn with orders to determine how to reduce pollutionto 2001 levels. A controversial measure to rein in pollution from railroad locomotives will be discussed thismorning, and a representative from Union Pacific railroad expressed concerns Wednesday that a railroadrepresentative had not been included in the working group.17 March 2013 Page 203 of 483 ProQuestLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: A road map to cleaner air in and around the Port of Los Angeles could be crafted today as a highpoweredpanel of experts wrestles with how to roll back air pollution to 2001 levels at the country's largestseaport. Officials overseeing the effort said Wednesday evening that they are increasingly optimistic that thepanel will move ahead today to approve a preliminary plan to slash pollution from ships, trains, trucks and yardequipment over the next 20 years. The push to create the first-in-the-nation clean-air plan for a seaport comesamid mounting public concern that the fast-growing Los Angeles-Long Beach port complex has become theregion's worst air polluter. Diesel fumes and other contaminants created by moving cargo through the ports arefouling the air, not only in the Harbor area, but along freeways and railroad lines east to the warehouses ofRiverside and San Bernardino counties. Measures being weighed include stringent regulations and voluntarysteps, but one little-noticed proposal, known as "03" -- on Page 104 of the draft plan -- would impose a growthcap if pollution grew above certain levels. "That's the ultimate backstop," said port environmental expertChristopher Patton. He is helping lead the task force appointed last summer by Mayor James K. Hahn withorders to determine how to reduce pollution to 2001 levels. But the panelists learned Wednesday that even thebarrage of more than 60 cutting-edge measures in their plan would take five years or longer to roll backpollution to 2001 levels. For the first time, they also saw charts showing how two major types of contaminants --particulate matter and nitrogen oxides -- would continue to mount until 2010 or later, despite the ambitiouscurbs, some of which would require new laws or still-to-be- perfected technology. Hahn's effort to create aclean-air plan gained momentum when three major agencies that regulate Southern California air quality - - theSouth Coast Air Quality Management District, the state Air Resources Board and the U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency -- dispatched some of their top technical staff to work with port experts and consultants on aworking group advising the larger task force. They have devised the preliminary plan now being reviewed bytask force members at a marathon two-day session at the Sheraton in San Pedro. Those members includerepresentatives of the railroad and shipping industry, community and environmental groups, and unions.Several members said they were encouraged by the convivial atmosphere of the Wednesday meeting. "We gotconsensus on most issues," said Port Commissioner Thomas Warren, co-chairman of the group. GailRuderman Feuer, senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said she was "very encouraged.I'm optimistic that this task force will deliver to the mayor a strong plan that will achieve no net increase." But acontroversial measure to rein in pollution from railroad locomotives will be discussed this morning, and arepresentative from Union Pacific railroad expressed concerns Wednesday that a railroad representative hadnot been included in the working group. Some members voiced disappointment that the adjacent Port of LongBeach, the nation's second-largest port, did not accept an invitation from rival Los Angeles to join the task forcedeliberations that began last fall. Richard Steinke, executive director of the Port of Long Beach, confirmedWednesday that his port received an invitation, but he said the port's harbor commissioners chose to developtheir own "green port" plan adopted in January. Los Angeles task force members said that is not enough."There needs to be a level playing field. It's unfair to do it in Los Angeles and not in Long Beach," Feuer said.Hahn is seeking to fulfill his 2001 vow to hold the line on emissions at the city-owned port. Credit: Times StaffWriterSubject: Environmental protection; Air pollution; PortsLocation: Los Angeles CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Port of Los Angeles; NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.317 March 2013 Page 204 of 483 ProQuestNumber of pages: 0Publication year: 2005Publication date: Mar 3, 2005Year: 2005Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421956432Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2005 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-31Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 97 of 213It's Not All Blue Skies for Drilling Project; Expansion of gas wells in Rocky Mountain states willdegrade the air at several national parks.Author: Bustillo, MiguelPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 29 Jan 2005: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: [Gutzon Borglum]'s vision endures in the Black Hills of South Dakota about 130 miles from here, butfor nearly a month every year, it may soon become harder to see the famous faces through the man-made hazegenerated by the addition of 50,000 gas wells in northeastern Wyoming and southeastern Montana. Emissionsare also expected to hinder visibility at Wyoming's Yellowstone National Park on 13 days, at South Dakota'sBadlands National Park on 28 days and at Montana's Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation on 92 days. AtDevils Tower National Monument in Wyoming, the monolithic rock formation made famous by the movie "CloseEncounters of the Third Kind," air pollution will degrade visibility on 47 days, the analysis found. Paul Beels, aBLM official who oversaw the environmental review for the Wyoming portion of the project, said Wyoming didnot want the BLM to require measures to reduce air pollution.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: When he turned Mt. Rushmore into his granite canvas, sculptor Gutzon Borglum wrote that the facesof Presidents Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt and Lincoln would remain visible, Lord willing, "until the wind17 March 2013 Page 205 of 483 ProQuestand the rain alone shall wear them away." Borglum's vision endures in the Black Hills of South Dakota about130 miles from here, but for nearly a month every year, it may soon become harder to see the famous facesthrough the man-made haze generated by the addition of 50,000 gas wells in northeastern Wyoming andsoutheastern Montana. It is just one of several ways in which the largest expansion of natural gas drillingapproved by the federal government is expected to degrade air quality in the region that today has the clearestskies in the lower 48 states. The federal Bureau of Land Management, under pressure from the White House tofast-track energy production, approved the drilling plan two years ago without incorporating any requirements toreduce the resulting air pollution. Government scientists expect that the drilling expansion, combined with aplanned increase in coal mining and oil drilling in the northern Great Plains, will nearly double smog-formingemissions and greatly increase particulate matter pollution in a thinly populated region that has produced lessthan 3% of the amount of unhealthful air found in Los Angeles. The BLM moved forward with the project despiteits own air quality analysis, which concluded that the pollution would cloud views at more than a dozen nationalparks and monuments, exceed federal air quality standards in several communities and cause acid rain to fallon mountain lakes, where it could harm fish and wildlife. The Environmental Protection Agency, National ParkService and U.S. Forest Service expressed similar concerns to the BLM. The agency was told to expectparticle-laden dust clouds and smog- forming exhaust from what amounted to a new industrial zone of gaswells, compressor stations and service roads spanning more than 30 million acres. "From our review, it appearsthis project may be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act," Forest Service officials wrote in a 2002 letter to theBLM. The letter stated that the Forest Service was particularly concerned about the effects of pollution and acidrain on several popular wilderness recreation areas. EPA officials wrote in a similar 2002 letter to the landmanagement agency: "Monitoring and mitigation are given short shrift." They added that the agency'senvironmental review did not "adequately link the modeled impacts, which are clearly above regulatory criteria,with what BLM proposes that it would do or it would recommend others do to mitigate impacts." BLM officialsacknowledged they were under orders from Washington to quickly approve the projects, which the Bushadministration considered vital to meeting the nation's energy needs. The U.S. Energy Department predictedlast year that natural gas demand would grow 38% by 2025. The Powder River Basin, the energy-rich region ofWyoming and Montana where the drilling plan was authorized, is believed to contain enough natural gas topower the country for a year. The administration has also accelerated drilling in Utah, Colorado and NewMexico, raising concerns about environmental effects. But the increase in drilling activity has been greatest inWyoming. There, BLM officials said they were collaborating with state officials and industry groups to see thatsteps were taken to prevent serious problems. "Even though we approved these wells, we were careful todisclose all impacts, and we have been working to mitigate them," said Richard Zander, assistant field managerfor minerals and lands at the BLM field office in Buffalo, Wyo. Wyoming officials, now flooded with permitapplications to run heavy equipment at the gas fields, are planning a massive network of monitoring sensors tomeasure how much air pollution the fields are generating. Officials, however, concede that they are not surehow the state will pay for all of it. Gas companies are helping purchase some of the monitors. "We definitelywant to make sure we don't violate the Clean Air Act," said John Corra, director of the Wyoming Department ofEnvironmental Quality. Critics say it will be difficult for government regulators to control the pollution after failingto address it upfront. "It was one of the worst pieces of work I have seen in a long time, and it made me mad,"said John Molenar, an air pollution consultant who has worked for the National Park Service. He was hired by aWyoming environmental group, the Powder River Basin Resource Council, to review the gas project. "Let's behonest about the consequences," Molenar said. "There will be an observable brown cloud at some times of theyear that people will get mad about." Now underway, the drilling boom, which will take two decades to complete,has already added more than 3,000 natural gas wells to the Powder River Basin, a picturesque landscape ofmeandering streams, rolling hills and expansive ranches where Crazy Horse once fought U.S. soldiers andButch Cassidy hid from lawmen. The air pollution from the gas project, when combined with existing emissions17 March 2013 Page 206 of 483 ProQuestfrom cars, coal mines and power plants, is expected to diminish visibility at Mt. Rushmore National Memorial 26days a year, according to the BLM's air quality analysis. Other government estimates, which did not take intoaccount local weather factors, said the haze could obscure views of the monument for up to 180 days a year.Emissions are also expected to hinder visibility at Wyoming's Yellowstone National Park on 13 days, at SouthDakota's Badlands National Park on 28 days and at Montana's Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation on 92days. At Devils Tower National Monument in Wyoming, the monolithic rock formation made famous by themovie "Close Encounters of the Third Kind," air pollution will degrade visibility on 47 days, the analysis found.Oil and gas companies began pushing to expand drilling during the last two years of the Clinton administration,as natural gas prices surged. Those efforts went into overdrive under President George W. Bush, who madeenergy development in the Rocky Mountain states a top priority. As the size of the expansion became clear,numerous government agencies filed written complaints with the BLM about the effect on air, water and wildlife."We are particularly concerned that the project may result in significant or potentially adverse impacts to severalunits of the National Park System," park service officials wrote. In addition to concerns over haze, park serviceofficials warned that air pollution could produce more acid rain, which occurs when emissions of sulfur dioxideand nitrogen oxides react in the atmosphere. EPA officials noted that particulate matter, mainly a result ofsurface coal mining, had already violated federal limits in parts of Wyoming on 13 days during 2001 and 2002.They warned that increased traffic at gas fields was sure to kick up dust, making the problem worse. Paul Beels,a BLM official who oversaw the environmental review for the Wyoming portion of the project, said Wyoming didnot want the BLM to require measures to reduce air pollution. "They basically didn't want the feds messingaround and telling them how this was going to be regulated," Beels said. Unpersuaded, four environmentalgroups have filed a federal lawsuit accusing the U.S. Department of the Interior, which oversees the landmanagement agency, of failing to protect air quality as required by the Clean Air Act and other federal laws.They assert that the natural gas blueprint the BLM approved should be scaled back or put on hold unless thepotential for pollution can be reduced. In response, industry groups are pressing Congress to rewrite the rulesprotecting visibility at national parks, arguing that they have become a way for environmentalists to hold upenergy production. Their effort is supported by Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal, who is worried that the hazerules will take away the state's power to police energy projects. In a letter to Bush administration officials lastyear, the Democratic governor argued that the visibility guidelines should be withdrawn. Wyoming, which hasroughly half a million residents, depends on natural resource extraction for its financial health. It enjoys a $949-million budget surplus, largely due to revenue from natural gas and mining. "You are going to see this issueaddressed -- no doubt about it," said Jim Sims, a former communications director for Vice President DickCheney's energy task force who is now executive director of the Western Business Roundtable. "These toolshave given antidevelopment groups grounds for a lawsuit. Some of these [visibility] changes are hardly evennoticeable." Wyoming oil and gas groups are downplaying the effects, contending that the region's gas depositswill be drained in two decades. "When you are building a house, there is a lot of activity; but after that you put inthe grass and the trees, and it calms down considerably," said Bruce Hinchey, president of the Petroleum Assn.of Wyoming. "It's similar with these wells." However, early data from natural gas fields in another part of thestate show that state and federal officials underestimated the extent of air pollution. The fields in the UpperGreen River Valley, approved during the Clinton administration, produced 2 1/2 times more nitrogen oxidepollution than government officials anticipated. Nitrogen oxides are one of the main ingredients of smog. "It'spretty obvious that since 1999, we have seen a marked increase" in nitrogen oxide emissions, said Ted Porwoll,an air- quality technician at Bridger-Teton National Forest, who has been monitoring air quality since 1984.Federal officials are now proposing to expand drilling in the Upper Green River area to more than 10,000 wellsover the next two decades. Meanwhile, ranchers and residents have complained about flaring, or open burningof impure natural gas, which releases plumes of pollutants into the air. They have petitioned the state toregulate it. One of the more outspoken critics is Perry Walker, a retired Air Force physicist and amateur17 March 2013 Page 207 of 483 ProQuestastronomer. Two years ago, he began noticing that his nighttime views of the Sombrero Galaxy seemed to begetting cloudier. Walker, who set up his own monitors to track pollution in the Upper Green River Valley, saysthat views of the state's most majestic landmarks, such as the 13,000-foot peaks of the Wind River Range, arestarting to lose clarity. "We've got two beautiful mountains behind me here," Walker said, "and they'redisappearing into the haze. "The problem with this state is that people are afraid that these oil and gas men aregoing to get in their white pickups and go back to Texas," he said. "Of course, that's garbage. What they want isin the ground right here, and they have to work with us to get it." Illustration Caption: GRAPHIC: Clouding theair; CREDIT: Paul Duginski Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: ARTIST: Gutzon Borglum designed and created Mt.Rushmore. Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Environmental impact; Air pollution; Natural gas exploration; Wells; National parksLocation: United States, US, Rocky Mountain statesPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2005Publication date: Jan 29, 2005Year: 2005Dateline: GILLETTE, Wyo.Section: Main News; Part A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421988206Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2005 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-08-31Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 98 of 213Los Angeles; Plans for L.A. Port Focus on Pollution; Mayor's task force hears several environmentalmeasures designed to cut levels of toxic emissions.17 March 2013 Page 208 of 483 ProQuestAuthor: Jack Leonard and Deborah SchochPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 30 Dec 2004: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Port staffers presented the proposals at a meeting in San Pedro of a task force appointed by LosAngeles Mayor James K. Hahn. Hahn has asked the 28-member team -- drawn from the ranks of industry,labor, community and environmental groups -- to deliver a blueprint to meet a pledge he made to keepemissions from the port at 2001 levels. The task ahead will not be easy. Port emissions have already risenbeyond 2001 levels despite efforts to roll back pollution with measures such as encouraging shippingcompanies to use electricity for shipboard operations on docked vessels. In 2001, the port produced nearly20,000 tons of nitrogen oxides and 1,000 tons of particulate matter -- specks of dust and soot that can beinhaled into the lungs and increase the risk of cancer and heart disease. By 2012, according to a draft reportreleased by port officials Wednesday, nitrogen oxide emissions could increase by 8,712 tons and particulatematter could climb by 906 tons.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Port of Los Angeles officials unveiled an array of environmental initiatives Wednesday that couldbecome part of the city's bid to curb rising levels of air pollution at the fast-growing facility. Among the measuresare proposals to take aim at ship engines that belch high levels of toxic emissions, to convert the rail line fromthe port to electric power, and to replace older trucks with newer models with cleaner burning engines.Environmentalists and local community representatives welcomed the suggestions, which were released at thesame time new port calculations indicate recent antipollution efforts alone will fail to rein in pollution. "These areall good," said Noel Park, a San Pedro resident and longtime port critic who sits on the port's CommunityAdvisory Committee. "We believe that the survival of these communities as a viable place to live is in thebalance." Representatives from the railroad and shipping industries said they would need more time to studythe proposals. But they noted that port officials have yet to calculate the costs of the measures and said thatlegal obstacles might rule out some initiatives. Sharon Rubalcava, who represents a prospective terminaloperator, said she believed that requiring diesel-powered ships to add expensive new electric-poweredequipment to use while docked could be challenged in court by ship owners. "I don't think it would survive aconstitutional challenge," she said. Port staffers presented the proposals at a meeting in San Pedro of a taskforce appointed by Los Angeles Mayor James K. Hahn. Hahn has asked the 28-member team -- drawn from theranks of industry, labor, community and environmental groups -- to deliver a blueprint to meet a pledge he madeto keep emissions from the port at 2001 levels. Hahn's sister, L.A. Councilwoman Janice Hahn, who representsSan Pedro, attended the meeting and praised the effort to put a lid on the region's largest single source of airpollution. "This is not just a harbor issue," she said. "This is an issue for the entire L.A. Basin." The task aheadwill not be easy. Port emissions have already risen beyond 2001 levels despite efforts to roll back pollution withmeasures such as encouraging shipping companies to use electricity for shipboard operations on dockedvessels. In 2001, the port produced nearly 20,000 tons of nitrogen oxides and 1,000 tons of particulate matter --specks of dust and soot that can be inhaled into the lungs and increase the risk of cancer and heart disease. By2012, according to a draft report released by port officials Wednesday, nitrogen oxide emissions could increaseby 8,712 tons and particulate matter could climb by 906 tons. Port officials have yet to calculate how much theproposals would reduce pollution, but plan to do so in the next few weeks. Hanh's task force is scheduled tosubmit a draft plan to the mayor by the end of February. Credit: Times Staff WritersSubject: Environmental impact; Shipping; Reforms; Ports; Air pollutionLocation: Los Angeles California17 March 2013 Page 209 of 483 ProQuestCompany / organization: Name: Port of Los Angeles; NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Dec 30, 2004Year: 2004Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421981037Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 99 of 213Plan to Cut Port Smog to Be Unveiled; Potential new rules and initiatives to reduce air pollution couldrequire widespread changes and cost billions of dollars.Author: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 27 Dec 2004: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: In 2001, ships and other sources of pollution at the Port of Los Angeles produced an estimated 1,000tons of particulates, specks of dust and soot that can be inhaled deep into the lungs and increase the risk ofcancer and heart disease. By 2025, as port traffic continues to soar, the amount of particulates, much of whichcomes from diesel exhaust, could more than double, to 2,724 tons, according to worst-case projections. [JamesK. Hahn] has pledged to keep emissions from the port at 2001 levels - - a level the port already has farexceeded. When residents complained last summer that city and port officials were doing little to achieve thegoal, Hahn assembled a 28-member task force including representatives from the shipping industry, labor, thecommunity and environmental groups and charged them with deciding by the end of this year how to reduceport pollution. Michele Grubbs, who represents the Pacific Maritime Shipping Assn., a trade group of shippers17 March 2013 Page 210 of 483 ProQuestand terminal operators, wonders if the team is overestimating its pollution projections. Newer cargo ships arecleaner and carry more containers, meaning fewer ships emitting less pollution will be calling at the port, shesaid.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: In an effort to put a lid on Southern California's largest single source of air pollution, local, state andfederal experts this week plan to unveil dozens of potential new rules and initiatives to cut smog from the fastgrowingLos Angeles port complex. In all, the proposals could cost billons of dollars and demand widespreadchanges at the nation's busiest seaport. One of the most novel ideas: a trade-in program to replace all truckscalling at the port with cleaner models built in 2004 or later. Replacing 1,000 trucks would cost $35 million to$40 million, and officials estimate that several thousand older trucks could be affected. Other ideas wouldemploy technology rarely, if ever, used in the United States, including new power sources for ships docked atthe port or idling near shore. Some ideas, such as restrictions on fuels for ships and trucks, might require newstate or federal legislation. For the last two months, as they crafted their plan, which is scheduled to receive itsfirst public airing Wednesday, experts from the port and state and federal air quality agencies have beenmeeting for six hours a week or more via telephone conference calls, huddled over spreadsheets, graphics andcalculators in offices and conference rooms. One call in late November was expected to last two hours butlasted seven, interrupted only by a half-hour lunch break. The experts, conscious of California's reputation forinnovative environmental rules, hope to produce a model of how to cut pollution at U.S. seaports, even as Asianimports continue to drive shipping to record levels. "I can't think of anything that's more important for us to doright now," said Ed Avol, a professor of preventive medicine at USC who is helping to prepare Wednesday'spresentation to a task force appointed by Los Angeles Mayor James K. Hahn. "This will really set the tone forhow other ports deal with pollution." The stakes are high. Although toxic emissions from cars and other sourceshave dropped dramatically in recent years, the Los Angeles area is still beset with the worst air pollution of anyU.S. metropolitan area. The fast-growing Los Angeles-Long Beach port complex is not only the largest airpolluter in Southern California, it is one of the few where emissions are "large and growing," said MichaelScheible, deputy executive director of the state Air Resources Board. In 2001, ships and other sources ofpollution at the Port of Los Angeles produced an estimated 1,000 tons of particulates, specks of dust and sootthat can be inhaled deep into the lungs and increase the risk of cancer and heart disease. By 2025, as porttraffic continues to soar, the amount of particulates, much of which comes from diesel exhaust, could more thandouble, to 2,724 tons, according to worst-case projections. Similarly, emissions of nitrogen oxides, a keycomponent of smog, could increase from 20,000 tons in 2001 to 39,700 tons in 2025, the projections show.Hahn has pledged to keep emissions from the port at 2001 levels - - a level the port already has far exceeded.When residents complained last summer that city and port officials were doing little to achieve the goal, Hahnassembled a 28-member task force including representatives from the shipping industry, labor, the communityand environmental groups and charged them with deciding by the end of this year how to reduce port pollution.For the last two months, out of public view, the team of experts that will report to Hahn's task force has beenstudying how to reduce pollution at the port and along freeways and railroad lines across the region. Aside fromits sheer scope, what makes the initiative so unusual is that experts from local, state and federal regulatoryagencies are working closely with the port staff. Typically, the port would produce a plan that would then bereviewed by those agencies. "What it shows is there's a sense of the importance of this, and a sense that wehave to move quickly," said one of the experts, Peter Greenwald, a senior policy advisor at the South Coast AirQuality Management District. The bulk of the work has been done by a group of technical experts from the portand the three major agencies overseeing air quality: the South Coast air district, the state Air Resources Boardand the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Showcasing an array of measures, from the use of low-sulfurfuel to cleaner-burning engines, the experts hope to show the task force how to close the gap between the17 March 2013 Page 211 of 483 ProQuestamount of pollution three years ago and the amount expected by 2025. Both the shipping industry and Hahnhave incentives to support the cleanup effort. In the last two years, growth of the port and the neighboring Portof Long Beach have sparked an intense debate over how to weigh the economic benefits of moving goodsthrough the Los Angeles region against the costs to public health. Residents from San Pedro to Riverside havecastigated government and business leaders for what they see as an emphasis on moving goods rather thancleaning the air. Industry officials fear the outcry could derail key transportation projects such as the LongBeach Freeway expansion or lead to no-growth campaigns directed at the ports. The political implications aresignificant for Hahn, who faces stiff competition in the March mayoral primary. Hahn's opponents sharplycriticized the mayor during a recent televised debate for what they termed his slowness in dealing with portpollution. Air quality regulators say their unusual involvement in the project stems from their own concerns aboutincreasing port pollution. The biggest polluters at the ports are diesel-burning ships. They are largely foreignownedand unregulated by state or federal agencies. Other major sources, such as trucks and railroadlocomotives, are bound by far less stringent regulations than cars. The course of the debate over port pollutionmay hinge on the control methods the experts identify and how those measures are viewed in coming weeks bya variety of interests, including community groups and the shipping and railroad industries. After Wednesday'spresentation, the task force will study the proposal and prepare a draft report for the mayor to be followed bypublic hearings. An array of government agencies and business groups would have to agree to the plan. Noone expects smooth sailing. Residents remain wary, although task force member Noel Park of San Pedro, alongtime port critic, said he is guardedly optimistic that the panel will produce useful information about how tocontrol pollution. "I'm less optimistic that programs will be implemented without some fierce budget fights," saidPark, who fears the effort will be undermined by what he describes as "political and legal maneuverings" by portofficials and industry leaders. Business representatives on the mayor's task force also are taking a cautiousapproach. Michele Grubbs, who represents the Pacific Maritime Shipping Assn., a trade group of shippers andterminal operators, wonders if the team is overestimating its pollution projections. Newer cargo ships arecleaner and carry more containers, meaning fewer ships emitting less pollution will be calling at the port, shesaid. One major issue is how to pay for new control measures. Some task force members would like to seesubsidies to industry to speed the adoption of controls. Others hope the federal government will step in, sincethe Los Angeles-Long Beach complex handles more than 40% of the nation's international container trade. TheWednesday presentation will include models of how the amount of pollutants might be reduced to 2001 levelsby the years 2008, 2010 and 2012, said Christopher Patton, a port staff environmental expert on the technicalteam. Some team members were planning to work through the holiday weekend to complete those models,Patton said. "Everyone is holding their breath, wanting to see how close we get," he said. "I am cautiouslyoptimistic that we'll have something that demonstrates that it can be done, without some draconian measureslike putting growth caps on, but that's always in the wings." Illustration Caption: GRAPHIC: Tough target to meet(includes MAP); CREDIT: Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Air pollution; Vehicle emissions; Environmental regulations; Pollution control costs; Pollution control;SmogLocation: Los Angeles CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Port of Los Angeles; NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 200417 March 2013 Page 212 of 483 ProQuestPublication date: Dec 27, 2004Year: 2004Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421942923Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 100 of 213Drugs May Offer Shield From Pollution's Harm; Researchers find that two types of medications takenfor high blood pressure can apparently block the deadly effects of air contaminants.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 08 Dec 2004: A.32.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The scientists reported that calcium channel blockers "had the most profound effect" on preventing airpollution from disrupting heart rates, according to the study published in this week's online journalEnvironmental Health Perspectives. Widely used for two decades, the medications, such as Procardia andCardizem, are prescribed for high blood pressure and some cardiac problems. Beta blockers, prescribed for thesame conditions, also were protective but less so. Dozens of studies conducted worldwide have shown thatdeaths and hospitalizations from heart attacks, strokes, asthma attacks and other diseases increase whenconcentrations of fine particles and ozone rise. Researchers at Yale and Johns Hopkins universities recentlycalculated that ozone causes several thousand more deaths throughout the United States each year.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Medications commonly prescribed for people with high blood pressure may protect them from thepotentially deadly effects of air pollution, according to a new study that examined hundreds of older men.Numerous studies have shown that people die more often from heart attacks, strokes and other cardiovascularproblems on smoggy and sooty days. But Harvard University researchers have found that two types of drugs,calcium channel blockers and beta blockers, apparently can shield the effects of the pollutants. The scientistsreported that calcium channel blockers "had the most profound effect" on preventing air pollution from disrupting17 March 2013 Page 213 of 483 ProQuestheart rates, according to the study published in this week's online journal Environmental Health Perspectives.Widely used for two decades, the medications, such as Procardia and Cardizem, are prescribed for high bloodpressure and some cardiac problems. Beta blockers, prescribed for the same conditions, also were protectivebut less so. Epidemiologists believe that fine particles of soot, mostly from diesel exhaust and factories, andozone, the main ingredient of smog, can interfere with the nervous system's control over variations in heartrates. People with low heart rate variability are considered prone to heart attacks. The team at Harvard's Schoolof Public Health, led by Dr. Sung Kyun Park, examined 497 men -- average age 72 -- from the Boston area,comparing their heart functions to air pollution levels recorded nearby. The scientists reported that on dayswhen ozone and fine particle pollution increased, the men had lower readings for heart rate variability; therewas less of an effect on those taking the medications. Dr. Henry Gong, a USC professor of medicine whospecializes in the health effects of air pollutants, said it was plausible that the medications could shield peoplefrom all causes of heart rate problems, including air pollution. But scientists would have to compare peopletaking the drugs who were breathing purified air with those breathing polluted air to offer more substantialevidence, he said. Because the lungs and heart work together, experts theorize that when tiny particles areinhaled, they inflame the lungs, triggering a neurological response in the heart. The calcium blockermedications, designed to stop calcium from reaching heart cells and allow blood to flow more freely to the heart,also may block that unwanted neurological response. Dozens of studies conducted worldwide have shown thatdeaths and hospitalizations from heart attacks, strokes, asthma attacks and other diseases increase whenconcentrations of fine particles and ozone rise. Researchers at Yale and Johns Hopkins universities recentlycalculated that ozone causes several thousand more deaths throughout the United States each year. Studies,including the new Harvard one, also have found that diabetics are at high risk because the pollutants alter theirheart rates. Health experts welcomed the news that commonly prescribed medications might protect the millionsof people who are most vulnerable to air pollution. But they say that efforts must continue to combat particulatesand smog. Levels of the pollutants in the Boston area where the heart study was conducted were considerablylower than in Southern California. About 100 million Americans live in areas that violate federal health standardsfor ozone, and about 20 million live in areas that exceed particulate standards, according to the EnvironmentalProtection Agency. But numerous studies have found increased deaths even in areas that are not consideredhighly polluted. Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Medical research; Hypertension; Air pollution; Prescription drugsPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.32Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Dec 8, 2004Year: 2004Section: Main News; Part A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: Newspapers17 March 2013 Page 214 of 483 ProQuestLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421999925Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 101 of 213Study Finds Smog Raises Death Rate; Scientists researching pollution's short-term health effects in95 U.S. urban areas link mortality rates to higher daily ozone levels.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 17 Nov 2004: A.20.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Scientists have long known that ozone, the main ingredient of smog, aggravates asthma and otherrespiratory illnesses and causes hospital visits to surge, particularly in severely polluted areas such as SouthernCalifornia. But the study in the Journal of the American Medical Assn. is the first major nationwide endeavor thatlinks day-to-day ozone levels with an increased number of deaths. In New York, the small increase in ozonecaused an additional 319 deaths annually. For the 95 areas nationwide, 3,767 more people died per year whenozone increased by 10 parts per billion. Ozone levels fluctuate greatly, and increases of that magnitude occurroutinely. In the Los Angeles region, the current federal health standard, 120 parts per billion, was violated 27days this year. One day last year, it reached as high as 216 parts per billion, almost double the amount deemedhealthful. The worst levels occur in San Bernardino County. Dr. Henry Gong, a professor of medicine at USCand a leading air pollution researcher, called the increase in deaths "plausible" because ozone was a potentirritant that inflamed airways and triggered asthma attacks and other breathing problems. Recent research alsohas implicated air pollutants, especially particulates, in heart attacks, based on evidence that they damage thenervous system's ability to vary the heart rate to handle stress.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: On smoggy days, deaths from heart and respiratory ailments and other diseases rise, causing severalthousand more people throughout the United States to die each year, according to a study published Tuesdaythat links air pollution and mortality in 95 urban areas. Scientists have long known that ozone, the mainingredient of smog, aggravates asthma and other respiratory illnesses and causes hospital visits to surge,particularly in severely polluted areas such as Southern California. But the study in the Journal of the AmericanMedical Assn. is the first major nationwide endeavor that links day-to-day ozone levels with an increasednumber of deaths. About 40% of the U.S. population lives in the areas analyzed -- including Los Angeles,Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties, which have some of the nation's worst smog -- according tothe authors, from Yale and Johns Hopkins universities. Other places studied include parts of the Bay Area, theCentral Valley and San Diego. Outside California, cities include Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, New York, Atlanta,Detroit, New Orleans, Nashville and Seattle. Francesca Dominici, a biostatistician at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg17 March 2013 Page 215 of 483 ProQuestSchool of Public Health and a co-author of the report, said the study "provides strong evidence of short-termeffects of ozone on mortality" because it pooled results from a large number of urban areas. The researcherssaid they found a link between mortality and ozone even in areas with low pollution, at concentrations less thanthe current federal health standard. Previous smaller studies reached varying conclusions, some finding anincrease in deaths and some not. Scientists have already documented in several dozen studies around theworld that deaths increase when airborne pollutants called particulates, or fine pieces of soot, rise. Particulatescome mostly from diesel engines. In contrast, ozone, a colorless gas that develops mostly in summer, is formedwhen nitrogen and hydrocarbon gases from cars, industries and consumer products react with sunlight. The LosAngeles basin -- with its large population, pollution- trapping mountains and stagnant, sunny conditions -- is likea smog- forming machine. The region has battled ozone for half a century with state and local controls on cars,businesses and other sources. As a result, levels have declined sharply. "This is a reminder call for the publicand for this agency that ozone still is a pollutant with some very serious health effects and one in which we haveto be just as aggressive in reducing as particulates," said Sam Atwood, a spokesman for the South Coast AirQuality Management District, which regulates air pollution in the Los Angeles basin. The study found that, whenozone levels increased by a fairly small amount, 10 parts per billion, the daily deaths from noninjury causes overthe next few days increased an average of 0.52%. For cardiovascular and respiratory deaths, the increase wasslightly higher, 0.64%, and for senior citizens, deaths increased by 0.70%. "In terms of the overall mortality risk,these changes are small, but they do add up," said Jean Ospital, the air quality agency's health effects officer."Because so many people are exposed, the cumulative effects can be significant." In New York, the smallincrease in ozone caused an additional 319 deaths annually. For the 95 areas nationwide, 3,767 more peopledied per year when ozone increased by 10 parts per billion. Ozone levels fluctuate greatly, and increases of thatmagnitude occur routinely. In the Los Angeles region, the current federal health standard, 120 parts per billion,was violated 27 days this year. One day last year, it reached as high as 216 parts per billion, almost double theamount deemed healthful. The worst levels occur in San Bernardino County. Dr. Henry Gong, a professor ofmedicine at USC and a leading air pollution researcher, called the increase in deaths "plausible" because ozonewas a potent irritant that inflamed airways and triggered asthma attacks and other breathing problems. Recentresearch also has implicated air pollutants, especially particulates, in heart attacks, based on evidence that theydamage the nervous system's ability to vary the heart rate to handle stress. "Ozone is still lurking out there,particularly in Southern California during the summer, and there are many sensitive people to it, such asasthmatics," Gong said. The study's lead author, Michelle Bell of Yale University's School of Forestry andEnvironmental Studies, and the co-authors said the study underestimated the number of deaths because it onlycaptured those within a few days of high pollution levels, not from lifetime exposure. "We've known for a longtime that smog is unhealthy, but this is some of the strongest evidence yet that smog actually kills," said NatMund of the Sierra Club. John L. Kirkwood, president of the American Lung Assn., said the study, funded by theU.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other federal sources, comes "at a critical time in the fight against airpollution" when the Bush administration and Congress are proposing to ease environmental regulations. Credit:Times Staff WriterSubject: Air pollution; Ozone; Studies; Urban areas; Smog; Public health; MortalityLocation: United States, USPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.20Number of pages: 0Publication year: 200417 March 2013 Page 216 of 483 ProQuestPublication date: Nov 17, 2004Year: 2004Section: Main News; Part A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421946737Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 102 of 213BEHIND THE WHEEL; Stuck on the Freeway? Here's Something Else to Fume About; Recentstudies suggest that exposure to air pollution in stop-and-go traffic could increase cardiovascularrisks.Author: Liu, CaitlinPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 16 Nov 2004: B.2.ProQuest document linkAbstract: In a follow-up study to be published in the journal Particle and Fibre Toxicology, [Wayne E. Cascio]and his colleagues found that the connection between air pollution and cardiovascular changes seemedparticularly strong when it came to stop-and-go traffic, which generates more air toxins than smooth driving.Chemical analyses of the air inside patrol cars found that acceleration increases the level of aldehyde in the air,while braking releases copper metal particles. The amount of black carbon in the air is an indicator of the levelof diesel exhaust. According to the AQMD, 90% of the cancer- causing air pollution in the region comes fromvehicle emissions, and the major source of cancer-causing toxins is diesel exhaust. GRIDLOCK: Cars creepalong the Riverside Freeway. Exposure to pollution during stop-and-go traffic could cause cardiovascularchanges, studies suggest.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Gina Ferazzi Los Angeles Times; TEST: A truck's exhaust ismeasured at a checkpoint in Sun Valley. The major source of cancer-causing toxins is diesel emissions,according to the AQMD.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Los Angeles TimesLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Spending time in traffic -- especially when the conditions are stop-and-go -- could be bad for yourhealth because of the air pollution flowing into your automobile, recent research shows. Although rolling up the17 March 2013 Page 217 of 483 ProQuestwindows might help a bit, no car is airtight. Turning on the fan makes only a modest difference at best, expertssay. Short of donning a gas mask or holding your breath, your best bet is to avoid driving behind certain types ofdiesel vehicles and to minimize your time on congested freeways. "Since traffic is the major source of toxins,you're getting substantial exposure to these agents in your daily commute," said Jean Ospital, health effectsofficer for the South Coast Air Quality Management District. The health risks, he added, increase with theamount of exposure. One recent study, funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, suggests thatexposure to air pollution particulate matter while driving could cause cardiovascular changes that have beenassociated with increased risks of heart attacks, inflammation and arteriosclerosis. Published in the April 15issue of the American Journal of Respiratory Critical Care Medicine, the study followed nine North Carolinastate highway troopers for four days. The officers -- all nonsmokers between the ages of 23 and 30, and in"excellent physical condition" -- were connected to electrodes that kept track of their heart rate. Blood sampleswere drawn before and after each work shift. Patrol cars were equipped with devices to monitor air quality. Byhaving the troopers keep a log of their daily activity, researchers were able to factor out stressful events -- suchas a high-speed chase -- that might be responsible for some cardiovascular responses. Still, they observed thatfor these healthy men, exposure to particulate matter while inside their vehicles was correlated with irregularheart rhythm, elevated blood protein levels and other blood cell changes. "The higher the dose of air pollution,the more we saw a [cardiovascular] change," said study co-author Dr. Wayne E. Cascio, chief of cardiology atBrody School of Medicine at East Carolina University. "A high level [of pollution] for a short term could be thesame as a smaller dose over a long period of time." In a follow-up study to be published in the journal Particleand Fibre Toxicology, Cascio and his colleagues found that the connection between air pollution andcardiovascular changes seemed particularly strong when it came to stop-and-go traffic, which generates moreair toxins than smooth driving. Chemical analyses of the air inside patrol cars found that acceleration increasesthe level of aldehyde in the air, while braking releases copper metal particles. A separate study, published inAugust in the journal Atmospheric Environment, found that driving behind certain types of diesel vehicles candramatically elevate the levels of black carbon -- or diesel soot -- in the air inside your car. The study said thatbeing behind a diesel bus with a low tailpipe could subject you to 18 times as much black carbon than if you aretailing a modern, gasoline-powered passenger vehicle. The amount of black carbon in the air is an indicator ofthe level of diesel exhaust. According to the AQMD, 90% of the cancer- causing air pollution in the regioncomes from vehicle emissions, and the major source of cancer-causing toxins is diesel exhaust. Ironically, thestudy showed that exposure to black carbons may be higher when you're behind a medium-size delivery truckwith a low tailpipe or a diesel passenger car than when you're tailing a big rig with exhaust piping out its top.That's because the smaller vehicles blow toxic particles directly at your car. "By far, the best thing to do is avoiddriving behind these vehicles and avoid driving on freeways dominated by these vehicles," said Arthur M.Winer, professor of Environmental Health Services at the UCLA School of Public Health and a co-author of thestudy. "That will help reduce your exposure." Winer and his colleagues also found that the time people spendinside their car averaged 1 1/2 hours a day -- or about 6% of their time -- but accounted for one-third to one-halfof their daily exposure to diesel exhaust. The diesel study analyzed data that had been collected in 1997 byresearchers funded by the California Air Resources Board. By equipping a car with an air-quality monitor,researchers measured real-time black carbon levels inside a car driving on freeways and roads in Los Angelesand Sacramento. Windows were closed, and different fan settings were used. Each run was recorded by avideo camera aimed at capturing what was in front of the driver. The most important predictor of black carbonlevels inside the test vehicle was the type of vehicle followed, the 2004 analysis found. Researchers did notcontrol for whether air conditioning was used, but found that variables such as speed, following distance andventilation did not matter much. "Vehicles are very porous," Winer said. "They're not space capsules. They'renot submarines. They're not airtight." Some manufacturers of car air purifiers sold in stores and over the Internetclaim their products can eliminate toxins and remove odors. But air pollution experts and others are skeptical.17 March 2013 Page 218 of 483 ProQuestLast year, Consumer Reports tested several in-home air purifiers and deemed them "not effective." Theorganization has not reviewed any in-vehicle air purifiers. "Some of them generate ozone to destroy odors,"professor Roger Atkinson, director of the Air Pollution Research Center at UC Riverside, said of such devices ingeneral. "The thing about ozone is it kills your sense of smell. That's why you don't notice odors anymore."Atkinson and others say it is ironic that such devices can add ozone, considering that it's the main ingredient inSouthern California's smog. "We've worked 35 years trying to reduce ozone!" said Jerry Martin, spokesman forthe Air Resources Board. Illustration Caption: PHOTO: GRIDLOCK: Cars creep along the Riverside Freeway.Exposure to pollution during stop-and-go traffic could cause cardiovascular changes, studies suggest.;PHOTOGRAPHER: Gina Ferazzi Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: TEST: A truck's exhaust is measured at acheckpoint in Sun Valley. The major source of cancer-causing toxins is diesel emissions, according to theAQMD.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Indoor air quality; Air pollution; Traffic; Vehicle emissions; Cardiovascular diseaseLocation: Los Angeles CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.2Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Nov 16, 2004Year: 2004Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421925585Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 103 of 213The State; State Money Helped Dairies Dirty the Air; Angelides freezes future loans after sayingbonds were used to build bigger, smoggier farms.17 March 2013 Page 219 of 483 ProQuestAuthor: Arax, MarkPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 11 Oct 2004: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: [Phil Angelides] now says that this reasoning was faulty and that the dairies never should havereceived the bond money. The larger dairies might have made some progress in protecting groundwater, butthey continue to rank among the major air polluters in the San Joaquin Valley, according to local regulators.Simply put, more cows mean more gases are released into the air to form smog and particulate pollution. "Thestate has missed a major opportunity to push these big dairies in the direction of new pollution control methods,"said Vicki Lee, a Sierra Club member in Sacramento who first questioned the dairy loans in an Aug. 30 letter toAngelides. "The dairies haven't taken a single step to justify this financing." Under Angelides, the board hasmoved away from financing oil companies and utilities and began awarding loans as large as $91 million tosolid-waste firms now required under law to recycle and reduce garbage at landfills. Angelides said he has triedto direct more of the agency's $200 million to $300 million in annual pollution control bond funds to projects thatcarry a real potential for environmental cleanup.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Over the last four years, nearly $70 million in state bond money designated for pollution control hasfinanced a score of giant dairies that have helped turn the San Joaquin Valley into the nation's most polluted airbasin. In several cases, the tax-exempt, low-interest loans to fight pollution have been used by dairymen toclose smaller operations in Chino and open dairies with as many as 14,000 cows each in the valley, whichproduces more milk than any other region in the country but has more violations of the eight-hour ozonestandard than even Los Angeles. "It's hard to believe that low-interest loans set aside by California to fightpollution are instead being used to expand some of the biggest polluters in agriculture," said Brent Newell, anattorney for the Center on Race, Poverty &the Environment, a San Francisco-based law firm that has joined theSierra Club to fight the expansion of industrial dairies. State Treasurer Phil Angelides, who heads the PollutionControl Financing Authority and approved the loans, now says the $70 million in bond money for dairies wasmisspent. He said the blame lies not with the dairy farmers but with the pollution control authority, which failedto scrutinize the environmental impacts of the big dairies. In their loan applications, the farmers stated that theirbigger dairies would provide an "environmentally sound method of disposing of animal waste." By expandingtheir acreage, they would have more land to spread manure, and thus lessen its effects on groundwater. ButAngelides now says that this reasoning was faulty and that the dairies never should have received the bondmoney. The larger dairies might have made some progress in protecting groundwater, but they continue to rankamong the major air polluters in the San Joaquin Valley, according to local regulators. Simply put, more cowsmean more gases are released into the air to form smog and particulate pollution. Angelides said onlybusinesses that take important steps to curtail their pollution should qualify for the financing. The 18 dairiesawarded state bond money since 2001, by contrast, never offered any plans to use new air pollution controltechnology, he said. Citing the concerns of the Sierra Club and others, Angelides has decided to freeze anadditional $24 million in loans approved this year for a new set of dairies. "We're going to stop financing dairiesuntil we can do a comprehensive review," Angelides said. "In the future, I'm going to press hard to make surethat any dairy we finance will be taking steps to resolve environmental problems, not contribute to them." Thedecision to finance dairies -- and now declare a moratorium on that funding -- is a setback to a program that thestate treasurer has worked to reform since taking office in 1999, making the bond money available to a broaderrange of industries. David Albers, whose 4,000-cow dairy in Fresno County got a $5.8- million loan at 1%interest in 2003, said he thinks his new dairy deserved the financing. "It's remarkable that Phil Angelides is nowsaying that his own agency has fallen short, but we didn't do anything wrong," he said. "We went through theprocess and got the money fair and square." Albers emphasized that his new dairy warranted funding because17 March 2013 Page 220 of 483 ProQuestit posed fewer risks to groundwater than his old dairy had. "We have about twice as many acres as we need tohandle the manure that we produce," he said. "The chances of our new dairy polluting the groundwater are slimand none." But Albers and other dairy farmers acknowledge that they continue to use an old recycling systemthat adds considerable pollutants to the air. Dairy waste is shunted into large, open-air lagoons that cook in thesun. Those lagoons emit millions of pounds of smog- forming gases each year, according to regulators at theSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. In addition, they say, dairies here account for more than 100million pounds of ammonia per year -- a major source of particulate matter that can lodge deep in the lungs andcause disease. Over the last six years, the San Joaquin Valley has violated the national eight-hour ozonestandard 689 times, as opposed to 569 violations for the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Theeight-hour measure is now regarded by federal regulators as the best standard for gauging the effects of smog.Los Angeles and Houston still lead the nation in one-hour peak violations. The recycling process used by dairiesalso carries risks to the water supply, say state water regulators. As dairies spread their liquid and dry fertilizeron adjacent cropland, it can leach into the aquifer or run off into rivers. One Solano County dairy receiving thebond financing was fined recently by the state for spilling 1.3 million gallons of liquefied manure into localirrigation canals. State records show that the pollution control authority under Angelides never required thedairies to employ methane digesters or other new technologies that enclose lagoons and reduce the amount ofharmful gases. Neither did the agency encourage stricter standards on lining the lagoons with clay and othermaterial to protect groundwater. "The state has missed a major opportunity to push these big dairies in thedirection of new pollution control methods," said Vicki Lee, a Sierra Club member in Sacramento who firstquestioned the dairy loans in an Aug. 30 letter to Angelides. "The dairies haven't taken a single step to justifythis financing." The pollution control board's rationale in awarding the loans was clearly wrong, Angelides nowsays. In every instance, the three- member board -- which includes state Controller Steve Westly and thegovernor's finance director, Donna Arduin -- cited the same reason: Each new or expanded dairy would benefitthe environment by diverting waste from a state landfill. But dairies, by long-standing practice, do not send theirwaste to landfills. The dumping fees alone would be prohibitive. "Diversion from landfills is not accurate,"Angelides said. "That's a staff error." The controversy over the dairy loans has shined a light on a ratherobscure state program that delivers hundreds of millions in tax-exempt revenue bond money to fight pollution.The pollution control financing board was established by the Legislature in 1972 "to provide industry within thestate, irrespective of company size, with an alternative method of financing" to build or expand pollution controlfacilities. After the authority approves a project for financing, the tax-exempt, variable-rate bonds are sold tomoney market funds, insurance companies and other investors. In the early years, much of the financing wentto Mobil and Arco, Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas &Electric to fund programs that cut back on theirpollutants. Under Angelides, the board has moved away from financing oil companies and utilities and beganawarding loans as large as $91 million to solid-waste firms now required under law to recycle and reducegarbage at landfills. Angelides said he has tried to direct more of the agency's $200 million to $300 million inannual pollution control bond funds to projects that carry a real potential for environmental cleanup. "When Icame here, we wanted to turn it into a much more aggressive, cutting-edge, environmentally friendly authority,"he said. "And I think we've done that." Three years ago, for instance, the board gave a $15.4-million loan to acheese manufacturer in Tulare County to install a state- of-the-art waste recovery system. This year, the boardhas given initial approval for $89 million in financing to a Glenn County company that will produce fiberboard byrecycling 200,000 tons of rice straw each year. In the case of the dairies, most recipients have been financedunder the agency's so-called Small Business Assistance Fund. The fund has allowed each dairy to also receivegrants of up to $250,000 to cover the loan's administrative costs. At least six of the dairy farmers who gotfinancing have consolidated or closed operations in Chino and other Southland cities where suburbia continuesto swallow up farmland. By selling their land to developers, many third-generation Dutch and Portuguese dairyfarmers have become wealthy. But it also has sent them over the mountain to the San Joaquin Valley in search17 March 2013 Page 221 of 483 ProQuestof dairy land for their children and grandchildren. The dairies now rising in Kern, Tulare, Kings and Fresnocounties are among the nation's largest, transforming the middle of California into a milk-producing marvel evenas they pollute the air and threaten to degrade the groundwater. Nearly 2 million cows are spread out over 625dairies across the San Joaquin Valley, industry figures show. Outside Bakersfield, the B&B, a dairy owned byJames Borba, who received $8 million in state bond money at 1.1% interest last year, milks 14,400 cows. Hiscousin, George Borba, has built his own 14,400-cow dairy next door with $3.8 million in state bond financing.Like the Borba dairies, Albers' Vintage Dairy on the far west side of Fresno County is built on an industrial scale.More than 4,000 Holsteins feed in tight stalls in open-air metal barns bigger than football fields. Twice a day, likeclockwork, comes the call of the milking line. Albers' dairy produces not only a river of milk, but also 9,000 tonsof wet sewage a year, according to state bond documents. Dairy experts say that is the equivalent waste of acity of 80,000 people. "Yes, big dairies do emit certain pollutants," Albers said. "So doesn't it make sense forsociety to allocate resources to control that pollution?" As a condition of the $5.8-million loan, the pollutioncontrol board never required Albers to install technology to reduce pollutants from the lagoons. Instead, Albersbought enough adjacent land to plant 2,500 acres of corn, alfalfa and wheat. That way, the manure from hiscows can be completely utilized as fertilizer. "No, we don't have any of the new technology, but we're usingmanure to grow crops and enrich the soil," said Albers, a third- generation dairyman who practices law inBakersfield. "This new dairy is much more environmentally efficient than our older one." But regional air districtregulators point out that before cow waste is spread as fertilizer, it releases much of its reactive and other gasesinto the air. Whatever efficiency Albers has gained by building a new dairy, they say, he will more than offset byeventually doubling the size of his herd to 8,000 cattle. Part of the problem, Angelides said, is that local andstate regulators have been toothless in holding dairies to more rigorous standards. Last month, for instance, theSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District delayed requiring dairies to install new technologies to reduceair pollutants. Likewise, the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board is monitoring fewer than 15%of the dairies for groundwater impacts. Angelides said the pollution control financing board under his leadershipshared the blame. "In absence of those tougher standards from regulators and the Legislature, I'm going to nowurge the board to set our own tough standards," he said. "If we decide to finance dairies in the future, thepollution controls will be real." Illustration Caption: GRAPHIC: Milk money (includes MAP); CREDIT: REBECCAPERRY Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: BOVINE POLLUTION: Dairy waste lagoons emit millions of pounds ofsmog-forming gases each year, according to regulators.; PHOTO: RIVERS OF MILK: Dairy cattle line up to feednear the San Joaquin Valley town of Lamont. State bond money designated for pollution control has financed anumber of giant farms that have helped turn the valley into the nation's most polluted air basin.;PHOTOGRAPHER: Photographs by David McNew Getty Images Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Pollution control; Municipal bonds; Expansion; Environmental impact; Public finance; Dairy farms; AirpollutionLocation: CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Pollution Control Financing Authority-California; NAICS: 924110Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Oct 11, 2004Year: 200417 March 2013 Page 222 of 483 ProQuestDateline: FRESNOSection: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421940177Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 104 of 213Air Quality Improves Markedly; Officials credit cooler weather for less ozone. But Southern Californiai s still failing to meet federal standards.Author: Bustillo, MiguelPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 04 Oct 2004: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Houston exceeded federal health standards for ozone over a one- hour period on 31 days so far thisyear, making it the smog capital - - at least by that test. But the San Joaquin Valley fared far worse thanHouston according to another federal measure of ozone over an eight-hour period, leaving room for debate.High as it was, that reading was the lowest recorded in the region for any year since air-quality officials begancarefully monitoring ozone in 1976. The same area registered a high of .216 ppm ozone a year ago. The federalhealth standard for ozone over a one-hour period is .12 ppm. Even a decade ago, Southern California violatedozone standards nearly twice as often as it does today. Peak ozone levels were also higher, which triggeredpublic health alerts by local officials warning people to stay indoors. Until high ozone levels required one lastyear, Southern California had not seen a Stage 1 health alert since 1998.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: California's air quality took a substantial turn for the better in 2004, after three years of steadilyworsening smog had sparked fears that the state was losing its decades-long war against air pollution. Theexplanation for the improvement, air-quality experts say, boils down to simple meteorology: It has not been ashot this year in California. The good news regarding bad air days demonstrates that the state's notoriously hazyskies are not only a product of pollution, but of weather conditions that often make California a perfect hothousefor smog. "Every year, the fleet of cars gets a little cleaner, and we see improvements in the pollutants that form17 March 2013 Page 223 of 483 ProQuestsmog," said Jerry Martin, a spokesman for the California Air Resources Board. "The big unknown is theweather. You don't get really high levels of ozone until pollution has spent several days cooking in the sun."Last year, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties surpassed a key federal healthstandard for ozone, the main ingredient in smog, on 64 days by the end of September -- nearly one- fourth ofthe time. So far this year, the region has exceeded the standard on just 27 days. Similarly, the San JoaquinValley, which has begun to challenge L.A. as the state's smog capital, has violated the ozone standard on onlynine days, compared with 36 at the same time a year ago. By contrast, Houston, which has vied with regions inCalifornia for the title of the nation's smoggiest place, experienced a slight increase in exceptionally bad air daysthis year. Houston exceeded federal health standards for ozone over a one- hour period on 31 days so far thisyear, making it the smog capital - - at least by that test. But the San Joaquin Valley fared far worse thanHouston according to another federal measure of ozone over an eight-hour period, leaving room for debate.Breathing air with high levels of ozone can cause shortness of breath, nausea and headaches. Repeatedexposure has been linked to serious health problems including asthma and heart disease. Cars are the largestsource of smog-forming emissions in California, followed by household chemicals from cleaning supplies andpaints. Diesel engines powering trains, ships, buses and construction equipment also are a major contributor,and remain loosely regulated compared with other causes of pollution. There were several smog hotspots inSouthern California this year, notably Santa Clarita. It violated the federal maximum for ozone more often thanany other area of Southern California. Meanwhile, the twin ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, a growingsource of air pollution, barely registered on the smog meter, largely because the emissions they spew do notform smog until they blow farther inland. The year's highest smog reading -- .163 parts per million of ozone inthe air -- was registered in the central San Bernardino Mountains, historically the smoggiest part of SouthernCalifornia due to wind-blown pollution from the Los Angeles area. High as it was, that reading was the lowestrecorded in the region for any year since air-quality officials began carefully monitoring ozone in 1976. Thesame area registered a high of .216 ppm ozone a year ago. The federal health standard for ozone over a onehourperiod is .12 ppm. Scientists have long known that high temperatures help cook the chemical stew ofpollutants that forms smog. Milder weather makes the stew boil more slowly, resulting in lower ozone levels. Airqualityexperts say the spring cloud layer, known locally as "June gloom," seemed to last longer this year,lowering temperatures. "It was a very cool early part of the summer. There were a few exceptions, but the realsevere weather days were not there this year," said Joe Cassmassi, senior meteorologist for the South CoastAir Quality Management District. The lower occurrence of smoggy days this year conforms with a trend towardcleaner air in California, which has been aggressively regulating air pollution for more than 50 years. "Certainly,the long-term trend shows improvement in ozone air quality," said Lynn Terry, deputy executive officer of the AirResources Board. Although the air above Los Angeles still shrouds the downtown skyline in a brown pall,pollution experts say it is almost pristine compared with the thick smog the city was notorious for following WorldWar II. Even a decade ago, Southern California violated ozone standards nearly twice as often as it does today.Peak ozone levels were also higher, which triggered public health alerts by local officials warning people to stayindoors. Until high ozone levels required one last year, Southern California had not seen a Stage 1 health alertsince 1998. A surge of smoggy days in California in recent years, however, had undermined the pattern ofreductions, leading some experts to fear that the state had begun losing ground. In 2001, the four-county SouthCoast Air Basin experienced 36 days exceeding the federal one-hour ozone standard, followed by 45 days in2002 and 64 days in 2003. Although air quality may be improving, Southern California is still failing to meetfederal standards, which are becoming tougher due to growing knowledge about the dangers of air pollution,critics note. The Environmental Protection Agency this year announced that by 2021 cities will have to meet theozone standard that measures the pollutant in the air over an eight-hour span. It requires levels to remain below.08 ppm. So far this year, the South Coast area has violated that standard on 86 days -- roughly a third of thetime. The San Joaquin Valley, which is expected to have a harder time meeting the eight-hour standard17 March 2013 Page 224 of 483 ProQuestbecause its pollution lingers longer, has exceeded it on 97 days so far this year. Although ozone has been thebarometer used to measure air pollution in California, air-quality experts are increasingly concluding thatparticulate matter -- microscopic specks commonly released into the air by car, truck and ship exhaust -- maybe more dangerous. A recent USC study that tracked Southern California children from fourth grade until theygraduated from high school found that children growing up in polluted areas were more likely to haveunderdeveloped lungs, leading to a lifetime of possible health problems. Illustration Caption: GRAPHIC: Cleanerair; CREDIT: Leslie Carlson Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Emission standards; Pollution control; Weather; Ratings & rankings; Environmental monitoring; Smog;Outdoor air qualityLocation: CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Oct 4, 2004Year: 2004Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421950479Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 105 of 213AQMD Critical of Port Plan to Grow; The agency says Long Beach officials have underestimated theamount of smog likely to result from added berths.Author: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 16 Sep 2004: B.1.17 March 2013 Page 225 of 483 ProQuestProQuest document linkAbstract: Officials at the South Coast Air Quality Management District said that they informed port officials inletters in October 2003 and again this July that its calculations of future air pollution were inadequate, but theport still used those calculations in environmental documents to support the expansion of Pier J. SusanNakamura, AQMD planning and rules manager, reiterated the agency's concerns at a Long Beach City Councilmeeting Tuesday. Port officials maintained Wednesday that their calculations were sound. The AQMD letterswere sent by the air agency's planning and regulatory department, but port administrators said they receivedguidance from other AQMD staff members. In its letters, the AQMD took issue with the port's assertion that theharbor would eventually see a 75% reduction in diesel particulate matter from vehicles. That decrease will occuronly in new trucks meeting federal standards being phased in beginning in 2007, air officials said. Even thoughmany old trucks will remain on the road long after the standards take effect, the port seems to be assuming thatall trucks entering the port after 2007 will have the new, cleaner engines, the AQMD said.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Long Beach port commissioners approved a 115-acre expansion plan last month even though smogregulators warned them that the harbor's environmental review underestimated how much air pollution would begenerated by trucks and other vehicles. Air pollution has emerged as the central issue in the debate overwhether to expand a pier near the Queen Mary. Critics of the plan point out that the Los Angeles and LongBeach ports are already the single largest source of air pollution in Southern California and that the new berthswould simply make the problem worse. Officials at the South Coast Air Quality Management District said thatthey informed port officials in letters in October 2003 and again this July that its calculations of future airpollution were inadequate, but the port still used those calculations in environmental documents to support theexpansion of Pier J. Susan Nakamura, AQMD planning and rules manager, reiterated the agency's concerns ata Long Beach City Council meeting Tuesday. After hearing Nakamura's comments, the council abruptlypostponed until November a final decision on whether to sign off on the Pier J project. "When you've got AQMDcoming out in two separate letters saying you're inadequate, and you're ignoring it -- that was the mostdamaging thing," said City Councilman Val Lerch, a critic of the proposal. Port officials maintained Wednesdaythat their calculations were sound. The AQMD letters were sent by the air agency's planning and regulatorydepartment, but port administrators said they received guidance from other AQMD staff members. "We're veryconcerned that we have an agency that we're depending on for guidance and we're not getting consistentinformation," said Robert Kanter, the port's planning director. Kanter also said he was puzzled by what he calledthe "eleventh- hour" testimony from Nakamura. In its letters, the AQMD took issue with the port's assertion thatthe harbor would eventually see a 75% reduction in diesel particulate matter from vehicles. That decrease willoccur only in new trucks meeting federal standards being phased in beginning in 2007, air officials said. Eventhough many old trucks will remain on the road long after the standards take effect, the port seems to beassuming that all trucks entering the port after 2007 will have the new, cleaner engines, the AQMD said. Theport's environmental documents "did not provide any enforceable commitment to ensure this level of controlwould occur at the project site," one letter said. Addressing the council on Tuesday, Nakamura said the AQMDbelieves its concerns "were not adequately addressed" by the port and that the environmental reportunderestimates certain emissions. The battle over Pier J reflects an emotional debate about growth at the LosAngeles-Long Beach port complex, the busiest in the United States. Residents of the harbor area and alongmajor area freeway corridors blame the port for increased air pollution and traffic congestion. That debateescalated after USC scientists released the results of two studies in the last two weeks, one reporting onunexplained pockets of cancer downwind of the port, and the other on the loss of lung function in children in sixcities with dirty air, including Long Beach. One resident of Camden Harbor View, a new residential developmentoverlooking the port in the city's downtown, took the podium Tuesday night and pulled a soiled rag out of a17 March 2013 Page 226 of 483 ProQuestplastic bag. The dirt on the rag had accumulated in one week on a terrace off his living room, David Carden Jr.told council members. "Just think what it must be doing to our lungs when we breathe," Carden said. A total of28 people addressed the council, with most residents criticizing the project; union members and port businessespraised it. Supporters said the project would create more high-paying dock jobs. One member of the pipe fittersunion said that an estimated 500,000 people recently applied for 3,000 new jobs at the port. Lawyers from theNatural Resources Defense Council spent nearly an hour critiquing what they called flawed assumptions andcalculations throughout the environmental impact report. Port officials, in turn, said the public may bemisunderstanding the intricacies of port operations. Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Expansion; Smog; Environmental impact; Ports; Air pollutionLocation: Long Beach CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA; NAICS:924110; DUNS: 01-598-6159; Name: Port of Long Beach-California; NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Sep 16, 2004Year: 2004Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421935079Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 106 of 213Los Angeles; Port's Effort to Cut Smog Is Criticized; Some Long Beach council members react afterresidents say that a report on an expansion project underestimates emissions.17 March 2013 Page 227 of 483 ProQuestAuthor: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 15 Sep 2004: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: In the process, the port complex has become the single largest air polluter in the five-county SouthCoast region, responsible for 24% of the region's diesel emissions. Diesel, a probable carcinogen, comesmostly from the mammoth container ships serving the ports, along with big-rig trucks, trains and port yardequipment. The Pier J expansion would involve creating more landfill around the current Pier J directly south ofthe Queen Mary and the central downtown area of Long Beach. Construction would be done in phases, with thefirst phase opening in the year 2007, and the final phase in 2015. The major tenant would be China OceanShipping Lines, or Cosco. Port officials say their plans include an assortment of measures to reduce airpollutants, including requiring ships to use cleaner- burning fuels, adding "cold ironing" for certain ships andrequiring the terminal operator to use only diesel-powered equipment that meets federal standards.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Amid growing concerns from residents about air quality, some Long Beach City Council membersTuesday chastised the city's port for what they called an insufficient effort to reduce air pollution. Theircomments came after residents and clean-air activists pleaded with the council to reject the environmentaldocuments the port has prepared and approved, supporting an 115-acre expansion project. The council votedto put off a final decision on the expansion until November, saying that they hope the two sides can work outtheir differences. Port officials defended those documents and urged the council to let them stand. Portrepresentatives said their plan came after a thorough, four-year-long review and would help rein in air pollution.Critics dismissed that review as a deliberate effort to underestimate the project's emissions, which they said putthe port's economic growth over people's health. "Shame on you guys for coming in here with the 'minimumlegal' rather than taking the high road," Councilman Val Lerch told port officials. The debate over the Pier Jexpansion has escalated sharply into what some are labeling a referendum on the benefits and problems ofinternational trade in the Los Angeles area. While many laud port trade for creating thousands of jobs, agrowing number of residents blame the port for increased air pollution and traffic congestion. The Los Angeles-Long Beach port complex has grown swiftly in the last two decades to become the busiest in the United States,largely because of imports from Asia. Today the ports handle more than 43% of the nation's seaborne cargo,with about 15% being transported by truck on the Long Beach Freeway. In the process, the port complex hasbecome the single largest air polluter in the five-county South Coast region, responsible for 24% of the region'sdiesel emissions. Diesel, a probable carcinogen, comes mostly from the mammoth container ships serving theports, along with big-rig trucks, trains and port yard equipment. The Pier J expansion would involve creatingmore landfill around the current Pier J directly south of the Queen Mary and the central downtown area of LongBeach. Construction would be done in phases, with the first phase opening in the year 2007, and the final phasein 2015. The major tenant would be China Ocean Shipping Lines, or Cosco. Port officials say their plans includean assortment of measures to reduce air pollutants, including requiring ships to use cleaner- burning fuels,adding "cold ironing" for certain ships and requiring the terminal operator to use only diesel-powered equipmentthat meets federal standards. But the Pier J environmental documents state that even with thosemeasurements, emissions of key air contaminants -- including a kind of particulate matter contained in dieselexhaust -- would still be considered significant. Critics call those plans woefully inadequate. In fact, two largeenvironmental groups -- the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Coalition for Clean Air -- have foughtthe project with a barrage of letters and reports. The same two groups sued the city and port of Los Angeles in2001, alleging an inadequate environmental review of the new China Shipping pier. Illustration Caption:GRAPHIC: MAP: Proposed Pier J expansion; CREDIT: Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff Writer17 March 2013 Page 228 of 483 ProQuestSubject: Air pollution; Emissions control; Smog; PortsLocation: Long Beach CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: City Council-Long Beach CA; NAICS: 921120; Name: Port of Long Beach-California; NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Sep 15, 2004Year: 2004Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421950011Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 107 of 213Kids Face Danger in the AirPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 10 Sep 2004: B.10.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The administration has seriously undercut some of California's efforts to control smog. WhenSouthland air regulators tried to force private vehicle fleets to replace worn-out diesel engines with cleanerburningones, the administration sided with engine makers and oil companies in court, killing the regulations.The administration also rejected any move to require environmental reviews before allowing Mexican dieseltrucks, which tend to be older and dirtier, to travel on U.S. roads. And the Environmental Protection Agency hasmade it easier for coal plants -- a major source of particulates -- to avoid installing new pollution equipmentwhen they renovate.17 March 2013 Page 229 of 483 ProQuestLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Everyone knows smog makes breathing harder. But the findings by USC researchers publishedThursday in the New England Journal of Medicine showed it can also impair children's lungs for life. Air pollution-- specifically, particulates -- doesn't just make ailments worse, it can create them. A child who grows up inUpland, for example, stands a nearly 10% chance of growing up with weak lungs, making him or her prone torespiratory problems, cardiopulmonary disease and even premature death. Particulates -- microscopic particlesin the air typically caused by diesel exhaust, dust and fumes from animal waste -- have only recently receivedserious regulatory attention. The new findings should have politicians jumping into action. A good place to startwould be for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to sign AB 2042, the port pollution bill. The ports of Los Angeles andLong Beach account for nearly a quarter of the particulate pollution in the region, and there are plans to expandthem. The modest legislation of Assemblyman Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach) would cap port pollution at 2004levels. The Bush administration, in probably its strongest environmental initiative so far, announced newregulations this year requiring cleaner fuel and cleaner engines for off-road diesel vehicles such as constructionequipment. Diesel emissions are the major source of particulate pollution in the L.A. area, and the newregulations will make a real difference. But the administration has seriously undercut some of California's effortsto control smog. When Southland air regulators tried to force private vehicle fleets to replace worn-out dieselengines with cleaner-burning ones, the administration sided with engine makers and oil companies in court,killing the regulations. The administration also rejected any move to require environmental reviews beforeallowing Mexican diesel trucks, which tend to be older and dirtier, to travel on U.S. roads. And theEnvironmental Protection Agency has made it easier for coal plants -- a major source of particulates -- to avoidinstalling new pollution equipment when they renovate. Credit California policymakers for moving forwardanyway. The California Air Resources Board this summer passed a regulation limiting the time diesel trucks canidle. Schwarzenegger helped put together a deal to raise money to help companies switch to cleaner- burningengines, and he is expected to sign the enabling legislation. Another bill on his desk, AB 1009 byAssemblywoman Fran Pavley (D-Agoura Hills), would require Mexican trucks entering California to meet smogstandards. It too deserves the governor's signature. If Washington doesn't want to help, at least it might doCalifornia kids the favor of staying out of the state's way.Subject: Air pollution; Airborne particulates; Public health; Children & youth; Federal legislation; Federal staterelations; Editorials -- Air pollutionLocation: California, United States, USCompany / organization: Name: Air Resources Board-California; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 62-691-2737Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.10Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Sep 10, 2004Year: 2004Section: California Metro; Part B; Editorial Pages DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.17 March 2013 Page 230 of 483 ProQuestCountry of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: EditorialProQuest document ID: 421952805Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 108 of 213Smog Harms Children's Lungs for Life, Study Finds; Eight years of research yield the most definitiveevidence yet that dirty air stunts lung growth.Author: Bustillo, MiguelPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 09 Sep 2004: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Despite decades of cleanup efforts that have greatly reduced smog, the amount of air pollution stillfound in parts of Southern California and elsewhere in the country can stunt lung growth in children, accordingto the most comprehensive study ever conducted on children's exposure to air pollution. The children lived inAtascadero in San Luis Obispo County; Santa Maria and Lompoc in Santa Barbara County; Lancaster, SanDimas and Long Beach in Los Angeles County; Upland and Lake Arrowhead in San Bernardino County; MiraLoma, Riverside and Lake Elsinore in Riverside County; and Alpine in San Diego County. The researchers didnot pinpoint how air pollution was affecting the children's lungs. They theorized, however, that pollution mayreduce the growth of alveoli, the tiny air sacs within lungs where the exchange of oxygen and carbon dioxidetakes place.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Despite decades of cleanup efforts that have greatly reduced smog, the amount of air pollution stillfound in parts of Southern California and elsewhere in the country can stunt lung growth in children, accordingto the most comprehensive study ever conducted on children's exposure to air pollution. The lung damage isserious enough to lead to a lifetime of health problems and, in some cases, premature death, the researchfound. Scientists have long known that smog aggravates respiratory conditions such as asthma. But untilrecently, they were uncertain whether the dirty air caused the problems or simply made pre- existing medicalconditions worse. The study, to be published today in the New England Journal of Medicine, provides the mostdefinitive evidence yet that routine exposure to dirty air during childhood actually harms lung development,leading to a permanently reduced ability to breathe. Underpowered lungs are known to cause a wide range ofhealth problems. The study was conducted by a team of USC researchers that monitored the lungs of 1,759schoolchildren in 12 Southern California communities from fourth grade until they graduated from high school."We were surprised at the magnitude of the effect we witnessed," said W. James Gauderman of USC's Keck17 March 2013 Page 231 of 483 ProQuestSchool of Medicine, one of the researchers who conducted the eight-year study. "It pushed a lot of kids beyondthat critical threshold of low lung function, and that was a surprise." Children breathing dirty air were nearly fivetimes more likely than children in less polluted communities to grow up with weak lungs, they found. Thedamage was similar to what is found in children whose parents regularly smoked around them. In thecommunities with the dirtiest air, such as Upland in San Bernardino County, almost 10% of the children studiedhad "clinically significant" reductions in their ability to breathe. In Long Beach, where air pollution levels werelower but still significant, the number was about 6%. In Lompoc, where air pollution levels were low, it was only2%. "There is a perception out there that air pollution has gotten a lot better, and certainly that is the case,"Gauderman said. "But these findings indicate that from a health standpoint, a lot of people are still in danger."The greatest danger appears to come from tiny particles -- typically produced in diesel exhaust, by road dustand in animal waste from large-scale farms. Until recently, such particles have not been regulated as strictly asozone -- the main ingredient in Southern California's smog. Ozone did not show up in the study as a majorcontributor to childhood lung problems. While emphasizing risks, the study also pointed to a way to improvepublic health, according to C. Arden Pope III, an economics professor at Brigham Young University who wrotean editorial that accompanies the findings in the New England Journal. "From at least one perspective, theoverall results of research involving air pollution are good news -- the control of air pollution represents animportant opportunity to prevent disease," Pope said. According to a policy brief released Wednesday by theUSC Urban Initiative, roughly 4 million children currently live in areas of the Greater Los Angeles region wherethe air remains polluted at least part of the year. Five million more children are expected to be born betweennow and 2021, the latest deadline set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to clean the area's air.Strict clean air laws have greatly reduced smog, particularly in coastal areas of Southern California, but seriouspollution remains a regular occurrence inland as well as in areas subjected to heavy truck traffic. Because thefindings suggest that the threat to children posed by air pollution may be greater than scientists and healthofficials had suspected, the research is likely to lead to calls for tougher environmental regulations.Wednesday, for example, environmental activists concerned about expansion of the ports of Los Angeles andLong Beach said the study's findings provided evidence for greater restrictions. The ports have become thebusiest in the United States. As they have grown, residents near them -- as well as people living near the inlandrail yards and warehouses that help move goods from the docks -- have become increasingly worried about thepotential health effects of diesel fumes and other air contaminants. The activists said they hoped the new studywould cause politicians to balance the economic benefits of port expansion against health concerns. "I don'tknow what it's going to take to get people to stop and really analyze this," said Penny Newman of Riverside,who has campaigned against increased truck traffic serving port-related warehouses in her area. To reach theirconclusions, the researchers began tracking the children in 1993. As the children passed from adolescence toadulthood, technicians visited their schools to test their lung capacity. By age 18, girls' lungs are fully formedand boys' lungs are nearly mature, likely making whatever damage occurs in childhood nearly irreversible, theresearchers concluded. The children lived in Atascadero in San Luis Obispo County; Santa Maria and Lompocin Santa Barbara County; Lancaster, San Dimas and Long Beach in Los Angeles County; Upland and LakeArrowhead in San Bernardino County; Mira Loma, Riverside and Lake Elsinore in Riverside County; and Alpinein San Diego County. The researchers also took measurements from pollution-monitoring stations in each of thecommunities to measure hourly levels of acid vapors, particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide and ground-levelozone. The pattern of lung damage being worst in communities with more polluted air held true across racialand economic lines, and applied to children with or without asthma. Underpowered lungs are a well-knowncause of health problems. Reduced lung function ranks second only to smoking as a respiratory risk factorincreasing a person's chances of premature death. It strongly increases a person's chances of developingrespiratory ailments such as wheezing during viral infections and can trigger more serious conditions such ascardiopulmonary disease later in adulthood, studies have shown. The researchers did not pinpoint how air17 March 2013 Page 232 of 483 ProQuestpollution was affecting the children's lungs. They theorized, however, that pollution may reduce the growth ofalveoli, the tiny air sacs within lungs where the exchange of oxygen and carbon dioxide takes place. * Staffwriter Deborah Schoch contributed to this report. * (Begin Text of Infobox) Schoolchildren and smog * A studythat followed Southern California children from fourth grade through high school found that those incommunities with higher air pollution were more likely to have underpowered lungs. *--* Microscopic particles/Percent of children foundSource: Department of Preventive Medicine, USC Illustration Caption: GRAPHIC: Schoolchildren and smog;CREDIT: Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Air pollution; Studies; Children & youth; Health hazards; Smog; Environmental impact; LungsLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Sep 9, 2004Year: 2004Section: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421920440Document URL: to have low lung function Low levelsLancaster 0% Lompoc 2.0% Santa Maria2.0% Lake Arrowhead 2.8% Atascadero 2.9%Alpine 3.4% Medium levels Lake Elsinore2.0% San Dimas 4.0% Long Beach 5.9% Highlevels Riverside 6.0% Mira Loma 6.3%Upland 9.6%__ *17 March 2013 Page 233 of 483 ProQuestCopyright: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 109 of 213Los Angeles; Long Beach Port Goes "Green"; The pollution-reduction program, thought to be the firsti n the U.S. for visiting oil tankers, aims to switch them from diesel to electricity.Author: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 31 Aug 2004: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The switch to electricity is expected to reduce BP tanker air emissions for five types of contaminants --nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, particulate matter and hydrocarbons -- by three to four tonsper vessel call. And BP experts calculate that greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced by 75 to 80 tons percall. BP initially will equip two of its tankers to plug into onshore power, and will gauge the effectiveness beforeremodeling the other four to six BP tankers that call at Long Beach. The company plans to spend $1 millionapiece to equip two brand-new tankers, named the Alaskan Frontier and the Alaskan Explorer. It will also payfor berth maintenance and for electricity. The port plans to spend $2.5 million to develop and build thenecessary equipment at Berth T121, including gear to attach power cables to the ships. UNDERCONSTRUCTION: Todd Schaefer, third mate, takes a look at the control room in the Alaskan Frontier.;PHOTOGRAPHER: Don Kelsen Los Angeles Times; DITCHING DIESEL: James Bobbitt, BP portsuperintendent, stands in front of a tanker that is planned to use onshore electricity.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Photographs by Don Kelsen Los Angeles TimesLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: When BP tankers pump oil ashore at the Port of Long Beach, they burn 10,000 gallons of diesel fuel aday, boosting pollution in a port complex that ranks as the largest air polluter in the Los Angeles region. But inlate 2006, at least two BP tankers will be able to plug into onshore electricity and shut down their dieselengines. The pollution-reduction program is believed to be the first in the nation for oil tankers. BP and portofficials, who announced the plan Monday, called it a pioneering effort to balance economic growth withenvironmental concerns. The switch to electricity is expected to reduce BP tanker air emissions for five types ofcontaminants -- nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, particulate matter and hydrocarbons -- bythree to four tons per vessel call. And BP experts calculate that greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced by75 to 80 tons per call. "We want to do more than live and work in communities. We want to make a difference,"said Tim Scruggs, BP business unit leader in the Los Angeles area. BP's participation is voluntary. In contrast,container ships owned by China Shipping are required to use electricity in the neighboring Port of Los Angelesas part of a court settlement. The technology, known as "cold ironing," allows vessels to shut down their mainand auxiliary engines and substitute electric power. Residents of southeastern Los Angeles County have grownincreasingly worried about diesel fumes and other air pollution from the ships, trucks and trains serving the twinports, which make up the largest seaport complex in the United States. Some residents have labeled the harborarea the "diesel death zone" because of studies showing that diesel fumes are a toxic air contaminant andprobable carcinogen. The two ports produce nearly one quarter of the diesel fumes in the Los Angeles area.Monday's announcement comes at a crucial time in the debate over port air quality. Port officials and clean-airadvocates are waiting nervously to see whether Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signs a controversial bill17 March 2013 Page 234 of 483 ProQuestapproved by the Legislature this month that would require port air emissions to be capped at 2004 levels. Thegovernor has until Sept. 25 to sign or veto the so-called "no net increase" bill. The Port of Long Beach opposesthe bill, and, although the Long Beach City Council voted unanimously to support it, Mayor Beverly O'Neill saidMonday that she questioned how the bill would work. "I agree with the intent, but I think the process needs moreexplanation," she said. Some residents and activists said they were unaware of O'Neill's reservations. "As far aswe know, the city of Long Beach is in favor of 'no net increase,' and we have no reason to believe that they willnot continue to support that bill," said Julie Masters, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources DefenseCouncil. She also noted that Los Angeles Mayor James K. Hahn has ordered a new task force to create a nonet-increase plan for the Los Angeles port by the end of the year that would cap emissions at 2001 levels.Simultaneously, environmental and clean-air groups are asking the Long Beach City Council to overturn theharbor commission's approval of environmental documents supporting a 115-acre expansion of the Pier Jterminal. The council will hear the appeal on Sept. 14. BP initially will equip two of its tankers to plug intoonshore power, and will gauge the effectiveness before remodeling the other four to six BP tankers that call atLong Beach. The company plans to spend $1 million apiece to equip two brand-new tankers, named theAlaskan Frontier and the Alaskan Explorer. It will also pay for berth maintenance and for electricity. The portplans to spend $2.5 million to develop and build the necessary equipment at Berth T121, including gear toattach power cables to the ships. The project grew out of a recent study conducted for the Long Beach port thatconcluded cargo vessels with high energy demands and frequent visits could make cold ironing economical. Inan independent financial analysis, BP determined that it could absorb the cold ironing costs. While some cruiseships in Alaska already use plug-in technology, the Port of Los Angeles was the first to apply it to industrialvessels, as required in a March 2003 settlement of a lawsuit brought by the Natural Resources Defense Counciland other groups. The groups sued the port, charging that there were flaws in its environmental review processfor the new China Shipping terminal. Another Los Angeles port tenant, Yusen Terminals, has voluntarily built acontainer ship equipped for cold ironing, and an existing terminal will be remodeled so that it can plug intoonshore power. A new expansion of Pier 400 that will open this fall contains some cold ironing technology, butelectrical lines must be built and the pier's owner, Maersk Sealand, still needs to retrofit its ships. The two portsappear to be at the cutting edge of the technology nationwide. A spokeswoman for the American Assn. of PortAuthorities said Monday that she did not know of any other U.S. ports with formal plans to install cold ironingequipment. Illustration Caption: PHOTO: UNDER CONSTRUCTION: Todd Schaefer, third mate, takes a look atthe control room in the Alaskan Frontier.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Don Kelsen Los Angeles Times; PHOTO:DITCHING DIESEL: James Bobbitt, BP port superintendent, stands in front of a tanker that is planned to useonshore electricity.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Photographs by Don Kelsen Los Angeles Times Credit: Times StaffWriterSubject: Electric power; Shipping industry; Environmental policy; Air pollution; Emissions controlLocation: Long Beach CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Port of Long Beach-California; NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Aug 31, 2004Year: 200417 March 2013 Page 235 of 483 ProQuestSection: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421927032Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 110 of 213The State; State May Put Time Limit on Idling Trucks; Pollution officials are expected to pass a rulebarring large diesel- powered vehicles from leaving engines running more than five minutes.Author: Bustillo, MiguelPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 22 July 2004: B.6.ProQuest document linkAbstract: California air pollution officials are expected to approve a new rule today that would bar large dieselpoweredtrucks and transit buses from idling their engines for longer than five minutes. State officials said theyplan a public awareness campaign to inform truckers and private bus lines of the change. Many drivers leavetheir diesel vehicles running because of concerns about wear and tear caused by restarting engines, but thosedon't apply to newer vehicles, officials said. State officials initially proposed implementing the rule in twophases, with one immediately banning general idling and another, starting in 2009, restricting the idling of thetrucks while drivers are resting in their sleeper cabins. But the second phase may be further delayed orscrapped altogether, officials said Wednesday, because of concerns about the effect on the trucking business.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: California air pollution officials are expected to approve a new rule today that would bar large dieselpoweredtrucks and transit buses from idling their engines for longer than five minutes. The rule, which comestwo years after the California Air Resources Board adopted similar restrictions on school buses, is expected tohelp reduce particulate matter pollution by about 1% and cut the gases that help form smog, officials said.Particulate matter, small flecks that can become lodged in the lungs, have been found to aggravate respiratoryailments, and elevated levels have been linked to increased emergency room visits and premature deaths.Environmentalists strongly support the idling rule, which some called long overdue. Twenty states andnumerous cities already have similar restrictions. The rule would be enforced primarily by the air board's 20-member diesel inspection team, which focuses on areas with a lot of truck traffic, such as the Port of Los17 March 2013 Page 236 of 483 ProQuestAngeles and the Nevada border. But the California Highway Patrol would also be able to levy fines of $100. "Iam very pleased this is moving forward, because in my own city, I have heard an earful about it," said ToddCampbell, a Burbank city councilman and policy director for the Coalition for Clean Air. "This is a big complaintfor a lot of people. There are complaints about trucks sitting around residential areas at night." State officialssaid they plan a public awareness campaign to inform truckers and private bus lines of the change. Manydrivers leave their diesel vehicles running because of concerns about wear and tear caused by restartingengines, but those don't apply to newer vehicles, officials said. "You might look at this as low-hanging fruit thatwas overlooked. It's rare for us to find ways to cut this much air pollution this easily," said air board spokesmanJerry Martin. Five minutes "gives a guy time to run into the mini-market and grab a cup of coffee ... but if he leftthat same truck running for an hour while he had lunch, that would be a problem," Martin said. The rule, whichcould take effect as soon as January, would apply to all diesel-powered commercial vehicles weighing 10,000pounds or more. State officials estimate that 409,000 such vehicles, including transit buses, construction anddelivery vehicles and large freight trucks, operate in the state every day. Buses would be allowed to idle for 10minutes prior to loading passengers. Vehicles that need to run while standing still to operate cranes and otherloading equipment would be exempt. State officials initially proposed implementing the rule in two phases, withone immediately banning general idling and another, starting in 2009, restricting the idling of the trucks whiledrivers are resting in their sleeper cabins. But the second phase may be further delayed or scrapped altogether,officials said Wednesday, because of concerns about the effect on the trucking business. Stephanie Williams,vice president of the California Trucking Assn., said the group supports the idling rule -- as long as truckers cancontinue sleeping in their cabins during breaks with the motors running, so that they can use air conditionersand heaters. Truck drivers are required under federal law to take rest breaks, and Williams suggested theywould have to use hotel rooms or add electric motors to power air conditioning systems if the second phase ofthe rule took effect. "We wouldn't want to treat truck drivers with less respect than dogs left in cars, would we?"Williams asked jokingly. "Sleeping in a truck in 100-degree weather somewhere would not be a smart thing todo. Animal shelter rules can't be more protective than the rules for our truck drivers. That would be inhumane."Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Trucks; Rules; Diesel engines; Air pollutionLocation: CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Air Resources Board-California; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 62-691-2737Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.6Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Jul 22, 2004Year: 2004Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 0458303517 March 2013 Page 237 of 483 ProQuestSource type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421912871Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 111 of 213Los Angeles; Ships Are Single Largest Polluter of Air at Port of L.A., Study FindsAuthor: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 08 July 2004: B.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The Port of Los Angeles on Wednesday made public its first-ever list of air pollutants produced by portoperations, but the report sparked questions from residents who have spent years fighting for more informationabout the contaminants emitted at the nation's largest port. The hefty 265-page emissions report, brimming withtechnical charts and graphs, used modeling rather than actual testing to measure the specific amounts of portemissions in 2001. Emissions include nitrous oxide, carbon monoxide, particulate matter and sulfur dioxide.Port officials assured the audience that the report was part of larger plans to address pollution at the portcomplex and that more would be done.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: CORRECTION: SEE CORRECTION APPENDED; Port pollution -- A photo in Thursday's Californiasection with a story about pollution at the Port of Los Angeles was misidentified as showing the L.A. port. Thephoto showed the Port of Long Beach. The Port of Los Angeles on Wednesday made public its first-ever list ofair pollutants produced by port operations, but the report sparked questions from residents who have spentyears fighting for more information about the contaminants emitted at the nation's largest port. The thousands ofships that call at the port each year are the single biggest source of air pollution at the complex, the report said.The report is intended to be used as a baseline as city officials juggle the tasks of serving the ever-growingvolume of cargo traffic at the port while also attempting to clean the air. Los Angeles Mayor James K. Hahn haspromised Harbor-area residents that there would be "no net increase" in air emissions at the port, even as itexpands. The port complex remains a strong economic engine for the region. The twin ports of Los Angeles andLong Beach are running at record levels for the third straight year. Cargo ships are waiting offshore as shippers,longshoremen, trucking companies and railroads struggle to keep up with the increase, fueled largely byshipments from China. Port officials hailed the report as a groundbreaking document. One independent expert,Ed Avol, a USC professor specializing in environmental health, said he was impressed by how it inventoriedpollutants in the area. "It does represent probably the best available approach to emissions inventories," hesaid. "It serves a very important purpose." The report and other data were presented to community residentsWednesday night at a meeting at the port's headquarters in San Pedro. Some residents greeted it with17 March 2013 Page 238 of 483 ProQuestskepticism. Some said, for instance, that the report underestimated emissions from trucks because of thetechnique used to measure truck traffic. The hefty 265-page emissions report, brimming with technical chartsand graphs, used modeling rather than actual testing to measure the specific amounts of port emissions in2001. Emissions include nitrous oxide, carbon monoxide, particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. It studiedpollution from five sources: oceangoing vessels, harbor craft, cargo handling equipment, railroad locomotivesand heavy-duty vehicles. The report does not recommend new programs or laws to reduce pollution. AlsoWednesday night, residents heard a presentation from a consultant who said the port accounts for 12% ofdiesel particulate matter in the region. The Port of Long Beach generates about the same amount, meaning thatthe two ports together generate nearly one-quarter of the diesel pollution regionwide. Port officials assured theaudience that the report was part of larger plans to address pollution at the port complex and that more wouldbe done. The report was prompted, in part, by years of protest by residents of San Pedro, Wilmington and othercommunities close to the port who fear that pollutants are causing cancer, asthma and other lung diseases.Their fears were spurred on by a 1999 report showing diesel emissions were responsible for 71% of the cancerrisk from air pollution in the Los Angeles Basin. The Los Angeles/Long Beach port complex is the single-largestconcentrated source of air pollution -- including diesel emissions - - in the region. The $425,000 report releasedWednesday by Houston-based Starcrest Consulting Group focused solely on the Port of Los Angeles. In themeantime, the ever-growing port, expected to triple in size by 2020, has been continuing to approve expansionprojects, while the Starcrest report -- originally due last winter -- was delayed and not made public until lateWednesday afternoon. "This report may turn out to be the best piece of science in the history of science -- butthe way it's been done only shows the problems in this process," said San Pedro activist Noel Park before hesaw the document. In addition to the Starcrest report, a second report was released, billed as a "plan to achieveno net increase of air emissions at the Port of Los Angeles." A number of residents berated the second report,saying it was no more than a series of projections of how pollution might rise or fall based on existing andproposed regulations. References Message No: 41859 Illustration Caption: PHOTO: GROWING PAINS: ThePort of Los Angeles, which is expected to triple in size by 2020, continues to approve expansion projects.;PHOTOGRAPHER: Gina Ferazzi Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Studies; Air pollution; Shipping industryLocation: Los Angeles CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Port of Los Angeles; NAICS: 488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Jul 8, 2004Year: 2004Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 0458303517 March 2013 Page 239 of 483 ProQuestSource type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421909416Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 112 of 213Clean-Air Order UndercutPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 01 July 2004: B.14.ProQuest document linkAbstract: [Bush] also rejected the idea of environmental reviews before allowing dirtier Mexican diesel trucks todrive U.S. roads. That decision, backed by the high court in June, would disproportionately pollute SouthernCalifornia. The administration extols its "Clear Skies" initiative, stalled in Congress, as a pollution cutter eventhough it would leave more soot and smog in the air than the Clean Air Act, which it would replace. Under Bush,the EPA has made it easier for coal plants -- the major source of fine particulates in the East -- to avoidinstalling state-of-the-art pollution equipment when they renovate.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: CORRECTION: SEE CORRECTION APPENDED; Clean-air rules -- A July 1 editorial erroneously saidnonroad diesel engines, such as those used for construction equipment, are unregulated. There are regulationsfor such engines, with much tougher ones to take effect in coming years. Some of the most microscopicparticles in the air are of the greatest concern to health because they easily find their way to the deep recessesof our lungs. Such pollutants, which include diesel exhaust and wildfire ash, can cramp lung function and causecoughs and shortness of breath. They aggravate asthma and turn bronchitis into a chronic condition. They'rebehind thousands of hospitalizations and premature deaths each year and have been linked to increased lungcancer risk. Because the risks only recently became clear, though, fine particulates have taken a back seat toozone when it comes to air regulations. That's not likely to change under a new directive from the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency ordering 243 counties nationwide to reduce unhealthful levels of fineparticulate pollution by 2010. As on-target as EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt's demand sounds, it is seriouslyundercut by his own efforts and those of his boss, President Bush, to erode even existing protections. That'sespecially true of the administration's decision to file a friend-of-the-court brief against an important antipollutioninitiative in Southern California, where some of the worst particulate pollution occurs. The U.S.Supreme Court in April struck down a regional air quality rule that would have required fleet owners to buycleaner engines when they replaced their dirty diesel vehicles. The White House could and should have leftengine makers to mount their own attack, giving the state a better chance of winning. Bush also rejected theidea of environmental reviews before allowing dirtier Mexican diesel trucks to drive U.S. roads. That decision,backed by the high court in June, would disproportionately pollute Southern California. The administration extolsits "Clear Skies" initiative, stalled in Congress, as a pollution cutter even though it would leave more soot and17 March 2013 Page 240 of 483 ProQuestsmog in the air than the Clean Air Act, which it would replace. Under Bush, the EPA has made it easier for coalplants -- the major source of fine particulates in the East -- to avoid installing state-of-the-art pollution equipmentwhen they renovate. The EPA put forth a valuable air regulation in May, when it announced tough pollutionstandards for construction vehicles and other non-road diesel engines. Because those engines are nowunregulated, the rules will make a real difference in the long term. But diesels last decades, and it will takeabout 25 years to replace most of them. California and many other states are way ahead of the feds in trying toscrub the air of these particles, thousands of which could fit on the period at the end of this sentence. Theregional Air Quality Management District is forging ahead with a more limited fleet- replacement rule, coveringonly public agencies and perhaps private companies that want public contracts. Gov. Arnold Schwarzeneggerrecently announced an innovative way to keep funding incentive payments that nudge diesel owners to replacetheir engines with cleaner technology. New state legislation seeks to keep foreign trucks out of California unlessthey meet federal pollution standards. California doesn't need to be forced by the Bush administration to cleanup the air. What it needs is for the administration to stop erecting roadblocks. References Message No: 40474Subject: Air pollution; Federal regulation; Environmental cleanup; Public health; Politics; Editorials -- AirpollutionLocation: United States, USPeople: Leavitt, Michael (public official), Bush, George WCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910;Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.14Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Jul 1, 2004Year: 2004Section: California Metro; Part B; Editorial Pages DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: EditorialProQuest document ID: 421918517Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-2217 March 2013 Page 241 of 483 ProQuestDatabase: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 113 of 213Regulators Order L.A., Orange Counties to Cut Fine-Particle PollutionAuthor: Elizabeth Shogren and Miguel BustilloPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 30 June 2004: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Nationwide, the EPA concluded that the air in all or part of 243 counties -- home to 99 million people --contains dangerous levels of particulate matter, tiny flecks as small as one-thirtieth the diameter of a human hairthat penetrate deep into the lungs. The EPA has concluded that the particles cause thousands of early deaths inolder people and aggravate asthma in children. The San Joaquin Valley and the greater Los Angeles area,covering 12 counties, were the only two regions in the nation that failed both of the standards the EPA used todetermine violations, said Wayne Nastri, regional EPA administrator for California and much of the West. Roaddust includes soot particles from diesel-burning trucks and buses. Although Southern California officials aretaking aggressive measures to reduce diesel pollution in the sources they have authority over, they may have toconsider measures such as particle filters to suck up the dust, EPA officials said.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The Environmental Protection Agency declared Tuesday that 13 California counties, including LosAngeles, Orange and San Diego, are shrouded with unhealthy levels of fine particles and must reduce thedeadly air pollutants or lose federal funding. As a result of the EPA requirement, air pollution officials in thegreater Los Angeles area must develop detailed blueprints to clean the air of the fine particles, just as they mustfor ozone, one of the main ingredients of smog. Nationwide, the EPA concluded that the air in all or part of 243counties -- home to 99 million people -- contains dangerous levels of particulate matter, tiny flecks as small asone-thirtieth the diameter of a human hair that penetrate deep into the lungs. The EPA has concluded that theparticles cause thousands of early deaths in older people and aggravate asthma in children. The two worstareas in the country were in California: the San Joaquin Valley and the greater Los Angeles area. Except forCalifornia, a corner of northwestern Montana and the St. Louis area, all the most polluted counties are east ofthe Mississippi River. "Reducing fine particles is the single most important action we can take to make our airhealthier for Americans," EPA administrator Mike Leavitt said. Leavitt said much of the problem of particlepollution could be solved when two of the EPA's new programs -- one to clean exhausts from off-road dieselengines and the other to reduce emissions from power plants -- are fully implemented. However, someCalifornia officials said they would need more help from Washington to meet the new standards. They said cars,trucks, planes, trains, ships and many of the other sources of particulate pollution are largely regulated by thefederal government. "We can wipe out our entire share and still not address all of these [particle] emissions,"said Elaine Chang, deputy executive officer of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the localagency charged with reducing air pollution for 16 million people in the Los Angeles Basin, which includesOrange County and parts of Riverside and San Bernardino counties. "We have more control over ammonia andsome other sources ... but we definitely need stronger federal action to attain the new standard." Tuesday'sresults were preliminary. The EPA will make final decisions on which areas have unhealthful particle levels inNovember after hearing appeals from the states, which proposed that only 141 counties be on the list. Thestates will have until 2008 to develop plans to reduce the airborne flecks. Then they must reduce the fineparticles to acceptable levels by 2010, though areas can seek an extension to 2015. Those that fail will risk the17 March 2013 Page 242 of 483 ProQuestloss of federal funds. For three decades, the federal government has been designating communities that violatehealth-based standards for smog and soot -- larger particles. But this is the first time it has designated areasthat violate the health-based standards for fine particles. The standards were set in response to researchshowing that fine particles aggravate lung and heart disease. But in a case that went to the Supreme Court, abroad coalition of industry groups sued the EPA over the fine-particle standards, delaying implementation of thestandards for several years. Although health concerns provided the primary impetus for reducing fine particlepollution, successful cleanups would also remove much of the haze over cities and rural areas. "The value ofthis will be seen as well as felt," Leavitt said. The San Joaquin Valley and the greater Los Angeles area,covering 12 counties, were the only two regions in the nation that failed both of the standards the EPA used todetermine violations, said Wayne Nastri, regional EPA administrator for California and much of the West.Those benchmarks were an annual average of 15 micrograms of fine particles per cubic meter and a 24-houraverage of 65 micrograms. San Diego County also was deemed out of compliance. State officials had asked theEPA to add Imperial County at the southeast corner of California to the list of violators. But EPA officialsconcluded that the county passed under both of the benchmarks. All states with counties on the list will have toshow that plans for new roads and public transit systems conform to the air quality goals, and new industrialpolluters in the violating areas will be required to use pollution controls. Beyond that, states have leeway to craftsolutions to their fine-particle problems. Although California has a decades-long history of combating airpollution and is ahead of federal standards in many areas, the fine- particle rules probably will require the stateto tackle other sources of emissions that it has not focused on in its fight against smog. The solutions may haveto be different for separate areas of the state, because the source of the problem varies. In the heavilyurbanized Los Angeles region, 19% of the particles directly emitted into the air come from paved road dust, theEPA said. Pollutants released into the atmosphere also can react chemically to form particles. Road dustincludes soot particles from diesel-burning trucks and buses. Although Southern California officials are takingaggressive measures to reduce diesel pollution in the sources they have authority over, they may have toconsider measures such as particle filters to suck up the dust, EPA officials said. By contrast, in the SanJoaquin Valley, historically an agricultural area that has seen a tremendous population spurt in recent decades,25% of the directly emitted particles come from the burning of farm waste, EPA officials said. And in San Diego,the biggest direct source is ash and other residue from seasonal wildfires (16%), followed closely by particlesfrom residential fuel combustion involving home uses such as fireplaces. That may require air pollution officialsin San Diego to pass restrictions on new wood-burning fireplaces, or to consider incentives for homeowners toswap existing fireplaces with gas- burning models. Illustration Caption: GRAPHIC: Particular pollution violators(includes map of the United States); CREDIT: Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WritersSubject: Environmental cleanup; Environmental impact; Public health; Federal funding; Federal regulation; AirpollutionLocation: Los Angeles County California, Orange County CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910;Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Jun 30, 200417 March 2013 Page 243 of 483 ProQuestYear: 2004Dateline: WASHINGTONSection: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421958307Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 114 of 213THE STATE; Court Upholds Imperial County Clean Air Rules; U.S. justices reject contention byfarmers and the EPA that Mexico is source of pollution.Author: Weinstein, HenryPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 22 June 2004: B.6.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The suit was filed by Earthjustice, an environmental law firm representing the Sierra Club, after theEPA in 2001 allowed Imperial County to skirt stronger Clean Air Act requirements. The county asserted that itsviolations were caused by pollution from Mexico. EPA spokeswoman Lisa Fasano said the agency would workwith officials from Imperial County and the California Air Resources Board to come up with a plan. Sheacknowledged that even if pollution from Mexico is part of the problem, Imperial County has to take steps tocurb its own sources of particulate pollutants. The goal, she said, is to bring clear air to the area. "ImperialCounty Farm Bureau stands firm in its belief that the majority of airborne pollution in our valley travels acrossthe border from Mexicali," said Nicole M. Rothfleisch, the bureau's executive director. "Agriculture is aninsignificant source ... when compared to naturally occurring [dust] and that which is coming from our millionplusneighbors across the border.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The Supreme Court on Monday let stand an order requiring stronger clean air protections for ImperialCounty, a region that has one of the highest childhood asthma rates in the state. In October, the U.S. 9th CircuitCourt of Appeals ruled 3 to 0 that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency erred in blaming Mexico forunhealthful air quality in the Imperial Valley and ordered the agency to impose more stringent control measures17 March 2013 Page 244 of 483 ProQueston the U.S. side of the border. The Imperial County Air Pollution Control District, the defendant, objected andasked the Supreme Court to review the case. The high court, without explanation, declined. "This is great newsfor public health," said attorney David S. Baron, who argued the case before the 9th Circuit on behalf of theSierra Club. "We hope that the state and the county will now move on with the job of adopting the strongerantipollution measures required by the law." Imperial County, Baron said, has exceeded federal healthstandards for airborne particulates hundreds of times over the last 10 years, according to EPA estimates, withlevels sometimes double the permissible amount. The goal of the environmental groups is to get farms, mines,factories and developers to take steps that will lower the level of particulate pollutants -- including diesel soot,tire fragments, oil droplets and dust -- that cause haze and health hazards. The suit was filed by Earthjustice, anenvironmental law firm representing the Sierra Club, after the EPA in 2001 allowed Imperial County to skirtstronger Clean Air Act requirements. The county asserted that its violations were caused by pollution fromMexico. Last year, however, the 9th Circuit ruled that the facts did not support that contention. "Based on thedata and the reports in the record, there simply is no possibility that Mexican transport could have caused" theobserved levels of airborne particles, Judge Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain wrote. The court concluded that the EPArelied on faulty data and misinterpretations of pollution and wind measurements. In his opinion, O'Scannlain,one of the 9th Circuit's most conservative judges, took the unusual step of ordering the EPA to act immediately,rather than performing more research on the issue. "We fail to see how further administrative proceedingswould serve a useful purpose; the record here has been fully developed, and the conclusions that must followfrom it are clear," he added. It is not known how much time Imperial County has to comply with national airquality standards, but Pat Gallagher of the Sierra Club said the county needs to act swiftly. "They already arelong overdue." Stephen Birdsall, Imperial County's air pollution control officer, said it already has been redoingan inventory of emissions sources to identify the primary polluters. Among the candidates, he said, areagriculture, dirt roads that generate dust, and Mexico. EPA spokeswoman Lisa Fasano said the agency wouldwork with officials from Imperial County and the California Air Resources Board to come up with a plan. Sheacknowledged that even if pollution from Mexico is part of the problem, Imperial County has to take steps tocurb its own sources of particulate pollutants. The goal, she said, is to bring clear air to the area. ImperialCounty produces about $1.2 billion worth of alfalfa, carrots, lettuce and sugar beets annually, and farm ownersare worried about the impact of the ruling. "Imperial County Farm Bureau stands firm in its belief that themajority of airborne pollution in our valley travels across the border from Mexicali," said Nicole M. Rothfleisch,the bureau's executive director. "Agriculture is an insignificant source ... when compared to naturally occurring[dust] and that which is coming from our million-plus neighbors across the border. "Although I hope that we cancome up with a reasonable plan for farmers to stay in compliance with these stringent air quality rules, myconcern is that this new ruling will devastate the already struggling agriculture industry here in the ImperialValley." Janie Davis, president of the American Lung Assn. of San Diego and Imperial counties, said Monday'saction "will be so important to the future health of the county." She said the pollution had contributed tosignificant asthma problems among children in the area and breathing difficulties for senior citizens. Credit:Times Staff WriterSubject: Air pollution; Environmental policy; State court decisionsLocation: Imperial County CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Supreme Court-California; NAICS: 922110Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.6Number of pages: 017 March 2013 Page 245 of 483 ProQuestPublication year: 2004Publication date: Jun 22, 2004Year: 2004Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421900589Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 115 of 213AQMD Moves to Corral Cow PollutionAuthor: Wilson, JanetPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 17 June 2004: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: About 250,000 dairy cattle are packed onto farms in the Chino area. The dairy lands that straddle theRiverside-San Bernardino line generate millions upon millions of pounds of manure annually, much of it storedin towering, open-air piles. "All of this comes down to the fact that they want to build houses in SouthernCalifornia," said Art Marquez, Jr., a third- generation dairy farmer and owner of Marquez Dairies in Chino, where2,000 Holsteins on 34 acres are milked twice a day. Each of those cows produces an estimated 120 pounds ofmanure a day. Part of the pollution problem with the Chino dairies involves location. Cars, trucks and factoriesin Los Angeles and Orange counties emit nitrogen oxides that are carried east by prevailing winds. When thenitrogen oxides pass over the airborne ammonia from the dairies, chemical reactions in the atmosphere yieldbursts of particulate-laden smog over parts of western Riverside and San Bernardino counties that are the worstin the United States on an average annual basis, [Barry Wallerstein] said.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Southern California air quality officials, whose regulatory efforts already cover smoke stacks, paint andhamburger stands, have taken on a new challenge -- cow manure. About 250,000 dairy cattle are packed ontofarms in the Chino area. The dairy lands that straddle the Riverside-San Bernardino line generate millions uponmillions of pounds of manure annually, much of it stored in towering, open-air piles. Ammonia emissions from17 March 2013 Page 246 of 483 ProQuestthose stockpiles contribute significantly to air pollution in heavily populated areas farther inland -- and downwind-- helping give parts of the Inland Empire the worst air quality in the nation. The new rules, which would requiremore frequent cleaning of corrals and more stringent measures for disposing of manure, would cost the dairyindustry about $3.5 million a year, officials at the South Coast Air Quality Management District say. The regionaldairy industry has revenues of about $1 billion a year, industry officials said. AQMD Executive Officer BarryWallerstein called the proposed rule "a cost-effective means to reduce dairy emissions and improve publichealth." An area dairy farm group and individual farmers said they are not totally opposed to the newregulations, which are expected to go into effect at the end of this year. But they warned that the rules coulddrive up the price of milk and are likely to speed the replacement of the Southland's dairy lands with housingdevelopments that will generate more traffic. "Just remember, for every cow that leaves the Chino basin, twocars are going to replace it," said Bob Feenstra, executive director of the Milk Producers Council in Chino. "Allof this comes down to the fact that they want to build houses in Southern California," said Art Marquez, Jr., athird- generation dairy farmer and owner of Marquez Dairies in Chino, where 2,000 Holsteins on 34 acres aremilked twice a day. Each of those cows produces an estimated 120 pounds of manure a day. Marquez said theproposed air quality rules come on top of tough new water-quality rules and skyrocketing land values. He alsosaid regulators were underestimating how much the new rules would cost. The new rules would require manureto be removed from corrals at least four times a year. Current water-quality rules require the cleanup twice ayear. Starting in 2006, manure that was not used on agricultural fields would either have to be sent to ananaerobic digester, where it could be recycled as "biogas" energy, be placed in a stringently regulatedcomposting facility or be processed by alternative means such as enclosed composting bags. Much of thewaste now is trucked to an open-air composting facility in Chino that is due to close in 2006, or is spread oncrop fields in the Inland Empire and Imperial and San Joaquin counties. The Milk Producers Council has beenworking with AQMD for years on the rules and is trying to negotiate exemptions during the rainy season. "Whenit's wet, it's heavier," said Nathan DeBoom, chief of staff at the council. "The manure acts like a sponge; it getsto be a nightmare." Part of the pollution problem with the Chino dairies involves location. Cars, trucks andfactories in Los Angeles and Orange counties emit nitrogen oxides that are carried east by prevailing winds.When the nitrogen oxides pass over the airborne ammonia from the dairies, chemical reactions in theatmosphere yield bursts of particulate-laden smog over parts of western Riverside and San Bernardino countiesthat are the worst in the United States on an average annual basis, Wallerstein said. Particulate pollutioncontributes to breathing and heart problems, particularly in children and the elderly. The Milk Producers Counciland farmers argue that pollution caused by the dairies is decreasing even without new regulations because ofthe sheer number of cows being moved out of the region. State farming figures show that of the quarter-millioncows in the Chino area, about 38,000 were moved to other parts of the Southwest in 2003, a 13% decline. ButAQMD staff said that the number of cows being moved out in previous years has been uneven, in part becauseenvironmental activists in the Central Valley have gone to court to block the expansion of dairies there. Andwhile new housing developments will yield more cars, cutting emissions from the dairies is more importantbecause of the role that ammonia plays in creating particulate pollution, the staff said. Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: State regulation; Cattle; Air pollutionLocation: Chino CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA; NAICS:924110; DUNS: 01-598-6159Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.117 March 2013 Page 247 of 483 ProQuestNumber of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Jun 17, 2004Year: 2004Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421974816Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 116 of 213The State; As Smog Thickens, So Does the DebateAuthor: Bustillo, MiguelPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 24 May 2004: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: [Douglas R. Lawson] and those who agree with him argue that regulators should put less emphasis onnitrogen oxides and focus more on reducing the other main constituent of ozone, a class of chemicals calledvolatile organic compounds. Those compounds have many sources, natural and man-made, includinghousehold cleaners, cars and trees. Ozone, a colorless and odorless gas, is formed in a photochemical reactioninvolving nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide and volatile organic compounds. Laboratory research has shownthat altering the ratio of nitrogen oxides to volatile organic compounds in the air can cause more ozone to form.Some scientists theorize that by slashing nitrogen oxide pollution in recent years, state and federal regulatorshave made the air above Los Angeles more conducive to ozone formation. California officials remain committedto rapidly cutting nitrogen oxides. In addition to helping cause ozone, they note, nitrogen oxides contribute toanother type of pollution: particulate matter, tiny flecks that can become lodged in the lungs and cause seriousrespiratory problems. Diesel particulate matter is responsible for 70% of the cancer risk from airborne toxicsubstances in Southern California, according to a government study.Links: Check Find It for Availability17 March 2013 Page 248 of 483 ProQuestFull text: As Southern California experiences a resurgence of smog, a growing number of scientists say thegovernment's long-standing strategy for reducing air pollution may be making it worse. The doubts have arisenbecause ozone, the main ingredient of smog, is becoming more common in Los Angeles and many other largecities on weekends, when big trucks and other heavy polluters are least active. Known as the "weekend effect,"the phenomenon has long perplexed scientists and air pollution officials, who remain divided over why ozone isso abundant Saturdays and Sundays. Now, some scientists, armed with new research about the weekendeffect, are suggesting that environmental officials may be putting too much emphasis on the wrong pollutantbecause they misunderstand how smog forms in the atmosphere. The dispute centers on one of the two maingroups of chemicals that react to form ozone: nitrogen oxides, which are released into the air when fuel burns.Air quality regulators have pushed hard to reduce those chemicals as much as possible. It's been a costlyprocess, particularly for the auto industry, and some scientists say it may be time to pull back. "It seems likemotherhood and apple pie to reduce pollutants. That sounds like a common-sense approach," said Douglas R.Lawson of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Colorado. "But things are not that simple. The moreintelligent way to approach the question of pollution controls is: How will the atmosphere respond to thechanges?" Lawson and those who agree with him argue that regulators should put less emphasis on nitrogenoxides and focus more on reducing the other main constituent of ozone, a class of chemicals called volatileorganic compounds. Those compounds have many sources, natural and man-made, including householdcleaners, cars and trees. A lot is at stake in the debate. Auto industry groups have tried to use the weekendeffect as a rationale for weaker antipollution rules. During state hearings in 1998, for example, automakers saidsport utility vehicles should not have to meet the same emissions standards as regular cars. The scientificarguments against cutting nitrogen oxide emissions may bolster their case. At the same time, a push to reducevolatile organic compounds could boost efforts to get old cars off the road. Those vehicles are major sources ofthe chemicals. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's administration has proposed such a program; its plan would costhundreds of millions of dollars and weigh disproportionately on people who can't afford newer vehicles. Officialsfrom the California Air Resources Board and the South Coast Air Quality Management District concede that thearguments by Lawson and others cannot be dismissed. But they say that changing successful strategies basedon unproven claims would be irresponsible. "The weekend effect is something you can see in different parts ofthe country and the world, but people tend to overemphasize it," said Leon J. Dolislager, a state air boardofficial who has researched the phenomenon. "We have to keep our eye on the big picture, not overreact." InSouthern California last year, 68 days exceeded federal ozone standards -- nearly twice as many as two yearsearlier. A disproportionate number of the bad air days over the last five years have been Saturdays andSundays. In Los Angeles County, 43.5% of the 260 days exceeding a federal ozone standard fell on weekends.It remains to be seen whether the smog increase is a sign of serious problems or an anomaly caused byunusual weather and massive wildfires, as some air experts have theorized. Ozone, a colorless and odorlessgas, is formed in a photochemical reaction involving nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide and volatile organiccompounds. Laboratory research has shown that altering the ratio of nitrogen oxides to volatile organiccompounds in the air can cause more ozone to form. Some scientists theorize that by slashing nitrogen oxidepollution in recent years, state and federal regulators have made the air above Los Angeles more conducive toozone formation. Although officials have been cutting both pollutants, they have reduced nitrogen oxides morerapidly over the last decade. Some experts -- most notably Lawson and Eric Fujita of the Desert ResearchInstitute in Nevada, both former California air pollution officials -- believe that regulators could keep ozone incheck better by slowing the pace of nitrogen oxide reductions while doing more to cut volatile organiccompounds. Over the last quarter century, by drastically reducing both pollutants, regulators have slashed peakozone levels in the Los Angeles area by 60%, even as population has grown by 50% and traffic nearly doubled.By 2010, environmental regulations will have reduced nitrogen oxide enough that the atmospheric changesseen on weekends will be present all week, Lawson predicts. "What we are saying is that in 2010, ozone could17 March 2013 Page 249 of 483 ProQuestbe worse than it is now; that is the bottom line," he said. California officials said in a detailed report last year thatthere might be other explanations for why ozone in urban areas was often worse on weekends. One theoryholds that emissions from weekdays remain aloft and "carry over" to the weekend. According to another theory,nitrogen oxide emissions from regular cars and trucks, which typically crest during the morning commute onweekdays, peak around noon on weekends. At that hour, the sun is brighter and atmospheric conditions aredifferent, which might cause ozone to form faster. "There are plausible hypotheses that do not involve the[nitrogen oxide] reduction question," said Richard Corey, head of the California air board's research branch.State officials, however, increasingly appear to be in the minority. Researchers have found the weekend effectin American cities as diverse as San Francisco, Chicago, Denver and Philadelphia -- and many experts sayreduced nitrogen oxide appears to be a big reason. The state officials "are the only ones who seem to believe"that reduced nitrogen oxides are not a leading cause of the weekend effect, said George Wolff, principalscientist for General Motors, who published an article on the phenomenon last year. Robert Harley, a professorof environmental engineering at UC Berkeley, analyzed 20 years of air-monitoring data throughout Californiaand found that the weekend effect, once seen only in coastal urban areas, could now be observed as far inlandas Sacramento and the northern San Joaquin Valley. Like other experts, he concluded that reductions innitrogen oxides on weekends seemed the most credible explanation for the spike in ozone levels. "We foundthe change in diesel truck emissions to be much more important" than the later start time for regular cars onweekends, said Harley, who considered both hypotheses. California officials remain committed to rapidly cuttingnitrogen oxides. In addition to helping cause ozone, they note, nitrogen oxides contribute to another type ofpollution: particulate matter, tiny flecks that can become lodged in the lungs and cause serious respiratoryproblems. Diesel particulate matter is responsible for 70% of the cancer risk from airborne toxic substances inSouthern California, according to a government study. "To address that, we have to do everything possible,"said AQMD spokesman Sam Atwood. * (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX) Bad air days Despite lower levels ofemissions, weekend days are more likely to violate federal ozone standards than weekdays in five SouthernCalifornia counties. In Los Angeles County, for instance, 22% of weekend days exceeded ozone standards overthe past five years, versus 11% of weekdays. Days exceeding ozone standards, 1999-2003 Los AngelesCounty Percent of all weekdays: 11% Percent of all weekend days: 22% Orange County Percent of allweekdays: 0.5% Percent of all weekend days: 3% Riverside County Percent of all weekdays: 19% Percent of allweekend days: 24% San Bernardino County Percent of all weekdays: 21% Percent of all weekend days: 31%Ventura County Percent of all weekdays: 6% Percent of all weekend days: 9% Source: Calif. Air ResourcesBoard References Message No: 32684 Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Air pollution; Environmental protection; Studies; SmogLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: May 24, 2004Year: 2004Section: Main News; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLC17 March 2013 Page 250 of 483 ProQuestPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421892945Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 117 of 213The Region; Smog District Will Not Back Down in Pushing Fleet Rules; Air pollution officials say courtruling does not prevent them from imposing standards on publicly owned and contractor vehicles.Author: Bustillo, MiguelPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 30 Apr 2004: B.5.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Manufacturers of diesel engines, along with an oil industry group, sued the AQMD because it hadbarred the owners of the private fleets from buying their products in the greater Los Angeles area, despiteadvances in clean diesel technology. The Supreme Court concluded Wednesday that the air district hadoverstepped its authority under the Clean Air Act. "The fact is that diesel remains a much higher source of NOxemissions than natural gas, even with the new technology," said AQMD spokesman Sam Atwood, referring tonitrogen oxide gases, one of the main ingredients of smog. Atwood contends that the fleet rules allowcompanies to make a case for diesel trucks or any other technology if they can show it is as clean as naturalgas. Traditional diesel engines are among the worst pollution sources in Southern California, contributingheavily to smog-forming gases and particulate matter, tiny particles that can become lodged in the lungs,causing respiratory problems. Heavy-duty diesel vehicles and stationary diesel engines are responsible for 70%of the air pollution cancer risks in Southern California, according to a study by the air officials.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Despite this week's U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Southern California air pollution officials say they willstill attempt to require most large-vehicle fleets to buy low-polluting trucks and cars -- a move that is certain tospark more court battles with industry groups. On Wednesday, the high court invalidated rules that had allowedthe South Coast Air Quality Management District to require private trash haulers, bus lines and other companiesto buy low-pollution vehicles for their fleets. But AQMD officials maintain the ruling does not bar them fromimposing the same requirement on publicly owned fleets or on private firms that provide city services -- acontention hotly disputed by the engine manufacturers that prevailed in the lawsuit decided Wednesday. Theentire controversy boils down to a disagreement over diesel engines. Manufacturers of diesel engines, along17 March 2013 Page 251 of 483 ProQuestwith an oil industry group, sued the AQMD because it had barred the owners of the private fleets from buyingtheir products in the greater Los Angeles area, despite advances in clean diesel technology. The SupremeCourt concluded Wednesday that the air district had overstepped its authority under the Clean Air Act. Industrygroups now say the decision should clear the way for street sweepers, bus lines and others bound by the rule tobuy new diesel engines that emit far less pollution than older models. "The Supreme Court decision is great foranyone who breathes, because it will allow some of the most promising technologies available to be used," saidAnita Mangels, a spokeswoman for the Western States Petroleum Assn. "By insisting inappropriately on settingstandards, South Coast was denying Southern Californians the ability to purchase one of the cleanesttechnologies." But South Coast officials firmly maintain that the new diesel engines, although improved, are stillfar from clean compared with alternatives such as engines that burn natural gas. "The fact is that diesel remainsa much higher source of NOx emissions than natural gas, even with the new technology," said AQMDspokesman Sam Atwood, referring to nitrogen oxide gases, one of the main ingredients of smog. Atwoodcontends that the fleet rules allow companies to make a case for diesel trucks or any other technology if theycan show it is as clean as natural gas. Under the Supreme Court's ruling, key details of the decision are still tobe worked out by a lower court in California. Since the rules were adopted in 2000 and 2001, they have putmore than 8,900 low-polluting trash trucks, transit buses, airport shuttles and passenger cars on SouthernCalifornia roads, according to air district officials. By 2010, the rules were expected to have eliminated 4,780tons per year of harmful emissions, including 1,931 tons of nitrogen oxides. The 8-1 decision by the court alsonoted that local officials could still impose fleet rules by receiving the approval of the California Air ResourcesBoard as well as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Air district officials said they would seek suchapprovals if necessary to save the rules. "We think the plaintiffs in this case were strictly trying to protect theirmarket share, not thinking about how to clean the air," Barry Wallerstein, executive officer of the South Coast airdistrict, said of the Engine Manufacturers Assn. and the Western States Petroleum Assn. "What has helpedclean diesel, quite frankly, has been these fleet rules, because they have created competition that has forcedthe diesel engine manufacturers to improve their performance .... But we need further progress." Traditionaldiesel engines are among the worst pollution sources in Southern California, contributing heavily to smogforminggases and particulate matter, tiny particles that can become lodged in the lungs, causing respiratoryproblems. Heavy-duty diesel vehicles and stationary diesel engines are responsible for 70% of the air pollutioncancer risks in Southern California, according to a study by the air officials. However, some private firms withlarge-vehicle fleets contend that there are few cost-effective alternatives available -- outside of the newer dieseltechnologies. "A government agency is trying to regulate how we do business to reduce pollution, and to adegree I understand that," Timothy Dillon, safety and environmental officer for Foothill Waste Reclamation, saidof the air district's fleet rules. "But they seem to be turning a blind eye to some technologies. It's as though we'reonly allowed to look at one technology." Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Supreme Court decisions; Air pollution; Emission standards; Automobile fleetsLocation: CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA; NAICS:924110; DUNS: 01-598-6159Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.5Number of pages: 0Publication year: 200417 March 2013 Page 252 of 483 ProQuestPublication date: Apr 30, 2004Year: 2004Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421904975Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 118 of 213Study Details Port Pollution Threat; Environmental groups' U.S. report, which ranks L.A. and LongBeach in the middle, calls for stricter regulation.Author: Schoch, DeborahPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 22 Mar 2004: C.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The report rates the environmental records of the 10 largest U.S. seaports, giving the highest marks tothe Port of Oakland and the lowest to the Port of Houston. "So few people are talking about this giganticelephant in our living room," said Thomas Plenys, one of the study's principal authors and a transportationpolicy analyst at the Coalition for Clean Air, a not-for-profit California group. Port activity, he said, is "arguablythe most poorly regulated source of pollution in the United States." The latest study's authors, using a variety ofreports, calculated that the Port of Los Angeles produces 31.4 tons per day of nitrous oxide, largely from ships,trucks and port equipment. By contrast, an average U.S. refinery produces 0.8 ton daily; an average powerplant, 4.6 tons; and half a million cars, 23.9 tons.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Booming global trade is taking a toll on the nation's major seaports as container ships, trucks and portequipment produce massive amounts of air and water pollutants that threaten residents' health, a studyconcludes. A prime example is the Los Angeles-Long Beach port complex, now the single largest fixed sourceof air pollution in Southern California, emitting as much diesel exhaust as 16,000 tractor- trailers idling theirengines 24 hours a day, according to the study, being released today by the Natural Resources DefenseCouncil and the Coalition for Clean Air. The report rates the environmental records of the 10 largest U.S.17 March 2013 Page 253 of 483 ProQuestseaports, giving the highest marks to the Port of Oakland and the lowest to the Port of Houston. SouthernCalifornia's two major ports finished in the low-to- middle range, with the Port of Long Beach edging out its chiefcompetitor, the neighboring Port of Los Angeles, with higher marks for environmental compliance. Long Beachreceived a C grade and Los Angeles trailed with a C-minus. The report calls for stricter regulation of portpollution, raising questions about how much ports, shipping companies, retailers and consumers may have topay to reduce air and water pollution. Port-related pollution across the country has been largely ignored andunregulated, it says. "So few people are talking about this gigantic elephant in our living room," said ThomasPlenys, one of the study's principal authors and a transportation policy analyst at the Coalition for Clean Air, anot-for-profit California group. Port activity, he said, is "arguably the most poorly regulated source of pollution inthe United States." At some ports and shipping companies, officials countered that they already were takingsignificant steps and making major investments to reduce air emissions and curb water pollution. "I know thereare a lot of people out there trying," said Geraldine Knatz, managing director of development at the Port of LongBeach, which got high marks in the report for its efforts to stem storm-water runoff. Evergreen America Corp., amajor shipping line, already is replacing old equipment with modern models using low-emission technology, saidExecutive Vice President Wesley Brunson, adding, "We want to go as 'green' as possible." Shipping companyAPL, which operates through Eagle Marine Service at Los Angeles, Oakland and other ports, is consideringwhether to switch to cleaner, low-sulfur diesel fuel, which is 6 to 10 cents more expensive than lower-gradediesel fuel, spokesman Scott Dailey said. "Diesel emissions are a significant issue, and we want to be goodcitizens and good neighbors," Dailey said. Air emissions are of particular concern at Los Angeles and LongBeach, since the region's air problems are among the worst in the nation. A 1999 study by the South Coast AirQuality Management District, for instance, found that diesel exhaust was to blame for 71% of the cancer riskfrom air pollution in the region, concentrated in areas around the two ports and freeway corridors. Ports alsoproduce large amounts of nitrogen oxides and particulate matter, both linked to human respiratory illnesses.The latest study's authors, using a variety of reports, calculated that the Port of Los Angeles produces 31.4 tonsper day of nitrous oxide, largely from ships, trucks and port equipment. By contrast, an average U.S. refineryproduces 0.8 ton daily; an average power plant, 4.6 tons; and half a million cars, 23.9 tons. The Los Angelesport produces 1.8 tons of particulate matter daily, in contrast to 0.4 ton from a refinery, 0.6 ton from a powerplant and 0.5 ton from half a million cars, the report determined. Together, the two ports form the third-largestcomplex in the world, behind Hong Kong and Singapore, serving as the point of entry for 33% of the nation'sseaborne cargo. As Asian ocean trade has swelled, rapid port expansion in both Los Angeles and Long Beachhas antagonized residents of San Pedro, Wilmington and Long Beach, where some neighborhoods flankterminals and truck arteries. Their concerns have increased in the face of predictions that cargo containervolume could quadruple in the two ports in the next 15 to 20 years. Such fears fostered a 2001 lawsuit againstthe port and city of Los Angeles brought by local groups, the NRDC and the Coalition for Clean Air. In a $60-million settlement, the port agreed to improvements including installing equipment so that ships docking at thenew China Shipping terminal could plug into onshore electric power and turn off their diesel engines. That andother changes haven't yet been implemented. The study praises the Los Angeles port for ordering 585 "dieseloxidation catalysts" that can be installed on tractors and other yard equipment, making them operate morecleanly. But it chides the port for not installing the catalysts more quickly. A port spokeswoman, TheresaAdams-Lopez, said Friday that only half the catalysts had been installed. Los Angeles lags behind Long Beachin efforts to reduce storm- water runoff of contaminants from vast expanses of terminals and container storageareas. Such runoff -- including oils, metals and pesticides -- ends up in the ocean and can taint beaches andother coastal areas, analyst Plenys said. The report urges Los Angeles to follow Long Beach's example andcoordinate port-wide anti-runoff efforts, rather than leaving that responsibility to individual tenants as it doestoday. Both ports are roundly criticized for poor community relations, and the report suggests that Long Beachcreate a community port committee such as the one operating in Los Angeles. At the competing Port of17 March 2013 Page 254 of 483 ProQuestOakland, officials said Friday that they were pleased to hear that the port received the highest marks in thestudy. "We've improved air quality, reduced congestion and are completing a beautiful waterfront park for publicenjoyment," John Protopappas, president of the Board of Port Commissioners, said in a statement. "The NRDCranking encourages us to continue to look for sustainability opportunities as we develop for the future." Thereport's most severe criticisms are directed at the Port of Houston, because of what it called "deplorabletreatment of local residents and its few noteworthy programs" to reduce air and water pollution. The port'scommunications manager, Felicia Griffin, expressed concern with the finding, saying that the port had takenextra steps to lessen the effect of its proposed Bayport expansion. "We're setting new standards forenvironmental stewardship and environmental sensitivity," said Griffin, who later declined to comment further.The Bayport project is currently stalled in the face of legal opposition from four cities and a number ofenvironmental groups, which allege that the plans violate federal law. * (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX) Portgrades How the nation's 10 largest seaports rank in improving air and water quality, reducing port sprawl andworking with the community: 1. Los Angeles C- 2. Long Beach C 3. New York/New Jersey C+ 4. Charleston,S.C. D+ 5. Oakland B- 6. Hampton Roads, Va. C+ 7. Seattle C+ 8. Savannah, Ga. D+ 9. Houston F 10. MiamiC- Source: "Harboring Pollution: The Dirty Truth About U.S. Ports," by the Natural Resources Defense Counciland the Coalition for Clean Air Los Angeles Times Illustration Caption: PHOTO: TRAFFIC: Trucks line up at theLos Angeles-Long Beach port complex, the single largest fixed source of air pollution in Southern California, areport says.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Lawrence K. Ho Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: BEST MARKS: Among the 10biggest U.S. ports, Oakland earned the highest grade for environmental practices.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Associated Press Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Ports; Environmental impact; Water pollution; Studies; Public health; Air pollutionLocation: Los Angeles California, Long Beach CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Port of Los Angeles; NAICS: 488310; Name: Port of Long Beach-California;NAICS: 488310Classification: 9190: United States; 8350: Transportation & travel industryPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: C.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Mar 22, 2004Year: 2004Section: Business; Part C; Business DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: News17 March 2013 Page 255 of 483 ProQuestProQuest document ID: 421900554Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 119 of 213Trains Are Targeted in Smog Fight; As more cargo leaves ports by rail, the AQMD seeks fines ondirty locomotives. Railroads tout voluntary plans for cleaner engines.Author: Bustillo, MiguelPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 07 Mar 2004: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The railroads helped scuttle a similar bill sponsored by the AQMD last year that would have allowedthe agency to place a pollution fee on ships, airplanes and trains. Such a move would almost certainly bechallenged in court as a violation of federal laws that give Washington oversight over railroads because of theirimportance to interstate commerce. The AQMD wants the railroads to begin replacing diesel engines withhybrids and natural gas trains, and contends that the move could easily cut emissions 50% more than would beaccomplished under the railroads' plan. RAIL: With more trains serving local ports, the AQMD wants to imposea fee on locomotives that don't substantially cut emissions.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Lawrence K. Ho Los AngelesTimesLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The expanding rail yards east of Los Angeles, brimming with foreign cargo from the area's two ports,are a brawny symbol of Southern California's growing stature as one of the world's great crossroads ofinternational trade. But the economic bonanza is exacting a rising price. Exhaust and soot from diesellocomotives, ships and planes are dirtying the air in neighborhoods from Wilmington to Commerce, threateningto undermine decades of progress toward healthful air. Alarmed by the procession of smoke-belching freighttrains rumbling out of the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles -- their number is expected to double by 2020 --Southern California's chief smog-fighting agency is seeking approval from the Legislature to impose a fee onlocomotives that do not substantially reduce smog- forming emissions. The fee proposal is part of a broaderattempt by the South Coast Air Quality Management District to strengthen its authority over a variety of pollutionsources, including the principal engines of global trade -- trains, ships and planes. Last year, the Greater LosAngeles area experienced a smoggy relapse: 68 bad air days, a 28% increase from the previous year andnearly 50% more than in 2001. Last summer, air quality officials declared the first Stage 1 health alert since1998. The public warning that the air was dangerous for everyone to breathe is one officials had thought theymight never need to issue again. "We're trying to shine a bright light on the railroads, because of the impactthey are having on air quality in local communities," said Barry Wallerstein, the AQMD's executive officer,adding that the district was going to bring railroad companies "to the table, one way or another, and have aserious discussion about air pollution." However, the legislation is strongly opposed by two powerfuladversaries: Union Pacific Railroad and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway. The railroads helped scuttle asimilar bill sponsored by the AQMD last year that would have allowed the agency to place a pollution fee on17 March 2013 Page 256 of 483 ProQuestships, airplanes and trains. Such a move would almost certainly be challenged in court as a violation of federallaws that give Washington oversight over railroads because of their importance to interstate commerce. Therailroads, which haul an estimated $100 billion in goods out of the region every year, note that they areresponsible for a relatively small share of Southern California's air pollution problems -- roughly 3% of smogformingfumes. And they argue that they are already doing their part to clean up the air by volunteering to bringa fleet of cleaner locomotives to the region by 2010, replacing engines as much as 40 years old. Under anagreement with the California Air Resources Board, the railroads have volunteered to bring in hundreds ofnewer, cleaner locomotives, each costing $2 million to $3 million. "Railroads are dramatically better than theother choices society has to move goods around," said Kirk Markwald, a San Francisco- based consultant to theindustry, adding that trains actually pollute far less than their chief competition, big-rig trucks. "It would be wrongto conclude railroads have not been doing anything." Acknowledging that he faces an uphill battle, the AQMD'sWallerstein argued that he had no choice but to seek the power to impose the fees. Four-fifths of the emissionsources that combine to form Southern California's smog -- exhaust from trains, trucks, ships and airplanes andfumes from consumer products such as hairspray -- are primarily regulated by the state and federalgovernment. But the state air board and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Wallerstein contends,refuse to set policies strict enough to meet Southern California's extraordinary air pollution challenge. Most ofthe AQMD's authority lies in regulating emissions from power plants, refineries, gas stations and factories. TheClean Air Act requires the Los Angeles region to cut ozone, the main ingredient in smog, in half by 2010. Failureto do so could lead to billions of dollars in lost highway funding and other economic sanctions in Los Angeles,Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Experts believe that the deadline will be impossible to meetunless government officials take drastic new measures. EPA administrator Mike Leavitt has announced that thefederal agency is considering requiring trains to use cleaner-burning fuel as part of a new rule to be made finalthis year. The EPA is also contemplating tougher engine standards for future locomotives. However, the agencyhas not made a final decision on either move, officials said. Although cars, buses and trucks together emitroughly half of the area's smog-forming fumes, the railroads' contribution is not negligible. Every day, trains inSouthern California spew 36.5 tons of nitrogen oxide, one of the building blocks of smog -- more than the area's100 largest factories, power plants and oil refineries combined. Diesel locomotives also emit nearly 2 tons perday of particulate matter -- tiny airborne specks of dust and soot that can become lodged in the lungs and leadto respiratory problems. An AQMD study concluded that 70% of the cancer risk related to air pollution in thefour-county area stemmed from diesel engine exhaust, making reductions a major public health priority.Although railroads may be more environmentally efficient, "they are really losing their edge, because trucks aregetting cleaner," said Diane Bailey, a scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmentalgroup. In Commerce, where working-class neighborhoods are only feet from bustling Union Pacific andBurlington Northern rail yards, residents who have complained for years about noise and flashing lights are nowblaming smoke and soot from the trains for increased respiratory illnesses. In response to reports that trainsbelching diesel exhaust run idle for hours at a time near open residential windows, local air district officials havebegun citing the train companies. But community activists say the railroads have made few changes. The trains,they say, often just move down a few blocks and idle beside someone else's house. "Interstate commerceshould not supersede community health, but that's the way it seems to work," said Angelo Logan, who grew upin Commerce on a street beside a rail yard and returned to work as an activist with East Yard Communities forEnvironmental Justice. "Maybe the cumulative impact of the trains is not as bad as the trucks. But when you livenear these trains, it's like having a thousand trucks by your house. The impact is huge."Noting that the railroadsvolunteered six years ago to replace the oldest, dirtiest engines, Mark Stehly, an assistant vice president onenvironmental issues for Burlington Northern Santa Fe, said: "We have agreed to things that others have notagreed to do." "We think our contributions are very positive. I will leave it to others to say, 'Where are the trucksand ships?' " Officials with the state air board predict that the agreement will reduce the railroads' air pollution by17 March 2013 Page 257 of 483 ProQuest67%. Catherine Witherspoon, the board's executive director, said she didn't think it fair to criticize the 1998replacement agreement "as lacking a substantive commitment by the railroads, because it is a big commitment.It's a two-thirds reduction." But AQMD officials dispute that claim, asserting that, in reality, the replacement willonly cut emissions a little more than half, because overall train traffic will grow substantially by 2010. The AQMDwants the railroads to begin replacing diesel engines with hybrids and natural gas trains, and contends that themove could easily cut emissions 50% more than would be accomplished under the railroads' plan. Therailroads' proposal, negotiated behind closed doors with the state air board, has also drawn criticism fromenvironmental groups, which cite it as a classic example of railroads' sidestepping tough regulations and settingtheir own terms. Because the plan is not a government regulation, environmental groups cannot sue to enforceit if the freight companies fail to carry it out. Moreover, the railroads can walk away from the proposal if the stateattempts to impose any new restrictions on the industry between now and 2010. The EPA had beencontemplating tougher regulations on the railroads before the freight companies made the voluntaryconcessions. The companies later employed a similar strategy in Houston, which has a smog problem nearly assevere as that of Los Angeles, by agreeing to a voluntary reduction pact with Texas officials. The railroads "aresmarter and smoother than others in the environmental arena, and they have been more successful" in shapingregulations to their satisfaction, said David Jesson, an EPA air expert based in San Francisco. IllustrationCaption: PHOTO: RAIL: With more trains serving local ports, the AQMD wants to impose a fee on locomotivesthat don't substantially cut emissions.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Lawrence K. Ho Los Angeles Times Credit: TimesStaff WriterSubject: Air pollution; Fees & charges; Emissions control; Smog; TrainsLocation: Southern CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA; NAICS:924110; DUNS: 01-598-6159Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2004Publication date: Mar 7, 2004Year: 2004Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421899029Document URL: March 2013 Page 258 of 483 ProQuestCopyright: (Copyright (c) 2004 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 120 of 213The Nation; EPA's 9/11 Air Ratings Distorted, Report SaysAuthor: Shogren, ElizabethPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 23 Aug 2003: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The White House Council on Environmental Quality "convinced EPA to add reassuring statementsand delete cautionary ones" from news releases, said the report by the EPA's inspector general office, aninternal watchdog. [Jerrold Nadler], other New York officials and public health activists have consistentlycriticized the EPA for underestimating the risks and failing to do enough to protect public health. Those criticssay the inspector general's report was confirmation from inside the EPA that their concerns were valid.According to the report, the White House had a role from the start in shaping EPA statements after the Sept. 11attacks. On Sept. 12, the EPA deputy administrator sent an e-mail to senior agency officials stating that "allstatements to the media should be cleared through the [National Security Council] before they are released,"according to the report.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: In the days after the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, White House officials persuaded theEnvironmental Protection Agency to minimize its assessment of the dangers posed by airborne dust and debrisfrom the skyscrapers' collapse, according to an internal agency report. The White House Council onEnvironmental Quality "convinced EPA to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones" from newsreleases, said the report by the EPA's inspector general office, an internal watchdog. For instance, a draft EPAnews release for Sept. 16, 2001, warned that the air near the attack site could contain higher levels of asbestos,a carcinogen, than is considered safe. After input from the White House environmental council, the release asissued by the EPA said the asbestos levels met government standards and were "not a cause for publicconcern." The report also concluded that the EPA lacked sufficient data and analyses when, on Sept. 18, itannounced that the air in Lower Manhattan was safe to breathe. At the time, air-monitoring data was not yetavailable for pollutants such as particulate matter and polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, the report stated. Itsaid the EPA should have qualified its assertion, warning that the air was not safe for children, the elderly orcleanup workers at the site that became known as ground zero. Also, while outdoor air in the surrounding areawas safe, indoor air was not, the report said. The report, released late Thursday, said "competingconsiderations, such as national security concerns and the desire to reopen Wall Street, also played a role inEPA's air quality statements." But White House and EPA officials said Friday that in the immediate aftermath ofthe terrorist attacks, public health was their prime concern as they worked together to provide the mostresponsible advice in an extraordinarily chaotic situation. "We were trying to quickly get out the best informationwe could so that people didn't overreact and also so people didn't underreact," said James Connaughton,chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality. The council coordinates environmental policythroughout the administration. A New York lawmaker charged that the White House hid crucial information thatcould have helped residents and workers protect their health. "EPA officials lied when they initially were tellingpeople that the air was safe," said Democratic Rep. Jerrold Nadler, whose district includes the attack site.17 March 2013 Page 259 of 483 ProQuest"That's an outrage." But acting EPA Administrator Marianne L. Horinko, who was involved in the Sept. 11response, said the inspector general's report "trivialized a national emergency and focused on nits." Horinkosaid she "vehemently" disagreed with the report's assessment, saying that EPA officials used their bestprofessional judgment and the best science available when declaring the air safe. "As soon as you have datayou should tell the public what that data is, and what the data are telling you," Horinko said. "Even in the earlydays, the data were telling us that the vast majority of people were not going to have serious problems." Afterterrorists flew hijacked jets into the World Trade Center and toppled its twin towers, dust, debris and smokefilled the air in Lower Manhattan, inundating buildings, stinging eyes and searing lungs. The immense scale andreach of the acrid plume raised fears of possible widespread health risks from asbestos, lead, concrete dust anda variety of other chemicals. The EPA played a key role in assessing the health risks posed by the dust andsoot, and the agency has continued to oversee the cleanup. Nadler, other New York officials and public healthactivists have consistently criticized the EPA for underestimating the risks and failing to do enough to protectpublic health. Those critics say the inspector general's report was confirmation from inside the EPA that theirconcerns were valid. According to the report, the White House had a role from the start in shaping EPAstatements after the Sept. 11 attacks. On Sept. 12, the EPA deputy administrator sent an e-mail to senioragency officials stating that "all statements to the media should be cleared through the [National SecurityCouncil] before they are released," according to the report. An official at the White House Council onEnvironmental Quality was designated to help the EPA obtain such clearance. Examples of White Houseinfluence on the EPA's public messages included advice given to those living close to the World Trade Center,according to the new report. EPA officials were said to believe the nearby residences should be cleaned byprofessional crews, but the agency's news release did not include such instructions. When asked about it, anassociate EPA administrator said: "It was in a press release; it was removed by" the official with theenvironmental quality council, according to the report. In another example, the report said a draft EPA newsrelease for Sept. 13 warned that "even at low levels, EPA considers asbestos hazardous in this situation." Afterthe White House suggested changes, the release as issued read: "short-term, low-level exposure of the typethat might have been produced by the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings is unlikely to causesignificant health effects." The report also criticizes the EPA for failing to more actively address indoor airpollution. The dust settled in furniture, curtains, rugs and air vents in nearby buildings. Many months after theattacks, residents continued to complain of health problems such as chronic coughs, which health experts saywere caused by corrosive concrete dust, ground glass and other lung irritants. Nina Lavin, a jewelry designerwho lives in Lower Manhattan, developed chronic bronchitis and moved into a hotel for 10 months after highlevels of asbestos were detected in her apartment. She said Friday she was not surprised by the EPA inspectorgeneral's conclusions. "You couldn't be in this neighborhood at the time and think the air was OK," Lavin said. "Iam grateful that the report has, against all odds, come out revealing some of the truth." Although her apartmentwas cleaned, the EPA refused to scrub the ventilation system in the 460-unit building, she said. Nikki L. Tinsley,the EPA inspector general, said the main aim of the report was to learn from mistakes to ensure an improvedagency response in the event of future large-scale terrorist attacks. There have not been any major studies ofthe health effects on the general public of the pollution caused by the collapse of the World Trade Center,according to the report. However, New York City and federal health officials are studying residents andemployees of Lower Manhattan to try to identify long- term lung effects. Several studies have found that a highpercentage of rescue workers and firefighters suffered from lung ailments and ear, nose and throat problems inthe months after the attack. Public health activists in New York were disappointed that the top EPA officialsdisputed the conclusions of the agency's inspector general. "It is troubling," said Joel Shufro, executive directorof the New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health, an advocacy and training group. "There is stilla significant amount of asbestos and heavy-metal contamination in Lower Manhattan, which should be cleanedup to protect public health." * Times staff writer John J. Goldman in New York contributed to this report. Credit:17 March 2013 Page 260 of 483 ProQuestTimes Staff WriterSubject: Carcinogens; Environmental policy; Air pollution; TerrorismLocation: New York City New YorkCompany / organization: Name: World Trade Center-New York City NY; NAICS: 813910; Name: EnvironmentalProtection Agency; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910; Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2003Publication date: Aug 23, 2003Year: 2003Dateline: WASHINGTONSection: Main News; Part A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421819783Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2003 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 121 of 213The State; San Joaquin Valley Air Board OKs Plan to Reduce Diesel Smoke, Dust; In submitting therules to state regulators, the panel says it had to act to meet federal deadlines. Activists say they arenot tough enough.Author: Arax, MarkPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 20 June 2003: B.8.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control board voted Thursday to accept a plan to reduce dustand diesel smoke while treading lightly on super dairies and big farm equipment -- a plan regulators hope will17 March 2013 Page 261 of 483 ProQueststave off penalties, including the loss of federal transportation funds. The district's previous plan to reduceparticulate pollution from farming and construction was rejected in 2001 by the EPA. If this plan suffers thesame fate -- and local regulators don't come up with a better one by next year -- the valley stands to lose $2billion in federal highway funds. It also risks seeing local control of air pollution ceded to federal regulators. Thefight against dust and smoke has fared even worse. Over the last three years, the daily amount of tiny particlesin the sky has risen by five tons in a region that already ranks near the top on the EPA's list of particulatepollution.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: FRESNO -- The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control board voted Thursday to accept a plan toreduce dust and diesel smoke while treading lightly on super dairies and big farm equipment -- a plan regulatorshope will stave off penalties, including the loss of federal transportation funds. Facing a deadline in August tocut some of the worst particulate pollution in the nation, air board members said they had no choice but toapprove the plan, whatever its flaws. "To not move forward only prolongs the process and delays the fight toclean up our air," said Mike Maggard, a Bakersfield city councilman and air district board member. "We have nochoice but to pull the trigger and move forward." He and his colleagues voted 10 to 0 to send the plan to thestate air regulators, who have indicated that they will approve it. The plan then will move to the federalEnvironmental Protection Agency, which can require agriculture and other industries to take more steps toreduce dust and diesel smoke. The plan drew criticism from doctors, environmentalists and residents who havesuffer from asthma, some of whom appeared before the board with steroid inhalers hanging around their necks.They said the plan does not control dust and other contaminants from the dairy and cattle industries and allowsthe rest of agriculture to police itself. They disputed the air district's calculations that the steps detailed in theplan will reduce particulate matter by 5% a year, as required by the federal Clean Air Act. The district's previousplan to reduce particulate pollution from farming and construction was rejected in 2001 by the EPA. If this plansuffers the same fate -- and local regulators don't come up with a better one by next year -- the valley stands tolose $2 billion in federal highway funds. It also risks seeing local control of air pollution ceded to federalregulators. "This plan is another delay in more than a decade of delays," said Kevin Hall, the local Sierra Clubmember who initiated a series of lawsuits that has turned valley air pollution into a national issue. "By my count,this is the fourth failed plan to reduce particulates created by big farms, trucks and the oil industry. "They'reletting the farmer regulate himself," Hall said. "Under this plan, he can decide what pollution measures he wantsto take and which ones he doesn't. And his final choice is kept secret from the public." Brent Newell, a staffattorney for the San Francisco-based Center on Race, Poverty and the Environment, said the plan fails toidentify any source of funds to hire regulators to ensure that farmers comply with the measures. The regulatorswho wrote the plan did not dispute that characterization. Farm groups supported the board vote. They said theresimply isn't enough scientific research to adopt specific pollution control measures on dairies and farms duringplowing and harvesting. "The science is not there. It's not accurate," said Manual Cunha, head of the NiseiFarmers League. "We keep blaming the outside world for asthma," Cunha said. "We need to take a look insideour houses. Asthma also happens there." The matter before the board Thursday deals with only half of thevalley's serious air pollution. The problem of smog, or ozone pollution, has yet to be addressed in a plan,although one was due in 2000. This 300-mile-long stretch of factory farms and sprawling suburbs has been theworst place in America for smog, violating the federal eight-hour ozone standard on 10% more days than theLos Angeles region. The valley's bad air stands in contrast to what has happened in other parts of the country.The local air pollution control district and the EPA have missed every deadline to improve the valley's skiessince the district's formation in 1991. During that time, the smog-forming emissions from cars, trucks, farms andoil refineries have been cut by one-fourth. This improvement is far below the requirements of the Clean Air Act.The fight against dust and smoke has fared even worse. Over the last three years, the daily amount of tiny17 March 2013 Page 262 of 483 ProQuestparticles in the sky has risen by five tons in a region that already ranks near the top on the EPA's list ofparticulate pollution. The haze is a piercing mix of dust, smoke and other airborne matter from farms, dairies,tractors, trucks and wood- burning stoves and fireplaces. Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: State regulation; Environmental protection; Farm machinery; Diesel engines; Air pollutionLocation: San Joaquin ValleyPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.8Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2003Publication date: Jun 20, 2003Year: 2003Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422029758Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2003 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 122 of 213The Region; Plowing Under Southland Dairies Gets Environmental Agencies' OK; Regulatorswelcome removal of farms that produce noxious fumes in combination with the pollution produced bytraffic.Author: Polakovic, GaryPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 06 May 2003: B.6.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Normally, replacing farms with suburbs would bring on more pollution from increased traffic. But forhundreds of thousands of people living in the Riverside area -- downwind from the dairies -- the biggest airpollution problem is a persistent haze of tiny particles, and dairy farms are one of the chief culprits. Haze17 March 2013 Page 263 of 483 ProQuestblankets many of California's inland valleys during warm weather, but it is especially abundant in the InlandEmpire. A pollution sensor in Rubidoux consistently records the highest particle pollution levels in SouthernCalifornia, and some of the top measurements in the nation. Throughout the year, the concentration of verysmall particles averages 31 micrograms per cubic meter of air in Riverside, more than double the federal healthbasedstandard, government records show. SUBURBAN PASTURE: Housing encroaches on dairy lands offSchleisman Road in Riverside County. For people living downwind, the biggest air pollution problem is apersistent haze of tiny particles, and dairy farms are one of the chief culprits.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Gina FerazziLos Angeles TimesLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: It is an oft-repeated pattern across Southern California: farmland yields to the bulldozer's blade. But incontrast to other parts of the state, where pitched battles have been fought to save farms from urban sprawl, therapid transformation of the dairy lands near Chino is being welcomed by environmental regulators as asignificant step toward cleaner air. Normally, replacing farms with suburbs would bring on more pollution fromincreased traffic. But for hundreds of thousands of people living in the Riverside area -- downwind from thedairies -- the biggest air pollution problem is a persistent haze of tiny particles, and dairy farms are one of thechief culprits. Ammonia rises from the dairies -- an estimated 21 tons each day, making the farms the largestsource of ammonia emissions in Southern California. The prevailing winds wafting over the region carry tons ofnitrogen oxides produced by cars, power plants and factories. The two chemicals mix in the air to produce tinyparticles of ammonium nitrate -- the same stuff as lawn fertilizer -- swirling in the sky. Health studies have linkedparticle pollution to maladies ranging from lost lung function to premature death. Western Riverside and SanBernardino counties suffer from some of the worst particulate pollution in the nation. But with houses replacingdairies, the plume of ammonia will continue to dissipate. "In this case, growth will take out the cows and that willhave a beneficial impact on particulate matter," said Roger Atkinson, director of the Air Pollution ResearchCenter at UC Riverside. Haze blankets many of California's inland valleys during warm weather, but it isespecially abundant in the Inland Empire. A pollution sensor in Rubidoux consistently records the highestparticle pollution levels in Southern California, and some of the top measurements in the nation. Throughout theyear, the concentration of very small particles averages 31 micrograms per cubic meter of air in Riverside, morethan double the federal health- based standard, government records show. Under the right conditions, a personstanding downwind from the Chino area can watch at midday as a billowing curtain of gray haze forms out ofthin air as onshore breezes pass over the dairies. The towering mass contains billions of particles efficient atreducing visibility -- many of the specks are the diameter of the wavelength of light and scatter the sun's rays --and it descends on the area from Grand Terrace to Mira Loma. Vicki Fitch, 35, is one of many who rely on theirnoses to tell which way the wind is blowing. She lives in the Bridlewood tract, one of Chino's newestcommunities built in dairy land. Like her neighbors, her family wanted to live in a rural area, but they got morethan they bargained for. "It's very odiferous. There's a lot of fragrance and flies in the air," Fitch said. "I use a lotof air freshener in the house, and I have to walk quickly from the house to get into the car," she said. Unlikeother polluters, the dairies have escaped regulation of their emissions. Now, the South Coast Air QualityManagement District is preparing a measure aimed at reducing emissions by at least half over the next decade.The agency is considering more stringent rules on manure removal and greater use of "digesters" that derivemethane fuel from manure. Reductions in dairy fumes could create benefits that would ripple to big cities fromLong Beach to the San Fernando Valley. If dairy emissions are substantially reduced, smog goals for the regioncould be met without having to reduce as much of the nitrogen oxides produced by industrial sources fartherwest. Illustration Caption: PHOTO: SUBURBAN PASTURE: Housing encroaches on dairy lands off SchleismanRoad in Riverside County. For people living downwind, the biggest air pollution problem is a persistent haze oftiny particles, and dairy farms are one of the chief culprits.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Gina Ferazzi Los Angeles17 March 2013 Page 264 of 483 ProQuestTimes Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Rural areas; Dairy industry; Environmental impact; Housing developments; Farms; Emissions; AirpollutionLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.6Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2003Publication date: May 6, 2003Year: 2003Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421809209Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2003 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 123 of 213Air Particles Linked to Cell Damage; An L.A.-area study finds the tiniest pollutants disrupt basiccellular functions, likely causing a host of diseases.Author: Polakovic, GaryPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 07 Apr 2003: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Dust and smoke are made of particles of about 10 microns. The smallest particles come mainly fromburning fossil fuels. Those tiny particles float in the air longer, travel farther and are more easily inhaled thanlarger ones. Deeper inside the cells, researchers found that the one-tenth-of- a-micron particles accumulatedinside cell structures called mitochondria. Oblong in shape, mitochondria are the workhorses of cells. Theycombine sugar and oxygen to produce the fuel that keeps cells running. "The mitochondria of a cell is like a17 March 2013 Page 265 of 483 ProQuestcell's battery. Once you damage the mitochondria, you're going to kill the cell," [Melanie Marty] said. "Thisshows the ultra-fine particles are better at causing damage, and we should be paying more attention to ultra-fineparticles because of their toxicity and ability to produce this stress in the cell."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: A team of Southern California researchers has discovered that microscopic airborne particles candisrupt the inner mechanics of cells, offering a possible explanation of how air pollutants common in urban hazecan harm the human body. The new study, led by scientists at UCLA and USC, links the most minusculeparticles found in dust and smoke to injuries. The particles are so small -- about 1,000 could fit inside the periodat the end of this sentence -- that they easily bypass the body's defense mechanisms. The findings also are thefirst to show that very tiny particles travel beyond the lungs and bloodstream to penetrate deep inside cells. Thepollutant accumulates within a critical component that powers the cell and maintains its function. Damage to thatcellular component is known to lead to an assortment of diseases. The study is scheduled to be published thisweek in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, a publication of the National Institute of EnvironmentalHealth Sciences, and is currently available on the journal's Internet home page. Researchers have long knownthat haze over major cities causes a wide range of health problems. Numerous studies worldwide have linkedparticle pollution to school absences, hospital admissions, shortened life spans, reduced lung function, heartdisease and cancer. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency established rigorous standards for curbingparticle pollution in 1997. The agency estimates that those rules will prevent 15,000 premature deaths, 350,000cases of asthma and 1 million cases of lung problems in children by the year 2020. But researchers have beenunsure what types of particles were to blame for the health effects. "We have had no idea of the biologicalpotency of different size particles in the air," said UCLA researcher Andre Nel, a physician and lead author ofthe study. The new research "may be a mechanism to explain how the smallest particles cause adverse healtheffects," he said. Particulate matter turns the sky gray with gauzy haze, limiting visibility. It consists ofmicroscopic bits, ranging from pulverized tire fragments to diesel soot to acid droplets, and is measured inmicrons, a unit equivalent to a millionth of a meter. A human hair is about 50 microns across. Currently,environmental regulations try to limit particles that are 10 microns in diameter and smaller particles in the 2.5-micron range. But the particles that caused the most damage in the new study are one-tenth of a micron across.Dust and smoke are made of particles of about 10 microns. The smallest particles come mainly from burningfossil fuels. Those tiny particles float in the air longer, travel farther and are more easily inhaled than largerones. The Los Angeles Basin ranks as one of the worst places in the nation for particle pollution. The highestconcentrations typically occur in western Riverside County. But the Los Angeles-Long Beach area has more ofthe tiny particles emitted by vehicle exhaust. Using the region as a laboratory, the EPA established one of fivenational particle-pollution research centers at UCLA, which produced the latest study. In their study, the team of10 scientists collected particles in various sizes from air above Claremont and the USC campus near downtownLos Angeles between November 2001 and March 2002. The pollution was concentrated, put into solution andadded to two types of cells. One group of cells included macrophages taken from mice. A macrophage is a typeof cell that scavenges and destroys foreign matter in the lung and other organs. The other cells were taken fromthe lining deep inside a human lung. The scientists then measured chemical reactions in the tissues andexamined the cells with an electron microscope. The researchers found that when the particles come in contactwith the cells, they trigger a reaction that causes inflammation. That may help explain how particle pollutionexacerbates asthma, an inflammation of the airways, Nel explained. Deeper inside the cells, researchers foundthat the one-tenth-of- a-micron particles accumulated inside cell structures called mitochondria. Oblong inshape, mitochondria are the workhorses of cells. They combine sugar and oxygen to produce the fuel thatkeeps cells running. The study shows that the pollution damaged the shape of mitochondria, causing them tostop producing the cellular fuel and start producing other chemicals, which lead to more inflammation and cell17 March 2013 Page 266 of 483 ProQuestdamage. Melanie Marty, chief of air toxicology and epidemiology at the California Office of EnvironmentalHealth Hazard Assessment, said the findings highlight the danger of the smallest particles, which have not beenthe focus of regulations of air pollution. She did not work on the research, but is familiar with the paper. "Themitochondria of a cell is like a cell's battery. Once you damage the mitochondria, you're going to kill the cell,"Marty said. "This shows the ultra-fine particles are better at causing damage, and we should be paying moreattention to ultra-fine particles because of their toxicity and ability to produce this stress in the cell." The studycomes with some limitations. Scientists examined pollutants at just two locations in the Los Angeles region.Particle pollution varies by concentration and type across cities. Also, the pollution that the cells were exposedto in the study is more concentrated than what is typically found in ambient air. The researchers cautioned thattheir observations come from the laboratory and that more studies are needed to see if similar results occur inpeople or animals exposed to less-concentrated pollution. Fernando Scaglia, a professor in the department ofmolecular and human genetics at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston who has read the paper, said damageto mitochondria in cells can lead to various diseases, including Parkinson's and Alzheimer's, as well as strokesand other neurological impairment. Damage to mitochondria, he said, can increase over time as cells divide,leading to a breakdown of cell function and early onset of disease. Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Medical research; Cells; Air pollution; Public health; DiseaseLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2003Publication date: Apr 7, 2003Year: 2003Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 422000514Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2003 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand17 March 2013 Page 267 of 483 ProQuest_______________________________________________________________Document 124 of 213Farm Loyalist's Proposal to Curb Smog Is Heresy to Big AgricultureAuthor: Arax, MarkPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 01 Mar 2003: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Veteran political observers say [Dean Florez], a maverick Democrat, is a savvy politician with an eyetoward higher office. As an assemblyman last year, Florez proved he was willing to cause a stir. He pushed sohard in committee hearings that exposed a no-bid $95-million computer contract with Oracle Corp. that heembarrassed Gov. Gray Davis' administration. That earned him a reputation for calculated political risk and,many believe, got him fired from a committee chairmanship. Florez could hardly blame them. For the longesttime, he said, he also wasn't willing to tackle the immense problem of smog and particulate pollution. But inrecent months -- after reading newspaper stories about a region that has missed more than two dozen clean-airdeadlines and listening to tales of children dying from respiratory failure -- Florez decided to take a stand.TRADITION: Old trees are stacked and burned in piles in Fresno. A package of bills introduced by state Sen.Dean Florez, a stalwart supporter of growers and the grandson of farm workers, would end agricultural burning,a longtime practice in the San Joaquin Valley.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Tomas Ovalle Fresno Bee; MAVERICK:State Sen. Dean Florez risks angering farmers, but pleasing other residents.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Robert DurellLos Angeles TimesLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: No politician in California has ever managed to touch it. For nearly 60 years, thanks to rural traditionand state law, agriculture has been exempt from clean-air rules. Even as the San Joaquin Valley has emergedas the smoggiest region in the nation, farmers continue to enjoy a special status, burning their uprooted treesand vines in big bonfires and plowing their fields into great clouds of dust. But the days of wide-open farmpollution in the valley may be nearing an end. Last week, state Sen. Dean Florez (D-Shafter), one ofagriculture's most loyal supporters here, walked into the state Capitol and did the heretical. He introduced apackage of bills that, if passed, will stop agricultural burning in California and make cotton, fruit, vegetable anddairy farmers answer to the state and federal Clean Air acts for the first time. Environmental groups call thelegislation historic. Some farmers consider it a betrayal, while others plan a concerted fight to water downseveral of the 10 bills. Pollsters say Florez's timing could not be better, with surveys showing air quality as a topconcern of valley voters. "It's a gutsy move because it shows that Dean is willing to challenge agriculture on asensitive issue," said Carol Whiteside of the Great Valley Center, a nonpartisan Modesto-based think tank. "Butno issue moves politically until it's ripe, and the issue of air quality is ripe in the valley. Over the past few years,growth and air quality have become the No. 1 and No. 2 concerns of voters here. Like any politician worth hissalt, Dean has a good antenna." Veteran political observers say Florez, a maverick Democrat, is a savvypolitician with an eye toward higher office. As an assemblyman last year, Florez proved he was willing to causea stir. He pushed so hard in committee hearings that exposed a no-bid $95-million computer contract withOracle Corp. that he embarrassed Gov. Gray Davis' administration. That earned him a reputation for calculatedpolitical risk and, many believe, got him fired from a committee chairmanship. Now the Harvard-educatedfreshman senator is proposing to take on the San Joaquin Valley's No. 1 employer by imposing new regulationson agriculture. If air quality has emerged as an issue dear to a voter's heart here, this region also happens to bethe Bible Belt of California, where conservative viewpoints, including pro-business arguments, resound. Onelikely outcome of the legislation, analysts say, is a compromise that creates clean-air rules that farmers can17 March 2013 Page 268 of 483 ProQueststomach while acknowledging the health concerns of suburbanites, whose numbers keep growing. Already intalks with farmers, Florez has indicated there is some wiggle room. V. John White, a Sierra Club lobbyist whohas opposed Florez on many issues, said the senator could make a real difference if he holds firm under thepressure sure to come from big agriculture. "What he is proposing here has never been done. The fact that he'staking on agricultural burning directly for the first time is big enough. But his approach is even morecomprehensive. If all his bills were to pass, it would lead to clean air in the Central Valley." But others see a riskin Florez digging in his heels and saddling farmers with regulations too onerous. "His district still depends onagriculture for its economic livelihood," said Tony Quinn, a Sacramento-based political analyst. "There's apolitical risk any time you take on the biggest employer." As Florez worked to finish the legislation last monthwith coauthor Byron Sher, a state senator from Stanford and longtime environmental standard-bearer, hespeculated on the political danger. Sure, lawmakers in Los Angeles and San Francisco would have no troublebacking him. But not one of his fellow legislators from the San Joaquin Valley would sign on as a co-sponsor.Florez could hardly blame them. For the longest time, he said, he also wasn't willing to tackle the immenseproblem of smog and particulate pollution. But in recent months -- after reading newspaper stories about aregion that has missed more than two dozen clean-air deadlines and listening to tales of children dying fromrespiratory failure -- Florez decided to take a stand. So here was a 39-year-old grandson of farm workers whohad never crossed farmers on a big vote holding court with the Sierra Club. Here was the same politician whoonce browbeat an environmentalist for challenging the opening of a large dairy in Kings County now telling dairyfarmers that their lagoons full of manure are the equivalent of industrial smokestacks. As such, he wants themto be regulated. If Florez prevails, dairies and housing tracts will no longer be able to locate within a three-mileradius of each other. "Something had to be done, and it couldn't be piecemeal or Mickey Mouse," said Florez, aformer track and football star at Shafter High School who became student body president at UCLA. He workedas a fellow for former Democratic state Sen. Art Torres of Los Angeles and as an investment banker beforewinning an Assembly seat in 1998. Some farmers see SB 700 and its companion legislation as something else:a good, old-fashioned stab in the back. One bill seeking to reduce farm dust would alter the way a tractor tillsthe land by utilizing different techniques or equipment. Few issues are more dear to a farmer's heart than hisplow. What these changes might entail isn't made clear in the bill. "A lot of what Dean is suggesting just isn'tpractical," said Pete Belluomini, a Kern County potato and citrus farmer. "We create dust for small periods oftime but we prevent dust for longer periods" by planting crops such as alfalfa. Belluomini said he met withFlorez last week and came away encouraged. He believes there is plenty of room for negotiation. "It's very earlyin the process, and these bills are going to be restructured again and again. Some will come to pass, others willdrop by the wayside." Farm groups question why none of the bills focus on the building industry and its role invalley sprawl. Over the last decade, new freeways and suburbs to accommodate a growing population haveincreased the daily miles traveled from 63 million to 83 million. On- road vehicles account for 40% of the smoghere. To offset the impacts of growth and help farmers, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District hastalked about charging a $5,000 fee for every new house built in the valley's eight counties. That money wouldgo into a fund to help farmers convert to cleaner- burning engines and fund alternatives to open-field burning.Florez has steered clear of any such impact fees. "You would think agriculture is the only industry in the valley.You would think that there isn't a Highway 99 and an Interstate 5 with cars and trucks and suburbs all along theway," said Cynthia Cory, director of environmental affairs for the California Farm Bureau. "Everyone has toshare in the clean-air burden: people, developers and farmers. But these bills focus almost exclusively onagriculture. You lose a farm by making it too costly and what pops up in its place? Another strip mall with morecars belching fumes." Over the last two decades, as cities up and down the state's farm belt have undergoneextensive growth, dirty air has veiled the mountains in a year-round curtain of brown. The San Joaquin Valleyhasn't seemed in any hurry to take corrective action. Yet when this basin recently found itself ranked ahead ofLos Angeles as the smoggiest region in the country over the last two years, with more days in violation of the 8-17 March 2013 Page 269 of 483 ProQuesthour federal ozone standard, the complacency disappeared. Suddenly, no matter where you turned -- thepreschool, the coffee shop, the Friday night football game -- people were talking about air pollution and theirchildren's breathing problems. Whether Republican or Democrat, politicians have done their best to steer clearof air pollution as a campaign or policy issue. In four years of state office, Florez never wrote a single newsrelease on air quality. He said the reason was simple: It was an issue sure to anger the valley's Big Three:agriculture, oil and the building industries. Florez said he began to open his eyes after reading a long story inThe Times in December on the failure of local, state and federal regulators to clean the air. A week later, theFresno Bee published a 24-page special section titled "Last Gasp." The letters-to-the- editor page began fillingup with angry missives from longtime residents who had grown tired of business as usual. "There's a growingrecognition among people in the valley that they've been left behind in the state's fight against air pollution," saidWhite. "People are angry because it's affecting not only their health, but economic development." Whenchildren's asthma grows worse breathing dirty air, White explained, it can't help bring businesses to the region.Farm groups had been hoping to beat back a recent set of legal challenges by EarthJustice, a San Franciscobasedenvironmental group that wants the federal government to enforce the Clean Air Act here. One of thelawsuits was settled last year after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency agreed to seek an end toCalifornia's farm exemption. If the state fails to follow through by regulating agriculture, it risks losing billions ofdollars in federal highway funds. But the 10 bills put forward by Florez and Sher go far beyond simply removingthe exemption. In addition to banning agricultural burning and controlling dairy emissions by Jan. 1, 2005, thelegislation would add a respiratory specialist and environmentalist to the regional air-quality board. Currently,the board regulating air pollution here is made up of county supervisors and city council members whom Florezbelieves are reluctant to challenge farmers, developers and oil companies. Three of the bills call for tax-exemptbonds and other funding to help underwrite the costs of converting to cleaner farm operations. One bill seeks toend the practice of San Joaquin Valley biomass plants processing only construction debris from SouthernCalifornia. Florez wants any local plant utilizing state funds to set aside at least 30% of its capacity for farmwaste. Farmers and residents will get a closer look at the proposals in hearings chaired by Florez over the nextsix months. But by offering the package after just one hearing in Sacramento, he has plunged into the fight.Illustration Caption: PHOTO: TRADITION: Old trees are stacked and burned in piles in Fresno. A package ofbills introduced by state Sen. Dean Florez, a stalwart supporter of growers and the grandson of farm workers,would end agricultural burning, a longtime practice in the San Joaquin Valley.; PHOTOGRAPHER: TomasOvalle Fresno Bee; PHOTO: MAVERICK: State Sen. Dean Florez risks angering farmers, but pleasing otherresidents.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Robert Durell Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Environmental protection; Legislation; Air pollution; AgricultureLocation: CaliforniaPeople: Florez, DeanPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2003Publication date: Mar 1, 2003Year: 2003Dateline: FRESNO17 March 2013 Page 270 of 483 ProQuestSection: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421974743Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2003 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 125 of 213Debris Fire Burns Unchecked in Fresno; Schools keep students indoors as blaze casts a smoky pallover city. State, U.S. agencies join efforts to douse it.Author: Arax, MarkPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 18 Jan 2003: B.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: INFERNO: Smoke pours from sprawling debris pile at a recycling center on the edge of Fresno,above. City firefighters tried dousing it with water last Saturday and thought they had extinguished it. But thewater acted as a form of fuel, only increasing the fire's intensity. At left, Fresno Fire Capt. Vic Bringetto watchesas a large fan blows mist onto the flames Friday. Earth-moving equipment and other firefighting gear areexpected to be brought in to tackle the blaze over the weekend.; PHOTOGRAPHER: ERIC PAUL ZAMORAFresno Bee; INFERNO: Smoke pours from sprawling debris pile at a recycling center on the edge of Fresno,above. City firefighters tried dousing it with water last Saturday and thought they had extinguished it. But thewater acted as a form of fuel, only increasing the fire's intensity. At left, Fresno Fire Capt. Vic Bringetto watchesas a large fan blows mist onto the flames Friday. Earth-moving equipment and other firefighting gear areexpected to be brought in to tackle the blaze over the weekend.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Darrell Wong Fresno Bee;NO END IN SIGHT: [Archie Crippen] watches as flames and smoke continue to pour from a blaze in a debrispile earlier this week at Archie Crippen Excavation, his recycling operation on the southeastern outskirts of thecity.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Tomas Ovalle Fresno Bee; DILEMMA: A thick pall of acrid smoke from the debris firehangs over Tulare Street in downtown Fresno.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Kurt Hegre Fresno BeeLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: A smoldering fire in a giant woodpile continued to burn stubbornly Friday on the outskirts of this city asmany residents already choking on a winter of foul air stayed indoors or wheezed their way to the doctor'soffice. Over the past week -- since the football field-sized woodpile combusted spontaneously and began its17 March 2013 Page 271 of 483 ProQuestslow, smoky burn -- the air in Fresno has turned so hazardous that schools have canceled basketball gamesand kept all students indoors. "We've have 81,000 students inside for the past four days and they're getting alittle stir crazy," said Jill Marmolejo of the Fresno Unified School District, the state's fourth-largest. "We'vecanceled basketball games, wrestling, soccer, baseball practice and track. Kids are missing school because ofrespiratory illnesses." Winter is never a time for pleasant air in the San Joaquin Valley, as thick blankets of fogtrap particles of smoke and dust for weeks at a time. Small particles from chimney fires and construction sitescan lodge deep in the lungs and have been linked to heart disease and cancer. The woodpile fire at a Fresnorecycling center could not have come at a worse time. A lid of warm air, winter's dreaded inversion layer, hadhunkered down and was going nowhere when the 25-foot- tall pile of construction debris, wood and grassclippings at the recycling center ignited on its own. City firefighters tried dousing it with water and mistakenlythought they had extinguished it last Saturday. But the water from their hoses acted as a form of fuel, creatingmore moisture and heat in the pile. The result was an even more daunting blaze. As monitoring stations beganrecording two and three times the healthy limit for particulate pollution in town, city officials appealed for help.On Thursday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the California Environmental Protection Agency, thestate Office of Emergency Services and the state Integrated Waste Management Board joined the effort. Morethan $300,000 in state and federal aid has been pledged to put out the blaze. The agencies expect to wade intothe pile this weekend with huge earth-moving equipment and firefighters in special gear, pulling apart the debrischunk by chunk and dousing it with retardant foam. "This is a big pile with a lot of things going on inside it," saidfederal EPA spokesman Mark Merchant. "We're going to put in any amount of money needed to stop this fire.This is a unified effort with the state and the city." The dirty, dangerous task could take another week or 10days. "It's not until we get in there and start separating the pile that we'll know the material that's burning andthe depth of the fire," said Eric Lamoureux of the state's Office of Emergency Services. "Until we do that, it'shard to say how long this thing will burn." Dr. Malik Baz runs an allergy and asthma clinic eight miles north ofthe woodpile and, as soon as he heard about the fire, he braced for a rush of patients. That rush beganThursday, with children and older people complaining of burning throats and lungs. "We're putting them oninhalers and giving them steroids," Baz said. "It's bad out there. You can smell it. We're telling people to stayindoors and, if they can afford it, take a trip to the coast or go skiing in the mountains. Get out of town and stayout of town until the fire is out." State and federal regulators have begun testing debris from the site andparticles in the nearby air, looking for possible toxins. School officials say they welcome the Monday holiday. Ifthe inversion layer lifts and the smoke from the fire eases, they expect students to resume gym and sportsactivities Tuesday. In the meantime, city officials are contemplating what action, if any, to take against theowner of the site, Archie Crippen Excavation. Crippen's property, according to the Fresno Bee, was annexed tothe city in the mid-1980s and was supposed to operate as a recycling center. In the early 1990s, a city inspectornoted that the debris pile contained material not allowed under Crippen's work permit, but it is unclear if the cityissued a citation. Illustration Caption: PHOTO: INFERNO: Smoke pours from sprawling debris pile at a recyclingcenter on the edge of Fresno, above. City firefighters tried dousing it with water last Saturday and thought theyhad extinguished it. But the water acted as a form of fuel, only increasing the fire's intensity. At left, Fresno FireCapt. Vic Bringetto watches as a large fan blows mist onto the flames Friday. Earth-moving equipment andother firefighting gear are expected to be brought in to tackle the blaze over the weekend.; PHOTOGRAPHER:ERIC PAUL ZAMORA Fresno Bee; PHOTO: INFERNO: Smoke pours from sprawling debris pile at a recyclingcenter on the edge of Fresno, above. City firefighters tried dousing it with water last Saturday and thought theyhad extinguished it. But the water acted as a form of fuel, only increasing the fire's intensity. At left, Fresno FireCapt. Vic Bringetto watches as a large fan blows mist onto the flames Friday. Earth-moving equipment andother firefighting gear are expected to be brought in to tackle the blaze over the weekend.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Darrell Wong Fresno Bee; PHOTO: NO END IN SIGHT: Archie Crippen watches as flames and smoke continueto pour from a blaze in a debris pile earlier this week at Archie Crippen Excavation, his recycling operation on17 March 2013 Page 272 of 483 ProQuestthe southeastern outskirts of the city.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Tomas Ovalle Fresno Bee; PHOTO: DILEMMA: Athick pall of acrid smoke from the debris fire hangs over Tulare Street in downtown Fresno.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Kurt Hegre Fresno Bee Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Fires; Health hazards; Air pollutionLocation: Fresno CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2003Publication date: Jan 18, 2003Year: 2003Dateline: FRESNOSection: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421762174Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2003 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 126 of 213Hold Firm on Diesel RulesPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 02 Jan 2003: B.12.ProQuest document linkAbstract: During his first two years in office, President Bush didn't have an environmental policy so much as anindustrial one. From building roads in national forests (he's for it) to cutting emissions from power plants(against), his administration has favored loggers and energy companies over wildlife or clean air. So it's terrific,if surprising, to hear that the Environmental Protection Agency is starting 2003 by drafting rules that would, forthe first time, restrict emissions from diesel-powered bulldozers, tractors and other heavy equipment used in17 March 2013 Page 273 of 483 ProQuestagriculture, construction and mining.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: During his first two years in office, President Bush didn't have an environmental policy so much as anindustrial one. From building roads in national forests (he's for it) to cutting emissions from power plants(against), his administration has favored loggers and energy companies over wildlife or clean air. So it's terrific,if surprising, to hear that the Environmental Protection Agency is starting 2003 by drafting rules that would, forthe first time, restrict emissions from diesel-powered bulldozers, tractors and other heavy equipment used inagriculture, construction and mining. Now if the administration only will stand up to industry pleas to weaken ordelay those rules. The EPA is expected to formally propose changes this spring that would apply the sametough standards adopted under the Clinton administration for diesel big rigs and buses to these off-highwayuses. Held to a lower standard since 1977, these exempt diesel engines are, along with power plants andoceangoing tankers, among the largest polluters linked by scientists to lung cancer, asthma and otherrespiratory diseases. Even California, known for strict emissions restrictions, has been unable to regulate themsince powerful lobbyists won a federal exemption from state controls. By limiting particulates, nitrogen oxide andother pollutants, the EPA projects that the federal rules under discussion would prevent more than 8,000premature deaths and hundreds of thousands of cases of respiratory illnesses each year. This translates intobillions of dollars in savings on health care, a compelling side benefit at a time when medical costs are soaringalmost as quickly as federal and state deficits. But it also means that oil refiners and engine makers would haveto spend more money developing low-sulfur diesel fuel and installing devices to treat exhaust gases, costs thatwould be passed on to farmers, miners and contractors. Those affected are clamoring to soften or delay therules, never mind the 30 years they have had without any. Tax credits to mitigate the pain are acceptable.Delayed or weakened rules are not. Even the Office of Management and Budget concedes that the healthbenefits far outweigh the costs to industry. And that's strictly the dollars-and-cents argument. Mud-colored skiesand kids who need inhalers make the moral case. Proximity to the 2004 election makes the political one. Surelythe president's astute advisors recall how former House Speaker Newt Gingrich's 1995 campaign againstenvironmental laws cost House Republicans votes. The year before an election year is the one votersremember. Industrial lobbyists may not care for clean air. Voters do.Subject: Environmental policy; Air pollution; Emissions; Editorials -- Environmental policyLocation: United States, USPeople: Bush, George WCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910;Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.12Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2003Publication date: Jan 2, 2003Year: 2003Section: California Metro; Part B; Editorial Pages DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLC17 March 2013 Page 274 of 483 ProQuestPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: EditorialProQuest document ID: 421760905Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2003 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-22Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 127 of 213Los Angeles; Solis Seeks Better Monitoring of Pollution From Gravel Pits; Citing a new congressionalreport, legislator calls for closer scrutiny of the mining operations' effects on air and water.Author: Bustillo, MiguelPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 14 Dec 2002: B.4.ProQuest document linkAbstract: State and federal regulators have failed to adequately monitor the environmental consequences ofmassive gravel mining that has carved canyon-sized holes in the San Gabriel Valley, Rep. Hilda L. Solis (D-ElMonte) charged Friday. San Gabriel Valley residents suffer higher rates of asthma and other respiratoryailments than others in the region, a situation Solis and some local politicians suspect is linked to dust andparticle pollution from mining. Residents of Irwindale, Baldwin Park, Azusa and El Monte "should be able to geta better quality of life, and they should get better information" on the health risks of the gravel pits, Solis said,standing outside Geddes Elementary School in Baldwin Park.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: State and federal regulators have failed to adequately monitor the environmental consequences ofmassive gravel mining that has carved canyon-sized holes in the San Gabriel Valley, Rep. Hilda L. Solis (D-ElMonte) charged Friday. Gravel mining has taken place in the Irwindale area for more than 100 years, supplyingthe sand and rock for more than 70% of California's roads and much of the building material for Los Angeles'sprawling real estate development. Yet the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and state air quality officialsappear to lack even the most basic information needed to assess the mines' contributions to air and waterpollution in the surrounding area, now home to more than a quarter-million people, Solis said. She based herstatements on the findings of a congressional report commissioned by her and another California Democrat,Rep. Henry Waxman of Los Angeles, that found a lack of environmental oversight of the gravel pits. San GabrielValley residents suffer higher rates of asthma and other respiratory ailments than others in the region, asituation Solis and some local politicians suspect is linked to dust and particle pollution from mining. Residentsof Irwindale, Baldwin Park, Azusa and El Monte "should be able to get a better quality of life, and they should17 March 2013 Page 275 of 483 ProQuestget better information" on the health risks of the gravel pits, Solis said, standing outside Geddes ElementarySchool in Baldwin Park. Responding to Solis' concerns, officials with the South Coast Air Quality ManagementDistrict announced Friday that they would begin to monitor specific mining operations in the area. But theynoted that they had regulated the operations for years and have a general air monitoring station in Azusa withina mile of most of the gravel pits. This year, that monitor found 22 violations of the state's standard for particulatepollution, said Chung Liu, the AQMD's deputy executive officer for science and technology advancement.Arnold Brink, a general manager with United Rock Products, which runs one of Irwindale's 17 gravel pits, saidthe firm would cooperate with regulators. But it is hardly lacking for oversight, he said, noting that, he oncecounted 26 different governmental entities at the local, state and federal level that were reviewing its miningpractices. "I honestly think we do a good job and are good stewards of the environment," Brink said. "If you satat my desk and saw things from my perspective, I don't think you could say we are under- regulated." Solis andothers at the news conference, including a woman whose husband suffered from asthma and whose father hadworked in a local quarry, emphasized that they valued the economic benefits the mines had brought. But theyadded that the health effects to which the operations might be contributing needed a closer examination. "Theresidents in this area are absolutely right to be concerned," said Constantinos Sioutas, a professor and deputydirector of the Southern California Particle Center at USC. Particles in the lungs that are stirred up by gravelmining "stay much longer than gases" and have been linked to higher mortality rates, he said. IllustrationCaption: PHOTO: BIG DIG: A skip loader is dwarfed by a mountain of sand at Vulcan Materials Co. in Irwindale,where the gravel pits have supplied the building material for 70% of the state's roads.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Robert Gauthier Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WriterSubject: Environmental impact; Regulation; Water pollution; Air pollution; Sand & gravel; MiningLocation: Irwindale CaliforniaPeople: Solis, HildaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.4Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2002Publication date: Dec 14, 2002Year: 2002Section: California Metro; Part B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421970243Document URL: March 2013 Page 276 of 483 ProQuestCopyright: (Copyright (c) 2002 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 128 of 213Clearing the Air at the PortsPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 09 Dec 2002: B.10.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The ill wind blowing through the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles comes from container shipsthat each day belch tons of diesel particulate matter and gases. In addition to being inhaled by the ports'immediate neighbors, the fouled air moves inland dozens of miles to cast a pall over millions. So a proposal thatcould noticeably cut emissions from ships docked at the ports is cause for cheering, even if it is only a start.Under financial incentives offered by the state and the South Coast Air Quality Management District, tugboatowners are already installing cleaner-burning diesel engines. Shipping lines are eliminating two tons ofemissions daily simply by slowing down ships as they enter and leave the harbor. New federal regulations meanthat old diesel-powered trucks gradually will be replaced with cleaner models.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The ill wind blowing through the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles comes from container ships thateach day belch tons of diesel particulate matter and gases. In addition to being inhaled by the ports' immediateneighbors, the fouled air moves inland dozens of miles to cast a pall over millions. So a proposal that couldnoticeably cut emissions from ships docked at the ports is cause for cheering, even if it is only a start. The portsare the local linchpin in international trade, which anchors Southern California's economy by accounting for420,000 jobs across the region. Port operators and shipping lines foresee 6% annual increases in the number ofcontainers passing through the ports. Good news for the economy but potentially bad for clean air. Cleaning upthe waterfront is not an easy sell. There is a worldwide glut of cargo ships, so cash-strapped owners resistbuying pollution-control devices. The United States can do little to force foreign owners to clean up their dieselfleets. No single agency has port jurisdiction, and international, federal, state, regional and local authorities havenot yet agreed on ways to act in concert. Nobody, of course, wants to throttle back the region's most importanteconomic engine. Against that backdrop, any progress is notable. Executives at some of the world's largestshipping lines are talking about shutting down big ships' dirty diesel engines while the vessels are in port anddrawing power from the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power grid. Shipping lines could recoup theirconsiderable equipment costs through energy savings, the DWP would get a new customer and SouthernCalifornians could breathe easier. During his Friday "state of the harbor" address, L.A. Mayor James K. Hahnpromised that a third of the ports' own vehicles and equipment would be replaced with lower-emissionsalternatives. Under financial incentives offered by the state and the South Coast Air Quality ManagementDistrict, tugboat owners are already installing cleaner-burning diesel engines. Shipping lines are eliminating twotons of emissions daily simply by slowing down ships as they enter and leave the harbor. New federalregulations mean that old diesel-powered trucks gradually will be replaced with cleaner models. Right now,however, the ports are the region's single worst air pollution problem. On an average day, 16 cargo shipsanchored at the ports release more smog-forming gases than 1 million cars. Diesel- powered tugboats, yardtractors and trucks add to the pollution mix. Taxpayers have poured tens of billions of dollars into improvementsat the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles. The port's operators, shipping lines, longshore workers and others17 March 2013 Page 277 of 483 ProQuestwith an interest in the waterfront can return the favor by working with regulatory agencies to clean up their act.Subject: Ports; Diesel engines; Air pollution; Container ships; Environmental impact; Environmental cleanup;Editorials -- PortsLocation: Los Angeles California, Long Beach CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Port of Los Angeles; NAICS: 488310; Name: Port of Long Beach; NAICS:488310Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.10Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2002Publication date: Dec 9, 2002Year: 2002Section: California Metro; Part B; Editorial Pages DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: EditorialProQuest document ID: 421758809Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2002 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 129 of 213SUNDAY REPORT; A Bumper Crop of Bad Air in San Joaquin Valley; Growth brings more smog andhealth woes. Cleanup seems a low priority for officials.Author: Mark Arax and Gary PolakovicPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 08 Dec 2002: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: (map)Making farms more environmentally friendly; CREDIT: Los Angeles Times; PRICE OFGROWTH: West of Fresno, above, a huge dust cloud is created when the dry remains of a cotton field areturned. Agriculture is the valley's biggest industrial polluter and the biggest source of haze. In addition,17 March 2013 Page 278 of 483 ProQuestemissions from dairies and feedlots are growing 5% a year, state figures show. In the last decade, more than500,000 cows -- many of them from Southern California, where the dairy farm has given way to gatedcommunities -- have joined the people moving over the mountains and settling into new tracts, such as this one,below, in Fresno; PHOTOGRAPHER: Spencer Weiner Los Angeles Times; PRICE OF GROWTH: West ofFresno, above, a huge dust cloud is created when the dry remains of a cotton field are turned. Agriculture is thevalley's biggest industrial polluter and the biggest source of haze. In addition, emissions from dairies andfeedlots are growing 5% a year, state figures show. In the last decade, more than 500,000 cows -- many ofthem from Southern California, where the dairy farm has given way to gated communities -- have joined thepeople moving over the mountains and settling into new tracts, such as this one, below, in Fresno.;PHOTOGRAPHER: Spencer Weiner Los Angeles Times; PRICE OF GROWTH: West of Fresno, above, a hugedust cloud is created when the dry remains of a cotton field are turned. Agriculture is the valley's biggestindustrial polluter and the biggest source of haze. In addition, emissions from dairies and feedlots are growing5% a year, state figures show. In the last decade, more than 500,000 cows -- many of them from SouthernCalifornia, where the dairy farm has given way to gated communities -- have joined the people moving over themountains and settling into new tracts, such as this one, below, in Fresno; PHOTOGRAPHER: Spencer WeinerLos Angeles Times; [Mike Biskup], below, with son Eli; PHOTOGRAPHER: Spencer Weiner Los AngelesTimes; [Kathy Riley], with asthmatic daughter [Krissy Riley], 13.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Spencer Weiner LosAngeles Times; POLLUTED: In the last 22 months, the San Joaquin Valley has violated the federal ozonestandard on 226 days. The L.A. region, with four times the people and cars, violated it on 201 days.;PHOTOGRAPHER: Spencer Weiner Los Angeles TimesLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: FRESNO -- The sun is setting on California's great valley, but the brilliant light no longer shines as itused to. The mountains to the east and west are gone too, blotted from the horizon by a sky the color of mud.When the first settlers arrived here in the early 1800s, it was the wildflowers of the San Joaquin Valley and thedivine view of the Sierra that set them to poetry. Today, this 300-mile-long stretch of factory farms and sprawlingsuburbs is the worst place in America for smog and one of the worst for haze. The state's big middle -- by themeasure of smog throughout the day -- has now overtaken Los Angeles as the nation's capital of bad air.During the last 22 months, the San Joaquin Valley, boasting 3.4 million people and 2.4 million cars and pickups,has violated the federal eight-hour ozone standard 226 days. The Los Angeles region, with four times as manypeople and cars, has violated the same ozone standard 201 days. This year the valley failed to achieve a singleday of clean air in June, July, August and October. During the last 12 months, the "good air" standard has beenreached only 53 days -- an average of once a week. But a sky full of colorless ozone, the main ingredient insmog that can sear and scar the lungs, is only half of what plagues this region. Dust and soot, the same hazyparticles that erase the Sierra and alter the light, contribute to the deaths of an estimated 1,300 valley residentseach year -- especially children, the elderly, the poor and people already suffering from respiratory disease.That's more deaths than from car accidents, murder and AIDS combined, according to a 2002 study of statehealth figures by the Environmental Working Group, an independent watchdog based in Washington, D.C.Even as people continue to move into the valley, some local residents, fearing the health effects on theirchildren, are packing their bags. "I spent a year in the valley and decided it wasn't for me," said Paul Kim, aradiologist who quit his job at a Fresno hospital this summer and moved his wife and baby to Orange County."It didn't take long to figure out that the valley is run by farmers and developers," he said. "The whole place isconsumed with building cheap tracts farther and farther out of town. When it comes to the air, there's acollective complacency." The valley's lingering bad air stands in sharp contrast to what has happened in otherparts of the country. While Los Angeles, San Diego and Denver have posted substantial gains in the campaignfor less polluted air, the flatland between Bakersfield and Stockton has amassed the worst cleanup record in the17 March 2013 Page 279 of 483 ProQuestWest. The local air district and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have missed every federal deadline toimprove the valley sky since the district's formation in 1991. During that time, the smog- forming emissions fromcars, trucks, farms and oil refineries have been cut by one-fourth. This modest improvement is far below therequirements of the U.S. Clean Air Act and far short of what Los Angeles and other regions have accomplished.The fight against haze has fared even worse. Over the last three years, the amount of tiny particles in the skyhas risen 17%, adding more haze to a region that already ranks near the top on the EPA's list of particulatepollution. The haze is a piercing mix of dust, smoke and other airborne matter from farms, vehicles, homeconstruction and wood-burning stoves and fireplaces. The particles are small enough to lodge deep in the lungsand can cause cancer, asthma and heart disease. The year-round assault from smog and haze also includes aconsiderable punch from pollen and pesticides. As a matter of topography, it would be hard for nature to designa more perfect smog factory than this place, the nation's longest valley, pinched by the Sierra and the CoastRange. An inversion layer traps emissions beneath a broiling sun in summer and a stagnant fog in winter. Soadverse are the climate and terrain that it takes half as many emissions in the valley to produce about the samelevels of smog found in the Los Angeles Basin. Poet Philip Levine, the only Fresnan other than William Saroyanto win a Pulitzer Prize, now spends part of his year in Brooklyn to get a dose of fresher air. "This past summerwas the worst I've experienced. I really had trouble breathing. As crazy as it sounds, New York is a whole lotbetter for my lungs." At a graduation ceremony in June, the sixth-graders at Malloch Elementary School inaffluent northwest Fresno were asked who among them used asthma inhalers. Parents and grandparents, whohad gathered in the cafeteria to celebrate, gasped when 30 of the 59 students raised their hands. "I had no ideait was that high," Principal Ellen Hedman said. More than 16% of the children in Fresno County have beendiagnosed with asthma. That is the highest rate in California and twice the rate in Los Angeles County,according to a survey by the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research. Indeed, every place in this region -- SanJoaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare and Kern counties -- has a rate higher than LosAngeles. Krissy Riley, 13, who attends a kindergarten-through-eighth- grade school, no longer hides her asthmainhaler from classmates. "Embarrassed? Heaven's no," said her mother, Kathy Riley. "The inhaler is a fact oflife here. It's almost cool to have one. It's right up there with a cell phone." No one needs to tell Tony Souza thathis dairy in Kingsburg is harsh on the lungs and bad public relations. Each late summer evening as the sunsets, a curtain of dust drifts from the dairy to nearby Highway 99. Passing drivers try turning off the flow of theirair conditioners, but there's no escape. What's floating in the air isn't only dirt but dung. The manure cloud,kicked up by the hooves of 2,000 Holsteins, bakes in the hot sun. "We want to be good neighbors, but it's notthat easy," said Souza, manager of Jensen Dairy. "We'd have to redesign our entire dairy to cut down on thedust and gases. You're talking about $3 [million] or $4 million to fix it." If the rest of California has emerged as aworld leader in the fight for clean air, a laboratory for innovative solutions and tough regulations, then smack inits middle lie eight counties and 24,000 square miles where the clean-air campaign is sadly broken. Not onlydoes the valley lack a plan to achieve healthful air, it has failed to cast the cleanup net as far and wide as LosAngeles has. In Southern California, for instance, there are regulations on idling big rigs and vehicle fleets,whereas the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District has none. Cars, pickups, sport utility vehicles andbig rigs remain this region's biggest polluters. Over the last decade, new freeways and suburbs toaccommodate a growing population have increased the daily miles traveled from 63 million to 83 million. Onroadvehicles now account for 40% of the smog here, state figures show. Agriculture, meanwhile, stands as thevalley's biggest industrial polluter and the biggest source of haze. Farming operations, which include tilling andharvesting of cotton, grapes, tree fruit, almonds and pistachios, account for 62% of particles in the air and 20%of the smog. Emissions from dairies and feedlots -- the gases and dust that help form smog and haze -- aregrowing 5% a year, state figures show. The fight to clean up the air has now fallen so far behind schedule thatthe rest of the decade promises no real change. "I can't tell you of a single political leader here who has takenon air quality as an issue," said Cliff Garoupa, a Fresno City College professor who serves on a committee to17 March 2013 Page 280 of 483 ProQuestreduce vehicle trips to and from campus. "They don't want to upset the building industry and agriculture or messwith the sanctity of the automobile. "Here we are, the worst place in the nation, and the only solution ourpoliticians and air district can come up with is a pathetic list of voluntary programs. 'Spare the Air' days, they callthem. Talk about fiddling while Rome burns." In October, for example, the county Board of Supervisors inMadera voted to push forward a "new town" that will plant 6,500 houses on farm fields 15 miles outside the city.At no time during the debate did the supervisors delve into the project's impact on air quality. Supervisor RonnDominici, who cast the swing vote, regrets not bringing up the issue. "I probably should have raised morequestions," said Dominici, who is also vice chairman of the valley air district. "Enough attention isn't beingdirected at our bad air by boards of supervisors and city councils." Elected officials point to the valley's deeppoverty and 15% unemployment as rationale for not imposing regulations that might drive away industry.Farming throughout California, for instance, has been largely exempt from state air pollution laws since 1947and has never had to answer to the U.S. Clean Air Act. The local air district has never challenged thisexemption or asked the EPA to regulate agriculture's biggest polluters. Nor has the EPA stepped in to do it onits own. "You can't go to the San Joaquin Valley and not be impacted by the conditions there," said WayneNastri, administrator for the EPA's Pacific Southwest office. "We have a long way to go, and there hasn't beenmuch progress." By law, the valley should be cutting its daily emissions by a third, or 300 tons. But even as theair district has reduced some smog-forming emissions, new suburbs and freeways emit almost as many newpollutants into the air. In the face of such growth, the daily discharge of noxious substances is being reduced bya mere 23 tons. David Crow, the local air district's top administrator, said the region has made progress, but notfast enough. "Our [air quality] has been improving over the past decade despite a population increase of500,000 people," he said. "The improvements just aren't enough to meet the federal standards." Doctors on thefront line of the asthma and allergy wars are surprised to find patients who don't make the connection betweenwhat ails them and the bad air. It got so frustrating that Fresno doctor Malik Baz decided to do something boldwhen he built his 9,000-square-foot medical complex along Freeway 41 north of town: He equipped it with a talltower that flashes each day's air quality to commuters. All summer long, as the big electronic red letters shouted"UNHEALTHY," the Baz Allergy and Asthma Center filled with people wheezing and coughing and clutchingsteroid inhalers that had run dry. "I had patients this summer who took their vacations on the coast and told thesame story," he said. "As soon as they got out of town, their sinuses and lungs cleared up and they stoppedtaking their medications. Then, as soon as they headed back and hit the valley floor, they had to pull out theirinhalers again." This summer, the San Joaquin Valley -- touted as the area that will have more to say about thestate's future than any other because of wide open land and affordable housing -- became the first region in thenation to seek the designation of "extreme noncompliance" with federal law. By moving to the worst category,the valley would accept a stigma in return for a reprieve: Federal officials will grant seven more years for thevalley to reach air-quality standards without forfeiting $2.2 billion in highway funds and exposing the region to$30 million in industry cleanup costs. The delay, some fear, will only play into the valley's impulse to put off yetagain making tough decisions. Dan McCorquodale, the retired state senator from San Jose who wrote the lawthat established the valley air district in 1991, said he feels like "a disappointed parent who's watched his childgrow up to accomplish nothing." "My worst fears have been realized," he said. "The air district has sat on itshands, and the people haven't gotten their money's worth." McCorquodale recalled that the counties had to bedragged "kicking and screaming" to form one big air district back in 1991. Oilmen in Bakersfield, farmers inTulare, builders in Stockton, chamber of commerce heads in Fresno -- no one wanted a regional agency thattook away local control. Lawmakers ended up passing the measure but on one condition: The air district's boardwould be made up of only county supervisors and city council members. Unlike in other regions of the state, thevalley's air board would have no voice from the fields of health, education or science. "Our bill got prettywatered down at the end," McCorquodale said. "By filling up the board with only elected officials, the cause ofclean air was lost right there. It guaranteed that the only voices heard were those of industry and business." In17 March 2013 Page 281 of 483 ProQuest1991-92, shortly after the formation of the regional air district, local neighborhood groups concerned aboutsprawling suburban development urged the agency to impose a fee on new construction. The idea behind theso-called "indirect source rule" was to make sprawl offset its own impacts. By assessing a fee of $5,000 perhouse, the air district could raise tens of millions of dollars to clean the air. The money could fund everythingfrom mass transit to farmers converting their diesel irrigation pumps to cleaner-burning fuel. But as soon as theidea was floated, records show, the letters of protest poured in from state and local building groups. The head ofthe Fresno-area Building Industry Assn. told residents they were wasting their time supporting the measure. Thefee would be killed, he said, and it was. With few brakes on growth, the state's midsection has sprouted newsuburbs in every direction. In Fresno, Mike and Lisa Biskup have watched the city march north all the way to theSan Joaquin River, filling an area once reserved as a greenbelt with 2,500 houses. The small farm where theyraise lambs, chickens, llamas and vegetables can now feel the breath of suburbia. Their two sons, ages 4 and2, have grown up hearing the sound of heavy equipment tearing out nearby orchards and vineyards. Eli, theiroldest, knows the different functions of a backhoe, grader, roller and trencher. But the Sierra outside his frontdoor is a mystery veiled in brown. "We've got a perfect view of the mountains, but we haven't seen them allsummer," Mike Biskup said. "For the past five years, my wife and I have been looking at the sky and saying, 'Mygosh, we breathe this stuff. This is so sick!' " Biskup, who works for an irrigation district, began wheezing atnight, and his cough lingered for months. His doctor diagnosed asthma. His wife, Lisa, a schoolteacher, lovestheir little rural patch, but the bad air has them looking elsewhere to raise their boys. "It's a geographic fact thatthe valley can't sustain the development they're talking about without destroying the air," she said. "But they justwant to keep doing what they're doing." Builders say that they aren't indifferent to the problem of air pollution butthat slowing growth is the wrong approach. The mantra here should be "smart growth," said Jeff Harris, head ofthe Building Industry Assn. of the San Joaquin Valley. "As long as people continue to be born, we have a moraland ethical obligation to put a roof over their heads," he said. "Now, how you do that is the key. It doesn't meandrawing a line around our cities with permanent greenbelts. It means higher densities and building out inincrements." It's not just people and their cars moving over the mountains and settling into new tracts andbefouling the air that are the problem. More than 500,000 cows -- many of them refugees from SouthernCalifornia, where the dairy farm has given way to gated communities - - have joined them in the past decade.That's one cow for every new resident. The valley now boasts 2.8 million dairy and feedlot cows - - more thanall the vehicles on its roads. Most dairymen have needed only to fill out a simple application with the county tostart up. The regulatory process was so lax that in 1999 the state attorney general sued Tulare County, thenation's No. 1 milk producer, and imposed a basic environmental review requirement. The industrial dairies ofthe San Joaquin Valley bear little resemblance to the bucolic California farms in TV ads, extolling "GreatCheese Comes From Happy Cows." Thousands of cows squeeze in and out of tight concrete stalls, kicking updust on manure-laden running paths. Emissions from dairies and feedlots will become the largest source ofsmog-forming gases in the next three years, according to air district projections. The California Air ResourcesBoard estimates that dairies also account for 44% of valley air's ammonia, which contributes to particlepollution. "There is ammonia coming off these diaries, and it's probably a significant amount," said J.P.Cativiela, a spokesman for dairy industry groups. "[But] the 44% figure comes from a study of just one dairyover a few days. "We're willing to do our part, but we need more research before they start imposing newregulations." This same argument can be heard from fruit, nut and vegetable farmers, as well as cotton andgrain growers, who form the backbone of California's $27-billion-a-year agriculture industry. They don't disputethat pesticides and fertilizers release more hydrocarbons than the valley's petroleum industry. Or that thousandsof acres of almond trees, the valley's new boom crop, create great dust clouds during harvest. They evenconcede a link between the fall spraying of cotton fields and what people here refer to as "defoliant colds." Butmany of the farmers say that they are barely hanging on in the face of global competition and that any clean airmeasures adding to their costs could drive them out of business. Like dairymen, cotton and grape growers17 March 2013 Page 282 of 483 ProQuestbelieve that more studies are needed to identify agriculture's exact role in air pollution and what solutions shouldbe undertaken. A $30-million particulate study backed by farm groups has been gathering data since 1993."We've had some problems with some of the more recent samples, and we're still working to complete thestudy," said Manual Cunha of the Nisei Farmers League. "We know farming is part of the problem, but withoutthat science we can only do so much." A state program that pays farmers to convert their diesel irrigationpumps to cleaner fuel has slashed emissions from farm equipment by nearly a third. But farmers have resistedproposals to do more. Last March, the California air board announced a statewide cleanup plan that outlinednew restrictions on livestock waste and irrigation pumps and raised the possibility of "no spray" pesticide days.Farm groups reacted so negatively that Gov. Gray Davis' staff moved quickly to scuttle the plan. WinstonHickox, head of the state EPA, said the no-spray idea was "dead on arrival." The rest of the plan was alsoshelved. Kevin Hall, a local Sierra Club member, is no stranger to the farmer's viewpoint or power. Beforebecoming a clean air activist, Hall spent 13 years editing California farm journals and organizing farm equipmentshows. "It's been the same song for 12 years. 'We need better science. We need more money to fund morestudies.' It's one delay tactic after another," Hall said. "Their end game is pretty simple. Avoid federal regulationsat all costs." Hall brought in EarthJustice, the San Francisco-based environmental defense fund, to file a seriesof lawsuits. Citing a pattern of neglect and inaction, EarthJustice challenged, among other things, the state'sexemption on agriculture and the failure of the federal EPA and air district to oppose this free pass. In May, theEPA settled one of the lawsuits by agreeing to seek an end to the farm exemption, though it's likely to be yearsbefore farms will be required to change their practices. Chuck Sant'Agata, executive director of the AmericanLung Assn. in Fresno, senses a shift in public awareness. The air district, for instance, may soon ban winterfireplace use on bad air days, and it has pledged to reconsider the idea of a fee on builders. "Public sentiment ischanging," Sant'Agata said. "People are starting to open their eyes. Now we have to get the politicians aboard."That may not be such an easy thing. In April, a poll by the Public Policy Institute of California ranked air pollutionas the No. 1 concern of valley residents, with sprawl not far behind. Yet two prominent state legislators -- Sen.Dean Florez (D-Shafter) and Assemblywoman Sarah Reyes (D-Fresno) -- have never made cleaning up the airan issue. "We have not touched on that issue yet," said Reyes' press secretary, Karen Clifton. Last year, stateSen. Roy Ashburn (R-Bakersfield), then an assemblyman, did take a stand when the Bakersfield Californianinterviewed him for an in-depth report on air quality. He told the newspaper he was too busy dealing with otherstate issues to concern himself with improving the air. This September, even as local schools canceled Fridayfootball games for the first time because of bad air, local officials took the following actions: * The Tulare CountyBoard of Supervisors approved a new dairy with 14,000 Holsteins. * The Council of Fresno CountyGovernments urged voters to pass a tax to fund $1.3 billion in new highways. * The air district allowed farmersto conduct open-field burning of more than 6 million tons of paper and plastic trays used to make raisins. * Thecity councils in Fresno, Clovis, Visalia and Tulare pushed ahead plans for more housing tracts and more stripmalls -- without studying impacts on traffic and air. "There's such a pressure to expedite these projects that noone in the planning departments is asking hard questions about traffic congestion and how it impacts airquality," said Moses Stites, an assistant planner for the California Department of Transportation in Fresno. "It'sbusiness as usual." At the Biskup farm on the northern edge of the city, a "For Sale" sign now marks thefrontyard. As soon as their third child is born in January, Mike and Lisa Biskup, lifelong Fresnans, are moving --to the Olympic Peninsula in Washington. "I love my job, and I love this farm," he said. "But I can't put my kids inharm's way anymore. We're 10 years away from breathing even marginally better air." * Arax is a stateenterprise reporter based in Fresno; Polakovic is an environment reporter based in Los Angeles. IllustrationCaption: GRAPHIC: (map)Making farms more environmentally friendly; CREDIT: Los Angeles Times; PHOTO:PRICE OF GROWTH: West of Fresno, above, a huge dust cloud is created when the dry remains of a cottonfield are turned. Agriculture is the valley's biggest industrial polluter and the biggest source of haze. In addition,emissions from dairies and feedlots are growing 5% a year, state figures show. In the last decade, more than17 March 2013 Page 283 of 483 ProQuest500,000 cows -- many of them from Southern California, where the dairy farm has given way to gatedcommunities -- have joined the people moving over the mountains and settling into new tracts, such as this one,below, in Fresno; PHOTOGRAPHER: Spencer Weiner Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: PRICE OF GROWTH:West of Fresno, above, a huge dust cloud is created when the dry remains of a cotton field are turned.Agriculture is the valley's biggest industrial polluter and the biggest source of haze. In addition, emissions fromdairies and feedlots are growing 5% a year, state figures show. In the last decade, more than 500,000 cows --many of them from Southern California, where the dairy farm has given way to gated communities -- havejoined the people moving over the mountains and settling into new tracts, such as this one, below, in Fresno.;PHOTOGRAPHER: Spencer Weiner Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: PRICE OF GROWTH: West of Fresno,above, a huge dust cloud is created when the dry remains of a cotton field are turned. Agriculture is the valley'sbiggest industrial polluter and the biggest source of haze. In addition, emissions from dairies and feedlots aregrowing 5% a year, state figures show. In the last decade, more than 500,000 cows -- many of them fromSouthern California, where the dairy farm has given way to gated communities -- have joined the people movingover the mountains and settling into new tracts, such as this one, below, in Fresno; PHOTOGRAPHER:Spencer Weiner Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: Mike Biskup, below, with son Eli; PHOTOGRAPHER: SpencerWeiner Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: Kathy Riley, with asthmatic daughter Krissy, 13.; PHOTOGRAPHER:Spencer Weiner Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: POLLUTED: In the last 22 months, the San Joaquin Valley hasviolated the federal ozone standard on 226 days. The L.A. region, with four times the people and cars, violatedit on 201 days.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Spencer Weiner Los Angeles Times Credit: Times Staff WritersSubject: Public health; Smog; Air pollutionLocation: San Joaquin Valley, Los Angeles CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2002Publication date: Dec 8, 2002Year: 2002Dateline: FRESNOSection: Main News MN; Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: FeatureProQuest document ID: 421755358Document URL: March 2013 Page 284 of 483 ProQuestCopyright: (Copyright (c) 2002 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 130 of 213NAFTA; Emissions by the TruckloadAuthor: Meyerhoff, AlPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 25 Aug 2002: M.2.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The North American Free Trade Agreement originally provided that Mexican trucks be allowed accessto border states in 1995 and throughout the U.S. by January 2000. Citing safety concerns, however, the Clintonadministration allowed Mexican trucks to operate only within a 20-mile buffer area inside the border. In 2001, aNAFTA trade panel took up the issue, ultimately ordering the U.S. to allow Mexican trucks to operate throughoutthe U.S. Since then, [Bush] has indicated his intention to lift the Clinton moratorium, insisting that NAFTArequires him to do so. But there are ways to satisfy the requirements of NAFTA other than by simply throwingopen our borders. The short answer is no. Had the Bush administration chosen to follow Americanenvironmental laws rather than run roughshod over them, the transition to increased cross-border trucking fromMexico could have occurred in an orderly fashion. The trade agreement with Mexico requires us to allowMexican trucks access to U.S. roads, but that doesn't mean we have to exempt the trucks from all U.S. laws.Pre-1994 trucks, which make up 80% to 90% of Mexico's fleet, could be excluded from U.S. roads unless theywere retrofitted. Better emissions inspections at the border could ensure that Mexican trucks met U.S.standards. Illegal so-called "defeat devices" (which allow diesel engines to run dirty when on the open road),now being removed from U.S. trucks, could be removed from Mexican trucks as well. And, most important, theBush administration could require that, starting in 2007, any Mexican truck entering the U.S. meet the very strictengine and fuel standards that will apply in the U.S. starting that year. Instead, the administration, intoxicatedwith the idea of deregulation, simply assured us there would be no negative effect.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: In the next few weeks, President Bush is likely to issue an executive order opening the Mexican borderto cross-border trucking. Tens of thousands of big rigs from Mexico will then be free to travel throughout theUnited States--bringing with them serious environmental consequences, especially for California and otherborder states. Caving in to diplomatic pressure, the Bush administration has chosen to simply ignore Americanenvironmental laws. Bush is compromising public health in the process. The North American Free TradeAgreement originally provided that Mexican trucks be allowed access to border states in 1995 and throughoutthe U.S. by January 2000. Citing safety concerns, however, the Clinton administration allowed Mexican trucksto operate only within a 20-mile buffer area inside the border. In 2001, a NAFTA trade panel took up the issue,ultimately ordering the U.S. to allow Mexican trucks to operate throughout the U.S. Since then, Bush hasindicated his intention to lift the Clinton moratorium, insisting that NAFTA requires him to do so. But there areways to satisfy the requirements of NAFTA other than by simply throwing open our borders. Mexico's fleet oftractor trailers is much older--and dirtier-- than that in the U.S. Before 1993, truck engines in Mexico wereunregulated. Even engines manufactured more recently don't begin to meet environmental standards beingphased in for U.S. engines. Yet, in deciding to open the border, the administration declined to consider theenvironmental impacts of these diesel-spewing behemoths. As a condition to opening the border, Congress17 March 2013 Page 285 of 483 ProQuestrequired the Department of Transportation to promulgate regulations governing the process. But in doing so, theagency simply ignored the mandate of the National Environmental Policy Act, which requires that thegovernment fully evaluate the impact of any "major federal action" on the environment and public health.Instead, without any significant evidentiary or scientific support, the department issued a "finding of nosignificant impact," insisting that opening the borders would not harm the environment. In reaching itsconclusion--a ludicrous one in light of studies showing that Mexican trucks on average generate 150% moresmog- forming nitrogen oxide and 200% more dangerous particulate matter than U.S. trucks--the administrationlooked at the effect of opening the border on the nation as a whole. The potentially heavy impact on borderstates was balanced against the far lighter effect on, say, New England states. This was ridiculous. Californiaalready has some of the most polluted, unhealthy air in the nation, the cause of respiratory disease andpremature death. The brunt of increased Mexican truck traffic will fall most heavily on Southern California, inmunicipalities like Los Angeles, which is already far out of compliance with the federal Clean Air Act. In fact, theact prohibits the federal government from causing or contributing "to any new violation of any [clean air]standard [or] increas[ing] the frequency or severity of any existing violation" in already troubled areas. Theproposed presidential action once again raises a question central to the NAFTA debate: Must increased freetrade come at the expense of American environmental standards and the public health? The short answer is no.Had the Bush administration chosen to follow American environmental laws rather than run roughshod overthem, the transition to increased cross-border trucking from Mexico could have occurred in an orderly fashion.The trade agreement with Mexico requires us to allow Mexican trucks access to U.S. roads, but that doesn'tmean we have to exempt the trucks from all U.S. laws. Pre-1994 trucks, which make up 80% to 90% ofMexico's fleet, could be excluded from U.S. roads unless they were retrofitted. Better emissions inspections atthe border could ensure that Mexican trucks met U.S. standards. Illegal so-called "defeat devices" (which allowdiesel engines to run dirty when on the open road), now being removed from U.S. trucks, could be removedfrom Mexican trucks as well. And, most important, the Bush administration could require that, starting in 2007,any Mexican truck entering the U.S. meet the very strict engine and fuel standards that will apply in the U.S.starting that year. Instead, the administration, intoxicated with the idea of deregulation, simply assured us therewould be no negative effect. To oppose this threat to public health, a collection of environmental, labor andbusiness organizations, including the California Trucking Assn., Public Citizen, the Teamsters, the CaliforniaLabor Federation, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Planning and Conservation League, has fileda lawsuit in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer has supported the suit as a friendof the court. But the Bush Justice Department has indicated that the administration will not wait on the court'saction to open the border to Mexican trucks. Last year, Congress acted to prevent the Bush administration frommoving ahead. Hearings were held, testimony was taken and concerns were expressed about the safety ofMexican trucks and the training of their drivers--as well as about possible terrorism. As a result, by a widemajority, the Republican-controlled House passed a rider to the Transportation Department appropriations billpreventing Bush from opening the border. The Senate followed suit, but in the face of a veto threat compromiselegislation was enacted requiring various safety checks before the border could be opened. Those safetychecks must address environmental concerns, because a truck that increases the risk of cancer or otherdiseases through its pollution is not a safe truck. Illustration Caption: PHOTO: (no caption); PHOTOGRAPHER:WES BAUSMITH / Los Angeles Times Credit: Al Meyerhoff is a partner with Milberg, Weiss, Bershad, Hynes&Lerach. He represents the plaintiffs challenging the Bush administration decision to open the Mexican borderto cross-border trucking.Subject: Emission standards; North American Free Trade Agreement; Environmental impact; Air pollution;Trucking industry17 March 2013 Page 286 of 483 ProQuestLocation: United States, US, MexicoPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: M.2Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2002Publication date: Aug 25, 2002Year: 2002Section: Opinion; Editorial Pages DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: CommentaryProQuest document ID: 421720606Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2002 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 131 of 213Asia's Wind-Borne Pollution a Hazardous Export to U.S.; Air: Dust, chemicals travel a long way.' We're a small world,' one scientist says.Author: Polakovic, GaryPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 26 Apr 2002: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Mixed with all the dust is another menace: Toxic and industrial pollutants from farms, factories andpower plants. China's coal- burning power plants and factories emit roughly 40 million tons per year of sulfuroxides, the most in the world and double the U.S. emissions of that pollutant. "We're not breathing just dust, butdust and whatever else has been deposited on it, like hundreds of compounds from man-made pollution," saidDavid Parrish, atmospheric chemist for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Spring is whenmost of the pollution blows across the Pacific. For example, after the 1998 dust storm, particle pollution levelsacross much of the interior West tripled. An additional 20 to 50 micrograms of particles were detected in valleysalong the West Coast--equivalent to one-third to three-quarters of the allowable particulate matter under EPApollution standards. Scientists are unsure how the pollution affects the marine environment. Dust can benefit17 March 2013 Page 287 of 483 ProQuestmarine ecosystems as minerals falling on water enhance plankton. But dust blowing over the North Pacificsometimes blocks about one-third of the sunlight reaching the ocean, reducing energy available for biologicalproductivity."We know it [haze] can affect the weather in the North Pacific by cooling the air, but we are trying tofigure out what it means for climate and plankton," [Tom Cahill] said.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Wind-borne pollution from China and neighboring countries is spreading to California and other partsof the nation and Canada as a result of surging economic activity and destructive farming practices half a worldaway, according to new scientific studies. The research shows that a mix of pollutants, from dust to ozone totoxic chemicals, travels farther than once realized. Federal air quality officials fear that the foreign-born pollutionwill complicate efforts to cut smog and haze, and make it more difficult to meet federal air quality standards inCalifornia and other parts of the West. Although most of the pollutants are similar to ones already found in NorthAmerica, they do add to health concerns by slightly increasing year-round concentrations of gases and tinyparticles in the air, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. During peak winds, however, dustand smoke levels can approach or exceed health-based standards. Federal scientists, too, are beginning toprobe the dust for bacteria and viruses that may be attached. The made-in-China label on haze over NorthAmerica is partly due to increased productivity of consumer goods ranging from patio furniture to CDs to toys.But it also is a result of deforestation, over-grazing and intensive cultivation of fragile soils. Researchers atuniversities on both sides of the Pacific have been tracking the haze for a number of years along its 6,000-milejourney, using satellites and aircraft, land-based sensors and computer models. In one severe dust storm inspring 1998, particle pollution levels in Oregon, Washington and British Columbia soared. In Seattle, air qualityofficials could not identify a local source of the pollution, but measurements showed that 75% of it came fromChina, researchers at the University of Washington found. "A larger fraction of the haze we see is Asian, farmore than we ever dreamed," said Tom Cahill, professor of atmospheric science and physics at UC Davis."We're a small world. We're all breathing each other's effluent." The amount of pollution reaching North Americafrom Asia does not equal that produced by the United States. But the impact of foreign- born pollution isbecoming more widely visible. The imported haze has recently been spotted at ski resorts from Lake Tahoe toAspen, Colo., and above Los Angeles and Vancouver, Canada. At its worst, it can cast a faint, yellow hueacross a 1,200- mile front from Arizona to Calgary, Canada, and beyond before it peters out somewhere overGreenland, studies show. "We may need to be more engaged in countries in Asia in helping them clean up theirindustries and reduce pollution to protect the health of Americans," said John Beale, deputy assistantadministrator for air programs at the Environmental Protection Agency. This week, scientists are launching amajor new research project to better understand the problem. Based in Monterey, dozens of scientists plan totrack pollutants reaching the West Coast. They have installed wind and pollution sensors at coastal outpostsfrom Goleta and Trinidad in California to the Olympic Peninsula in Washington. They will compare data withresearchers in Japan, and study satellite images from space and data from lasers aboard an airplane flyingbetween Seattle and Los Angeles. Called the Intercontinental Transport and Chemical Transformation 2002Project, the research effort will collect and analyze air pollution samples through late May. What researchersdon't fully understand yet is just how much pollution drifts across the Pacific, its exact chemical composition,how it changes once it reaches North America and how it affects the environment. They also want to know howmuch air pollution comes from thousands of cargo ships plying the Pacific to service the global economy. Whatthey do know is that deserts in China and Mongolia are a major source of pollution. Wind storms rake theTaklimakan and Gobi deserts, where soil erosion is increasing, whipping towering clouds of dust miles into theair. High-speed winds whisk them along at up to 1,500 miles per day. "Once the pollution gets on that conveyorbelt, it often doesn't run into clouds or weather systems and doesn't mix or fall out of the air, so you have largelyundiluted pollution arriving in North America," said Rudolf Husar, director of the Center for Air Pollution Impact17 March 2013 Page 288 of 483 ProQuestand Trend Analysis at Washington University in St. Louis. A process called desertification has intensified inChina, home to about 100 million peasant farms. As a result of drought, forest- clearing, overgrazing andintensive cultivation, huge tracts have been stripped of the vegetation that held the soil in place. Desertificationaffects one of every four acres in China today, Cahill said. Numerous studies have linked microscopic airborneparticles with a host of health problems, including heart attacks, respiratory failure, asthma and prematuredeath. The smallest particles are too tiny to be filtered by the body and penetrate deep into the lungs. Mixedwith all the dust is another menace: Toxic and industrial pollutants from farms, factories and power plants.China's coal- burning power plants and factories emit roughly 40 million tons per year of sulfur oxides, the mostin the world and double the U.S. emissions of that pollutant. "We're not breathing just dust, but dust andwhatever else has been deposited on it, like hundreds of compounds from man-made pollution," said DavidParrish, atmospheric chemist for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. About one-third of allthe mercury--a toxic metal--released in the United States comes from fossil-fuel burning in Asia, said DanielJacob, professor of atmospheric chemistry at Harvard University. Mercury is found in some coal deposits and isreleased into the air primarily by power plants. Also, pesticides that have been banned in the United States arepart of the fallout from dust blowing off farmland in China, said Dan Jaffe, atmospheric chemist at the Universityof Washington. Among the pesticides detected are DDT, toxaphene and dieldrin, he said. "In the United States,many of these pollutants are decreasing, yet in these countries, the pollution is increasing," Jaffe said. Spring iswhen most of the pollution blows across the Pacific. For example, after the 1998 dust storm, particle pollutionlevels across much of the interior West tripled. An additional 20 to 50 micrograms of particles were detected invalleys along the West Coast--equivalent to one-third to three-quarters of the allowable particulate matter underEPA pollution standards. Ozone also has been tracked moving across the North Pacific. In one instance,concentrations at Cheeka Peak on the Olympic Peninsula in Washington reached 70 parts per billion, 60% ofthe U.S. one- hour ozone standard, Jaffe said. Ozone, a gaseous pollutant formed chemically in the air asemissions from smokestacks, tailpipes and cleaning solvents react with sunlight, is the common ingredient insmog, and highly destructive to lung tissue. Most of the year, however, pollution from Asia is less severe. Windswane in summer and the smog-conveyor belt slows down. Still, a steady trickle of pollutants reaches NorthAmerica throughout the year, adding 5 to 15 parts per billion of ozone, Jacob said. Scientists are unsure howthe pollution affects the marine environment. Dust can benefit marine ecosystems as minerals falling on waterenhance plankton. But dust blowing over the North Pacific sometimes blocks about one-third of the sunlightreaching the ocean, reducing energy available for biological productivity."We know it [haze] can affect theweather in the North Pacific by cooling the air, but we are trying to figure out what it means for climate andplankton," Cahill said. Illustration Caption: GRAPHIC: Asian Dust Express, Los Angeles Times Credit: TIMESSTAFF WRITERSubject: Studies; Air pollutionLocation: United States, US, AsiaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2002Publication date: Apr 26, 2002Year: 2002Section: Part A; Metro Desk17 March 2013 Page 289 of 483 ProQuestPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: InfographicProQuest document ID: 421883234Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2002 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 132 of 2132nd Suit Filed Over Air From S.F.Bay Area SmogAuthor: Bailey, EricPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 13 Mar 2002: B.8.ProQuest document linkAbstract: That suit, filed Monday in Sacramento Superior Court, follows a virtually identical legal challengelaunched Feb. 20 by the San Joaquin Valley air district asking that Bay Area motorists participate in the SmogCheck II program. Though cars in Sacramento and the San Joaquin Valley have to pass the tougher standardsof Smog Check II, motorists in the Bay Area do not. It is the only metropolitan area in the state that hasn't beenrequired to participate in the program. A review last year by the state air board determined that migratingpollution pouring into the northern San Joaquin Valley represented an "overwhelming" factor on bad air days inStockton, Modesto and Merced.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: For the second time in a month, the state Air Resources Board has been sued by a Central Valley airquality district over pollution blown in on winds from the San Francisco Bay Area. The local air district forSacramento County asks in its lawsuit that the state air board push for tougher auto smog inspections in theBay Area. That suit, filed Monday in Sacramento Superior Court, follows a virtually identical legal challengelaunched Feb. 20 by the San Joaquin Valley air district asking that Bay Area motorists participate in the SmogCheck II program. "The major point of our lawsuit is fairness and equity," said Kerry Shearer, a spokesman forthe Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. Though cars in Sacramento and the San JoaquinValley have to pass the tougher standards of Smog Check II, motorists in the Bay Area do not. It is the onlymetropolitan area in the state that hasn't been required to participate in the program. The result, according toCentral Valley air regulators, is a huge amount of bad air blown in on winds during the summer months, addingto the pollution problems of a region facing harsh consequences from federal regulators if it doesn't clean up itsair by 2005. How much pollution is carried into the valley remains a question. A study in the early 1990s found17 March 2013 Page 290 of 483 ProQuestthat a quarter of the pollution came from the Bay Area, but state regulators say those conclusions represented abrief, bad smog cycle unrepresentative of normal events. With more than 1 million cars in the Sacramento area,"there's plenty of home-grown smog to put them over the health base standards," said Gennet Paauwe, aCalifornia Air Resources Board spokeswoman. In Sacramento County, the big problem is ozone, an invisiblepollutant that can cause breathing difficulties and long-term health effects. The area has reduced the number ofbad air days in recent years, but has a way to go to exceed federal standards. At its peak in 1984, Sacramentohad 23 days that exceeded federal air quality standards. Last year, just three days violated the limits, Shearersaid. The region has until 2005 to meet the federal standard of no more than one bad air day a year on average.If not, federal highway funding could be jeopardized and tougher limits on business could be enacted that couldhinder economic growth. Regulators in the San Joaquin Valley face a similar deadline and even tougherproblems. Aside from ozone, the southern half of the Central Valley has difficulties meeting air particulatestandards because of diesel fumes, dust kicked up by agriculture and other pollutants. Moreover, air regulatorssay the valley's air is sullied not only by pollution from the Bay Area, but also by bad air blowing in fromSacramento to the north. A review last year by the state air board determined that migrating pollution pouringinto the northern San Joaquin Valley represented an "overwhelming" factor on bad air days in Stockton,Modesto and Merced. Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Litigation; Air pollution; Inspections; Automobiles; SmogLocation: San Francisco California, Central ValleyCompany / organization: Name: Air Resources Board-California; NAICS: 924110; SIC: 9500; DUNS: 62-691-2737Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.8Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2002Publication date: Mar 13, 2002Year: 2002Dateline: SACRAMENTOSection: California; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421741583Document URL: March 2013 Page 291 of 483 ProQuestCopyright: (Copyright (c) 2002 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 133 of 213Ventura County Had Few Smog Days This Year; Pollution: Region exceeded federal ozone standardon two days, down from 122 in 1974.Author: Ragland, JeniferPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 29 Dec 2001: B.8.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The drop in high-smog days, from a 1974 peak of 122, comes even as the county's population hasdoubled since monitoring for smog and its hazardous ozone component began in 1973. Exceeding the one-hourfederal ozone standard--the least stringent of three goals for the pollutant--means that for at least 60 minutes ona given day, ozone concentrations average more than 0.12 parts per million. Levels that high can be detrimentalto health, particularly in children or people with asthma, officials said. Ventura County also monitors the morestringent one-hour state standard and the federal eight-hour standard for ozone, [Richard Baldwin] said.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Ventura County experienced another year of mostly clear skies in 2001, exceeding a key federalozone standard on only two days. "We are seeing long-term, significant improvement in our air quality," saidDoug Tubbs, manager of the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District's Monitoring and Technical Servicesdivision. The drop in high-smog days, from a 1974 peak of 122, comes even as the county's population hasdoubled since monitoring for smog and its hazardous ozone component began in 1973. However, the two daysof heavy smog also mean Ventura County-- still ranked as one of the most polluted areas in the nation--is atleast one more year away from complying with the standard. For that to happen, air quality in the county mustnot exceed the one-hour ozone standard more than three times in three consecutive years, officials said. Thisyear's two-day violation period brings the total to five since 1999. "If you look at the history of this thing, we're soclose it's painful," Tubbs said. It will be difficult to do away with high-smog days in 2002 because unknownweather factors can cause ozone production to fluctuate drastically, Tubbs said. But officials said the county ismaking progress toward the Environmental Protection Agency's November 2005 deadline for complying with theone-hour standard. "We're not in violation of any laws right now, and we're on track to meet that deadline," saidRichard Baldwin, executive officer of the air district. "We're in good shape." The two violations of the one-hourstandard this year occurred during hot summer days in Simi Valley--the county's smog hot spot. Ozone, whichmakes up about 95% of Southern California's smog, is created when hydrocarbons from vehicle emissions andother pollutants from stationary sources react with sunlight. It can cause respiratory problems and lung damage.Exceeding the one-hour federal ozone standard--the least stringent of three goals for the pollutant--means thatfor at least 60 minutes on a given day, ozone concentrations average more than 0.12 parts per million. Levelsthat high can be detrimental to health, particularly in children or people with asthma, officials said. VenturaCounty also monitors the more stringent one-hour state standard and the federal eight-hour standard for ozone,Baldwin said. The state standard of 0.09 parts per million was exceeded on 34 days this year, down from 37 lastyear. The federal eight-hour standard, in which ozone levels average 0.08 parts per million over an eight-hourperiod, was topped on 23 days, down from 29 in 2000. The eight-hour federal standard, details on which theEPA is still working out after court challenges, is intended to protect people living and working in lower levels of17 March 2013 Page 292 of 483 ProQuestozone but facing constant exposure to the pollutant. Baldwin said the state standard, which is the most stringentof the three, is the "driving force" behind the air district's effort to reduce smog in Ventura County. There is noset deadline, but officials must come into compliance as soon as possible. There was also good news in theannual report. Data collected over the past three years show that the county is likely in compliance with a newfederal standard for fine particulate pollution, Tubbs said. The microscopic particles, formed from the samepollutants that generate ozone, have been proven to cause premature death at elevated levels. Baldwin said thenews is a relief for the county's business community, because it means the air district will not have to imposenew controls to meet the standard. Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Year in review; Air pollutionLocation: Ventura County CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.8Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2001Publication date: Dec 29, 2001Year: 2001Section: California; Zones DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421683491Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2001 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 134 of 213Cozy Domestic Symbol Takes Heat in Berkeley; Air: New law aims to stem pollution from fireplaces,wood-fired ovens. Critics protest infringement on a way of life.Author: Hong, Peter YPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 23 Dec 2001: B.1.17 March 2013 Page 293 of 483 ProQuestProQuest document linkAbstract: SEE CORRECTION APPENDED; Berkeley fireplaces--A story in Sunday's California section aboutBerkeley fireplace restrictions used the wrong measurement to express the size of particles released by burningwood. The description of the pollutants should have read: The most dangerous particles are less than 2.5microns in diameter. (A human hair is about 75 microns in diameter). The City Council has banned log-burningfireplaces in new homes and other buildings, believing the warmth of wood fires comes at the cost of clean air. Italso adopted tough restrictions for new wood- fired pizza ovens and restaurant grills, which are as much aBerkeley fixture--and some say as big a polluter--as aged VW buses. Michael Gersick, a lobbyist for fireplacemakers and masons who lives in the Berkeley area, says the fireplace ban, rather than raising awareness, ismore a lesson in foolish policy. "I love the tempest and tumult of Berkeley. But God help you if you want to actresponsibly and expect Berkeley to confront a public policy issue using facts," he said.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: SEE CORRECTION APPENDED; Berkeley fireplaces--A story in Sunday's California section aboutBerkeley fireplace restrictions used the wrong measurement to express the size of particles released by burningwood. The description of the pollutants should have read: The most dangerous particles are less than 2.5microns in diameter. (A human hair is about 75 microns in diameter). Berkeley politicians, known for assailingsuch acts as government bombing campaigns and capital punishment, now are taking on an emblem ofdomestic coziness: the fireplace. The City Council has banned log-burning fireplaces in new homes and otherbuildings, believing the warmth of wood fires comes at the cost of clean air. It also adopted tough restrictions fornew wood- fired pizza ovens and restaurant grills, which are as much a Berkeley fixture--and some say as big apolluter--as aged VW buses. Like other stands taken by this little city on big issues, no one expects the fireplaceban to yield tangible results any time soon. For one thing, housing construction in built-up Berkeley is rare,officials acknowledge. Fireplace makers say the city should have required the thousands of fireplaces alreadysmoking up the air to burn cleaner. They would have been happy to sell homeowners the necessary equipmentto comply, they say. Jami Caseber, the Berkeley environmental activist who led the drive for the ordinance, callsit "the first step to controlling or curtailing residential wood burning." Caseber said he would have preferredrestricting existing fireplaces, but the new law "was the best I could do" as a compromise with "conservatives."Berkeley's measure follows fireplace bans in at least seven Bay Area places, including San Jose and Palo Alto,as well as Contra Costa and San Mateo counties. In winter months, wood smoke ties with car and truck exhaustas the Bay Area's leading source of particulate air pollution. Wood smoke on average produces 30% of theregion's winter particle pollution, according to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. In some areas onsome days, it can produce as much as 80% of harmful air particles. Tommie Mayfield, principal air qualityspecialist for the Bay Area AQMD, said oil refineries, commercial dumps and power plants were once the area'slargest generators of particle pollutants. Decades of environmental restrictions have curbed those industrialemissions, Mayfield said. During cold and calm Bay Area winters, smoke from wood fires is trapped by warm airhovering above cold air, and hangs on in the absence of wind and rain. Tiny particulates from the smoke canbecome lodged deep in the lungs. The most dangerous particles are less than 2.5 micrograms in diameter. (Ahuman hair is about 75 micrograms in diameter.) Some scientists say the health threat can be as dangerous assecondhand tobacco smoke. Particulate air pollution is especially harmful to people with diseases such asasthma, chronic bronchitis and emphysema, and to those with heart disease. Children and the elderly areespecially vulnerable. Regulators say the danger has yet to register with the public, and that is one reason whyBay Area officials have not proposed tougher policies. "It's more difficult to get people to change patterns ofbehavior if they do not know why [they should]," said Mayfield. Ordinances like Berkeley's are meant "to makethe public more aware that particulates are a problem." Michael Gersick, a lobbyist for fireplace makers andmasons who lives in the Berkeley area, says the fireplace ban, rather than raising awareness, is more a lesson17 March 2013 Page 294 of 483 ProQuestin foolish policy. "I love the tempest and tumult of Berkeley. But God help you if you want to act responsibly andexpect Berkeley to confront a public policy issue using facts," he said. Gersick, of the California Hearths andHome Assn. trade group, said his industry clients would support emission limits for fireplaces. "All we reallywant is a standard to meet," he said, citing a Washington state law as an example. His group also supportscontrols on the use of fireplaces rather than their existence. Because wood smoke is most troublesome onwinter days with little wind, Gersick said the industry favors a ban on wood burning on days when pollution isworst. Gersick's clients have sued Palo Alto and San Jose. Fireplace bans in those cities deny fireplacemanufacturers the same chance to meet pollution standards available to others, the suits allege. Wood stovescertified by the Environmental Protection Agency, or heaters burning wood pellets rather than logs, for instance,are typically allowed by the Bay Area ordinances banning new fireplaces. Gersick said those suits are beingsettled, and the manufacturers do not plan to sue Berkeley because the stakes there are too low. "The fightwould be about, maybe, a half-dozen fireplaces," he said. Though other Bay Area cities have banned newfireplaces, Berkeley is the first to restrict wood-fired restaurant ovens and grills. The ordinance requirespollution-control equipment on new ovens and grills, which will now also require a permit from the city and theBay Area AQMD. The rule exposes a potential conflict for the city's many eco- conscious epicureans: Theforaged-mesquite fires cooking free-range chickens or vegan pizzas also may be fouling the air. It also hasincensed Alice Waters, owner of Berkeley's Chez Panisse restaurant and a world-famous advocate for organicfoods. Waters said she burns half a cord of oak and fig weekly in her grill and oven, which have no pollutioncontrolequipment. The Berkeley ordinance, which concerns only new ovens, will not affect Waters, who builthers 20 years ago. But Waters said her grill and oven did not work properly when she tried to filter the exhaust,and new restaurateurs shouldn't be burdened with such a restriction. "I am totally opposed" to the new law, shesaid. "We've had a fundamental connection between fire and food since the beginning of time. Until we stopdriving cars, I'd rather live in a world with wood-burning ovens," Waters said. The battle over wood burning willprobably escalate. Caseber and some other backers of the Berkeley fireplace law say they hope the public willembrace tougher restrictions and a total ban at some point. They liken the fight against fireplaces to pastcampaigns against tobacco smoke. "When they started outlawing smoking in public places there was a hugeoutcry," Caseber said. "Now nobody is tolerant of smokers, but we're super-tolerant of wood smoke," he said.Others argue that there are few cases in which a ban is necessary: Fireplaces are not efficient heat sourcesand, like ovens and grills, they can be fueled by gas. That's where the environmental debate spirals into anotherBerkeley hallmark, the culture clash. Gersick says prohibiting wood burning would be like banning gardens tocut pollen: an attack on a way of life. "Fireplaces have been a symbol of the family since we lived in caves," hesaid. "I'm not ready to let somebody else decide which of my domestic pleasures can be taken away from mewithout proof of harm." References Message No: 101625 Illustration Caption: PHOTO: Lori Podraza preparespizza dough at Chez Panisse. Its owner is "totally opposed" to new rules for wood-fired pizza ovens.;PHOTOGRAPHER: RANDI LYNN BEACH / For The Times Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Disputes; Bans; Restaurants; Cooking; Air pollution; FireplacesLocation: Berkeley CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2001Publication date: Dec 23, 200117 March 2013 Page 295 of 483 ProQuestYear: 2001Section: California; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421696460Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2001 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 135 of 213Air Pollution Harmful to Babies, Fetuses, Studies Say; Health: Smog is linked to stillbirths, infantdeaths and low birth weight.Author: Polakovic, GaryPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 16 Dec 2001: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Scientists have long known that the extreme levels of air pollution found in the developing world canharm babies, and that lesser pollution in U.S. cities can sicken or kill the elderly and infirm. In the latest researchfrom UCLA, Ritz and a team of researchers found that women exposed to high levels of ozone and carbonmonoxide were three times more likely than others to have babies with cleft lips and palates and defective heartvalves. In a separate study, a team of researchers from the United States and Sweden found that pregnantwomen in five U.S. cities who were exposed to elevated levels of carbon monoxide during their third trimesterwere 31% more likely to give birth to underweight babies.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: A growing body of research from around the world indicates that smog is exacting a much greater tollthan previously known on infants and unborn babies. Scientists have long known that the extreme levels of airpollution found in the developing world can harm babies, and that lesser pollution in U.S. cities can sicken or killthe elderly and infirm. The new research shows that the harmful effects of dirty air can extend even into thewomb. More than a dozen studies in the United States, Brazil, Europe, Mexico, South Korea and Taiwan havelinked smog to low birth weight, premature births, stillbirths and infant deaths. In this country, the research hasdocumented ill effects on infants even in cities with modern pollution controls, including Los Angeles. Thefindings have helped prompt California officials to seek more stringent smog controls. "Smog can harm the17 March 2013 Page 296 of 483 ProQuesthealth of babies," said Beate Ritz, an epidemiologist at UCLA's Center for Occupational and EnvironmentalHealth. "This should make us pause. Air pollution doesn't just impact asthmatics and old people at the end oflife, but it can affect people at the beginning of their life, and that can disadvantage people throughout their life."A UCLA study conducted by Ritz and scheduled for release Dec. 28, for the first time links air pollution and birthdefects in Southern California. Other experts say that although worldwide research shows a strong correlationbetween air quality and infant illnesses, it does not establish a conclusive cause-and-effect connection. Most ofthe studies have been analyzed by disinterested scientists--a process called peer review--and have beenpublished in leading journals or will be soon. The studies differ on which pollutants are of most concern. Someimplicate gases, others blame particles, and some point to both. "The research is suggestive, but preliminary.It's something to be concerned about, but nothing to panic about," said Tracey Woodruff, a senior scientist forthe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and an author of one of the research papers. "It's something weneed to pay attention to." Some Skeptical, Others Troubled Frederick W. Lipfert, a New York environmentalconsultant hired by auto makers, the steel industry, the U.S. Department of Energy and the Electric PowerResearch Institute to critique several of the reports, downplayed the findings. "These studies raise moresuspicions than smoking guns," he said. Nonetheless, the research, especially the studies focusing on U.S.cities where pollution levels have been declining, is regarded by health experts as troubling. "We know there areserious health effects from low levels of air pollution," said Aaron Cohen, an epidemiologist and principalscientist for the Health Effects Institute in Boston, a joint enterprise of the EPA and several pollution-generatingindustries, including oil companies and utilities. "When something affects babies and children, everybody takesit seriously. I think it's a high priority that we follow up on these studies," Cohen said. In the latest research fromUCLA, Ritz and a team of researchers found that women exposed to high levels of ozone and carbon monoxidewere three times more likely than others to have babies with cleft lips and palates and defective heart valves.The researchers looked at thousands of pregnant women in the Los Angeles area from 1987 to 1993, andcompared those living in areas with relatively dirty air to those living in cleaner areas. Virtually the entire studyarea, bounded roughly by San Bernardino, Santa Ana and Santa Clarita, met federal standards for carbonmonoxide, and much of the region complied with ozone requirements. The study, to be published in theAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, found that the greatest risk occurs during the second month of pregnancy,when a fetus gains most of its organs and much of its facial structure. The Clean Air Act regulates smog levelsto protect certain sensitive groups, including children, the elderly and people with respiratory ailments, but notbabies or fetuses. Pollutants inhaled by pregnant mothers can reach fetuses through the umbilical cord,research has found. Most of the studies about smog and babies came after the Clinton administration set newfederal limits for ozone and microscopic particles. EPA officials say that before those standards can bestrengthened, more research is needed to determine which pollutants are most harmful and at what stage ofpregnancy they do the most damage. State Officials Push for Action However, California officials say they haveseen enough. Melanie Marty, chief of the air toxicology and epidemiology unit at the state Office ofEnvironmental Health Hazard Assessment, said the studies linking smog and harm to babies are part of a bodyof evidence the state is relying on to recommend that the Air Resources Board lower the statewide standard forairborne particle pollution by 33%. "These studies are very suggestive of effects in infants, and in terms ofpublic health, you want to protect against that rather than wait for the most perfect study in the world," Martysaid. Recently, more and more scientists--many of them women--have been investigating whether ill effects ofsmog persist even where the pollution has been reduced, as in much of the United States. A study by scientistsfrom the Harvard School of Public Health and the University of Basel in Switzerland concluded that as many as11% of infant deaths in the United States--about 3,000 per year-- may be a result of microscopic particles in theair. The study, which has yet to be published, expands on earlier research by the EPA and Centers for DiseaseControl that looked at 4 million infants in 86 metropolitan areas and compared the incidence of mortality withfluctuating rates of particulate pollution. That study concluded that as particulate matter increased in the air, the17 March 2013 Page 297 of 483 ProQuestinfant mortality rate rose by 10% to 40%. Carbon Monoxide, Underweight Babies In a separate study, a team ofresearchers from the United States and Sweden found that pregnant women in five U.S. cities who wereexposed to elevated levels of carbon monoxide during their third trimester were 31% more likely to give birth tounderweight babies. They found that when concentrations of carbon monoxide increased by 1 part per million,the risk climbed by nearly one-third. The researchers, from Johns Hopkins University, the Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention and the Nordic School of Public Health in Sweden, examined 90,000 births and airpollution trends between 1994 and 1996 in Boston; Hartford, Conn.; Philadelphia; Pittsburgh; Springfield, Mass.;and Washington, D.C. The findings were published in June in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.Another study by UCLA researchers, which was published last year and focused on Southern California,concluded that mothers are 20% more likely to have a baby prematurely when exposed to elevated amounts ofmicroscopic particles in the final six weeks of pregnancy. The analysis, which examined 97,518 newbornsbetween 1989 and 1993, found the highest rate of premature births in eight communities where smog levelswere among the highest in the nation though generally in compliance with federal standards. The communitiesare Anaheim, Burbank, central Los Angeles, El Toro, Glendora, Hawthorne, Long Beach and Santa Clarita.The researchers adjusted the findings to account for a variety of factors often related to premature birth,including the mother's age, access to prenatal care, smoking and illnesses such as lung disease, diabetes andhypertension. They excluded births by caesarean section. In a 1998 study of pregnant women in Sao Paulo,Brazil, scientists found that women exposed to high levels of nitrogen and sulfur oxides were 18% more likely tohave their pregnancies terminate in stillbirths. Nitrogen and sulfur oxides, produced by fuel combustion invehicles and factories, is more abundant in Sao Paulo than in U.S. cities. The Sao Paulo researchers also foundevidence of carbon monoxide in the umbilical cords of 47 nonsmoking mothers. The levels of carbon monoxiderose and fell with daily air pollution levels. Carbon monoxide can cut off oxygen to a fetus, leading to death. Thediscovery of carbon monoxide in umbilical cords helps explain how air pollutants reach a fetus and causedamage. "There really is evidence that levels of air pollution encountered in large cities worldwide may behazardous to the fetus," said Dana Loomis, a co-author of the study and an epidemiologist at the University ofNorth Carolina. "This is something that has not been recognized before. It was always assumed the fetus wasisolated in the womb from things in the environment." The EPA is weighing the emerging body of research as itconsiders whether to tighten its standard for airborne particles. "We do see the trend. There is a growing bodyof literature finding an association of conventional air pollution and infant mortality," said John D. Bachmann,associate director of science policy in the EPA's air division. "Our review is in mid-process, and we are lookingat all of this." Illustration Caption: PHOTO: Haze obscures skyline in view from Griffith Park. Even cleaned-upL.A. air is seen as hazard to babies.; PHOTOGRAPHER: KEN LUBAS / Los Angeles Times Credit: TIMESENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Babies; Public health; Medical research; Studies; Smog; Child development; Air pollution; FetusesLocation: United States, USPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2001Publication date: Dec 16, 2001Year: 2001Section: Part A; Metro Desk17 March 2013 Page 298 of 483 ProQuestPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421876770Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2001 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 136 of 213The State; San Joaquin Valley Placed on List of Smoggiest Areas; Air: Under the threat of lawsuits,the EPA says the region has made inadequate progress in tackling the problem.Author: Polakovic, GaryPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 24 Oct 2001: B.7.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Threatened with lawsuits from clean-air advocates, the EPA designated the San Joaquin Valley a"severe" ozone region, a change in status from "serious" that reflects the smog problem as well as the lack ofprogress in solving it. Valley smog exceeded federal health-based standards on 80 days from 1997 to 1999,according to the EPA. Much of the pollution, too, blows into the Mojave Desert, as well as to the Central Coast.But rapid growth, a climate conducive to smog formation and tall mountains all help trap pollutants in the valley.The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District must submit a new anti-smog plan by May 31, one thatdemonstrates compliance with the federal one-hour ozone standard before 2006. Also, state and local clean-airofficials must implement six control measures in the valley's current anti-smog plan.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday designated California's San Joaquin Valley asamong the nation's most severely polluted regions for its failure to make substantial progress against smog.The action comes amid a growing body of evidence that California, once a world leader in the fight against airpollution, is slipping in its efforts to provide healthful air for millions of residents in hazy, rapidly growing inlandareas. Threatened with lawsuits from clean-air advocates, the EPA designated the San Joaquin Valley a"severe" ozone region, a change in status from "serious" that reflects the smog problem as well as the lack ofprogress in solving it. The reclassification means that the 25,000-square-mile valley becomes one of the 11most polluted regions in the nation. Concentrations of ozone and airborne particulate matter from Stockton toBakersfield rival pollution found in Los Angeles and Houston. Sequoia National Park, which is immediatelydownwind of the valley, has the worst smog of any national park; more days of unhealthy ozone were recorded17 March 2013 Page 299 of 483 ProQuestthere last year than in Los Angeles and New York City combined. Although concentrations of ozone, a colorlessgas harmful to lung tissue, and airborne particles have declined slightly in the valley, the improvements havefallen far short of federal Clean Air Act goals. Valley smog exceeded federal health-based standards on 80 daysfrom 1997 to 1999, according to the EPA. Much of the pollution, too, blows into the Mojave Desert, as well as tothe Central Coast. But rapid growth, a climate conducive to smog formation and tall mountains all help trappollutants in the valley. "Ozone in the valley is a more persistent problem than we imagined, and it's time for usto work together to fix it," said Jack Broadbent, the EPA's director of air programs for the region that includesCalifornia. Environmentalists hailed the decision as an opportunity for the valley to play catch-up in the battle forclean air. "With this decision, the EPA takes an important step to end its decade-long neglect of the air qualityproblems in the San Joaquin Valley," said Bruce Nilles, an attorney for the San Francisco-based EarthjusticeLegal Defense Fund. The new designation signals that additional pollution controls will be necessary in thevalley. To attain the health-based ozone standard, smog-forming emissions must be reduced about 30%.Among the likely targets of the controls are farms, vehicles, factories and petroleum operations. The SanJoaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District must submit a new anti-smog plan by May 31, one thatdemonstrates compliance with the federal one-hour ozone standard before 2006. Also, state and local clean-airofficials must implement six control measures in the valley's current anti-smog plan. The San Francisco BayArea recently saw unhealthful levels of smog, earlier eliminated, recur in the Livermore area. The state AirResources Board is to consider a more stringent clean-air plan for the Bay Area at its Nov. 1 meeting. In theCoachella Valley, officials are losing the fight to control wind-driven dust, which was in check in the early 1990sbut has since surged. In the Los Angeles Basin, smog has been in rapid retreat for the last decade, althoughparts of the area still suffer from the nation's worst ozone, and smog levels this year showed little improvementover last year. Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Smog; Air pollutionLocation: San Joaquin ValleyCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; SIC: 9500; DUNS: 05-794-4910; Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; SIC: 9500; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.7Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2001Publication date: Oct 24, 2001Year: 2001Section: California; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: News17 March 2013 Page 300 of 483 ProQuestProQuest document ID: 421657998Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2001 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 137 of 213THE STATE; EPA Blames Emissions From Mexico for Dusty Air in Imperial County; Pollution:Agency's decision spares area growers from sanctions. Environmentalists sharply criticize ruling.Author: Polakovic, GaryPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 15 Oct 2001: B.5.ProQuest document linkAbstract: That determination effectively spares growers in Imperial County from stringent pollution controls andsanctions. About 250 tons of smoke and dust are released in Imperial County daily, mostly from farmequipment, crop burning and dust blowing off sugar beet and lettuce fields, as well as from the unpaved roadsthat lace the valley's 581,000 acres of irrigated cropland. The EPA concluded that pollution from ImperialCounty was not enough to cause the air-quality violations. Indeed, were it not for haze coming from Mexico,Imperial County would have met U.S. pollution standards in 1994, the agency concluded. [David Baron] saidenvironmentalists are contemplating further legal action to force more stringent smog controls in ImperialCounty. County officials are nine years behind schedule in preparing a comprehensive blueprint for cleanup. Acleanup plan is being prepared, although there is no deadline to complete it, said EPA staffer Doris Lo.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: For years, residents of Imperial County have breathed some of the dirtiest air in the nation. In recentyears, the incidence of respiratory disease in the county has been more than twice the statewide average,according to the state health department. County officials blame the problem on Mexico, prompting a lawsuitlast year by an advocacy group, Earthjustice, on behalf of the Sierra Club to force a crackdown on pollution.Last week, in response to the lawsuit, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency echoed the county's argumentand declined to require more rigorous pollution control. The agency concluded that emissions from Mexicali, afast- growing nearby town in Mexico, are largely responsible for the deteriorating air quality along California'ssoutheastern border. That determination effectively spares growers in Imperial County from stringent pollutioncontrols and sanctions. About 250 tons of smoke and dust are released in Imperial County daily, mostly fromfarm equipment, crop burning and dust blowing off sugar beet and lettuce fields, as well as from the unpavedroads that lace the valley's 581,000 acres of irrigated cropland. The region is one of the richest agriculturalcenters in the nation and provides much of the country's wintertime vegetables. The EPA concluded thatpollution from Imperial County was not enough to cause the air-quality violations. Indeed, were it not for hazecoming from Mexico, Imperial County would have met U.S. pollution standards in 1994, the agency concluded."There's been such tremendous growth in Tijuana, Mexicali and other cities, and there's a lot of activity that'skicking up dust that blows along the border," said Jack Broadbent, EPA's administrator for air programs inCalifornia. Environmentalists blasted the agency's decision, charging that the EPA is being soft on smog toavoid an international dispute and a conflict with growers. "EPA's waiver of health standards is absolutely17 March 2013 Page 301 of 483 ProQuestdisgraceful," said David Baron, attorney for San Francisco-based Earthjustice. "EPA seems more concernedwith protecting industry and agribusiness than with protecting the lungs of children in the Imperial Valley."Blueprint for Cleanup Years Behind Schedule Baron said environmentalists are contemplating further legalaction to force more stringent smog controls in Imperial County. County officials are nine years behind schedulein preparing a comprehensive blueprint for cleanup. A cleanup plan is being prepared, although there is nodeadline to complete it, said EPA staffer Doris Lo. Much of the pollution consists of microscopic particles, so tinythey evade the body's defenses and lodge deep in people's lungs. Numerous studies around the world havelinked this type of pollution to cancer, lung disease, heart attacks and asthma. "With the dust, environmentalpollution from pesticides and insecticides, we do see more patients with asthma symptoms," said Dr. PatrickWolcott, a pulmonary specialist in El Centro. "We have more patients and more respiratory symptoms duringcertain portions of the year when it's windy and there's lots of dust in the air." The dispute betweenenvironmentalists and the EPA underscores a growing problem around the nation in which communities,required by the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments to mark significant progress toward clean air, are failing tomeet those goals. Air quality in some communities in the South and Midwest has actually deteriorated, while inCalifornia progress has slowed in the face of population growth from Imperial County to the San Joaquin Valleyto San Francisco. Pollution From Mexico Detected in Rockies Meanwhile, along the border, rapid growth inMexico is producing more and more air pollution that sometimes blows north into the American Southwest.Scientists say they detect pollution from Mexico as far north as the central Rockies. According to the EPA,concentrations of particle smog 71% greater than the daily federal limit have been recorded in Calexico. Thecounty violates health standards for so-called fine particulate one day in three. In one neighborhood on the eastside of town, where the Immigration and Naturalization Service routinely drags tires across the soil along theborder to help track illegal immigrants, particulate concentrations 11 times the limit have been recorded. Yet inthe triage of smog control across the West, pollution in the Imperial Valley has not received as much attentionas in more populated regions, including Las Vegas, San Francisco, Phoenix and Los Angeles. California'ssoutheastern corner also lacks effective citizen involvement to press for environmental improvements. The areais poor and largely Latino, and suffers chronic unemployment. "There's a lot of hopelessness. People arereluctant to speak out against the growers," said Jan Cortez, vice president of environmental health for theAmerican Lung Assn. of San Diego and Imperial counties. "A lot of nonprofits get their funding from localindustry and they're afraid they'll lose funding if they speak up. And there's a lot of finger-pointing back and forthacross the border." (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Outside Influences The U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency says that Mexicali, a fast-growing town in Mexico, is mostly to blame for the deteriorating airquality in Imperial County. Environmentalists want strict standards enforced nonetheless. Illustration Caption:PHOTO: A tractor tills the soil near El Centro in Imperial County. About 250 tons of smoke and dust arereleased in the county daily, mostly from farm equipment, crop burning and dust blowing off sugar beet andlettuce fields, as well as from unpaved roads.; PHOTOGRAPHER: ANNIE WELLS / Los Angeles Times;GRAPHIC: Outside Influences / Los Angeles Times Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Environmentalists; Air pollution; International relations-US -- MexicoLocation: Mexicali Mexico, Mexico, Imperial County CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Sierra Club; NAICS: 813410, 813990; DUNS: 00-196-6852; Name:Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; SIC: 9500; DUNS: 05-794-4910; Name: EPA; NAICS:924110; SIC: 9500; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B.517 March 2013 Page 302 of 483 ProQuestNumber of pages: 0Publication year: 2001Publication date: Oct 15, 2001Year: 2001Section: California; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: InfoboxProQuest document ID: 421645452Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2001 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 138 of 213AMERICA ATTACKED; ENVIRONMENTAL NIGHTMARE; Experts Differ on Peril From Smoke;Health: EPA says the cloud rising from the ruins is not toxic, but others aren't so sure. Rescuers aremost at risk for possible ill effects.Author: ROBERT LEE HOTZ; Polakovic, GaryPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 14 Sep 2001: A.5.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Man wears a scarf over his mouth Tuesday after the attacks on the World Trade Center towers. Manywere exposed to dust and smoke from the collapsed buildings.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press; ArmyNational Guard members wear masks as they walk near the World Trade Center. Rescue crews face thegreatest risk from the smoke and dust because of prolonged exposure.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Agence France-Presse; As this picture from Tuesday shows, the disaster stirred a thick cloud of dust and smoke in lowerManhattan.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press; Even while taking a rest Thursday, Bill Fennelly, a volunteerfirefighter, wears a mask to ward off the smoke.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated PressLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: A vast choking plume of smoke from the ruined World Trade Center has engulfed much of lowerManhattan, stinging eyes like tears and searing lungs since the towers were destroyed in a terrorist attackTuesday. Federal health officials say the fumes, which at times have extended over parts of Queens and17 March 2013 Page 303 of 483 ProQuestBrooklyn as well, pose no serious hazard to the millions of people breathing them. But other experts warn that itis too soon to draw such a conclusion. The acrid billows have stirred fears of possible airborne asbestos fibersand a witch's brew of toxic chemicals that might have been created as the towers burned. Many experts saidThursday that it is too soon to know what fumes were forged in the furnace of burning jet fuel, insulation andother synthetic materials that consumed one of the most heavily computerized office complexes in the world.As the wind has shifted from hour to hour, the smoke and ash have driven indoors the children playing onswings in Washington Square. Pedestrians in Greenwich Village and window shoppers on Park Avenue haveworn cotton masks, wrapped shirts around their faces and otherwise done their best to ignore the corrosivestench of terrorism. At night, dust and ash swirl around the wreckage, illuminated by the spotlights shining downon the site. Black smoke leaks out of the rubble. Rescue workers stumble out of the debris, their eyes red andfaces sooty. Despite the masks worn by workers and volunteers, the ash seeps through, coating people'sthroats. The smoke rises and forms a heavy curtain over the mountain of rubble, blocking out the sky. Based ontests around New York and New Jersey, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency officials said Thursday that theycould find no elevated levels of asbestos, lead or volatile organic compounds in residential areas outside theimmediate vicinity of the Trade Center. They even scraped the powdered ash from a wrecked police car at theTrade Center to analyze the chemistry of the talc-like dust. "The good news for the residents of New York is thatthe air, while smoky, is not dangerous," said EPA spokeswoman Tina Kreisher in Washington. "There aredangers of smoke from the fire, of course, but it is not something we would classify as toxic." But independentauthorities on environmental health and air quality were more cautious and discounted the EPA tests. "I don'tthink preliminary tests will tell us what has been deposited in the neighborhoods and in the lungs of peoplebreathing it," said environmental health expert Paul Lioy of Rutgers University. The tools of the terrorist attack--passenger jets laden with aviation fuel--made the aftereffects on air quality even worse. "You had highly volatilefuel, which leads to a very hot fire," Lioy said. "That will lead to the evaporation of plastics and [other] syntheticmaterials in the building and the wiring. It also probably vaporized some of the metals in the structure." Expertsat UC San Diego, New York University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology all cautioned that there isno easy way to assess the unique mixture of potentially toxic chemicals and soot created in the collapse of thetwin 110-story towers. It is equally hard to gauge any long-term health effects. "There is such a mix--jet fuel, thedust from the buildings and the cement, burning electronics, all the wires and the melting pipes- -you have to beworried," said atmospheric chemistry expert Kimberly Prather of UC San Diego. Given the uncertainties aboutthe health effects, "I would be plain-out concerned about what people have been breathing. Nobody reallyknows how the different chemicals will affect people," she said. Caltech chemical engineering expert JohnSeinfeld, who specializes in the study of particulate pollution, said relatively brief exposures to the fumes fromthe wreckage may not cause long- term health damage. Even so, "You don't want to be breathing this materialin high concentrations up close," he said. The greatest risk is to rescue workers, said Dr. Philip Landrigan of theMount Sinai School of Medicine in New York. Those exposed to the initial fire or to hot spots in the wreckagerisk thermal injuries, which can produce redness, swelling and ulceration, impair breathing and make peoplemore susceptible to the impact of soot and dust in the air. "Those construction workers, firefighters and cops arebeing very heavily exposed to dust and asbestos. That [exposure] isn't going to end tomorrow; they'll be heavilyexposed for weeks and months," he said. As for everyone else, the continuing release of smoke and gases intothe air is likely to intensify the classic impacts of air pollution--exacerbating asthma, emphysema and coronarydisease for many vulnerable people nearby. Health officials have recommended that New Yorkers do their bestto avoid undue exposure to the smoke. The advice is particularly important for children, the elderly, women andpeople with heart or respiratory conditions, Landrigan said. "We recommend people limit their time outdoors, becareful about heavy outdoor activity like running and be prudent," he said. Hotz reported from New York andPolakovic from Los Angeles. Times health writer Jane E. Allen contributed to this story. Illustration Caption:PHOTO: Man wears a scarf over his mouth Tuesday after the attacks on the World Trade Center towers. Many17 March 2013 Page 304 of 483 ProQuestwere exposed to dust and smoke from the collapsed buildings.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press; PHOTO:Army National Guard members wear masks as they walk near the World Trade Center. Rescue crews face thegreatest risk from the smoke and dust because of prolonged exposure.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Agence France-Presse; PHOTO: As this picture from Tuesday shows, the disaster stirred a thick cloud of dust and smoke inlower Manhattan.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press; PHOTO: Even while taking a rest Thursday, BillFennelly, a volunteer firefighter, wears a mask to ward off the smoke.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated PressCredit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSSubject: Evacuations & rescues; Disaster recovery; Air pollution; Terrorism; Health hazards; Labor forceLocation: New York City New YorkCompany / organization: Name: World Trade Center-New York City NY; NAICS: 813910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.5Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2001Publication date: Sep 14, 2001Year: 2001Dateline: NEW YORKSection: Part A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421650351Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2001 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 139 of 213THE NATION; State Losing Ground in War on Dirty Air; Environment: Growth, lax enforcement areblamed for rising smog levels in some areas.17 March 2013 Page 305 of 483 ProQuestAuthor: Polakovic, GaryPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 17 July 2001: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The San Joaquin Valley Air Quality Management District blames the Bay Area for much of its pollution,but the EPA says the smog increasingly is home-grown. Local air quality officials have blocked controlmeasures adopted elsewhere, insisting that they meet a cost- effectiveness yardstick more restrictive than usedin Los Angeles or San Francisco. The EPA directed the district last year to implement at least six rulesregulating emissions from paints, solvents and oil tanks that had been set aside, but some have still not beenapproved. To meet the standards, which are set at the levels required to prevent damage to human health,smog-forming emissions would have to be cut by an additional 300 tons daily--equivalent to removing nearlyone-third of all the cars, factories and oil operations in the valley. Instead, the EPA is leaning toward putting offcompliance until 2007, although officials acknowledge smog might not be tamed by then either. Even inSouthern California, which has had the best record in the country for smog reduction, high levels of carbonmonoxide--a poison gas emitted principally from tailpipes--continue to pervade South- Central Los Angeles. Thepollutant was supposed to have been eliminated last year, under provisions of the federal Clean Air Act. Andalthough regional air pollution officials have succeeded in eliminating it elsewhere in the Los Angeles Basin,carbon monoxide in South-Central has remained a problem.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: California's war on air pollution is beginning to falter as smog- control efforts increasingly fall behindthe state's never-ending growth. From the Sierra Nevada to Ventura beaches, San Francisco Bay to the SaltonSea, some of the nation's most polluted regions are slipping in their commitment to clean air, according to airquality officials from around the state. The cost of delayed cleanup is prolonged damage to human lungs,spoiled forests and crops, and the pervasive pall of dirty air. In the San Joaquin Valley, so little progress hasbeen made recently that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is poised to declare the 25,000-square-milearea a "severe" smog zone, a status shared by only 10 other U.S. regions. Cities such as Bakersfield andFresno are beginning to challenge the Los Angeles region--where air quality has shown steady improvement--and Houston for the nation's air pollution crown. Sequoia National Park, which is immediately downwind of thevalley, has the worst smog of any national park; more days of unhealthy ozone were recorded there last yearthan in Los Angeles and New York City combined. The valley has the most lackluster record against airpollution of any California region. The San Joaquin Valley Air Quality Management District blames the Bay Areafor much of its pollution, but the EPA says the smog increasingly is home-grown. Local air quality officials haveblocked control measures adopted elsewhere, insisting that they meet a cost- effectiveness yardstick morerestrictive than used in Los Angeles or San Francisco. The EPA directed the district last year to implement atleast six rules regulating emissions from paints, solvents and oil tanks that had been set aside, but some havestill not been approved. To meet the standards, which are set at the levels required to prevent damage tohuman health, smog-forming emissions would have to be cut by an additional 300 tons daily--equivalent toremoving nearly one-third of all the cars, factories and oil operations in the valley. Instead, the EPA is leaningtoward putting off compliance until 2007, although officials acknowledge smog might not be tamed by theneither. "It doesn't look good. There's a lot that still needs to be done, and you wonder why a lot hasn't beendone earlier," said John Ungvarsky, an environmental scientist at the EPA. The Bay Area also has trouble.After years of effort, the region in 1995 reached the health- based standard for ozone, the main component ofsmog. But pollution has resurged, and today it once again exceeds federal limits. Now, the Bay Area Air QualityManagement District is trying to regain the upper hand, but it won't be easy. It faces the daunting task ofeliminating 246 tons of hydrocarbons daily over the next four years. Environmentalists and the EPA said BayArea smog fighters have not been tough enough on oil refineries, but local officials say greater reductions are17 March 2013 Page 306 of 483 ProQuestneeded from power plants and diesel generators as well as ports and airports, some of which are under federaljurisdiction. Backsliding is also evident in dust clouds ranging from Palm Springs to Indio, where machinery froma construction boom grinds soil that the wind blows all over the Coachella Valley. Windblown dust is thedominant source of a serious problem with particulate pollution in the desert region. Particulates can lodge deepin the lungs and have been linked to an increased risk of cancer, lung disease and premature death. Theregion, which suffers some of the worst dust storms in the nation, had the problem licked in 1996 whenrecession slowed down the construction industry. But as the building boom revived with the economy,enforcement efforts failed to keep up, and pollution has returned. Today, the valley once again exceeds limitsfor microscopic wind-blown dust, said Bill Kelly, spokesman for the South Coast Air Quality ManagementDistrict. "They didn't keep up the emphasis on dust controls they had in the past," Kelly said. "They need toredouble their efforts to get back into attainment" of smog standards. Even in Southern California, which hashad the best record in the country for smog reduction, high levels of carbon monoxide--a poison gas emittedprincipally from tailpipes--continue to pervade South- Central Los Angeles. The pollutant was supposed to havebeen eliminated last year, under provisions of the federal Clean Air Act. And although regional air pollutionofficials have succeeded in eliminating it elsewhere in the Los Angeles Basin, carbon monoxide in South-Central has remained a problem. Meanwhile, a key program to cut emissions from 360 of the region's biggestindustrial polluters has not worked. The setbacks could tarnish California's reputation as a leader in the fight forclean air, environmental activists say. As a result of the resurgent pollution, millions of residents will continue tobreathe unhealthy air for many more years than Congress envisioned when it set cleanup deadlines forCalifornia under the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments. "Things are slip-sliding away," said Sierra Club lobbyist V.John White. "We gave ourselves all these victory laps and cheered ourselves, and then we started losingresolve. We've stopped pushing." The slowdown in smog improvement "bothers me," said Alan C. Lloyd,chairman of the state Air Resources Board. "We need to understand what is going on, what we are doing right,and what we are doing wrong." That evaluation has begun as air quality officials develop comprehensive newcleanup plans for smoggy cities. To achieve smog- fighting goals, officials say, those plans will have to dealaggressively with diesel-powered engines, solvent-based paints, consumer products and machinery used atharbors and airports, which are among the largest and least controlled pollution sources. Drafts of the plans areexpected to be completed this summer, followed by public hearings. California continues to have a better recordon smog cleanup than any other state, said Joseph M. Norbeck, director of the Center for EnvironmentalResearch and Technology at UC Riverside. But smog cleanup is not getting any easier. Growth is overtaking it.More cars, trucks, boats, businesses, chemicals and consumer products fill the air with emissions. The state'seconomy expanded by 9.2% last year, and although economic growth has slowed markedly this year, thestate's population continues to increase. New car sales last year were up 11% statewide, adding 2 millionvehicles-- nearly half of them trucks and sport utility vehicles, which spew out substantially more pollution thanstandard passenger cars. A record 34 million people live in California, and each day they release 68.3 millionpounds of pollutants into the sky, according to the Air Resources Board. "The growth is starting to catch up withthe gains we've made," said Jack Broadbent, administrator of air programs for the EPA's California office."We're at a point in time where a lot of the attainment dates are approaching. If we're going to attain thosedeadlines, you have to put controls in now." The state's electricity crisis is complicating matters. ThroughoutCalifornia, power plant emissions are surging as pollution controls are relaxed to prevent blackouts. When thelights threaten to go out, businesses switch on backup diesel generators, the dirtiest power source and acontributor to deteriorating air quality in the Bay Area. "We need some leadership on this issue and we are notseeing it," said Larry Berg, a Calabasas air quality consultant and a former director for the South Coast AirQuality Management District and USC's Jesse Unruh Institute of Politics. "The historical memory about what'sgoing on with air pollution and public health is not on the minds of people in Sacramento. They need to refocus."Illustration Caption: GRAPHIC: State of Smog, Los Angeles Times Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITER17 March 2013 Page 307 of 483 ProQuestSubject: Smog; Law enforcement; Environmental cleanup; Public health; Air pollution; Environmental impactLocation: CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2001Publication date: Jul 17, 2001Year: 2001Section: Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: Top Story, InfographicProQuest document ID: 421807368Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2001 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 140 of 213THE NATION; A Shroud on Sequoia's Scenery; Pollution: The park's air quality is among the worst inthe national system. Evidence suggests that plants and animals are being harmed.Author: Hymon, StevePublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 17 July 2001: A.16.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Even as air quality improves in some big cities, including Los Angeles, it is getting worse at manyWestern parks. According to a recent park service report, levels of ozone--the principal noxious ingredient insmog--are on the rise at Yellowstone, Canyonlands, Rocky Mountain, Lassen Volcanic, Grand Canyon, MesaVerde and Joshua Tree, a frequent challenger to Sequoia for the title of park with the dirtiest air. Air pollution isblamed for damaging native vegetation, killing frogs and acidifying soils and trout streams. At Sequoia,prescribed burns--needed to maintain the health of the park's namesake species, the world's largest trees--havebeen canceled because they would worsen the park's already bad air. In a study published in June in thejournal Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, scientists at the geological survey identified two pesticides17 March 2013 Page 308 of 483 ProQuestfound in the tissue of Pacific tree frogs in Sequoia and elsewhere in the Sierra. Although Pacific tree frogs stillare common, researchers argue the pesticides are linked to widespread declines of foothill and mountainyellow-legged frogs.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The views from the top of Little Baldy should be stupendous. The 8,044-foot granite dome, in SequoiaNational Park, is surrounded by California's High Sierra, the mountains John Muir dubbed "the range of light."On most summer days, the views leave visitors gasping--but for all the wrong reasons. To the west, the Sierrafoothills usually are covered by a thick brown blanket of smog. Looking east, the haze stains the skies abovesome of the Sierra's tallest, most majestic peaks. Although the smog's severity is a shock to many park visitors,air pollution at Sequoia has for years ranked among the worst in the national park system and, occasionally, thenation. Now, with President Bush promising to fix the national parks and lawmakers grappling with a host of airquality issues, researchers say, with increasing urgency, that more than soiled vistas is at stake. Even as airquality improves in some big cities, including Los Angeles, it is getting worse at many Western parks. Accordingto a recent park service report, levels of ozone--the principal noxious ingredient in smog--are on the rise atYellowstone, Canyonlands, Rocky Mountain, Lassen Volcanic, Grand Canyon, Mesa Verde and Joshua Tree, afrequent challenger to Sequoia for the title of park with the dirtiest air. Last year in Sequoia, for example, ozonelevels at one air monitoring station exceeded the federal health standard on 52 days. In downtown Los Angelesthe number of such days was four. Moreover, researchers say evidence is growing that foul air is harmingplants and animals and changing ecosystems at Sequoia and other national parks. Air pollution is blamed fordamaging native vegetation, killing frogs and acidifying soils and trout streams. At Sequoia, prescribed burns--needed to maintain the health of the park's namesake species, the world's largest trees--have been canceledbecause they would worsen the park's already bad air. "I think if the public knew what was going on, they wouldbe appalled," says Judy Rocchio, the park service's Pacific region air coordinator. Who's to blame? The parkservice's air experts say pick any or all from the following list: the West's booming population; a dramaticincrease in the number of cars and trucks; urban sprawl; the migration of industry to rural areas; state and localregulators who either can't or won't enforce clean air standards. "There's a landfill planned for right next to thepark, and six power plants are either being built or are proposed for the area," said Chris Holbeck, a scientist atJoshua Tree, located 140 miles east of Los Angeles. "You pour all that nitrogen [from pollution] on desertplants, and they don't know what to do. Then the weeds take off, and that makes us more susceptible to fire."Two years ago, Holbeck says, a fire that began in a weed-ridden area consumed 14,000 acres of importanthabitat for bighorn sheep and deer. The problem for vegetation is simple: "Plants can't go inside when the air isbad," says Jeanne Panek, a UC Berkeley researcher. In 1990, a study in Sequoia indicated that a smallpercentage of giant sequoia seedlings might be harmed by ozone. But the real concern in the park is whatozone may be doing to two other widespread species, ponderosa and Jeffrey pines. In some research plots atthe park, more than 90% of the trees have shown signs of injury. "Ozone is like a chronic backache for thesetrees," said Dan Duriscoe, a park ecologist. "Like people, the trees can go about their work, but maybe not aswell because they're in constant pain." Ozone rarely kills trees outright. Rather, the pollutant is absorbed by pineneedles, which interferes with their ability to photosynthesize and, therefore, grow. In response, some treesdrop their needles years before they normally would. Other trees are so weakened they're killed by bark-beetleattacks that healthy trees could survive. Another problem facing the park is a broad category of pollutantsknown as particulate matter. The particulates typically consist of soot, ash and dust--and toxic substances thatcan hitch a ride on the tiny particles. Those particles can carry pesticides from the agricultural San JoaquinValley. In a study published in June in the journal Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, scientists at thegeological survey identified two pesticides found in the tissue of Pacific tree frogs in Sequoia and elsewhere inthe Sierra. Although Pacific tree frogs still are common, researchers argue the pesticides are linked to17 March 2013 Page 309 of 483 ProQuestwidespread declines of foothill and mountain yellow-legged frogs. Annie Esperanza, Sequoia's air specialist,says the frogs are gone from places teeming with them 20 years ago. If the ecological implications of airpollution are complicated, so are the politics. Bush visited Sequoia in May and promised to spend nearly $5billion over five years on cleaning up maintenance backlogs at national parks. But that money is not aimed at airquality problems, environmentalists point out. The Bush administration has allowed several Clinton-era clean airrules to go forward, including one that targets the cleanup of diesel truck emissions--a big source of pollution inthe San Joaquin Valley. But environmentalists criticize the administration's energy plan, which seeks to boostsupplies by increased burning of coal and oil. Ultimately, says Esperanza, cleaning the air won't be up topoliticians. Rather, it will depend on the majority of park visitors making the connection between smog-filledvistas and their everyday actions. "The San Joaquin Valley has to change if our air is going to change,"Esperanza said. "But I think it has to get worse before it gets better." Illustration Caption: GRAPHIC-MAP: (nocaption), Los Angeles Times Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Trees; Environmental impact; Environmental cleanup; National parks; Air pollutionLocation: Sequoia National ParkPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.16Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2001Publication date: Jul 17, 2001Year: 2001Section: Part A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421811116Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2001 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 141 of 21317 March 2013 Page 310 of 483 ProQuestTHE STATE; The New NIMBYs Are Taking Back Their Back Yards--and Their AirAuthor: Soller, MichaelPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 18 Mar 2001: M.6.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The new NIMBYism has many causes: studies linking childhood asthma to soot; riders' campaignsagainst diesel buses; the growth of environmental-justice groups such as Oakland-based Communities for aBetter Environment, which spearheaded the South Gate campaign; the impact of Latino voters empowered byanti-immigrant politics; the publicity brought by more than 20 years of state and federal air- quality management.But the essence of the attitude that upended the South Gate plant is a new vision of how people, pollution andpolitics intersect. The failure of the well-heeled backers points to another dynamic state politicians need toconsider: informed disbelief about the power crisis. Last week, Smutny-Jones of the power plant trade groupcautioned, "If people want electricity at reasonable prices, we are going to have to build power plants ormodernize older plants." Yet, many South Gate residents were unmoved by the rhetoric of the energy crisis,with its blackout scares and ruinous economic predictions. One reason is that Stage 3 alert bells sound lessloudly in the ears of low-income consumers whose utility bills take a disproportionate bite out of their paychecks.Working people also blame deregulation, not environmental rules, for the current problems. And the energycompanymoney backing Gov. Gray Davis and other politicians has not escaped voters' notice. The newNIMBYs are savvy to the political process, and the South Gate vote could embolden poor communities acrossthe state to oppose fast-track power plants. If so, state politicians will have to find another way out of the crisispushed on them by careless deregulation, rampant energy speculation and the hardball tactics of overextendedutilities. The fresh wind blowing down Firestone Boulevard might bring new ideas into the state's power debate.*Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Off the 710 freeway in South Gate, a billboard flashes "Power Station Entertainment Centers," anunintended reference to the power plant that had been slated to go in next door. Residents sent a differentmessage when they voted March 6 to reject the plant, which would have been the first built in Los Angeles in 20years. The guardians of the state's power supply have blamed not-in-my- back-yard attitudes for California'stattered electricity-delivery system. But South Gate's voters aren't your usual NIMBYs. The March 6 vote, whichthe power plant's builder announced it would respect, represents a victory for the new NIMBYs, whose backyard is already the most polluted corner of crowded Southeast Los Angeles County. The original NIMBYsgenerally were affluent white homeowners who organized to oppose the homeless shelter around the corner orthe halfway house across the street. More recently, canny politicians and lobbyists on the left and right havediscovered the tactic. Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of a statewide trade group of power generators,said after the South Gate vote, "The NIMBY problem is serious if we don't figure out how to get through that."This analysis doesn't account for workng-class attitudes toward urban pollution, which have changed radically inrecent years. Once smokestacks and truck traffic powered economic growth in cities such as South Gate,Commerce and Huntington Park. Now, residents gather at places like South Gate High School off FirestoneBoulevard, legacy of the tire plant that closed 20 years ago, to plot against a power plant whose backerspromised union jobs and millions in annual tax revenue. The new NIMBYism has many causes: studies linkingchildhood asthma to soot; riders' campaigns against diesel buses; the growth of environmental-justice groupssuch as Oakland-based Communities for a Better Environment, which spearheaded the South Gate campaign;the impact of Latino voters empowered by anti-immigrant politics; the publicity brought by more than 20 years ofstate and federal air- quality management. But the essence of the attitude that upended the South Gate plant isa new vision of how people, pollution and politics intersect. Take particulate matter, the microscopic byproducts17 March 2013 Page 311 of 483 ProQuestof our combustible economy that sting the eyes and lodge in the lungs. The Environmental Protection Agencyidentified diesel particulates as a carcinogen in 1983, and the federal Clean Air Act of 1990 set emission targetsfor a variety of airborne chemicals and pollutants, including oxides of nitrogen (NOx), particulate matter, ozoneand carbon monoxide. The law has pushed cities such as Los Angeles to reduce their reliance on diesel buses,but its measurement of "ambient" air left leeway for states to skirt its provisions. Working people now make theconnection between the symptoms that haunt their families and the plating plant down the block. At acommunity meeting in December, South Gate resident Jesus Carrera sat between his son, who has asthma,and his elderly father. "I think these problems are caused by pollution," Carrera said about his son. Medicalconditions are often complex, involving access to care, diet and decent housing, as research demonstrating thespread of asthma in poor communities has shown. But invoked as a strategy for grass-roots organizing andjudicial action, these personal connections have surprising power. The South Gate plant, set to create fewerthan 25 new jobs, won the backing of the County Federation of Labor and state Sen. Martha Escutia (DWhittier),whose husband was hired to do public relations work for the new plant six months after Escutia'sendorsement. The company behind the plant spent an estimated $150,000 on a South Gate Christmas paradefloat, a Cinco de Mayo festival and a mail campaign that, in the week before the vote, sent candles to cityresidents to warn of the costs of opposing new power plants. In addition, the South Coast Air QualityManagement Board gave its approval for the new power plant, noting, in Executive Director Barry Wallerstein'swords, "the present electricity crisis in California and the advancement of control technology resulting in ultralowNOx emissions." The commission estimated that the proposed plant would emit 56 tons of NOx, 17 tons ofcarbon monoxide, 24 tons of volatile organic compounds and 287 tons of particulate matter each year. Thesefigures proved more persuasive than the combined heft of local labor groups, politicians and industry. "Theyneed to take [the power plant] somewhere where it won't harm any person, child or senior citizen," South GateVice Mayor Xochilt Ruvalcaba told The Times. The failure of the well-heeled backers points to another dynamicstate politicians need to consider: informed disbelief about the power crisis. Last week, Smutny-Jones of thepower plant trade group cautioned, "If people want electricity at reasonable prices, we are going to have to buildpower plants or modernize older plants." Yet, many South Gate residents were unmoved by the rhetoric of theenergy crisis, with its blackout scares and ruinous economic predictions. One reason is that Stage 3 alert bellssound less loudly in the ears of low-income consumers whose utility bills take a disproportionate bite out of theirpaychecks. Working people also blame deregulation, not environmental rules, for the current problems. And theenergy- company money backing Gov. Gray Davis and other politicians has not escaped voters' notice. Thenew NIMBYs are savvy to the political process, and the South Gate vote could embolden poor communitiesacross the state to oppose fast-track power plants. If so, state politicians will have to find another way out of thecrisis pushed on them by careless deregulation, rampant energy speculation and the hardball tactics ofoverextended utilities. The fresh wind blowing down Firestone Boulevard might bring new ideas into the state'spower debate. * Illustration Caption: GRAPHIC-DRAWING: (no caption), JAVIER AGUILAR / For the TimesCredit: Michael Soller is PhD candidate in American history at UCLASubject: Public health; Disputes; Neighborhoods; Referendums; Electric power plants; Air pollutionLocation: South Gate CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: M.6Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2001Publication date: Mar 18, 200117 March 2013 Page 312 of 483 ProQuestYear: 2001Section: Opinion; PART- M; Opinion DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: Opinion PieceProQuest document ID: 421598707Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2001 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 142 of 213Inland Empire Activists Seek to Curb Warehouse Boom; Business: Group says fumes from trucksserving distribution centers imperil health. Others say job creation cuts commutes.Author: Gold, ScottPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 21 Feb 2001: B1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: In recent years, the two counties have taken that role to unprecedented levels. As the population hassoared to 3.2 million, about the same as that of Oregon, the region has catered increasingly to giant distributioncenters put up by companies such as GE Plastics and Target Corp. in Ontario, Upland, Rancho Cucamongaand, more recently, Mira Loma. Mira Loma and Glen Avon, two adjacent unincorporated communities west ofRiverside that are home to about 20,000 people combined, have become the latest stops for those distributioncenters--and the newest battleground in the debate. Marc Burns, first vice president of CB Richard Ellis inOntario and an industrial broker who handles leases and sales of property in the region, said complaints in theMira Loma area are isolated. Like others in the business, he expects the logistics industry to expand east--intoRiverside, Moreno Valley, Redlands and Perris--and soon.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Everybody here has a story about a truck. There's the one about horses rearing up and tossing theirriders, startled by a semi rumbling through a residential neighborhood that was once a quiet, rural haven. Aboutkids forced to play their street hockey games between two enormous trailers. About the 18- wheeler that clippedthe curb of Penny Newman's quarter-acre corner lot in nearby Glen Avon. "And my grandkids were out there inthe yard," said Newman, the executive director of the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice,a nonprofit activist organization in this western Riverside County community. Now, armed with two damning17 March 2013 Page 313 of 483 ProQueststudies about air quality, residents and environmental activists are trying to derail the Inland Empire's drive tobecome the warehouse district of the southwestern United States--and to push out some of those trucks. Sincethe 1880s, when railroads set up shop here, Riverside and San Bernardino counties have offered plenty ofcheap land and handy access to truck, rail and air routes that stretch through the Southwest. Those elementshave made the region a natural for warehousing and goods distribution. In recent years, the two counties havetaken that role to unprecedented levels. As the population has soared to 3.2 million, about the same as that ofOregon, the region has catered increasingly to giant distribution centers put up by companies such as GEPlastics and Target Corp. in Ontario, Upland, Rancho Cucamonga and, more recently, Mira Loma. Thewarehouses--about 30 million square feet of them to date-- hold everything from deodorant to best-sellingnovels. Many see distribution as the Inland Empire's economic future, in a region where population growth haslong outpaced job growth. Led largely by the blue-collar work that warehouses bring, the region has created275,000 jobs in the last decade, more than any other sector of California, according to the San BernardinobasedInland Empire Economic Partnership, a nonprofit business-boosting organization. Many area residentsand environmental activists, however, are beginning to see the dark side of the trend. The warehouses, many ofwhich contain more than a million square feet, have begun to dominate the rugged landscape. They are pitstops for thousands of trucks each day, which are beginning to clog already busy highways and take overresidential neighborhoods. And, what is perhaps most urgent, they add to an air pollution problem that isalready among the worst in the nation. Mira Loma and Glen Avon, two adjacent unincorporated communitieswest of Riverside that are home to about 20,000 people combined, have become the latest stops for thosedistribution centers--and the newest battleground in the debate. Leaders of the movement to reject thewarehouses, calling themselves HOME--for Help Our Mira Loma Environment--have enlisted block leaders towalk door to door each evening, collecting petition signatures. The petitions will be presented to countysupervisors to urge more aggressive review of projects' environmental baggage before approval. Theorganization is putting together neighborhood meetings every two weeks, including a gathering earlier thismonth at Mira Loma's Jurupa Valley High School that drew more than 300 residents. The group is working withattorneys to weigh its legal options, said leader Colleen Smethers, a retired nurse practitioner and mother of fivewho has lived in Mira Loma since 1972. "We are not going to allow this to continue," she said. "I don't mean tosound like I think we can stop the world. But this is wrong. This is being done to us with full knowledge that it isdetrimental to our health. "We are really coming together as a community. And it's all for the common good--orbecause of the common bad, I guess." Perhaps more than any other portion of the Inland Empire, Mira Lomahas been altered forever by warehousing operations. Traditionally a farming area, the community attractedmany families in the 1980s and early 1990s with affordable half-acre lots. Many children in the modest, pleasantneighborhoods are in horse clubs, which dispense cherished ribbons almost every weekend, and homes arenear small riding trails that wind their way to the Santa Ana River. All of that is changing. "It is very much acountry feel," said Newman, who became an activist more than two decades ago, battling for cleanup of thenotorious Stringfellow acid pits nearby. "That's why people moved here. I don't know if you've ever seen ahorse's reaction to a huge truck barreling down the street, but it's very scary. This is very real." The foremostconcern, though, is air quality, in a region that is already bathed in smoggy air blown east from Los Angeles andOrange counties. Two recent studies have suggested that diesel trucks are hurting, not only the quality of life,but also the quality of the air. The first study, by the South Coast Air Quality Management District last year,found that diesel particles in the air are to blame for 70% of the cancer caused by air toxins. In addition, USC'sEnvironmental Health Center recently completed a study of air quality in 12 Southern California communities,and found higher concentrations of particulate pollution in the air over Mira Loma than in any of the other testspots. Mira Loma's air contained 67 micrograms of particulates-- including diesel emissions--per cubic meter ofair, compared with 18 micrograms in an area north of Santa Barbara. That study also tracked residents' lungdevelopment, and found that children in Mira Loma had 4% to 5% less lung capacity than their counterparts in17 March 2013 Page 314 of 483 ProQuestless polluted areas. Studies Will Assess Effect of Trucks The AQMD and USC have both embarked onambitious new studies to better assess the share of blame that diesel trucks must shoulder, work that also couldhelp determine how much of the region's pollution is locally generated. In any case, said James Gauderman, anassistant professor in USC's department of preventive medicine and an author of the study, "It's not good."Those studies were the center of attention at the packed meeting this month. In Mira Loma, they are seen asthe most potent ammunition residents have amassed. "It's very difficult for the county to say that there is noimpact when you have two studies coming out that contradict that," Newman said. "It doesn't really pass thegiggle test." Backers of warehouse construction, however, are not convinced that the trucks add significantly tothe area's smog problem. On the contrary, they may help air quality by creating local jobs in a region whereabout 400,000 people commute west or south to work in neighboring counties. What's more, the economicbenefits of the warehouses and distribution centers are clear, supporters say. As the distribution centersbecome more high-tech and critical to the region's economy, they are offering better wages and benefits,including retirement packages and profit-sharing plans, said Teri Ooms, president and chief executive officer ofthe Inland Empire Economic Partnership. Economically, "I think the logistics infrastructure is extremelyimportant to our region," she said. Marc Burns, first vice president of CB Richard Ellis in Ontario and anindustrial broker who handles leases and sales of property in the region, said complaints in the Mira Loma areaare isolated. Like others in the business, he expects the logistics industry to expand east--into Riverside,Moreno Valley, Redlands and Perris--and soon. Resident opposition "is a small blip in our market," said Burns,who helped broker a $40-million, 1.2-million-square-foot deal for a Target Corp. distribution center in Ontario inDecember. "I don't think . . . that is going to have a dampening effect on the industry." Increasingly, however,local government officials are agreeing that more attention must be paid to environmental and lifestyleconcerns. "There is a balancing act with regard to the advantages and disadvantages. And we may be upagainst the line," said Riverside County Executive Officer Larry Parrish. "We've made a very concerted effort toget quality jobs that allow people to come here and stay," he said. "But there is a tension there. And it would bedisingenuous of me to say that there isn't some appropriate criticism." Riverside County supervisors have begunrejecting some plans for distribution centers, and have proposed measures designed to appease communitieslike Mira Loma. Some, for example, are pushing the county to open a facility that would help trucks refrigerateperishable goods without running their diesel engines at night. And Supervisor Bob Buster has proposed thatthe county charge companies a fee if their businesses generate new traffic. Illustration Caption: PHOTO:Distribution centers like the one in background are transforming many formerly rural Inland Empire areas.;PHOTOGRAPHER: GINA FERAZZI / Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: (San Fernando Valley Edition, B9) ActivistPenny Newman is leading fight against more warehouses; PHOTOGRAPHER: GINA FERAZZI / Los AngelesTimes; GRAPHIC- MAP: (no caption), Los Angeles Times Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Disputes; Rural areas; Air pollution; Distribution centers; Neighborhoods; Warehouses; TrucksLocation: Riverside County CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2001Publication date: Feb 21, 2001Year: 2001Dateline: MIRA LOMA, Calif.17 March 2013 Page 315 of 483 ProQuestSection: Metro; PART- B; PART-; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: InfographicProQuest document ID: 421576276Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2001 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 143 of 213California and the West; As Las Vegas Grows, 'Sin City' Looks More Like 'Smog City'; Pollution:Rapid growth, lax enforcement of environmental laws and its desert location give the metropolis someof the dirtiest air in the West.Author: Polakovic, Gary; Gorman, TomPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 02 Feb 2001: A3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Cleaning up won't get any easier, either, what with Clark County projected to grow by nearly anothermillion people in 25 years. Meanwhile, the EPA is tolerating less pollution in American cities, having recentlyissued tough new limits for ozone and microscopic particles that are sure to require more aggressive controlsfor Las Vegas. [Christine Robinson], the county's new anti-smog chief, is calling for new dust control measures,restrictions on unpaved roads and increased emissions fees to pay for 15 new pollution inspectors. The countyalso plans to merge its two clean-air agencies into one smog- fighting unit. And Las Vegas could come intocompliance for carbon monoxide by year's end, because of cleaner-running cars. Unfettered growth, with scantattention paid to smog, has left Las Vegas with some of the worst air quality in the western United States.;PHOTOGRAPHER: BOB CAREY / Los Angeles Times; Construction spews tens of thousands of tons of dustand microscopic grit into the city's air annually.; PHOTOGRAPHER: BOB CAREY / Los Angeles Times;GRAPHIC: Tons of Dust, LYNN MEERSMAN / Los Angeles TimesLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Any given day, the view across this desert valley--the fastest growing metropolitan area in the nation--shows a carpet of homes stretching to the foothills, sprawling beneath not blue skies but a yellowish-tan haze.Distracted by the demands of an expanding population--new roads, new water lines and new schools--government officials here have failed to keep up with one of the most toxic side effects of growth: air pollution.As a result, Las Vegas--which outsiders may associate with images of sparkling neon piercing a crisp desert17 March 2013 Page 316 of 483 ProQuestsky--today has some of the worst air quality in the Western United States. A decade of unfettered growth, withscant attention paid to air pollution, has created a public health and bureaucratic mess that may take years toreverse, experts say. "Our elected officials don't take this seriously, and the air quality officials have been eitherinept or corrupt or both," said Peggy Pierce, a leader of the Southern Nevada Sierra Club. "I'd prefer thenickname of 'Sin City' to 'Smog City,' but that's what we've become." Confronted with mounting criticism, thehead of the local air quality agency resigned in August, leaving his replacement hobbled with low staff moraleand government reports condemning officials for lax enforcement of clean air laws. New Director ChristineRobinson, 32, has launched several tough new clean air initiatives. Her marching orders are clear: Bring orderto the anti-smog program serving Las Vegas and surrounding Clark County. "It's been obvious to everyone weneed to take our air quality problems more seriously," she said. But the effort is so belated that air qualityimprovements, federally mandated for more than a decade, are still years away. Despite three attempts duringthe 1990s, local officials have yet to produce a strategy to clean up dust and soot that is deemed credible by theU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and are expected to miss this year's federal deadline to clean up hazyskies. Geography and Climate Conspire Las Vegas sits on the edge of the Mojave Desert in a 500-square- milevalley ringed by the ridges of the Southwest's Great Basin. Summers are hot and dry, winds roar in spring andwinters are cold and stagnant. Mix in 1.4 million people and it's a recipe for dirty air. The biggest mess is causedby wind-blown dust. It's a major component of so-called particulate pollution, which has been linked in severalstudies to respiratory diseases, including lung cancer, bronchitis and premature death. Some of the dust is ofnatural origin. Though desert topsoil usually develops a wind-resistant crust, as much as 31,000 tons of dustcomes from the open desert, in part because off-road vehicles break the natural surface seal. But a biggercontributor is the feverish pace of construction, which spews an estimated 53,000 tons of microscopic grit intothe air over Las Vegas annually. Exasperated EPA officials have moved to take control of Clark County's airprogram--as the agency did in the Phoenix area in 1998, after years of foot-dragging by officials there. Lastmonth the EPA started a countdown that could lead to sanctions against Clark County, beginning next year. Theregion stands to lose millions of dollars in highway funds and may face growth restrictions. "It's a terrible mess,"said David P. Howekamp, who managed EPA's air programs in the Southwest for 18 years until recently. "LasVegas is a wild place. . . . It is local politics at its worst." The situation isn't lost on the state Legislature, whichcommissioned independent analysts to assess Clark County's smog- control program. "The county has beendragging its feet something terrible," said state Sen. Dina Titus (D-Las Vegas), a longtime critic of the region'spell-mell growth. "The County Commission is very tied to developers and growth, and hasn't wanted to crackdown, and that's what's gotten us to this stage." In September, consultants to the state concluded that thecounty's anti-smog program is understaffed and underfunded, poorly enforced, and disorganized and lacks aclear idea about how much pollution is emitted and exactly where it all comes from--the very foundation ofeffective clean air efforts in California and other Western cities. Just one inspector in the Clark County HealthDistrict has been assigned to police 1,000 manufacturers and other businesses under permit, according to thestate-sponsored audit by Environ International Corp. EPA audits in 1992 and 1996 found that local regulatorsallow some new polluters to escape stringent controls required by the federal Clean Air Act, either by writingunenforceable guidelines or by not requiring the best available emission control devices. EPA Begins to PunishPolluters EPA officials say they've been slow to respond to the situation in Las Vegas because they werepreoccupied with more pressing air pollution problems in California and Arizona. However, the agency hasbegun enforcing anti-smog regulations that Clark County officials do not. The EPA has issued 17 violationnotices to Las Vegas polluters in the last few years and so far has assessed $1.2 million in fines, and isstudying further penalties. One such action was taken in September against CalNev Pipeline Co., which importsjet fuel, diesel fuel and gasoline from Southern California. The company boosted its fuel handling capacity a fewyears ago to 23 million barrels per year, resulting in an extra 100 tons of smog-forming fumes. The EPAcharged that local air quality officials ignored their own regulations by approving the CalNev expansion without17 March 2013 Page 317 of 483 ProQuestfirst requiring permits or the best possible emission controls. A onetime consultant for CalNev, Mike Sword, wassubsequently hired by the county's air quality agency and promoted to be its acting director while the U.S.Justice Department was pursuing negotiated penalties against CalNev. Allegations of conflicts of interest havedogged the county's smog program. Michael Naylor, who led Clark County's air program for 20 years, quit afterthe district attorney's office found he had exempted a major printing company, to which he had family ties, frompurchasing $60,000 in pollution credits. Investigators concluded that Naylor's conduct "may have beeninappropriate" but said they could not demonstrate criminal intent. And the county Health District's legalcounsel, Ian Ross, resigned last summer amid controversy surrounding his financial interest in building projectssubject to air pollution regulations. Ross's job was to advise the district about air pollution laws. Elected officialssay they're ready to address a problem that in the past, they concede, has been shrugged off. Particulatepollution "was an issue, frankly, that was never regarded as a serious problem before," said Bruce Woodbury,chairman of the Clark County Board of Commissioners. "We live in a desert. When the wind blows, you're goingto get dust. Now the EPA has made a health issue of it, and probably rightfully so." Coping With ExpectedGrowth Cleaning up won't get any easier, either, what with Clark County projected to grow by nearly anothermillion people in 25 years. Meanwhile, the EPA is tolerating less pollution in American cities, having recentlyissued tough new limits for ozone and microscopic particles that are sure to require more aggressive controlsfor Las Vegas. Robinson, the county's new anti-smog chief, is calling for new dust control measures, restrictionson unpaved roads and increased emissions fees to pay for 15 new pollution inspectors. The county also plansto merge its two clean-air agencies into one smog- fighting unit. And Las Vegas could come into compliance forcarbon monoxide by year's end, because of cleaner-running cars. For other solutions, many here look to thefederal government's Bureau of Land Management, which owns 54,000 acres of undeveloped, dust-pronevalley land. The BLM hopes to sell half of its valley holdings--27,000 acres-- in a series of land auctions. Thestrategy will eliminate some long- term desert dust--but create short-term construction pollution as developersmove in. Business leaders embrace the notion of clean air--to a point. "I'm sure people would love to seepristine skies, but we have to reach a happy medium between that and development," said A. SomerHollingsworth, president of the Nevada Development Authority, a Las Vegas-based consortium of localbusinesses that markets commercial and industrial growth. "There are two sides to 'quality of life.' One is air,traffic and water--the green side. But if you can't make a living, the town will die. That's the financial side toquality of life." Dr. Otto Ravenholt, who headed the Health District for 35 years before retiring in 1998, said hisoffice neglected the haze problem during his tenure and clearly should have done more as the communityoutgrew its smog control program. "This isn't a battle that you win and go home, like the Gulf War," Ravenholtsaid. "The public has to realize that the more people and activities you pack into the valley, the more we'll haveto modify how things are done, so there are fewer emissions." (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)Tons of Dust About 87,261 tons of particle pollution annually swirls in the air of Clark County, home of LasVegas. The county was the fastest- growing metropolitan region in the nation during the 1990s. Clark Countyparticle pollution sources Sources: Nevada state demographer, Environ International Corp. Illustration Caption:PHOTO: Unfettered growth, with scant attention paid to smog, has left Las Vegas with some of the worst airquality in the western United States.; PHOTOGRAPHER: BOB CAREY / Los Angeles Times; PHOTO:Construction spews tens of thousands of tons of dust and microscopic grit into the city's air annually.;PHOTOGRAPHER: BOB CAREY / Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC: Tons of Dust, LYNN MEERSMAN / LosAngeles Times Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSSubject: Air pollution; Population growth; Environmental policy; Smog; Urban areasLocation: Las Vegas NevadaPublication title: Los Angeles Times17 March 2013 Page 318 of 483 ProQuestPages: A3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2001Publication date: Feb 2, 2001Year: 2001Dateline: LAS VEGASSection: Part A; PART- A; PART-; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: InfographicProQuest document ID: 421582001Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2001 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 144 of 213There's Hope in the Air; L.A. Is Winning the Smog War, Though Battles RemainAuthor: Polakovic, GaryPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 14 Jan 2001: B1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Conditions have improved to the point where, even on bad days, the level of ozone--an invisible gasthat is smog's main ingredient-- throughout much of the Southland is no worse than in East Coast cities. Ozonelevels in Anaheim stack up favorably with those in Memphis; Azusa, which was the nation's ozone hot spot alittle more than a decade ago, now more closely resembles the suburbs of Atlanta; Burbank is comparable toPensacola, Fla. The biggest challenge for the future is posed by population growth, air quality regulators say.More people mean more cars and more pollution from small, household sources. Consumer products spill about88 tons of smog-forming fumes into the sky daily--three times more than comes from all the region's oilrefineries and gasoline stations. Recreational boats and off-road vehicles release about 200 tons of carbonmonoxide daily--as much as all the heavy-duty trucks and buses operating in the region, according to estimatesby the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Ozone, an invisible gas, has decreased sharply in L.A.region, but haze-creating particles remain a problem.; PHOTOGRAPHER: KEN LUBAS / Los Angeles Times;17 March 2013 Page 319 of 483 ProQuestLooking from Hollywood toward Century City and West L.A.; PHOTOGRAPHER: KEN LUBAS / Los AngelesTimes; GRAPHIC: Southland Smog Sources, LYNN MEERSMAN / Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC: Cleaningthe Air, Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC: Bad Air Days, Los Angeles TimesLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: It is a campaign that has lasted more than 50 years, but Los Angeles can finally claim it is winning thewar against smog. The region's air quality problems are not over, of course. And the gains that have been madein the last decade could erode with the population growth expected in the decade to come. But as air qualityregulators pore over year-end data for 2000, the figures show that, for the second year in a row, no first-stageozone alerts were reported anywhere in Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino or Riverside counties. Not longago, such days of extremely unhealthful smog occurred somewhere in the region on one day in three. Indeed,many of the 16 million people living in the four counties- -a large majority of residents of Los Angeles andOrange counties and many in Riverside and San Bernardino counties--today breathe air that meets all nationalhealth-based standards in force under the Clean Air Act. Conditions have improved to the point where, even onbad days, the level of ozone--an invisible gas that is smog's main ingredient- -throughout much of the Southlandis no worse than in East Coast cities. Ozone levels in Anaheim stack up favorably with those in Memphis;Azusa, which was the nation's ozone hot spot a little more than a decade ago, now more closely resembles thesuburbs of Atlanta; Burbank is comparable to Pensacola, Fla. In addition, levels of the substances that createvisible smog have been falling as well, though not as dramatically. On more and more days each year, bluehues are returning to skies across the region, pushing aside the big brown cloud as well as the smog stigmathat has been a staple of the Southland since the boom years of World War II. The change is no statistical flukeor succession of Cinderella seasons, either. Rather, the decline in smog is real and dramatic, a hard-wondividend that has improved the quality of life for millions of Californians and made Los Angeles a model and alaboratory for cities around the world choking on dirty air. Houston has taken the ozone title from Los Angeles--not because its air has gotten much worse, but because it has failed to keep up with Southern California'simprovements. But it is not alone; El Paso, Phoenix and Bakersfield are beginning to challenge SouthernCalifornia's ranking as the capital of haze. Unhealthful levels of ozone persist primarily in the Inland Empire, butthe worst of it concentrates on a sparsely populated, pine-covered slope in the San Bernardino Mountains 70miles east of downtown Los Angeles. "I think it's amazing we've taken such a populated city with such poormeteorology and topography and made the air quality better than it was. It's a major technologicalachievement," said Lynn M. Hildemann, associate chairwoman of Stanford University's civil and environmentalengineering department. "Smog was so wonderfully thick in Los Angeles that I used to wax rhapsodically withmy students over how it was in the old days," Hildemann said. "Now it's on the boring side. You just don't havethe smog you used to." The progress is all the more striking because it has occurred against a backdrop ofsurging growth. There are twice as many people and three times as many cars in the four-county Los Angelesregion as there were 40 years ago. There are 80% more jobs, and the total number of miles driven by vehiclesis double the 1970 level. Yet days of unhealthful air quality have dropped by 75% over the last 15 years,according to government figures. All of that is the good news. The continued bad news can be seen by anyonewho flies into the region's airports or looks down from Mt. Wilson and sees how much pollution remains. Tinyparticles--the dust and soot blown off roads, carried from construction sites and spewed from diesel engines--create the brown pall that is signature Southern California. It is a serious environmental health hazard. NewBreakthroughs Will Be Required And with growth continuing--6.7 million more people expected in the next twodecades--simply keeping pollution at its current level, let alone cleaning up the rest of it, will require billionsmore dollars, technological breakthroughs and substantial political courage. Southern California's clean-aircampaign has grown into the world's most sophisticated and successful. Californians drive the world's cleanestcars powered by the world's cleanest fuels, use the world's cleanest consumer products and have some of the17 March 2013 Page 320 of 483 ProQuestworld's cleanest factories and power plants. The state is a proving ground for methods that frequently shapeamendments to the national Clean Air Act. Experts from Houston, New York City, Japan and Mexico come hereto seek advice from leading authorities at Caltech, USC and the UC campuses in Riverside, Irvine, Los Angelesand Davis. In the last 13 years, an estimated 900 tons daily of hydrocarbon fumes and 4,000 tons daily ofcarbon monoxide gas have been removed from the air, according to air quality officials. Peak ozoneconcentrations are down two-thirds. Mountain ranges have reappeared through haze that once obscured themduring summer. In Riverside, which has some of California's dingiest air, average visibility has improved to ninemiles and will probably triple by the end of the decade. Long Beach can expect visibility more typical of lesspolluted portions of the California coast in the next several years, according to officials. The Los Angeles regionnow meets existing national standards for three of the six pollutants targeted in the Clean Air Act: nitrogendioxide, a brownish gas; sulfur dioxide; and lead. The carbon monoxide standard could be met this year, andthe ozone and particulate standards are expected to be met by 2010, officials say. That task could besubstantially complicated, though, by new national standards that the federal Environmental Protection Agencyhas developed to limit ozone and ultra-small particles. Existing standards--difficult as they are to meet in LosAngeles- -are widely recognized as inadequate to protect health or ensure visibility. The tougher new standardsare being challenged in the Supreme Court by industry groups. If the high court allows the new limits to go intoeffect, Los Angeles-area air quality regulators will have to find ways of reducing nitrogen oxides by an additional30% to 60% and hydrocarbons by 25%. Officials admit that they do not yet know how to do that. As always,regulators work against the huge handicaps of the region's climate and topography. Sunny days, weak windsand tall mountains make Southern California a smog trap. Early explorers called the Los Angeles Basin the"valley of smokes" because of haze from fires made by Indians. Population Growth Could Undo Progress Butthe biggest challenge for the future is posed by population growth, air quality regulators say. More people meanmore cars and more pollution from small, household sources. Consumer products spill about 88 tons of smogformingfumes into the sky daily--three times more than comes from all the region's oil refineries and gasolinestations. Recreational boats and off-road vehicles release about 200 tons of carbon monoxide daily--as much asall the heavy- duty trucks and buses operating in the region, according to estimates by the South Coast AirQuality Management District. "Any time you have an area that is still really growing, as you do in L.A., you haveto be careful that growth doesn't undo the air quality gains," said Paulette Middleton, director of the EnvironmentCenter for the Rand Corp. and a member of the EPA's science advisory board. Future strides against smog willrequire coordinated strategies to deal with matters traditionally tackled in isolation-- such as urban development,transportation and environmental protection--she said. Soot and dust pose a formidable challenge. TheRiverside area remains the nation's haze hot spot, and other eastern valleys downwind of Los Angeles fare littlebetter. Even in 1999, an exceptionally clean year, for example, residents of the San Gabriel Valley still could notsee farther than 10 miles on one day out of three. Scientists understand ozone smog fairly well. By contrast,particle pollution is so poorly understood that experts are only beginning to unravel the complex chemistrybehind haze. What they do know is that particles, many smaller than the diameter of a human hair, are linked tocancer, premature death and loss of lung function in smoggy cities. Diesel-powered engines used at ports,freight terminals, construction sites, airports and farms are big contributors and have not been cleaned up asmuch as factories and cars. A new national diesel standard that the EPA announced in December would reducethe fuel's sulfur content by 97% and enable use of add-on controls for diesel engines, but it remains to be seenhow aggressively the new Bush administration will enforce the rule. Political Consensus Helps in Air Campaign"Fine particle levels have not dropped . . . [as much as] ozone, and that's emerged as the most seriousproblem" causing illnesses and premature deaths, said Arthur M. Winer, professor of environmental healthsciences at UCLA. A central reason that California has been able to handle those problems better than otherstates so far is a broad-based political consensus about clean air. For most of the last two generations, clean airhas remained a shared value, regardless of which political party was in power. Poll after poll has shown that17 March 2013 Page 321 of 483 ProQuestCalifornians support blue skies and are willing to pay more to get them. They will have to. The cost to clean theSouthland's sky is expected to run $1.7 billion annually for the next 10 years, the date when all federal airpollution standards are supposed to be met, according to the AQMD. But even the business community, whichbears many of the costs and which, in other states, has fought environmental regulations, has generallyaccepted the clean air consensus. "There's been significant cost borne by industries and consumers, but itprobably has been worth it," said Brian White, director of environmental issues for the California Chamber ofCommerce. "We do believe there are other ways to achieve clean air without having to go through more costlymandates," he added, citing programs to scrap old cars and voluntary cleanup programs. As long as the publiccontinues to see improvements in air quality, support for the state's efforts is likely to continue, says UCLA'sprofessor Winer. "The public needs to understand what a tremendous improvement has happened, because itrequires social and political will to go the rest of the way," he said. "People have to understand that if it costs afew hundred dollars more for a catalytic converter on a car, or a few cents more per gallon for gasoline, or theextra costs for consumer products, that it was worthwhile." (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) BadAir Days The Southland is experiencing fewer days with unhealthful ozone levels. The highest concentrationsare in the Inland Empire and the San Bernardino Mountains, while the urban coastal region now meets allfederal standards. Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX /INFOGRAPHIC) Cleaning the Air It has taken the better part of a century, but Southern California is winning itswar against smog. Ozone is in rapid retreat now... * Note: Figures for the Southern California area are for LosAngeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Sources: South Coast Air Quality ManagementDistrict, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Southern California Assn. of Governments (BEGIN TEXT OFINFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Southland Smog Sources Cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles: 49% Constructionequipment, planes, farm equipment: 20% Paint, household chemicals: 20% Oil refineries, factories, powerplants: 6% Other: 5% Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District Illustration Caption: PHOTO:Ozone, an invisible gas, has decreased sharply in L.A. region, but haze-creating particles remain a problem.;PHOTOGRAPHER: KEN LUBAS / Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: Looking from Hollywood toward Century Cityand West L.A.; PHOTOGRAPHER: KEN LUBAS / Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC: Southland Smog Sources,LYNN MEERSMAN / Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC: Cleaning the Air, Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC: Bad AirDays, Los Angeles Times Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Air pollution; Public health; Smog; Environmental cleanupLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2001Publication date: Jan 14, 2001Year: 2001Section: Metro; PART- B; PART-; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 0458303517 March 2013 Page 322 of 483 ProQuestSource type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: InfographicProQuest document ID: 421592203Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2001 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-21Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 145 of 213California and the West; U.S. OKs Rules to Cut Diesel Fumes by 95%; Smog: The national order is abreakthrough for clean air advocates and a boost for truckers, who already face tough standards inCalifornia.Author: Polakovic, GaryPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 22 Dec 2000: A3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: EPA officials said new engines, anti-smog devices and fuels to be introduced in 2006 will eliminatenearly 3 million tons of smog- forming emissions annually from diesel-powered big rigs, buses, delivery vansand mid-size trucks. In pollution terms, this is equivalent to removing 13 million trucks from the road and shouldgo far toward helping America's smoggy cities achieve federally mandated clean-air targets. Although dieselpoweredbuses and trucks are a major source of air pollution, they have largely escaped stringent control overthe last 25 years while factories, power plants, consumer products, cars and gasoline have been cleaned up.Tackling diesel pollution is difficult because it is a highly efficient fuel that powers the nation's interstatecommerce as well as off-road farm and construction equipment. Diesel engines also are quite long-lived, and itcan take decades for new technologies to be widely adopted. Beginning in June 2006, refiners must beginproducing diesel that contains not more than 15 parts of sulfur per million parts of fuel-- a 97% reduction.Although sulfur is an air pollutant, it's a greater threat to add-on emissions-control devices such as particle trapsand catalysts. Getting sulfur out of fuel is a major breakthrough that will lead for the first time to widespread useof those clean devices, according to EPA.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The Clinton administration Thursday approved final regulations to cut diesel fumes from big trucks andbuses by 95%, a breakthrough for clean air and a boost for California truckers. The action will usher in a newgeneration of virtually smokeless diesel-powered vehicles nationwide, replacing the heaviest polluters on thehighways. Billowing plumes of soot from those engines are a chief source of air pollution complaints and bigcontributors to two of the worst pollutants--ozone and microscopic particles--in California's skies. "Anyone whohas ever driven behind a large truck or bus is familiar with the smell of diesel fuel and the clouds of thickexhaust emissions," said U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Director Carol M. Browner. Thursday's action"will dramatically cut harmful air pollution. New trucks and buses run as cleanly as those running on naturalgas." EPA officials said new engines, anti-smog devices and fuels to be introduced in 2006 will eliminate nearly17 March 2013 Page 323 of 483 ProQuest3 million tons of smog- forming emissions annually from diesel-powered big rigs, buses, delivery vans and midsizetrucks. In pollution terms, this is equivalent to removing 13 million trucks from the road and should go fartoward helping America's smoggy cities achieve federally mandated clean-air targets. The regulations--moresweeping than any the EPA has approved to attack soot from tailpipes--are the latest in a string ofenvironmental protections enacted by the Clinton administration as it prepares to hand power over to GeorgeW. Bush next month. It is unclear what action the new president's administration might take, but repeal of theregulations would be a lengthy and politically difficult process. Critics in the oil industry and among enginemakers said that the controls go too far and that shortages might result if refiners decide not to produce thecostly fuels. The oil industry predicts the regulations will add 15 cents per gallon to the cost of diesel fuel; EPAsaid the added cost will be 4 cents. "What EPA proposed is going beyond the practical. We could gettremendous cleanup without going so far," said Bill Hickman, spokesman for the American Petroleum Institute,a coalition of oil companies that sought more lenient limits. Those concerns struck a sympathetic chord withinthe Energy and Commerce departments, where intense debate has resulted in minor revisions to the rules sincethey were unveiled in draft form in May. In Congress, Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.) has threatened to rollback the new rules early next year, although new committee assignments in an evenly divided Senate couldaffect that effort. But EPA officials said the measures are necessary to protect people from sooty particles.Smaller than the diameter of a human hair, particulates are inhaled deep into the lungs and are implicated as acause of cancer, respiratory illness and premature death for people living in smoggy cities. The EPA backersare supported by a peculiar alliance of environmentalists, two oil companies, a major maker of diesel enginesand the California Trucking Assn. "This is the biggest vehicle pollution news since the removal of lead fromgasoline, and will lead to the most significant national public health advance in a generation. It's a realwatershed," said Rich Kassell, senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council. Although dieselpoweredbuses and trucks are a major source of air pollution, they have largely escaped stringent control overthe last 25 years while factories, power plants, consumer products, cars and gasoline have been cleaned up.Tackling diesel pollution is difficult because it is a highly efficient fuel that powers the nation's interstatecommerce as well as off-road farm and construction equipment. Diesel engines also are quite long-lived, and itcan take decades for new technologies to be widely adopted. The regulations unveiled this week affect onlyvehicles that ply the streets and highways and target both diesel engines and fuel. Beginning in June 2006,refiners must begin producing diesel that contains not more than 15 parts of sulfur per million parts of fuel- -a97% reduction. Although sulfur is an air pollutant, it's a greater threat to add-on emissions-control devices suchas particle traps and catalysts. Getting sulfur out of fuel is a major breakthrough that will lead for the first time towidespread use of those clean devices, according to EPA. Two oil companies, BP and Tosco Corp., alreadyprovide low- sulfur diesel in California. Nonetheless, to ease the transition for the rest of the refiners, theregulations permit as much as one- fifth of the fuel to be high-sulfur until December 2009. About 144,000 bigrigs are registered in California, and operators said the new regulations will boost fuel costs for their competitorsin other parts of the country. A state law already in place for clean-diesel fuel adds at least a dime to the cost ofa gallon of diesel here, said Stephanie Williams of the California Trucking Assn. New engine specifications inthe regulations require a 90% reduction in soot emissions and a 95% cut in nitrogen oxide gases. Half theengines produced must meet those standards beginning in 2007, and the rest by 2010. Engine makers saidthey will be hard-pressed to meet those limits. "The levels of emissions reduction that the rule requires and thetechnical challenges that manufacturers need to overcome are unprecedented," said Jeb Mandel, legal counselfor the Engine Manufacturers Assn. But at least one company, Chicago-based International Truck and EngineCorp., a leading manufacturer of mid-size diesel engines, already produces a so-called green diesel engine thatmeets those limits. It will take perhaps 30 years before the full benefit of the new regulations is realized, but inthe end the nation's fleet of heavy duty trucks and buses will be among the world's cleanest, EPA officials said."It's very good news for air quality in California. These trucks should have invisible smoke and be much less17 March 2013 Page 324 of 483 ProQuestpolluting than today's trucks," said Jerry Martin, spokesman for the California Air Resources Board. The totalcost of implementing the rules is estimated at $4.3 billion by 2030. EPA estimates that the regulations will addas much as $1,900 to the price of a new truck or bus, which costs as much as $250,000. Those expenditures,however, represent a fraction of the savings that the agency said should be realized by improved health andenvironmental benefits. Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Environmental protection; Buses; Trucks; Federal regulation; Diesel engines; Air pollutionLocation: CaliforniaPeople: Clinton, BillPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2000Publication date: Dec 22, 2000Year: 2000Section: Part A; PART- A; PART-; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421589367Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2000 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-06Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 146 of 213Study Links Deaths to Airborne Particles; Health: Dust and soot contribute to toll of 20 to 200 peopledaily, researchers find, in examining urban areas.Author: Polakovic, GaryPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 14 Dec 2000: B1.ProQuest document link17 March 2013 Page 325 of 483 ProQuestAbstract: For years, researchers have known that microscopic particles can lodge deep in the lungs. They haveknown, as well, that high levels of particles in the air are associated with respiratory illness, heart attacks andpremature deaths. The new study, conducted by a team of researchers at Johns Hopkins University in Marylandand published in the current edition of the New England Journal of Medicine, is likely to bolster the EPA's case.The researchers found strong evidence that dust and soot particles, not other factors suggested by industry,appear to be causing the harmful effects. And they found that the ill effects occur even in cities that meetexisting national air pollution standards-- suggesting that stronger controls would protect public health. The EPAcurrently sets the maximum allowable concentration of microscopic particles, called PM10, at 150 microgramsper cubic meter of air. All the cities tested had average air pollution levels well below that level.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Dust and soot in the air contribute to between 20 and 200 early deaths each day in America's biggestcities, according to the largest coast-to-coast scientific study of the problem. Ill health from particulates, tinyspecks smaller than the width of a human hair, is spread across 20 of the largest cities in the United States--including Los Angeles, Santa Ana-Anaheim, San Bernardino and three other California areas--which areinhabited by about 50 million people, the new research indicates. Elderly people are the most frequentlyharmed. For years, researchers have known that microscopic particles can lodge deep in the lungs. They haveknown, as well, that high levels of particles in the air are associated with respiratory illness, heart attacks andpremature deaths. But whether the particles are actually the cause of illness has been in dispute. TheEnvironmental Protection Agency has been attempting to tighten limits on emissions of particles. Critics in thebusiness community are challenging those new rules in the Supreme Court, arguing that the regulations are toocostly and that the scientific evidence behind them is too sketchy. The new study, conducted by a team ofresearchers at Johns Hopkins University in Maryland and published in the current edition of the New EnglandJournal of Medicine, is likely to bolster the EPA's case. The researchers found strong evidence that dust andsoot particles, not other factors suggested by industry, appear to be causing the harmful effects. And they foundthat the ill effects occur even in cities that meet existing national air pollution standards--suggesting thatstronger controls would protect public health. The researchers examined daily changes in air pollution andmortality between 1987 and 1994 and made allowance for other factors that could skew the results, includingaccess to health care, influenza outbreaks, socioeconomic status, weather and the presence of other pollutants.The EPA currently sets the maximum allowable concentration of microscopic particles, called PM10, at 150micrograms per cubic meter of air. All the cities tested had average air pollution levels well below that level. Butthe researchers found that even at those existing levels, if the amount of particles rose by 10 micrograms percubic meter, the rate of death increased about 0.5%. Based on those existing levels, the researchers estimatedthat 20 to 200 deaths per day nationwide are caused by the particles. "When we look nationally, we see aneffect of particles on mortality that suggests there is a public health problem. The science continues to indictparticles and their role in mortality," said Dr. Jonathan M. Samet, lead author of the study and chairman of theepidemiology department at Johns Hopkins. "The higher the PM10 levels, the higher the health effects, so if youare exposed to high levels, the risk is greater," said Jean Ospital, health effects officer for the South Coast AirQuality Management District, which is charged with cleaning up smog in the Los Angeles region. Other studieshave estimated that particulate pollution may cause 1% of heart disease fatalities in the United States, whichtranslates to about 10,000 deaths per year or about 28 per day. In Los Angeles County, 77 residents die fromcardiovascular disease from all causes daily. Some scientists have questioned whether particle smog merelyhastens by a day or two the demise of people who are elderly or very ill. The new study does not conclusivelyanswer that question, but the researchers noted that the evidence is "heavily in the direction that the deaths areamong people of old age." Some of the nation's worst particle smog is found in California, both in the InlandEmpire and in parts of the east Bay Area and the San Joaquin Valley. In addition to the three Southland cities,17 March 2013 Page 326 of 483 ProQuestthe other California metropolitan areas in the study were San Diego, San Jose and Oakland. Elsewhere, theresearchers looked at New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Atlanta, Miami, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago,Minneapolis, Dallas-Forth Worth, Houston, San Antonio, Phoenix and Seattle. Credit: TIMESENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Fatalities; Studies; Public health; Dust; Air pollutionLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2000Publication date: Dec 14, 2000Year: 2000Section: Metro; PART- B; PART-; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421575646Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2000 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-06Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 147 of 213Driving in Front on Diesel ControlPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 21 Nov 2000: B8.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Since the California air board linked diesel exhaust to cancer in 1998, state and local air qualityofficials have taken giant steps to cut diesel pollution. Since last summer, for instance, the South Coast AirQuality Management District has ordered that new government- owned trucks and buses, except for schoolbuses, must use alternative fuels. In September, the state air board mandated the use of low- sulfur diesel fuelstatewide by 2006 and required that all diesel engines, whether new or already in service, have particulate trapsto reduce emissions.17 March 2013 Page 327 of 483 ProQuestLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Monday's announcement that 13 other states will join California in imposing new measures to cut thesoot spewed from diesel-powered trucks underscores this state's leadership in the national air pollution fight.California has moved decisively since diesel exhaust was identified as a carcinogen and has been ahead ofother states and the federal government in ordering reductions. The 13 Sunbelt and Northeastern states arejoining with California to plug a loophole created in 1998 when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency andthe Justice Department reached a settlement with seven diesel engine makers charged with intentionallyunderreporting their emissions under real driving conditions. The pact required that, until 2004, engines mustperform nearly as cleanly on the road as under controlled test conditions. But between October 2004 and 2007,when new federal rules kick in, engine makers are not bound to meet this test, and air quality officials fearedthat emissions would shoot up in those three years. At its Dec. 7 meeting, the California Air Resources Board islikely to extend those interim testing rules to trucks sold in the state until the federal rules take effect in 2007.The 13 other states have said they will do the same. The move is important because the testing rules are reallyemissions controls. Tests that low-ball the amount of soot and other pollutants that diesel engines actually emiton the road are hardly helpful in producing cleaner air. Since the California air board linked diesel exhaust tocancer in 1998, state and local air quality officials have taken giant steps to cut diesel pollution. Since lastsummer, for instance, the South Coast Air Quality Management District has ordered that new governmentownedtrucks and buses, except for school buses, must use alternative fuels. In September, the state air boardmandated the use of low-sulfur diesel fuel statewide by 2006 and required that all diesel engines, whether newor already in service, have particulate traps to reduce emissions. Federal law currently allows California toimpose tougher air pollution requirements than the rest of the nation, and other states are now following ourlead. This bodes well for cleaner skies.Subject: Diesel engines; Air pollution; Environmental protection; State regulation; Editorials -- Diesel enginesLocation: States-USPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B8Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2000Publication date: Nov 21, 2000Year: 2000Section: Metro; PART- B; PART-; Editorial Writers DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: EditorialProQuest document ID: 42154530417 March 2013 Page 328 of 483 ProQuestDocument URL:: (Copyright (c) 2000 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-06Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 148 of 213Diesel's Free Ride Is EndingPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 28 Sep 2000: 10.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Two years ago, after much study, the air board declared the microscopic particles spewed from theexhaust pipes of diesel engines to be a toxic air contaminant, one capable of causing cancer. The ARB's 1998declaration obligated the agency to craft a plan to reduce the health risk. That plan, before the board today,requires the use of low-sulfur diesel fuel statewide by 2006.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Today the state Air Resources Board could begin to make some real headway against dieselemissions, a major remaining cause of air pollution. The agency is poised to adopt rules that may work ahardship on many, particularly diesel-dependent truckers, but in the long run are necessary to clear the air.Two years ago, after much study, the air board declared the microscopic particles spewed from the exhaustpipes of diesel engines to be a toxic air contaminant, one capable of causing cancer. The ARB's 1998declaration obligated the agency to craft a plan to reduce the health risk. That plan, before the board today,requires the use of low-sulfur diesel fuel statewide by 2006. The board is also slated to mandate that all dieselengines, whether new or already in service, include particulate traps to reduce emissions, devices analogous tocatalytic converters. If adopted, the rules would apply to both cars and trucks and, according to agencyestimates, reduce emissions from California's 1.25 million diesel engines by up to 90%. Many within theindustry, including the California Trucking Assn., acknowledge the need to clean up diesel engines but wouldhave preferred incentives for compliance over blanket regulations. The pace of change is quickening. In Junethe South Coast Air Quality Management District adopted sweeping new rules that will force buses and trashtrucks to use cleaner-burning alternative fuels. Later this year, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency willconsider new nationwide standards for diesel trucks. The ARB's expected action this week should pave the wayfor that landmark federal step.Subject: Diesel fuels; Emission standards; Air pollution; Editorials -- Diesel fuelsLocation: CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Air Resources Board-California; NAICS: 924110; SIC: 9500; DUNS: 62-691-2737Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 10Number of pages: 0Publication year: 200017 March 2013 Page 329 of 483 ProQuestPublication date: Sep 28, 2000Year: 2000Section: Metro; PART- B; PART-; Editorial Writers DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: EditorialProQuest document ID: 421535419Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2000 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-06Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 149 of 213Pollution Rules Tighten Squeeze on Power SupplyAuthor: Vogel, NancyPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 05 Aug 2000: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: "I can't tell you whether we are in big trouble or medium trouble," said Terry Winter, who oversees thenonprofit agency that buys last-minute supplies when electricity consumption spikes so high that it threatens todisrupt the state's high-voltage grid. "I was flying by the seat of my pants," said Richard Baldwin, head of theVentura County Air Pollution Control District, who hurriedly struck a deal last week to keep a gas-fired turbinerunning on the Ventura County coast. The plant, which would have otherwise been shut down for the rest of theyear because of air pollution rules, is owned by Houston-based Reliant Energy, one of the major players inCalifornia's recently deregulated electricity market. The agreement means that California's grid operators cannow count on the plant to produce enough electricity to supply 125,000 homes. On a hot day in late July theydesperately needed that electricity, but could not get it because Reliant's air pollution permit allowed 100 hoursof operation each year and only five remained.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: California's already severe electricity squeeze could tighten further this summer if regulators don't easeup on air pollution rules, power company officials said Friday. The state's 1,000 power plants--many aging andburning natural gas--have been running so hard and long in this summer of electricity scarcity that many areclose to spewing as much pollution as they are allowed for the year under their permits. Without flexibility fromair pollution regulators, the plants could be forced to shut down or face fines. This summer California cannot17 March 2013 Page 330 of 483 ProQuestafford the loss of any of those plants at times of peak demand, said the state's last-resort buyer of electricity. "Ican't tell you whether we are in big trouble or medium trouble," said Terry Winter, who oversees the nonprofitagency that buys last-minute supplies when electricity consumption spikes so high that it threatens to disruptthe state's high-voltage grid. "If it stays really hot and we've got to run every unit," said Winter, "then we've got aproblem. If it cools off a little bit, we could turn off those units exceeding their permits and we won't have aproblem at all. My sense is, by late August we'll be seeing the problem more severely. But we're working on it."Local and state air pollution regulators say they recognize the problem and will do their best to help avoidoutages. "I was flying by the seat of my pants," said Richard Baldwin, head of the Ventura County Air PollutionControl District, who hurriedly struck a deal last week to keep a gas-fired turbine running on the Ventura Countycoast. The plant, which would have otherwise been shut down for the rest of the year because of air pollutionrules, is owned by Houston-based Reliant Energy, one of the major players in California's recently deregulatedelectricity market. Under the deal, Reliant will pay the air district $4,000 for every hour it runs the relatively dirtyplant the rest of the year. The money will go toward replacement of heavily polluting diesel engines. Theagreement means that California's grid operators can now count on the plant to produce enough electricity tosupply 125,000 homes. On a hot day in late July they desperately needed that electricity, but could not get itbecause Reliant's air pollution permit allowed 100 hours of operation each year and only five remained. "Thoseair quality districts could just throw up their hands and say no, not our problem," said Winter, executive directorof the California Independent System Operator, the nonprofit entity that runs most of California's electric grid,"but they have all been very responsive." He said his Folsom-based staff foresaw the problem and has beentalking with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the California Air Resources Board and the local airdistricts that set pollution limits for individual power plants. "They have been very, very cooperative in trying tofigure out ways to allow us to continue to generate but at the same time not add more pollutants to the air," hesaid. One way to do that, Winter said, may be to not run power plants in the evenings, when demand dips. "Wedon't want to put the lights out in the state," said Bill Kelly, spokesman for the South Coast Air QualityManagement District, which issued a letter to power producers two weeks ago warning that many will soonbump against their air pollution limits. "We asked them, if they're going to be above their caps, to come in andwork with us on compliance plans," Kelly said. "These plans would be developed through public hearings."What can be done will vary with every plant in the state, said V. John White, who sits on the Cal-ISO board anddirects the Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies in Sacramento. Air quality will not suffersignificantly, White said, "with some creative application of rules and the principle that you've got to pay for thepollution somehow." The root of the current conflict between air pollution and energy production lies withCalifornia's failure in the last 10 years to build any major power plants. Demand for electricity in the state'shumming economy has soared higher than anyone anticipated, while new supplies are not expected to reachthe grid for at least a year. Several times this summer, grid operators have had to frantically purchase electricityelsewhere in the West to save the state from outages that can endanger lives and cost high-tech companies asmuch as $30 million a day in lost production. The shortage of electricity compromises air quality. Whenbusinesses voluntarily disconnect from the grid at times of highest demand, they often turn on diesel generatorsto maintain computer and phone systems. Such generators spew toxic air contaminants, particulates and higherlevels of nitrogen oxides than most power plants. The tight supplies this summer also mean that California's old,inefficient power plants are running harder than ever and those built just for backup are running steadily. DukeEnergy's power plant in Oakland helped keep lights on in the city after a disastrous 1989 earthquake. Typically,the costly plant operated 30 to 50 hours a year; its air pollution permit allows no more than 870 hours annually.So far this year, said Duke spokesman Tom Williams, the plant has run more than 500 hours. "The turbinesdate to late 1970s," he said. "They're being called on more and more." North Carolina-based Duke purchased orleased several major power plants from utilities such as Pacific Gas &Electric Co. and San Diego Gas &Electricafter the Legislature deregulated the state's electricity market in 1996. One plant, in Chula Vista, generates17 March 2013 Page 331 of 483 ProQuestenough electricity for 700,000 homes in San Diego, where transmission problems leave the city especiallyvulnerable to power sags and surges. That plant is rapidly approaching its limit on nitrogen oxide pollutants,Williams said. "We're evaluating our options about how to address this problem." * SIZZLING STOCKS Shareprices of many electric utilities have proved to be hotter than the weather. C1 References Message No: ..ACCN:00073364 Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Power plants; Regulation; Power supply; Air pollution; Electric utilitiesLocation: CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2000Publication date: Aug 5, 2000Year: 2000Dateline: SACRAMENTOSection: Part A; PART- A; PART-; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421529760Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2000 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-06Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 150 of 213California and the West; State Plan Would Require Diesel Soot Traps; Pollution: Air board calls forordering the costly retrofitting of 1.25 million engines. A trucking group endorses the proposal.Author: Vogel, NancyPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 14 July 2000: 3.ProQuest document link17 March 2013 Page 332 of 483 ProQuestAbstract: The particle-trapping technology that is the key to the plan dates to the mid-1980s but is untested on alarge scale, said [Jerry Martin]. The traps get clogged and work poorly on engines burning diesel fuel rich in thesulfur that is a natural ingredient of crude oil. That's why another key component of the soot reduction plan is arequirement that refiners begin selling diesel fuel with roughly one-tenth the sulfur content as that now sold.Still, said [Gail Ruderman Feuer], clean-air advocates worry that the diesel soot reduction plan does not doenough to force engine manufacturers to drop diesel altogether in favor of cleaner fuels such as natural gas- -something the South Coast Air Quality Management District did last month when it banned the purchase ofdiesel-powered buses by transit operators in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties.Widespread installation of muffler-like soot traps, plus a new mandate for low-sulfur diesel fuel in California andstrict requirements for new engines, could shrink diesel particulate pollution in California by 85% over the nexttwo decades, according to air board scientists. The tiny, lung-irritating particles in diesel exhaust make life nearbusy freeways, truck stops and schools where buses idle potentially dangerous places, researchers say.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Calling the cancer risk from diesel soot too deadly for delay, state regulators Thursday released a firsteverplan to force owners of diesel-powered tractors, bulldozers, big rigs, school buses and other vehicles toinstall soot-catching equipment at costs of perhaps thousands of dollars per vehicle. Not content to wait for anew generation of cleaner-burning diesel engines, the state Air Resources Board wants to force the retrofittingof an estimated 1.25 million engines. Widespread installation of muffler-like soot traps, plus a new mandate forlow-sulfur diesel fuel in California and strict requirements for new engines, could shrink diesel particulatepollution in California by 85% over the next two decades, according to air board scientists. The tiny, lungirritatingparticles in diesel exhaust make life near busy freeways, truck stops and schools where buses idlepotentially dangerous places, researchers say. "Diesel engines are the most significant source of air toxiccontaminants in California," said Mike Kenny, executive officer of the Air Resources Board. The board isscheduled to consider adopting the three-pronged plan in September. It set the plan in motion in August 1998,when it declared diesel soot a toxic air contaminant. Workers exposed for long periods to diesel exhaust aremore likely to develop lung cancer, according to the air board, and even brief exposure can lead to coughingand bronchitis. If approved, the plan would be fully implemented by 2010, with the goal of making existing andnew diesel engines in California run 10 times cleaner than they do now. Regulators offered no overall estimateof the cost of their plan to the farmers, truckers, school districts, refiners and others who would have to carry itout. But they did figure that installing equipment to make existing vehicles cleaner would cost from $10 to $50per horsepower. That could mean $3,750 to $18,750 for the owner of a 375-horsepower long- haul truck. TheCalifornia Trucking Assn. on Thursday endorsed the board's draft plan, agreeing that California must cut dieselsoot pollution. Spokeswoman Stephanie Williams said the group intends to seek legislation that would impose a$25 to $50 fee on truck owners to create a board-administered fund to help small trucking company ownersoffset retrofitting costs. Cynthia Corey, who monitors the issue for the California Farm Bureau Federation, saidher members worry that retrofitting makes no economic sense on farm equipment that may be, for example, 30years old and used only two months a year. Farmers wonder too about how much time they'll have to meet newrequirements and whether the state will offer financial help. Such details will be worked out as the air boardcrafts actual regulations based on the broad plan released Thursday, said spokesman Jerry Martin. Theparticle-trapping technology that is the key to the plan dates to the mid-1980s but is untested on a large scale,said Martin. The traps get clogged and work poorly on engines burning diesel fuel rich in the sulfur that is anatural ingredient of crude oil. That's why another key component of the soot reduction plan is a requirementthat refiners begin selling diesel fuel with roughly one-tenth the sulfur content as that now sold. According toMartin, Arco has said it can produce enough low- sulfur fuel by 2002 to supply several thousand transit busesthat must begin using it under a rule recently passed by the air board. Other refiners expect to produce the low-17 March 2013 Page 333 of 483 ProQuestsulfur fuel soon, said Mike Wang, manager of operations and environment for the Western States PetroleumAssn., though it's not clear yet how much low-sulfur fuel might be required by California or when. The U.S.Environmental Protection Agency recently proposed a national requirement for low- sulfur diesel to take effect in2006. Gail Ruderman Feuer, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council in Los Angeles,praised the move toward massive retrofitting, an unusual step for an agency that tends to rely upon theevolution of cleaner-burning technology. "If we really want to do something about pollution levels," she said, "wehave to do something about vehicles now on the road." Still, said Feuer, clean-air advocates worry that thediesel soot reduction plan does not do enough to force engine manufacturers to drop diesel altogether in favorof cleaner fuels such as natural gas- -something the South Coast Air Quality Management District did lastmonth when it banned the purchase of diesel-powered buses by transit operators in Los Angeles, Orange,Riverside and San Bernardino counties. "The South Coast keeps pushing for alternative fuels," said Feuer, "andthe state air board needs to catch up." References Message No: ..ACCN: 00066182 Credit: TIMES STAFFWRITERSubject: Environmental protection; Retrofitting; Trucking industry; Diesel engines; Air pollutionLocation: CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2000Publication date: Jul 14, 2000Year: 2000Dateline: SACRAMENTOSection: Part A; PART- A; PART-; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421665837Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2000 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-06Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________17 March 2013 Page 334 of 483 ProQuestDocument 151 of 213THE CUTTING EDGE: FOCUS ON TECHNOLOGY; Auto Industry Teams With Clean- Air Groups toCut Sulfur in DieselAuthor: O'Dell, JohnPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 26 June 2000: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Under the EPA proposal, diesel refiners would have to begin providing low-sulfur fuel nationwide inmid-2006, and diesel engine manufacturers would have to provide engines equipped with high- efficiencyemissions systems beginning in 2007. Diesel engines are as much as 20% more fuel-efficient than gasolineengines. They are largely scorned in the U.S. as noisy, smelly and sooty, but they are widely used in passengervehicles in Europe and Asia, where low-sulfur diesel fuel predominates and where technological advances havemade the engines cleaner and quieter. In this country, the EPA seeks to cut emissions from diesel- burning bigrigs and buses by 95%. Like gasoline, diesel produces smog-causing nitrogen oxides; in addition, particulatesfrom diesel engines have been linked to lung disease.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: In an unlikely pairing of usually warring interests, automobile industry executives will be standingshoulder to shoulder with environmentalists in Los Angeles on Tuesday to argue for a federal rule that wouldslash the sulfur content of diesel fuel. They will join forces at a public hearing on the Environmental ProtectionAgency's proposed emissions rules for heavy-duty on-road vehicles--the long-haul trucks that move most of thecountry's goods and the buses that provide most public transit. Car makers, however, are entering the fraybecause they believe low-sulfur diesel is essential to their ability to continue producing low-emissions internalcombustion-engine passenger vehicles that can also achieve greater fuel economy. "Sulfur reduction is criticalto us being able to achieve tighter emission standards in cars" with gasoline or diesel engines, said Greg Dana,vice president for environmental affairs for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, a Washington trade groupthat represents 13 major car makers. Diesel engines are as much as 20% more fuel-efficient than gasolineengines. They are largely scorned in the U.S. as noisy, smelly and sooty, but they are widely used in passengervehicles in Europe and Asia, where low-sulfur diesel fuel predominates and where technological advances havemade the engines cleaner and quieter. In this country, the EPA seeks to cut emissions from diesel- burning bigrigs and buses by 95%. Like gasoline, diesel produces smog-causing nitrogen oxides; in addition, particulatesfrom diesel engines have been linked to lung disease. The problem is that the sulfur that occurs naturally incrude oil- -and thus in distillates such as gasoline and the fuel oil used in diesel engines--reduces theeffectiveness of engine emissions systems. The proposed federal rules would require fuel refiners to reducesulfur in diesel to a maximum of 15 parts per million, down from about 500 ppm today. Although some naturallylow-sulfur crude oil is available, in most cases the sulfur reduction is accomplished in the refining process.California already leads the nation in adopting stiff curbs on sulfur in gasoline but has only recently begun actingunilaterally to regulate diesel's sulfur content. The EPA estimates that reformulated diesel fuel would cost about4 cents more a gallon, while fuel refiners have said it would add up to 10 cents a gallon to the retail cost.Additionally, the agency says, the more efficient emissions systems needed to meet its proposed standardswould add about $1,500 to the price of a $150,000 diesel truck. In California, the state Air Resources Boardrecently adopted rules requiring use of low-sulfur diesel in public transit buses in some areas beginning in 2002,and several refiners, including BP Amoco, Chevron Corp. and Tosco Corp., have told state air-quality regulatorsthat they can provide the fuel by then. California refiners can more easily make the change to low- sulfur diesel,and can keep the price down, a BP Amoco spokesman said, because the companies have already installed and17 March 2013 Page 335 of 483 ProQuestpaid for much of the necessary equipment in order to produce the low-sulfur gasoline the state requires. Underthe EPA proposal, diesel refiners would have to begin providing low-sulfur fuel nationwide in mid-2006, anddiesel engine manufacturers would have to provide engines equipped with high- efficiency emissions systemsbeginning in 2007. Diesel engine makers support the new rules, while refiners, except those in California,generally oppose them. Environmental and community health groups and the nation's auto makers--on oppositesides of the aisle in the continuing debate over California's zero-emissions vehicle rules--are also pushing foradoption of the diesel regulations. The auto manufacturers and health groups such as the California Coalitionfor Clean Air, in fact, say they would like to see diesel's sulfur content cut even further, to about 5 ppm. "Itabsolutely has to be done if we are ever going to correctly address pollution from diesel sources, the dirtiest onthe road today," said Todd Campbell, policy director for the clean-air coalition. "And the means to handlepollution from heavy-duty trucks has to come from a national rule because of interstate trucking. It is impossibleto expect the California Air Resources Board to do it all internally." About 25% of the diesel truck emissions inCalifornia come from trucks that travel in from other states, according to the air board. But the national refinersgroup claims that purifying diesel to the extent demanded by the EPA would be prohibitively expensive andwould reduce diesel refining output by as much as 30% because some high-sulfur crude oil cannot be cleanedsufficiently to meet the standard. "We believe that refining diesel's sulfur content to 50 ppm will meet the EPA'starget for particulate matter reduction by 2007, and we believe we can meet 70% to 80% of the nitrates ofoxygen limits that EPA has set," said Bob Slaughter, general counsel for the National Petrochemical &RefinersAssn. Increasing demands for better fuel economy are what bring the auto industry into the debate. Without lowsulfurfuel, the auto makers argue, diesel engines for cars and light trucks--pickups, minivans and sport-utilityvehicles--can't meet the federal and California passenger vehicle emissions standards that would take effectbeginning with 2004 model-year vehicles. The EPA's diesel rules "are very similar to what California did withgasoline sulfur," said Dana, the auto alliance environmental specialist. "And as in the gasoline sulfur issue, weare closely aligned with environmental groups and organizations like the [Washington-based] State andTerritorial Air Pollution Program Administrators to push for EPA adoption of the clean diesel rules." Campbell,the clean-air coalition's policy director, called the pairing of environmental and auto industry interests "a prettypowerful coalition." The EPA plans to complete the standards by the end of the year after a series of publichearings around the country, including Tuesday's session in Los Angeles. The hearing is to be held from 10a.m. to 6:30 p.m. at the Hyatt Regency Hotel, 711 S. Hope St. Information about the EPA proposal is availableon the agency's Web site at . References Message No: ..ACCN: 00060421Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Automobile industry; Environmentalists; Sulfur; Air pollution; Environmental cleanup; Diesel fuelsLocation: Los Angeles CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; SIC: 9500; DUNS: 05-794-4910; Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; SIC: 9500; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2000Publication date: Jun 26, 2000Year: 2000Section: Business; PART- C; PART-; Financial Desk17 March 2013 Page 336 of 483 ProQuestPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421496106Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2000 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-06Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 152 of 213Fleets to Stop Buying Diesel Buses, Trash Trucks; Pollution: Board order affects MTA and otheragencies. Panel to reconsider if engine emissions are slashed.Author: Rabin, Jeffrey LPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 17 June 2000: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Representatives of engine and oil companies were quick to argue that the latest diesel engines can bemade far cleaner by using low- sulfur fuel and particulate traps similar to catalytic converters on cars. The U.S.Environmental Protection Agency recently proposed slashing the sulfur content in diesel fuel from as much as500 parts per million to 15 ppm. The AQMD board will consider its own low- sulfur diesel regulation thissummer. In response to a lobbying blitz from an army of diesel advocates, the panel accepted an amendment toreconsider the ban if the California Air Resources Board should certify that diesel engines that burn ultra-lowsulfurfuel and have particulate traps to reduce soot are as environmentally clean as natural gas vehicles. TheAQMD board's landmark action effectively closes the door to the purchase of more diesel buses by transitagencies that operate more than 100 buses. Smaller operators with 15 to 99 buses were given extra time--untilJuly 1 of next year--before being subject to the requirement to buy alternative fuel vehicles such as natural gasvehicles. The lone exception is for longer articulated buses, which can still be diesel powered.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: In an unprecedented crackdown on pollution from diesel engines, the South Coast Air QualityManagement District board unanimously adopted sweeping new rules Friday that would force use of cleanerburningalternative fuels in transit bus and trash truck fleets. The regulations, approved after a contentioushearing, immediately ban the purchase of diesel-powered buses by the Metropolitan Transportation Authorityand other large transit operators in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties. But inresponse to a lobbying blitz from an army of diesel advocates, the panel accepted an amendment to reconsiderthe ban if the California Air Resources Board should certify that diesel engines that burn ultra-low-sulfur fuel and17 March 2013 Page 337 of 483 ProQuesthave particulate traps to reduce soot are as environmentally clean as natural gas vehicles. "Today's action isgoing to accelerate competition between alternative fuels and diesel and both fuel types will ultimately be thewinner," said the AQMD board's executive officer, Barry Wallerstein. "The public is the biggest winner of allbecause of cleaner air, lower cost due to competition and better technology." The board's action, which alsoincluded adoption of a rule ordering government agencies to purchase low-emission vehicles for their fleets,came after more than three hours of testimony pitting diesel engine manufacturers and oil companyrepresentatives against the natural gas industry, environmentalists and community organizations.Environmentalists praised the board's decision. "This is a major step forward to protect our communities fromthe hazard of diesel exhaust," said Gail Ruderman Feuer, senior attorney with the Natural Resources DefenseCouncil. "If diesel can come clean, then it deserves a shot. But it has a long way to go before they reduce thecancer risk." The state Air Resources Board in 1998 declared that diesel soot is a toxic air pollutant. Amidmounting evidence of the health risks, regulatory officials in Los Angeles, Sacramento and Washington haveproposed a variety of steps to reduce diesel emissions. The AQMD board's landmark action effectively closesthe door to the purchase of more diesel buses by transit agencies that operate more than 100 buses. Smalleroperators with 15 to 99 buses were given extra time--until July 1 of next year--before being subject to therequirement to buy alternative fuel vehicles such as natural gas vehicles. The lone exception is for longerarticulated buses, which can still be diesel powered. The air quality district also took aim at trash trucks byrequiring that public and private refuse haulers that operate more than 50 garbage trucks buy alternative fuelvehicles when they add or replace vehicles in their fleets. The larger operators were given until July 1, 2001, tocomply, while smaller operators were given two years to meet the requirement. Additional time was provided forlarger trucks that haul trash from transfer stations to landfills. A third rule would require that new cars and lightand medium duty trucks added to government fleets of 15 or more vehicles meet new state low-emissionstandards. Many new gasoline-powered vehicles, including the 2000 Toyota Camry and Ford Crown Victoria,would qualify. Police cars and other emergency vehicles would be exempt. The board also approved a motionby Los Angeles City Councilman Hal Bernson to encourage the state to examine the retrofitting of all existingdiesel vehicles--not just buses and trash trucks--for use of low-sulfur fuel and particulate traps. Robert Sulnick,executive director of a lobbying group that includes business interests, oil companies and some school districtsand transit operators, pushed hard for the amendment to reconsider the diesel ban if newer diesel engines arecertified as clean as alternative fuels. "It's patently confusing; on the one hand they have said our position onclean diesel is a really good thing for retrofits. Why isn't it good enough for new vehicles?" he asked. "It's not anegalitarian approach to policymaking. It's a biased approach." The new rules are the first in a series ofproposals by the AQMD board to tighten controls on diesel emissions, which have been found to be responsiblefor 70% of the region's airborne toxic contaminants. Representatives of community and public health groupsfrom South- Central to East Los Angeles and the Inland Empire called on the board to help reduce the amountof diesel exhaust they believe contributes to health problems in their neighborhoods. Dr. Scott Weissman, a LosAngeles pediatrician, warned that diesel exhaust is leading to a sharp increase in the number of asthma cases,particularly in children. "Air cannot move normally in and out of the lungs." He compared the effect to "trying tosuck air through a straw." Granada Hills resident Mary Edwards said the issue is simple. "The bottom line ishealth and children." And Neil Silver, president of the Amalgamated Transit Union local that representsmechanics at the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, said experience shows that compressed natural gasbuses are "far cleaner than diesel." To transit workers, cleaner burning alternative fuels are "literally a matter oflife and breath," he said. Representatives of engine and oil companies were quick to argue that the latest dieselengines can be made far cleaner by using low- sulfur fuel and particulate traps similar to catalytic converters oncars. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently proposed slashing the sulfur content in diesel fuelfrom as much as 500 parts per million to 15 ppm. The AQMD board will consider its own low- sulfur dieselregulation this summer. Jed Mendel, general counsel for the Engine Manufacturers Assn., questioned the17 March 2013 Page 338 of 483 ProQuestboard's legal right to regulate against diesel. He said the association believes that regulations on mobilesources of pollution are limited to state and federal authorities. Mendel said the board should allow fleetoperators the "freedom of technology choice" in selecting vehicle and fuel types. He added that having local airquality districts make their own rules on government fleets would result in a "patchwork quilt" of regulations.Representatives of oil companies, BP/Amoco and Tosco, also testified that dramatic reductions in dieselemissions are possible. To have the board reopen the issue, diesel proponents must prove to the state that thenewer engines, low-sulfur fuel and particulate traps can reduce emissions of smog-causing nitrogen oxides,particulate matter and toxics to levels comparable with those of natural gas vehicles. The amendment approvedFriday would require the board to act within 90 days of any state certification. References Message No: ..ACCN:00057344 Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Diesel fuels; Environmental impact; Air pollution; Trucks; Regulation; Diesel engines; PublictransportationLocation: Southern CaliforniaCompany / organization: Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA; SIC:9500; DUNS: 01-598-6159Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2000Publication date: Jun 17, 2000Year: 2000Section: Metro; PART- B; PART-; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421507250Document URL:: (Copyright (c) 2000 Los Angeles Times)Last updated: 2011-09-06Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 153 of 21317 March 2013 Page 339 of 483 ProQuestCalifornia and the West; Central Valley Looking for Ways to Fight Air Pollution; Environment: Officialsbegin a $44.5-million search for solutions to smog that grips a vast area. Seven of the nation's 20dirtiest spots are in the region.Author: Bailey, EricPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 06 June 2000: A.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Air pollution has been a problem in the Central Valley for decades. In recent years, pollution readingshave improved a bit, but not enough to satisfy federal regulators. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issoon expected to downgrade the region's air quality rating from serious to severe. The stew mixes in the valley'swalled-in topography, with the Sierra Nevada, the Coastal Range and the Tehachapi Mountains forming a sortof gigantic bathtub. Generally docile winds and blistering heat combine to create the perfect oven for ozoneduring summer months. In the winter, the region records soaring levels of particulates--the microscopic sootfrom fires, diesel engines and other pollution sources. Among the questions scientists want to answer is howpollution swirls around the valley and where, exactly, it comes from. Valley residents have long blamed pollutionproblems in part on smog blown in from the Bay Area, much as Los Angeles gets fingered for Inland Empire airproblems.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: With stubborn air pollution gripping the rural reaches of California's Central Valley, authoritieslaunched a $44.5-million initiative Monday to find ways to defeat smog in the state's agricultural heartland.Even as Los Angeles and other pollution-plagued spots have made headway in recent years, the Central Valleyhas lagged behind in efforts to improve air quality. A coalition of government agencies and businesses hopesthat two ambitious studies of the valley's nagging smog problems will help chart a course to dramaticallyimprove air quality--and avoid federal sanctions if health standards aren't met by 2005. "There's still a lot weneed to find out before we can put in effective pollution controls," said Josette Merced Bello, spokeswoman forthe San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. "We'll be getting down to the gnat's eyebrows with this."To collect air samples over the coming months, scientists will deploy a pair of planes and roll out a 30-foot,remote-controlled blimp during foul weather. They'll also erect a 328-foot tower in a corner of Kings County toscoop up samples from the sky. Nearly half the cost of the studies, about $21 million, will be borne by thefederal government. The state will pay $10 million and local governments will contribute $9 million. Privateindustry will pick up the rest of the cost. Among the questions scientists want to answer is how pollution swirlsaround the valley and where, exactly, it comes from. Valley residents have long blamed pollution problems inpart on smog blown in from the Bay Area, much as Los Angeles gets fingered for Inland Empire air problems.Though the Southland remains among the smoggiest areas in the country, the Central Valley is catching up. Ofthe nation's 20 most polluted spots, seven are in the Central Valley, including Bakersfield, Fresno, Merced andSacramento. Authorities say the new air quality studies are needed because the sort of wide-ranging approachadopted in Southern California-- cleaning up everything from gasoline to lawn mowers--hasn't worked as well inCentral California. "As air districts go, we're finding one size doesn't fit all," said Cathy Reheis of the WesternState Petroleum Assn., which is contributing $700,000 toward the study. "If you don't have good science, youend up controlling everything everywhere, and that doesn't make good sense." Business leaders like Reheishave jumped aboard the Central California Air Quality Coalition, which is sponsoring the studies, out of abottom-line desire to ensure that regulators focus on only the worst polluters, avoiding blanket regulations thatcould affect all industries. Environmental groups also support the effort. "We're pleased there's going to be anin-depth study," said Kevin Finney of the Coalition for Clean Air. "We know it's a very serious problem." Air17 March 2013 Page 340 of 483 ProQuestpollution has been a problem in the Central Valley for decades. In recent years, pollution readings haveimproved a bit, but not enough to satisfy federal regulators. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is soonexpected to downgrade the region's air quality rating from serious to severe. Suburbs are spreading fastthroughout the Central Valley, an area long dominated by agribusiness. The region has 3.2 million cars pumpingout pollutants. Add to that a parade of diesel trucks and farm equipment, plus smoke from agricultural burning,power plants, oil production and other industries. The stew mixes in the valley's walled-in topography, with theSierra Nevada, the Coastal Range and the Tehachapi Mountains forming a sort of gigantic bathtub. Generallydocile winds and blistering heat combine to create the perfect oven for ozone during summer months. In thewinter, the region records soaring levels of particulates--the microscopic soot from fires, diesel engines andother pollution sources. Those particles can cause respiratory problems such as bronchitis and also have beenrecently linked by researchers to heart attacks in some people with existing cardiac problems. The valley'sconditions are particularly dangerous for children, the elderly and adults who exercise outside. The federalgovernment threatens to cut highway construction money in the valley, potentially costing the fast-growingregion billions of dollars, if pollution levels do not fall below health standards within five years. "We're going tohave to get very creative in the valley," Reheis said. "We're such a huge area, surrounded by mountains, withexploding population, businesses that want to grow. You put all that together and it is going to be a challenge."References Message No: ..ACCN: 00053551 Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Rural areas; Environmental policy; Government spending; Studies; Air pollution; EnvironmentalcleanupLocation: Central Valley, CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2000Publication date: Jun 6, 2000Year: 2000Dateline: SACRAMENTOSection: Part A; PART- A; PART-; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421557893Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 2000 allRights reserved)17 March 2013 Page 341 of 483 ProQuestLast updated: 2011-09-06Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 154 of 213Studies Link Heart Attacks to Moderate Air Pollution; Health: Particles apparently can alter rhythms inweak or diseased hearts, even at levels common in L.A., other cities.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 05 June 2000: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Robert McWherter is about as vulnerable to particle pollution as anyone can get. He's 80, suffers fromheart disease and chronic bronchitis, and lives in Indio, a desert town with high levels of microscopic particlesfrom dust whipped up by spring winds. Like many retirees, McWherter moved to the Coachella Valley to protecthis health, unaware that particulates there may be harming his heart. Some environmental health researchersand doctors say cardiologists should advise patients such as McWherter to avoid exertion on days with highparticulate counts. In the Coachella Valley, particulate pollution peaks in the spring. In the Los Angeles Basin, itpeaks in the fall and winter, when many residents mistakenly believe the sky is clean because traditional smogstrikes most heavily in the summer. Caption: PHOTO: Researcher Cheryl Terrell monitors Evelyn Gould asGould is exposed to air pollution in a Downey lab.; PHOTOGRAPHER: LUIS SINCO / Los Angeles Times;PHOTO: As two recorders sit on his fireplace, Robert McWherter, 80, of Indio wears a heart monitor.;PHOTOGRAPHER: GINA FERAZZI / Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC: Particle Pollution, LYNN MEERSMAN /Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC: Pollution and the Heart, LESLIE CARLSON / Los Angeles TimesLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Even moderate air pollution routinely found in many U.S. cities may trigger sudden deaths by changingheart rhythms in people with existing cardiac problems, according to extensive new scientific research. Thefinding, backed by more than a dozen studies on humans and animals, suggests that heart attacks, not lungdisease, may be the most serious medical threat posed by air pollution. The culprits appear to be tiny pieces ofsoot called particulates. Scientists caution that the link between heart problems and air pollution remains astrong likelihood--not a certainty. More research is underway. But the emerging evidence could have particularimportance for the Los Angeles region, where residents breathe some of the worst concentrations of ultra-fineparticulates in the nation, largely because of diesel trucks. Severe particulate pollution also exists in many otherurban and desert areas, including the Coachella Valley, Philadelphia, Chicago, New York City, Salt Lake Cityand Phoenix, which in 1998 surpassed Riverside for the nation's highest particulate levels. Research continuesto show that air pollution can cause serious lung problems. But as an overall threat to public health, the dangerto the heart appears to be more weighty because of the sheer numbers of people with heart disease.Cardiovascular disease is the No. 1 killer in the United States, responsible for nearly half of all deaths.Changes in heart rhythm that occur after breathing particle pollution are subtle on an electrocardiogram, and ahealthy person is unaffected. But for someone with a compromised or diseased heart-- especially an elderlyperson--the impact could have deadly consequences, researchers say. "When particulate pollution increases,the heart rate seems to go up a little bit and the variability in the heart rate seems to go down. Those are thingsclassically seen [in people] with heart failure," said Dr. Timothy Denton, a cardiologist at Cedars-Sinai MedicalCenter in Los Angeles. Experts have estimated that particulate pollution may cause 1% of heart diseasefatalities in the United States. That fraction is small but would amount to 10,000 deaths a year. In Los Angeles17 March 2013 Page 342 of 483 ProQuestCounty, on average, 77 residents die from cardiovascular disease each day. "If you believe the calculations,particulate-related death is a serious public health problem--more serious than any other pollutant like ozone orsulfur dioxide or carbon monoxide," said Dr. Henry Gong, a USC medical professor who is a leading expert onthe health effects of air pollution. Epidemiologists in about 70 cities around the world consistently have foundthat more people die and are hospitalized during periods when particulate pollution rises even a moderateamount. Rarely does such a clear pattern emerge in epidemiology, and most experts are now convinced that itis not a coincidence. "For air pollution to have such a substantial impact on public health, and have it show upso consistently, is remarkable," said Daniel Costa, chief of the Environmental Protection Agency's pulmonarytoxicology branch. The sudden-death phenomenon has been reported for nearly a decade. Only within the lastyear have scientists begun to figure out why. Tiny, ubiquitous particles of soot--from diesel trucks, cars,industrial plants and perhaps even windblown dust--seem to alter the normal pulsing of the heart, the emergingresearch shows. At pollution levels commonly found in U.S. cities, inhaling particles appears to disrupt thebody's ability to regulate the pumping of blood. As particulate counts rise on any given day, a vital indicatorcalled heart rate variability decreases in some people, disturbing the beat-to-beat variations that are designed tomeet the demands of activities ranging from sleep to exercise. The threat seems particularly acute for elderlypeople who have arrhythmia--a life-threatening condition of skipped or premature beats--or the combination of aweak heart and lung disease such as asthma. One of the most frightening aspects of heart rhythm irregularitiesis that they can kill quickly, without warning. "Studies suggest that people are dying relatively rapidly after yousee an increase in particles. Sometimes it's within 24 hours," said Robert Devlin, chief of human studies at theclinical research branch of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In the past year, about a dozen majorscientific studies have turned up heart pattern changes in animals exposed in laboratories and in elderly peopletested in nursing homes. Several more studies are about to be published. Skepticism Turns to SuspicionAccording to one groundbreaking study of 100 patients in Boston, conducted by the Harvard School of PublicHealth, when particle pollution increased, elderly people with pacemakers suffered more arrhythmia. In anotherstudy, 26 seniors at a Baltimore nursing home wore heart monitors for three weeks. Their heart rate variabilitydecreased on and around days when particulate levels were higher, according to a study by the University ofNorth Carolina and the EPA. "I started out skeptical, but I'm starting to think there's something really there," saidBrigham Young University epidemiologist Arden Pope, who studied elderly patients in Provo, Utah. "We havestrongly suggestive evidence now that there's an impact on the heart." Robert McWherter is about as vulnerableto particle pollution as anyone can get. He's 80, suffers from heart disease and chronic bronchitis, and lives inIndio, a desert town with high levels of microscopic particles from dust whipped up by spring winds. Like manyretirees, McWherter moved to the Coachella Valley to protect his health, unaware that particulates there may beharming his heart. "My heart muscle is pretty well shot," said McWherter, who has undergone both a quadrupleand a triple bypass but stays in shape by walking outdoors and lifting weights in a gym. McWherter is one of 23cardiac patients in the Coachella Valley who are wearing heart monitors one day a week for three months. Theyare volunteers in a new state study testing whether elderly people in the desert are endangered on high-particledays. In March, during the worst of the windy season, McWherter's heart monitor detected skipped beats. Noone knows whether the particles were to blame, but taking part in the experiment probably saved his lifebecause the abnormalities were found. McWherter wound up being fitted for a pacemaker. Some environmentalhealth researchers and doctors say cardiologists should advise patients such as McWherter to avoid exertion ondays with high particulate counts. In the Coachella Valley, particulate pollution peaks in the spring. In the LosAngeles Basin, it peaks in the fall and winter, when many residents mistakenly believe the sky is clean becausetraditional smog strikes most heavily in the summer. But Denton of Cedars-Sinai, one of the few cardiologists tostudy the link between heart rhythm and particulates, said the findings are too preliminary to base medicalrecommendations on them. "Based upon the data we have, there's no need [at this time] for us to change apatient's behavior or treatment," said Denton, who is a consulting cardiologist for the state's Coachella Valley17 March 2013 Page 343 of 483 ProQuesttest. "Maybe in a year or so it could [warrant doctors' warnings], if we get better data." In much of the researchon the heart rhythm theory, animals have served as scientific surrogates. Rats with simulated heart diseasedied from arrhythmia when exposed to single doses of highly concentrated smokestack particles in EPA tests.The rats started out with normal heartbeats, but within half an hour their hearts went haywire, skipping beatsand contracting prematurely. Fashioning Tests for Human Volunteers The rats were exposed to pollution levelshundreds of times higher than what any person would encounter. But in another experiment, dogs withsimulated coronary artery disease showed "very significant changes in EKGs" after breathing elevated levels ofparticulates no higher than those found in many U.S. cities, said Daniel Greenbaum, director of the HealthEffects Institute, a Massachusetts research group that funded the study at Harvard. Studies of rats and dogs,however, have limited value because their hearts differ from human hearts. As a result, scientists are nowfashioning creative experiments using human volunteers. An as yet unpublished EPA study offers some of themost compelling evidence so far that particles can affect heart rhythm. Elderly volunteers were tested in specialpollution chambers using air collected in North Carolina. Even when they were exposed to a dose found inmany urban areas, their heart rate variability was worse than when they were exposed to clean air. Youngervolunteers showed no heart changes, even at the highest doses. Although the changes detected in beatvariability "were not huge," some persisted for at least a day after exposure and they are "very significant" forhuman health because low heart rate variability often occurs in people who are about to suffer heart attacks,said Devlin, who directed the study. A similar study is underway at Rancho Los Amigos Medical Center inDowney, where elderly volunteers are being exposed both to clean air and to air with 200 micrograms of ultrafineparticles per cubic meter--the Los Angeles Basin's "worst-case scenario." Experiments like this are theclosest that science comes to proving a cause and effect between pollution and heart effects. Researchers arejust now trying to understand how particles could affect the heart. The most popular theory is that when particlesenter the lungs, some part of the nervous system reflexively sends an impulse to the nerve center in the heartthat controls contractions. This reflex raises the pulse rate and lowers the variability of the heart rate.Examining Particle Size, Content Also, inhaled particles cause lung inflammation, which can release agents intothe blood that are carried into the heart. Blood also seems to thicken and clot differently upon exposure,according to some studies. Particulates may be dangerous because of fragments of metals such as iron that arecontained in soot. But some researchers believe it is the size of the particles, not the content, that causes theharm, and that microscopic road dust could be just as hazardous as truck exhaust. Air pollution regulators saythey need the answers to help them decide how to target efforts to clean up particulate pollution. Billions ofdollars from corporate and public interests--from utilities to the trucking industry--are at stake. To public healthofficials, the new findings are disturbing because they suggest that moderate, everyday concentrations of apollutant can be lethal. But epidemiologist Pope says if the link between air particles and heart attacks isproved, "it's incredibly good news." "We already know that about half of us die of cardiopulmonary disease, andif this is true about particulates, we have found a preventable cause," he said. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX /INFOGRAPHIC) Pollution and the Heart A regular heartbeat is vital because it determines the amount of bloodthat surges into the arteries. If the pattern is erratic or the beat is too slow or fast, it could be life-threatening.Microscopic solids in the air, called particulates, seem to interfere with the body's ability to control its heart rateand rhythm. * * Nerves help keep the heart beating in a regular, rhythmic pattern. * * Electrical impulses shootout from a node in the upper section of the heart. This stimulates a heartbeat--contraction of thick muscularwalls--that forces blood out of the heart. * * According to one theory, when particles are inhaled, it stimulates areflex response in the autonomic nervous system that alters the heart rate and lowers heart rate variability --theheart's ability to respond to exercise or stress. Such changes are often associated with fatal heart attacks inpeople with cardiac disorders. * * The inhaled particles also provoke immune cells and cause inflammation inthe lungs and heart that might exacerbate heartbeat disturbances. * Source: U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency/Experimental Toxicology Division (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Particle Pollution17 March 2013 Page 344 of 483 ProQuestFine particulates have fouled the Los Angeles Basin's air for decades, especially in the Riverside area. Here arepeak concentrations per year for 1990-98, measured in micrograms of particles per cubic meter of air. * *What's in Particulates * Nitrate: Mostly from cars and diesel trucks * Organic carbon: From auto and truckexhaust and from petroleum- based solvents and paints * Elemental carbon: Mostly from diesel engines *Ammonium: From animal waste * Sulfate: From factories and motor vehicles * Other: Mostly dust, soil and salt* RIVERSIDE Nitrate: 41% Organic carbon: 18% Ammonium: 17% Sulfate: 9% Elemental carbon: 8% Other:7% * Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District References Message No: ..ACCN: 00053310Illustration Caption: PHOTO: Researcher Cheryl Terrell monitors Evelyn Gould as Gould is exposed to airpollution in a Downey lab.; PHOTOGRAPHER: LUIS SINCO / Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: As two recorders siton his fireplace, Robert McWherter, 80, of Indio wears a heart monitor.; PHOTOGRAPHER: GINA FERAZZI /Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC: Particle Pollution, LYNN MEERSMAN / Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC:Pollution and the Heart, LESLIE CARLSON / Los Angeles Times Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Cardiovascular disease; Environmental impact; Medical research; Heart attacks; Air pollutionLocation: Los Angeles CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2000Publication date: Jun 5, 2000Year: 2000Section: Part A; PART- A; PART-; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421522967Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 2000 allRights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-06Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 155 of 21317 March 2013 Page 345 of 483 ProQuestCalifornia and the West; Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Clinton's Anti-Smog Plan; Ecology: Paneldecides to hear case next year on proposal to force a 10% reduction in air pollution.Author: Savage, David G; Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 23 May 2000: A.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The fate of the [President] Clinton administration's plan to force a 10% reduction in air pollutionnationwide will be decided next year by the Supreme Court. The anti-smog rules, if put into effect, would makebreathing easier for millions and spare thousands from asthma and respiratory ailments, the administrationsays. Last year, a U.S. appeals court in Washington sided with lawyers for business interests and said theEnvironmental Protection Agency had failed to justify lowering acceptable levels of ozone and particles in the airwith scientific evidence.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The fate of the Clinton administration's plan to force a 10% reduction in air pollution nationwide will bedecided next year by the Supreme Court. The anti-smog rules, if put into effect, would make breathing easier formillions and spare thousands from asthma and respiratory ailments, the administration says. But the U.S.Chamber of Commerce says it would cost American business at least $46 billion a year to comply with thestandards. Last year, a U.S. appeals court in Washington sided with lawyers for business interests and said theEnvironmental Protection Agency had failed to justify lowering acceptable levels of ozone and particles in the airwith scientific evidence. Advocates on both sides have called the dispute over air quality standards the biggestenvironmental case in years. And few were surprised by the high court's announcement that it will hear theadministration's appeal. Arguments will be heard in the fall and a final ruling in the case (Browner vs. theAmerican Trucking Assn., 99-1257) will not come until after President Clinton has left office in January. TheEPA set the new pollution limits for smog and soot after a years-long review, which determined that existingstandards do not protect public health. Fine particles have been linked to cancer, asthma attacks and deathsfrom lung and heart ailments. Ozone irritates the lungs and decreases breathing power. The new standardswould be especially difficult to achieve in the Los Angeles region, which usually records the nation's highestlevels of particulates as well as ozone. California has struggled to clean its air for half a century but, if the newstandards go into effect, the state will have to draft sweeping new rules that go much further. The new rule onparticulates would focus attention on trucks and other diesel engines, the primary source for soot-like particles.Despite California's air pollution problem, the strongest opposition to the new rules has come from the Midwest,where old power plants still burn coal and belch smoke. Ohio, Michigan and West Virginia have joined thebusiness groups in challenging the new rules. Eastern states, where the polluted air drifts in from the Midwest,have joined the Clinton administration and the American Lung Assn. in defending the rules. "This is the first stepin getting these health-protective air quality standards back on track," said Dave Hawkins, director of air andenergy programs for the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental advocacy group. For the highcourt, the case raises the question of whether the judges should second-guess regulatory decisions. In the1980s, the justices said agencies should have considerable leeway to regulate, so long as the rules are in linewith the law passed in Congress. In this case, however, the U.S. appeals court said Congress gave away toomuch of its lawmaking power in the Clean Air Act. The court also took up a second environmental case, sayingit will consider limiting federal authority to protect wetlands. At issue is whether the Clean Water Act coversponds, lakes and wetlands that are not navigable. * Savage reported from Washington, Cone from Los Angeles.References Message No: ..ACCN: 00048702 Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSSubject: Air pollution; Environmental policy; Negotiations; Smog; Environmental cleanup17 March 2013 Page 346 of 483 ProQuestPeople: Clinton, BillCompany / organization: Name: Supreme Court-US; NAICS: 922110Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2000Publication date: May 23, 2000Year: 2000Dateline: WASHINGTONSection: Part A; PART- A; PART-; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421643702Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 2000 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-06Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 156 of 213Diesel Buses: a Step BackwardPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 21 May 2000: M.4.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The MTA staff's arguments for so-called "clean diesel" buses are as follows: Diesels are cheaper thancompressed natural gas (CNG) buses; the region can't afford to be dependent on buses that operate on onlyone kind of fuel; the new diesel engines and fuels and particulate traps will bring emissions down to near CNGlevels (hotly disputed); the diesels will run longer and more reliably; CNG buses might pose an explosiondanger.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: With its proposal to purchase hundreds of new diesel buses, the Metropolitan Transportation Authorityis trying to turn its back on seven years of clean-air progress. The MTA staff's arguments for so-called "clean17 March 2013 Page 347 of 483 ProQuestdiesel" buses are as follows: Diesels are cheaper than compressed natural gas (CNG) buses; the region can'tafford to be dependent on buses that operate on only one kind of fuel; the new diesel engines and fuels andparticulate traps will bring emissions down to near CNG levels (hotly disputed); the diesels will run longer andmore reliably; CNG buses might pose an explosion danger. The expense argument is shot down immediately bythe fact that Gov. Gray Davis' proposed budget is calling for $150 million for Los Angeles to buy 385 CNGbuses. The danger of "putting all of your fuel eggs in one basket" as one MTA spokesman put it, seems weak atbest; no one said that when all the buses were diesel-fueled. The growing movement against diesel holds that itwill never run as cleanly as CNG. The MTA is making claims about the relative unreliability of CNG buses at atime when it is crowing about improved reliability and range and on-time performance for all of its buses. Andthe idea that we should be concerned about the safety of CNG is spurious, given the rock-steady safety recordof CNG buses nationwide. Moreover, the pressure to reduce the nation's reliance on diesel has never beenstronger. A legal settlement, which still requires a judge's approval, is expected to end years of litigation broughtby local environmentalists against truckers and the Ralphs, Safeway/Vons and Albertsons/Lucky Stores grocerychains, which have agreed to purchase alternative-fuel trucks and warn communities near their distributioncenters of the cancer threat from the exhaust from their trucks. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agencyrolled out draft national standards that would force new heavy-duty trucks and buses to be virtually smoke-freebeginning in 2007. The proposed 97% cutback in the sulfur content of diesel fuel is necessary. And this summerthe South Coast Air Quality Management District will consider draft rules requiring all government entities in theLos Angeles Basin to purchase only alternative-fuel buses and trash trucks. Why now would the MTA even thinkof cutting across the new grain? The agency at its meeting this week should reject the attempt to put morediesel buses on the region's still smoggy streets. References Message No: ..ACCN: 00047963Subject: Buses; Diesel engines; Air pollution; Editorials -- Metropolitan Transit Authority-Los Angeles County CACompany / organization: Name: Metropolitan Transit Authority-Los Angeles County CA; NAICS: 485111,926120Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: M.4Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2000Publication date: May 21, 2000Year: 2000Section: Opinion; PART- M; Editorial Writers DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: EditorialProQuest document ID: 42167741017 March 2013 Page 348 of 483 ProQuestDocument URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 2000 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-06Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 157 of 213California and the West; EPA Calls for Trucks, Buses to Be Smoke- Free by 2007; Energy: Newstandards for cleaner diesel fuel unveiled by Clinton administration would dramatically reduceemissions. Oil companies oppose plan.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 18 May 2000: A.3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: New heavy-duty trucks and buses would be virtually smoke-free by 2007 under sweeping nationalstandards for cleaner diesel fuel and engines unveiled Wednesday by the [President] Clinton administration.EPA Administrator Carol Browner said in Washington that once the plan takes effect, buses and trucks wouldbe "cleaner than the natural gas buses on the road today." Big rigs and buses have long been some of theleast-controlled sources of air pollution in the United States, largely because of technological difficulties incleaning up their exhaust. An old diesel big rig engine can spew almost 8 tons of pollution per year or 240 tonsin its lifetime. Major engineering advances, however, have allowed manufacturers to build cleaner diesels thatcan meet the new standards.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: New heavy-duty trucks and buses would be virtually smoke-free by 2007 under sweeping nationalstandards for cleaner diesel fuel and engines unveiled Wednesday by the Clinton administration. The newpollution limits would dramatically reduce the truck and bus emissions that are major sources of California's twoworst air pollutants--smog and particle soot. The highlight of the proposal by the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency--and its most controversial and costly aspect--is a 97% cutback in the sulfur content of diesel fuel. Oilcompanies are vehemently opposed, with their trade group warning Wednesday that the requirement could leadto severe fuel costs and shortages. The new fuel standard has "potential to seriously affect supplies, adverselyaffect U.S. consumers and harm the U.S. economy," said Red Caveney, president of the American PetroleumInstitute. However, diesel engine manufacturers, California trucking companies and environmentalists praisedthe standards as reasonable and necessary to protect people from pollutants that threaten their health. "Thisproposal is truly historic," said Frank O'Donnell, executive director of the environmental group Clean Air Trust."It will finally mean the end of the big, horrible, smoke-belching truck as we know it." EPA Administrator CarolBrowner said in Washington that once the plan takes effect, buses and trucks would be "cleaner than thenatural gas buses on the road today." The proposed regulation is expected to become final this fall, beforePresident Clinton leaves office, Browner said. The EPA, which does not need congressional approval to enactthe plan, will hold five hearings for public comment next month, including one in Los Angeles on June 27.California usually sets the course for cleaning up vehicle emissions, but with heavy-duty trucks, a nationalregulation is considered vital because they spend much of their time traveling between states. About 25% oftruck emissions on California roads come from vehicles registered out of state. Big rigs and buses have long17 March 2013 Page 349 of 483 ProQuestbeen some of the least-controlled sources of air pollution in the United States, largely because of technologicaldifficulties in cleaning up their exhaust. An old diesel big rig engine can spew almost 8 tons of pollution per yearor 240 tons in its lifetime. Major engineering advances, however, have allowed manufacturers to build cleanerdiesels that can meet the new standards. Manufacturers of truck and bus engines, including Cummins, DetroitDiesel and International Truck and Engine Corp., have faced intense pressure to clean up diesel engines toavoid regulations that would require alternative technologies such as natural gas. "We are in support of thestandards. It's the right thing to do," said Glenn Keller, executive director of the Engine Manufacturers Assn."We think this clean diesel technology is going to be the panacea for the future in getting to the lower [pollution]levels we need." The focus on diesel is the second prong of the Clinton administration's policy to tackle airpollution. Tighter emission standards for cars were announced last year. President Clinton said Wednesday thatalthough air pollution has declined over the past quarter-century, "stronger action is needed to protect publichealth and keep us on track to meeting our nation's air quality goals." The new standards, he said, "wouldproduce the cleanest trucks and buses ever, significantly reducing smog, soot and other pollutants thatcontribute to asthma and other respiratory disease." According to EPA estimates, the reformulated diesel fuelwould cost 3 to 4 cents more per gallon, and the price of a new heavy-duty truck, currently around $150,000,would rise by about $1,500. Oil companies say the fuel price hike could be 10 cents a gallon. Under the EPAplan, beginning in June 2006, sulfur in diesel fuel would be limited to 15 parts per million, compared with thecurrent limit of 500 parts per million. The cleaner fuel would allow manufacturers to equip diesel engines withcatalytic converters and soot traps, which clog up if fuel contains more than a trace amount of sulfur. Nitrogenoxides from a new diesel engine would decrease 95% and particulates 90%, compared with the existingstandards for 2004 models. Nitrogen oxides combine with hydrocarbons to form ozone, the main ingredient ofsmog. Particulates in diesel exhaust are ultra-fine pieces of soot linked to cancer and deaths from lung andheart ailments. The particles are responsible for the smoke spewed by trucks and buses. New trucks wouldhave to meet the new particle limits in 2007, but manufacturers would be allowed to phase in the nitrogen oxidestandards between 2007 and 2010. Existing vehicles would not have to be equipped with the new devices. Theemission controls on large engines would be required to endure for 435,000 miles, which Keller of the enginegroup said "is a very stringent hurdle for us to achieve." Browner said the plan is the equivalent of removing 13million of today's new trucks from U.S. roads. Environmentalists endorsed the new standards, although theysaid EPA should require complete compliance in 2007 rather than 2010. The Natural Resources DefenseCouncil hailed it as the "biggest clean- air advance in a generation." The trucking industry's national associationopposes the new rules because of the price hikes and potential for fuel shortages. But California truckingcompanies broke with the pack and endorsed the EPA plan. In fact, the powerful California Trucking Assn.urged the agency to implement the rules three years sooner, in 2004. The trucking association's StephanieWilliams said the EPA regulations will avoid the need for the state to enact its own diesel truck pollution rules,which it had been considering for years. Such regulations would have resulted in increased costs only for trucksregistered in California. "We don't make fuel and we don't make engines, we just move freight. And if we have alevel playing field and economies of scale we can do it [clean up exhaust] cheaper and better," she said. "Yeah,it's gonna be a little bite in the beginning but we have to look at the entire picture." When it comes to the newrules, the engine makers are pitted against the oil industry. The engine companies want the EPA to set a sulfurstandard even tighter than it has proposed to ensure their catalysts and soot traps are protected. Oil companiesare seeking smaller cutbacks in sulfur content than the EPA is proposing. The oil industry urged EPA to set a90% sulfur reduction, a limit of 50 parts per million. But engine makers said a minimum 97% cutback is neededto ensure that sulfur does not poison catalysts and soot traps. Oil industry leaders say it may be impossible totransport the new fuel through pipelines without it being tainted by sulfur from other fuels. Truck stop operatorsalso said they do not have the money or storage space to install extra underground fuel tanks that would benecessary under EPA's phased-in rule. Browner predicted no fuel disruptions, saying the new plan provides "a17 March 2013 Page 350 of 483 ProQuestlot of time and a lot of flexibility so that the industry can do their part for cleaner air." If fuel shortages did occur,trucking is so vital to Southern California's economy that it could lead to widespread problems in the shipping ofmerchandise and food. The national standards raise questions about regulations and proposals in Californiarequiring or promoting use of alternative fuels in buses and trucks. If new diesel is just as clean, why movetoward natural gas? But officials and environmentalists warn that the new truck and bus engines won't berequired for another six years, and natural gas buses and trucks will always remain cleaner. California AirResources Board spokesman Jerry Martin said Wednesday that uniform national standards are preferable tostate regulations. Martin said the state is now urging the EPA to set similar standards for other tractors,bulldozers and similar off- road equipment. * Times staff writer James Gerstenzang contributed to this story. *MTA PANEL FAILS TO TAKE STAND Committee leaves to full board a decision on buying 370 new buses. B3References Message No: ..ACCN: 00046964 Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Air pollution; Federal legislation; Trucks; Buses; Environmental impact; Diesel engines; EnvironmentalpolicyPeople: Clinton, BillCompany / organization: Name: Environmental Protection Agency; NAICS: 924110; SIC: 9500; DUNS: 05-794-4910; Name: EPA; NAICS: 924110; SIC: 9500; DUNS: 05-794-4910Publication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2000Publication date: May 18, 2000Year: 2000Section: Part A; PART- A; PART-; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421498295Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 2000 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-06Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________17 March 2013 Page 351 of 483 ProQuestDocument 158 of 213Air Pollution Is Stifling Precipitation, Study Finds; Weather: Tiny particulates inhibit rain and snowfall,with major implications for the Southland, experts say.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 10 Mar 2000: A.1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: For decades, scientists have debated whether urban air pollution can alter a region's rainfall. The newstudy, for the first time, seems to provide direct evidence that tiny particles in industrial pollution cause physicalchanges in clouds that prevent water from condensing into raindrops and snowflakes, Daniel Rosenfeld, anatmospheric scientist at Hebrew University of Jerusalem, said his research "shows unambiguously that airpollution can shut off precipitation completely from certain types of clouds." The results, reported in the journalScience, "might indicate that human activity may be altering clouds and natural precipitation on a global scale,"he said. Many questions remain about how pollution affects rain and snow around the globe, especially becausesome previous studies have indicated that it might have the opposite effect of increasing rainfall. But OwenToon, a University of Colorado scientist, wrote in an accompanying article in Science that the pollution plumesin the study will "serve as a Rosetta stone for the potential impact" in more urbanized and industrialized areas,where pollution sources are ubiquitous.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Pollutants that waft from major industries are stifling precipitation in many regions of the world, in somecases eliminating almost all rain and snow produced by clouds, according to a new, multinational study byatmospheric scientists published today. For decades, scientists have debated whether urban air pollution canalter a region's rainfall. The new study, for the first time, seems to provide direct evidence that tiny particles inindustrial pollution cause physical changes in clouds that prevent water from condensing into raindrops andsnowflakes, Daniel Rosenfeld, an atmospheric scientist at Hebrew University of Jerusalem, said his research"shows unambiguously that air pollution can shut off precipitation completely from certain types of clouds." Theresults, reported in the journal Science, "might indicate that human activity may be altering clouds and naturalprecipitation on a global scale," he said. Because numerous factors can influence precipitation, documentingpollution's effect on overall rainfall levels remains difficult. But Rosenfeld said he has shown that weatherchanges can spread hundreds of miles downwind of a large industry's plume of pollution. The scientist trackedpollutants from a coal-burning power plant in remote Australia, factories in Turkey and a smelter in Canada.Many questions remain about how pollution affects rain and snow around the globe, especially because someprevious studies have indicated that it might have the opposite effect of increasing rainfall. But Owen Toon, aUniversity of Colorado scientist, wrote in an accompanying article in Science that the pollution plumes in thestudy will "serve as a Rosetta stone for the potential impact" in more urbanized and industrialized areas, wherepollution sources are ubiquitous. In the study, satellite images were used for the first time to simultaneouslytrack pollution and measure the precipitation and structure of clouds over large expanses of sky. In the past,scientists used airplanes to probe individual clouds. Rosenfeld reported that it is a physical process, rather thana chemical one, that blocks formation of rain and snow. Industrial plants spew particles, formed by fuelcombustion, that are much smaller than the water droplets normally found in clouds. The small pollutionparticles inhibit the cloud's water droplets from coalescing into larger drops to create rain. Smaller waterdroplets are also slower to freeze, reducing the ice particles in clouds. In types of clouds that are short-lived, thelack of larger droplets reduces or even eliminates precipitation, the report says. "Since the 1970s, people havebeen looking for the smoking gun to back up this theory, and it sounds like he may have found it," said Stephen17 March 2013 Page 352 of 483 ProQuestE. Schwartz, an atmospheric scientist at Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York. "It sounds like[Rosenfeld] has a nice, clean case." Experts do not know what, if any, impact pollution is having on rain andsnow in the United States or other urbanized countries, where most clouds are polluted to some degree. If thereis an impact, it could have serious consequences in Southern California, where the air contains high levels ofparticulate pollution, and water derived from rain and snow is scarce. In the Los Angeles area, the types ofclouds likely to be altered by pollution are ones of "modest depth," Rosenfeld said, "that come from the west intypical winter days characterized by intermittent, moderate rain showers." Rosenfeld said he cannot speculateon what his findings may mean for areas like California, where there are no large smelters or coal- burningplants. But he said: "It does not take a very large level of pollution, by health standards, to affect the clouds toproducing smaller droplets." The tiny size of the particles in the pollution seems to be the most important factorin inhibiting rain and snow. Most of the fine particles in the Los Angeles region's air come from trucks and cars,not heavy industries. The most striking plumes of pollution in the study were in southern Australia, home to theworld's largest lead smelter, mineral- processing plants and a large coal-burning power plant. The pollutantsthere were easy to track because the area has fairly pristine, blue skies. Rosenfeld found that polluted cloudswere producing hardly any raindrops and ice crystals, while unpolluted clouds did produce them. Scientists havelong speculated about the impact of urban and industrial air pollution on rainfall and snow patterns. Some hadthought particle pollution inhibits precipitation, similar to what happens with smoke from forest fires. But somescientists recently have reported the opposite--increased rainfall--downwind of some paper mills and over someurban areas. Barbara Finlayson-Pitts, an atmospheric chemist at UC Irvine, was surprised by Rosenfeld'sfindings. She said nearly all evidence recently has indicated that pollution from ships and other sources couldincrease precipitation. The new study differs, though, because it actually tracked pollutants and studied cloudsover large areas. If pollution is actually stifling rainfall, why have scientists studying specific areas been unableto document any correlations between urban pollution and overall precipitation? Rosenfeld said it may bebecause urban areas are inflicting other changes in clouds, too, that could offset the effects of pollution. Forexample, a power plant generates heat that could make clouds grow larger in the immediate area than theywould naturally. "There are a lot of subtleties responsible for whether we get rain or not," Schwartz said.Rosenfeld said the rain-reducing effects of pollutants are often strongest many miles downwind of industries, soit has been difficult to pinpoint a cause and effect. "At least now," with the new satellite images, he said, "wehave evidence that pollution can suppress precipitation." The next step, he said, is quantifying how big of aneffect the pollution is having. Environmental regulators, especially in California, have recently begun focusing oncleaning up particle pollution, which in the Los Angeles Basin comes largely from diesel vehicles. The push fornew regulations, which has been controversial because of the high cost, has been driven by concerns aboutlung disease and public health, not weather. References Message No: ..ACCN: 00023025 Credit: TIMESENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Environmental impact; Atmosphere; Industrial gases; Research; Air pollution; RainLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 2000Publication date: Mar 10, 2000Year: 200017 March 2013 Page 353 of 483 ProQuestSection: PART- A; PART-; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421499497Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 2000 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-06Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 159 of 213World Perspective; ENVIRONMENT; Little by Little, Breathing Easier in Mexico City; The air in 1999was the least dirty of the decade. Data suggest that even Third World cities, with determination, canclean up.Author: Smith, James FPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 15 Jan 2000: A.2.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Quietly but steadily, Mexico City made significant progress in reducing its infamous air pollution duringthe 1990s, thanks to one of the world's most aggressive anti-smog initiatives. To be sure, Mexico City remainsbadly polluted. Ozone, one of the most serious threats to health and the worst airborne offender in the capital,was still above acceptable levels on 300 days last year. And some programs have lagged, such as theconversion of smoke-belching buses from gasoline and diesel to cleaner-burning fuel sources. The FederalDistrict, which is similar to the U.S.' District of Columbia, worked with the adjacent state of Mexico during the1990s to attack pollution. The Federal District is home to 8.5 million people; 10 million more live in the statewithin the Valley of Mexico.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Quietly but steadily, Mexico City made significant progress in reducing its infamous air pollution duringthe 1990s, thanks to one of the world's most aggressive anti-smog initiatives. Metropolitan officials disclosedpollution data this week that shows 1999 was the least-dirty year of the decade here for the air, with the fewestemergency days and the most days within acceptable norms. To be sure, Mexico City remains badly polluted.Ozone, one of the most serious threats to health and the worst airborne offender in the capital, was still aboveacceptable levels on 300 days last year. And some programs have lagged, such as the conversion of smokebelchingbuses from gasoline and diesel to cleaner-burning fuel sources. But federal and local experts agreethat the trend is strongly in the right direction compared with the worst days from 1990 to 1992, when pollutants17 March 2013 Page 354 of 483 ProQuesthit emergency levels on as many as 177 days a year. During 1999, even after a stricter threshold had beenintroduced the year before, pollutants triggered emergencies on just five days. The achievement suggests thateven huge Third World cities can begin to reduce pollution if they muster the will. Better air quality had a payoffin improved health, said Alejandro Encinas, secretary of the environment in the Federal District. "Eye andbronchial illnesses were less severe and placed less demand on medical services and hospitals," he said whilereleasing the latest figures. The Federal District, which is similar to the U.S.' District of Columbia, worked withthe adjacent state of Mexico during the 1990s to attack pollution. The Federal District is home to 8.5 millionpeople; 10 million more live in the state within the Valley of Mexico. The valley is surrounded by mountains andsits at 7,300 feet above sea level. Housing is spread out, commutes are long and roads are congested. There islittle wind to disperse pollutants, and thermal inversions are common during the winter. Conditions for pollution,in short, are excellent. What's more, Mexico's mid-1990s economic crisis made it more difficult for people toafford new vehicles, which tend to produce less pollution. The Private Sector Center for Environmental Studiesand Sustainable Development reported last year that 24% of vehicles in Mexico City are pre-1980 models,which can release as much as 70 times more pollutants than new models. Against these obstacles, the localgovernments have carried out two five-year programs to improve air quality. Some measures were harsh andcontroversial, such as the "Today You Can't Drive" law. It takes 20% of all vehicles without catalytic convertersoff the roads each weekday, and halts as many as 40% of vehicles on emergency days. In the early 1990s, leadwas removed from gasoline sold in the valley. The government supports reforestation efforts by payingresidents about 10 cents for each tree planted that has been growing for at least a year. Inspections of factoriesto reduce pollution doubled in 1999 to 1,521. Luis Manuel Guerra, head of the independent National Institute ofEcological Studies and a frequent critic of government anti- pollution efforts, said Mexico City "has achievedsignificant advances." "There is a political will here," he said, "that has translated into measures that havechanged the behavior of the people." But the real test is whether pollution declined, and there the evidence ispersuasive. The average daily ozone reading fell from 197.6 in 1991 to 144.9 in 1999, according to the city'smeasurement service, on a scale equivalent to California's system. The acceptable air quality norm of 100points for ozone is equivalent to exposure to 0.11 parts per million for one hour. Similar progress occurred lastyear in reducing small particulates, which can penetrate the lungs and cause serious health problems. Therewas a jump in small-particulate pollution in 1998, probably fueled by forest fires, when readings were below 100points on just 176 days. In 1999, there were 345 days below 100. The valley's environmental authority is nowdeveloping its third strategic plan. "We are going to have even stricter, tougher norms," vowed Gustavo Olaiz,federal director general of environmental health. "We can't forget that not having emergencies does not meanwe have good air quality, nor does it mean we no longer have health problems. We have to keep workingtoward meeting the norms." (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) A Clear Trend An aggressivecampaign has begun to reduce Mexico City's high levels of air pollution. Average daily maximum ozone levels,on scale in which below 100 points is acceptable and 240 triggers a pollution emergency.* Number of days ofacceptable ozone levels. * Emergencies triggered by reading of 350 points until 1995, and then 250 points untillast year. Source: Mexico City Environment Ministry Illustration Caption: PHOTO: Mexico City on a clearer day,looking south from the city center.; GRAPHIC: A Clear Trend, REBECCA PERRY / Los Angeles Times Credit:TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Smog; Environmental protection; Environmental policy; Fuels; Air pollution; Environmental cleanupLocation: Mexico City MexicoPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A.217 March 2013 Page 355 of 483 ProQuestNumber of pages: 0Publication year: 2000Publication date: Jan 15, 2000Year: 2000Dateline: MEXICO CITYSection: PART- A; PART-; Foreign DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421474265Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 2000 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-06Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 160 of 213Emissions of Coke Dust Spur Probe, Lawsuit; Industry: D.A. investigates whether facilities at portsare violating pollution standards. Meanwhile, a Terminal Island customs worker takes his case tocourt.Author: Weikel, DanPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 02 Dec 1999: B, 1:4.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The Los Angeles County district attorney's office said Wednesday that it is investigating whether coalterminals and storage areas in the county's ports are emitting hazardous petroleum coke residues in violation ofstate air and water pollution standards. Meanwhile, a U.S. Customs Service employee, whose office onTerminal Island has allegedly been shown to contain cancer-causing substances from coke dust, has filed thefirst of two planned lawsuits against the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, as well as the operators of coalfacilities in the harbor area. [Sandi] Gibbons said the effort has focused so far on the Los Angeles ExportTerminal, a two-year-old facility at Pier 300 in the Port of Los Angeles. The 120-acre operation, which is partlyowned by the city's Harbor Department, has been the target of community protests and action by air qualityregulators to get domes built over its petroleum coke piles.17 March 2013 Page 356 of 483 ProQuestLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The Los Angeles County district attorney's office said Wednesday that it is investigating whether coalterminals and storage areas in the county's ports are emitting hazardous petroleum coke residues in violation ofstate air and water pollution standards. Meanwhile, a U.S. Customs Service employee, whose office onTerminal Island has allegedly been shown to contain cancer-causing substances from coke dust, has filed thefirst of two planned lawsuits against the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, as well as the operators of coalfacilities in the harbor area. The prosecutor's investigation and the lawsuit are the latest developments in a longstandingcontroversy surrounding the handling and control of petroleum coke at about 30 harbor area facilitiesthat store and export the byproduct of the refining process. "There has been a lot of talk since the onslaught ofthis problem, but no one has stepped up to the plate to take a swing," said Victor E. Nilsen, 55, a CustomsService official whose family has lived in San Pedro for more than 100 years. "Things are getting worse here.Coke dust is ruining the community." Petroleum coke, which is used as a fuel in Asia, contains cancer- causingagents. Fine particles of coke dust also can aggravate respiratory illnesses such as asthma, emphysema andpneumonia. Medical studies have repeatedly shown a link between elevated levels of particulate matter anddeaths of people with respiratory or heart disease. Residents, elected officials and workers in Wilmington, SanPedro and Long Beach have been concerned since the early 1990s that coke dust, which can travel miles onthe wind, is a health hazard and a nuisance that has soiled homes, businesses and boats. Sandi Gibbons,spokeswoman for the district attorney's office, said the agency's environmental unit has begun assessingemissions from coke piles in the ports. If violations are found, prosecutors can file civil or criminal cases.Gibbons said the effort has focused so far on the Los Angeles Export Terminal, a two-year-old facility at Pier300 in the Port of Los Angeles. The 120-acre operation, which is partly owned by the city's Harbor Department,has been the target of community protests and action by air quality regulators to get domes built over itspetroleum coke piles. "Testing will be done to determine the extent of the problem," Gibbons said. "We are inthe early stages of our investigation. A lot of work needs to be done." Port officials in Los Angeles and LongBeach declined any comment on the lawsuit and the district attorney's investigation as premature. They said theports have not yet been served with a copy of Nilsen's suit. Terminal and coal facility operators said they are incompliance with all applicable environmental laws and must improve their clean- up efforts under rulesapproved in June by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Among other things, the new regulationsrequire cargo terminals and firms that handle petroleum coke to enclose conveyors, loading facilities andstorage areas within three years. The rules also call for wind screens, covers for trucks, and programs toremove spilled materials from roads and property. AQMD officials say the requirements will build on existingrules that have not been effective in substantially reducing airborne particles of coal, coke and sulfur.Regulators estimate that coal operations in the ports emit about 334 tons a year of fine particles that can beinhaled and 1,345 tons of larger particles that contaminate property. "We are monitored by [the] AQMD probablymore than any other facility in the port," said Gerald Swan, chief executive officer of the Los Angeles ExportTerminal. "Simply stated, we are running a two- year-old operation that has not been cited for anything." Nilsen,a seized-property specialist who has been stationed at the Customs House on Terminal Island for 10 years,sued the export terminal and some of its 37 investors in Long Beach Superior Court on Monday. He says hisoffice, no more than 500 feet from the terminal, has become a "hot spot" for carcinogens, according to samplesof coke dust taken at the Customs House and near the terminal. Nilsen's lawsuit names 22 defendants,including the two ports and major oil companies, as well as operators of coal terminals and storage facilitiesthroughout the harbor area. Carmen Trutanich and Tim Lignoul, two San Pedro attorneys who represent Nilsen,brought the suit under Proposition 65, which voters passed in 1986. The initiative requires companies to warnthe public if they are discharging pollutants that can cause cancer or affect the human reproductive system.The lawsuit seeks a court order to stop the discharge of petroleum coke dust, compensatory damages and civilpenalties of $2,500 per day for each violation of the state Health and Safety Code. Nilsen, who is also preparing17 March 2013 Page 357 of 483 ProQuestto file a federal lawsuit, alleges that he and others were never warned about the health risks and that companiesare emitting carcinogens in violation of pollution standards set by regulatory agencies. "We believe safe levelsare being exceeded and it's got to stop," Trutanich said. "This lawsuit is a small effort that could become part ofa larger effort to protect the harbor community from exposure to petroleum coke." For the case, Trutanich hiredDavid Leu, an environmental consultant and former director of the state Division of Toxic Substances Control.Leu, whose office is in Orange County, tested coke dust from five locations at the Port of Los Angeles and inSan Pedro. Leu said the samples contained "remarkably high levels" of seven cancer-causing materials, suchas benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene and vanadium. He likened them to the contents of cigarettesmoke. "What we are looking at is not a trivial situation. It could very well be a significant situation," said Leu,who cautioned that his results were preliminary. "I don't want to sound alarmist, but I see a lot of yellow flags,even red flags, going up." Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Health hazards; Investigations; Ports; Storage; Air pollution; CoalLocation: Los Angeles County CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B, 1:4Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: Dec 2, 1999Year: 1999Section: Metro; PART- B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsProQuest document ID: 421652207Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 161 of 213Vehicles Blamed for a Greater Share of Smog17 March 2013 Page 358 of 483 ProQuestAuthor: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 30 Oct 1999: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The tonnage of smog-forming gases that waft from vehicles in the Los Angeles Basin is two to threetimes greater than the California Air Resources Board had been estimating, according to a new emissionsinventory developed by the state agency. The new inventory does not mean that smog is worse than expertsbelieved. Instead, it means that vehicles are responsible for a bigger share of the problem, and that industry,consumer products and other sources of pollution are now blamed for a smaller proportion. The amount ofozone--the prime ingredient of smog--in Southland air has been steadily declining, reaching record smogseasonlows this year. One of the main reasons for the undercalculation of emissions is that the Air ResourcesBoard had misreported the number of cars on California's roads. There are about 4.5 million more cars than ithad originally figured, the agency determined. Also, gasoline leaks from many cars have gone undetected insmog checks, the agency said, and emissions from heavy-duty trucks were based on flawed data provided bydiesel engine manufacturers.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Cars and trucks are responsible for a much larger share of California's smog than previouslydocumented--a revelation that may force air quality officials to redouble their efforts to clean up vehicleemissions, according to new data released Friday. The tonnage of smog-forming gases that waft from vehiclesin the Los Angeles Basin is two to three times greater than the California Air Resources Board had beenestimating, according to a new emissions inventory developed by the state agency. The inventory is vital forguiding the region's multibillion- dollar war against smog, and experts will now spend months analyzing how thenew calculations will alter plans for achieving healthful air quality in the Los Angeles area and the rest of thestate. The new inventory does not mean that smog is worse than experts believed. Instead, it means thatvehicles are responsible for a bigger share of the problem, and that industry, consumer products and othersources of pollution are now blamed for a smaller proportion. The amount of ozone--the prime ingredient ofsmog--in Southland air has been steadily declining, reaching record smog-season lows this year. One of themain reasons for the undercalculation of emissions is that the Air Resources Board had misreported the numberof cars on California's roads. There are about 4.5 million more cars than it had originally figured, the agencydetermined. Also, gasoline leaks from many cars have gone undetected in smog checks, the agency said, andemissions from heavy-duty trucks were based on flawed data provided by diesel engine manufacturers. Theboard's deputy executive officer, Tom Cackette, said the new data in many ways renew the importance ofregulating all aspects of pollution from cars, trucks and other vehicles. "There's more emissions than wethought, so there are more emissions to go after. These programs are even more important than we thought,"he said. How to Get Old Cars Off the Road After 30 years of regulations, California will probably have to devoteeven more attention to finding ways to get old, polluting vehicles off the roads and accelerate the pace at whichnew, clean ones are purchased. The new data may prompt strengthening of the state's widely hated SmogCheck program and put extra pressure on auto makers and truck engine manufacturers to promote sales of newtechnologies to motorists. "The implications of this are pretty clear that we have to go much further with ourmotor vehicle controls," said Roland Hwang, senior analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists, anenvironmental group that has pushed for stronger emission controls on cars. "It clearly puts more pressure onthe motor vehicle sector to clean up." Air quality officials say they are not surprised by the magnitude of the shiftin data. They have always cautioned that their emissions estimates are questionable, especially for cars,because so many variables are involved--from the speed at which motorists drive to the hidden leaks from fueltanks. As a result, they mount a major revision every two years, incorporating improvements in data collection toget a better grasp on how much vehicles contribute to smog. For one important pollutant--the fine particles of17 March 2013 Page 359 of 483 ProQuestsoot that can lodge in lungs and cause respiratory disease--the volume spewed by vehicles is 162% greater inthe Los Angeles Basin than the Air Resources Board had been estimating. Cackette said the overhauledinventory especially reinforces the need to crack down on diesel trucks, the main source of particulates. Enginemanufacturers say they are close to commercializing advanced technologies for diesel engines that will cutnitrogen oxides, which cause ozone, and particulates. Tighter state and national standards for diesel enginesand fuel are in planning stages now. Emissions From New Cars Already Slashed The auto industry, facingsmog standards set by the Air Resources Board, has already cut emissions from new cars more than 90% fromthe level of new cars in the late 1960s. Some major auto makers are now selling small numbers of electric cars,and they will soon begin marketing electric-gasoline hybrids and super-low-emission models of gasolinepoweredcars. An environmental official at Honda Motor Co.--considered a leader in new smog-controltechnology for cars--was unavailable for comment on the new data Friday. In general, the auto industrycontends that new cars are about as clean as they can get and that new smog efforts should focus on givingconsumers incentives to scrap their old cars and buy newer, less polluting ones. Air board Chairman Alan Lloyd,appointed this year by Gov. Gray Davis, is a fervent supporter of emission-free vehicles. He has said his goal isno emissions, or nearly none, from any car, bus, truck or other mobile source in California. Under a statemandate that takes effect in 2003, 10% of new cars that major manufacturers sell in California must producezero emissions--which essentially means that they must be battery- powered. So far, though, electric cars andnatural-gas trucks have not caught on with drivers. Hwang said the pace at which consumers are buying thevehicles clearly needs to be accelerated--either with tougher state mandates or with market incentives such assubsidies and tax breaks. Also, he said, smog control equipment on gasoline- powered cars needs to be moredurable. The increase in the emissions estimate is especially striking in the Los Angeles Basin. Here, the airboard has been underestimating the hydrocarbons from vehicles by 113% and nitrogen oxides by 84%. Onereason that the old inventory was skewed was that the board had not been factoring in cars that were in theprocess of being registered or that were being driven without proper registration. That amounts to 4.5 millioncars statewide, increasing the total number included in the inventory to about 26 million. The added cars- -whichtend to be older--were responsible for 20% of the increase in hydrocarbons reported in the new inventory, theair board says. In addition, the inventory changed dramatically because the board incorporated tests that bettermimic real-life driving conditions, such as slow driving during congested rush hours. They also changedestimates of the number of times cars are started--which is when their emissions are greatest. Also, the staffdiscovered that some older cars and some new fuel- injection cars are leaking gasoline not detected by theSmog Check program, which tests only exhaust. The leaks are large enough to evaporate and help form smogbut small enough to escape the notice of motorists and mechanics. Cackette suggested that a test for the leaksmay be needed in smog checks. Such changes, however, require approval of the Legislature, which has foughtfor years over the Smog Check program because it is extremely unpopular with many motorists. The SouthCoast Air Quality Management District and the state air board are developing new smog plans that will outlineregulations and programs for the next 10 years. The overhaul of the vehicle emission data does not mean thatother sources of smog should be let off the hook, Cackette said. If every rule outlined in the current smog planswere adopted, the Los Angeles Basin would still not have air clean enough to satisfy federal health standards by2010, as the law requires. "This does not in any way change what we already are doing," Cackette said."There's nothing here that says, 'Oops, we controlled the wrong thing.' It shifts around the pie, but it doesn'tchange it in such a way to rethink what we are doing." Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Smog; Emissions; Automobile driving; Air pollutionLocation: Southern CaliforniaPeople: Hwang, Roland17 March 2013 Page 360 of 483 ProQuestCompany: Air Resources Board-CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: Oct 30, 1999Year: 1999Section: PART- A; PART-; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05763834ProQuest document ID: 421624197Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 162 of 213Plan to Require Cleaner Diesel Trucks UnveiledAuthor: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 07 Oct 1999: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: New diesel trucks and other vehicles would be virtually exhaust- free beginning in 2007 underproposals announced Wednesday by the Clinton administration's top environmental official and California's airboard chairman. The proposed standards are designed to address rising concerns about the danger that dieselexhaust poses to people's health. Diesel engines spew large quantities of tiny, soot-like particles that can lodgedeeply in lungs and have been linked to cancer and respiratory disease. They also are a major contributor toCalifornia's smog. State Air Resources Board Chairman Alan Lloyd, while attending a symposium in Irvine onclean-air technologies, said near-zero emission trucks and other heavy duty vehicles are within reach.17 March 2013 Page 361 of 483 ProQuestLinks: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: New diesel trucks and other vehicles would be virtually exhaust- free beginning in 2007 underproposals announced Wednesday by the Clinton administration's top environmental official and California's airboard chairman. The proposed standards are designed to address rising concerns about the danger that dieselexhaust poses to people's health. Diesel engines spew large quantities of tiny, soot-like particles that can lodgedeeply in lungs and have been linked to cancer and respiratory disease. They also are a major contributor toCalifornia's smog. State Air Resources Board Chairman Alan Lloyd, while attending a symposium in Irvine onclean-air technologies, said near-zero emission trucks and other heavy duty vehicles are within reach. Thisweek he directed his staff to draft a proposal that would require manufacturers to cut particulates 90% andnitrogen oxides 75% by 2007 compared with today's diesel engines. The standards would apply to new trucks,tractors, bulldozers and other farm and construction equipment. The U.S. government is preparing to setnational standards for diesel truck engines that are expected to be about the same. On Wednesday,Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Carol Browner said details of the EPA's strategy are expectedlate this year or early next year. "Anyone who has ever driven behind a large truck already knows about thelevels of harmful air pollution that can come out of the exhaust pipes. This strategy would reduce thoseemissions by more than 90%," Browner said. As a result of air quality mandates, diesel engines have alreadybeen getting cleaner in the last 10 years, with new models no longer spewing clouds of black smoke. The newstandards, if enacted, would cut exhaust so dramatically that a diesel bus or truck would be as clean as one thatruns on natural gas. "That's wonderful. It's something we've been advocating," said Tim Carmichael, executivedirector of the Coalition for Clean Air, a Los Angeles-based environmental group. "There's been so muchinformation over the last decade and certainly over the last year about how nasty diesel exhaust is and howmuch harm it does to human health. We should be moving very aggressively to rid ourselves of our dependencyon diesel fuel." State trucking industry officials say they would support the standards only if they were orderednationwide. The state air board only has the power to regulate vehicles registered in California, but about 60%of trucks operating here are registered elsewhere and are regulated by the EPA. "The technology is there andit's the right thing to do," said Stephanie Williams, environmental manager of the California Trucking Assn. "Butyou have to have a level playing field for the California trucker. We want clean air too, but we also want to stayin business. And we shouldn't be punished just because we work in California." Manufacturers, under pressureto clean up trucks and other diesel vehicles, are close to perfecting pollution-reducing catalysts that would workon heavy duty diesel engines for the first time. They also are developing soot-capturing traps. A major obstacle,however, lies in the state air board's path: Diesel fuel must first undergo a formula change so it contains verylittle sulfur. Today's fuel has so much sulfur that it would clog catalysts and filters. "We're confident that thetechnology will be there by 2007, but [the proposed standard] is dependent on very low sulfur fuel," said airboard spokesman Jerry Martin. "We've heard a lot of different manufacturers say they have technologies thatthey know will work." Browner said the EPA, within a few months, will propose a measure requiring a 90% cut inthe sulfur found in diesel fuel. The requirement has been opposed by oil companies, because it would increasethe cost of fuel and force major retooling of refineries. Major engine manufacturers, such as Cummins, Navistarand Caterpillar, have spent millions of dollars on research in recent years. The biggest push driving the searchfor new technology came last year, when the California air board declared diesel soot a cancer-causingsubstance. "The industry is seeing the writing on the wall," the air board's Lloyd said. He called the latest reportsfrom manufacturers "very promising. It gives me a lot of encouragement that . . . we can get much cleaner air."Because a truck lasts about 30 years, the new technologies may take years to substantially reduce the cancerthreat and smog problem posed by diesel engines. Today, a new diesel truck puts out an average of 4 grams ofnitrogen oxides and 0.10 of a gram of particulates per brakehorse hour, a standardized unit measuring heavyduty engine performance. Beginning in 2002, the nitrogen oxides allowed will drop to 2 grams under nationalstandards already adopted. The California rules proposed by Lloyd this week would be 0.5 of a gram or less for17 March 2013 Page 362 of 483 ProQuestnitrogen oxides and 0.01 for particulates in 2007. A separate plan for buses has already been proposed by thestate air board and would go into effect two years earlier, in 2005. The EPA plans to change national truckstandards to around the same levels as the state board proposes. Also, in its statement Wednesday, the EPAsaid it intends to reduce the sulfur content of diesel fuel "approximately 90% from its current level" of 500 partsper million. During the last 30 years, the California air board has pioneered low-emission standards for a varietyof vehicles that have had worldwide ramifications. In 1990, the board set stringent standards that requiredphased-in sales of low-emission and zero-emission cars. Since then, the technology has improved at a pacemuch quicker than anyone had imagined, and new gasoline-powered cars are virtually emissions free. Lloyd, anexpert in low-emission vehicles whom Davis appointed in February, has said his goal is to "count down to zero"--to push for vehicles that emit no pollutants. The Coalition for Clean Air's Carmichael said he will urge the airboard to include requirements for some zero-emission diesel engines in its new proposal. Prototypes forexhaust-free trucks and buses, powered by fuel cells, are already available. "It's not going to happen tomorrow,but zero is an option, certainly by 2007," he said. Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Diesel engines; Trucks; Environmental policy; Air pollution; Federal legislation; InitiativesLocation: CaliforniaPeople: Carmichael, Tim, Clinton, BillCompany: Air Resources Board-CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: Oct 7, 1999Year: 1999Section: PART- A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05736175ProQuest document ID: 421434125Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-2317 March 2013 Page 363 of 483 ProQuestDatabase: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 163 of 213California and the West; Tire Fire Casts Worrisome Pall in Central Valley Town; Air quality: A sootyblaze in a mountain of scrap rubber has citizens concerned about health.Author: Warren, JeniferPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 01 Oct 1999: 3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The experts tell her there's nothing to fear from the clouds of black smoke billowing out of the hillsnear her home, but Karen Grischott is not so sure. Anxiety is familiar here in the San Joaquin Valley, wherefarmers live in fear of drought, pests and other phenomena that can obliterate a year's crop--and profits--in aninstant. But now the locals are confronting an entirely foreign foe--a massive tire fire burning at their doorstep.Last week, lightning ignited a mountain of scrap tires six stories high in a ravine on the edge of Westley, a townof 500 people about 100 miles south of Sacramento. The inferno--engulfing the largest tire pile in California--isspewing vast, smoky plumes that stretch like black tentacles over surrounding crops, playgrounds and homes.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The experts tell her there's nothing to fear from the clouds of black smoke billowing out of the hills nearher home, but Karen Grischott is not so sure. Every morning, she finds a film of soot covering her car. Relativesare hacking and wheezing like never before. And wherever she turns, she hears about another kid with anotherbloody nose. "I see what's landing on my car--a lot of ash--and I figure that's going in my lungs, too," saysGrischott, a waitress and mother of three. "It doesn't make you too comfortable." Anxiety is familiar here in theSan Joaquin Valley, where farmers live in fear of drought, pests and other phenomena that can obliterate ayear's crop--and profits--in an instant. But now the locals are confronting an entirely foreign foe--a massive tirefire burning at their doorstep. Last week, lightning ignited a mountain of scrap tires six stories high in a ravine onthe edge of Westley, a town of 500 people about 100 miles south of Sacramento. The inferno--engulfing thelargest tire pile in California--is spewing vast, smoky plumes that stretch like black tentacles over surroundingcrops, playgrounds and homes. Fearful of creating oily runoff that could contaminate underground watersupplies, firefighters have so far not attempted to put out the blaze. But that will change today. On Thursday, theU.S. Environmental Protection Agency hired a Texas company to douse the flaming mound with water andchemical foam. The smoke could subside within two weeks, though the fire may not be out for two months."They tell us they can put this fire out safely," said Steve Mayotte, a fire battalion chief in Stanislaus County. "It'sa long, slow process, but we think it will work." The fire has split residents in its smoky path into two distinctcamps. Some have greeted the blaze resolutely, refusing to get alarmed. Doc Westbrook, an alfalfa grower inWestley for 46 years, is one of them. "It's too bad it had to happen, but I'm sure not going to panic," Westbrookdeclared as he played a lunch-hour game of liar's dice with some buddies at a cafe in town. "I feel just fine."Others are far less sanguine, fearful of the fire's health effects and angry that 7 million tires were allowed to pileup and create a time bomb so near their homes. "This is a disaster," said Karen Cox, a tomato and lima beanfarmer who lives close to the fire. "Somebody dropped the ball and we're all paying the price." In Westley,Patterson and a few other towns this week, residents were streaming into doctors' offices, complaining ofbreathing problems, bloody noses, burning eyes and sore throats. Dr. Piero Garza, an internist in nearbyPatterson, said he's advising patients with such symptoms to stay inside or place a wet handkerchief over theirnose and mouth if they must go out. Tests show that air contaminants remain at levels below what is considered17 March 2013 Page 364 of 483 ProQuesthazardous, though there is a modest increase in particulates--microscopic particles that can slip past the body'sfiltering system and into the lungs. Favorable winds have helped by blowing smoke upward, where it is mosteasily dispersed, said Allan Hirsch of the state Air Resources Board. Although the skies look ominous, atground level "the air quality is really quite good," Hirsch said. Despite such a rosy assessment, many residentsdon't quite believe it, given their symptoms and the thick haze overhead. "You can smell it, you can see it, youcan feel it," said Pat Maisetti, the former mayor of Patterson who is suffering nosebleeds, labored breathing andburning eyes. "How can they say everything's fine?" Melanie Marty, a state toxicologist, said symptoms likecoughing, burning eyes and irritated throats are consistent with the gases and particulates in smoke. Butwhether the tire fire poses a long-term, chronic health threat is "a gray area," she said. As a precautionarymeasure, Stanislaus County officials advised asthmatics and the elderly living near the fire to remain inside, andrecommended that all residents refrain from strenuous activity on days when the smoke is blowing their way.Local schools have canceled physical education classes and practices for sports teams and the marching band.At Patterson High, the football and soccer teams were scheduled to play home games today but instead willtravel to their rivals' schools on the other side of the county. At Grayson Elementary, Principal Mary Parker iskeeping children indoors during recess and lunch hour and watching the sky as she fields calls from worriedparents. Patrick Sweeney, district superintendent, said a dip in attendance since the fire reflects thecommunity's fear. The fire erupted on Sept. 22 just west of Interstate 5. For a few days after the blaze erupted,the wind blew smoke westward into the Bay Area. Workers in San Francisco's financial district reported smellingacrid fumes, and a light rain in the East Bay city of Fremont caused gooey black soot to coat cars and soilswimming pools. Today, smoke remains visible for dozens of miles in all directions, and flashing signs on thestate's major north-south freeway warn motorists to roll up their windows. State regulators say the pile ofdiscarded tires belongs to Edward Filbin, who opened the disposal site in the 1950s. The tires were supposed tobe recycled, either in an adjacent incinerator that produces energy or through other markets. Instead, officialssay, the pile continued to mushroom, prompting the state to revoke the operation's permit and issue a cleanupand abatement order against Filbin in July. Regulators blame the fire on Filbin's failure to create firebreakswithin the pile and keep fire suppression equipment on hand. In addition to the acrid smoke, the smoldering tiresare producing a steady stream of toxic black oil as they melt. A separate fire-- spewing a particularly darksmoke heavy with hydrocarbons--was ignited in a holding pond of oil next to the pile. The Westley fire is about16 miles southwest of a smaller tire fire in Tracy. That blaze has been allowed to smolder for more than a yearbecause officials believed the threat of contaminated runoff exceeded air pollution dangers. Angry residentsnear the Westley fire said such a course of action was unacceptable. Meanwhile, a close evaluation of the firesite revealed that the nearest well is a few miles away and 600 feet deep. "We decided that in terms of groundwater, we would not be creating a big problem" by pouring foam and water on the fire, said Reagan Wilson,chief executive officer for Stanislaus County. Illustration Caption: PHOTO: A bulldozer works on road near themound of burning tires in Westley.; PHOTOGRAPHER: ROBERT DURELL / Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: (2photos) Doc Westbrook, left, says he feels fine despite tire fire's smoke and soot. Karen Cox, right, with cloudsof smoke behind her, calls it a disaster.; PHOTOGRAPHER: ROBERT DURELL / Los Angeles Times Credit:TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Tires; Fires; Air pollution; Environmental impact; ContaminationLocation: San Joaquin ValleyPeople: Filbin, EdwardPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 317 March 2013 Page 365 of 483 ProQuestNumber of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: Oct 1, 1999Year: 1999Dateline: WESTLEY, Calif.Section: PART- A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05731522ProQuest document ID: 421619167Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 164 of 213California and the West; Tire Fire Spews Hazardous Smoke; Pollution: Mammoth dump catches firei n northern San Joaquin Valley. Residents are warned to stay indoors.Author: Warren, JeniferPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 23 Sep 1999: 3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: A bulging mountain of scrap tires six stories high caught fire in the northern San Joaquin Valley earlyWednesday, spewing a black plume of smoke 3,000 feet in the air and sprinkling soot for miles. "There's thishuge black cloud and it's casting a shadow over the whole town," said Laura Deimler, a waitress in Westley, asmall farming settlement five miles from the fire at California's largest tire pile. "It's ugly." Because tire fires arenearly impossible to put out, the blaze is expected to burn for months. A smaller mound of tires to the north inTracy caught fire more than a year ago and still smolders today.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: A bulging mountain of scrap tires six stories high caught fire in the northern San Joaquin Valley earlyWednesday, spewing a black plume of smoke 3,000 feet in the air and sprinkling soot for miles. Favorablewinds initially blew clouds of the noxious smoke away from populated areas. But a wind shift was expected, and17 March 2013 Page 366 of 483 ProQuestStanislaus County officials--declaring a local state of emergency--warned residents to prepare to evacuate orremain inside their homes with the windows closed. "There's this huge black cloud and it's casting a shadowover the whole town," said Laura Deimler, a waitress in Westley, a small farming settlement five miles from thefire at California's largest tire pile. "It's ugly." Because tire fires are nearly impossible to put out, the blaze isexpected to burn for months. A smaller mound of tires to the north in Tracy caught fire more than a year agoand still smolders today. "We consider this an environmental disaster," said Roland Brooks of the San JoaquinValley Air Pollution Control District. "It's just a real mess." Tire fires are the dangerous legacy of America'sappetite for automobiles. Millions of scrap tires are scattered illegally in canyons, quarries and fields throughoutthe state, and California produces 30 million more a year--the most of any state. In 1989, the state launched awar on illegal tire piles, many of which are "orphan" piles with no responsible party to pay for cleanup. Sincethen, authorities have made a dent in the state's stockpile of discarded tires, but about 15 million remain and thethreat of fires persists. Wednesday's blaze is raging in a small ravine just west of Interstate 5 in farm countrytwo hours south of Sacramento. Officials believe that it was sparked by lightning from a thunderstorm justbefore dawn. By dusk, the fire had engulfed 80% of the pile's 7 million tires. Crews in bulldozers attempted tocarve off chunks of the burning mound but intense heat forced them to abandon the effort. The fire's proximity toInterstate 5 spawned concerns that smoke could affect visibility on the state's major north-south freeway. Noimmediate traffic problems were reported, but authorities were poised to close the interstate if needed. In termsof weather, the dramatic fire could not have struck at a better time. Normally, winds in the area blow in a southsoutheasterlydirection--which would put Westley, Patterson and a few other small settlements in the path of theblack plume. But Wednesday, a frontal system pushed winds to the west, into deserted dry foothills thatseparate the San Joaquin Valley from the Santa Clara Valley. The intense heat of the fire also had a beneficialeffect--forcing the plume up high and aiding dispersion. "The big fear is we'll get stagnant air conditions withsmoke near ground level," said Brooks. He said state air quality experts from Sacramento had set up portablemonitoring stations near the fire and in adjacent towns. The greatest risk to those inhaling the smoke comesfrom particulate matter as well as hydrocarbons and some trace elements of hazardous materials, such asbenzene, health authorities said. Aside from the potential respiratory problems, tire fires can contaminateground water. Burning tires emit an oil that seeps through soil and into the aquifer, said Steve Rosenbaum ofthe state Regional Water Quality Control Board. Although the California Aqueduct--which serves SouthernCalifornia--passes about one mile from the fire site, Rosenbaum said it was unlikely that soot falling into thewater would contaminate the supply. State regulators said they have been troubled by the Stanislaus Countypile for years, both because of its size and the lack of fire prevention measures in place. The mound sits on a40-acre parcel owned by Edward Filbin who, in the 1950s, opened the disposal site that at one pointmushroomed to include 40 million tires. The tires were supposed to be recycled, either in an adjacentincinerator that produces energy or through other market uses. Instead, regulators say, the pile kept growing,prompting the state to revoke the operation's permit last year and issue a cleanup and abatement order in July.Filbin, who has contested the order, could not be reached for comment. His San Francisco attorney, ThomasTrapp, did not return a telephone call from The Times. State regulators blamed the blaze on Filbin's failure toguard against the threat of fire. He should have created firebreaks within the pile and had fire suppressionequipment on hand, they say. Legislation signed by Gov. Gray Davis this year will help the board in its battleagainst illegal tire piles, Chandler said. The bill, by Sen. Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey), gives stateinspectors authority to enter private property where tires are stored if they suspect a threat to the public healthor environment. Illustration CAPTION: PHOTO: Smoke and flames rise from blaze started by lightning at dumpwith 7 million tires near Westley.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press; GRAPHIC-MAP: (no caption), LosAngeles Times Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Fires; Tires; Health hazards; Air pollution; Evacuations & rescues17 March 2013 Page 367 of 483 ProQuestLocation: San Joaquin ValleyPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: Sep 23, 1999Year: 1999Dateline: SACRAMENTOSection: PART- A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05718457ProQuest document ID: 421562602Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 165 of 213Rapidly Growing Phoenix Finds Dust Unsettling; Sprawl: Development run amok is leading to dirty air,creating serious health and environmental problems.Author: Cart, JuliePublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 07 Sep 1999: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Bonnie Eich and her neighbors on Orchid Lane were fed up. Dust billowed up from the dirt road intheir unincorporated neighborhood on the outskirts of Phoenix. Trucks racing to nearby construction sites werecreating huge dust clouds. Phoenix's astonishing growth has created a pesky fallout--dust. Officials in the Valleyof the Sun call it "fugitive dust," and it has become public enemy No. 1. An innovative dust removal industry isthriving--locked in daily battle to eradicate what has become a serious health threat. While city and countyofficials are spending millions on dust abatement measures and scrambling to control growth, more and more17 March 2013 Page 368 of 483 ProQuesthouses are sprouting in the Sonoran desert that rings Phoenix. More than one-third of the city's homes werebuilt in the last 10 years.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Bonnie Eich and her neighbors on Orchid Lane were fed up. Dust billowed up from the dirt road in theirunincorporated neighborhood on the outskirts of Phoenix. Trucks racing to nearby construction sites werecreating huge dust clouds. "We wanted our kids to be able to play outside, but the dust was everywhere," Eichsaid. "I've had valley fever, my daughter has asthma, everybody who lives here has a health problem." Whenthe county balked at paving the road, everyone on Orchid Lane pitched in $1,700 each to pave it themselves.The two-lane strip of asphalt cost the residents more than $50,000, but it allowed them to reclaim their air.Phoenix's astonishing growth has created a pesky fallout--dust. Officials in the Valley of the Sun call it "fugitivedust," and it has become public enemy No. 1. An innovative dust removal industry is thriving--locked in dailybattle to eradicate what has become a serious health threat. The brown cloud that clings to Southwestern citiessuch as Albuquerque and Denver regularly engulfs Phoenix like a grainy veil. A Phoenix-based poll earlier thisyear found that 51% of Arizonans blame air pollution as the source of their breathing and vision problems.While city and county officials are spending millions on dust abatement measures and scrambling to controlgrowth, more and more houses are sprouting in the Sonoran desert that rings Phoenix. More than one-third ofthe city's homes were built in the last 10 years. For as long as anyone can remember, Los Angeles hasrepresented all that is detested here, yet Phoenix has slipped inexorably into L.A.'s familiar patterns of trafficsnarls, suburban sprawl and developers plowing under farmland to throw up stucco starter homes. Now the airhere has been deemed so foul that the Environmental Protection Agency has stepped in under court order toforce the city and county to clean it up. The action begat a massive road-paving program, among othermeasures, to inhibit the region's prodigious dust production, a problem that has serious health implications.Phoenix's air quality is well below national health standards, and its violations for particulates, ozone andcarbon dioxide have been classified as "serious," a distinction shared with only one other city: Los Angeles.The air problems stem in large part from the continuing population spurt: Phoenix is now the nation's fastestgrowinglarge city. At 1.3 million, it is now ranked 7th. Surrounding Maricopa County has a 23% growth rate,with more than 700,000 people moving here since 1990. The ills of unchecked growth are the hot button issuesof the moment and the subject of intensive local and state debate. And dust has become at once a metaphor,and a symptom, of this swelling development. 'Growing Smarter,' or Out of Control? At 500 square miles,Phoenix is already larger than L.A. and is still gobbling land through annexation. It gained 5 square miles lastyear. What land it doesn't absorb, it redefines: The city lost 40% of its farmland from 1990 to 1995. As a city,Phoenix has both enthusiastically embraced development and abhorred its consequences. Last November,Arizona voters spoke loud and clear and passed Proposition 303, calling for $220 million to be set aside over 11years to purchase land to protect it from development. Endless committees, task forces and blue ribbon panelshave examined the issue over the years and there's still no discernible policy. Republican Gov. Jane Dee Hullcalls "sensible growth" a priority and labels this approach "growing smarter." The commission she charged withplanning the state's growth completed a report that reached her desk Thursday. It is believed to call for changesin the management of land held in state trust. State Rep. Carolyn Allen (R-Scottsdale) helped prepare thereport. The plain-talking Allen freely admits growth has not so much been characteristic of industry in Phoenixas the industry itself. "There is a great suspicion that the Legislature is a toothless tiger on growth. I don't thinkit's an unfounded notion," she said. John Benton is a valley architect specializing in urban infill, a term fordeveloping in the center city. He said politicians may superficially address the concerns of citizens whocomplain about sprawl, but behind the scenes they coddle the state's huge developers who are plowing underpristine desert acreage on the northern and western edges of Phoenix, where land is cheap. "Growing Smarteris the Legislature's way of doing things without making Del Webb angry," he said of Arizona's largest builder.17 March 2013 Page 369 of 483 ProQuestBenton considers most of the current planned communities sprouting on the fringes of Phoenix to be "soulless"and decries the now-standard growth policy of luring a large population to the edge of a city, beyond the reachof existing public services and businesses. "We should draw concentric circles around our cities and make thedevelopers pay to extend services to the perimeter--schools, retail, driving time, roads and the resultantpollutants," Benton said. "Development fees on the perimeter should be 4X and the infills should be minus 2X.The way it is now, infill pays for the sprawl." Phoenix was second in the nation in housing starts last year, andas sprawl continues its march into Arizona's remote corners, some envision a future with wall-to-wall plannedSpanish-style communities--effectively placing the entire state under a red tile roof. "The reality is the SierraClub has all the good sound bites on their side. The developers don't have any," said Diane McCarthy, cochairwomanof the county's Valley Vision 2025 planning group. "Planners need to see Phoenix as themegalopolis it has become, a la Los Angeles." To be sure, Phoenix's growth has something to do with the city's4% unemployment rate, its revitalized downtown, healthy opera, symphony and theater companies and a recentranking as the No. 1 city in the nation for small business start-ups. And the emigres help to add diversity toMaricopa County, which is still 79% white. But the challenges only mount: Maricopa County's population isexpected to more than double by 2035. Dust's Serious Side Effects Phoenix is teeming with those whose onlyjob is to fight the dust battle. Pool cleaners, air-conditioning repairmen and house cleaners all report that theirlives are made more miserable by dust, even as their livelihoods benefit. An entire bureaucracy exists withinlocal government to dust off dust. Maricopa County has a Dust Hot Line, which receives 1,400 calls a year.Gaye Knight, the air quality advisor for the city of Phoenix, said her office receives 5,000 complaints a yearabout fugitive dust. Since the EPA crackdown last year, Knight says, the city has paved 70 miles of roads andspent more than $12 million in dust abatement programs. Dust is being viewed less as a housekeeping choreand more as a serious environmental problem. Officials say that 75% of the dust is created by humans, mainlyfrom agriculture and construction. The county even sends teams into the schools to teach children dust-controltechniques and health guidelines. "We've come a long way in people understanding that dust is a problem,"Knight said. A 1995 study estimated that 963 Arizonans a year die prematurely of respiratory ailments frominhaling particulates. Another study found that in areas where fine dust levels are consistently high, lifeexpectancy among heart patients may be reduced by as much as two years. The EPA and the Centers forDisease Control and Prevention found a 10% increased risk of mortality among babies living in cities with highlevels of particulate pollution. Children and the elderly are most at risk for dust-related health problems, as areasthma sufferers--the very demographic that flocks to Arizona's warm, dry climate. Valley fever, an illnesswhose symptoms can range from fatigue to fungus in bones or the lining of the brain, is a pathogen that livesquietly in the ground until soil is disturbed. The number of cases in Arizona has doubled in recent years, and thecost of hospitalizing valley fever patients has been put at more than $20 million. Of course, dust problems arenot new in Arizona, and some suggest that simply growing up in the desert might lead to valley fever. Butblaming the landscape is not the answer, says Howard Wilshire, a former senior scientist for the U.S. GeologicalSurvey. "Undisturbed desert does not create large quantities of dust," he said. "A natural crust of algae andlichen forms in the desert and it stabilizes the soil. The problem is man. We are being exceedingly foolish withour abuse of the desert." Need for Cleanup Spawns an Industry Lou Snow is one of Phoenix's dust busters withhis 10-year-old business, Dust Pro. Snow provides dust abatement on vacant lots, dirt roads and constructionsites. Business has been booming since the EPA's mandates, one of which now requires dust control measureson any plot of ground larger than a tenth of an acre. Among the methods Snow employs is spraying organicstabilizers on soil that bind with dirt to keep dust down. Snow is passionate on the topic and about what heviews as the colossal waste of water, popularly used as a dust inhibitor here. Watching two water trucks trudgethrough an immense sand and gravel yard in south Phoenix, Snow points to the spray that barely wets the dustyroad as the sun blares down. "You can time how long it works on your second hand," he said dismissively.Snow's quick calculation of the water usage to suppress dust at this one site comes to 64,000 gallons a day.17 March 2013 Page 370 of 483 ProQuestThe multiplying effect across the valley makes the construction industry one of the state's biggest waterguzzlers. With Maricopa County bringing its number of dust inspectors to nine as part of its compliancemeasures, more water trucks are likely to be pressed into action, especially at Phoenix's myriad constructionsites. At one such rambling site, Curtis Rogers sits in the dusty cab of his water truck, fingering a grimy bolognasandwich. A fine layer of dust covers him. When he gestures in conversation, the dust rises like a mist. The 33-year-old is philosophical about the growth and dust debate that is roaring around him. "It's pretty clear if wedidn't keep growing the way we are here, building and building, we wouldn't have such a dust problem," he said,shrugging. "But it doesn't bother me that much. It's called job security." Researcher Belen Rodriguez contributedto this story. Illustration CAPTION: PHOTO: A massive dust storm looms above downtown Phoenix, whereunchecked real estate development is diminishing air quality.; PHOTOGRAPHER: SHERRIE BUZBY / ArizonaRepublic; PHOTO: This dust storm last month was so thick it delayed takeoffs from Phoenix's Sky HarborInternational Airport for up to 90 minutes. Wind gusts up to 45 mph hampered visibility throughout the area.;PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Urban development; Air pollution; Dust; Quality of lifeLocation: Phoenix ArizonaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: Sep 7, 1999Year: 1999Dateline: PHOENIXSection: PART- A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05709056ProQuest document ID: 421468457Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand17 March 2013 Page 371 of 483 ProQuest_______________________________________________________________Document 166 of 213Smoke From Wildfires Chokes N. California; Health: Smog levels, respiratory problems and energyuse soar. High temperatures compound difficulties.Author: Bailey, Eric; Acuna, ArmandoPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 27 Aug 1999: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Hundreds of wildfires threw a choking blanket of smoke over Northern California on Thursday,combining with triple-digit temperatures to prompt health warnings and send residents scurrying indoors toescape the foul air. Gov. Gray Davis declared fire emergencies in four Northern California counties--Tehama,Butte, Tuolumne and Shasta--and ordered the National Guard to assist in fighting the fires that scorched morethan 80,000 acres. A layer of atmospheric pressure acted like a lid over the region, sending smoke from morethan 250 mountain blazes cascading into the heart of the valley. Pollution readings for fine particles--the stuffthat smoke is made of--soared to five times higher than normal in Sacramento, causing the local air district toissue a special health warning against strenuous outdoor activity.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Hundreds of wildfires threw a choking blanket of smoke over Northern California on Thursday,combining with triple-digit temperatures to prompt health warnings and send residents scurrying indoors toescape the foul air. Schools canceled recess, softball leagues postponed games, summer camps movedindoors, and allergists reported record business as smoke blanketed a 200-mile stretch of the Central Valleyfrom Modesto to Redding. Gov. Gray Davis declared fire emergencies in four Northern California counties--Tehama, Butte, Tuolumne and Shasta--and ordered the National Guard to assist in fighting the fires thatscorched more than 80,000 acres. A layer of atmospheric pressure acted like a lid over the region, sendingsmoke from more than 250 mountain blazes cascading into the heart of the valley. Pollution readings for fineparticles--the stuff that smoke is made of--soared to five times higher than normal in Sacramento, causing thelocal air district to issue a special health warning against strenuous outdoor activity. "I've been delivering mailhere for 24 years and this is the worst I've ever seen it," said Steve Tessman, a U.S. Postal Service lettercarrier, as he prepared to hit the street in downtown Sacramento. "This bothers me a lot more than the rain, thefog, all that stuff." Residents reported watery eyes, scratchy throats and difficulty breathing, especially thosealready suffering from asthma and other lung conditions. At Enloe Medical Center in Chico, five people hadbeen treated and released since Wednesday for respiratory problems caused by the smoke. "It feels like I havea freight train sitting on my chest," said Tina Munoz, a severe asthmatic who runs a coffee cart near the stateCapitol. "This reminds me of the air when Mount St. Helens blew its top." The culprit this week was the scoresof wildfires, many sparked by thunderstorms that plowed through the region Monday and scattered 3,700lightning strikes in a matter of hours. By Thursday, thousands of acres had been charred, mostly by a dozenlarge fires in rural Butte, Tehama and Lassen counties, and one person had been killed. A 36-year-old ButteCounty woman died Tuesday after she apparently became disoriented by the smoke, took a wrong turn anddrove into the flames. Hundreds of people were evacuated in remote areas across the region, but firefightersbeat back blazes that threatened residential areas. Property damage has been minor--so far just an uninhabitedcabin and a few other small structures. One fire closed California 120 into Yosemite National Park and otherblazes burned thousands of acres in remote sections of the park. More than 4,000 state and federal firefightersbattled the wildfires, along with 1,400 recruits flown in from as far away as Tennessee. Scores of wildfires alsoraged in Nevada, Oregon, Utah and Idaho. Firefighters were gearing up for the weekend as weather forecasters17 March 2013 Page 372 of 483 ProQuestpredicted a combination of hot, dry weather, renewed lightning storms and gusty winds. "The concern right nowis we're going to be hit by another wave of fires," said Karen Terrill of the California Department of Forestry andFire Protection. On Thursday, the high temperatures combined with the brush fires prompted regional electricityregulators to declare a Stage 1 emergency in Northern California, asking customers to voluntarily reduce energyuse. The brush fires had limited the ability of utilities to draw power from the Pacific Northwest. Hightemperatures--which reached 105 degrees in Redding and 99 degrees in Sacramento--fueled heavy demandfor air conditioning. But the most visible problem for most people was the air. In Sacramento, smog spiked in thevery unhealthful range Wednesday and was only slightly better Thursday. In contrast, Los Angeles has yet tohave a first-stage smog alert all year. An even bigger worry was the smoky particulates clouding the skies,which settled like a fog over vast areas. In Sacramento County, the normal level is 10 micrograms per cubicmeter. About 8 a.m. Thursday, the smoke drove it to 144, clouding views of the Capitol dome from just acrossthe street. That was nothing compared to Butte County, which was hit by dozens of fires. Lawrence Odle,director of the county's Air Quality Management District, said the particulate reading briefly hit 800 earlyThursday. A north wind continued to push the smoke deeper into the valley. Forecasters said they expect thesmoke to hang around through the weekend, until a new weather system arrives early next week and blows thedirty air away. At school districts just starting for the year in Sacramento County, administrators reacted to theair alert by switching to rainy-day schedules. Recess and physical education classes were being held inclassrooms, lunch in multipurpose rooms. Football teams at several area high schools were headed into thegym for practice. Doctors were flooded with queries from concerned patients. "I've never had as many calls inmy life in the 25 years I've lived here," said Dr. Eric Gershwin, head of the UC Davis Medical Center'sDepartment of Allergy and Rheumatology. Most were asking for medication or advice on dealing with thesmoke, particularly those with asthma, emphysema and bronchitis. Gershwin was advising patients to stayindoors, wear paper masks if they had to go outside and avoid sitting in cars on freeways. In downtownSacramento, Lizzie Wolf and Rita Spillane refused to let the miserable air beat them down. Instead of hunkeringinside an air-conditioned office, they braved the heat and smoke at an outdoor cafe. Spillane had biked to work,figuring that in her own small way she had helped reduce the smog. "This is a terrible, horrible day. It'sunbelievable," said Spillane, a deputy district attorney. "It's like sitting around a campfire too long. At a nearbyhigh-rise under construction, Bob Figone said the smoke got thicker the higher he went in the 26-story buildinghe is helping to erect. If conditions got any worse, he said, he planned to order his colleagues down to lowerfloors or pull them off the job completely. "This is a real bad deal," he said. "You can see different layers ofsmoke, and it feels like it's about 102. You smell bad, people are getting headaches. It's just terrible." (BEGINTEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Bad Air Day Smoke from more than 250 wildfires burning in NorthernCalifornia has caused pollution readings for particulate matter to jump five times the normal level. Ozone levelshave risen to unhealthy levels in the Central Valley. California Fires Most of the fires were sparked by 3,700lightning strikes from thunderstorms that moved across the northern part of the state. High winds and stormsmay develop in the next few days, possibly worsening the fires and making them more difficult for firefighters tocontain. Central Valley Air Quality Ozone levels improved Thursday in Sacramento, though air remained visiblydirty with particulates. Illustration CAPTION: PHOTO: (A-1) Heavy smoke from wildfires drifts across stateCapitol dome Thursday morning in Sacramento.; PHOTOGRAPHER: ROBERT DURELL / Los Angeles Times;PHOTO: Bob Bowen adjusts his mask before riding his bicycle in Davis. Mountain wildfires have spewedunhealthy smoke into Sacramento area.; PHOTOGRAPHER: ROBERT DURELL / Los Angeles Times;GRAPHIC: Bad Air Day, (Including maps), Los Angeles Times Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSSubject: Forest & brush fires; Smog; Air pollution; Temperature; Public health; Health hazardsLocation: Northern California17 March 2013 Page 373 of 483 ProQuestPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: Aug 27, 1999Year: 1999Dateline: SACRAMENTOSection: PART- A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05680616ProQuest document ID: 421429425Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 167 of 213The City With the Grittiest Air on Earth; China: Breathing in Lanzhou is like smoking a pack ofcigarettes a day. Officials have started to realize the costs.Author: Farley, MaggiePublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 15 June 1999: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The latest survey from the World Resources Institute in Washington found this city of 2 million peoplein central China to have the globe's least breathable air. A combination of coal smoke, car exhaust and dustfrom the arid yellow mountains means that on the worst days, each breath is something you can crunchbetween your teeth. That Lanzhou tops the list is not a surprise for China: Nine of the world's 10 most pollutedcities are in this country--the other one is Rajkot, in India--and respiratory illness is the leading cause of deathhere. The number of particulates per cubic meter in Lanzhou is about seven times the number in Los Angeles.In the race toward economic development, China had until fairly recently been following the West's path: Getrich, and then get clean. But studies showing that a polluted environment has significant economic and health17 March 2013 Page 374 of 483 ProQuestcosts galvanized the country to follow a different strategy. The government decided that making an expensiveinvestment now will mean universal rewards later.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Jun-jun, a 7-year-old with tiny pigtails, has an unexpected answer to a simple question: What color isthe sky? "White," she says. "Sometimes yellow." Jun-jun lives in Lanzhou, the world's most polluted city. It is aplace where simply breathing is the same as smoking a pack of cigarettes a day. The latest survey from theWorld Resources Institute in Washington found this city of 2 million people in central China to have the globe'sleast breathable air. A combination of coal smoke, car exhaust and dust from the arid yellow mountains meansthat on the worst days, each breath is something you can crunch between your teeth. That Lanzhou tops the listis not a surprise for China: Nine of the world's 10 most polluted cities are in this country--the other one is Rajkot,in India--and respiratory illness is the leading cause of death here. The number of particulates per cubic meterin Lanzhou is about seven times the number in Los Angeles. In the race toward economic development, Chinahad until fairly recently been following the West's path: Get rich, and then get clean. But studies showing that apolluted environment has significant economic and health costs galvanized the country to follow a differentstrategy. The government decided that making an expensive investment now will mean universal rewards later."The environmental sacrifices China has made in achieving its economic growth are astonishing," Shanghaiprofessor Zhai Shijing said at the National People's Congress in March. Chinese researchers calculate that thecosts of pollution can eat up about 3.5% of gross domestic product. Counting the cost of workers' sick days andhealth care for pollution-induced diseases, as well as the amount of forests and farmland lost to environmentaldegradation, the World Bank estimates that the price is as high as 8% of GDP, effectively canceling out China'seconomic progress. This year, the government has put aside $10 billion for environmental protection. Andthanks to an ambitious program to clean up industries by 2001, the air in some Chinese cities is actuallyimproving. In Shanghai, for example, the collapse of the textile industry, the shifting of other large factories tooutside the city and an aggressive tree-planting program mean the air has fewer particulates--the grit that cancause lung cancer. The amount of lead in the air, however, remains alarmingly high, at a level that can causeretardation in children. National Plan Targets 49 Cities Faced with the risk of damaging a generation of childrenand wasting hard-won growth, the central government has put forth an impressive plan. In 49 key cities, localgovernments must reduce their pollution to 1995 levels by 2000 or the factories that don't meet the standardswill be shut down. So far, says Mou Guangfeng, a vice director of the National Environmental ProtectionAgency, the government has closed about 65,200 small plants. Lanzhou is considering everything to reducepollution, including moving a mountain. But so far, the air here is only getting worse. "Yes, we have achieved akind of fame for our air pollution," says Yu Xionghou, the director of the Lanzhou Environmental ProtectionBureau. "We're doing the best we can to improve it." Man has conspired with nature here: Lanzhou sits in thebottom of a narrow bowl-shaped valley, lidded with layers of haze, dust and smoke. The mountains surroundingthe city keep the wind from blowing the smog away. The arid yellow earth here crumbles to the touch, and theonly trees on the hillsides have been planted and watered by hand. "When I was a schoolboy, we had to carry apiece of ice on our backs up the hill to water the trees. Now we pipe water up," Yu muses. "But I think God isunfair to put us in this place." One Developer's Idea: Move a Mountain To give the trapped smog an outlet, adeveloper came up with the idea of moving a mountain. A team of explosive experts blasted off the peak--butdespite elaborate sprinkling systems to keep the detritus down, the blast put even more dust in the air. The planto make the mountain into a molehill was much costlier, and much less effective, than people had hoped andwas suspended last year. "I think it was like drilling a hole in the wall of a smoke-filled room," Yu says. "Weneed to do something else." Now he is spearheading more down-to-earth solutions: converting to unleadedgasoline; switching from coal--80% of Lanzhou's power comes from coal-fired plants--to natural gas; plantingmore trees; and trying to use more wind, solar and hydroelectric energy. The World Bank is helping the city17 March 2013 Page 375 of 483 ProQuestestablish a pollution-monitoring system. The hardest task of all: shutting down the polluters. Last winter, whenair pollution reached a critical level, Lanzhou's environmental agency ordered more than 100 factories to closetemporarily. But it was also a time when each city in China had to reach a government-mandated target of 8%growth, and Lanzhou is home to several of the largest state-owned enterprises, including a giant oil refinery anda steel plant. "It was very, very hard to shut down the factories," says Yu, who describes strong resistance notonly from the factory managers but also from other government departments intent on meeting their economictargets. So Yu tried another tack: public outrage. He called local journalists and told them how the largefactories were endangering people's health and refusing to stop doing so. The usually restrained press wentafter the companies with relish, and the loss of face for the factories spurred them to halt production. Yu wonthe battle, but the struggle continues in Lanzhou, and in cities across China, as local, short-term interests tendto win out over the mandate for a global good. The national environmental agency has been gaining politicalinfluence in the central government, but it still has the power only to suggest changes and supervise policy.Recently, its mission has become even harder as the economy slows and the imperative to keep peopleworking weighs against the need to shut down inefficient factories. The biggest difference can be made withmoney and technology from more developed countries, officials say. Authorities Look to Foreign Investment"Frankly speaking, it is too costly to make all the improvements necessary to meet the new governmentstandards," says Mao Xuewen, a senior engineer at the Sinopec petroleum plant in Lanzhou. "But if we don't,we will be closed down. If foreign countries complain about China's pollution, they should help us solve it andgive us better technology." In fact, as China's 1.3 billion people use more electricity and drive more cars, theworld is feeling the effects and is pitching in. Japan, suffering from acid rain caused by clouds of sulfur blownover from China, is donating $343 million and new equipment to help China clean up. "The process of economicdevelopment can cause pollution," says Yu. "But it can also help stop it." Illustration Caption: PHOTO: A veteranstreet sweeper in Lanzhou wears mask while working.; PHOTOGRAPHER: MAGGIE FARLEY / Los AngelesTimes Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Air pollution; Public health; Respiratory diseasesLocation: China, Lanzhou ChinaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: Jun 15, 1999Year: 1999Dateline: LANZHOU, ChinaSection: PART- A; Foreign DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: English17 March 2013 Page 376 of 483 ProQuestDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05595760ProQuest document ID: 421380966Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 168 of 213California and the West; Burning of Waste by Farmers Raises Concerns; Ecology: Few peoplecomplain, but air quality experts say the time-honored torching of plant material is polluting the SanJoaquin Valley.Author: ARAX, MARKPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 14 June 1999: 3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: In this long, flat valley that stretches from Bakersfield to Stockton--the second-worst air quality basin inthe nation, after Los Angeles--farmers are still allowed to torch branches, ignite raisin trays and burn entirefields of uprooted peach trees, grapevines and grain stubble. Years after rice growers in the Sacramento Valleywere forced to change their controversial burning practices because of air quality degradation, farmers in theSan Joaquin Valley continue their time-honored practice. Air quality experts agree that the burning of farmwaste can be a significant source of pollution, especially during the fall and winter when the air is stagnant orfoggy and classrooms are sometimes one-quarter empty because of children at home with asthma or other lungailments. Nearly 750,000 acres of farmland and rangeland were burned last year in the eight counties that makeup the San Joaquin Valley, according to official reports. More than 1 million tons of farm waste was set on fire,adding nearly 5,000 tons of suspended particulates to the air basin.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The San Joaquin Valley, one foot stuck in suburbia and the other foot still firmly planted in itsagricultural past, is a place full of odd little clashes. There are the Hmong aborigines from the highlands of Laosgrowing big, fat strawberries at the town's edge, their tiny farms about to be gobbled up by suburban sprawl.There are busy streets full of commerce suddenly stopped dead by an irrigation canal shunting water to distantfarms. And then there is the TV weatherman bemoaning another forecast of smutty, putrid air only to announcethat tomorrow--for the third straight day--is another "permissive burn day" for farmers. In this long, flat valley thatstretches from Bakersfield to Stockton--the second-worst air quality basin in the nation, after Los Angeles--farmers are still allowed to torch branches, ignite raisin trays and burn entire fields of uprooted peach trees,grapevines and grain stubble. Years after rice growers in the Sacramento Valley were forced to change theircontroversial burning practices because of air quality degradation, farmers in the San Joaquin Valley continuetheir time-honored practice. There are few calls, not even from the local Sierra Club, to stop the burnings, eventhough entire recycling plants were built over the last 15 years to handle such waste. "It's not an issue that reallycomes up, though it probably should," said George Whitmore, president of the Fresno chapter of the Sierra17 March 2013 Page 377 of 483 ProQuestClub. But air quality control regulars say that there are problems with the current practice, and they have metwith farmers and others to find a better way. To what degree farming practices contribute to the valley'sworsening air pollution is not exactly known. A $27-million joint study by federal and state environmentalregulators is trying to quantify the health risks posed by dust and other particulates from farming operations. Airquality experts agree that the burning of farm waste can be a significant source of pollution, especially duringthe fall and winter when the air is stagnant or foggy and classrooms are sometimes one-quarter empty becauseof children at home with asthma or other lung ailments. Nearly 750,000 acres of farmland and rangeland wereburned last year in the eight counties that make up the San Joaquin Valley, according to official reports. Morethan 1 million tons of farm waste was set on fire, adding nearly 5,000 tons of suspended particulates to the airbasin. The San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District declared 101 days off-limits to burning in1998. But farmers here and there routinely defy "no burn" days, willing to risk a sometimes stiff fine in order toclear a field for planting. With only half a dozen full-time inspectors monitoring field burning in a valley thatencompasses 25,000 square miles, farmers say there are better than even odds that they will get away with it."It's like breaking a speed law," said farmer Walt Hogan. "If you need to clear your field in a hurry to plant newtrees or crop, some farmers figure they're better off risking a fine than letting that field sit idle for a whole year."Hogan, a Caruthers raisin grower who operates a land clearing business, was fined $1,500 last year by the airpollution control district for burning on a "no burn" day. "This is how backward the law is," he said. "A lot of timesI start the fire on a burn day, but I have to stop because the next day is a 'no burn' day. So the fire just sits thereand smolders for two or three days until it's a burn day again. This smoldering creates a heck of a lot morepollution than if I had been allowed to let it burn clean and straight through." Farmers say that time and moneyconsiderations force them to torch their pruned waste and uprooted orchards rather than opt for wood chippingor recycling at a biomass plant. Clearing an old orchard by bulldozer and fire can take half the time and cost halfas much as recycling. Air pollution control regulators say that big and small growers alike break the law. Theyconcede that the fines, mostly ranging from $500 to $2,000, do not act as a huge deterrent. The largest fine,$7,000, was issued a few years ago against E.J. Gallo Winery of Modesto for burning plastic bags of greengrass and other landscaping waste and trying to pass it off as walnut tree limbs, regulators say. Gallo's Fresnooperation, paradoxically, is listed as one of the firms that recycle green waste for farmers. "For a lot of farmers,it's a matter of tradition," said Mike Escotto, a supervisor for the air pollution control district. "They feel it's theirright to burn and they can be resistant to change." Some environmentalists criticize the air pollution controldistrict as a toothless agency unwilling to come down hard on farmers. They also criticize local governmentsthat approve large residential projects on the fringe of town, thereby increasing car travel. At the same time,environmentalists point out, nearly all of the biomass plants in the valley have closed because the big powercompanies, in the climate of deregulation, are no longer buying energy produced by burning recycled waste.Environmentalists are encouraging the air pollution district to spend some of its millions in grant money to bringthe biomass plants back on line and subsidize agricultural recycling. Air pollution regulators say they don't knowif it is economically feasible for a single district to attempt to salvage the cogeneration industry without the helpof the state government. They say former Gov. Pete Wilson vetoed two bills that would have provided taxcredits to farmers and biomass plants for recycling farm waste. The pollution control district does not foreseebanning the practice of agricultural burning, but regulators have proposed a plan that they believe will betterprotect the public and prove more fair to farmers. The plan would open up every day of the year to agriculturalburning except smog alert days. But burning would be allowed on only a limited number of acres in each countyeach day. "Putting it in place is going to be a big challenge," said Bob Kard, the air district's director ofcompliance. "It would require a lot more accounting, computer monitoring and weather forecasting. Bu with thisvalley only getting more crowded, we're going to have to do something." Illustration Caption: PHOTO: VerdoGregory uses fire to clear weeds on his farm near Corcoran, Calif.; GARY KAZANJIAN / For The Times Credit:TIMES STAFF WRITER17 March 2013 Page 378 of 483 ProQuestSubject: Fires; Air pollution; Farmers; Waste disposalLocation: San Joaquin ValleyPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: Jun 14, 1999Year: 1999Dateline: FRESNOSection: PART- A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05585958ProQuest document ID: 421407278Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 169 of 213Air Board OKs New Limits on Pollution in Harbor Area; Environment: Measure seeks to curbemissions of coal, coke and sulfur. Impact on industry could reach $65 million.Author: Weikel, DanPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 12 June 1999: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Air quality regulators took a major step toward cleaning up the harbor environment Friday byapproving a comprehensive package of measures to reduce potentially hazardous emissions of coal, petroleumcoke and sulfur at industrial sites in the county's ports. The decision by the South Coast Air QualityManagement District board came as a relief to harbor-area residents and workers who have been trying foryears to cut air pollution from cargo terminals, oil refineries and petroleum coke storage areas. AQMD officials17 March 2013 Page 379 of 483 ProQuestsaid the requirements passed Friday build on existing rules that have not been effective in substantiallyreducing airborne particles of coal, petroleum coke and sulfur.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Air quality regulators took a major step toward cleaning up the harbor environment Friday by approvinga comprehensive package of measures to reduce potentially hazardous emissions of coal, petroleum coke andsulfur at industrial sites in the county's ports. The decision by the South Coast Air Quality Management Districtboard came as a relief to harbor-area residents and workers who have been trying for years to cut air pollutionfrom cargo terminals, oil refineries and petroleum coke storage areas. The 11-member board voted 8 to 0 toapprove a host of measures, which might cost businesses up to $65 million to implement at sites located mostlyin the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Three board members were absent. "This represents 2 1/2 yearsof work with industry and the harbor community," said Carol Coy, a high-ranking AQMD official who oversawdevelopment of the regulations. "We have crafted a lasting solution to a long-standing problem." AQMD officialssaid the requirements passed Friday build on existing rules that have not been effective in substantiallyreducing airborne particles of coal, petroleum coke and sulfur. The new measures focus primarily on petroleumcoke, a byproduct of the refinery process that can be used as a fuel for heating and industrial purposes. Much ofit is exported to Asia. Fine particles of the material can aggravate respiratory illnesses such as asthma,emphysema, bronchitis and pneumonia. Medical studies have repeatedly shown a link between elevated levelsof particulate matter and deaths of people with respiratory or heart disease. Among other things, the new rulesrequire cargo terminals and companies that handle petroleum coke to enclose conveyors, loading facilities andstorage areas. Trucks that haul the material must be covered. The regulations also call for wind screens,cleanup programs and paved roads to allow the removal of spilled materials at companies that handle coke,coal and sulfur. "This is a great accomplishment for harbor-area residents. Finally, we are going to have safeair," said Gertrude Schwab, a local activist and president of the Wilmington North Neighborhood Assn. AQMDofficials say that terminal operators, shipping companies, storage facilities and refineries have until the end of2002 to comply with the regulations. The schedule is a compromise between industry, which had sought a fiveyeartime frame, and the district staff, which wanted a two-year period. During the compliance phase, AQMDofficials will monitor emissions twice a year. They will hold a community meeting in 18 months to assess theimpact of the regulations. The new rules affect about 30 facilities that handle, transport and store petroleumcoke, coal and sulfur; 23 are located in the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. The AQMD estimates that allthe facilities emit 334 tons a year of fine particulates that can be inhaled and 1,345 tons a year of largerparticles that soil boats, buildings and other property. If the new rules are effective, AQMD officials say, annualemissions of fine particulates will be cut by 265 tons and the larger particles by 1,047 tons. Board membersvoted after hearing more than an hour of public testimony from industry, labor organizations, environmentalgroups and harbor-area residents, some of whom brought samples of coal and coke dust collected from theirhomes. "When we moved to Long Beach nine months ago, we thought we had reached heaven," said EdnaBruce, who grew up in a West Virginia coal mining town and now lives in a high-rise condominium. "After twoweeks, I began to notice the dust," she said holding up a small plastic bag. "It looked like coal dirt." Long BeachCity Councilman Ray Grabinski called for the board to pass the new requirements, saying that schoolchildren inhis district are repeatedly exposed to petroleum coke from the adjacent harbor. "This is like sweeping up afteran elephant. We need to make the bad boys do something," Grabinski said. "We need to do something aboutthis witch's brew in the air." With a couple of exceptions, industry representatives said they generally supportedthe new rules, although they have been concerned about the cost and effectiveness of the new measures aswell as the deadline for compliance. William A. Zobel, director of legislative and regulatory affairs for ArcoProducts Co., said the new rules will cost his company $8 million to $12 million up front and increase operatingcosts $2 million to $5 million a year. "These rules will be expensive for industry and a challenge to implement,"17 March 2013 Page 380 of 483 ProQuestsaid Al Garnier, executive vice president of Metropolitan Stevedore Co., which handles shipments of petroleumcoke, coal and sulfur in the Port of Long Beach. Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Emissions; Local government; Harbors; Refineries; Industrial wastes; Air pollutionLocation: Los Angeles County CaliforniaCompany: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CAPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: Jun 12, 1999Year: 1999Section: Metro; PART- B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05584143ProQuest document ID: 421519930Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 170 of 213Air Inside Cars Found Dirtier Than OutsideAuthor: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 11 June 1999: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The air people breathe inside their cars can be as much as 10 times more polluted than even thetypical dirty outdoor air in the Los Angeles area, according to a study released Thursday by California air qualityofficials. Breathing the Los Angeles region's outdoor air is known to be bad for health, but the new study is thefirst to show how high the pollution levels are inside cars under a variety of driving conditions. Pollution levels of17 March 2013 Page 381 of 483 ProQuestseveral dangerous pollutants are at least twice as bad inside cars as outside, and levels of others are 10 timesworse. In the study, which cost $440,000, motorists were equipped with monitors to record the levels of pollutionthey breathed while driving. "We know that air pollutants in ambient outdoor air pose a health risk to Southlandresidents," said Barry Wallerstein, the AQMD's executive officer. "This study confirms that commuters face anadditional risk breathing the polluted air inside their cars."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The air people breathe inside their cars can be as much as 10 times more polluted than even thetypical dirty outdoor air in the Los Angeles area, according to a study released Thursday by California air qualityofficials. And the researchers found there is little that motorists and passengers can do to protect themselvesother than staying away from rush-hour driving and, in particular, avoiding getting stuck behind diesel buses orolder-model cars. Other common tactics, such as opening or closing windows or vents and turning on airconditioning do not help, according to a new study of motorists driving on freeways in Los Angeles County andSacramento. Although car ventilation systems did show marginal success in filtering out tiny soot particles, thesort that belch from diesel trucks and buses, toxic gases such as benzene leaked into the vehicles no matterwhat, the research showed. Breathing the Los Angeles region's outdoor air is known to be bad for health, butthe new study is the first to show how high the pollution levels are inside cars under a variety of drivingconditions. Pollution levels of several dangerous pollutants are at least twice as bad inside cars as outside, andlevels of others are 10 times worse. "We're learning that people's highest daily exposure to air pollutants maybe during their commute to and from work," said Alan Lloyd, chairman of the California Air Resources Board,which conducted the study with the South Coast Air Quality Management District. In the study, which cost$440,000, motorists were equipped with monitors to record the levels of pollution they breathed while driving."We know that air pollutants in ambient outdoor air pose a health risk to Southland residents," said BarryWallerstein, the AQMD's executive officer. "This study confirms that commuters face an additional risk breathingthe polluted air inside their cars." The study found that a person standing alongside a freeway is actuallyexposed to less of some kinds of pollutants than a person driving a car. That is probably because the gases andparticles spewed by traffic accumulate in the vehicles, which contain only a small volume of air in which theycan be dispersed. The fumes found inside the cars have been linked to a variety of respiratory problems,including lung cancer, asthma and allergies. Because of the disturbing results, the California Air ResourcesBoard has begun tests to explore the risks that children face in school buses. Initial tests showed that the airinside buses is better than that inside autos, probably because there is a larger volume of air inside a bus. Butbecause children are more susceptible than adults to lung problems and breathe in more air for their bodyweight, the board has decided to collect more data on the risk to youngsters traveling to and from school. "Wehave concerns about the potential impact on bus riders, especially children," Lloyd said. Is there anything amotorist can do? "Drive in the carpool lane, avoid rush hour, report smoking vehicles and avoid the mostcongested traffic," said Air Resources Board spokesman Jerry Martin. To report vehicles putting out excessiveexhaust, motorists can call (800) CUT-SMOG. During the tests, cars driven during rush hours contained nearlytwice the pollutants of cars driven at less congested times. People in carpool lanes breathed cleaner air. Theircars contained two to five times less pollution than those in regular lanes, probably because the lanes are lesscongested and farther from trucks. More than half of the pollutants inside the test cars were emitted by thevehicle in front of them. The two-year study was conducted on several Los Angeles County freeways. Beginningin El Monte, the motorists drove on Interstates 10, 110, 405, 605 and 91. Similar tests were also conducted inSacramento. While the tests focused on freeways, the results on heavily traveled surface streets are likely to besimilar. In general, because California has gradually imposed standards reducing car exhaust, older vehiclestend to produce more pollution. Hydrocarbon emissions from a 1999 auto are 90% lower than those from a 20-year-old car. Truck and bus engines built after 1990 emit less soot than older ones. The worst pollutants found17 March 2013 Page 382 of 483 ProQuestwere tiny, inhalable particulates that come mainly from diesel vehicles and two compounds that are emittedmostly from gasoline-powered automobiles: benzene, which is known to cause leukemia, and 1,3-butadiene,which is a powerful carcinogen. Diesel exhaust has been linked to lung cancer and allergies, and fine particlesare believed to raise the risk of death from respiratory and cardiac diseases. Concentrations of pollution insidethe cars were compared with ambient air measurements, which are taken throughout the region at monitoringstations that are not located near freeways or factories. The study revealed that a car driving behind a dieselbus contained up to 18,000 counts of fine particles per cubic meter of air. The normal range in the area is 2,000to 4,000. A car behind a diesel delivery van contained 12,000, or up to six times the normal range. For 1,3-butadiene, a car on a freeway contained 4.1 counts per cubic meter of air, 10 times worse than the ambientaverage of 0.4. For benzene, a car contained more than triple the concentration found in ambient air. Otherpollutants found in high concentrations were carbon monoxide, the fuel additive MTBE, ethyl benzene andtoluene. All have been declared toxic air pollutants by the state air board and the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency. Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Air pollution; Automobiles; Traffic; Research; StudiesLocation: CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: Jun 11, 1999Year: 1999Section: PART- A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05583974ProQuest document ID: 421388937Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________17 March 2013 Page 383 of 483 ProQuestDocument 171 of 213SUNDAY REPORT; Diesel--the Dark Side of Industry; Emissions from trucks, trains and machinespose a serious threat, clogging lungs, damaging airways and triggering allergies. But regulating theproblem is a contentious issue. Series: DIRTY EXHAUST: America's Unhealthy Reliance on Diesel .First of two partsAuthor: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 30 May 1999: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: One of the most ubiquitous and perilous pollutants in the nation's air, exhaust spewed from dieselengines is a potent blend of particles and gases that can inflame the airways, clog the lungs, trigger allergiesand even damage genes and induce cancer. Nowhere is the issue more pressing than in California, wherediesel engines--preferred for their reliability and powerful enough to climb mountain passes--drive the state'seconomy. More than 4 million Californians suffer from a chronic lung disease. Residents of Los Angeles,Orange, San Bernardino and Riverside counties breathe some of the worst concentrations of diesel fumes inthe nation--on average, almost 20 times more diesel particles every day than if they lived in the rural foothills ofthe Sierra Nevada. Hot spots--city streets, trucking centers, ports, train yards and freeways--are even worse.Driving to work or standing at a busy intersection exposes Southern Californians to diesel exhaust several timesworse than the amount the EPA calls unhealthful. Air along the region's freeways regularly contains dieselpollution twice as bad as the EPA's recommended maximum. Some city streets peak at six times higher.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: SEE CORRECTION APPENDED Dale Lewis' life went up in a puff of thick, black smoke. For two daysin a row, as he unloaded baggage from jets at Los Angeles International Airport, clouds of soot poured out of amalfunctioning diesel-powered loading machine. For 23 years Lewis worked for airlines, taking pride in hardlyever calling in sick. But now his head ached, his eyes burned and his nose ran. Coughs racked his body.Suddenly he could barely breathe. Examined by a doctor, Lewis was shocked to learn, according to courtdocuments, that his airways were severely scarred. A specialist told him he was suffering the sudden onset ofan unusual respiratory disease, an "industrial asthma," caused by the intense bouts of diesel smoke exposure."An irreversible condition," the pulmonologist said, "with a poor prognosis." The fumes had eaten away at thelining of his airways, leaving them so hypersensitive he had to live on oxygen 24 hours a day, confined to hishome. Less than three years later, in 1997, Lewis died at the age of 59--a victim, apparently, of a rare case ofdeath by diesel. One of the most ubiquitous and perilous pollutants in the nation's air, exhaust spewed fromdiesel engines is a potent blend of particles and gases that can inflame the airways, clog the lungs, triggerallergies and even damage genes and induce cancer. The danger is not just from the sort of sudden, extremeexposure that afflicted Lewis, but from everyday, lower doses as well. Exactly how much the public isendangered and how best to protect people from trucks and other machinery is now among the mostcontentious issues facing environmental officials. The state air board last year declared diesel particles acancer-causing pollutant, triggering a study of possible ways to reduce the health threat. The federalEnvironmental Protection Agency is considering similar action. Nowhere is the issue more pressing than inCalifornia, where diesel engines--preferred for their reliability and powerful enough to climb mountain passes--drive the state's economy. More than 4 million Californians suffer from a chronic lung disease. Residents of LosAngeles, Orange, San Bernardino and Riverside counties breathe some of the worst concentrations of dieselfumes in the nation--on average, almost 20 times more diesel particles every day than if they lived in the ruralfoothills of the Sierra Nevada. Hot spots--city streets, trucking centers, ports, train yards and freeways--are even17 March 2013 Page 384 of 483 ProQuestworse. Driving to work or standing at a busy intersection exposes Southern Californians to diesel exhaustseveral times worse than the amount the EPA calls unhealthful. Air along the region's freeways regularlycontains diesel pollution twice as bad as the EPA's recommended maximum. Some city streets peak at sixtimes higher. A Population at Risk Many baffling and controversial uncertainties remain about what preciselydiesel exhaust does to human lungs, and the degree of danger people face from regularly breathing it in city air.Despite the unanswered questions, most health experts believe the risk is real and that this airborne attack isleaving serious casualties. Asthma attacks, allergies, lung cancer, deaths from heart and respiratory disorders,weakened lung power and difficulty fighting off infections such as bronchitis have all been linked to dieselparticles in a series of scientific studies of humans and animals. "Diesel has very powerful effects on the lung,"said John Froines, director of UCLA's Center for Occupational and Environmental Health. Routinely inhaling aconcentration of diesel particles found in most urban areas--over 5 micrograms per cubic meter of air--cancause a "spectrum of respiratory problems," said Charlie Ris, an EPA risk assessment expert. The people whoearn a living operating these pervasive machines, from truckers to rail crews--as well as the families thathappen to live near them--face the most danger. Children appear to be especially vulnerable because theyinhale a larger dose of the particles in proportion to their lung size. Every day across Southern California,people are routinely exposed to high concentrations of diesel's soot and toxic gases--sometimes even in theirown homes. In the San Bernardino County town of Colton, idling freight trains sent thick clouds of diesel smokeblowing into houses near a track en route to a busy Union Pacific rail yard. Until an order from local air qualityofficials forbade the idling last summer, parents would not let their children play in the yards, and windows anddoors were kept shut. Union Pacific is challenging the order as a violation of its interstate commerce rights.Also near Colton, schoolchildren breathe diesel fumes in their playground at Grand Terrace Elementary School,which abuts a freeway onramp on Interstate 215 used by trucks at a supermarket distribution center. Loftdwellers in downtown Los Angeles complain about noisy, dirty trucks carrying fruit and vegetables idlingbeneath their windows for hours. In suburban Pico Rivera, Chris Johnson has lived next to a truck companyyard for most of his 36 years, his bedroom just 50 feet from the trucks. Like many people who live near suchbusinesses, Johnson feels powerless and frustrated that no government agency is willing to help. He mostlyfrets about the annoying noise and road dust. But he can't help but wonder whether he is risking lung diseasefrom breathing so much exhaust. His father, a smoker who lived in the same house, died of cancer. "I try to livemy life without worrying about dying," Johnson said, "but of course you have to be concerned." Diesels, bydesign, are dirtier than other engines. Equipped with no sparkplugs, a diesel engine ignites solely bycompressing a mixture of fuel and air. Compared with a standard car engine, the mix in a diesel one contains afar higher percentage of fuel. Fine particles of carbon and sulfur remain unburned and are blown out theexhaust. The intense heat and pressure also create nitrogen oxides--a main ingredient of smog. Today's dieseltrucks and buses, equipped with advanced electronics to control the fuel mixture, are much cleaner than adecade ago. Smog-fighting engine standards set by the EPA and the California Air Resources Board havesteadily reduced the volumes of particles from new engines since 1988. Still, diesels remain a predominantsource of air pollution. If every train, truck, bus, tractor, ship and other engine powered by diesel instantlyvanished, more than one-third of the nitrogen oxides that form California's smog and one-fifth of the fine-particlesoot would disappear. Because of formidable engineering challenges and concerns about the economic impact,heavy-duty diesels are not as aggressively regulated as automobiles. One heavy-duty truck--a typical one, not aparticularly smoky one--spews as much soot as 150 average cars. Locomotives are even dirtier, emitting onaverage of 10 times more soot particles than a truck, according to an Air Resources Board estimate. Much ofthe Threat Is Invisible Although everyone hates being enveloped in the black clouds of smoke behind a bus ortruck, it's the pollutants you can't see that pose the most danger to your lungs. Microscopic carbon particles canhover in the air for 10 days. Many times thinner than a human hair, they are readily inhaled, penetrating deepinto the lungs, where they stay lodged for weeks or months. Bound to these particles are traces of hundreds of17 March 2013 Page 385 of 483 ProQuestcancer-causing, petroleum-based chemicals that are carried into the lungs, where they dissolve and spread.One class of compounds, called nitro-PAHs, are such potent gene-damaging carcinogens that, unlike mostothers, they produce tumors in a multitude of organs in every animal tested. Scientists theorize that diesel sootworks like cigarette smoke--it irritates the airways, and the chronic inflammation can lead to a massive wave ofmutated cells. From routine exposure, people face a cancer threat from diesels comparable to the risk frombreathing secondhand tobacco smoke, according to the Health Effects Institute, an independent research groupspecializing in air pollutants. The danger is low compared with people who smoke, which doubles the cancerrisk, but high for cancers linked to pollution. "Diesel certainly ranks as one of the more potent--and one of themore important--sources of long-term carcinogenic exposure to the public," said Ron White, the American LungAssn.'s environmental health expert. "It is probably one of the leading causes of environmental exposures thatlead to lung cancer." Experts suspect that fewer than 2% of cancers are caused by environmental factors, but ina population as large as California's, that can still translate into thousands of people. A state panel of scientistssays four of every 10,000 Californians could contract cancer from breathing diesel fumes in average outdoor air.Overall, they estimate that 14,000 Californians alive today will die from lung cancer caused by diesel exhaust.The estimate, however, is imprecise and highly controversial because it is extrapolated from cancer ratesamong railroad workers, truckers and others exposed to larger doses of fumes. While the risk of cancer is theattention-grabber, for a majority of people the most prevalent threat is allergies and asthma, said Dr. JohnBalmes, chief of San Francisco General Hospital's division of occupational and environmental medicine. Dieselparticles seem to aggravate--and may even cause--allergic reactions and asthma attacks in people whoinherited certain genetic traits, Balmes said. When diesel particles equivalent to breathing Los Angeles air areapplied inside the noses of people with allergies, immune cells are triggered and there is a 50-fold surge in theantibodies that cause allergy symptoms, according to UCLA School of Medicine immunologist Andrew Saxon.The UCLA research and animal studies in Japan suggest that diesel may be one of the culprits behind analarming increase in asthma and hay fever. One of every five Americans suffers allergies, and asthma ratesamong U.S. children have soared over the last 20 years, reaching epidemic proportions. Also, deaths from lungand heart ailments have been linked to fine soot particles that come not just from diesel, but from any fuelcombustion. Whenever particles in the air increase, deaths and hospitalizations rise, according to several dozenstudies of U.S. cities. "We are now finding, more and more, that lower levels of particles can cause significanthealth concerns, ranging from premature death to aggravation of asthma," said White of the lung association.Machine Operators Face Most Serious Risk The 4 million Americans who operate diesel machines on the jobface the most serious risks. Their chances of dying from lung cancer rise 20% to 40% compared with thegeneral population, according to a Health Effects Institute review of about 40 studies by epidemiologists. Whilefive of every 100 people in the general population contract lung cancer from smoking and other factors, anotherone or two are expected to get it from diesel exposure at their jobs. At the Ports of Long Beach and LosAngeles--massive operations that are filled with trucks, ships, trains and cranes--workers breathe some of themost severe doses of diesel exhaust found anyplace in California. On busy days, the seaside air is tinged adingy gray, with a hundred or more big rigs backed up at each of the two harbors. One typical afternoon at theLong Beach port, Mike Nichols stood beside his big rig, engine running, as he waited to drop off a load of cargodestined for overseas. A dozen trucks like his were lined up, most of them so old or badly maintained that blacksoot poured out in long, billowing streams. Nichols and the other truckers breathe the fumes for hours at a timeas they wait for ships to load or unload cargo containers. "That stuff's bad," said Nichols, who has driven trucksfor 15 years. "It makes me nauseated and dizzy and sleepy. When I get home, I have to sleep it off. It feels likemy body is buzzed. Like I've been drugged." Wes Brickner, a marine clerk at the Port of Los Angeles,remembers one especially bleak day when a ship stoked its stacks for more than an hour. Winds blew the sootup, straight at workers sitting in the cabs of gigantic cranes unloading the cargo. "There was a big cloud overthe harbor, and it was just sitting there," Brickner said. "It just makes you sick to think about it. You're exposed,17 March 2013 Page 386 of 483 ProQuestyou're breathing it, you're tasting it. You get headaches and stuff from it." Studies show that truck cabs containthe same amount of carbon particles as the surrounding highway air. But because truckers spend more time onhighways than the general population, they probably breathe more pollutants into their lungs. In one federalstudy, truckers with more than 35 years on the job faced an 89% increase in lung cancer compared with thegeneral public. The study controlled for both smoking and diet. A Harvard University study that tracked 55,000railroad workers who died before 1980 found that their cancer rate increased with years of exposure--those withmore than 15 years on the job had a 72% greater rate of dying from lung cancer than the general population.Yet many truckers and their employers remain skeptical. "If there's an epidemic of cancer in our industry, whereare the bodies?" asked Mike Applegate, owner of a trucking company in Sacramento. "I've never had a truckerdie of lung cancer." Many cancers, however, have a 20-year latency, and the use of diesel has growndramatically only in the last generation. Because of that, many workers may not fall ill until well into retirement.If the cancer risk is true, added Applegate, "we would need some serious changes. We're not making that muchmoney. It's not worth it." Engine manufacturers and trucking companies question the veracity of the studies,calling them flawed and outdated. In most cases, the workers were exposed several decades ago, whenexhaust was dirtier, and the researchers lacked important data about how much the people actually inhaled.Aaron Cohen of the Health Effects Institute and Millicent Higgins of the National Institutes of Health found "apaucity of data on exposure and potential confounding {factors}" that makes the worker studies "difficult tointerpret," they said in a 1995 report. Still, Froines said, "the evidence around the human studies is extremelystrong and consistent." Daniel Greenbaum, president of the Health Effects Institute, said about 40 studies havebeen conducted and "they all, almost every one of them, show a positive association" between diesel andcancer in workers. The institute, funded by the EPA as well as the automobile industry, is considered a leading,unbiased source of data on the hazards of air pollution. Efforts to understand the health danger are complicatedby the complex makeup of diesel exhaust. It remains a mystery as to which of the thousands of chemicals indiesel exhaust makes people sick or how it inflicts its damage--critical questions for public officials trying toprotect people. Some health officials suspect that the size of the individual particles determines the damage, notnecessarily what they are made of. Other arguments remain about what the higher cancer rate for workersmeans for the general public. Can the risks of working on a freight train for 20 years be scaled back to gaugethe danger to people who occasionally drive behind trucks on freeways or live near a rail yard? Is there a levelwhere there is no risk at all? USC epidemiologist John Peters called it a "classic threshold question that maynever be answered." The diesel industry has strongly rejected the idea that their engines can be linked tocancer. "Before you say ambient air causes cancer, you should be very certain, and we don't think that theevidence is there," said Dr. William Bunn, medical director of Navistar International, one of the largest dieselengine manufacturers. Independent scientists agree that the estimates of the level of cancer risk arecontroversial. "Diesel exhaust is a carcinogen," said Balmes of San Francisco General, and workers "are atrisk." What is less clear, he said, is "whether ambient levels are leading to a cancer problem in the generalpopulation." Workers generally breathe exhaust "an order of magnitude {10 times} higher than what you or Iwould get on the street," Greenbaum said. Froines defends his panel's conclusion that the general public facesa serious cancer risk from diesel exposure. To assume there is no cancer at doses people routinely breathe"ignores basic chemical facts" about the human body, he said. "I believe there are different {cancer rates} atdifferent doses, but the risk to the general population is not zero," he said. Despite the uncertainties, after nineyears of debate and delays, the state air board last year followed its scientific panel's advice and declareddiesel particles a cancer-causing pollutant. Former EPA assistant administrator Dick Wilson said, "Whatever therisk {of diesel} is today, it's way down and will continue to go down." Still, he said, "we are concerned about thehealth reports showing it's toxic." The new, and rare, phenomenon of severe lung illnesses being directly linkedto diesel exposure adds some urgency to the call for action. In the last few years, health experts haveuncovered a handful of such cases. At LAX, two days of breathing heavy diesel exhaust combined with years of17 March 2013 Page 387 of 483 ProQuestexposure apparently turned deadly for Dale Lewis. Dr. Mohan Khurana, a Torrance pulmonologist who treatedhim for three years until he died, said in a 1997 court declaration that the diesel exhaust ate away at the lining ofLewis' airways, "causing an extreme hypersensitivity." His airways constricted so tightly whenever heencountered airborne irritants that he was left unable to breathe on his own. Before he died, Lewis sued themaker of the container loader, alleging that the machine was designed with an improper exhaust system. Hiswidow, who declined to talk to The Times, settled for an undisclosed amount of damages last year.Pulmonologists uninvolved with the Lewis case say there are only a few documented examples of asthmainduced by diesel exhaust. In 1993, scientists at the National Jewish Center for Immunology and RespiratoryMedicine in Denver reported that three railroad workers contracted sudden, severe asthma from riding inlocomotives right behind the lead engines of freight trains. Like Lewis, all three were healthy until a severeexposure at work that persisted many hours. Such diseases, sometimes called irritant-induced asthma, "arerare, and death due to it is very rare," said Balmes of San Francisco General Hospital. Still, he said, "it isconceivable. I think it's real." Union leaders say few truckers and other workers complain about diesel fumes,believing the danger simply comes with the job. But trucker Mike Nichols wonders if he can stand it muchlonger. "It's the sickness, the exhaust," he said. "If it's not my truck, it's all the others." * Next: Cleaning up dieselpollution is difficult but possible. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Sources of Diesel ExhaustStatewide tons of diesel particulates in 1995 Trucks 54% 14,280 tons Construction equipment: 19% - 5,010 tonsShips/boats: 10% - 2,770 tons Farm equipment: 7% - 1,870 tons Trains: 4% - 1,090 tons Stationaryengine/mobile refrigeration units: 4% - 950 tons Cars and buses: 2% - 590 tons Source: California AirResources Board (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) How a Diesel Engine Pollutes A diesel enginehas several unique characteristics that make it an efficient and durable technology--and a major source of airpollution. It has no spark plugs; instead the fuel is ignited through pressure. Also, it has a very high ratio of fuelto air during combustion--more than 20 times more fuel than air. Diesel fuel is pumped into the computerizedinjector that inserts fuel into the cylinder at a very high pressure so it is atomized into a fine mist. Air is forcedthrough the turbocharger into the cylinder, where it mixes with the fuel. The piston rises up, compressing the airand fuel to create an explosion--combustion--at temperatures exceeding 1,500 degrees. The explosion pushesthe piston down, which turns the crankshaft and ultimately moves the truck. Toxic hydrocarbons, soot particlesand other compounds come out the exhaust pipe. Because of the extreme pressure and heat in the engine,nitrogen and oxygen react, forming nitrogen oxides--a major ingredient in smog. Also, because so much fuel isinjected, some is left unburned, leaving fine particles of sulfur and carbon that spew out of the exhaust pipe.'Source: Cummins Engine Co. and California Air Resources Board ******* START OF CORRECTION******************* CORRECTION: For the Record; Los Angeles Times Tuesday June 29, 1999 Home EditionPart A Page 3 Metro Desk 2 inches; 48 words Type of Material: Correction; Diesel engines--In a May 30 graphicand story about diesel exhaust, The Times incorrectly stated that a diesel engine has a high fuel-to-air ratio. Infact, the reverse is true. The mix is 25 to 150 times more air than fuel. This ratio results in exhaust that is high innitrogen oxides, while incomplete combustion forms tiny pieces of carbon soot.; ******* END OF CORRECTION************************ @ART CAPTION: PHOTO: (Bulldog Edition) Workers at the busy Port of Long Beachbreathe in heavy doses of diesel exhaust from its many trains, trucks, ships and cranes.; PHOTOGRAPHER:LAWRENCE K. HO / Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: At the Port of Los Angeles, trucks line up as drivers wait toload trailers. Workers at these terminals breathe heavy doses of diesel exhaust.; PHOTOGRAPHER:LAWRENCE K. HO / Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC-CHART: Sources of Diesel Exhaust / ROB HERNANDEZ /Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC: How a Diesel Engine Pollutes / ROB HERNANDEZ / Los Angeles TimesReferences ACCN-48721 Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Diesel engines; Air pollution; Emission standards; Studies17 March 2013 Page 388 of 483 ProQuestCompany: Environmental Protection Agency, EPAPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: May 30, 1999Year: 1999Section: PART- A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: Non Dup, Series, Infobox, Main StoryAccession number: 05562865ProQuest document ID: 421394989Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 172 of 213Air Quality Standards Rejected by Appeals Court; Environment: EPA construed Clean Air Act tooloosely in setting rules for smog and soot, judges say. Ruling is seen as setback for Clintonadministration.Author: Jackson, Robert L; GERSTENZANG, JAMESPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 15 May 1999: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Declaring that the Environmental Protection Agency construed part of the 1990 Clean Air Act soloosely as to render it "an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power," the judges on a 2-1 vote agreed withthe American Trucking Assn. and other industry plaintiffs that the EPA had exceeded its authority in July 1997 insetting air quality rules designed to govern levels of smog and soot. If the ruling stands, it would have a specialeffect in California, which for half a century has waged a massive and expensive war against smog. Federalstandards are the driving force behind virtually every clean-air regulation in the state. Whenever California setsnew rules for vehicles and businesses, they are designed to eliminate enough pollution to gradually meet those17 March 2013 Page 389 of 483 ProQuestfederal standards. Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA was ordered by Congress to determine the levels ofpollutants that endanger human health. The agency set the standards after exhaustively reviewing hundreds ofscientific studies about the health effects of air pollution. After receiving public reaction to the proposed rules--industry, environmental groups and individual citizens weighed in at public hearings and with thousands ofpages of comments--the agency finalized the standards in 1997.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: A divided federal appeals court Friday overturned the nation's most controversial and far-reachingregulations that establish air quality standards across the country. Declaring that the Environmental ProtectionAgency construed part of the 1990 Clean Air Act so loosely as to render it "an unconstitutional delegation oflegislative power," the judges on a 2-1 vote agreed with the American Trucking Assn. and other industryplaintiffs that the EPA had exceeded its authority in July 1997 in setting air quality rules designed to governlevels of smog and soot. The decision, which stunned environmentalists, represented a major setback to Clintonadministration efforts to clean up the environment. Officials said an appeal of the ruling was likely. "We aredeeply disappointed . . . particularly given the court's explicit recognition that there is a strong scientific andpublic health rationale for tougher air quality protections," White House press secretary Joe Lockhart said. "Wewill continue to do everything within our power to ensure that the American people are adequately protectedagainst smog, soot and other harmful air pollutants," he added. The court, said a senior EPA official, "ignoredthe last 25 years of the way public health standards have been set." The ruling has no effect on earlierregulations that set existing standards, authorities said. But it blocks the administration from taking actionsbased on the new standards, which were to be phased in over the next decade. If the ruling stands, it wouldhave a special effect in California, which for half a century has waged a massive and expensive war againstsmog. Federal standards are the driving force behind virtually every clean-air regulation in the state. WheneverCalifornia sets new rules for vehicles and businesses, they are designed to eliminate enough pollution togradually meet those federal standards. Depending on what eventually happens in the courts and Congress,some analysts said the ruling could lead to a lengthy rule-making process that would give the next presidentialadministration the upper hand in defining air quality standards that pass legal muster. Attorney Edward W.Warren, who represented the American Trucking Assn. in the case, told Bloomberg News Service that "there isno doubt the 2000 election does impact where this thing ultimately comes out." Under the Clean Air Act, theEPA was ordered by Congress to determine the levels of pollutants that endanger human health. The agencyset the standards after exhaustively reviewing hundreds of scientific studies about the health effects of airpollution. After receiving public reaction to the proposed rules--industry, environmental groups and individualcitizens weighed in at public hearings and with thousands of pages of comments--the agency finalized thestandards in 1997. "EPA's analysis of the scientific basis was exemplary, phenomenal," said Robert Phalen,director of the Air Pollution Health Effects Laboratory at UC Irvine. "They reviewed all the research and theycame to reasonable conclusions, but that research is still so current it is contentious." "It is a surprise," said TomEichhorn, a spokesman for the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the agency responsible formeeting smog standards in the Los Angeles Basin. "It's a major decision, but we need time to digest it and seewhat it means." Eichhorn noted, however, that there would be no immediate effect on any smog rules, becausethe new federal standards had not yet gone into effect. In an opinion heavily larded with highly technicallanguage, the appellate court majority said the EPA had exceeded its authority because it devised standardsthat were too vague and imprecise in seeking to distinguish between healthy and unhealthy levels of airpollution. "What EPA lacks is any determinate criterion for drawing lines," the court said. "It has failed to stateintelligibly how much is too much." Industry groups had challenged the 1997 regulations as ill-conceived andoverly expensive; government authorities said it would cost businesses and local governments nearly $10 billionto comply with the new rules by 2010. The regulations cover airborne pollutants from automobile tailpipes,17 March 2013 Page 390 of 483 ProQuestfactories, power plants, dry cleaners and other sources. The standards dramatically tightened air qualityrequirements designed to give better protection to the elderly, children and persons with respiratory problems.The court, however, said EPA officials had exercised too much latitude in devising their standards, leaving theagency "free to pick any point between zero and a hair below the concentrations yielding London's Killer Fog of1952," which caused 4,000 deaths in a week. The EPA said in a statement after the ruling that it "stands by theneed for the health protections embodied by the clean air standards and the science behind them," adding thatthese standards protect the health of 125 million Americans. The court did not vacate the EPA's ozone and fineparticulaterule altogether, but said it "cannot be enforced" as it was issued. Robin Conrad, a senior vicepresident with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, called the standards for smog-causing ozone and microscopicparticles of soot "probably one of the most complex regulations that has ever come out of EPA . . . with vastimplications for the business community." "What the court did was extremely broad. Using this standard isbreathtaking, and should go to the heart of the way the agency operates," she said. Some environmentaladvocates attributed the ruling to a pro-business leaning by court conservatives. Circuit Judges Stephen F.Williams and Douglas H. Ginsburg, both appointees of President Reagan, voted in the majority, while JudgeDavid S. Tatel, a Clinton appointee, issued a strongly worded dissent. Objecting to the majority view that therules represented an unlawful delegation of legislative authority, Tatel wrote, "The Clean Air Act has been onthe books for decades, has been amended by Congress numerous times, and has been the subject of regularcongressional oversight hearings." The court majority declared that 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Actrequired the EPA to recognize that ozone was not entirely bad, considering that ozone shields people fromcancer-causing ultraviolet rays of the sun. But "in estimating the effects of ozone concentrations, EPA explicitlydisregarded these alleged benefits," the judges said. "This decision is ludicrous. The public has spoken throughCongress that they want the EPA to move on clean air standards when supported by the science," said KathrynHohmann, the director of environmental quality for the Sierra Club. "We think the American public took thisseriously two years ago. It would reduce cases of severe respiratory problems in kids by 250,000 per year. Thisis about the health of the elderly and kids with asthma. With the summer smog season just around the corner, itis greedy over-reach by industry. "The court made it clear there was ample science to support the standards.But they question the authority of the EPA to set the standards at all." But Mark Whitenton, vice president forresources, environment and regulations at the National Assn. of Manufacturers, which filed a friend of the courtbrief supporting the challenge, said, "If this were to result in the administration starting the rule-making over, thatwould be wonderful." * Times staff writer Marla Cone in Los Angeles contributed to this story. * TOUGHERPAINT RULES Southern California regulations to slash the amount of pollutants in paint are adopted. B1Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSSubject: Air pollution; Emission standards; Clean Air Act 1990-US; Federal court decisions; Appeals;Environmental policyCompany: Environmental Protection Agency, EPAPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: May 15, 1999Year: 1999Dateline: WASHINGTON17 March 2013 Page 391 of 483 ProQuestSection: PART- A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05543939ProQuest document ID: 421501409Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 173 of 213COLUMN ONE; Fouled Air a Major Pet Peeve for Mexico City; In the Federal District alone, 2 milliondogs deposit 353 tons of waste a day. The dried dust mixes with other particulates to form a viciousbrew that contaminates food and scars lungs.Author: Smith, James FPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 30 Apr 1999: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Statistics here show that Mexico City's inner Federal District alone has more than 2 million dogs,which deposit at least 353 tons of waste a day. Few owners of the 580,000 registered pets bother to scoop upafter their canines, bylaws notwithstanding. And hardly anyone cleans up after the city's estimated 1.5 millionstray mutts. The picture gets uglier still: Mexico City has 13,000 street-corner food stands, catering to its millionsof poor and working-class residents. The dog dust and other particulates settle on the tortillas, tamales andsalsa being served up to customers at the open-air stands, feeding chronic intestinal miseries. The worstatmospheric hazard to public health in Mexico City has long been and still is ozone--the invisible, throat-searinggas formed by the sun's reaction with nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons. But small particulates are challengingozone's notoriety, not only in Mexico but in many developing countries--and even, to some extent, in LosAngeles.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The hordes of mongrels scavenging the vast open-air garbage dumps on the eastern outskirts ofMexico City are part of this polluted capital's dirtiest secret. So is the handsome pet German shepherd preeningin the tidy Esparsa Oteo park in the city center. Statistics here show that Mexico City's inner Federal Districtalone has more than 2 million dogs, which deposit at least 353 tons of waste a day. Few owners of the 580,00017 March 2013 Page 392 of 483 ProQuestregistered pets bother to scoop up after their canines, bylaws notwithstanding. And hardly anyone cleans upafter the city's estimated 1.5 million stray mutts. In a city with a 6-month-long dry season, the waste dries intodust that is then blown aloft. It combines with particles from factories, erosion from dried lake beds andhydrocarbons from car exhausts to form a vicious brew of particulates that darkens the skies and scars thelungs. The picture gets uglier still: Mexico City has 13,000 street-corner food stands, catering to its millions ofpoor and working-class residents. The dog dust and other particulates settle on the tortillas, tamales and salsabeing served up to customers at the open-air stands, feeding chronic intestinal miseries. While scientists are stillstudying the role of dog dust in particulate pollution, it's a sufficiently disgusting symbol of Mexico City's vile airto have prompted a flurry of civic action programs in recent months. Results have been modest. The problem ofthe dust is just one example of how much greater is the challenge for poor, disorganized societies to attackpollution than wealthy cities such as Los Angeles--especially when weak systems encourage scofflaws, andoverwhelming human needs make problems such as stray dogs seem an afterthought. The worst atmospherichazard to public health in Mexico City has long been and still is ozone--the invisible, throat-searing gas formedby the sun's reaction with nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons. But small particulates are challenging ozone'snotoriety, not only in Mexico but in many developing countries--and even, to some extent, in Los Angeles. AWorld Health Organization report in December 1997 described these lung-boring particulates as "the mostimportant pollutant worldwide." The problem is most severe in fast-industrializing societies such as China andIndia, especially where coal remains a basic energy source. The dog dust is one of the nastiest organicparticulates. "We breathe it. We eat it. We irritate our lungs. We get sick with gastroenteritis. We are all exposedto this, especially children and older people," Laura Elena Herrejon said with a shudder. "I never eat in thestreets anymore." Herrejon, a tall and elegant business executive, is president of the Pro-Neighbor Movement,a year-old civic association that has made clean streets one of its goals--and dog poop its particular bugbear.The most dangerous particulate matter is less than 10 microns in diameter, and thus called PM10. (One micronis a thousandth of a millimeter.) Not only does PM10 reduce visibility, it penetrates deep into the lungs. AMexico City government report said that many studies directly link increases in PM10 to higher death rates. Thestudy said more than half the city's residents are exposed each day to PM10 concentrations above the"unhealthy" threshold. Readings of PM10 in the capital rose above the danger point on 52% of the days in 1998,up from 44% a year earlier--and almost zero in the early 1990s. Drought-fueled forest fires were one factor lastyear, and greater deforestation in recent years appears to have increased erosion on the edges of the Valley ofMexico. The nation's economic rebound has its cost too, reviving output by brick factories and other PM10generators north of the city. Even after last year's fires went out, PM10 levels soared to nearly twice the"unhealthy" norm in December, provoking the first pollution emergency ever called here because of particulates.This year, periodic spring rains have kept particulates well below 1998's record levels, but authorities arewatching to see what happens in the driest months of May and June. The particulate scare arose even as themetropolitan area's ozone problem was stabilizing--albeit at dangerous levels. Although ozone still exceededthe "unsatisfactory" level on 337 days last year, it no longer reaches the terrifying peaks of 1991 and 1992,when it sometimes rose to nearly four times the international health norm. Indeed, Mexican authorities areproud of the results delivered by their antipollution program over the last decade. Measures include twice-yearlyemission tests for all vehicles, the banning of lead and reduction of sulfur in gasoline and emergency programsin which as many as 50% of the cars must stay off the roads. Officials argue that the capital's air gets suchnotorious press because Mexico City measures its pollution far more precisely than comparable citiesworldwide. One of Nature's Cruel Tricks There's no doubt that Mexico City is punished by nature, as well as itsown excesses. Sitting in a mountain-ringed bowl at an elevation of 7,300 feet, the city is subject to frequenttemperature inversions that trap pollutants. Winds are often light, and the altitude makes gasoline-burningengines 25% less efficient. But human folly and flawed planning have loomed large ever since conquerorHernando Cortes began draining the lakes that graced the Aztec capital, Tenochtitlan, in the 1520s. Just17 March 2013 Page 393 of 483 ProQuestbeyond the garbage mountains on the city's eastern border, the now-dry bed of Lake Texcoco forms a vast dustbowl that is a major source of particulates in the valley. On one recent day, wind spouts stirred up mini-cyclonesof brown dust. While the lake bed was too poor for farming, it was acceptable for squatters, who began pouringinto the valley during the 1950s. They built up areas like the immense eastern bedroom suburb ofNetzahualcoyotl, now home to 3 million people in the state of Mexico, just beyond the Federal District's border.Of the nearly 18 million people in greater Mexico City, about 10 million live beyond the Federal District boundarybut still within the valley--joined, no doubt, by millions more scraggly strays in addition to the 2 million dogswithin the Federal District. When a few residents founded the Pro-Neighbor Movement a year ago, they did soon the premise that, as the valley's population exploded, the laws were increasingly flouted, making communitylife less safe and less pleasant, not least due to roaming, dirtying dogs. "The laws are a joke--people know theywill never be fined," said Herrejon, the president of the group. "Before, our parks were places to bring children.Now you are sure to step in something." So Pro-Neighbor, which now counts 4,000 members, is trying tochange people's attitudes. "We have to change our customs, reeducate ourselves," Herrejon said. "We aresaying, 'Neighbor, it is your pet, make yourself responsible.' " In February, Pro-Neighbor and the city'sEnvironment Department began putting up posters in city parks and handing out pamphlets. They show peoplehow to clean up after their dogs, using plastic bags as gloves, and scooping up the waste tidily. The group istrying to persuade companies to adopt parks and is working with pet food firms and dog owners associations.Herrejon is optimistic: "From crises, good things emerge." The often careless treatment of dogs infuriates doglovers. One devotee, Ita Osorno, cares for 1,300 strays in her private dog shelter. She follows a strict no-killpolicy and carries out 30 free sterilizations a day. She complained that the media have "Satanized" dog wasteas a pollution source, which will merely prompt more roundups and killings of strays rather than address the realproblem of irresponsible owners who let dogs wander the streets and reproduce at random. Parks BecomingMinefields Judging by the piles of dog feces on a recent day in the square-block Esparsa Oteo park in themiddle-class Del Valle section of the city, the challenge remains substantial. Two small children rolled on thegrass near fresh excrement dropped by a German shepherd, with no owner of the animal in sight. Parkgardener Felipe Calete, who has worked for the city 27 years, said 15 to 20 stray dogs wander into the parkdaily. Some pet owners clean up after their dogs; some just let their pets out from nearby apartment buildings touse the park after dark. "Many people don't realize they are damaging their own families and children, who playhere and get dirty or who eat from that tamale stand with the air so dirty," Calete said. "I think the public attitudehas gotten worse toward caring for the environment as the city has grown." In March, the downtown BenitoJuarez district launched its own program, encouraging citizens to clean up after their pets but also dispatchingmunicipal crews on bicycles to clean up after strays. If the sanitation problem is serious in a well-to-do, in-townneighborhood, it is far worse in the vast poor belt surrounding the Federal District, especially the sprawlingeastern and northern sides of the valley. Few areas are as foul as the Xochiaca strip, five square miles ofgarbage dumps and landfill along the Netzahualcoyotl border. Netzahualcoyotl was a poet king of the pre-Columbian Aztec city of Texcoco; the modern queen of the garbage mountain is Maria Luisa Alanis Robles, whohas ruled one of the largest garbage fiefdoms for 17 years. She controls the gate where horse-drawn carts bringa steady flow of trash from adjacent Netzahualcoyotl. The 40 or so families within her section live in shacks atopthe trash, and scavenge a living by sorting through it for recyclable materials such as soda cans. Lookingtoward several dogs climbing over the garbage, Alanis snorted: "They belong to nobody; they scrounge fortortillas. There are dogs that are sick, old; they defecate anywhere. Lots of puppies are left here along the fenceby families who don't want them, and the dogs grow up and spend their whole lives here." Juan Reyes, head ofNetzahualcoyotl's dog pound, said 20 to 40 strays are rounded up daily and taken to the pound. "If no oneclaims them in 72 hours, they are sacrificed," he said. No more than two are reclaimed a day. The criteria fordeclaring pollution emergencies were tightened last year. Using a California-style scale on which 100 points isthe "unhealthy" level, the trigger for an ozone emergency was reduced from 250 points to 240. And reflecting17 March 2013 Page 394 of 483 ProQuestincreased concern about small particulates, the new rules for the first time set a threshold for PM10 as well. Thevalley's emergency program kicks in when small particulates reach 175 on the scale, as they did in May andagain in December. For her part, garbage dump leader Alanis sees a brighter future. "My vision for this place isthat, once it is filled in, it will go from a garbage dump to an ecological park," she said, "for the good of thecommunity--so the children can play here." Illustration Caption: PHOTO: Antonio Silva checks a filter in amachine that monitors air pollution.; PHOTOGRAPHER: JAMES F. SMITH / For The Times; PHOTO: A straydog outside the Federal District rummages at a dump, an area where pollution problem is aggravated.;PHOTOGRAPHER: SERGIO DORANTES / For The Times; PHOTO: (A2) CANINE CONTAMINANTS: Wastefrom Mexico City's 2 million dogs dries into dust that mixes with other particulates to form a vicious brew thatcontaminates food and scars lungs.; PHOTOGRAPHER: SERGIO DORANTES / For The Times Credit: TIMESSTAFF WRITERSubject: Air pollution; PetsLocation: Mexico, Mexico City MexicoPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: Apr 30, 1999Year: 1999Dateline: MEXICO CITYSection: PART- A; Foreign DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05520961ProQuest document ID: 421511634Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________17 March 2013 Page 395 of 483 ProQuestDocument 174 of 213Arco Discloses Development of Decisively Cleaner Diesel FuelAuthor: NANCY RIVERA BROOKS; Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 24 Mar 1999: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Scientists at Atlantic Richfield Co. have developed a new experimental diesel fuel that the LosAngeles oil company said could make "dramatic reductions" in air pollutants from buses, trucks and cars. Inpreliminary testing, the fuel, called EC Diesel, resulted in a 15% reduction in particulates and a 5% reduction innitrogen oxide emissions, both key components in smog, without reducing fuel economy, Arco will announcetoday. Arco plans to test EC Diesel in nearly 200 Southern California fleet vehicles, such as buses and trucks,to verify the results and hopes to make the fuel commercially available in a few years.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Scientists at Atlantic Richfield Co. have developed a new experimental diesel fuel that the Los Angelesoil company said could make "dramatic reductions" in air pollutants from buses, trucks and cars. In preliminarytesting, the fuel, called EC Diesel, resulted in a 15% reduction in particulates and a 5% reduction in nitrogenoxide emissions, both key components in smog, without reducing fuel economy, Arco will announce today."Reductions of those kind are hard to get. If it were to become widely used, it could become very significant,"said Tom Eichhorn, spokesman for the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Arco plans to test ECDiesel in nearly 200 Southern California fleet vehicles, such as buses and trucks, to verify the results and hopesto make the fuel commercially available in a few years. "We're pretty excited about the possibilities of ECDiesel," said Roger Truitt, president of Arco Products, the firm's refining and marketing arm. "From the chairmanon down, there is a commitment at Arco to clean fuels." In California alone, diesel fuel powers several hundredthousand trucks, plus many buses, tractors, bulldozers and other heavy vehicles. An estimated 740,000 dieselpoweredvehicles will travel California's roads by next year. Breathing the particulates found in diesel exhaust isconsidered a major threat to the public, and the Environmental Protection Agency recently set stringent newhealth standards for cities that could force a cleanup of diesels. Also, last year, the Air Resources Boarddeclared diesel particulates a cancer-causing substance. Large trucks represent only 2% of California's vehiclesbut account for about 30% of nitrogen oxides and 65% of particulates pumped by vehicles into the air, the ARBsays. Air-quality watchers reacted with restrained enthusiasm, both praising Arco's push for cleaner fuels butnoting the experimental nature of the project. "We are pleased Arco is undertaking this project and look forwardto examining how improvements in diesel fuel could be a tool in helping California reduce exposure to dieselparticles and help achieve compliance with other air quality standards," said Mike Kenny, executive director ofCalifornia Air Resources Board. Eichhorn said EC Diesel's potential will not be known until testing is completed."Clearly, Arco has a vested interest in maintaining market share, and we love the way that competition leads tothe development of cleaner fuels," he said. Truitt estimates that Arco will spend nearly $2 million on developingand testing EC Diesel, which was created during the last year at Arco's research facility in Anaheim. The newArco fuel is much lower in sulfur and aromatics than current diesel, although the specifics are "classifiedinformation," an Arco Products spokesman said. Reducing sulfur in the fuel is widely considered critical tocleaning up the exhaust. Energy officials predict that the ingredients of diesel fuel will change dramatically overthe next 10 years. The Big Three auto makers have added a major incentive to clean up diesel exhaust: Theyhope to soon begin manufacturing sport-utility vehicles powered by diesel. Nearly 20% of all new vehicles soldin the country are SUVs, so it would open up a huge new market for companies such as Arco that make dieselfuel. Under new California standards, SUVs can be powered by diesel fuel only if they are as low in emissions17 March 2013 Page 396 of 483 ProQuestas gasoline-powered cars. Existing diesel fuels are dirtier but more fuel-efficient than gasoline. Arco's Truitt saidthe new fuel will cost about 10 cents to 15 cents more to produce in the relatively small 7-million gallon batch tobe used during the yearlong test, expected to start at the end of summer. If the fuel is produced commercially,that premium probably would be smaller, he said. The cost of the new fuel would be a factor in its marketacceptance. Even a penny-a-gallon increase can make a trucking firm unprofitable. A cleaner-burning dieselfuel is a step in the right direction, said Todd Campbell, policy director for the Coalition for Clean Air in West LosAngeles, an environmental group. "But we're always cautious about trying to make diesel work . . . because itdistracts us from our ultimate goal, which is to move toward clean technologies that are not petroleum based,"Campbell said, such as fuel cells and natural gas. Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSSubject: Diesel fuels; Air pollution; Product developmentCompany: ARCOPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: Mar 24, 1999Year: 1999Section: PART- A; Financial DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05480274ProQuest document ID: 421366372Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 175 of 213Smog Study of Children Yields Ominous ResultsAuthor: Marquis, Julie17 March 2013 Page 397 of 483 ProQuestPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 18 Mar 1999: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Air pollution in Southern California appears to have subtle long-term effects on children's lungs andmay cut into girls' breathing capacity more than boys', according to early results from the most comprehensivestudy ever undertaken in the region. Findings from the first year of a 10-year smog study by USC researcherssuggest that high smog levels most markedly restrict the wind of girls who spend a lot of time outdoors. Whileimpaired breathing capacity--reduced volume or flow of air in the lungs--can leave children vulnerable torespiratory disease and underdeveloped lungs, it is not the same as an illness like asthma or bronchitis. Whyboys would be more prone to such diseases is unclear, said the researchers, who published their preliminarydata today in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Air pollution in Southern California appears to have subtle long-term effects on children's lungs andmay cut into girls' breathing capacity more than boys', according to early results from the most comprehensivestudy ever undertaken in the region. Findings from the first year of a 10-year smog study by USC researcherssuggest that high smog levels most markedly restrict the wind of girls who spend a lot of time outdoors. Boys,on the other hand, are more likely to develop respiratory illnesses, as are children of either sex who live inhouses with indoor pollution caused by pets, pests, mildew and water damage or cigarette smoke. Whileimpaired breathing capacity--reduced volume or flow of air in the lungs--can leave children vulnerable torespiratory disease and underdeveloped lungs, it is not the same as an illness like asthma or bronchitis. Whyboys would be more prone to such diseases is unclear, said the researchers, who published their preliminarydata today in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. "It's not good news," said HeleneMargolis, an epidemiologist with the California Air Resources Board, principal sponsor of the $16-millionresearch. The study, which began in 1993, is one of the few to focus on pollution's long-term effects on children--a population considered especially vulnerable because they spend so much time exercising and out of doors.Of unprecedented scope, it involves more than 3,600 children in the fourth, seventh and 10th grades in 12communities in the southern half of the state. A wide mix of communities was selected, from those withrelatively clean air, such as Santa Maria and Atascadero, to more smoggy cities like Upland and San Dimas.The initial findings are based on questionnaires and lung function tests. Researchers plan in the future to alsoinclude school absences. Unpublished results from later years in the study, which researchers reported to theAir Resources Board in January, suggest that the link between high levels of pollution and chronic respiratoryproblems holds steady over a period of several years. It is the promise of finding such long-term patterns thatmost intrigues pollution experts. "That will be unique" to this study, said David Bates, a professor emeritus ofmedicine at the University of British Columbia who has advised USC researchers on their approach. "Everyonewill be interested in that." The preliminary findings of chronic lung effects on children come in the wake ofanother alarming--but unrelated--study this month showing that despite the Los Angeles Basin's improved airquality, residents still are breathing unusually dangerous levels of cancer-causing toxins produced mainly bymotor vehicles. The children's study, by contrast, focused on more commonplace byproducts of vehicles andindustrial emissions--ozone, microscopic elements known as particulates, nitrogen dioxide and acid vapors. Theimmediate effects of such substances have been well-studied but their long-term impact on youngsters remainssomewhat of a mystery. Although billions of dollars are spent in this region each year to fight smog on theassumption that dirty air has short- and long-term health effects, Southern California still exceeds federal andstate health standards for ozone and particulates, researchers said. Yet one of the study's surprising findingswas that "ozone was not the big hitter," said Dr. Morton Lippmann, professor of environmental medicine at theNew York University School of Medicine and a member of the study's advisory board. "The fine particles andacid and nitrogen dioxide seemed to be playing a bigger role." That was striking because other studies have17 March 2013 Page 398 of 483 ProQuestshown that ozone--formed when hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides react with sunlight--is more clearlyassociated with short-term ill effects of pollution such as shortness of breath, chest pain and watery eyes. Mostremarkable in the first year's findings were consistent, but as yet unexplained, gender differences. "There is {notjust} a difference between boys and girls; there is a difference between the pollutants most affecting boys andgirls," Margolis said. Researchers clearly linked elevated pollution levels to reduced breathing capacity in girls.Nitrogen dioxide and particulates apparently were the greatest culprits, although high ozone exposure played asignificant role in girls with asthma. Boys' breathing capacity was affected by high ozone exposure too, but onlyin those who spent a lot of time outdoors. Boys tended to be more affected by respiratory illnesses. In theircase, wheezing was linked to nitrogen dioxide and acid vapor. But researchers noted that although boys initiallysuffered more from asthma, girls essentially caught up with them in that regard by the time they reached highschool. Researchers hope to tease out the reasons for the gender differences as the study progresses. Possibleexplanations include variations in boys' and girls' lung volume and airflow, growth rates and hormonal effects.There were other findings that stumped researchers. For example, they could not explain why the incidence ofexcessive respiratory disease did not correlate with the highest levels of outdoor air pollution. This contrastswith the separate finding of girls' reduced lung capacity in highly polluted areas. Whatever the answer, theinvestigators say the findings underline the importance of indoor pollutants such as mildew and cigarette smoke.Researchers argued for "a broad-based campaign to abate airborne hazards inside homes." Other remainingchallenges are to determine which pollutants are responsible for which physiological effects and how pollutionaffects asthma. Whether reductions in lung capacity and aggravated respiratory illnesses will translate intolifelong health problems remains an open question, but such findings in the young do not bode well, researcherssaid. "This is just a snapshot. . . . The real answer is going to come from finishing this study," said Dr. John M.Peters, lead author of the research. Peters said the children will be followed for eight years, with the final twoyears reserved for analysis--meaning that the fourth-graders' health will be studied at least through high school.(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Breathing Problems Asthma is more prevalent among boys thangirls until the high school years, according to a study of respiratory disease-prevalence rates among SouthernCalifornia children. Boys Severe Grade Asthma Asthma Wheeze Bronchitis Cough PneumoniaSevere Grade Asthma Asthma Wheeze Bronchitis Cough PneumoniaSevere Grade Asthma Asthma Wheeze Bronchitis Cough Pneumonia4 17% 9% 25% 14% 8% 2%7 17 12 22 14 6 210 16 8 21 11 8 1Girls4 9 5 22 11 5 27 13 7 22 12 8 110 16 7 26 15 8 2Both genders4 13 7 23 13 7 27 15 10 22 13 7 210 16 8 23 13 8 117 March 2013 Page 399 of 483 ProQuestIllustration Caption: GRAPHIC-TABLE: Breathing Problems, Los Angeles Times Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Air pollution; Public health; Smog; Studies; Children & youthLocation: Southern CaliforniaCompany: University of Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1999Publication date: Mar 18, 1999Year: 1999Section: PART- A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05467132ProQuest document ID: 421393279Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 176 of 213CALIFORNIA; EPA Seeks Same Rules for Light Trucks; Pollution: Proposal, echoing state'smeasure, would equalize emission standards and require cleaner gasoline by '04.Publication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 18 Feb 1999: 2.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Following California's lead, the Environmental Protection Agency will propose a set of tough rules thatwould require light trucks and sport-utility vehicles for the first time to meet the same stringent emissionstandards as cars, according to the Washington Post. The new rules are designed to create huge improvementsin air quality, according to environmentalists. Cleaner gasoline alone should be the equivalent of taking 54Source: American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine17 March 2013 Page 400 of 483 ProQuestmillion cars off the road, said William Becker, executive director of a national association of state and local airpollution officials. The EPA proposals, if adopted, could also reduce acid rain and diminish the amounts ofharmful toxins and particulates in the air. The rules also are expected to increase gasoline and vehicle costs.The Air Resources Board estimated the average additional cost at $107 per vehicle, though the charge forconsumers could prove far higher on certain types of vehicles.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Following California's lead, the Environmental Protection Agency will propose a set of tough rules thatwould require light trucks and sport-utility vehicles for the first time to meet the same stringent emissionstandards as cars, according to the Washington Post. The proposed rules also would require oil companies toproduce cleaner gasoline. Both changes would take effect starting in 2004. The California Air Resources Boardadopted similar measures in November, with the same effective date. The new rules are designed to createhuge improvements in air quality, according to environmentalists. Cleaner gasoline alone should be theequivalent of taking 54 million cars off the road, said William Becker, executive director of a national associationof state and local air pollution officials. The EPA proposals, if adopted, could also reduce acid rain and diminishthe amounts of harmful toxins and particulates in the air. The rules also are expected to increase gasoline andvehicle costs. The Air Resources Board estimated the average additional cost at $107 per vehicle, though thecharge for consumers could prove far higher on certain types of vehicles. That, in turn, could gradually changethe mix of vehicles on the nation's roads, which in recent years have become crowded with smog-producing,fuel-thirsty trucks. Light trucks--pickups, vans, minivans and sport-utility models--now account for 47.5% of allnew vehicles sold in the United States. As a group, their average fuel consumption is 20.7 miles per gallon,compared with an average 27.5 for passenger cars. The proposed requirements have been the source of fiercebattles between the automobile and oil industries. The final draft of the document is supposed to be sent to theOffice of Management and Budget for review on Friday, but the EPA has begun briefing people on its generalcontents. An auto industry executive said Wednesday that in some respects the proposal goes too far. But "theindustry would like very much to be positive in this thing," he said. He said the industry would try to push backsome of the target dates for reducing tailpipe emissions and that it would also argue that some targets are toostrict. William F. O'Keefe, executive vice president of the American Petroleum Institute, which represents the oilcompanies, said the EPA proposals to reduce the sulfur content in gasoline could increase the cost of gasolineby as much as 5 to 6 cents a gallon and would require hard-pressed refiners to spend $5 billion to $6 billion toretool. Some refiners may be forced to shut down and others may choose not to make the investment,producing gasoline only for export, he said. The EPA proposal would require a nationwide average for sulfur ingasoline of 30 parts per million, phased in from 2004 through 2006. The nationwide average is now more than10 times that level, or about 330 parts per million. The car makers had sought lower levels of sulfur in gasolinebecause sulfur clogs the honeycombs in catalytic converters and limits their ability to reduce pollution. Theproposed rules also aim to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides, which contribute to smog. The current standardfor emissions of nitrogen oxides from passenger cars limits them to 0.4 grams per mile, but in the Northeastbeginning this year the standard becomes 0.2 grams. That standard will apply nationally by 2001. Credit: FromStaff and Wire ReportsSubject: Emission standards; Sport utility vehicles; Environmental regulations; Air pollutionCompany: Environmental Protection Agency, EPAPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 2Number of pages: 017 March 2013 Page 401 of 483 ProQuestPublication year: 1999Publication date: Feb 18, 1999Year: 1999Dateline: WASHINGTONSection: Business; PART- C; Financial DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05425974ProQuest document ID: 421369827Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1999 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 177 of 213California and the West; CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS / PROPOSITION 7; Should Tax Breaks HelpClean Air?; Smog: Backers say incentives will help reduce old diesel trucks and buses from the road.Detractors say it will take away from other programs.Author: Ingram, CarlPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 09 Oct 1998: 3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: A relatively low-budget measure, Proposition 7 is sponsored by the environmentalist Planning andConservation League. It is backed by members of the clean air industry, electric power companies, theAmerican Lung Assn. and environmental protection organizations. Opponents also say that the initiative wouldrequire California taxpayers to subsidize via the tax credits a variety of questionable clean air remediesadvocated by the same industry interests who paid to put Proposition 7 on the ballot. "This is about getting taxbreaks, if you pay," said Lenny Goldberg, director of the opposition campaign. "These are 16 narrow categoriesof tax breaks specifically designed for {pro-Proposition 7} campaign contributors."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The scenario is familiar: You are stuck in traffic and just ahead is an old diesel truck belching noxiousclouds of exhaust with seeming impunity. You inhale the fumes, curse and wonder, yet again, how such obvious17 March 2013 Page 402 of 483 ProQuestpolluters of the air can get away with it. Californians like you are exactly who the drafters of Proposition 7 had inmind when they wrote the Air Quality Improvement Act and put it on the Nov. 3 ballot. The measure wouldaward about $2.3 billion in tax credits over the next 11 years as an inducement for private industry to intensifythe technological fight against smog, especially cleaning up old diesel trucks and buses. Tax credits also wouldbe handed out for reducing other emissions, including pollution from locomotives, ships, heavy constructionmachinery, agricultural burning, power lawn mowers and fireplaces. Research and development costs alsowould qualify. The initiative states that unless these sources of pollution are attacked with new vigor, currentanti-smog requirements "will not be sufficient to clean up California's air quickly enough to protect public health."A relatively low-budget measure, Proposition 7 is sponsored by the environmentalist Planning and ConservationLeague. It is backed by members of the clean air industry, electric power companies, the American Lung Assn.and environmental protection organizations. It is opposed by Taxpayers Against Corporate Welfare, a campaignorganization of mostly public employee unions who warn that Proposition 7 threatens funding for otherprograms dealing with tax relief and environmental, law enforcement and higher education programs.Opponents also say that the initiative would require California taxpayers to subsidize via the tax credits a varietyof questionable clean air remedies advocated by the same industry interests who paid to put Proposition 7 onthe ballot. "This is about getting tax breaks, if you pay," said Lenny Goldberg, director of the oppositioncampaign. "These are 16 narrow categories of tax breaks specifically designed for {pro-Proposition 7} campaigncontributors." Goldberg noted that virtually all the $630,000 contributed to the initiative through June 30 camefrom industry sources, including fireplace product makers, electric utilities, a waste-to-energy company and abusiness that manufactures a product that "eats" harmful ozone. He says the proposition's complex provisionsare written in such a way that businesses would be able to claim tax credits for up to 100% of their costs, anallegation denied by proponents. Gerald Meral, the Planning and Conservation League's executive director, notonly concedes that industry members are the campaign's chief financial backers but boasts, "We're proud ofthem. "We want them to be more in the business and increase their level of sales," Meral said. "Keep in mindthat the people who ultimately benefit from this are the people who are not going to die from air pollution."Proposition 7 supporters note that old trucks and buses are major air polluters, but are beyond the reach ofrecent anti-smog requirements imposed on newer vehicles. Incentives to the Industry Diesel emissions result ina disproportionate amount of air pollution, experts say. Diesels represent only 4% of the motor vehicles inCalifornia, but emit 40% of the nitrogen oxide, a chief ingredient of smog, and 60% of particulate waste. TheLegislature recently approved a $25-million program by Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa (D-LosAngeles) and Sen. Jim Brulte (R-Rancho Cucamonga) to encourage the retrofit or purchase of low emissionheavy-duty engines. But Meral dismisses the legislation as a weak alternative to the more comprehensiveProposition 7, charging that the Legislature lacks the political will to regulate dirty old trucks and agriculturalburning in a meaningful way. The initiative was drafted, in effect, to buy cleaner air by making the fight againstsmog more economically attractive to private industry, Meral said. "We have to deal with the problem" throughincentives, Meral said. Supporters say the tax incentives could lead to a 50,000-ton reduction in diesel soot andother air pollutants each year. Under the initiative, the tax credit would be roughly equivalent to the differencebetween the higher cost of new clean air technologies and their less clean alternatives. For example, a truck orbus company could receive a credit on its state tax bill if it purchased a clean-operating electric or natural gasvehicle instead of one powered by diesel fuel. A business also could seek tax breaks if it converted or retrofittedits older vehicles to burn fuel more cleanly. The tax credits would be awarded competitively on a "cost effective"basis by the state Air Resources Board, or local air districts. Eligible applicants would include manufacturers,suppliers and purchasers of clean air products. The credits also would apply to a variety of other air pollutionsources, including power landscaping tools, locomotives, fireplace inserts and agricultural burning of rice strawand orchard clippings. Alternative Systems In all, $218 million in tax credits would be made available each yearuntil the program expired in 2010. More than half the yearly credits, $114 million, would be earmarked for17 March 2013 Page 403 of 483 ProQuestcleaning heavy duty trucks and buses, construction machinery and for alternatives to agricultural burning. ButGoldberg objects to the tax advantages being mandated every year, regardless of whether the remedies wereeffective in cleansing the air. He contends that granting tax breaks on the basis of cost-effectiveness would beunworkable because the categories are so narrow that comparable alternatives could not be considered. "Thereare all kinds of scams that can be run with this thing," Goldberg said. But Meral countered that the state airboard is "literally the world's expert" in evaluating the effectiveness of clean air strategies and would not rewardboondoggle schemes with tax breaks. Proposition 7 also has drawn criticism from the independent CaliforniaBudget Project, a nonpartisan research organization that monitors fiscal issues. It warned that tax credits wouldbe awarded for anti-pollution programs that, in many cases, have been mandated by the government but arenot yet in effect. "Proposition 7 provides a public subsidy for pollution reduction efforts that would occur {in thefuture} in the absence of the credits," the organization said. The overall financial impact of Proposition 7 onCalifornia eluded a precise estimate by Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill, the Legislature's nonpartisan fiscaladvisor. In an analysis, Hill said Proposition 7 may result in a revenue loss to the state ranging from tens ofmillions to more than $100 million each year. To the extent that the initiative resulted in cleaner air, long-termstate and local health care costs probably would be reduced, Hill said. She said the amount was "unknown."Potential Budget Buster Proposition 7 also caught the attention of Gov. Pete Wilson and the Legislature as apotential budget buster when they were writing the state budget last summer. They concluded that the budgetcould not finance both the tax credits proposed by Proposition 7 and the tax relief the governor and lawmakerswanted to give other businesses. As a result, they made the award of $52.4 million worth of business tax breakscontingent on the defeat of Proposition 7 by the voters. At stake are tax breaks such as extendingmanufacturing investment credits to software developers, increasing credits for research and development,exempting certain teleproduction equipment from sales taxes, and reducing the minimum tax small start-upbusinesses must pay. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) The Prop. 7 Pollution Plan What it woulddo: Through 2010, provides $218 million a year in tax credits to private industry to develop, manufacture andsell products that produce less air pollution; targets heavy-duty trucks and buses. Arguments for: Intensifies thebattle against air pollution; uses tax incentives as a tool to reduce smog; protects the health of Californians.Arguments against: Narrowly written and will benefit businesses that put Proposition 7 on the ballot; threatensfunding for other programs; awards tax credits for clean air projects already required but not yet in effect.Supporters: California Farm Bureau Federation, Air Pollution Control Officers Assn., Southern California GasCo., California Chamber of Commerce, California Trucking Assn., California Energy Biomass Alliance, SierraClub, Clean Air Now, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn., California Transit Assn. Opponents: CaliforniaProfessional Firefighters, Assn. of Professional Scientists, Service Employees International Union, CaliforniaTax Reform Assn., California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO. Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Air pollution; Referendums; Tax credits; SmogLocation: CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1998Publication date: Oct 9, 1998Year: 1998Dateline: SACRAMENTO17 March 2013 Page 404 of 483 ProQuestSection: PART-A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05243673ProQuest document ID: 421378279Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1998 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 178 of 213Nothing to Sneeze At; Air--free of smog or alergens--is a precious commodity in L.A. Here's wherehome buyers can find it.Author: Doheny, KathleenPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 27 Sep 1998: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: On a sultry, smoggy Sunday that left inland residents gasping, a breeze blowing through this home'sfront windows could be felt in the dining area, where Tina Black, an agent in the Palisades office of ColdwellBanker-Jon Douglas Co., stood ready to accept offers. The AQMD collects pollution measurements hourly atabout 32 monitoring stations around the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino anddisplays the levels on its Web page (). Nine monitoring regions did not exceed the federalozone standards at all in 1997, including Central Los Angeles, Northwest Coastal Los Angeles, SouthwestCoastal Los Angeles, the South Coast, the West San Fernando Valley, South-Central Los Angeles, CentralOrange County and North Coastal Orange County and one of two monitoring stations in the Coachella Valley.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Nestled on a shady street in Pacific Palisades, the starter home has three bedrooms and two baths in1,300 square feet and--in real estate lingo--room for a pool and great potential for a second story add-on. Butthe feature that might help fetch the $689,000 asking price is actually free. This house is surrounded by freshair. On a sultry, smoggy Sunday that left inland residents gasping, a breeze blowing through this home's frontwindows could be felt in the dining area, where Tina Black, an agent in the Palisades office of Coldwell Banker-Jon Douglas Co., stood ready to accept offers. "When clients call, the first thing they mention {wanting} is thefresh air," she said. House hunters from out of the immediate area almost always notice how much fresher the17 March 2013 Page 405 of 483 ProQuestair is on her side of the hill, Black said. Tudor Martin, an agent in the Brentwood office of Coldwell Banker-JonDouglas Co., agreed: "I would say roughly 50% of the people we work with ask {about air quality}." Fresh airwas definitely on the wish list of Larry Penfold, general manager of the Century Wilshire Hotel, as he househuntedone Sunday in July. He and his family have moved here from Kailua, the windward side of Oahu, and headmits the trade winds have them spoiled. "It's hard to adjust" to the smoggier parts of L.A., he noted. So hewas inspecting an open house on Sunset Boulevard near Temescal Canyon, where both fresh air and theproximity of Palisades High School, where his son hoped to enroll, were selling points. At a nearby open house,Dr. Osman Ratib, UCLA professor and vice chairman of radiological sciences, and his wife, Beatrice, werehoping to find both fresh air and the cooler temperatures that often accompany it. "If you look at the downtownL.A. area, you can clearly see the air is better here," said Ratib, who is back in Los Angeles after working inSwitzerland for 10 years. Where can Southern California house hunters find the freshest air? When the questionis posed to physicians and air quality experts, they repeat the same mantra: The closer to the beach the better.The higher the better. But that's only the short, simple answer. The more complete and complicated answerdepends, say these experts, on other variables. Are you simply trying to avoid smog? Or do you have allergies,asthma or both and need to avoid the triggers to sneezing and wheezing? Of the two, it's easier to find a housein a less smoggy neighborhood. Beach areas are best, said Robert F. Phalen, professor of community andenvironmental medicine and director of the Air Pollution Health Effects Laboratory at UC Irvine. "If the beach istoo expensive, I would consider {locations} up five miles inland," Phalen said. "If that's still too expensive, tryOrange County. Avoid the areas around Azusa and Riverside." Beyond those guidelines, house hunters canaward their own rankings of "most smoggy" and "least smoggy" to neighborhoods by studying statistics from theSouth Coast Air Quality Management District. The AQMD collects pollution measurements hourly at about 32monitoring stations around the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino and displaysthe levels on its Web page (). In addition, the AQMD has compiled an analysis of 1997 airquality statistics for all its monitoring stations, taking into account ozone (what most refer to as smog), carbonmonoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, particulates, lead and sulfate. Air quality is getting better, said BillKelly, an AQMD spokesman. Last year, he said, there was just one smog alert. Still, in recent years, the SouthCoast Air Basin has been the worst in the United States in terms of annual number of days exceeding federalair quality standards, as the AQMD notes in its "Current Air Quality and Trends" report. Last year, ozone levelswere the worst in the East San Bernardino Valley, with that area's station recording levels exceeding the federalozone standard on 35 days, more than any other monitoring station. (Federal standards are less stringent thanstate standards.) Close behind were the Central San Bernardino Valley monitoring station No. 2, registering 32days above federal limits, and the Central San Bernardino Mountains, registering 29 days. Last year, one of thethe East San Gabriel Valley's two monitoring stations exceeded the federal smog standard on 18 days and theother exceeded it on 11 days; the Santa Clarita Valley station registered 13 days of excessive smog. Ninemonitoring regions did not exceed the federal ozone standards at all in 1997, including Central Los Angeles,Northwest Coastal Los Angeles, Southwest Coastal Los Angeles, the South Coast, the West San FernandoValley, South-Central Los Angeles, Central Orange County and North Coastal Orange County and one of twomonitoring stations in the Coachella Valley. But smog doesn't tell the whole story. For instance, the South-Central Los Angeles monitoring station had no days in 1997 on which the federal ozone level was exceeded,but on 14 days it did exceed the federal standard for carbon monoxide (a byproduct of combustion that comesalmost entirely from motor vehicles). In other areas, toxins from industry can pose a problem. Besides payingattention to pollution levels in various neighborhoods, Phalen advises house hunters to note traffic volume in thearea. "Traffic and congestion generate smog," he noted. So how close is too close to a freeway? "If you're byone freeway, 100 yards is no big deal {in terms of exposure to air pollution}," Phalen said. "But if your house is10 miles downwind from a six-freeway interchange that carries hundreds of thousands of cars, you could beaffected by the pollution." For house hunters who are battling allergies or asthma, some of these same caveats17 March 2013 Page 406 of 483 ProQuestabout clean air apply. "Generally I tell my patients to live as close to the coast as possible," said Dr. BernardGeller, a Santa Monica allergist on staff at UCLA-Santa Monica Medical Center and St. John's Hospital andHealth Center. "Higher is better, too." The higher you are, the drier it is likely to be, said Dr. Robert Eitches, anallergist on staff at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and an assistant clinical professor of pediatrics at UCLA. Andthat usually means fewer dust mites, which are a frequent allergen, and fewer mold spores. If money were not aconsideration, Eitches said the ideal environment for the allergy-prone would be a high-rise building along theWilshire corridor or an oceanfront home with windows only on the waterfront side. Beyond those generalities,those who are allergy- and asthma-prone should take a careful look at the wind patterns, traffic volume,vegetation and house construction before picking a new neighborhood. Suppose there is a constant stiff breezeat an oceanfront home. "If there is a lot of wind, it can increase pollen," Eitches said. "I've had patients movefrom Culver City to ocean-side Pacific Palisades and have more problems." Their new coastal neighborhoodswere windier and had more tree and weed pollens. Those with environmental allergies should avoid areas witha lot of diesel traffic, said Dr. Adrian Casillas, a UCLA assistant professor of medicine. With his colleagues,Casillas has found that simultaneous exposure to diesel particulates and to ragweed allergen worsens theallergic response. In a recent study, published last year in The Journal of Immunology, the UCLA team usedragweed as a model. But Casillas says the advice to avoid diesel pollutants probably holds for anyone withenvironmental allergies, such as allergies to trees, weeds or household pets. House hunters with these allergieswould do well to avoid neighborhoods with truck lines and many bus lines, Casillas said, as well asneighborhoods near airports. Those sensitive to molds should generally avoid canyons, Geller said, becausemold spores thrive in the dampness. "The narrower they are, the worse," he said. Those who react strongly tomold spores should also avoid living in houses with swamp coolers, Eitches said, because they, too, can be abreeding ground for mold. Over their many years of practice, Eitches and Geller have also learned from theirallergy-prone patients which areas of the Southland to avoid, based on the specific allergy. * Those sensitive toolive trees should avoid Sherman Oaks, Studio City, West Hollywood and Griffith Park, where they're common,Eitches says. People with allergies to walnut trees are advised by Eitches to avoid the San Fernando Valley,where they are especially prevalent. Those allergic to ash trees will have a harder time of it, he says, becausethey are scattered throughout the region. The flatlands tend to have more grass pollens, Eitches finds. Thosewho are extremely sensitive to outdoor pollens might do best in a city environment with more concrete thanvegetation, he said. "Newer is better than older," said Eitches, who recommends that allergy-prone patients, ifpossible, look for houses less than 15 years old. Homes older than that may be more prone to mold and dustmites, he said, and may have windows that don't seal well. Those with asthma should avoid neighborhoods withhigh smog levels and look for homes with central air-conditioning and filtration units, Eitches recommends.They should also avoid homes with heavy carpets, which tend to harbor dust mites, a frequent asthma trigger.(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Stuck in a Smog or Pollen Pocket? So you're stuck in thesmoggiest neighborhood--or the most vegetated--in Southern California with an affordable mortgage and noinkling that you'll win the lottery? Here are same ways to minimize the misery. * Plan outdoor activities aroundthe smog levels. "Smog is not constant," said Robert F. Phalen, professor of community and environmentalmedicine and director of the Air Pollution Health Effects Laboratory at UC Irvine. Levels are generally higherfrom about 10 a.m. to 7 p.m. when the sun is out and many cars are on the road. * Pay attention to indoor airquality. Clean air filters regularly to eliminate microorganisms. Get rid of indoor plants with pollen or mold growthon them. Consider buying a HEPA (high-efficiency particle air) filtering machine, suggests Dr. John W. Dalton,medical director of the respiratory therapy department at UCLA-Santa Monica Hospital Medical Center. Theycan help to reduce inside airborne allergens. For information on HEPA filters and general information on allergyand asthma, contact the Asthma &Allergy Foundation of America, Southern California chapter, (800) 624-0044.* Get an Analysis of Southland Air For a copy of the 1997 analysis of Southland air quality by monitoringstations, call the South Coast Air Quality Management District, (800) 288-7664, and ask for the 1997 data17 March 2013 Page 407 of 483 ProQuestcards. The toll-free information line also offers brochures and other pollution information and registerscomplaints. For details on various pollutants, hourly pollution updates and other information, visit the AQMDWeb site, . PHOTO: Robert F. Phalen, director of the Air Pollution Health EffectsLaboratory at UC Irvine, uses a laser to illuminate pollutants being "inhaled" by mannequin.;PHOTOGRAPHER: DON BARTLETTI / Los Angeles Times; PHOTO: Osman, left, Jeremy, Alexander andBeatrice Ratib enjoy the Palisades air.; PHOTOGRAPHER: BOB CAREY / Los Angeles Times Credit: KathleenDoheny is a Los Angeles freelance writer. She can be reached at kdoheny@Subject: Air pollution; Real estate salesLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1998Publication date: Sep 27, 1998Year: 1998Section: Real Estate; PART-K; Real Estate DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: FeatureAccession number: 05223805ProQuest document ID: 421313572Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1998 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 179 of 213California and the West; Board Declares Diesel Soot a Cancer-Causing Pollutant; Health: Thecompromise comes after a years-long debate. It sets in motion a process to try to figure out how todeal with the emissions of the toxic particulates.Author: Cone, Marla17 March 2013 Page 408 of 483 ProQuestPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 28 Aug 1998: 3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Diesel soot--the culprit behind the smoke from trucks and buses that annoys many Californians--is atoxic, cancer-causing danger to the public, the state's air quality board declared in a unanimous vote Thursday.Now, the real work begins for the state Air Resources Board. In a process likely to take years, the agency mustevaluate strategies to protect Californians from the fine carbon particles emitted by diesel engines, includingthose in trucks, tractors and trains. Earlier this week, industry groups, from trucking companies to oil giants,agreed to end their years of intense opposition to air board action on diesel so long as the board identified onlydiesel particulates--not diesel exhaust as a whole--as a toxic pollutant.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Diesel soot--the culprit behind the smoke from trucks and buses that annoys many Californians--is atoxic, cancer-causing danger to the public, the state's air quality board declared in a unanimous vote Thursday.The decision, which set in place an unusual compromise between industry and environmentalists, ended nearly10 years of political debate and scientific analysis by state officials and a panel of scientists. Now, the real workbegins for the state Air Resources Board. In a process likely to take years, the agency must evaluate strategiesto protect Californians from the fine carbon particles emitted by diesel engines, including those in trucks,tractors and trains. Air board Chairman John Dunlap assured business leaders that banning diesel engines orfuel is not an option. Instead, the air board voted to create a working group of health experts, industry leadersand environmentalists who will help devise a plan that is likely to focus on tightening emission standards forfuture vehicles and finding ways to get rid of old, smoking trucks. Ending years of confrontation,environmentalists and industry groups Thursday endorsed the move to list diesel particulates as a toxic aircontaminant. "This is a really important step and we're very pleased," said Linda Waade of the environmentalgroup Coalition for Clean Air. "After nine years, I absolutely believe that it starts the clock ticking and we'll seesome really good {policy} out of this. There will be no new regulation immediately, but it starts this veryimportant risk-evaluation process." Earlier this week, industry groups, from trucking companies to oil giants,agreed to end their years of intense opposition to air board action on diesel so long as the board identified onlydiesel particulates--not diesel exhaust as a whole--as a toxic pollutant. The main difference, business leaderssay, is that the board is giving them something specific to focus on--finding new technologies to reduce theparticles created by diesel engines. Particulates are microscopic pieces of soot that contain molecules ofvarious toxic compounds and can penetrate deep into lungs. The particles are believed to cause seriousrespiratory problems. California Chamber of Commerce President Allan Zaremberg called it a "win-winsituation" and a "fair compromise." Board member Joseph Calhoun, a former General Motors engineer, said hehad "lost some sleep" over the prospect of voting to identify diesel exhaust as toxic. But he found it morereasonable to act only on diesel particulates--the ingredient that health studies, engineers and regulators havefocused on. Already, under existing emission standards, a new diesel truck or bus emits 90% fewer particlesthan one manufactured a decade ago. Many trucks on the road, though, are still putting out large amounts ofsmoke because the engines are older models. Despite the years-long delay brought by industry opposition,Dunlap said California is now ahead of the curve. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is evaluatingdiesel exhaust and is likely to declare it a carcinogen. Since 1989, debate has centered on how much of acancer risk diesel poses to people driving on freeways, riding on buses, living near trucking centers or simplybreathing urban air. A state-appointed panel of scientists concluded that diesel pollution could be causing14,000 cases of lung cancer in California. But that cancer estimate is highly controversial and uncertainbecause it is extrapolated to the general population from studies that found a high cancer rate among railroadcrews, truckers and other workers who encounter high doses of exhaust. Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTALWRITER17 March 2013 Page 409 of 483 ProQuestSubject: Air pollution; Diesel fuels; Emission standards; Health hazards; Pollutants; CarcinogensLocation: CaliforniaCompany: Air Resources Board-CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1998Publication date: Aug 28, 1998Year: 1998Section: PART-A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05182087ProQuest document ID: 421307495Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1998 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 180 of 213California and the West; Accord Near on Hazards of Diesel Exhaust; Pollution: Panel is expected todeclare soot a carcinogen rather than targeting all exhaust components.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 27 Aug 1998: 3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Ending a bitter fight over diesel exhaust, the California Air Resources Board today is expected todeclare diesel soot a cancer-causing pollutant after industry leaders and environmentalists struck a deal thatquells nearly a decade of intense opposition. Convening this morning, the air board had intended to declarediesel exhaust a toxic air contaminant and begin crafting a strategy to reduce the threat. Instead, under thecompromise, the board is expected to identify only a portion of the exhaust--tiny pieces of soot called17 March 2013 Page 410 of 483 ProQuestparticulates--as toxic. Diesel particulates are microscopic pieces of carbon that can lodge in the lungs, carryinga host of carcinogenic molecules, and create dark, noxious clouds of smoke. Engine manufacturers, truckingcompanies and other businesses say that it would have been unfair and impractical for the air board to indicteverything about diesel exhaust as dangerous. The compromise, they say, will allow them to focus instead onfinding new technologies and other solutions to reduce the 27,000 tons of particles a year that come from dieselequipment, which includes millions of trucks, buses, trains, ships, tractors and other machinery.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Ending a bitter fight over diesel exhaust, the California Air Resources Board today is expected todeclare diesel soot a cancer-causing pollutant after industry leaders and environmentalists struck a deal thatquells nearly a decade of intense opposition. The agreement is an unusual compromise in a war of words thathas endured for nine years--the time that state environmental officials have spent reviewing the dangers thattrucks, buses and other diesel engines pose to public health. Convening this morning, the air board hadintended to declare diesel exhaust a toxic air contaminant and begin crafting a strategy to reduce the threat.Instead, under the compromise, the board is expected to identify only a portion of the exhaust--tiny pieces ofsoot called particulates--as toxic. Diesel particulates are microscopic pieces of carbon that can lodge in thelungs, carrying a host of carcinogenic molecules, and create dark, noxious clouds of smoke. Once today'sdecision is made, the state must review ways to clean up diesel particulates, perhaps by tightening emissionstandards for future trucks and stepping up efforts to remove old, smoking vehicles from California roads, farmsand construction sites. Engine manufacturers, trucking companies and other businesses say that it would havebeen unfair and impractical for the air board to indict everything about diesel exhaust as dangerous. Thecompromise, they say, will allow them to focus instead on finding new technologies and other solutions toreduce the 27,000 tons of particles a year that come from diesel equipment, which includes millions of trucks,buses, trains, ships, tractors and other machinery. In a statement, a coalition of influential industry groups, ledby the California Chamber of Commerce and California Trucking Assn., called it "a fair compromise." "It's timeto put past disagreements and public confrontations behind us. With the agreement that has been reached, wecan continue to make strides in making diesel fuel safer and cleaner for the future," the industry leaders said.Environmentalists are thrilled with the imminent end to the battle with the trucking industry and other businessgroups, saying that the public will be well-protected if the California air board works to reduce dieselparticulates. "We now have the chance to come out of the box with a strong, focused effort," said Sierra Clublegislative consultant John White. "This is a good thing, because it will give us a chance to get to work andmake {air quality} improvements over time. This is going to be a decades-old struggle to clean up dieselexhaust." Under Gov. Pete Wilson, the air board is extremely sensitive to opposition from California businesses,and the decision on whether to declare that diesel is toxic prompted vehement dissent and lobbying from everyindustry group--from oil companies to farmers--as well as Republican legislators. To quell the protest, AirResources Board Executive Officer Michael Kenny last month invited negotiations with industry leaders,environmentalists and scientists. White said industry groups agreed to the deal after they failed to persuade theLegislature to prohibit the air board from naming diesel exhaust as toxic. All major business groups active in thedebate signed off on the agreement, including engine manufacturers, unions, oil companies, farmers andmanufacturers. Given the lack of opposition, the air board members will probably adopt the compromise today.Under the proposal, the board's staff "doesn't feel they lose any ability to control diesel emissions and itcertainly brings a decade-long episode to a close," said air board spokesman Jerry Martin. "It allows us to moveon to the real work of actually reducing emissions." The state's Scientific Review Panel estimated that dieselpollution could eventually kill more than 14,000 Californians by causing 450 lung cancers among every 1 millionpeople exposed to average concentrations for a lifetime. Diesel exhaust ranks sixth in cancer potency among19 pollutants that the board has already identified as toxic. Scientists are uncertain what exactly in diesel17 March 2013 Page 411 of 483 ProQuestexhaust causes lung cancer. But they have focused on the particulates, which are easy to inhale deep into thelungs since they measure only a slight fraction of the diameter of a human hair. Dozens of organic compoundslinked to cancer also attach to the particles and are carried into the lung. Daniel Greenbaum, president of theHealth Effects Institute, an independent air pollution research group, said Wednesday that it makes sense forregulators to target particulates. Only a small amount of toxic substances are found in diesel gases, as opposedto the particles, he noted, so most of the apparent health danger from diesels can be addressed by reducingthem. Several dozen studies of railroad crews, truckers, miners and other workers have shown they contractedlung cancer at a rate 40% higher than normal. Particulates have been linked to numerous other serious healthproblems. In human health studies in dozens of cities around the world, deaths from heart attacks and lungailments such as asthma increase on days when particulates in the air increase. Despite the years ofcontroversy, there has been little doubt among air board officials that they would list diesel pollution as a "toxicair contaminant," which state law defines as a substance that "may pose a present or potential hazard to humanhealth." Business groups have argued that the cancer research is flawed and outdated because the people whowere studied were exposed to old engines and dirtier fuel that spewed more particles. As part of the new deal,the air board would note that the cancer estimates may not accurately reflect new diesel fuel and engines,which are 90% cleaner than ones manufactured 10 years ago. Beau Biller, a trucking association spokesman,said declaring just the particles as toxic instead of all exhaust will reduce the threat that trucking companies willbe sued by people exposed to fumes. Fear of liability over the cancer threat has been the companies' overridingconcern. Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Diesel engines; Emissions; Air pollution; CancerLocation: CaliforniaCompany: Air Resources Board-CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1998Publication date: Aug 27, 1998Year: 1998Section: PART-A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05179929ProQuest document ID: 421345438Document URL: March 2013 Page 412 of 483 ProQuestCopyright: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1998 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 181 of 213California and the West; Crestline's Air Quality May Take Breath Away; Pollution: Surprisingly, theSan Bernardino mountain community reigns No. 1 in the area on AQMD's ozone charts.Author: Gorman, TomPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 26 July 1998: 3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: On those hot and smoggy days in the cities down below--and this summer is proving worse than last--just imagine the clean air embracing this San Bernardino Mountains resort community, as bucolic as any.That's what you'll have to do, because this little town--with its cabins and A-frame homes, its lovely, lofty pinesand its little lake enjoyed by anglers and paddle-boaters alike--is enveloped in more ozone than any other placein Southern California. Crestline is the victim, not the culprit. The ozone is created west of here, then waftseasterly with the afternoon sea breeze. Its lung-invading toxins cook in the afternoon sun before settling in overCrestline, which at 4,700-foot elevation sits just below a hot summer day's inversion layer that serves as a highpressurelid to contain sour basin air.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: On those hot and smoggy days in the cities down below--and this summer is proving worse than last--just imagine the clean air embracing this San Bernardino Mountains resort community, as bucolic as any.That's what you'll have to do, because this little town--with its cabins and A-frame homes, its lovely, lofty pinesand its little lake enjoyed by anglers and paddle-boaters alike--is enveloped in more ozone than any other placein Southern California. Worse than Burbank and Azusa, Van Nuys and Glendora, Riverside and Pomona."Really?" asked a disbelieving Kevin Yuruki, who brought his son from Anaheim for a day of fishing. "Geez,that's surprising." Said a county parks employee: "Maybe they had a truck running next to the monitoring stationwhen they took those measurements." He then refused to give his name for fear that his cynicism towardanother bureaucratic agency might get him in trouble. But, indeed, for all the places where air quality ismonitored by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, this town above San Bernardino reigns No. 1 onthe ozone charts, king of the hill because it's near the top of the hill. Crestline is the victim, not the culprit. Theozone is created west of here, then wafts easterly with the afternoon sea breeze. Its lung-invading toxins cookin the afternoon sun before settling in over Crestline, which at 4,700-foot elevation sits just below a hot summerday's inversion layer that serves as a high-pressure lid to contain sour basin air. Although this weatherphenomenon afflicts other foothill and lower mountain communities, Crestline seems to get the worst of it. "It's amisnomer that going up into the mountains will get you the cleanest air," said Joe Cassmassi, seniormeteorologist for the air quality agency. You need to get above 5,000 feet--Big Bear is good--to really avoidsmog. "That's why I moved up here--for the beautiful, clean, pristine air," said Peter Haisler, who thought he hadbeen benefiting from Crestline's air for the past 11 years. "From up here, you can look down below and see alltheir gunk." Because ozone is invisible, it's easy to assume that mountain air is pure--especially when lookingdown to the "gunk" that shrouds the valley floor. That haze is caused by dust and other particulates, the othermajor partner in smog. It has different deleterious health effects and serves as the most visible reminder ofsmog. Ozone is a mixture of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxide, the stuff emitted by automobiles, factories, even17 March 2013 Page 413 of 483 ProQuestopening a can of paint or solvent. It tightens the chest, burns the eyes. Some residents say they've developedasthma after moving here. Kim Wright moved to Crestline four years ago from Lancaster "because I wanted thequiet, I wanted to avoid traffic and I wanted good air," she said. "Now I have asthma, but I'm not sure what'scaused it. Maybe the pollen." Another resident, Nancy Landford, is all but bed-bound by her asthma. Shemoved here four years ago from Perris "because I wanted all that oxygen from the trees around here," but nowshe complains that her breaths are shorter than ever. Crestline's ozone problem is relative, given that SouthernCalifornia's smog problem has improved remarkably over the past four decades. In the mid-1970s, it was notunusual for cities in the San Fernando, San Gabriel and San Bernardino valleys--and for Crestline --to havefirst-stage smog alerts more than 60 days a year (when the level of ozone in the air exceeds 0.20 parts permillion for at least one hour). By comparison, Crestline had first-stage smog alerts only four times in 1996--butthat was still more than any other place in Southern California. Last summer, a Stage 1 smog alert was declaredon only one day, for Crestline as well as a handful of other places. So far this year, there have been seven dayswhen Crestline recorded first-stage smog alerts. On only one of those days, July 16, were other cities also puton a Stage 1 alert. The alert is declared if the ozone standards are exceeded for any one hour of the day. Is itpossible that places like Crestline might have just one or two bad hours of ozone--as the afternoon wind blowsthe foul air through town--but actually have clean air most of the day? New federal guidelines now call for notinglower levels of ozone--but over an extended eight-hour period, to monitor sustained exposure to ozone. AQMDofficials applied those new standards to last year's numbers, curious to see how communities in SouthernCalifornia compared to one another. The conclusion: The east San Gabriel Valley (with a monitoring station inGlendora) experienced 79 days last year that would have exceeded the new standard for prolonged ozoneexposure. Alas, Crestline ranked second, with 74 days of prolonged exposure to ozone. Crestline's civic leadersare not thrilled by its smog notoriety, even though it is kept somewhat under wraps. The AQMD dividesSouthern California into regions, and Crestline shows up in reports simply as the "central San BernardinoMountains." That region extends from Crestline to Arrowbear, about 20 miles to the east. But it so happens thatthe AQMD's monitoring station is on the shoreline at Lake Gregory, in the heart of Crestline. On gorgeoussummer days, children frolic in the water and anglers appear, well, blissfully bored, and everyone probablyassumes that the air couldn't be finer. Mention "ozone" to Cynthia Fargo, director of the Crestline ResortsChamber of Commerce, and she takes a cleansing breath and reaches for her smog file. She denies nothing.But let's be fair, she said, ozone levels are waaaay down from the bad years. And she uses the ozone crown topromote civic action: "Up here, we live in a beautiful mountain environment, and sometimes we forget aboutsome of the world's issues, such as air quality. This is an opportunity for us to address the issue and see howwe can help, even in our own little community." Others are hardly so noble. "That's life," said Shawn Holt, whowith her son was fishing for trout by the lake. "I moved up here from Moreno Valley six years ago, because theschools are better, there's fewer people, it's just overall a better quality of life. Ozone? Life's full of trade-offs."Nearby, Frank Gramer, a retired Caltrans worker, waved off the problem. "Smog doesn't bother me. I like totaste and smell the air so I can tell if I'm alive and breathing." PHOTO: Crestline, nestled around Lake Gregory,is the recipient of the easterly winds that carry the smog from the Los Angeles area.; PHOTOGRAPHER: GINAFERAZZI / Los Angeles Times Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Air pollution; Ozone; Ratings & rankingsLocation: Crestline CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 3Number of pages: 017 March 2013 Page 414 of 483 ProQuestPublication year: 1998Publication date: Jul 26, 1998Year: 1998Dateline: CRESTLINESection: PART-A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05140458ProQuest document ID: 421401803Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1998 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 182 of 213The Color of SummerAuthor: Jones, Robert APublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 19 July 1998: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: As far as I can determine, that story records the first smog attack in Los Angeles' history. The word"smog" had yet to be invented, of course, and the city, as apparent from the headline, was clueless about thesource of its affliction. We have now lived with smog for more than 50 years. Recently, pollution levels havegone down, but each summer the smog returns and changes the city in fundamental ways. Parts of thelandscape disappear and the city seems to shrink physically. The color of the air is altered, and objects of everykind grow more diffuse in the scattered light. She tells the story of standing on a rise near Riverside severalyears ago. The time was early afternoon. She looked up and saw the infamous wall of smog rolling eastwardfrom Los Angeles. The smog seemed pure white, she says, and when it enveloped the rise where she stood thesounds of the cars and people around her grew softer.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: In the dim cell where I work, a newspaper clipping hangs on the wall. The date is July 1943, and theheadline reads: "Butadiene Smoke Blankets City in Haze." As far as I can determine, that story records the first17 March 2013 Page 415 of 483 ProQuestsmog attack in Los Angeles' history. The word "smog" had yet to be invented, of course, and the city, asapparent from the headline, was clueless about the source of its affliction. Butadiene had been fingered as thevillain because it poured from a factory on 7th Street in great, foul quantities. The war effort was going fullthrottle and butadiene was used in synthetic rubber. Ironically, the butadiene diagnosis worked to allay people'sfears. It implied a limited problem. All you had to do was shut down the factory and the problem woulddisappear. Then the war ended, the factory shut down, but the pall did not go away. It only got worse. Prettysoon the word "smog" began to appear in the newspapers. We have now lived with smog for more than 50years. Recently, pollution levels have gone down, but each summer the smog returns and changes the city infundamental ways. Parts of the landscape disappear and the city seems to shrink physically. The color of the airis altered, and objects of every kind grow more diffuse in the scattered light. This process has given us a specialrelationship with smog. We watch it from our patios, study it on the freeways. Smog has become part of our city,and part of us. I have a friend who claims the city grows more quiet in the summer because of the smog. It's herown epiphany. The billions and billions of tiny particles absorb sound, she says, producing the same muffledeffect you get with a fog or snow. She tells the story of standing on a rise near Riverside several years ago. Thetime was early afternoon. She looked up and saw the infamous wall of smog rolling eastward from Los Angeles.The smog seemed pure white, she says, and when it enveloped the rise where she stood the sounds of the carsand people around her grew softer. The feeling was pleasant. She knows that smog hurts people--she has seenthe pictures of blackened lungs taken from the cadavers of longtime L.A. residents--but now she realizes shealso takes comfort from it. Ronald Henry, an environmental scientist at USC, studies the interplay of smog andlight. "Smog has insinuated itself in our lives for so long that we don't even think how it changes ourperceptions. But it does," he says. Henry tells his own story of taking his teenage daughter, who grew up in LosAngeles, to see the stars on Mt. Pinos near Gorman. Henry reasoned that his daughter had never experienceda truly dark, clear night and would enjoy seeing the thousands of stars shining in the sky. Instead, he said, shegrew apprehensive. "The world was too dark and too large without the smog," he says. "This huge sky openedup. To her, it didn't seem right and she got afraid." For most of us, the relationship with smog is composed ofsmall observations. Probably the most common is the phenomenon known as light scattering. On summer days,the city gets infused with yellow light that appears to have no direct source. A generation ago the writer MarshallFrady referred to this effect as "the unbright Southern California sunshine." That light is a gift of the smog. Tinyparticulates spewed from diesel trucks, power plants and the like have so scattered sunshine that the air itselfseems illuminated. This light casts only the vaguest of shadows and has a palpable quality. In the afternoons,whole neighborhoods can appear to float in it. Henry Hogo, a scientist at the AQMD, says light scattering alsocreates the intense sunsets of summer. Some particles may scatter red light while others scatter blue. "That'show we get sunsets that you don't see anywhere else," he says. And certain mysteries about smog prevail.Let's say you're driving to work and the morning sun is low in the sky. From that point of view, smog will havethe color of soap film. But the same smog seen from the surrounding mountains will look either dark gray oryellow-brown. I put this apparent contradiction to Henry at USC. "We know a huge amount about the physics ofsmog and light," he said. "What we don't know is how the human eye deals with the physics. Many questionshave never been answered." Actually, Henry says, the smog is the same color at all times: a grayish white. Ifyou point a spectrometer at the smog from the mountains, the spectrometer will report that the smog is, indeed,white. The eye registers it as yellow-brown because of a physiological trick, he says, known as "induced color.""The phenomenon is well known. If you take something that's gray or white and put it up against a coloredbackground, the eye will induce the complementary color in the gray or white material. "When you view smogfrom the mountains, you're seeing it against the background of a blue sky. And the complement of blue isyellow." In a sense, Henry seems to be confirming some old myths about L.A. We live in a city where you can'teven trust the color of smog. It's fake. As I was talking to people about this story, one person suggested that ourconnection to smog was so deep that we might regret its passing from the scene. I doubt that. In fact, our17 March 2013 Page 416 of 483 ProQuestconnection with smog already seems to have faded as the intensity of air pollution has begun to wane. In the1960s, author Reyner Banham pointed out in his book, "Los Angeles, the Architecture of Four Ecologies," thatthe city had a nearly swaggering attitude toward life in the smog. People seemed proud that they had breathedthe air here and survived. "Their conversations are peppered with phrases like 'being stuck in a jam in theOctober heat with the kids in the back puking with the smog,' " he wrote. These tales were like war stories,bigger than life, that grew more elaborate with each retelling. These days, the relationship has changed tosomething milder and more tenuous. I don't think we feel perversely proud of it anymore. When I made thatpoint to Margaret Brunnell, she seemed happy to hear it. In the 1950s Brunnell served as the assistant to ArieHaagen-Smit, the Caltech chemist who discovered photochemical smog. It used to be, Brunnell says, thatpeople's eyes would water so badly from the smog they couldn't drive. Housewives couldn't put laundry on aline to dry because their clothes would soon be covered in soot. After years of fighting for clean air, she says,she realized a corner had been turned when she addressed a school class. She was describing a test onceused to measure eye-watering and a kid in the class raised his hand. Why, the kid asked, would you want tomeasure eye-watering? "He had never experienced smog bad enough to make his eyes water," she says. "Iknew then that we were getting somewhere." None of which stops Brunnell from engaging in her ownidiosyncrasies with smog. More sophisticated than the rest of us, Brunnell has discovered that nighttime smogleaves small, bleaching drops of dew on her roses. So she goes out regularly to inspect her roses on summermornings. "It's the acid in the smog," she says as I am leaving her house. She stops to show me. We look at theroses but no bleached spots show up. I say goodbye. As I leave she is hunched over, still looking for the telltalespots that only a 40-year veteran of the smog wars would recognize. PHOTO: (The Color of Summer);PHOTOGRAPHER: Los Angeles TimesSubject: Air pollution; Summer; Psychological aspectsLocation: Los Angeles CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1998Publication date: Jul 19, 1998Year: 1998Column: ESSAYSection: Metro; PART-B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: CommentaryAccession number: 0512626817 March 2013 Page 417 of 483 ProQuestProQuest document ID: 421308781Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1998 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 183 of 213Fires Shroud Mexico in Hazardous Haze; Environment: Smoke exacerbating pollution, health woeshas spread to U.S.Author: Smith, James FPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 14 May 1998: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: As if the air in this metropolis wasn't foul enough already, a plague of El Nino-fed forest fires, slashand-burn clearing and searing temperatures has created a relentless smoky pall so vast that it stretches all theway to Houston and Miami. And there's been no escape here. Residents accustomed to driving out of the valleyof Mexico City to weekend homes or trekking by bus to modest swimming spas to escape the funk have foundthe air in the countryside equally polluted--or worse. Most states in central and southern Mexico have beenengulfed in a steadily thickening haze throughout this seemingly endless dry season, which usually stretchesfrom October to late May. In recent days the smoke grew so dense that the plumes began reaching Texas andthe southeastern U.S.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: As if the air in this metropolis wasn't foul enough already, a plague of El Nino-fed forest fires, slashand-burn clearing and searing temperatures has created a relentless smoky pall so vast that it stretches all theway to Houston and Miami. And there's been no escape here. Residents accustomed to driving out of the valleyof Mexico City to weekend homes or trekking by bus to modest swimming spas to escape the funk have foundthe air in the countryside equally polluted--or worse. Most states in central and southern Mexico have beenengulfed in a steadily thickening haze throughout this seemingly endless dry season, which usually stretchesfrom October to late May. In recent days the smoke grew so dense that the plumes began reaching Texas andthe southeastern U.S. Texas Health Commissioner William Reynolds Archer told reporters Tuesday that thesmoke was reaching hazardous levels and that people should stay indoors. In Tabasco state on Mexico's GulfCoast, authorities closed the airport for three days last week when the smoke made it unsafe for planes to land,and city health workers handed out gauze facemasks. The Chiapas capital of Tuxtla Gutierrez on Mondaydeclared an environmental emergency, and people drove with their lights on at midday. All four airports inHonduras were shut Wednesday by the pollution. The Mexican Environment Ministry said Tuesday that 9,649forest fires were recorded this year, burning nearly 600,000 acres, and 247 fires were reported burning Monday.The number of fires is up 87% over the five-year average, and the acreage burned is up 210%. The blazes alsohave been deadly. Nearly 50 people have died in fires this year, including 19 amateur firefighters who werekilled in a single incident in Puebla state last week and another who died in Veracruz state Tuesday. OnWednesday, newspapers reported that an 18-year-old asthma sufferer in Tabasco state died as a result of thesmoke. Authorities acknowledge that the only hope is for rain, which will douse the fires and clear the skies. So17 March 2013 Page 418 of 483 ProQuestfar, there have been nothing but rumors of rain in most states, although thunder has started to clap in the capitalin the afternoons, raising hopes for relief. Oscar Cedeno, director of forestry protection, said the governmentbelieved that the worst had passed because the season for slash-and-burn clearing was nearing an end. Hesaid the fires had aggravated the unusually high temperatures and raised levels of suspended particulates. Thetemperature in Mexico City hit 100 degrees Saturday, the highest for that date since 1927. At an altitude of7,500 feet, such heat is rare. The city's ozone pollution index hit 248 the same day, far above the danger levelof 100 and two points below the hazard level. Throw in the recent belches of smoke and ash from nearbyPopocatepetl volcano that have occurred with increasing frequency, and the high levels of fetid dust hanging inthe capital's air due to lack of wind, and the mixture becomes disgustingly murky. Towering "Popo," 33 milessoutheast of the capital but rarely visible anymore through the smog, spewed steam and ash about a mile intothe air Sunday, dumping a light blanket of ash on nearby towns. In the less polluted northern city of Monterrey,the problem has been heat: Temperatures hit 115 degrees, and environmental officials said 200,000 farmerswere affected by heat and drought. Baja California has been spared--instead experiencing more rain thannormal. Mexico City crouches in a valley ringed by mountains and filled with 18 million people using 3.4 millioncars a day, not to mention 800,000 more vehicles that commute daily into the city from the adjacent state ofMexico, according to Raimundo Artiz, head of transportation in the capital. That generates some of the world'sworst pollution levels, even without any fires. Ozone readings in the low 200s have occurred regularly sinceMarch, even though the worst pollution normally is recorded in colder January and February. When ozonereadings reach 250 or higher, Mexico City invokes extreme measures, barring 40% of the cars from the roads,shutting many factories and keeping schoolchildren indoors. The human hand has played the largest role inchoking the country with smoke. In rural areas, farmers often burn brush to clear farmland, creating constanthaze in the spring. Near Mexico City and other urban centers, squatters have been setting fire to tinder-dryprotected ecological zones to clear spaces for their invasive informal housing. The southern state of Chiapasand central state of Michoacan have had the most fires, but Guerrero and Oaxaca also have been aflame.Similar problems have been reported throughout much of Central America as well. Federal and state officialshave repeatedly warned that they will enforce bans on intentionally setting fires to clear land, but to little avail."There is a lack of compliance with any environmental norm," said Homer Aridjis, a poet and founder of theGroup of 100, an environmental action organization. "The government doesn't have the capacity to implementregulations. The rules exist, but nobody complies." He said the cause of the crisis is not just El Nino; worse isthe human-caused deforestation that is changing the climate and causing water problems and air pollution. At anewspaper stand in Mexico City, vendor Pedro Chavez said: "It is worse than in previous years. You notice it inyour eyes, in the tiredness you feel. Our two children are getting sick more often, and the heat causes rashes. Ifwe could, we would leave Mexico. But this is where our business is." Brinley Bruton of The Times' Mexico CityBureau contributed to this report. PHOTO: Smoke darkens Mexico City's already polluted skies.;PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press; PHOTO: President Ernesto Zedillo, left, meets with firefighters nearTexocuixpan, a town southeast of Mexico City.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press Credit: TIMES STAFFWRITERSubject: Forest & brush fires; Air pollution; Temperature; Public healthLocation: MexicoPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 199817 March 2013 Page 419 of 483 ProQuestPublication date: May 14, 1998Year: 1998Dateline: MEXICO CITYSection: PART-A; Foreign DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 05052125ProQuest document ID: 421284434Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1998 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-09-23Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 184 of 213Air Board Targets Utility Vehicles, Minivans, Pickups; Pollution: Unprecedented state proposal wouldrequire them to adhere to passenger car emission standards by 2004. Auto industry attacks plan atworkshop.Author: Clifford, FrankPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 10 Dec 1997: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: California air quality officials unveiled a proposal Tuesday that for the first time anywhere wouldsubject light trucks, minivans and most sport utility vehicles to the same strict smog controls as passenger cars.If approved by the California Air Resources Board, the regulations would require the auto industry to developand install sophisticated new pollution control equipment starting in 2004 for those vehicles, which have sogrown in popularity that they account for nearly as many sales as cars. The proposed new regulations--announced at a two-day Air Resources Board workshop in the agency's El Monte office--will not be voted on bythe board for another year. But their mere introduction drew an immediate attack from a well-organizedcontingent of auto industry executives, well aware of California's pioneering role in setting air quality standards.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: California air quality officials unveiled a proposal Tuesday that for the first time anywhere wouldsubject light trucks, minivans and most sport utility vehicles to the same strict smog controls as passenger cars.17 March 2013 Page 420 of 483 ProQuestIf approved by the California Air Resources Board, the regulations would require the auto industry to developand install sophisticated new pollution control equipment starting in 2004 for those vehicles, which have sogrown in popularity that they account for nearly as many sales as cars. Heavier trucks, those weighing morethan 7,000 pounds, would continue to be exempt from passenger car standards. The proposed new regulations--announced at a two-day Air Resources Board workshop in the agency's El Monte office--will not be voted on bythe board for another year. But their mere introduction drew an immediate attack from a well-organizedcontingent of auto industry executives, well aware of California's pioneering role in setting air quality standards.What's more, about 10% of the nation's cars and trucks are sold in California. At issue is the soaring market inpickups and sport utility vehicles, or "SUVs," which have evolved from being the low-cost workhorses of farmsand ranches into stylish--and often costly--transportation for suburban families. As the sales have surged,however, air quality officials here and in Washington have become concerned about the nation's ability tocomply with the federal Clean Air Act, especially in highly polluted areas such as Southern California. Underexisting state standards, light trucks, minivans and sport utility vehicles are allowed to emit up to three times theamount of smog-forming chemicals as passenger cars. With Tuesday's proposal, the air quality board becomesthe first state or federal agency to formally challenge the emissions exemptions for the "light truck" category ofvehicles. An official of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, who was at the workshop, said the federalgovernment is still trying to decide what to do. "We know we want to narrow the gap {between passenger carsand light trucks}, but by how much we don't know," said John M. German, senior technical advisor to the EPA'sVehicle Programs and Compliance Division. "We haven't decided whether to bring the standard down to thepassenger car level like California wants to, or whether to come down in between passenger cars and thecurrent standard for light trucks," German said. As soon as air board staff members outlined the proposed newregulations, a dozen auto industry representatives rose--with charts and other exhibits--to deliver an hourlongrebuttal coordinated by the American Automobile Manufacturers Assn. Leading off for the opposition,association spokesman Steve Douglas said the regulations would be costly to consumers and virtuallyimpossible for the industry to comply with by 2004. Douglas urged the board to postpone its November 1998deadline for adopting the new rules "to provide for critical testing" of emissions control technology. TheCalifornia initiative could have broad policy implications. States are allowed now to either adopt federal clean airstandards or California standards. The Northeast states have followed California's lead in adopting a mandatefor future sales of zero-emission vehicles--electric cars--and could do the same with the tougher light truckemissions standards in their desire to meet federal clean air mandates. Historically, light trucks and sport utilityvehicles were regulated more leniently than passenger cars because they were designed to pull trailers, haulheavy loads and travel off-road--and thus run hotter, burn more fuel and emit more pollutants than passengercars. But the board's report noted that as minivans and sport utilities have become surrogate station wagons,they have gone from accounting for 20% of all vehicle sales nationally in 1980 to almost 46% in 1997. "Thistrend has a substantial impact on California's air quality because, although these vehicles are used aspassenger cars, they are certified to the more lenient gram per mile emission standards designed for worktrucks," the report said in defending the proposed regulations. The air board's staff took issue with the industrycontention that smog control equipment in these vehicles cannot be as efficient as in conventional passengercars because of the heavier stress placed on the catalytic converters--which filter out pollutants--in thelighttrucks and sport utility vehicles. "Due to advancements in emission control technologies," the report states,"it is now estimated that emission levels from the category of vehicles can be lowered to that of passenger carsand that these emission levels can be maintained for the useful life of the vehicles." The air board staff turned tothe industry for suggestions on how to regulate the vehicles in such a manner that people who still use them theold-fashioned way--for hauling and towing in work--are not penalized. "We are looking for a proposal from theindustry that would distinguish a working vehicle from a passenger vehicle," said Steve Albu, chief ofengineering studies for the board. So far, though, industry representatives see no way of doing that. And they17 March 2013 Page 421 of 483 ProQuestworry that the pollution controls could undermine the appeal of the sport utility vehicles, which is based on theirrough-and-ready image--in other words on the heft and horsepower that drives up emissions. "The problem iscontrolling usage," said Alan R. Weaverstad, manager of vehicle emissions activities for General Motors. "Partof the image the customer wants is ruggedness." Weaverstad acknowledged that advertising heavily promotesthat image, but said that the ads were "merely picking up on trends rather than creating them." The newregulations for light trucks were part of a package of emission reduction strategies spelled out at the workshop,which drew not only domestic and foreign auto industry representatives, but government regulators andenvironmentalists from across the country. Another proposal seeks to cut back on the allowable levels of twosmog-forming elements--particulate matter and nitrogen oxides--in vehicle exhaust. A GM spokesman, KevinCullen, complained that the measure "would preclude sales of diesels" in California at a time when the autoindustry in partnership with the Department of Energy is researching how to perfect diesel engines. Theseengines have the potential to make gas-guzzling SUVs considerably more fuel efficient while reducing theiremissions of carbon monoxide, which contribute to global warming. But diesel emissions are high in nitrogenoxide and particulate matter. Although much of Tuesday's workshop was consumed by the barrage of criticismfrom the auto industry representatives, some jabs went the other way. Board officials complained that theindustry seemed most interested in designing ever larger sport utility vehicles--only aggravating pollutionproblems. "It seems you are going to make more and more of these vehicles that undermine our air quality,"said Albu, the board engineer. "We are not hearing much about what you plan to do to make things better."Albu said he was particularly troubled by Ford's plans for an extra-large sport utility vehicle that could functionas a passenger car but would be heavy enough when fully loaded, over 8,500 pounds, that it would be exemptfrom even the new emissions regulations. "Why should we give up our air quality," he asked, "so they canproduce even larger vehicles with even dirtier emissions?" (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)Smog Check Under a new proposal, sport utility vehicles and light trucks would have to match passenger caremission levels. Current standards: Grams per mile hydrocarbons and nitrous oxides Sport utility vehicles Lightdutytrucks Cars Source: California Air Resources BoardDonald W. Nauss contributed to this story. Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Automobile industry; Product lines; Environmental regulations; Emissions; Proposals; Air pollution;Emission standards; Automobiles; Regulation; Trucks; VansLocation: Los Angeles, CA, US, Pacific, CaliforniaCompany: Air Resources Board-CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Dec 10, 1997Year: 1997Section: PART-A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.GRAPHIC-CHART: Smog Check, Los Angeles Times; * Times staff writer17 March 2013 Page 422 of 483 ProQuestCountry of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 98-41280, 04829065ProQuest document ID: 421383095Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 185 of 213A Quiz For Deep BreathersAuthor: Jones, Robert APublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 23 Nov 1997: B, 1:1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: My quiz is a setup, of course. Both statements are true. Each year the smog levels drop, leaving theview a bit clearer. And each year scientists discover that the remaining filth in the air erodes our lungs in waysno one predicted when the war on smog began. Nowhere have these paradoxical trends been so displayed aslast week in Diamond Bar. The Air Quality Management District, which relentlessly praises its smog-fightingsuccess, released a new study that should scare every parent in the basin and anyone else who has breathedL.A.'s air for long periods. The study, conducted by the Kaiser Foundation Research Institute, found that modestincreases in particulate pollution--we're talking here about construction dust, rubber tire grit and the like--produced sharp increases in hospitalizations at Kaiser hospitals.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Which of the following statements is true: * Los Angeles' air pollution gets better year by year, so don'tworry, be happy. * Air pollution is more dangerous to your health, and your children's health, than anyonerealized even 10 years ago. My quiz is a setup, of course. Both statements are true. Each year the smog levelsdrop, leaving the view a bit clearer. And each year scientists discover that the remaining filth in the air erodesour lungs in ways no one predicted when the war on smog began. Nowhere have these paradoxical trendsbeen so displayed as last week in Diamond Bar. The Air Quality Management District, which relentlessly praisesits smog-fighting success, released a new study that should scare every parent in the basin and anyone elsewho has breathed L.A.'s air for long periods. * The study, conducted by the Kaiser Foundation ResearchInstitute, found that modest increases in particulate pollution--we're talking here about construction dust, rubbertire grit and the like--produced sharp increases in hospitalizations at Kaiser hospitals. Keep in mind thatparticulates once were regarded as so innocuous that little research was conducted into their impact on humanhealth. After all, it was only dust. The heavy-duty research was directed at the more exotic pollutants such as17 March 2013 Page 423 of 483 ProQuestozone and nitrogen oxides. Now we know different. A dozen studies over the past decade have establishedparticulates as one of the most dangerous components in the air pollution mix. They work their way deep intothe lungs, where they slowly do their damage. And Southern California, natcherly, has the highest particulatelevels in the country. The Kaiser study showed that the biggest jump in hospitalizations came for those whoalready suffer from chronic lung diseases such as bronchitis or asthma. If the particulate level rose from 40micrograms per cubic meter to 50 micrograms--a common occurrence here--the number of hospitalizationsamong this group increased by 7%. Shankar Prasad, the health effects officer for the AQMD, called the 7%figure "a big number." And indeed it is, almost twice as large as the increases found in cities back East. RonaldWhite of the American Lung Assn. says such figures are sometimes dismissed by those who argue that theyapply only to the dying and very sick. That represents a misconception, he says. "This country has tens ofmillions of people with chronic lung and cardiovascular disease," White says. "Many of them go to work everyday and lead productive lives. They are not lying in bed on a respirator." And how did these people come bytheir chronic lung disease in the first place? Some of them smoke cigarettes, of course, or have a geneticpredisposition. For others, the culprit may be the same air pollution that eventually delivers a knockout blow andputs them in the hospital. * In fact, one of the scariest studies of recent years involves the autopsies of 107young accident victims in Southern California. As described in a report by the Natural Resources DefenseCouncil, the study found that 104 of the young people showed early signs of permanent lung disease. Nearly allhad chronic low-level bronchitis. One-third had chronic interstitial pneumonia, a form of the disease found deepwithin the lung tissue. Before their deaths, almost none of the young people showed outward signs of breathingdisorders. In other words, they didn't know they were developing chronic lung disease. But they were movinginexorably toward that status of a person who eventually gets picked off by an uptick in particulates. "Thedilemma is that people keep hearing about the air getting cleaner, and it is," says White. "What they should alsohear is that science has learned there's much more to worry about even with those lower levels." As forparticulates, the city of Los Angeles could strike a quick blow for cleaner air by committing itself to enforcementof the 6-month-old ban on leaf blowers. In all of Southern California, some 420,000 leaf blowers now workfuriously to throw as much dust as possible into the air so we can all breathe it. That dust contains desiccatedpesticides, animal feces, lead, asbestos and god knows what else. And it gets thrown right into people's faces,especially the faces of the men who must work with the machines strapped to their backs. The leaf-blower banwon't solve the particulate problem by any means, but it's a start. Wouldn't it be pretty to think that one day wecould drop off our kids at school, watch them race across the playground, and not feel that twinge of regret overraising them in the filthiest air in the country? Ironically, the new science may help us get there. Knowledge ispower, after all. If we use it correctly, this knowledge could get us a long way.Subject: Smog; Air pollution; StudiesLocation: Los Angeles County CaliforniaCompany: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CAPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B, 1:1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Nov 23, 1997Year: 1997Column: ROBERT A. JONES17 March 2013 Page 424 of 483 ProQuestSection: Metro; PART-B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: CommentaryAccession number: 04806826ProQuest document ID: 421316486Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 186 of 213California and the West; Air Officials Urge Smog Alerts at Lower Pollution LevelsAuthor: Clifford, FrankPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 21 Nov 1997: A, 3:2.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Air quality officials recommended Thursday that the Southland's system of health advisories, warningpeople of hazardous smog levels, be strengthened in the wake of new studies linking lung and heart problemsto surprisingly small increases in air pollution. "The data we are now seeing indicates that health advisoriesshould be revised and issued for lower levels of pollution," said Shankar Prasad, health effects officer for theSouth Coast Air Quality Management District. The studies--one by the Kaiser Foundation Research Instituteand one by the California Environmental Protection Agency--found a correlation between hospital admissionsfor cardiopulmonary ailments and daily levels of ozone and particulate matter.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Air quality officials recommended Thursday that the Southland's system of health advisories, warningpeople of hazardous smog levels, be strengthened in the wake of new studies linking lung and heart problemsto surprisingly small increases in air pollution. "The data we are now seeing indicates that health advisoriesshould be revised and issued for lower levels of pollution," said Shankar Prasad, health effects officer for theSouth Coast Air Quality Management District. He said the studies also point to the need for stricter regulation ofunpaved roads, construction sites and industrial yards where coal and other sources of soot and dust arestockpiled. The studies--one by the Kaiser Foundation Research Institute and one by the CaliforniaEnvironmental Protection Agency--found a correlation between hospital admissions for cardiopulmonaryailments and daily levels of ozone and particulate matter. The yearlong Kaiser study, which is still being17 March 2013 Page 425 of 483 ProQuestanalyzed, looked at more than 10,000 hospital admissions in the Los Angeles Basin--making it the mostcomprehensive study of its kind conducted in the region, according to the AQMD, which paid for the project.The most significant finding, common to both studies, is that rather small amounts of coarse particulate matter--or airborne grit--appear to be as hazardous to human health as other components of smog, such as ozone, thatare emitted by gasoline and a host of other chemicals. It has long been known that high levels of microscopicparticle pollution are unhealthful because of their impact on lung function when they are inhaled. Once inside,they interfere with the lungs' capacity to clear themselves of bacteria and other damaging microorganisms. Themicroscopic grit, however, comes in different sizes. Up to now, so-called fine particle pollution has been theprime focus of medical experts because these particles are inhaled more deeply than the larger, coarseparticles. Fine particles result from combustion in cars and factories. Coarse particles are produced by a varietyof sources--from dirt roads and construction sites to diesel engines and industrial boilers. "What we are seeingnow, and that is new, is that coarse particles are an equal or greater problem," Prasad said. The AQMD'smonitors do a better job of measuring unhealthful levels of ozone than of particle pollution, he said. In light ofthe studies, though, he recommended that smog alerts in the future be triggered by lower levels of both ozoneand particulate concentrations. For example, health alerts are now issued when particulates reach 150micrograms per liter of air. Prasad suggested that the AQMD consider issuing the alerts at a level as low as 50micrograms per liter. The Kaiser study, which covered Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino and Riversidecounties, found that hospital admissions for chronic respiratory illnesses rose 7% for every 10-microgramincrease in particulate pollution--even on days when the overall particulate level was well below 150micrograms. On the most severely polluted days, researchers said, admissions for all types of cardiopulmonaryproblems jumped 25%. The second study--conducted by Cal/EPA in the Coachella Valley--turned up similarrelationships between increases in particulate pollution and hospital visits for heart and lung problems.Preliminary results of a 10-year study by USC environmental health researchers also suggest some evidencethat the rate of lung development is slower for children growing up in areas of high ozone concentration. Theproject, now half completed, is tracking 4,000 children from the fourth through the 12th grades in 12 SouthernCalifornia communities. "We are seeing small changes in lung functions related to ozone," said USC's Ed Avol.But the changes are so minor, he added, that it is too soon to say whether they represent a significant departurefrom normal ranges of development. Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Smog; Quality standards; Air pollution; Medical disorders; TrendsLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 3:2Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Nov 21, 1997Year: 1997Section: PART-A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 0458303517 March 2013 Page 426 of 483 ProQuestSource type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04809162ProQuest document ID: 421254419Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 187 of 213Study Correlates Smog to Heart, Lung Ailments; Health: L.A. Basin study finds that hospitalizationsrise along with pollutants, especially coarse particles, in the air.Author: Clifford, FrankPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 20 Nov 1997: A, 1:2.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The yearlong study by the Kaiser Foundation Research Institute found a particularly strong correlationbetween hospital admissions and elevated levels of coarse particles that typically come from road dust, tirewear and airborne erosion from construction sites. The preliminary results of the ongoing research project,which will be formally unveiled today, are based on more than 10,000 admissions to Kaiser Permanentehospitals throughout 1995. The patients were living in or near Southern California communities where the SouthCoast Air Quality Management District was making daily pollution measurements for the major components ofsmog--particulate matter and ozone. Hospital admissions for chronic respiratory disease were found to rise by7% for every 10-microgram increase in particulate pollution--basically grit--in the air. Admissions rose 3.5% foracute respiratory illness and 3% for those with cardiovascular disease.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: In the first study of its kind in the Los Angeles Basin, medical researchers say they have confirmed thatmore people are hospitalized for lung and heart ailments as smog increases. The yearlong study by the KaiserFoundation Research Institute found a particularly strong correlation between hospital admissions and elevatedlevels of coarse particles that typically come from road dust, tire wear and airborne erosion from constructionsites. The preliminary results of the ongoing research project, which will be formally unveiled today, are basedon more than 10,000 admissions to Kaiser Permanente hospitals throughout 1995. The patients were living in ornear Southern California communities where the South Coast Air Quality Management District was making dailypollution measurements for the major components of smog--particulate matter and ozone. "The maximum effectwas on people with preexisting diseases," said Shankar Prasad, health effects officer for the AQMD, which paidfor the study. Hospital admissions for chronic respiratory disease were found to rise by 7% for every 10-microgram increase in particulate pollution--basically grit--in the air. Admissions rose 3.5% for acute respiratoryillness and 3% for those with cardiovascular disease. "Seven percent is a big number, almost twice what hasbeen reported in other studies," said Prasad. Other experts concurred. "It is a surprisingly big increase in the17 March 2013 Page 427 of 483 ProQuestnumber of patients for a relatively small change in the level of pollution," said Henry Gong, a professor ofmedicine and environmental health specialist at USC. "The preliminary results . . . indicate there are significantadverse health outcomes to ozone and particle pollution." Hospitalizations increased at lesser rates as ozonelevels rose. With an increase of 10 parts per billion, admissions went up 5.7% for cardiovascular disease, 2.7%for chronic respiratory problems and 1.5% for acute respiratory illness. A number of previous studies haveshown connections between smog and various types of illness. One research project, released last year,estimated that 64,000 people in major American cities may die each year from lung or heart problems madeworse by inhaling particulates. The Kaiser study is different, however, because of its local focus. Up to now,Prasad said, 90% of health effects studies relating to smog have been conducted in the Eastern andMidwestern United States, where there are significant sources of pollution not found in Southern California.Many of the studies are out of date, he added, but in this study, "we're not looking back at 15-year-old records.We have fresh data." The strength of the Kaiser study, he said, derives from the number of patients involved,from the uniformity of medical data coming from a single health maintenance organization, and from theintensity of the pollution monitoring. It was done on a daily basis in downtown Los Angeles, Anaheim, DiamondBar, Fontana and Rubidoux in Riverside County. The results are also significant, in part, because they departfrom the current emphasis on extremely fine particulate matter, the object of controversial new air pollutionregulations by the Clinton administration. Those small particles come largely from fuel combustion, such as carand truck exhaust. On the other hand, the coarser particles that tend to correlate more closely with hospitalvisits in the study come largely, but not entirely, from dirt roads and construction sites. Coarse particles are alsoformed by ammonium nitrate, the components of which come from a variety of sources, including combustionand diesel engine exhaust, industrial boilers, waste water treatment plants, dairies and composting facilities.Along with the Kaiser study, the AQMD plans today to present the findings of a related research project by theCalifornia Environmental Protection Agency. Conducted in the Coachella Valley, the Cal EPA study found a2.5% increase in emergency room visits for pneumonia and 1% increase in deaths corresponding to a 10-microgram increase in daily amounts of coarse particulates. Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: Smog; Health hazards; Air pollution; TrendsLocation: Los Angeles CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 1:2Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Nov 20, 1997Year: 1997Section: PART-A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: English17 March 2013 Page 428 of 483 ProQuestDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04803616ProQuest document ID: 421190042Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 188 of 213SMALL BUSINESS; Firms Push for Some Breathing RoomAuthor: Torres, VickiPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 22 Oct 1997: D, 9:1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: As Congress winds down before adjourning next month, small-business interests are pushingdesperately for one last piece of legislation aimed at putting the brakes on stringent new air pollution controlstandards. Nationwide, the cost for the new controls is projected at up to $37 billion annually, according to theWhite House Council of Economic Advisors and the EPA. The cost to thousands of small businesses in affectedindustries is expected to reach 3% of their individual net sales, according to the EPA. Businesses that would beaffected include manufacturers of plastic or chemical products and those that work with heated metals. Alsoaffected would be printers, construction companies, road builders, companies that lay asphalt and firms withfleets of vehicles. The Small-Business Regulatory Enforcement Act, which became law in March 1996, requiresthat before proposed rules are published, the EPA get input on how small businesses will be affected. The EPAignored the act in devising the new rules, contends National Small Business United, a nonprofit small-businessorganization that filed a lawsuit against the EPA in September.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: As Congress winds down before adjourning next month, small-business interests are pushingdesperately for one last piece of legislation aimed at putting the brakes on stringent new air pollution controlstandards. HR 1984, a bill sponsored by U.S. Rep. Ron Klink (D-Pa.), would impose a four-year moratorium onimplementation of new regulations for ozone and particulate matter. Currently states must come up with rules tomeet the standards by 2002. The Environmental Protection Agency says the new regulations would prevent15,000 deaths a year from respiratory and cardiac disease, 25,000 asthma attacks and 60,000 cases of chronicbronchitis, and save up to $120 billion, mostly in medical bills. To fight such a laudable goal would seem, at firstglance, to put small business in league with the dark side. Although bureaucrats say the air in the Los AngelesBasin is cleaner than ever, it still stings our eyes, clogs our sinuses and scratches our throats. Smog givesdowntown Los Angeles a perpetual grainy look, so great for film noir and so bad for living, breathing creatures.So why would small business line up with million-dollar oil companies and utilities to fight air pollution controls?One reason is cost. Nationwide, the cost for the new controls is projected at up to $37 billion annually,according to the White House Council of Economic Advisors and the EPA. The cost to thousands of smallbusinesses in affected industries is expected to reach 3% of their individual net sales, according to the EPA.Businesses that would be affected include manufacturers of plastic or chemical products and those that work17 March 2013 Page 429 of 483 ProQuestwith heated metals. Also affected would be printers, construction companies, road builders, companies that layasphalt and firms with fleets of vehicles. The other reason is fairness. The Small-Business RegulatoryEnforcement Act, which became law in March 1996, requires that before proposed rules are published, the EPAget input on how small businesses will be affected. The EPA ignored the act in devising the new rules, contendsNational Small Business United, a nonprofit small-business organization that filed a lawsuit against the EPA inSeptember. The EPA argues that small businesses would be affected only marginally by the new regulations.Under the new rules, emissions of ozone (the smog formed when sunlight reacts with nitrogen oxide and volatileorganic compounds) must be reduced to 0.08 parts per million averaged over eight hours, compared with thecurrent standard of 0.12 parts per million averaged over an hour. Particulate matter (small bits of carbon, acids,nitrates and other substances) would be reduced to no more than 2.5 microns in size, compared with the 10-micron standard now. (A human hair is approximately 100 microns in diameter.) But the EPA says theregulations require a lengthy state-by-state implementation procedure that ends in 2012, when local jurisdictionsmust meet the standards. By that time, technology to meet the new controls will have been devised or will havebecome cheaper. To bolster faith in technology, EPA officials point to the example of sulfur dioxide emissioncontrols, which help prevent acid rain. Estimates in 1990 were that power plants would pay $1,500 for every tonof emissions reduced. Currently, that cost has fallen to $78 per ton. Second, the EPA says a new agreementworked out by a coalition of 37 northeastern states, the Ozone Transport Assessment Group, means thatcleanup efforts by large manufacturers and utilities will clean the air so well that small businesses won't have tomeet the standards. Finally, the agency argues that it did not violate the act because it did not propose newrules, but simply modified existing ones. This rather technical and legalistic debate over new air pollutioncontrols is generating lots of grass-roots concern from small businesses, said David D'Onofrio, an NSBU staffmember in Washington. For example, one small-business group in Cleveland sent out a mailing on the issue to2,000 of its members and received 750 letters back. "You don't normally see that kind of response unless it'stax issues," D'Onofrio said. "A lot of people feel the EPA is starting to overstep its bounds." Even so, HR 1984and a similar measure in the Senate to stop the new air pollution rules appear dead in the water for lack ofDemocratic support. Democrats are unlikely to agree to a measure that would block new air pollution controls,because measures supporting controls are generally popular with voters. Perhaps what is needed is not lastminutelegislation to block air cleanup rules, but aid to smaller businesses in the form of federal and state taxcredits for air pollution control equipment or procedures. "A tax credit would incentivize people to {installequipment}, and more companies could come into compliance," said Helen Anderson, owner of RayvernLighting Supply Co. in Paramount, who suggested the tax credits at a recent Small Business Administrationhearing. Grants for environmental technology work are already provided by the federal government through theEnergy and Transportation departments, as well as the EPA. Although no tax credit proposal is on the table,such a measure could help cut through the clean-air-versus-business debate that is at the heart of the newcontrols. "The general principle in which we move forward in air pollution is that clean air is a common good,and industry has no right to pollute the air and jeopardize public health," said one mid-level EPA official,perpetuating the good-guys/bad guys tone the debate often takes. A tax credit would recognize that businessalso has an interest in clean air but needs some help, particularly small businesses without the resources oflarge corporations. Small-business owners might feel they are getting some aid from the government in a jointeffort to meet pollution controls, instead of being forced to meet increasingly strict regulations and blamed forthe quality of the air. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Clearing the Air on Savings and Cost * TheEnvironmental Protection Agency says new regulations for ozone and particulate matter would prevent 15,000deaths a year from respiratory and cardiac disease, 25,000 asthma attacks and 60,000 cases of chronicbronchitis and would save up to $120 billion, mostly in medical bills. * Estimated cost for the new controls wouldbe as much as $37 billion a year, according to the White House Council of Economic Advisors and the EPA.The cost to thousands of small businesses in affected industries is expected to reach 3% of their individual net17 March 2013 Page 430 of 483 ProQuestsales. Sources: Environmental Protection Agency, White House Council of Economic Advisors GRAPHICCHART:Clearing the Air on Savings and Cost / Los Angeles TimesSubject: Air pollution; Small business; Federal legislation; Emission standardsPeople: Klink, RonPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: D, 9:1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Oct 22, 1997Year: 1997Column: AT ISSUE / VICKI TORRESSection: Business; PART-D; Financial DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: CommentaryAccession number: 04754123ProQuest document ID: 421308805Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 189 of 213California and the West; Fire's Ash Poses Hazards for Those With Ailing LungsAuthor: DODSON, MARCIDAPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 15 Oct 1997: A, 3:3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Dirty gray and gritty, the flakes were tossed about by hot, dry winds, settling on cars, patio furnitureand tree leaves miles away from the Orange County wildfire that created the ash. But authorities said Tuesdaythat unless you have asthma, bronchitis or other respiratory problems, the ash in the sky should be no morethan a passing irritant. Students at Tustin Ranch Elementary School were sent home midmorning Tuesday, not17 March 2013 Page 431 of 483 ProQuestbecause the flames threatened the campus, but because the smoke and ash from the fire, about seven miles tothe east, were bothering teachers and pupils.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The ashes fluttered down like tiny snowflakes, but Tuesday's air show was the antithesis of a pristinewintry downfall. Dirty gray and gritty, the flakes were tossed about by hot, dry winds, settling on cars, patiofurniture and tree leaves miles away from the Orange County wildfire that created the ash. You could see the airand smell it. But authorities said Tuesday that unless you have asthma, bronchitis or other respiratory problems,the ash in the sky should be no more than a passing irritant. Still, some schools closed or kept students indoorand some doctors recommended against outdoor physical activity. "It's probably better not to exercise outside,"said Dr. Archie Wilson, chief of pulmonary and critical care medicine at UC Irvine Medical Center. "When youexercise, you breathe deeply," and more particulates are inhaled, he said. "But for most people, breathing in alittle ash won't hurt much." Students at Tustin Ranch Elementary School were sent home midmorning Tuesday,not because the flames threatened the campus, but because the smoke and ash from the fire, about sevenmiles to the east, were bothering teachers and pupils. "Some people were getting headaches," said Mark Eliot,a spokesman for the Tustin Unified School District. "The smoke and ash got into the ventilation system." Atother schools in the path of the smoke, students were kept indoors. "It's like a rainy day schedule," Eliot said."Students are not going outside for recess and physical education classes and lunch." The South Coast AirQuality Management District issued a special "smoke advisory" to schools and community centers, urging themto avoid unnecessary outdoor activities in affected areas. But for most people, breathing the airborne ashshould cause no serious problems because the particles are too big to penetrate the lungs, Wilson said.Instead, they should be captured by the mucus layer of the airways, which continually move such substancesupward, until they are high enough to be swallowed or coughed up, he said. The ash presents more concern forpeople with chronic respiratory illnesses. Any foreign particles in the air can cause flare-ups of asthma,bronchitis, emphysema or other conditions, authorities said. The American Lung Assn. warned people withrespiratory problems to stay inside with doors, windows and fireplace flues shut. Air should be circulated withpurifiers or air conditioners. Those with asthma should be extra careful to follow medication directions, using themaximum amount that their doctors have directed for days when air quality is bad, authorities said. The ashmay hang around for several days, even after a fire is extinguished, doctors said. Further, during any cleanup inash-filled areas, people should wear dust masks and water down dusty or sooty areas or use wet cloths to keepthe particles from becoming airborne, the lung association said. Cars need extra care too, even miles from thefire, the Western Insurance Information Service advises. Ash can be acidic and damage paint, so vehiclesshould be kept in garages or washed immediately, the agency said. But do not dry-wipe the car, warned JoelBernstein, owner of Irvine Hand Car Wash. The ash may contain pieces of tree bark or other materials that didnot completely burn, which could scratch paint, he said. PHOTO: (Orange County Edition, A15) A freelancephotographer turns lens on flames jumping a back road near Irvine Lake Dam. Smoke and ash from the canyonfire could be seen--and breathed in--for miles Tuesday.; PHOTOGRAPHER: AL SCHABEN / Los AngelesTimes; PHOTO: Smoke from 5,200-acre Baker Canyon fire in Orange County fills the South Bay sky behind thedock cranes at the harbor in San Pedro.; PHOTOGRAPHER: BOB CHAMBERLIN / Los Angeles Times Credit:TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: Forest & brush fires; Air pollution; Wind; Public healthLocation: Orange County CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 3:317 March 2013 Page 432 of 483 ProQuestNumber of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Oct 15, 1997Year: 1997Dateline: ORANGESection: PART-A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04741562ProQuest document ID: 421222280Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 190 of 213Dithering Over Dirty AirAuthor: Jones, Robert APublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 14 Sep 1997: B, 1:1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Good news. Of a sort. The AQMD has capitulated in the matter of Sunlaw Energy Corp., finallyallowing the company to help cleanse that soup of gases we refer to as "air" in Los Angeles. You may notice theirony of an air pollution agency being forced to "capitulate" to cleaning the air. But so it goes, as Kurt Vonnegutwould say; that's the state of affairs these days at the AQMD. All the AQMD needed to do was test the newsystem and decide whether the Sunlaw people were charlatans or the real thing. If the decision was charlatans,toss 'em out. If the real thing, get on with it.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Good news. Of a sort. The AQMD has capitulated in the matter of Sunlaw Energy Corp., finallyallowing the company to help cleanse that soup of gases we refer to as "air" in Los Angeles. You may notice theirony of an air pollution agency being forced to "capitulate" to cleaning the air. But so it goes, as Kurt Vonnegutwould say; that's the state of affairs these days at the AQMD. To recap the story, Sunlaw knocked on the17 March 2013 Page 433 of 483 ProQuestdistrict's door about two years ago with a claim that it had developed a new system for scrubbing pollutants frompower plant stacks. Specifically, the company said its system would reduce gases such as nitrogen oxide--amajor smog component--to one- third the level produced by existing plants. All the AQMD needed to do was testthe new system and decide whether the Sunlaw people were charlatans or the real thing. If the decision wascharlatans, toss 'em out. If the real thing, get on with it. But the AQMD did neither. It dithered and made excusesfor nearly two years. Finally the federal Environmental Protection Agency stepped in, found the test resultsremarkable and certified them in a matter of weeks. That happened in July. And still the AQMD withheld itsblessing. Even Mike Antonovich couldn't understand it. The supes' representative on the AQMD board,Antonovich wrote the executive director and asked, in effect, what's going on? The answer was more dithering.Barry Wallerstein, acting executive director of the AQMD, offered this gobbledygook in reply: "Health and SafetyCode Section 40440.11 (c) specifies the criteria and process that must be followed by the AQMD in order toupdate and change the BACT designation contained in the BACT Guidelines." Got that? Translated intoEnglish, Wallerstein was claiming that a state law passed in 1995 prohibited the AQMD from recognizing theEPA's decision on Sunlaw. It was an absurd position because states cannot prohibit enforcement by federalagencies operating under federal law. When the EPA caught wind of the Wallerstein claim, it put the hammerdown on the AQMD. Either recognize the Sunlaw certification or risk losing your authority to review newtechnology, the EPA said. And so the ugly culmination: The AQMD caved, reversing its interpretation of statelaw, and certified Sunlaw. The new technology is now available for use in Southern California. A debacle, yes,but one that goes beyond its immediate importance. It demonstrates the depressing erosion taking place at apublic agency that once led the world. Not for nothing did the old AQMD win the reputation of seeking out thebest technology to control pollution. Not for nothing did it get known for imposing the most stringent standards.We had the best air pollution district in the world. These days, the agency seems to spend much of its energyadvertising that L.A.'s air is much cleaner than it was 25 years ago. And it is. But that progress was madelargely because of the work, and political will, of the AQMD that has long disappeared. The new AQMD, whilereminding the public of the progress made, rarely confronts the disagreeable fact that L.A. still has the dirtiestair on the North American continent outside of Mexico City. Nor does it widely publicize the findings of recentstudies showing air pollution to be far more dangerous and life-shortening than was previously believed. Thesestudies, especially those on microscopic particulates, have demonstrated that even moderate air pollution cansap the vigor of children and the elderly. In some cases it can lead to premature death. Here in L.A., of course,we do not have a moderate problem. We have a problem so serious that it could be used, by perceptiveleaders, to galvanize support and regain the initiative on air pollution. Instead, we get self-congratulation by thebureaucrats and, behind the scenes, the impotent dithering over a matter like Sunlaw. In fact, even as theAQMD was admitting its mistakes and certifying the results of the Sunlaw tests, some were saying the battlewould be carried on. Martin Ledwitz, a member of the scientific review committee at the AQMD, says, "The EPAhas been told not to do it that way anymore." He means the way the EPA "did it" with Sunlaw. In the future, hesays, the EPA will "think twice" before certifying. It is unlikely, I think, that the EPA will quake in its boots overLedwitz's threat. But the remark suggests the current tone of things at the AQMD. As does the fact that Ledwitz,in addition to sitting on the agency's scientific committee, also happens to be Southern California Edison's chieflobbyist at the AQMD. And so the news was good this week at the AQMD. But good in its own peculiar fashion.Which is to say, sort of.Subject: Air pollutionCompany: Sunlaw Energy Corp, South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CAPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B, 1:117 March 2013 Page 434 of 483 ProQuestNumber of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Sep 14, 1997Year: 1997Column: ROBERT A. JONESSection: Metro; PART-B; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: CommentaryAccession number: 04726596ProQuest document ID: 421357892Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997 all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 191 of 213Pollution Link to SIDS Is Probed; Health: Government research indicates that tiny particulates maycontribute to deadly syndrome. Babies in highly polluted regions could be at greater risk.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 11 July 1997: A, 3:5.ProQuest document linkAbstract: New government research shows that tiny particles of air pollution may contribute to sudden infantdeath syndrome--a finding that an environmental group said Thursday points toward dirty air as an explanationfor 45 infant deaths in parts of Southern California. The study found that babies in highly polluted areas were26% more likely to die of SIDS than those who live in cities with cleaner air. Extrapolating from that data, twoadvocacy groups, the Environmental Working Group and Physicians for Social Responsibility, estimatedThursday that particulates could be responsible for 500 cases of SIDS nationwide each year, including 45 in LosAngeles, Orange and Riverside counties.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: New government research shows that tiny particles of air pollution may contribute to sudden infantdeath syndrome--a finding that an environmental group said Thursday points toward dirty air as an explanation17 March 2013 Page 435 of 483 ProQuestfor 45 infant deaths in parts of Southern California. For several years, scientists have known that more adultsdie from cardiac and respiratory ailments on days when particulates--microscopic pieces of carbon soot, sulfurand other pollutants--increase. But the new study, conducted by federal government researchers and publishedlast week in a National Institutes of Health journal, is the first to find that the rate of infant mortality also seemsto increase as particle pollution rises. The study found that babies in highly polluted areas were 26% more likelyto die of SIDS than those who live in cities with cleaner air. Extrapolating from that data, two advocacy groups,the Environmental Working Group and Physicians for Social Responsibility, estimated Thursday thatparticulates could be responsible for 500 cases of SIDS nationwide each year, including 45 in Los Angeles,Orange and Riverside counties. The estimated number of deaths in Southern California was the highest in thecountry, reflecting the fact that the Los Angeles Basin, especially around Riverside, has the nation's highestconcentrations of particulates, largely due to emissions from cars and trucks. Medical experts do not know howor why particles seem to increase deaths among people with respiratory or heart diseases--some suspect thatthe particles may irritate nerves that control the heart. The report is certain to add to a major controversy overthe health effects of particulate pollution. That controversy is at the center of the debate over controversialstandards the Clinton administration is about to adopt that would limit the amount of ultra-fine particles allowablein the air. Under those tougher standards, about 167 counties nationwide, including most of Southern California,would have air deemed unhealthful and would face potentially costly new cleanup bills. The new study hasseveral limitations. Most important, the study, which reviewed health records of nearly 4 million babies born inthe United States between 1989 and 1991, excluded babies in California and New York because those statesdo not track critical data concerning smoking by the parents--a known risk factor for SIDS. Ronald Harper, aUCLA neurophysiologist who specializes in SIDS, said the study could be pinpointing a previously undisclosedfactor in the unexplained sudden deaths of babies while they sleep. But Harper and other experts remainskeptical because of the limitations of such studies that try to track environmental influences on disease. "Thisis an important first study but it is a mistake to say air pollution causes SIDS because the mechanisms involvedare far more involved than just air pollution," Harper said. "These authors have pointed out an importantenvironmental stressor, and this stressor along with important other issues, such as prenatal factors, maycontribute to SIDS." More than 3,800 infants in the United States died of SIDS in 1994. Doctors suspect that thebabies' heart and respiratory rates slow and their blood pressure drops as they sleep. The federal scientists, ledby U.S. Environmental Protection Agency epidemiologist Tracey Woodruff, discovered that in cities with lowparticulate pollution, 1 of every 1,000 babies died of SIDS, compared with 1.13 in cities with medium pollutionand 1.26 in highly polluted cities, according to the article published in Environmental Health Perspectives. * Theresearchers found that babies in the highly polluted cities were 10% more likely to die of SIDS even whendifferences in birth weight, race, smoking by the mother during pregnancy and temperature--all factors thatcontribute to SIDS--were factored out. The study did not attempt to distinguish between babies who slept ontheir stomachs and those who slept in other positions. Some experts question how infants who spend most oftheir time indoors could be injured by outdoor pollution. California researchers, however, have found highparticulate levels indoors. But Harper noted that other factors, such as income of the families, could play a rolein the higher death rates found in the polluted cities. "It could be due to some other factor in the people who livein these cities," he said. While the environment after birth can be an important contributor to SIDS, the infantdeaths often are related to what happens while the baby is in the womb--such as cigarette smoking by themother or abnormal cardiovascular development, Harper said. Deaths from SIDS have declined 30% over thepast few years because doctors now tell parents that infants should not sleep on their stomachs or on softbedding. Babies also are at higher risk of SIDS if exposed to secondhand smoke or if their mothers smokedwhile pregnant. The Environmental Working Group used the risk rate from the study to extrapolate the city-bycitynumber of annual SIDS deaths that might be tied to pollution. Because of its severe pollution and largepopulation, the Los Angeles-Orange-Riverside counties area ranked first with 45, followed by the New York City17 March 2013 Page 436 of 483 ProQuestmetropolitan area with 29 and the Chicago area with 27. Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: MEDICAL & BIOLOGICAL TECHNOLOGY; HEALTH; LIFESTYLE; ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS;Sudden infant death syndrome; SIDS; Air pollution; Medical researchLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 3:5Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Jul 11, 1997Year: 1997Section: PART-A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04650730ProQuest document ID: 421282036Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 192 of 213L.A. Loses Battle With Owens Valley; Pollution: Board orders city to mount costly campaign involvingreturn of water to curtail severe dust storms from dry lake. Officials here vow to sue.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 03 July 1997: A, 3:5.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Reaching a historic decision that aims to force Los Angeles to surrender a large portion of its prizedwater, an Owens Valley pollution board Wednesday ordered the city to mount an unprecedented, multimilliondollarproject to curtail severe dust storms at Owens Lake. Since Los Angeles turned on its famed aqueduct in1913, all the fresh water from the Owens River, which had flowed into Owens Lake, has been transported more17 March 2013 Page 437 of 483 ProQuestthan 200 miles south to quench the big city's insatiable thirst. The lake became a giant dust bowl, and on windydays, nearby residents suffer asthma attacks and other respiratory ailments. The Owens Valley officials referredoften to the bitter history and intense distrust between Los Angeles and the rural valley. When Los Angeleschief engineer William Mulholland turned on the aqueduct 84 years ago and let the water flow to Los Angeles,he proclaimed, "There it is, take it." On Wednesday, Dorame of Inyo County put his own spin on those famouswords, telling Los Angeles, "There it is, fix it.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Reaching a historic decision that aims to force Los Angeles to surrender a large portion of its prizedwater, an Owens Valley pollution board Wednesday ordered the city to mount an unprecedented, multimilliondollarproject to curtail severe dust storms at Owens Lake. The order compels Los Angeles to make amends foreight decades of water diversions that dried up one of California's largest natural lakes, triggering immensesheets of hazardous, lung-damaging particles that occasionally descend on Eastern Sierra towns. But LosAngeles officials have vowed to mount a legal challenge to keep the water--litigation that probably would dragon for years and delay the project. After a tense and passionate debate Wednesday, the Owens Valley boardrejected a tentative compromise announced Monday, turning down a plea from Los Angeles for a delay so thata deal might be worked out and a scientific panel could be convened to study alternatives. "I'm tired of hearingthe excuses and the alibis. . . . Let's go for it," said Inyo County Supervisor Michael Dorame. "How can you lookout there and say we'll put it off? The people are crying out for this, and those who go against the people arefools." When the vote was cast, cheers rose up from the audience of Owens Valley residents, who have waitednearly 15 years for a solution. Los Angeles Department of Water and Power officials say the solution, whichtakes 15% of the city's aqueduct water in perpetuity, is exorbitant, and there is insufficient evidence that it willsucceed in curbing the dust. "We'll take prudent action to protect our rights," said Chris O'Donnell, a city aiderepresenting Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan. At the same time, he said he retains some hope that thepollution board is still amenable to negotiations. If the board's order holds up to the city's appeals, just over onethirdof the lake bed--35 square miles--will be covered with a mix of shallow water, salt grass and gravel. LosAngeles must return 51,000 acre-feet of water every year in perpetuity--43 million gallons daily, enough to servemore than 100,000 families. Lasting more than four years, construction will cost the city between $91 millionand $300 million, with annual costs of $25 million to replace the lost water. Consumer rates in Los Angelescould rise as much as 20%--up to $4 extra a month for an average household. Owens Lake remains the lastmajor battleground in the century-long water wars between Los Angeles and the Owens Valley. Since LosAngeles turned on its famed aqueduct in 1913, all the fresh water from the Owens River, which had flowed intoOwens Lake, has been transported more than 200 miles south to quench the big city's insatiable thirst. The lakebecame a giant dust bowl, and on windy days, nearby residents suffer asthma attacks and other respiratoryailments. The conflict over Owens Lake has been a classic David versus Goliath battle. It has pitted the tiny butpowerful Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, responsible for protecting the health of ruralresidents, against the nation's second largest city, which has always gone to great lengths to safeguard itswater supply. Worth $170 million a year, Owens Valley water is one of Los Angeles' most precious assets,allowing the city to boom while the Owens Valley's economy sagged. The Owens Valley board faced a difficultchoice: Issue the order and trigger lawsuits or give in to pressure from Los Angeles and postpone the project inhopes of striking a deal with the city. * In hastily arranged, last-minute talks, Riordan and the City Council sent innegotiators last Friday. Under a recommendation favored by the city leaders and endorsed by the Owens Valleyboard's chairman, negotiations would have continued for 90 days, a scientific team would be formed, andcleanup of the lake dust would be extended five years, to 2006. But the pollution board, made up of six countysupervisors and one mayor from three Eastern Sierra counties, rejected the compromise and instead issued itsorder to Los Angeles in a 6-1 vote. They, however, voted to allow the city 120 days to file appeals. Several17 March 2013 Page 438 of 483 ProQuestboard members said they were tired of waiting after 14 years of exploring various options, from building sandfences to refilling the lake. "We have to do it. . . . There's going to be a lawsuit whichever way we go, so if wehave to have a lawsuit, I'd rather have one for doing the right thing," said Mono County Supervisor AndreaLawrence. The Owens Valley officials referred often to the bitter history and intense distrust between LosAngeles and the rural valley. When Los Angeles chief engineer William Mulholland turned on the aqueduct 84years ago and let the water flow to Los Angeles, he proclaimed, "There it is, take it." On Wednesday, Dorame ofInyo County put his own spin on those famous words, telling Los Angeles, "There it is, fix it. "We need clean air,and if the city of Los Angeles is sincere, I would encourage them to move swiftly to resolve the dust issue," hesaid. But Mammoth Lakes Mayor David Watson, the board's chairman and the sole member who voted againstthe order, said the fastest way to clean up the lake may be to negotiate for several months. "I think we have abetter chance . . . if we utilize a 90-day cooling-off period . . . rather than adopt this {order} right now and plungeinto a court battle," Watson said. Michael Kenny, executive officer of the state Air Resources Board, said it is"absolutely crucial" to curtail the dust, but he also urged the delay because lawsuits probably would mean thatthe lake problem won't be resolved for years. City attorneys say the order violates the city's water rights andwould require a vote of the people to implement. "It's a $300-million project for the city and there's no closureand no certainty and no cap on the water they want," O'Donnell said. In three hours of emotional testimony, InyoCounty residents said they were fed up with the city. Jeanne Lopez, who lives in Keeler on the shore of OwensLake, said she has lived through many "blistering, hair-raising" dust storms, one as recent as Monday. "It wouldbe almost criminal to not take immediate action. We don't think five years of study will do anything," she said.Michael Rogers, representing Native American tribal elders in Bishop, said Los Angeles' treatment of theOwens Valley "is no longer a rape, it's turned into a cancer." "It's always been delay, delay, delay. There can beno healing of the environment with . . . promises. This has been going on too long," he said. * While LosAngeles has already surrendered in the restoration of Mono Lake and the lower Owens River after lengthy courtbattles, it has not offered any alternative solutions for Owens Lake, despite studies conducted since 1983. Thefederal Clean Air Act requires states to clean up fine pieces of pollution called particulates by the end of 2001 orseek a five-year extension from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Under state law, Los Angeles isresponsible for "reasonable" measures to study and curb the lake's dust. Most of the year, the Owens Valley,nestled between the Sierras and the White Mountains, has blue skies and sparkling fresh air. But when windsexceed 20 mph, as much as 11 tons of salty white crust hurls off the lake in a day, exposing residents to theworst particle pollution in the nation. The tiny particles, laced with arsenic and toxic metals, reachconcentrations as extreme as 25 times higher than the national health limit. The dust reaches hazardous levels19 times a year on average in the small town of Keeler, according to the pollution agency's report. Doctors inRidgecrest say their emergency rooms and offices fill up with people suffering respiratory infections, asthmaattacks and other ailments. Navy officials also say the dust storms jeopardize flight safety and weapons testingat their China Lake base downwind from the lake. Under the order, 8,400 acres of the lake bed will bepermanently flooded with a few inches of water, another 8,700 acres will be planted with salt grass andirrigated, while 5,300 acres will be covered with a four-inch-thick layer of gravel. Based on studies of smallpatches of the lake, the air pollution agency's engineers predict that 99% of the dust would be eliminated withinfive years. The city, however, believes that analysis is flawed. To replace water needed to irrigate Owens Lake,the city probably would have to buy more expensive imported water from the Metropolitan Water District. Thatputs added demand on the limited supply used by 16 million people in six Southern California counties,especially since flows from the Colorado River are about to be reduced. In most years, it would pose noproblem, but during dry years, it could cause shortages, water district officials say. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX/ INFOGRAPHIC) Owens Lake Controversy Los Angeles will lose much of its invaluable Owens Valley waterunder an order imposed by an air pollution board to control Owens Lake dust. The city plans to appeal. TheProposal Nestled between the Sierra Nevada, Coso and Inyo mountains, Owens Lake has been dry since 193017 March 2013 Page 439 of 483 ProQuestbecause of L.A.'s water diversions. Under the order, about one-third of the 110-square-mile lake bed--thedustiest portion--would be treated. Under the plan, 8,400 acres would be permanently flooded with a few inchesof water, 8,700 acres would be planted with saltgrass and irrigated, and 5,300 acres would be covered with afour-inch layer of gravel. 13 square miles of the dry lake would be flooded 14 square miles would be planted forvegation 8 square miles would be covered with gravel Impact on Los Angeles * Owens Lake would bepermanently irrigated with 51,000 acre-feet a year. That's 9% of Los Angeles' total water supply, enough toserve 102,000 families every year. * The pollution agency estimates construction will cost $91 million while cityconsultants say $250-$300 million. Yearly costs to replace the lost water could reach $25 million. * Los Angelesconsumer rates could rise 6% to pay for annual costs--adding slightly over $1 to an average household's $20monthly bill. Plus, rates could increase 5% to 12-15% during the five years of construction, adding another $1 to$3 per month. * To make up the shortfall, the city could buy expensive San Francisco Bay-San Joaquin RiverDelta and Colorado River water, increase conservation and reclamation, or buy water from Central Californiafarmers. Source: Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and Great Basin Unified Air Pollution ControlDistrict Dust to Water The pollution board says dust storms would be nearly eliminated. Particles, up to 11,000tons on a peak day, are projected to be cut to about 44 tons per day. Sources: Los Angeles Department ofWater and Power, Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District GRAPHIC-CHART: Dust to Water, LosAngeles Times; GRAPHIC-MAP: Owens Dry Lake, Los Angeles Times Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTALWRITERSubject: POLLUTION CONTROL, WASTE MANAGEMENT; INDUSTRIAL & COMMERCIAL SERVICES - ALL;ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS; HEALTH; Water supply; Lakes; Air pollution; Public worksLocation: Owens Lake, Los Angeles CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 3:5Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Jul 3, 1997Year: 1997Dateline: INDEPENDENCE, Calif.Section: PART-A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04639916ProQuest document ID: 421315455Document URL: March 2013 Page 440 of 483 ProQuestCopyright: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 193 of 213New Smog Rules Easier--and Harder; Air: A key deadline will be extended and a major pollution limitwill be raised. Nonetheless, the region faces an enormous challenge.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 29 June 1997: A, 3:1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: While setting tough new mandates for cleansing the nation's skies of smog and soot, the broad antipollutionpolicy that the Clinton administration announced last week also contains fine print that should meanthat polluted cities, especially in the Los Angeles Basin, will find the path to healthful air a bit easier thanenvisioned. Clinton decided Wednesday to approve new, stringent limits on the amount of ozone and particlesallowed in the air. But he also revised how those standards will be implemented to soften the blow to cities andstates. Compared to the original proposal unveiled by the Environmental Protection Agency in November, a keydeadline will be extended and a major pollution limit will be raised, among other changes. Although themodifying steps--welcomed by California's air quality officials and businesses--will ease some of the burden, theLos Angeles region still faces an enormous challenge over the next 15 years. Its air sometimes contains twicethe fine particles and ozone allowable under the new health standards.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: While setting tough new mandates for cleansing the nation's skies of smog and soot, the broad antipollutionpolicy that the Clinton administration announced last week also contains fine print that should meanthat polluted cities, especially in the Los Angeles Basin, will find the path to healthful air a bit easier thanenvisioned. Clinton decided Wednesday to approve new, stringent limits on the amount of ozone and particlesallowed in the air. But he also revised how those standards will be implemented to soften the blow to cities andstates. Compared to the original proposal unveiled by the Environmental Protection Agency in November, a keydeadline will be extended and a major pollution limit will be raised, among other changes. The idea is to givecities and states--and the industries and other sources of pollution they must regulate--more time and flexibilityin cleaning their dirty air. "Read the implementation schedule. Work with us. We will find a way to do this in away that grows the American economy," Clinton said in announcing the plan, which has created a firestorm ofprotest that has raged for seven months. Although the modifying steps--welcomed by California's air qualityofficials and businesses--will ease some of the burden, the Los Angeles region still faces an enormouschallenge over the next 15 years. Its air sometimes contains twice the fine particles and ozone allowable underthe new health standards. From Santa Barbara to San Bernardino to the U.S-Mexico border, every county inSouthern California--home to 17 million people--exceeds the new standards, according to the EPA's preliminaryestimate. And in the nation's smog capital, the critical question remains: Can the Los Angeles Basin achievehealthful air without harming its economy? The region's manufacturing industries say they have already doneabout as much as they can, so the burden will have to fall on finding less-polluting ways to haul goods andmove people around the sprawling Southland. "Every single person, every single business in the region is goingto have to do their fair share," said Victor Weisser, president of the California Council for Environmental andEconomic Balance, which represents large industries and labor unions. "You can get decent air quality and17 March 2013 Page 441 of 483 ProQuesthave a decent level of economic activity, but the question is trying to meld those two. The key is how muchflexibility the EPA builds into the process." So far, California's multibillion-dollar smog-fighting effort has beenimpressive: Southland power plants have switched to natural gas and undergone smog-control renovations at acost of millions of dollars. Oil refineries are producing cleaner gasoline, and new cars are much cleaner thantwo decades ago. Large factories are gradually reducing nitrogen emissions. Solvents, paints and consumerproducts are less polluting. Beginning in 2003, the state will require 10% of new cars to be electric-powered.And new diesel trucks and buses must cut exhaust in half by 2004. * Despite all these measures--plus manydozens more--air pollution in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties often exceeds thecurrent limits. And they will certainly violate the new ones, especially for fine particles--microscopic pieces ofsoot and other substances that come mostly from fuel combustion. After several years of slowing their effortsand rolling back some rules, local and state air quality officials must now struggle to intensify their smogcontrols. Today, short of curbs on growth or commuting, no technologies are commercially available to clean upenough of the basin's pollution to satisfy the new mandates. However, under the changes in the fine particlepolicy announced Wednesday, California has up to eight years to figure out how to do it--instead of the five theEPA had originally envisioned. Then, the state will have until 2012 to carry out whatever plan is developed. Infact, the real deadline may be even further away because the EPA's new schedule for meeting the standardsremains unclear. The EPA also raised the benchmark for the amount of fine particles allowed in the air during a24-hour period--from 50 micrograms per cubic meter in the original proposal to 65. At present, the EPA has nostandard for fine particulates. * For ozone, the main ingredient of smog, plans are due in 2002, and the air mustreach the health limits by 2010 or 2012. The Clinton administration is tightening the standards because it saysscientific studies show that the existing ones fail to protect public health, especially in children, the elderly andpeople with asthma and other respiratory problems. EPA Administrator Carol Browner said she agreed to only"minor adjustments" in deadlines and implementation, which will be unveiled in greater detail next month.Environmentalists, relieved that Clinton did not abandon the standards as some of his advisors recommended,say the changes appear modest. Ron White of the American Lung Assn. said it will still bring a "very significantimprovement" in the protection of public health. Many members of Congress, mayors, governors and industryleaders, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, remain vehemently opposed to the new policy, saying theeconomic impact is too high and the science uncertain. Under the administration's proposal, the next five yearswill be spent sampling the air and gathering more data on fine particles, because many cities have done nomonitoring. Then, the EPA will give states until 2005 to craft plans outlining how the limits will be met. Still, "anyway you cut it, it's going to be difficult" for the Los Angeles Basin to comply with the new standards, said DavidHowe-kamp, head of the EPA's Western regional air division. The fine print--the EPA's guarantees about the"how" and the "when"--is what interests California officials and businesses the most. Gov. Pete Wilson's smogchief said he supports tighter standards and was heartened to hear Clinton promise that states and cities willhave control over clean air strategies and be given federal assistance and time for developing newtechnologies. "If we have the kind of control we've been promised, we believe we can come up with areasonable plan," said state Air Resources Board Chairman John Dunlap. "We're really focused on theimplementation element," he added. "We're of course interested in the scientific and political debates, but weare reacting to what signals EPA is sending us about how it will be implemented." Weisser of the industry-laborgroup said the extra years and flexibility will "help give the public and business community time to figure outwhat is going to work best and cheapest." But, he warned, "the words {from the EPA} haven't always matchedthe actions. There's always a lot of talk about providing flexibility, but . . . it comes out pretty dogmatic." Credit:TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS; HEALTH; Air pollution; Standards; Environmental protection17 March 2013 Page 442 of 483 ProQuestPeople: Clinton, BillPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 3:1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Jun 29, 1997Year: 1997Section: PART-A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04624833ProQuest document ID: 421152529Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 194 of 213California and the West; Mayors Oppose EPA's New Smog Limits; Conference: They adopt aresolution against stricter standards that they believe will harm business. Clinton is expected todecide soon on the proposal.Author: La GANGA, MARIA L; Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 25 June 1997: A, 3:6.ProQuest document linkAbstract: As the White House prepares to weigh in on whether the federal government should strengthen cleanair standards, the U.S. Conference of Mayors voted resoundingly Tuesday to oppose a plan to set strict newlimits on smog and soot. At the heart of the mayors' vote was a deep skepticism over the science behind theEnvironmental Protection Agency's tougher standards on ozone and particles, a loathing at the local level to paythe costs of a federal mandate, and a fear that the proposed standards could jeopardize other governmentprograms. "How would we attract new business to come to our cities and keep the businesses that are herewithout defensible standards? . . . Who's going to pay for it?" asked Detroit Mayor Dennis W. Archer, pointing to17 March 2013 Page 443 of 483 ProQuestthe standards' $60-billion price tag. "How can I get our unemployed jobs if I can't attract business?"Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: As the White House prepares to weigh in on whether the federal government should strengthen cleanair standards, the U.S. Conference of Mayors voted resoundingly Tuesday to oppose a plan to set strict newlimits on smog and soot. At the heart of the mayors' vote was a deep skepticism over the science behind theEnvironmental Protection Agency's tougher standards on ozone and particles, a loathing at the local level to paythe costs of a federal mandate, and a fear that the proposed standards could jeopardize other governmentprograms. "How would we attract new business to come to our cities and keep the businesses that are herewithout defensible standards? . . . Who's going to pay for it?" asked Detroit Mayor Dennis W. Archer, pointing tothe standards' $60-billion price tag. "How can I get our unemployed jobs if I can't attract business?" The vote ismerely an expression of dissatisfaction with the federal measure and does not exempt local governments fromcomplying with the regulations. Under the EPA proposal--unveiled in November and due to be finalized July 19--the air in more than 400 counties would be deemed unsafe. Those counties must then take steps over the next15 years to clean it up. In most areas, that would force regulations curbing exhaust from vehicles, power plants,industrial plants and consumer products. The president is expected to decide by the end of next week whetherto endorse or weaken the EPA proposal. There is no consensus in the administration about what to do, andEPA Administrator Carol Browner has said that she will not back down on her proposal. Across the country,local and state officials have been divided on how the Clinton administration should proceed when it comes tothe decade's most far-reaching environmental policy. Many have endorsed the EPA's stronger standards insome of the nation's largest and most polluted cities and regions, including Southern California, New York andMassachusetts. Some of that division has shown up throughout the group's proceedings here--both on Tuesdaymorning during a heartfelt debate and vote, and on Saturday, when the resolution was drafted. The resolutiondeclares that the proposed standards have the potential to "jeopardize progress toward other federal prioritiesthat are equally important to achieving sustainable communities, such as the revitalization of our cities,empowerment zone initiatives, job creation." Rosemary Corbin, mayor of Richmond, Calif., cast the lone "no"vote against the resolution. To Corbin, whose Bay Area city is home to oil refineries and other industry, thestricter standards are a health issue, and the scientific studies underpinning them are sufficient. "Withsustainable development, it is important to have a healthy environment in order to have a healthy economy,"Corbin said. Amid much public hand-wringing about America's eroding faith in government, the majority of the300 mayors in attendance said they did not trust the federal government and its scientific studies. Tulsa MayorM. Susan Savage voiced concern about stiffening the standards for particulate pollution--the byproduct of fuelcombustion--because she does not believe that government monitoring of particulates is sufficient. Archer saidthat the EPA has not offered "ample scientific data that gives anybody a comfort level. What is the evidence toshow the new regulations will improve the public health?" Seattle Mayor Norman B. Rice looked askance at thefederal government for another reason: the unfunded mandate, or what the mayors view as Washington's badhabit of giving lots of orders but no financial help. "I'm willing to have very strong standards, if the federalgovernment is going to help us pay for it," Rice said. "I'm for shared costs." To which a derisive Richard M.Daley of Chicago replied: "Shared costs? You're kidding yourselves. When the EPA comes along, you pay for it.The taxpayers pay for it." EPA officials say their proposed standards would rescue 15,000 people each yearfrom premature death due to cardiac and lung diseases traced to particulates. They would also prevent severalhundred thousand asthma attacks, bronchitis cases and other respiratory illnesses, especially among children.In addition to fomenting the strongest debate, the mayors' votes on the clean air proposal also drew the mostprotest. On Monday, demonstrators with the California Public Interest Research Group donned gas masks andmarched--with a 10-foot foam tombstone--to the Fairmont Hotel where Clinton was addressing the conference."The basic message is that air pollution kills," said Jon Golinger, CalPIRG's legislative advocate. "These17 March 2013 Page 444 of 483 ProQueststandards will save lives. Voting against the standards is pure politics. When politics affects peoples' health andthe air we breath, that's a problem." Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSSubject: ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS; Air pollution; Standards; Mayors; Federal governmentCompany: US Conference of MayorsPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 3:6Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Jun 25, 1997Year: 1997Dateline: SAN FRANCISCOSection: PART-A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04621381ProQuest document ID: 421330100Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 195 of 213Soot Cleanup Is Essential; EPA must consider science first in new air particle rulesPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 15 June 1997: M, 4:1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Carol Browner says the Clean Air Act requires her to consider only science and public health in settingnew federal pollution rules. That is exactly what the Environmental Protection Agency administrator should dobefore announcing the standards next month. That is also what the White House should let her do--instead ofpushing the agency to be more lenient, possibly compromising public health. The federal Clean Air Act requiresthe EPA to review existing regulations every five years and, if necessary, set new pollution limits or standards to17 March 2013 Page 445 of 483 ProQuestprotect public health, "with an adequate margin of safety." Last November, Browner issued draft rules to protectAmericans from the dangers posed by ozone, the main component of smog, and the ultra-fine airborne dirtknown as particulates. The draft rules on particulates have generated one of the fiercest environmental debatesin a decade. The White House has been lobbied hard by businesses, mayors, governors and members ofCongress, and it's now turning up the heat.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Carol Browner says the Clean Air Act requires her to consider only science and public health in settingnew federal pollution rules. That is exactly what the Environmental Protection Agency administrator should dobefore announcing the standards next month. That is also what the White House should let her do--instead ofpushing the agency to be more lenient, possibly compromising public health. The federal Clean Air Act requiresthe EPA to review existing regulations every five years and, if necessary, set new pollution limits or standards toprotect public health, "with an adequate margin of safety." Last November, Browner issued draft rules to protectAmericans from the dangers posed by ozone, the main component of smog, and the ultra-fine airborne dirtknown as particulates. The draft rules on particulates have generated one of the fiercest environmental debatesin a decade. The White House has been lobbied hard by businesses, mayors, governors and members ofCongress, and it's now turning up the heat. The EPA already regulates coarser particles that come mostly fromdust. The new rule targets particulates much finer than a human hair, emitted chiefly by vehicles, utilities andfires. The scientific studies that the EPA reviewed link these sooty particles to an estimated 64,000 Americandeaths each year. Riverside County residents face the highest risk in the nation from airborne particulates. EPAofficials say the proposed standard would save lives and prevent several hundred thousand asthma attacks andbronchitis cases yearly. Scientists regard the link between particles and premature death as compelling. Butwhile most of the scientists advising Browner agreed the EPA should limit fine particles, they disagreed on, ordeclined to recommend, how stringent the particle rule should be. The expense of reducing fine particleemissions could be staggering. The EPA estimates it at $6 billion each year, starting in 2007, but industry fearsit could be 10 times higher. For Southern California, already struggling to comply with other Clean Air Actstandards, the particulates rule will be yet another burden. Finally, much of the technology that would beneeded to capture and contain particles is not even commercially available yet. Browner acknowledges theobstacles but says the long implementation schedule of the Clean Air Act makes compliance feasible. Statesand cities will have until 2002 to design cleanup strategies, then eight to 10 years beyond that to implementthem. Browner says she relies on American industry's history of ingenuity in meeting environmental standardsonce thought impossibly high. But with the health risk so strong and immediate, she is right when she argues,"We should not in this country walk away because we don't know the answers."Subject: Editorials; Air pollution; Federal legislation; Public health; Environmental regulationsPeople: Browner, CarolCompany: Environmental Protection Agency, EPAPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: M, 4:1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Jun 15, 1997Year: 199717 March 2013 Page 446 of 483 ProQuestSection: Opinion; PART-M; Editorial Writers DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: EditorialAccession number: 04611096ProQuest document ID: 421161433Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 196 of 213Tougher Air Standards Pose Quandary for White House; Pollution: It is caught betweenenvironmental officials holding line on limits and GOP lawmakers and business pressing for lessstringent rules.Author: GERSTENZANG, JAMESPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 07 June 1997: A, 15:3.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Facing intense political and economic pressures, the Clinton administration is feverishly seeking a wayto implement the stringent air standards that it proposed six months ago while softening the impact of theirimplementation. With environmental officials refusing to give in to pressure from congressional Republicans,manufacturers and others to relax the proposed standards, administration aides are predicting that efforts toresolve the conflict will focus on attempts to make cleaning up the air less costly. But no specific plans havebeen drawn up, and one White House aide held out the strong possibility that, ultimately, the proposedstandards would be relaxed. The Environmental Protection Agency is required by law to examine new scientificstudies on the impact of smog and soot on human health and, using that data, to determine the impact onrespiratory and other diseases. Its proposed revisions to air standards are a result of that process.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Facing intense political and economic pressures, the Clinton administration is feverishly seeking a wayto implement the stringent air standards that it proposed six months ago while softening the impact of theirimplementation. With environmental officials refusing to give in to pressure from congressional Republicans,manufacturers and others to relax the proposed standards, administration aides are predicting that efforts toresolve the conflict will focus on attempts to make cleaning up the air less costly. But no specific plans have17 March 2013 Page 447 of 483 ProQuestbeen drawn up, and one White House aide held out the strong possibility that, ultimately, the proposedstandards would be relaxed. The administration wants to avoid a drawn-out congressional battle over thestandards, which were developed after years of study and hundreds of scientific reports. The EnvironmentalProtection Agency is required by law to examine new scientific studies on the impact of smog and soot onhuman health and, using that data, to determine the impact on respiratory and other diseases. Its proposedrevisions to air standards are a result of that process. Carol M. Browner, the agency's administrator, has made itclear that she sees no choice but to give final approval to the standards she proposed in November. But othersin the administration, particularly those who deal with economic questions, are pressuring her to relax the plan,leaving the outcome still far from certain. "We're still talking about where the standards should be," one senioradministration official said. While Browner "has some flexibility, we have to do what is credible to protect publichealth. As time goes on, more of the discussion will focus on implementation," the official said. The standardswould define concentrations of particles and ozone deemed not damaging to health. Then, each city or statewould have until 2002 to craft its own strategy and until 2012 to achieve the new limits. Areas that fail to complywould face the threat of severe sanctions, including a freeze on federal highway funds. The EPA proposal wouldlower the standard for ozone, or smog, to 0.08 parts per million when averaged over eight hours. The LosAngeles Basin and many other regions still do not meet the current standard, 0.12 parts per million averaged ina single hour. The plan would set standards governing particulate matter, or soot, no larger than 2.5 microns--far below the current threshold of 10 microns. Soot particles are dust-like matter given off by the burning of coaland wood, among other fuels. Particles 28 times smaller than the width of a human hair can lodge in the lungsand reduce their capacity, a problem of often extreme concern for people with respiratory systems alreadyweakened by disease. The EPA had estimated that the tighter standards would prevent 20,000 prematuredeaths a year from respiratory and cardiac disease--a figure that it later revised to 15,000--as well as 250,000asthma attacks and 60,000 cases of chronic bronchitis a year. The agency also said costs for complying withthe two stricter standards would reach $6.6 billion to $8.5 billion in 2007, while the benefits, largely in terms ofreduced medical bills, would reach $58 billion to $120 billion that year. Opponents said the science regardingthe health benefits of stricter standards is incomplete and does not warrant such expense. And while healthexperts said that scientific evidence overwhelmingly shows that fine particles are linked to illnesses and death,they do not know which types are the most dangerous or exactly what they do to the human body. Industryleaders said that waiting for such details could avoid a massive effort that might prove to be inconsequential inprotecting health. Browner's adherence to the standards she drafted late last year is widely supported within heragency and by environmentalists. But she has come up against adamant opposition from the National Assn. ofManufacturers, small- business organizations and local and county governments. All are concerned thatcomplying with the standards would cost too much--either in expensive new equipment intended to reducepollution emissions or in closed factories, lost jobs and eroded tax bases. "There aren't many allies, except forthe American Lung Assn. and Henry Waxman," said a senior environmental official, exaggerating only slightlythe EPA's seemingly isolated position in which relatively few in Congress, beyond Rep. Waxman, the LosAngeles Democrat, have outspokenly defended Browner's position. And within the administration, he pointedout, Sally Katzen, a senior budget official who oversees the formation of regulations, "is trying to soften thissomehow." Documents assembled in such diverse federal agencies as the Departments of Agriculture andTreasury have also reflected objections. Throughout the debate, EPA officials have pointed out that thestandards are based only on scientific considerations and that the only place for economic considerations is inthe preparation of regulations. Officials said the debate has not yet reached President Clinton. However, it hasdeeply involved his top economic advisors. The debate puts Vice President Al Gore in a particularly difficultposition, forcing him to choose between the goals for toughened standards, favored by the constituency in theenvironmental community that he has long courted, and the Rust Belt workers in the Midwest, where peoplefear that stricter standards would exact a high economic price. Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITER17 March 2013 Page 448 of 483 ProQuestSubject: ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS; LAW & LEGAL ISSUES; Air pollution; Standards; Federal government;Environmental protectionPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 15:3Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Jun 7, 1997Year: 1997Dateline: WASHINGTONSection: PART-A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04602553ProQuest document ID: 421137996Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 197 of 213Experts Split Over Peril of ParticulatesAuthor: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 06 June 1997: A, 1:4.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Although severe pollution has long been known to be harmful and even lethal, only in the last fewyears have researchers made the surprising discovery that deaths seem to be tied to the moderate particlepollution found in many cities today. But how can a fairly small dose hasten a person's death? How can piecesof pollution made up of chemicals that are vastly different from city to city all be dangerous? And is it wise tomount a massive national effort to tackle the threat while such scientific mysteries linger? In November, the EPAproposed a new health standard that, for the first time, would limit the volume of ultra-fine particulates allowable17 March 2013 Page 449 of 483 ProQuestin the air. One of the most far-reaching environmental proposals to emerge in a decade, it has triggered abruising battle and fervent opposition from the oil and auto industries and others, as well as from manymembers of Congress, governors and mayors in both political parties. A court order requires the EPA to set finalstandards by July 19. But other scientists are skeptical about whether particulates are really the culprit forpremature deaths, since no one knows why relatively modest doses could be lethal. They cannot at this pointidentify what may make fine particles capable of killing, especially when their chemical composition variesgreatly, depending on whether they are emitted by cars, trucks, factories or fires. For instance, fine particles onthe East Coast are largely sulfur, while California's are mostly nitrates and carbon from gasoline and diesel.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: When tiny particles of pollution descend on a city, everything--skyscrapers, mountains, the horizon--drowns in a sea of soot that can persist for days and stretch for miles. But something more ominous happenstoo. Death counts rise. People who might have survived a heart attack or bout of pneumonia or other illness aremore likely to die. Scientists consider the link between airborne particles and premature deaths about ascompelling and well-documented as any finding can be. But even they are debating the merits of a Clintonadministration plan to force a nationwide cleanup--staggering in scope and cost--when fundamental questionsremain about why the microscopic particles seem to be killing people. Although severe pollution has long beenknown to be harmful and even lethal, only in the last few years have researchers made the surprising discoverythat deaths seem to be tied to the moderate particle pollution found in many cities today. But how can a fairlysmall dose hasten a person's death? How can pieces of pollution made up of chemicals that are vastly differentfrom city to city all be dangerous? And is it wise to mount a massive national effort to tackle the threat whilesuch scientific mysteries linger? Dilemmas Lead to Judgment Call The move by the U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency to tackle one of the nation's most pervasive urban pollutants raises profound dilemmas forpublic health policy, focusing on how much danger is acceptable, how much proof of harm is needed, and howfar health officials should go in an effort to protect lives. The answer winds up a judgment call, even for medicalexperts. "You have to be willing to err on the side of being very careful, because the penalty for being wrong isthat you've done nothing about a problem responsible for thousands of deaths per year," said Dr. PhilipBromberg, director of University of North Carolina's Center for Environmental Medicine and Lung Biology."When you deal with public health, you accept less certainty for a basis for action." But University of Rochestertoxicologist Gunther Oberdorster, who does research exposing lab animals to fine particles, disagrees. He saidthat setting new limits "is the wrong thing to do at this time" and should be postponed until scientists can naildown what makes tiny specks of pollution dangerous and which are the most potent types that warrant cleanup.In November, the EPA proposed a new health standard that, for the first time, would limit the volume of ultrafineparticulates allowable in the air. One of the most far-reaching environmental proposals to emerge in adecade, it has triggered a bruising battle and fervent opposition from the oil and auto industries and others, aswell as from many members of Congress, governors and mayors in both political parties. A court order requiresthe EPA to set final standards by July 19. An estimated 167 counties nationwide--including nearly all ofSouthern California--would violate the agency's proposed limit. Once standards are set, those areas have up to15 years to cut pollution, most likely from trucks, cars, power plants, factories and wood smoke. The EPAestimates the national cost at $6 billion a year, starting in 2007, while industry groups predict it will soar asmuch as 10 times higher. The Los Angeles Basin, often veiled with gray-brown soot, faces the biggest burden.Even EPA Administrator Carol Browner acknowledges that California will probably need to find replacements fordiesel fuel, which powers everything from generators to trucks, trains and ships. Midwestern states reliant oncoal-fired power plants also would be hit hard. The focus of the debate is an amorphous, complex blend ofchemicals such as sulfates, carbon, nitrates and minerals. They have one thing in common: They measure lessthan 2.5 microns in diameter, much finer than a human hair or grain of sand. The EPA currently restricts only17 March 2013 Page 450 of 483 ProQuestcoarser particles, less than 10 microns, which come mostly from dust. Virtually everywhere epidemiologistshave looked, deaths and hospitalizations from heart and respiratory ailments increase on days when particlepollution rises. Such consistency in epidemiology is so rare it's striking. Among the cities studied are LosAngeles, New York City, Philadelphia, Detroit, Chicago, Santa Clara, Seattle, Denver and Provo, Utah. Basedon those studies, an estimated 64,000 Americans are believed to be dying every year because of particulates.EPA officials say their proposed standard would save 15,000 of those lives and prevent several hundredthousand asthma attacks and bronchitis cases yearly. Speaking at a medical conference in San Francisco lastmonth, Terry Gordon, an associate professor of environmental medicine at New York University's School ofMedicine, said these "silent extra deaths" make particles as deadly as if an airliner crashed each time pollutionrises. Danger Exists, Health Experts Agree Some scientists say the danger is so clear and the evidence sopersuasive that the public deserves protection as soon as possible. Twenty-seven scientists--including some ofthe most prominent researchers in environmental medicine--sent a missive to President Clinton in Januaryurging stringent standards. But other scientists are skeptical about whether particulates are really the culprit forpremature deaths, since no one knows why relatively modest doses could be lethal. They cannot at this pointidentify what may make fine particles capable of killing, especially when their chemical composition variesgreatly, depending on whether they are emitted by cars, trucks, factories or fires. For instance, fine particles onthe East Coast are largely sulfur, while California's are mostly nitrates and carbon from gasoline and diesel. "Iam very well convinced that we are showing links between day-to-day numbers of deaths and air pollution. Andthe weight of the evidence indicates . . . particles seem to be responsible," said Jonathan Samet, chairman ofepidemiology at Johns Hopkins University's School of Hygiene and Public Health. "But," he said, "particles are amixture. Do we know enough about the characteristics that may be causing the health damage so that we knowwhat to regulate? These are some of the difficult issues we face." Some toxicologists contend that the EPAstandards carry such a high cost that they should wait until these riddles are solved--a breakthrough, probablyat least five years away, that could help pinpoint a solution with less severe economic pared to the cost of regulation, the cost of additional science would be trivial, they say. "It's very importantto first find out why particles are toxic," said Robert Phalen, director of UC Irvine's Air Pollution Health EffectsLaboratory. For any individual venturing outside on a polluted day, the risk is small. But because millions ofpeople breathe the minute particles, the overall death and illness count can grow substantially. Numerousstudies have found that deaths rise 1% to 5% among the general population on days when particulates increaseby a moderate amount. That amounts to 10 deaths per day in an area the size of Los Angeles County or NewYork City, or 300 people along the entire East Coast during a three-day episode. In eastern Los Angeles Countyalone, the EPA calculates that 800 people died prematurely in 1995 from cardiopulmonary ailments aggravatedby pollution. Riverside residents face the highest risk because particles are more voluminous there than in anyother urban area in the country. During severe sieges, there is no doubt particulates can kill. In London in 1952,about 5,000 people died during a weeklong fog of coal smoke that soared to concentrations 40 times worsethan anything measured today. Deadly particle fogs also struck a Pennsylvania valley in 1948 and Belgium in1930. But it wasn't until the early 1990s that scientists linked deaths to the much lower pollution levels found inmodern cities. In more than 20 separate studies, researchers, dominated by a Harvard University team,examined tens of thousands of hospital records and death certificates in various cities and compared them withpollution conditions. Consistently, deaths were higher in the most polluted cities and on days when volume ofparticles increased. "We're convinced this is more than some oddball statistical nicety," said John Bachmann,the EPA's associate director of science policy. "It's not as strong as cigarette data {showing a high cancer rate}.But we have three or four lines of evidence to suggest {death from particulates} isn't just a statistical fluke." Still,some medical researchers and toxicologists remain suspicious because, over a lifetime, a minuscule volume ofparticles are deposited in a person's body--probably less than a gram. Questions Linger for ScientistsToxicologists began trying to answer these questions just in the last few years. So far, they have been unable to17 March 2013 Page 451 of 483 ProQuestfigure out how particles damage the heart and lungs or how to replicate the deaths in healthy lab animalsexposed to different compounds. The danger is partially because of the particles' size--the tiniest ones mayirritate nerve endings that affect the heart and penetrate deep in the lungs. But some suspect that the realdanger comes from acids that cling to some particles, while others believe it is metals such as iron, lead andzinc. Medical experts also cannot pinpoint whether people with illnesses are having their lives shortened bydays, weeks or years and what happens to people exposed over a lifetime. Determining how particles can kill isof critical concern to those outside the laboratory as well. As states and cities across the nation framemultibillion-dollar strategies to clean the air over the next decade, they would prefer to know which sources totarget to get the biggest bang for their bucks. Phalen of UC Irvine said the economic and social impacts are sogreat it is premature for the EPA to limit particles based on mass when the real danger could be some hiddencompound that attaches itself to a select group of them. But EPA and many other health officials say too manylives are at stake to wait. Browner, the EPA's administrator, compared it to the cigarette industry saying healthwarnings shouldn't have been issued until scientists knew exactly how smoking causes cancer. "If we had donesomething like that with leaded gasoline or tobacco smoke, years would have gone by," she said. The Clean AirAct requires the EPA to set standards providing "an adequate margin of safety" for all Americans, based oncurrent science. But what if scientists are at odds? Of 21 scientists convened by EPA, 19 recommended that theagency limit ultra-fine particles. The 19, however, disagreed or wouldn't give opinions on how stringent it shouldbe, leaving Browner to reach her own conclusions. The EPA's proposal is "defensible but also attackable" onscientific grounds, said Bromberg of the University of North Carolina. Still, he believes a strong call for action ismerited when the recent mortality findings are combined with lessons from the past, especially during theLondon fog. Because particles are already declining in most cities thanks to smog-fighting efforts, somescientists, including Oberdorster of the University of Rochester, say new standards can wait. The EPAstandards, however, are designed with the more distant future in mind. After they are set in July, states andcities will have until 2002 to craft cleanup strategies, then eight to 10 years to implement them. By then,Browner said, scientists will have uncovered new clues to unravel the mysteries. "To be honest with you, I don'tthink the challenge {of cleaning up particulates} is small," she said. "But we should not in this country walk awaybecause we don't know the answers." (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Particle Pollution Linkedto premature deaths from heart and lung ailments, particulates are a noxious stew of various compounds. Theircomposition varies greatly from city to city, depending on its mix of vehicles, industry and farming, which meanseach area needs to come up with its own solutions. SOURCES OF ULTRA-FINE PARTICLES (less than 2.5microns) Nitrates: Mostly car and truck exhaust. Also factories. Sulfates: Coal-fired power plants, factories,boilers Carbon: Diesel vehicles and equipment, fires, woodburning Soil/minerals: Paved roads, construction,erosion, farm tilling Ammonium: Fertilizer, manure, sewage plants **** Los Angeles Ammonium: 13% Nitrates:30% Carbon: 43% Sulfates: 13% * Anaheim Ammonium: 12% Nitrates: 32% Carbon: 36% Sulfates: 16%Soil/Minerals: 4% * Riverside Ammonium: 17% Nitrates: 39% Carbon: 27% Sulfates: 10% Soil/Minerals: 7% *San Joaquin Valley Unknown: 12% Nitrates: 34% Carbon: 36% Sulfates: 11% Soil/Minerals: 7% * PhoenixNitrates: 13% Carbon: 57% Sulfates: 14% Soil/Minerals: 16% * Washington, D.C. Nitrates: 13% Carbon: 35%Sulfates: 47% Soil/Minerals: 5% **** HOT SPOTS California has 14 counties that would violate the EPA'sproposed limit for fine particles. The Riverside, Visalia and San Bernardino areas have the nation's worstconcentrations. Fresno Imperial Inyo Kern Kings Los Angeles Madera Merced Orange Riverside SanBernardino San Diego San Joaquin Tulare Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and South Coast AirQuality Management District GRAPHIC-CHART: Particle Pollution / Los Angeles Times Credit: TIMESENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS; HEALTH; Air pollution; Public health; Fatalities17 March 2013 Page 452 of 483 ProQuestCompany: Environmental Protection Agency, EPAPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 1:4Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Jun 6, 1997Year: 1997Section: PART-A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04602445ProQuest document ID: 421314419Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 198 of 213Beijing Is New 'Air Apparent' as Smog CapitalAuthor: Chu, HenryPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 04 May 1997: A, 1:5.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The level of pollutants in the Beijing air continually exceeds limits deemed acceptable by the WorldHealth Organization. And experts say the situation is unlikely to improve demonstrably any time soon as Chinaraces pell-mell into both the industrial and consumer ages in one go, spewing soot from its factories and fumesfrom its growing fleet of privately owned cars. In a surprisingly frank assessment last year, China's topenvironmental official, Xie Zhenhua, described the condition of the country's ecosystem as "grave" andpredicted that China would have to spend $50 billion over the next five years to bring air and water pollutionunder control. Beijing has appealed to the World Bank for help. In Beijing, breathing the air for a day is equal tosmoking three packs of unfiltered cigarettes, one study concluded. Lung cancer is now the deadliest form ofcancer in China's urban areas, and a quarter of all deaths in China are caused by respiratory diseases,17 March 2013 Page 453 of 483 ProQuestalthough it is impossible to separate the effects of pollution from those of actual cigarette smoking, a popularpastime.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Miss Zhang has her regulars, customers who come looking for a hit as often as every other day. Theylean back in recliners while she sticks a tube up one of their nostrils. They inhale deeply for up to 20 minutes.Then they leave feeling invigorated and better able to cope with the stresses of urban living. What is the sourceof this high? "Pure, medical oxygen," announces the poster on the wall of the Beijing Recreation Center, whereZhang welcomes her well-heeled patrons. Welcome to one of the smoggiest cities on Earth, where thesheltering sky is a leaden gray and the people beneath pay for shots of good, clean air in a handful of "oxygenbars" around town. The customers seek a variety of benefits--a better complexion, a longer life, a clearer mind.But the existence of these establishments underlines a single fact: In Beijing, air quality has become somethingof an oxymoron. By one measure, the atmosphere here is two to five times dirtier than that in Los Angeles--asobering statistic for this capital's population of 11 million. The level of pollutants in the Beijing air continuallyexceeds limits deemed acceptable by the World Health Organization. And experts say the situation is unlikely toimprove demonstrably any time soon as China races pell-mell into both the industrial and consumer ages in onego, spewing soot from its factories and fumes from its growing fleet of privately owned cars. "When I was a littleboy in Beijing, the blue sky was really impressive. I can still remember that," said Liang Congjie, president ofFriends of Nature, a local environmental group. "Nowadays it's so hard for you to see the blue." Things havereached such a pitch that the Chinese government, though loath to admit failings of any kind, has declaredpollution a national crisis. In a surprisingly frank assessment last year, China's top environmental official, XieZhenhua, described the condition of the country's ecosystem as "grave" and predicted that China would have tospend $50 billion over the next five years to bring air and water pollution under control. Beijing has appealed tothe World Bank for help. "Everyone recognizes the problem," said Steve Judd, who studies energy and climateat the World Wildlife Fund's new office here. "Now we have to focus on solutions." Already, China has spentmillions of dollars in an effort to clean up its skies by phasing out leaded gasoline and shutting down thousandsof the worst-offending factories. The government has toughened anti-pollution laws, even calling for the deathpenalty in severe cases of environmental crime. But protecting the air remains a monumental task for a nationwedded to double-digit economic growth and saddled with political and geographical burdens that literally leaveits citizens gasping for breath. * In Beijing, breathing the air for a day is equal to smoking three packs ofunfiltered cigarettes, one study concluded. Lung cancer is now the deadliest form of cancer in China's urbanareas, and a quarter of all deaths in China are caused by respiratory diseases, although it is impossible toseparate the effects of pollution from those of actual cigarette smoking, a popular pastime. "If you already haveasthma, and then you go to Beijing, you're killing yourself," said Vaclav Smil, an environmental scientist atCanada's University of Manitoba who studies pollution in China. Much of Beijing's pollution is flushed into the airby industrial works, such as the massive Capital Iron &Steel Corp., not far from the summer palaces and parksbuilt by Chinese emperors to enjoy the city's scenic beauty. The plant boasts a work force of 200,000 andunleashes high concentrations of sulfur dioxide, a major pollutant and contributor to acid rain. "No capital in theworld has such a big steel corporation, with 10 million tons of capacity a year," Liang said. In winter, the chill ofwhich is just now fading, the factory's enormous appetite for state-subsidized coal combines with that ofthousands of household heaters to cloak Beijing with soot. China, the world's largest consumer of coal, burns1.3 billion tons each year, the source of 75% of its energy--and most of its unhealthful air, according togovernment figures. Some Japanese scientists contend that China's sulfur dioxide emissions from coal burninghave caused acid rain to fall on Japan and pushed a huge cloud of smog out over the Pacific Ocean. Yetbecause Capital Iron &Steel is a linchpin in the economy, the government will no more ask the company toslash production or move operations than it will order Beijingers to stop heating their homes with the coal17 March 2013 Page 454 of 483 ProQuestbriquettes delivered by young men on bikes. The result: eyes that smart, throats that constrict, lungs that labor."Yesterday I could actually taste the sulfur in the air in my office," said Seamus Ryan, an Irish doctor who worksin Beijing. "It really is dreadful." But for many of China's leaders and citizens, the war on pollution and the waron poverty cannot be fought at the same time, forcing a grim political choice in which the environment loses."You cannot close down all the factories overnight. They're the backbone of economic development," Liangsaid. "How would you deal with all these unemployed workers?" Nor can you remove Beijing from the north ofChina, among the dustiest settled regions on the planet. Winds sweep in sand from the Gobi Desert, which getscaught up with fuel-combustion byproducts to turn the air into a thick stew of particulate matter. Indeed, northernChina has some of the worst levels of polluted air on record. Until a recent cleanup campaign, Benxi, anindustrial town in the northeast, regularly disappeared from satellite photos underneath its impenetrable shieldof smog. Residents of Shenyang, which experts say is the smoggiest major city in Asia, suck in up to 10 timesthe limit of sulfur dioxide and particulate matter set by Chinese authorities. "No other cities in human historyhave been in a position like that," Smil said. China as a whole has five of the world's Top 10 smoggiest cities,including Beijing and Shanghai, according to the World Bank, which ranks Mexico City at the top of the list.Anything left outdoors in Beijing, from playground equipment to bicycles, is coated with a fine layer of grime byday's end. The dirt also finds its way inside: One survey showed that Beijing families, on average, spend ninemore days a year cleaning their houses than families in unpolluted rural areas. The filth comes from coalburning,the Gobi, the city's myriad construction projects--another sign of China's relentless economy--and arelatively new culprit: cars. Private automobiles have exploded onto the scene in Beijing. An independent localpolling firm recently found that two-thirds of residents are in favor of private cars, symbols of personal wealth inChina's rapid modernization. Compared with Los Angeles, home of 6.2 million cars in 1994, Beijing lags farbehind, with just more than 1 million at the end of last year. But the number is steadily climbing. "With more carson the road, the air has become much dirtier," said one 30-year-old woman who sits by the street throughoutthe day hawking fresh fruit. The cars burn leaded fuel, which not only pumps tons of lead into the air but alsorenders catalytic converters useless--devices, now standard in California cars, that reduce pollutants. By thenew year, Beijing motorists are supposed to switch to unleaded gas, followed by the rest of the nation in 2000.With the increasing supply of cars, however, "even if these cars are cleaner and more efficient, at best you canhope that {Beijing} will be standing still" in terms of pollution, Smil said. "That's optimistic." Smil and othersdoubt that China will be able to pull itself out of its ecological morass in the near future. But they draw somehope from the government's stated commitment to improving the environment, while understanding that politicaland economic realities often prevail. Last year, President Jiang Zemin reportedly denounced the old formula ofpursuing economic gains first, then cleaning up afterward. The state-run China Daily reported last month thatthe government shut down nearly 63,000 small factories between September and the end of March in a bid tostop the nation's worst air and water polluters. Chinese journalists have been ordered to beef up their coverageof environmental issues, such as Beijing's successful push to install natural gas for heating and cooking in newapartments. Beginning in June, television stations in major Chinese cities will broadcast weekly air-qualityreadings. And the National Environment Protection Agency plans to set up a group of "green" schools within afew years to teach environmental protection and conservation to students of all ages. Liang's Friends of Naturehas promoted environmental awareness for three years now, through lectures in schools and the community.His organization, possibly China's only government-allowed activist group, wants to spur the kind of indignationand initiative shown a year ago by the residents of Tangshan, a suburb east of Beijing. Fed up with a small tirerecyclingplant in their midst, which was belching foul-smelling smoke, neighbors took their displeasure to thestreets. Hundreds of people blockaded the factory. A pedicab rolled through town broadcasting Jiang'sstatements on protecting the environment. Surprised by the outburst of negative public opinion, local officialsshut the factory. "That's one case where the ordinary people won a victory against the factories," Liang said."For ordinary citizens, it's easy {to get motivated}. For decision-makers, it's difficult." PHOTO: A Beijing man17 March 2013 Page 455 of 483 ProQuestinhales pure oxygen in one of the severely polluted Chinese capital's "oxygen bars."; PHOTOGRAPHER:GREG BAKER / For The Times Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: POLLUTION CONTROL, WASTE MANAGEMENT; INDUSTRIAL & COMMERCIAL SERVICES - ALL;ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS; HEALTH; Air pollution; SmogLocation: ChinaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 1:5Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: May 4, 1997Year: 1997Dateline: BEIJINGSection: PART-A; Foreign DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04550680ProQuest document ID: 421203094Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 199 of 213The Logical Next StepPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 27 Feb 1997: B, 8:1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The clouds of dust that swirl over dirt roads, farm fields and construction sites are a major source oflocal air pollution. Dust particulates--microscopic pieces of pollution--contribute heavily to smog and can causeserious respiratory problems. But the impact of these visible clouds pales in comparison with the political duststorms that have greeted costly local and federal initiatives to control them. Dust accounts for about a third of17 March 2013 Page 456 of 483 ProQuestthe particulates in the Los Angeles Basin, and reducing it is considered one of the cheapest and most effectiveways to improve air quality. Earlier this month the board of the South Coast Air Quality Management Districtunanimously passed two measures designed to eliminate as much as 86 tons of particles per day fromSouthern California skies.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The clouds of dust that swirl over dirt roads, farm fields and construction sites are a major source oflocal air pollution. Dust particulates--microscopic pieces of pollution--contribute heavily to smog and can causeserious respiratory problems. But the impact of these visible clouds pales in comparison with the political duststorms that have greeted costly local and federal initiatives to control them. Dust accounts for about a third ofthe particulates in the Los Angeles Basin, and reducing it is considered one of the cheapest and most effectiveways to improve air quality. Earlier this month the board of the South Coast Air Quality Management Districtunanimously passed two measures designed to eliminate as much as 86 tons of particles per day fromSouthern California skies. The new regulations will require localities to pave much of the 4,600 miles of dirtroads in the Los Angeles Basin and to take more aggressive steps to suppress road dust, such as usingsweepers equipped with vacuums or fine-particle filters. Governments will also be required to take strongermeasures to control dust at construction sites, mines, farms and landfills. The board's action comes in responseto mandatory federal limits on airborne dust and particulates. When fully implemented, by 2006, the new rulesshould eliminate about 25% of the dust that hangs in a gritty, gray haze over the region each day, exacerbatingrespiratory and cardiac problems. The AQMD estimates the program will cost $10.6 million yearly. The region's150 cities and counties will bear the brunt of that cost, and their officials worry about how to find the money. Butthey must face facts. These rules are just the beginning of a new phase in the long struggle for cleaner air.Federal rules proposed in November would impose limits on what are called fine particulates, particles ofpollution smaller than those generally found in dust clouds. The new Environmental Protection Agency rules willaffect 130 million Americans in several regions, including Southern California. Compliance will require moreadvanced emissions technologies or, perhaps, the phaseout of diesel fuel. The EPA may adopt final standardsthis summer. The process of final adoption and implementation over the next 15 to 20 years will be a test of ourcommitment to cleaner air. Some Congress members and governors already have warned that they will not onlytry to block the rules but will attempt to revise the Clean Air Act, which gives the EPA authority to set airpollution standards. We have taken the easy steps to cut smog, and they have paid off. Our air is cleaner. Thenext steps promise to be much harder, but each one will increase the safeguards for our health.Subject: Editorials; Air pollution; Environmental policyLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B, 8:1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Feb 27, 1997Year: 1997Section: Metro; PART-B; Editorial Writers DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.17 March 2013 Page 457 of 483 ProQuestCountry of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: EditorialAccession number: 04443012ProQuest document ID: 421264107Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 200 of 213AQMD Rule Makes Dust-Busting a Must; Air: Cities to improve street sweeping, control particles onunpaved roads.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 15 Feb 1997: A, 1:1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Southern California streets and skies should be cleaner under a new regulation approved Friday thatrequires all cities and counties in the region to improve their street sweeping and to control dust on unpavedroads. Clouds of road dust are a major source of particulates, the microscopic pieces of pollution that cantrigger serious respiratory problems and form a gritty, gray haze. Dust accounts for about a third of theparticulates in the Los Angeles Basin and reducing dust is regarded as one of the cheapest and most effectiveways to clean up the air here. Sweepers equipped with vacuums or filters capable of removing fine pieces ofdust and silt will be purchased for paved streets, and many of the basin's 4,600 miles of unpaved roads will bepaved or subjected to other dust controls.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Southern California streets and skies should be cleaner under a new regulation approved Friday thatrequires all cities and counties in the region to improve their street sweeping and to control dust on unpavedroads. Clouds of road dust are a major source of particulates, the microscopic pieces of pollution that cantrigger serious respiratory problems and form a gritty, gray haze. Dust accounts for about a third of theparticulates in the Los Angeles Basin and reducing dust is regarded as one of the cheapest and most effectiveways to clean up the air here. Two measures, approved unanimously Friday by the South Coast Air QualityManagement District board, are designed to scrub the skies of an estimated 86 tons of particles every day. Themore sweeping mandate affects the upkeep of tens of thousands of miles of paved and unpaved roads in LosAngeles, Orange and nondesert portions of Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Sweepers equipped withvacuums or filters capable of removing fine pieces of dust and silt will be purchased for paved streets, andmany of the basin's 4,600 miles of unpaved roads will be paved or subjected to other dust controls. Also, under17 March 2013 Page 458 of 483 ProQuestthe second measure, construction sites, mines, farms and landfills will be required to boost their efforts toreduce dust. The AQMD estimates that the measures will cost $10.6 million yearly, of which $8.8 million will beborne by the region's 150 city and county governments. At a time when local governments are already strappedfor money, many mayors and other city officials opposed the rule, saying they will have trouble paying for theextra street maintenance. "We are more than willing to comply as far as improving the quality of life of ourcitizens, but where are we going to get the money?" said Jane Williams, an associate traffic engineer forMoreno Valley near Riverside. Although construction sites and landfills have faced AQMD dust requirements foryears, this is the first time that the agency's quest for clean air has turned to the massive amounts of road dustthat loft up into the sky. Every year from 1998 through 2006, each city and county must either pave one mile ofunpaved road, apply dust suppressants such as polymers to two miles, or reduce speeds to 15 mph on threemiles. The roads chosen are required to be among those that are the most well-traveled. Of the basin's 4,600miles of unpaved roads, more than half are in Los Angeles County. Even the city of Los Angeles has somestretches of unpaved streets left. Livestock operations, mostly in Riverside and San Bernardino counties, alsoare required under the new rule to pave or lay thick gravel on their private roads. In addition, cities and countiesmust purchase special street sweepers that can suck up microscopic particles under 10 microns in diameter.They must also remove large areas of dust from paved roads within 72 hours of a windstorm, mudslide, truckspill or other event. Today, most cities use broom sweepers, which many residents have long ridiculed asineffective since they can stir up more dust than they pick up. But beginning in 1999, newly purchasedequipment for use on roads where a lot of silt builds up must be vacuum sweepers or equivalent technologiesfor removing fine particles. Vacuum sweepers cost $157,000 apiece compared with $120,000 for broomsweepers, and they are slower moving, so three of the new models are needed to replace two older ones. BarbGarrett, a legislative analyst for Los Angeles, said vacuum sweepers are too slow to keep up the city's usualpace of street cleaning without a substantially bigger investment in equipment and manpower. But Garrett saidthe city, originally vehemently opposed to the rule, now supports it because the AQMD eased many earlierprovisions, which would have required vacuum sweepers on all streets and paving of all dirt roads within 10years. The AQMD also created a task force to ensure that more efficient and cheaper sweepers are availablebefore the 1999 deadline. "We still have some concerns about whether we will be able to maintain our existingoperation and maintenance schedules, but we think we can work through the process," Garrett said. "It {therule} has public health benefits, which is the goal of the whole program." In Riverside and San Bernardinocounties, where there are almost 1,300 miles of unpaved roads, city officials are especially worried about therequirements for dirt roads. "We cannot support it totally because we see this as an unfunded mandate and aninfringement on property rights," said Ruthanne Taylor Berger of the Western Riverside Council ofGovernments, which represents 14 cities and the county. "With everything else going on with every city andlocal agency, finances are so tapped that they are having difficulty just maintaining the systems they havewithout adding to them." Pomona City Councilwoman Nell Soto, who represents Los Angeles County cities onthe AQMD board, said she was worried, too, but voted for the rule after the AQMD pledged to help locatefunding. Still, there were no guarantees Friday. "We're broke. All the cities are broke and we don't know wherewe'll get the money," Soto said. Under a separate measure also unanimously adopted, construction companies,mines and utilities must water dusty areas more often and clean up dust tracked from their sites. Farms musthave soil erosion plans. Those requirements will cost businesses an estimated $1.8 million a year. Federal lawrequires the AQMD to reduce airborne dust and achieve health limits for particulates--considered the deadliesttype of air pollution since they can lodge in lungs. About one-third of particle pollution comes from dust, whilethe rest is largely from gasoline and diesel exhaust. Cleaning up road dust is one of the cheapest ways toreduce the pollutant. "The Coachella Valley has already done this, and it's cut their {particulates} down to withinthe limits, so we see no reason to assume similar things won't work here," said AQMD spokesman Bill Kelly.AQMD Chairman Jon Mikels, a San Bernardino County supervisor, said the brunt of previous clean-air17 March 2013 Page 459 of 483 ProQuestmeasures has hit private businesses, "so it's incumbent upon local government to step forward and do their partin cleaning up the air." When Friday's measures are fully implemented, they will eliminate about 25% of the 340tons of dust per day blowing from roads, construction, agriculture and landfills, the agency says. The AQMDestimated the tonnage by measuring dust blown from a sampling of streets and extrapolating for the rest. Onpaved roads, dust is formed when tires crush particles into finer pieces that spiral up into the air, where theysometimes hang for hours. The Los Angeles Basin--especially the Riverside area--has the nation's unhealthiestconcentrations of particle pollution, sometimes reaching levels double the limit deemed healthful. The newmeasures do little, if anything, to help the region comply with a controversial new limit on particulates that theU.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed in November. Road dust is usually composed of coarserparticles, while the new standard focuses on ultra-fine ones mostly coming from combustion. The dust control,however, will go a long way toward satisfying the EPA's limit on coarser particles, the AQMD says. (BEGINTEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Scrubbing the Streets Road dust is an important source of particulates,the microscopic pollutants that create a gray haze over the Los Angeles Basin and can lead to respiratoryproblems. To reach the goal of eliminating 86 tons of particulate matter every day, cities and counties in thebasin must control dust on unpaved roads and improve street cleaning. SOURCES OF DUST Paved roads:50% Unpaved roads: 15% Construction: 13% Windborne: 16% Agriculture: 5% Landfills: 1% Total: 340 tons perday in L.A. Basin Source: Air Quality Management District PHOTO: Road dust is an important source ofparticulates, the microscopic pollutants that create a gray haze over the Los Angeles Basin and can lead torespiratory problems.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Los Angeles Times; GRAPHIC-CHART: Scrubbing the Streets / LosAngeles Times Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: POLLUTION CONTROL, WASTE MANAGEMENT; INDUSTRIAL & COMMERCIAL SERVICES - ALL;ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS; Air pollution; Environmental policy; RegulationLocation: Southern CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 1:1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Feb 15, 1997Year: 1997Section: PART-A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04430290ProQuest document ID: 42128630617 March 2013 Page 460 of 483 ProQuestDocument URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 201 of 213EPA Chief Says Air Rules Won't Jeopardize Backyard BarbecuesAuthor: GERSTENZANG, JAMESPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 13 Feb 1997: A, 17:1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The Clinton administration had a strong message Wednesday for Americans who may be worriedabout the tougher clean air standards it is proposing: Don't be fooled by what you hear--the resulting regulationswill not come between you and your barbecue. No more obsessing about the relationship with your lawn mower,Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Carol Browner said in her first congressional testimony aboutthe new standards. And breathe easy--your Fourth of July fireworks are not yet outlawed. "This is a vital issue oftremendous importance to millions of America's families," Browner told the Senate Environment and PublicWorks Committee. "It is not about outdoor barbecues and lawn mowers. It is not about fireworks on the Fourthof July. It is about whether children can go outdoors on the Fourth of July and enjoy those fireworks."Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The Clinton administration had a strong message Wednesday for Americans who may be worriedabout the tougher clean air standards it is proposing: Don't be fooled by what you hear--the resulting regulationswill not come between you and your barbecue. No more obsessing about the relationship with your lawn mower,Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Carol Browner said in her first congressional testimony aboutthe new standards. And breathe easy--your Fourth of July fireworks are not yet outlawed. "This is a vital issue oftremendous importance to millions of America's families," Browner told the Senate Environment and PublicWorks Committee. "It is not about outdoor barbecues and lawn mowers. It is not about fireworks on the Fourthof July. It is about whether children can go outdoors on the Fourth of July and enjoy those fireworks." The moreserious debate over the air quality proposal--and the focus of a well-funded opposition group made up ofmanufacturing industries and oil companies, among others--has turned on whether the plan is supported bysound scientific research and how much it will cost to carry it out. Scientific studies leave no doubt that the newplan is valid, Browner said, and the costs will be considered before specific regulations go into effect. Theproposal sets levels at which air would be considered dangerously polluted with ozone, or smog, and withparticles of soot a fraction of the width of a human hair. Then, regulations would be established to helpcommunities reach the lower levels of pollution, by reducing emissions over a period that could stretch morethan a decade. That is where the debate turns to Americans' lifestyles and their backyard gadgets. Sometimessheepishly, sometimes with great assurance, sometimes in radio advertisements and sometimes from streetcorners as they did near a Senate office building on Wednesday, critics have sought to fire up opposition to theproposed standards by asserting that such personal pollutants as barbecues, power boats, lawn mowers andother small-motor implements--and even fireworks--would be outlawed as communities try to meet the new airquality levels. So Browner was asked if she could offer assurance that backyard barbecues were not in17 March 2013 Page 461 of 483 ProQuestjeopardy? "You are free to barbecue, mow your lawn and enjoy the Fourth of July fireworks," Browner said inresponse to a question from Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.). Indeed, she did not mention it, butjurisdictions in California have dealt with such matters by ordering a reformulation of charcoal lighter fluid andredesign of the small gasoline engines used in garden tools. The EPA issued its proposal last November, actingunder a court order enforcing a provision of the Clean Air Act. Under the legislation, the agency must update theair standards every five years to take into account the most recent scientific determinations about the healtheffects of dirty air. The agency must make its proposal final by July 19. The proposal would lower the standardfor ozone, or smog, to 0.08 parts per million when averaged over eight hours from the current 0.12 parts permillion average over a single hour. It also would set tougher new standards for particulate matter, or soot.PHOTO: BREATHE EASY: EPA chief Carol Browner said tougher clean air standards would not jeopardizebackyard barbecues. Above, Browner testifies before U.S. Senate committee.; PHOTOGRAPHER: AssociatedPress Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS; LAW & LEGAL ISSUES; SERVICES; BUSINESS SERVICES;CONSULTING; Air pollution; Standards; Environmental protectionCompany: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, ASSOCIATED PRESS LIMITED(THE), EnvironmentalProtection Agency, EPAPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 17:1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Feb 13, 1997Year: 1997Dateline: WASHINGTONSection: PART-A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04429461ProQuest document ID: 421130357Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand17 March 2013 Page 462 of 483 ProQuest_______________________________________________________________Document 202 of 213EPA Proposal to Toughen Air Quality Rules Faces Strong OppositionAuthor: GERSTENZANG, JAMESPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 12 Feb 1997: A, 12:2.ProQuest document linkAbstract: On the eve of a major Senate hearing, a senior Republican senator with strong environmentalcredentials said that the Clinton administration's proposal to toughen national air quality standards is too harsh,signaling that the plan is in serious trouble in Congress. The comments by Sen. John H. Chafee (R-R.I.),chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, are the strongest indication yet that theEnvironmental Protection Agency will come under strong pressure from the Republican-led Congress to modifyits proposal. At the heart of Chafee's message is his concern that, if the proposal is not modified, conservativesenators will try to weaken the underlying legislation--the 1970 Clean Air Act, one of the nation's broadest, mostsuccessful environmental laws.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: On the eve of a major Senate hearing, a senior Republican senator with strong environmentalcredentials said that the Clinton administration's proposal to toughen national air quality standards is too harsh,signaling that the plan is in serious trouble in Congress. The comments by Sen. John H. Chafee (R-R.I.),chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, are the strongest indication yet that theEnvironmental Protection Agency will come under strong pressure from the Republican-led Congress to modifyits proposal. At the heart of Chafee's message is his concern that, if the proposal is not modified, conservativesenators will try to weaken the underlying legislation--the 1970 Clean Air Act, one of the nation's broadest, mostsuccessful environmental laws. Opponents of the new standards said that they are based on questionablescience and even a lack of data. They also warn that they would add billions of dollars to industry costs andforce some regions to impose such strict regulations that smoky backyard barbecues and gasoline-poweredlawnmowers would be outlawed. The EPA said that years of research support its decision and that the newstandards would save 20,000 people a year from premature death from respiratory illness. The competingclaims will be at the center of a hearing today when Carol Browner, the EPA administrator, testifies on the airstandards for the first time before Chafee's committee. The EPA proposal would lower the standard for ozone,or smog--a standard that the Los Angeles basin and many other regions still do not meet regularly--to 0.08 partsper million when averaged over eight hours from the current 0.12 parts per million average over a single hour.The plan also would set new standards for particulate matter, or soot. Pieces 28 times smaller than the width ofa human hair can lodge in the lungs and reduce their capacity. Under the proposal, particles 2.5 microns orlarger could not exceed 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air in a day, or an average of 15 micrograms percubic meter annually. Under existing law, the threshold is 10 microns. Particles less than 10 microns cannotexceed 150 micrograms per cubic meter of air in a day or 50 micrograms on an annual average. The EPAdeveloped the proposal under a court order and has until July 19 to prepare final standards. Congress can voteto approve the proposal, change it or ignore it--in which case the final standards would take effect withoutchanges. Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS; LAW & LEGAL ISSUES; Environmental policy; Air pollution; Environmentalcleanup17 March 2013 Page 463 of 483 ProQuestPeople: Chafee, John HCompany: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 12:2Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Feb 12, 1997Year: 1997Dateline: WASHINGTONSection: PART-A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04429271ProQuest document ID: 421229312Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 203 of 213Proposed Clean-Air Standards Kick Up a Storm in CongressAuthor: GERSTENZANG, JAMESPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 06 Feb 1997: A, 22:5.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Strict new air-quality standards proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency were given theirfirst hearing in Congress on Wednesday, and from the swirling scientific data, only one conclusion emerged:The Clinton administration is in for a long, tough fight. In its most far-reaching environmental initiative, theagency wants to rewrite air-quality standards, reducing the amount of smog and soot--ozone and particulates--that it would consider a healthy level in the nation's air. Already, the pressure has persuaded the EPA to delaypresentation of the final standards by two months. And already, the American Lung Assn., whose lawsuit17 March 2013 Page 464 of 483 ProQuestprompted the agency to develop the new standards, has gone back to court to restore the original Junedeadline.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Strict new air-quality standards proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency were given their firsthearing in Congress on Wednesday, and from the swirling scientific data, only one conclusion emerged: TheClinton administration is in for a long, tough fight. In its most far-reaching environmental initiative, the agencywants to rewrite air-quality standards, reducing the amount of smog and soot--ozone and particulates--that itwould consider a healthy level in the nation's air. But industry officials, joined by many congressionalRepublicans, believe that the standards are too strict and they questioned the scientific conclusions on whichthe standards are based. Already, the pressure has persuaded the EPA to delay presentation of the finalstandards by two months. And already, the American Lung Assn., whose lawsuit prompted the agency todevelop the new standards, has gone back to court to restore the original June deadline. For Congress, the newstandards pose an unpleasant dilemma, giving members the choice of voting against measures portrayed asprotecting Americans from sometimes-deadly respiratory illness or voting for measures that manufacturingindustries argue are unnecessary and would lead to regulations so costly that the economy would suffer.Wednesday's hearing before a Senate subcommittee brought together eight scientists, including two whoserved on a committee that advised the EPA on scientific studies of the connection between health and airpollution. Their information was complex and their opinions were not in agreement. Particulates are the dust-likematter given off by the burning of coal and wood, among other fuels. Pieces as little as 28 times smaller thanthe width of a human hair can lodge in the lungs and reduce their capacity--a problem of critical concern duringperiods of air pollution alerts for people with respiratory systems already weakened by disease. "Substantialevidence exists that fine combustion particles of all types are associated with death, hospital admissions andrespirator illness," said Joel Schwartz, an environmental epidemiologist at Harvard University. The EPAproposal would lower the standard for ozone to 0.08 parts per million when averaged over eight hours from thecurrent 0.12 parts per million averaged in a single hour. For particulates, the new standard would be thatparticles smaller than 2.5 microns could not exceed 50 micrograms per cubic liter of air in a day, or a dailyaverage of 15 micrograms per cubic liter on an annual basis. Under existing law, particles of less than 10microns cannot exceed 150 micrograms per cubic liter of air in a day or 50 micrograms on an annual dailyaverage. Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: LAW & LEGAL ISSUES; ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS; Air pollution; Standards; RegulationCompany: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Environmental Protection Agency, EPAPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 22:5Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Feb 6, 1997Year: 1997Dateline: WASHINGTONSection: PART-A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLC17 March 2013 Page 465 of 483 ProQuestPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04416561ProQuest document ID: 421283747Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 204 of 213AQMD's Smog Plan for L.A. Basin OKd; Air: Environmentalists criticize scaled-back plan as being tooweak. The rules are designed to cut emissions by targeting a variety of pollution sources.Author: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 24 Jan 1997: A, 3:6.ProQuest document linkAbstract: The California Air Resources Board on Thursday approved the Los Angeles Basin's controversialsmog plan, casting the official blueprint that sets the course of the battle against the nation's worst air pollution.Because the scope of its attack on smog is scaled back compared to past efforts, the plan crafted by the SouthCoast Air Quality Management District was opposed by environmentalists as too weak to assure healthful air.But in an interview Thursday, board Chairman John Dunlap offered less than a ringing endorsement of theAQMD's plan, calling the scope, time frame and stringency of the rules "adequate," but expressing concern thatsome opposition remained so vigorous.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: The California Air Resources Board on Thursday approved the Los Angeles Basin's controversialsmog plan, casting the official blueprint that sets the course of the battle against the nation's worst air pollution.Because the scope of its attack on smog is scaled back compared to past efforts, the plan crafted by the SouthCoast Air Quality Management District was opposed by environmentalists as too weak to assure healthful air.Rejecting the protests of environmentalists and some businesses during a three-hour hearing, the AirResources Board voted 8-1 to approve the plan with no modifications. But in an interview Thursday, boardChairman John Dunlap offered less than a ringing endorsement of the AQMD's plan, calling the scope, timeframe and stringency of the rules "adequate," but expressing concern that some opposition remained sovigorous. Fifty-five measures outlined in the plan are scheduled to be enacted over the next four years at a costestimated by the AQMD at $1.7 billion per year. The rules are designed to cut emissions in Los Angeles,Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties by 61% in 2010 by targeting a variety of pollution sources.17 March 2013 Page 466 of 483 ProQuestIncluded are restaurant char-broilers, street cleaning, glass manufacturing, water heaters, oil companyequipment, idling at truck stops and degreasers used by mechanics and machinists. Also, national standards fordiesel trucks and buses, construction equipment, ships, trains and airliners would be enacted by the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. The AQMD board has begun implementing some of the measures. InNovember, it set rules that gradually ban most house paints that contain oil-based solvents. The new smogstrategy is substantially less aggressive than one adopted by the AQMD and Air Resources Board in 1994.Thirty-one proposals, including rules that would have forced malls and sports arenas to offer rideshareprograms, were dropped because the AQMD believed that they were too costly or impractical.Environmentalists say the plan means a severe rollback in Southern California's smog control because it allowsseveral hundred additional tons of smog-forming emissions to remain in the air compared to the previous plan.They also say the strategy is overly reliant on undefined clean-air technologies that might emerge after 2005.Gail Ruderman Feuer of the Natural Resources Defense Council called the Air Resources Board's decision "avote to allow decades more of smoggy skies and thousands more premature deaths each year." Dunlap,however, said the extensive amount of smog cleanup needed means that the region has to rely on the inventionof new technologies. The AQMD's plan is designed to clean up enough emissions to bring the Los AngelesBasin into compliance with health limits for ozone and particulates. The two pollutants, which aggravaterespiratory problems, are more pervasive and unhealthful in the four-county basin than anyplace in the nation.The plan will now be sent to the EPA, and if any measures are relaxed or abandoned, the AQMD must make upthe shortfall or Southern California faces harsh economic sanctions from the EPA. The new strategy willprobably have to be strengthened in 2002 because the EPA is expected this summer to set more stringent limitson ozone and ultra-fine particles. Soon after the plan's draft was unveiled last summer, nine of 11 members ofthe AQMD's scientific advisory panel resigned en masse. Several of the advisors said the AQMD's predictionsof future smog was based on flawed computer modeling and that the plan is unlikely to achieve healthful air.Credit: TIMES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITERSubject: ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS; Air pollution; Environmental monitoringLocation: Los Angeles County CaliforniaCompany: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA, Air Resources Board-CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 3:6Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Jan 24, 1997Year: 1997Section: PART-A; Metro DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: Newspapers17 March 2013 Page 467 of 483 ProQuestLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04399631ProQuest document ID: 421085483Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997all Rights reserved)Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 205 of 213Clean-Air Debate Pits Economics, ScienceAuthor: GERSTENZANG, JAMESPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 15 Jan 1997: A, 5:1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: On Jan 14, 1997 in Chicago, a public hearing examined the federal government's efforts at controllingair pollution. Similar sessions were held in Boston and Salt Lake City.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Within the confines of a hotel meeting room in downtown Chicago, all the arguments that come to bearin the nation's debate over cleaning up its air could be heard on Tuesday. Carl Le Gant is the mayor ofCountryside, a small town southwest of Chicago. His wife is suffering from what he portrayed as pollutionaggravatedemphysema. "Take a pillow, put it up to your face as tight as you can and try breathing." That, LeGant said, is emphysema. And don't blame smoking, he said; she gave it up 50 years ago when they weremarried. David A. Sykuta, executive director of the Illinois Petroleum Council, issued a warning. The federalgovernment, in its consideration of the tougher pollution standards that were the subject of Tuesday's publichearing, is on the verge of a program that will "raise taxes, stifle economic growth and create a lifestyle police . .. mandating car-pooling, a ban on wood-burning stoves and snow blowers," he declared. Health vs. dollars:How much will the nation spend? Indeed, how much can it afford to spend? And must it give up its cars andboats to breathe clean air? How much pollution is too much? At the core sits this question: Should the realityoffered by science or the one offered by economics determine how clean an environment the nation will set asits goal? Air pollution is responsible for hastening the deaths of 64,000 people a year in the United States,according to the Environmental Protection Agency. In Chicago, 80% of the air pollution is blamed on the steelmills ringing the southwestern shore of Lake Michigan--not on the snow blowers and motorboats and oldautomobiles that draw such attention in the debate. On Nov. 27, the agency came up with what is widely viewedas its greatest effort yet to reduce the number of premature deaths by improving air quality. The sharplystrengthened air pollution standards that it proposed could lead to new restrictions on the amount of soot andsmog that polluters--mostly factories and vehicles--would be allowed to emit each year. Unless changed, theybecome final at the end of June. The standards do not themselves impose regulations on the amount ofpollutants that may be sent into the air. Rather, they state the level of ozone and particulates that makesunhealthy conditions. Such standards then provide the basis for government regulation. Ground-level ozone is a17 March 2013 Page 468 of 483 ProQuestgas that contributes to smog. Particulates are the nearly invisible pieces of metal and the detritus of combustionthat make up soot. On Tuesday, those most affected by the proposal--among them industries, interest groupsand individuals--had their say at a public hearing in Chicago and at similar sessions in Boston and Salt LakeCity. The meeting here produced nothing resembling a consensus among the 102 people signed up to testify.Rather, said Mary Nichols, assistant administrator of the EPA for air quality, the comments were intended tocomplement "a very extensive scientific" process that produced the proposed standards. The hearing offered acompelling picture of the personal and economic dynamics at the heart of the issue. The Damitz boys--8-yearoldKyle and 10-year-old Jeff--have severe asthma. In a precise but unhurried little-boy voice, Kyle told Nichols,who was presiding at the hearing, what the illness means: "I hate going to the hospital. They poke tubes in you.I get shots. I can't play outside. Why would we want to pollute the air? I don't understand why people want to dothat." But are the government's standards the best way to deal with the problem? No, said John McKnight,director of environmental compliance of the National Marine Manufacturers Assn., which represents the makersof pleasure boats and engines. Cutting back emissions from such vessels, he said, would have "a devastatingeffect" on the recreational marine business. Industry after industry--oil companies, representatives of smallbusiness, energy utilities--echoed those concerns. Times staff writer Marla Cone in Los Angeles contributed tothis story. Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITERSubject: ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS; Air pollution; Federal government; Public interestLocation: Chicago IllinoisPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A, 5:1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1997Publication date: Jan 15, 1997Year: 1997Dateline: CHICAGOSection: PART-A; National DeskPublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04392826ProQuest document ID: 421278399Document URL:: (Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997all Rights reserved)17 March 2013 Page 469 of 483 ProQuestLast updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 206 of 213AQMD adopts disputed plan for clean airAuthor: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 16 Nov 1996: A19.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Rejecting pleas from environmentalists to scrap its plan start over, the Southland smog board onFriday unanimously adopted a controversial strategy that aims to bring the region's two most ubiquitous andunhealthy pollutants under control in the first decade of the 21st century. The new plan now becomes theblueprint that plots the details of the attack on smog in the Los Angeles Basin by setting the scope and pace offuture regulations. Although smog has retreated significantly in the four-county region, residents still breathe theworst air in the nation. The new catalog of smog measures is less aggressive and allows substantially moreemissions--several hundred tons per day--than other plans drafted by the AQMD over the past decade. Theagency abandoned or delayed 31 proposals included in its 1994 strategy after new computer modeling showedthat health limits for ozone and particulates can be achieved more easily than previously predicted.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: Rejecting pleas from environmentalists to scrap its plan start over, the Southland smog board onFriday unanimously adopted a controversial strategy that aims to bring the region's two most ubiquitous andunhealthy pollutants under control in the first decade of the 21st century. The new plan now becomes theblueprint that plots the details of the attack on smog in the Los Angeles Basin by setting the scope and pace offuture regulations. Although smog has retreated significantly in the four-county region, residents still breathe theworst air in the nation. Now the even bigger challenge begins: Fifty-five measures targeting an array of vehicles,businesses and consumer products in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties arescheduled to be enacted over the next four years. The voluminous brew of emissions that creates today's smogis supposed to be cut 61% by 2010 under the plan approved in a 10-0 vote of the South Coast Air QualityManagement District board. The cost to businesses and consumers is estimated at $1.7 billion annually for thenext 14 years, which the AQMD predicts will be offset by $1.9 billion yearly in benefits from reducing illnesses,property damage and congestion and improving visibility. The new catalog of smog measures is less aggressiveand allows substantially more emissions--several hundred tons per day--than other plans drafted by the AQMDover the past decade. The agency abandoned or delayed 31 proposals included in its 1994 strategy after newcomputer modeling showed that health limits for ozone and particulates can be achieved more easily thanpreviously predicted. Many of the region's major industries that contribute to smog support the strategy, calling itmore moderate and less economically disruptive. Endorsements came from Chevron USA, Northrop Grumman,Hughes Aircraft, McDonnell Douglas, Southern California Edison, Texaco, Shell Oil and the Walt Disney Co.,among others. The Orange County Business Council told the AQMD the plan "balances sound air quality goalswith economic impacts in a technically flawed competent manner," and the California Manufacturers Assn. saidit "goes further in complying with our requests than any previous plan." But environmental groups, as well asseveral air quality experts who resigned this year in protest from the AQMD's advisory council, lambasted it astechnically flawed in predicting future smog and too weak to safeguard people, especially in Riverside and SanBernardino counties. "This air plan is hazardous to your health," said Gail Ruderman Feuer, a senior attorney at17 March 2013 Page 470 of 483 ProQuestthe Natural Resources Defense Council in Los Angeles. "A vote yes means they will roll back what theycommitted to do in 1994." Carlos Porras of Communities for a Better Environment said the AQMD is headeddown a path that will mean the Los Angeles Basin--especially inland areas with many low-income minorities--retains its stigma as the nation's smog capital. "This district has been moving further and further away fromprotecting public health," Porras said. The plan sows the AQMD is "an agency that has lost its backbone or itsconscience," said state Sen. Tom Hayden (D-Los Angeles), who heads the Senate's natural resourcescommittee. Under federal law, the Southland's plan must achieve health limits for ozone-a colorless, powerfullung irritant--by 2010 and for particulates--tiny pieces of soot and other substances that are called smog'sdeadliest ingredient--by 2006. Top air quality officials in the Clinton administration also criticized the plan, tellingthe AQMD that it is shortsighted to ease same of its proposals. "We believe it is far less in the public's interest toput forward plan and control measure relaxations at this time, when we know that...strengthenings will almostcertainly be needed," David Howekamp, director of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's regional airdivision, wrote in a letter to the AQMD. The EPA is expected later this month to propose tougher healthstandards that will probably mean the Southland's new plan will have to be strengthened substantially within afew years. Howekamp also warned AQMD officials that they cannot continue to backslide on smog controls. Inrecent years, the board members have weakened some rules and delayed adopting others because it mightharm the economy and fuel already heated attacks from conservative state legislators. If the AQMD strays fromits new plan, it must make up the shortfall or the Southland could face sanctions from the EPA, including afreeze on federal highway funds. The plan now goes to the California Air Resources Board, where it becomesthe main component of a statewide smog strategy to be voted on in January. The entire package then is sent tothe EPA, which must approve it or order changes. The proposed regulations to be imposed over the next fouryears include restrictions on restaurant charbroilers, dairy farms, water heaters, glass manufacturers, metalparts industries, street cleaning, lumber yards, oil company operations. Also, buying and scrapping largenumbers of old diesel trucks and gross-polluting cars is emphasized, carpool lanes and rail transit would beincreased, and national emission standards would be set by the EPA for trains, trucks, ships and airliners. Inaddition to the 55 specific measures, the plan after 2000 relies heavily on highly advanced future technologies--such as hydrogen-fueled cars and buses. Environmentalists said the AQMD should have mandated morereadily available solutions instead of depending on vague options that may not emerge. "The AQMD believesthe tooth fairy will find these solutions and put them under their pillow," Feuer said. But AQMD Executive OfficerJames Lents on Friday vowed "our commitment to get to clean air as fast as technology allows us" and said thedropped rules are small and insignificant in the long run. Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan's staff supportedthe new plan with some misgivings, particularly about the cost of a proposal to improve city street sweeping.Orange County Chief Executive Officer Jan Mittermeier said the plan "considers economic prosperity as well asenvironmental advancement." It is the first plan in which the AQMD had to focus not just on ozone--thepredominant pollutant in smog--but also particulates, which are linked in health studies to thousands ofpremature deaths from heart and respiratory disorders. The particles also form the gritty haze that ruins views.The most potent criticism came from eight AQMD scientific advisors who resigned in August and cast doubt onthe plan's technical foundation. Several experts say the computer modeling poorly predicts vehicle exhaust,causing great uncertainty about when the region will actually achieve healthful air. AQMD Deputy ExecutiveOfficer Barry Wallerstein acknowledged uncertainties but said the plan is based on a "state-of-the-scienceanalysis" and will be revised in 2000.Subject: Regulatory agencies; Air pollution; DisputesLocation: Los Angeles, CA, US, PacificCompany / organization: Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA; SIC:4954, 9500; DUNS: 01-598-615917 March 2013 Page 471 of 483 ProQuestPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A19Number of pages: 5Publication year: 1996Publication date: Nov 16, 1996Year: 1996Publisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NEWSPAPERAccession number: 97-18720ProQuest document ID: 421112875Document URL:: Copyright Times Mirror Company Nov 16, 1996Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 207 of 2139 AQMD advisors quit in protest of new smog planAuthor: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 09 Aug 1996: A1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: In a stunning rebuke of the Southland's smog agency, nine of its scientific advisors resigned en masseThursday in protest of broad policies and decisions they said are failing to protect the region from severepollution that threatens public health. The nine--chemists, economists, health experts and other scientists--saidthey are most concerned that the smog plan unveiled last week by the South Coast Air Quality ManagementDistrict will not ensure healthful air. They said it is based on unreliable predictions about the severity of smogover the next 15 years. (excerpt)Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: In a stunning rebuke of the Southland's smog agency, nine of its scientific advisors resigned en masseThursday in protest of broad policies and decisions they said are failing to protect the region from severepollution that threatens public health. The nine--chemists, economists, health experts and other scientists--saidthey are most concerned that the smog plan unveiled last week by the South Coast Air Quality Management17 March 2013 Page 472 of 483 ProQuestDistrict will not ensure healthful air. They said it is based on unreliable predictions about the severity of smogover the next 15 years. But the advisors also named a long litany of fundamental concerns over virtually everymajor facet of the AQMD operations, from lax penalties imposed on industrial polluters to the board's failureover the last two years to adopt any major new measures to combat pollution. The experts, who are supposedto guide the agency and its governing board on all major technical decisions, said the new smog plan--designedto guide pollution control through 2010--was drafted without their input. The advisors said they learned about itsconclusions last month in news reports. "Based on our many collective years of experience in the air pollutionfield, we do not think the district's posture is consistent with the efforts needed to achieve on healthful air qualityfor the 13 of million people in the Los Angeles Basin," said a letter to AQMD board Chairman Jon Mikels signedby eight of the nine who resigned effective immediately Thursday. The ninth advisor resigned in a separateletter. "Since we cannot agree with the current and proposed policies ... it is best for us to resign," the advisorssaid. The advisory council member cited the AQMD's "lack of coherent rule-making" over the last two years and"the absence of concerted rule-making in the proposed new plan." Jane Hall, a Cal State Fullerton economistwho resigned after serving more than 10 years, called the agency's new smog plan "the straw that broke thecamel's back." "There's been a drift in the district in the last couple years away from effective air qualitymanagement," Hall said in an interview. In the plan, AQMD officials decided to eliminate or shelve severaldozen proposed anti-smog measures, saying their new computer analyses showed that fewer tons of pollutionwould need to be eliminated than previously believed in order to meet federal health standards. The agencyalso determined that no extra cleanup effort would be needed to meet the national Limits on particulates--tinypieces of soot, nitrates and other substances that can be deadly for those with lung and heart ailments. Sincethe tiniest particles come from vehicle exhaust--largely diesel engines--controlling them is especiallycontroversial and costly. In their letter, the advisors said "the district is embarked on a course that will not leadto attainment of the federal ozone and fine particle standards." They criticized the plan for being based ontechnical assumptions that are uncertain and unreliable. Last week, a top Clinton administration official criticizedthe plan for the same reason. They also criticized the "unmet promise" of the AQMD's pollution trading program,a highly touted plan to reduce emissions by allowing industry to buy and sell smog credits as long as overallpollution is reduced. A proposal to triple the size of the so-called RECLAIM program was scuttled last year. Justas troubling, the advisors said, was the "absence of enforcement of rule violations over the past 18 months."The AQMD advisors are among the nation's leading experts in air pollution. Like Hall, many had at least adecade of experience with the air quality agency. Tom Eichhorn, the AQMD's communications director, said theresignations came as a "complete surprise." "The concerns they are voicing are similar to what we've heard inthe environmental community, which believes we should be doing a more aggressive job and that'sunderstandable," Eichhorn said. "Given the recession, and the public's concern about jobs, we're doing what wecan do. But the public ought to be pleased with the progress that we've been making toward clean air." Theblunt criticism by the advisors, coming with no warning, was an unprecedented blow to the air quality agency,which over the years has been known for its innovative and stringent anti-pollution programs. Since 1994,however, the AQMD staff and governing board have come under intense political pressure from politicians andbusiness leaders, who have said the anti-pollution effort was hurting the state's economy. Arthur Winer, a UCLAatmospheric scientist who resigned from the panel, said he is troubled that AQMD Executive Officer JamesLents and his staff "are declaring victory against smog, saying that we don't need to to do much more." "Myconcern is really looking into the future," Winer said. "I think that the district and the state Air Resources Boarddeserve a tremendous amount of credit for the dramatic improvement in air quality we've seen over the past 10or 15 years. But ... that's because of controls that we put in to place many, many years ago. "The question iswhat will happen five years from now if we don't stay the course?" Despite decades of progress, the region--LosAngeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties--still has by far the nation's foulest air. Federal healthstandards for ozone, a powerful lung irritant, are violated on the average of every three days. The levels of17 March 2013 Page 473 of 483 ProQuestparticulates also are the nation's highest. "Public health is the ultimate issue here," Hall said. " Resigning was avery hard decision for everyone who made it. Here's an agency that has done some excellent work and theyhave fallen on some hard times politically. "The essence is that it's not going to change any time soon andthere's nothing this advisory council could do that was likely to change that," Hall said. Nick Hazelwood, whoheads the advisory panel, was not among the nine who resigned Thursday. But he had notified the agencyearlier this year that he was leaving this summer for a multitude of reasons. In an interview Thursday,Hazelwood said he "agrees with the sentiments" in the letter but told AQMD board chairman Mikels that he willstay on for a few months to help with the transition when a new advisory council is appointed by the board. "Atour meetings, there was a significant feeling of 'what's the use,'" said Hazelwood, a retired environmentalconsultant from Orange County. "The advice, when asked for and given, was not heeded and in some casesnot even acknowledged." Only Williams Carter, a UC Riverside air quality scientist, will remain an advisor.Carter reportedly told fellow council members that although he also opposes the AQMD's course, he feels hemay still have some influence on decisions. Others who resigned include Russell Sherwin and John Peters, twoUSC scientists who are researchers on the health effects of pollution. In addition to their other criticisms, thescientists cited the AQMD's "dismantling" of its system for measuring air quality throughout the four counties,calling it "the world's premier air pollution monitoring network." Many monitoring stations are being shut down forcost reasons. Orange County will have only two monitors, compared to the four it had. But the advisors'harshest criticism was reserved for the data used to draw up the AQMD's latest clean air plan. The agency isrequired to revise its strategy every three years, but this version--which goes to the AQMD board for a final votein October or November--is pivotal because it is the first to address the problem of particulates. Although theyagreed that the assumptions about future pollution levels were unreliable, they stopped short of suggesting thatthe data was manipulated to avoid aggressive and unpopular measures. "The model they are relying on isextremely sensitive to changes in information," Hall said. "There is a lack of confidence that their predictions areaccurate." AQMD spokesman Eichhorn said the staff "disagrees strongly" with the criticism of the new plan,calling the computer analyses "the best in the district's history." The resignations were disturbing, Eichhorn said,but "we get beat up all the time. It's not unusual to have disagreements within the family."Subject: Smog; Resignations; Government sponsored enterprises; Advisors; Public health; Environmentalpolicy; Air pollutionLocation: US, Pacific, Los Angeles, CACompany / organization: Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA; SIC:9500, 4954; DUNS: 01-598-6159Classification: 8300: Other services; 1540: Pollution controlPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A1Number of pages: 4Publication year: 1996Publication date: Aug 9, 1996Year: 1996Publisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United States17 March 2013 Page 474 of 483 ProQuestISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 96-89162, 04159067ProQuest document ID: 421197265Document URL:: Copyright Times Mirror Company Aug 9, 1996Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 208 of 213AQMD to drop several anti-smog regulationsAuthor: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 18 July 1996: A1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: In a major shift in anti-smog tactics expected to ease the burden on businesses and motorists, theSouth Coast Air Quality Management District plans to discard several unpopular measures and impose no extrasteps to combat particulates, the deadliest form of air pollution.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilitySubject: Smog; Regulation; Air pollutionLocation: Southern CaliforniaCompany: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CAPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A1Number of pages: 17Publication year: 1996Publication date: Jul 18, 1996Year: 1996Publisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: Newspapers17 March 2013 Page 475 of 483 ProQuestLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 04123868ProQuest document ID: 421076942Document URL:: Copyright Times Mirror Company Jul 18, 1996Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 209 of 213Grit in L.A. air blamed in 6,000 deaths yearlyAuthor: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 09 May 1996: A1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Nearly 6,000 residents of Greater Los Angeles, and 64,000 people in major American cities, may bedying annually from lung or heart problems aggravated by breathing the gritty air pollution known asparticulates, according to a study released on May 8, 1996 by a national environmental group.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilitySubject: Public health; Fatalities; Air pollutionLocation: Los Angeles CaliforniaPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A1Number of pages: 1Publication year: 1996Publication date: May 9, 1996Year: 1996Publisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 0403266917 March 2013 Page 476 of 483 ProQuestProQuest document ID: 421213582Document URL:: Copyright Times Mirror Company May 9, 1996Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 210 of 213Smog plan would shift emissions to winterAuthor: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 07 Feb 1996: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: In a novel move that would shift some summer air pollution to winter, air quality regulators are craftinga new strategy allowing industrial emissions in Southern California to increase in the off-season for smog. Cleanair rules are typically set to achieve clearer skies year-round. But the high cost of pollution control and strongresistance from the business community have forced the South Coast Air Quality Management District to seekmore economical ways to regulate smog. The smog problem would improve during the warmer months underthe plan. But asthmatics and others with sensitive health may not like the seasonal approach, and it may disruptsome jobs in industries that shift their work schedules. (excerpt)Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: In a novel move that would shift some summer air pollution to winter, air quality regulators are craftinga new strategy allowing industrial emissions in Southern California to increase in the off-season for smog.Clean air rules are typically set to achieve clearer skies year-round. But the high cost of pollution control andstrong resistance from the business community have forced the South Coast Air Quality Management District toseek more economical ways to regulate smog. The smog problem would improve during the warmer monthsunder the plan. But asthmatics and others with sensitive health may not like the seasonal approach, and it maydisrupt some jobs in industries that shift their work schedules. Support from business, which the concept isdesigned to help, is not guaranteed. "I don't personally know any industries that would see it as an advantage."said Gary Stafford, vice president of Terra Furniture in Vernon and leader of an industry trade group. In a reportto be presented Friday to the AQMD board, the agency's staff recommends letting manufacturing plants releasemore smog-causing compounds into the air in December, January and February, while reducing emissionsduring the rest of the year. Total pollution released during the year by the affected industries would not change.But moving some summertime emissions into the winter, when winds and cooler temperatures keep the skiesmuch clearer, would ease smog during the Southland's peak season. Ozone, the eye-stinging, lung-damaginggas that the main ingredient of smog, is rarely if ever a problem during winter. But in winter months, the LosAngeles is blanketed by an oppressive of ozone formed when emissions react with each other and with sunlightand are trapped by still air. About 95% of the area's health standard violations occur from April throughSeptember. "The atmosphere can tolerate greater emissions in the winter without compromising air quality as aresult of less sunlight to drive the photochemistry," the AQMD staff report says. The aim of the seasonalstrategy is to ease the economic blow to manufacturers by letting them shift some production to winter monthsrather than curtail year-round activities or install costly equipment to comply with pollution limits. The magnitude17 March 2013 Page 477 of 483 ProQuestof pollution increases envisioned in winter under the concept has yet to be determined by the AQMD staff. Butofficials say that even if industrial emissions double or triple in wintertime, they would remain far below the levelnecessary to trigger a health violation or full/scale smog alert anywhere within the four-county basin. Fewresidents, the AQMD contends, would notice the increase in winter smog. "The potential adverse impacts ... inwinter months are small," the report says. "Significant amounts of emissions can be shifted from summer towinter months without causing any" health standard violations. That could be little solace for asthmatics andothers with respiratory disease who have trouble breathing even when pollution falls within government healthlimits. "Increasing emissions any time is a bad idea," said Gladys Meade, an air quality consultant for theAmerican Lung Assn" should proceed very carefully with this .,.. There are a lot of factors they are not lookingat, like the reactivity of the compounds. For another, the weather is not all that predictable." The strategy alsocould affect the labor force at hundreds of plants in Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino and Riversidecounties, from aerospace giants to furniture makers. "There may be a greater need for temporary workers in thenon-ozone winter season," the AQMD report says. "Moreover, as facilities shift their production schedules towinter , unemployment could rise during the smog season." Business leaders say shifting production schedulesis impractical for most companies. Many manufacturers, such as printers, auto body shops, furniture makersand defense contractors, face year-round demand for their goods and services. "We react to orders," saidStafford. "We don't necessarily receive our orders during the winter months, we receive them evenly throughoutthe year. "I think they're grasping everywhere for ideas," he added. "But it's all coming back to the same thingsqueezingmore out of industry, when industry isn't the problem, cars are. Industry has already come a longway. Emissions are down substantially." AQMD spokesman Bill Kelly said the state is analyzing what kinds ofcompanies could participate. "For example, some aerospace companies could schedule some of the painting ofairplanes in the off-smog season," he said. Other companies could shift production are ones that operate incycles, perhaps including printers of phone books and annual reports. The AQMD, however, must also ensurethat increasing the winter emission of petroleum-based compounds would not exacerbate another seriousproblem--particulates, the microscopic soot that lodges in lungs and forms a gray-brown haze. Particulates aresometimes severe in winter. The seasonal plan, which will not come up for a vote until later this year, is part of abroader overhaul of smog rules that the AQMD board is considering. Called "inter-credit trading," it would createa market for pollution credits much more far-reaching and open than the small program called RECLAIM thatnow exists. For instance, a shopping mall that converts its shuttle buses to natural gas to cut emissions couldsell credits to a factory. The credits could be banked from year to year--a controversial aspect because pollutioncould surge in any given year if businesses used them all at once.Subject: Smog; Environmental regulations; Emissions; Air pollutionLocation: US, Pacific, Los Angeles, CAClassification: 4310: Regulation; 1540: Pollution controlPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Publication year: 1996Publication date: Feb 07, 1996Year: 1996Section: APublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLC17 March 2013 Page 478 of 483 ProQuestPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NEWSPAPERAccession number: 96-31623ProQuest document ID: 421261440Document URL:: Copyright Times Mirror Company Feb 07, 1996Last updated: 2011-08-09Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 211 of 213Stricter curbs on tiny airborne particles soughtAuthor: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 22 June 1995: B1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Seeking a crackdown on a dangerous air pollutant, the American Lung Association said on Jun 21,1995 that a stricter limit on airborne particulates would produce nearly $11 billion a year in health-relatedsavings and benefits in the US.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: _TVM:UNDEFINED_Subject: Regulation; Medical disorders; Air pollutionCompany: American Lung AssociationPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: B1Publication year: 1995Publication date: Jun 22, 1995Year: 1995Publisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 0458303517 March 2013 Page 479 of 483 ProQuestSource type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 03570317ProQuest document ID: 421030963Document URL:: Copyright Times Mirror Company Jun 22, 1995Last updated: 2011-09-26Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 212 of 213Regulators shift focus to tiny air pollutantsAuthor: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 27 Dec 1994: A1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: Beginning in 1995, the South Coast Air Quality Management District will embark on a new frontier as itlaunches a decade-long quest to control the pervasive and mysterious air pollutant known as PM 10--particulatematter smaller than 10 microns, one-fifth the width of a human hair.Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: _TVM:UNDEFINED_Subject: Environmental cleanup; Air pollutionLocation: Southern CaliforniaCompany: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CAPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: A1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1994Publication date: Dec 27, 1994Year: 1994Publisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: Newspapers17 March 2013 Page 480 of 483 ProQuestLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NewsAccession number: 03296497ProQuest document ID: 421194241Document URL:: Copyright Times Mirror Company Dec 27, 1994Last updated: 2011-09-25Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Document 213 of 213Smog agency seeks to put lid on restaurant broilersAuthor: Cone, MarlaPublication info: Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 02 Sep 1994: 1.ProQuest document linkAbstract: At the corner of Beverly and Rampart boulevards in Los Angeles, the mouthwatering smell ofTommy's famous chili burgers has wafted through the air for almost 50 years. But that familiar odor of burgers--savory to some, unpleasant to others--could soon be a thing of the past throughout the Southland. Althoughfumes from burgers, steaks, chicken and other fried and broiled foods may be relished by gourmands andgluttons, they also are a major source of smog. From McDonald's and In-N-Out Burgers to Lawry's and Ruth'sChris Steak House, an estimated 6,000 restaurants would be forced to reduce smoke from charbroilers, griddlesand deep-fat fryers under a proposal unveiled Thursday by the South Coast Air Quality Management District.(excerpt)Links: Check Find It for AvailabilityFull text: At the corner of Beverly and Rampart boulevards in Los Angeles, the mouthwatering smell of Tommy'sfamous chili burgers has wafted through the air for almost 50 years. But that familiar odor of burgers--savory tosome, unpleasant to others--could soon be a thing of the past throughout the Southland. Although fumes fromburgers, steaks, chicken and other fried and broiled foods may be relished by gourmands and gluttons, theyalso are a major source of smog. From McDonald's and In-N-Out Burgers to Lawry's and Ruth's Chris SteakHouse, an estimated 6,000 restaurants would be forced to reduce smoke from charbroilers, griddles and deepfatfryers under a proposal unveiled Thursday by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. The agencysays Southland restaurants emit 33 tons of pollution into the air daily--as many hydrocarbons as oil refineriesand nine times more soot particles than all the region's buses. Fat, as it decomposes, releases petroleumbasedgases into the air, and when grease drops on open flames, it emits smoky particulates that obstructvisibility and lodge in lungs. "We don't have to give up our burgers. We just won't be choking on as muchsmoke," AQMD spokesman Sam Atwood said. "Restaurants are a very significant source of emissions. This isnot a tiny, insignificant source." Under the AQMD proposal, restaurants in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside andSan Bernardino counties that cook more than 50 pounds of meat per day and 25 pounds of non-meat wouldhave to reduce emissions. That would encompass fast-food chains, large restaurants, "mom-and-pop"operations and coffee and doughnut shops. Residential kitchens, catering vehicles and charity operations would17 March 2013 Page 481 of 483 ProQuestbe exempt. AQMD officials--who had postponed the proposal for five years because of concerns of restaurantowners and technical gas--are bracing for the same type of jokes and public backlash they faced in 1990 whenthey targeted fumes from back-yard barbecues. A series of workshops to discuss the proposal begins Tuesday,while the air quality board has scheduled a vote in November. Restaurant representatives reacted with concernThursday, saying the would have trouble complying with the proposed deadlines and pollution limits and mighthave to increase prices. Under the first phase of the proposal, existing restaurants would have three years tomeet a limit of 2.25 pounds of hydrocarbons per day--equivalent to cooking about 1,200 quarter-pound burgers--and one pound of particulates, equal to about 500 Quarter Pounders, said Peter Votlucka, an AQMD air qualityengineer. New restaurants would have two years. In seven years, all restaurants would have to reduce theiremissions to no more than half a pound of hydrocarbons a day and 0.4 of a pound of particulates. "I think it willaffect every chain. Anybody who cooks meat will have a problem," said Larry Leis, construction servicesdirector for Irvine-based El Pollo Loco, which operates about 150 restaurants in the four-county basin. GeraldBreitbart, business issues consultant for the California Restaurant Assn., said the provisions are especiallyunreasonable for popular fast-food restaurants that cook large volumes of burgers. "The toughest part of thisthing is that we cannot control the consumer and we cannot control the product," he said. To comply, manyrestaurants might turn to essentially the same smog control technology installed on automobiles--catalyticconverter. Five Southland restaurants, including one at Knott's Berry Farm in Buena Park, are experimentingwith the catalysts. Attached to a steel hood on top of a charbroiler, it turns the cooking fumes into harmlesswater and carbon dioxide. But Breitbart said that installing the devices costs $5,000 to $10,000, and that theymay not be effective enough to meet the proposed limits. Many restaurant owners also question the accuracy ofAQMD tests that measure emissions from their broilers and fryers, suggesting that no one really knows howmuch they emit. Leis said the industry needs more time to ensure that the testing procedure is on target. ElPollo Loco has cleaned up much of its smoke by devising a chicken cooker that sits upright and preventsgrease from dripping onto flames. At a cost of $30,000 per restaurant, the chain has installed them at 25locations and plans to expand their use to all sites in the basin if the rule is adopted. But Leis said the newcookers will probably satisfy only the first phase of requirements--which he called "a good, practical,reasonable" proposal. The second, more stringent step would be "awfully hard to attain," he said. "I really thinkit will be economically prohibitive," Leis said. "The technologies are not out there now and the AQMD is bankingon those technologies coming forth." AQMD officials believe their proposal would eliminate 60% of emissionsfrom all the region's restaurants--amounting to a reduction of almost 12 tons of hydrocarbons per day and eighttons of particulates. Breitbart said the AQMD is grossly overestimating the extent of the problem because itbases its estimates on restaurants that charbroil the fattiest meat--hamburgers. "We're not saying thatrestaurants shouldn't have to be regulated," he said. "What we're saying is let's try to find out what we are tryingto regulate before we pass a rule." AQMD spokesman Bill Kelly compared the concerns to those raised fouryears ago when the AQMD ordered manufacturing changes in barbecue lighter fluid. At the time, someopponents coined the misleading phrase "use a barbecue, go to jail." But Kelly said manufacturers havesucceeded in complying by creating many barbecue fluids, chips and other new products that are cleanerburning. "It is a success story," Kelly said. "It has cleaned the air and people can still barbecue using a greatnumber of products."Subject: Restaurants; Regulatory agencies; Pollution control; PacificLocation: US, Los Angeles, CACompany / organization: Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District-Los Angeles County CA; DUNS:01-598-6159Classification: 8380: Hotel & restaurant industries; 4310: Regulation17 March 2013 Page 482 of 483 ProQuestPublication title: Los Angeles TimesPages: 1Number of pages: 0Publication year: 1994Publication date: Sep 02, 1994Year: 1994Section: APublisher: Tribune Publishing Company LLCPlace of publication: Los Angeles, Calif.Country of publication: United StatesISSN: 04583035Source type: NewspapersLanguage of publication: EnglishDocument type: NEWSPAPERAccession number: 94-83888ProQuest document ID: 421026943Document URL:: Copyright Times Mirror Company Sep 02, 1994Last updated: 2011-09-25Database: Los Angeles Times,ProQuest Newsstand_______________________________________________________________Contact ProQuestCopyright ? 2012 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. - Terms and Conditions17 March 2013 Page 483 of 483 ProQuest ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download