California Smog Plan Gets Long-Awaited OK

The Clinton administration gave a long-awaited nod of approval Monday to California’s smog plan, calling it a sound and aggressive strategy that, if implemented, should achieve healthful air throughout the state within 15 years.

The sweeping plan, which outlines more than 100 anti-smog measures that will cost businesses and consumers billions of dollars per year, was adopted by the governor’s air board 16 months ago after much contentious debate.

“California put together a pretty darned good road map for getting to clean air, and now they have to follow it,” said Felicia Marcus, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s western regional administrator. “The issue is making sure it gets done, which is a challenging and important task. Now we have to get to work.”

Environmental groups reacted negatively to the conditional approval, accusing the EPA of endorsing a seriously flawed plan that amounts to a “wish list.” They say that unless their concerns are addressed, they are likely to sue EPA Administrator Carol Browner--a threat the EPA takes seriously since it has lost major legal battles over earlier California smog plans.

“EPA and the state will need Houdini to achieve clean air with this plan full of vague promises and undefined new technologies which will magically appear,” said Gail Ruderman Feuer, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Gov. Pete Wilson said he was pleased with the EPA’s approval, although state air quality officials were still exploring some caveats in the federal agency’s findings.

“This is the first time the federal government has truly embraced a partnership approach with California,” Wilson said Monday.

The sternest warning from the EPA went to the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which is responsible for implementing smog measures in the four-county Los Angeles Basin, which has the nation’s worst air pollution.

The AQMD board has already put off 26 measures aimed at local industries that it had promised to enact in 1994 and 1995. If the AQMD had followed its plan, it would have already eliminated 72 daily tons of smog-causing gases, but instead, the AQMD allowed emissions to increase by easing several rules on businesses last year.

In its report, the EPA warned the AQMD that its continued failure to implement the plan “will prolong the unacceptable current levels of pollution and will expose the areas to potential sanctions under the Clean Air Act.”

The EPA’s preliminary approval of the state plan is contingent on the AQMD’s scheduling new deadlines for imposing several dozen rules--a step that the air board already is working on.

“We are concerned that they have not been making very quick progress, but we also believe they can turn it up and get the job done,” said David Howekamp, the EPA’s regional air policy chief.

AQMD officials say the delays are the result of a large-scale three-year effort that collapsed in January because of opposition from businesses. It would have imposed pollution limits on about 1,000 manufacturers by expanding the AQMD’s pollution trading market.

The federal agency will hear public comments on its findings for 45 days before taking final action on the plan.

The state’s vast clean-air plan is designed to meet federal health standards by slashing emissions in the Los Angeles Basin 70% by 2010 with measures aimed at cars, trucks, factories, trains, farm equipment, consumer products, pesticides and numerous other sources.

The EPA’s approval is critical to California because the agency is required to impose serious economic sanctions--including a freeze of highway funds--on states with inadequate strategies for achieving healthful air.

Endorsement of California’s clean-air plan presented a thorny issue for the EPA, since the relationship between the Wilson and Clinton administrations has frequently been hostile over air-quality issues.

EPA officials wanted to avoid appearing too harsh in their criticism of California, which risked pushing Wilson into more vehement attacks on the federal agency, already under fire from Congress. But the EPA must ensure that the plan does not violate the Clean Air Act or risk a court order demanding that the EPA take over smog control in California, as occurred two years ago.

The elements in the EPA’s approval likely to trigger the most concern in California are mixed signals about the agency’s intent to set new national rules. California’s plan is dependent upon the EPA’s setting stringent and controversial federal standards for jets, interstate trucks, construction and farm equipment, trains and ships.

The EPA was placed in the unusual position of approving a state plan which assumes federal actions that could be derailed by technological obstacles or an anti-regulatory fervor in Congress.

As a result, the EPA said its approval is contingent on California’s guaranteeing that it will come up with other means of cutting smog if the EPA does not impose some national regulations. The EPA promised to convene yearlong public talks about specific national standards.

“We agree that the federal government has a role to play, and we want to do it in the most fair and cost-effective way. But we have to engage people throughout the country on this first,” Marcus said.

Wilson administration officials want to ensure that the caveat does not mean the EPA has a license to back off from tough rules on interstate vehicles that only the federal government can control.

“We now look to the federal government to keep its side of the bargain by adopting national standards . . . which will not disadvantage California businesses,” Wilson said in a statement.

The EPA also was concerned that California has assigned 25% of the emission reductions that the Los Angeles region needs to achieve to “conceptual measures.”

These are undefined rules that will be based on innovations that may appear by 2004, such as heavy-duty trucks powered by alternative fuels. The EPA told the state to reduce its reliance on the fallback strategies and to be more specific about “their timing and stages.”

Feuer said that if the ruling becomes final, environmental groups will probably sue the EPA under the Clean Air Act for approving a plan reliant on open-ended, futuristic technologies and federal rules that may never be adopted.

“The real problem is this plan has very little meat on the bones,” she said.

Linda Waade of the Coalition for Clean Air also denounced the EPA and said, “It’s time for the state to go back to the drawing board to come up with new real measures.”

The state plan also addresses smog in Ventura and San Diego counties, the San Joaquin Valley, Sacramento and the southeast desert area.

The EPA granted preliminary approval to each region’s plan except for parts of Sacramento and the southeast desert, which are still under review. Howekamp called those remaining issues technicalities.