Comment Log Display

California Air Resources Board
Submitted via webform located on the Air Resources Board website
at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/lispub/comm/bcsubform.php?listname=oridesl07&comm_period=A

Dear Members of the California Air Resources Board:

I am writing to you as a fourth generation Californian who cares
deeply about the quality of the air that my parents, my wife, my
daughter, and the rest of my family breathe in this state
everyday.  I applaud you each in your efforts to improve the air
quality in California and thereby protect the health of my family
and neighbors, as well as myself.  

I understand that you are each currently considering the adoption
of new off-road diesel regulations in your pursuit to improve the
state's air quality.  The goal of this proposed regulation is to
reduce PM and NOx emissions.  This goal is laudable.  However, I
cannot support the proposed regulation due to the language and
specific requirements which are contained therein.  In fact, I am
greatly disturbed by this proposed regulation.  Why?  Read on...

I am acutely aware of the impact that this regulation will have on
California.  As a graduate of the business administration program
at California State University, Northridge, I know that the
burdens of all government regulations are most visibly borne by a
particular group of individuals - in the case of the proposed
regulation, that group will be the owners and employees of small
to medium-sized heavy construction contractors and the allied
businesses that serve them.  As a graduate of the Master of
Construction Management Program at the University of Southern
California, I know that small to medium-sized contractors in
California are overwhelmingly made up of "mom-and-pop" and family
businesses that have a dramatically large impact on the health of
the state's economy when considered in aggregate.  As a third
generation California contractor, I know that the vast majority of
small construction businesses "do not make a killing", but do
provide good-paying jobs through which an untold number of
Californians enjoy a comfortable living.  These jobs are jobs that
will not be outsourced.  They will not be shipped overseas.  These
are jobs that, if lost, will greatly hurt many of the citizens of
this state and consequently will greatly hurt this state.  After
reviewing the details of the proposed regulation, I am convinced
that many of these jobs will be lost.  This includes the jobs of
many of my family members and friends, as well as possibly my
own.

Why do I think this proposed legislation will cause many
Californians to lose their jobs?  Because the financial burden on
small contractors will be too great.  It takes many, many years
for the owners of a small grading or demolition contracting firm
to amass the capital to buy several loaders, excavators, and
scrapers.  This type of construction is a classic example of a
low-margin line of business.  If the proposed legislation is
adopted and enforced, and this equipment has to be “repowered” at
a very high cost (reference the comments already submitted by Mr.
Dave Porcher of Camarillo Engineering which are posted at
http://www.arb.ca.gov/lispub/comm/bccomdisp.php?listname=ordiesl07&comment_num=3&virt_num=3),
then the owners of such a business will likely choose to sell
their equipment one piece at a time.  Selling equipment or closing
shop altogether will be a more financially viable option than
“repowering” older smaller fleets.  (By the way, your definition
of what constitutes a “small fleet” is not at all in line with
what really constitutes a small fleet.)  This equipment will
basically no longer be welcome in California, which means that the
jobs of all the equipment operators, dispatchers, mechanics, truck
drvers, parts salesman, and affiliated trades will also no longer
be welcome in California.  This will have the effect of leaving
only the largest contractors in the California marketplace,
shutting down an untold number of family businesses.  At the same
time, this regulation will greatly increase the cost paid by
California taxpayers and property owners on construction projects
as the larger contractors who remain in business will have to
submit increasingly higher bids on projects to cover the enormous
expenditures they will incur to “repower” their massive fleets. 
Higher bids will likely result in the cancellation of many planned
construction projects, which will result in even more jobs being
lost.

Am I an alarmist?  No, I am afraid that I am not.  Am I against
clean air?  Definitely not!  Can I support the claims that this
proposed regulation will cost Californians their jobs?  Yes. 
Quite a number of Californians can support the claims I make
herein.  I am afraid that you, the members of the California Air
Resources Board, have not heard from nearly enough of these people
simply because they don’t seriously believe there is any chance
that such a regulation could ever be adopted at this time.  I
believe, therefore, that you should give great credence and
all-the-more-carefully consider the points raised by Mr. Dave
Porcher of Camarillo Engineering and Mr. Bruno Dietl of Vulcan
Construction & Maintenance, Inc. (for the record, I have never met
either of these individuals, but I find the financial costs they
project to be entirely realistic).  The majority of the people I
have mentioned this proposed legislation to in the construction
trades believe that the negative impacts this legislation would
have would be so obvious that no one would ever approve its
adoption.  Therefore, they are remaining quiet at the current
time.  However, I believe that the members of the CARB, and many
other government officials (including state assemblypersons and
senators), will hear an overwhelmingly large outcry from the
people of this state if this proposed legislation is adopted and
enforced.  I think this legislation, if adopted, has the potential
to embarrass the CARB after the ramifications of this legislation
become apparent to rank-and-file Californians.

In conclusion, I would like to state that although I support you
in your efforts to improve our state's air quality, I cannot
support this proposed regulation concerning off-road diesel
emissions.  I strongly urge the Air Resources Board to develop a
committee composed of those Californians who would bear the
greatest burden from this proposed regulation - the owners,
managers, and rank-and-file employees of small and medium-sized
heavy construction companies (including demolition contractors,
grading and excavating contractors, shoring contractors, paving
contractors, underground utilities contractors, and the like). 
Many of these individuals, like myself, believe strongly in the
importance of improving California’s air quality.  At the same
time, they know better than anyone else how much financial burden
the proposed legislation will place on their businesses, and how
this great financial burden can best be mitigated (perhaps through
slower implementation or government subsidies or tax
credits/offsets).  I believe that with much input from this select
group of Californians, the proposed regulation can be modified in
such a way that meets the goal of improving our state’s air
quality while at the same time protecting California’s
construction industries.  I, for one, would be interested in
serving on such a committee and offering my services to the CARB.
Please let me know if you are interested in such a proposal.


Sincerely,

Michael Turner