Comment Log Display

I am writing in response to the recent campaign of the California
Air Resources Board regarding off road diesel regulations they
have proposed. As it is according to their current proposed
regulations as of the end of 2009 I, as small family run a 2
person tree trimming operation for the last 29 yrs, will be faced
with buying all new equipment &  have to dispose of my old
equipment that was purchased back in the late 1980's.
Notwithstanding that I took care of my equipment and kept it
running well, and did not contribute to the throw away society
that we  seem to have become. Being 55 in my fifties and doing
this part time into my old age, I will not be able to afford those
new machines which the cost will total over 100,000.00 That
equipment was purchased from national companies at the time who
manufactured these units under the prevailing standards at the
time. There are no retrofits available to bring these older well
running motors(2) up to current standards. 

When the EPA instituted smog checking requirements years ago for
gasoline vehicles, those vehicles which already numbered in the
millions were not forced off the road if they did not pass later
EPA standards, as long as they passed whatever standard they were
manufactured to at the time of manufacture.That also goes for
diesel & gas motors that were manufactured eventually to meet
certain emission standards. The older motors were not thrown away,
they were permitted to continue operating, and when they finally
wore out, one could either buy another used unit, repair their own
or purchase new which then would be manufactured according to
current available technology and epa standards. As it was I
believe vehicles older than either 1975 or 1978 were not smogged
at all & were grandfathered into the system. Any vehicles
manufactured after that date had to meet the prevailing smog
standards. As people replaced their cars over the years more
stringent smog standards were instituted. The gradual process
allowed people to naturally adapt to newer standards as cars etc
wore out. Any older vehicles continued to operate if they still
were able to. People did not HAVE to get rid of older functioning
vehicles.

 Imagine if everyone in California or the US would  have had to
get rid of anything currently older than 1996,  cars, trucks,
tractors, lawn mowers, motorcycles etc. within 2yrs and buy all
brand new vehicles. Could you see what would  happen ? A public
uproar of unimaginable proportions.  YET THIS IS WHAT THE
CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD ESSENTIALLY IS PROPOSING THAT
CONTRACTORS MUST DO WITH EQUIPMENT THAT IS OLDER THAN 1996. This
equipment can last for many years, this is why bulldozers, cranes,
back-hoe's, chippers, stump grinders, graders etc cost so much.

 That contractors big and small just get rid of all their older
equipment and buy all new equipment at enormous expense. Can you
imagine the disruption of commerce to the whole state that this
will create.
Everybody wants cleaner air, but imagine if the country back in
the 70's or 80's had to replace all their cars, trucks etc. in 2
years for cleaner  air. Whoever would have instituted this would
have been run out of town. Does the ARB feel that replacing all
these vehicles  is going to negate all the emissions that are
created on California highways of millions of cars & trucks
sitting in gridlock traffic, because of long neglected highway &
infrastructure construction. 

Another good example of how outlandish this concept the ARB is
proposing. Imagine if a unelected by popular vote, government
agency put into law a requirement that stated  all houses and
buildings that were built more than 2, 3, 4, or 5 or say 15 years
ago, are no longer permitted to exist. They are a source of
pollution, they are energy inefficient, they cost too much to
supply with electric & gas. The energy plants that are required to
keep these homes operating are too numerous and are polluting the
planet. And the only way to solve this was to dismantle all the
non conforming houses & buildings, and build new ones. The
individual home owners & building owners would just have to foot
the bill for this. But in order to pay for all these things, all
these individuals (according to the ARB published cost example
regarding the expense of their proposals) would only need to get a
3% raise from their employers or customers to cover the expense of
replacing everything.  Do you think  a 3 % raise in your  income
would cover the expense of these requirements. Yet that is what
the California ARB is claiming.

Are we trying to chase every contractor out of the state? Are we
interested in putting businesses as well as employees out of work?
 Are we trying to make new home , building , highway ,
infrastructure, remodeling, construction, landscaping, beach &
parks, tree trimming etc the most expensive in the nation. Are we
trying to  minimize the payoff of recent voter passed construction
bonds making the cost of "Rebuilding California" out of site? Is
this mandate really what California's voters want? Is this fair?
My civic lessons from the past taught me that a democracy should
not  disenfranchise an individual let alone many self-employed &
small business owners,  as well as larger businesses that build
the roads & bridges we drive on, the homes & buildings we live &
work in, the yards, parks, beaches  and landscapes we create, 
maintain & enjoy. 

I don't  know  the answer, but shoving this down the throat of the
off road diesel construction & maintenance industry, especially to
those of us who are very small, seems un-american at the least &
akin to the taking of private property without recourse by an
unelected government agency at the most. At the very least there
should be some exemption for very small operations, that these
regulations would be unduly burdensome upon.   

The ARB is due to vote May 25, 2007 on this issue. What you are
doing is just not right. You will put me out of business, as well
many others. And you will raise the cost of doing nearly anything
in California out of the reach of more and more people.

Sincerely,
Panicked Californian.