Committee Staff: Donna De Costanzo, Counsel
Richard Colón, Policy Analyst
Jonathan Rosenberg, Finance
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Mark Goldey, Counsel
The New York City Council
Committee on Environmental
Protection
James
F. Gennaro, Chairman
Committee on Education
Eva
Moskowitz, Chairman
Marcel Van Ooyen, Legislative
Director
April 19, 2005
Proposed Int. No. 414-A: By
the Speaker (Council Member Miller) and Council Members Gennaro, Yassky, Quinn,
McMahon, Gerson, DeBlasio, Avella, Brewer, Clarke, Comrie, Fidler, Gioia,
Gonzalez, James, Jennings, Koppell, Liu, Martinez, Nelson, Palma, Recchia Jr.,
Reed, Rivera, Seabrook, Stewart, Vallone Jr., Weprin, Lopez, Monserrate,
Gentile, Foster, Baez, Moskowitz, Katz, Jackson, Sanders Jr., Barron, Perkins,
Oddo and Gallagher
Title: A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to the city's purchase of cleaner vehicles and the repeal of sections 24-163.1 and 24-163.2 of such code.
Preconsidered Res. No: By Council Member Gennaro
Title: Resolution finding that the enactment of Proposed Int. No. 414-A does not
have a significant adverse impact on the environment and is consistent with the
state environmental quality review act.
Proposed Int. No. 415-A: By
the Speaker (Council Member Miller) and Council Members Gennaro, Yassky, Quinn,
McMahon, Avella, Boyland, Brewer, Clarke, Comrie, Fidler, Gentile, Gerson,
Gioia, Gonzalez, James, Jennings, Koppell, Liu, Martinez, Monserrate, Nelson,
Palma, Recchia Jr., Reed, Rivera, Sanders Jr., Stewart, Vallone Jr., Weprin,
DeBlasio, Lopez, Foster, Baez, Moskowitz, Katz, Jackson, Barron, Perkins,
Addabbo Jr. and Reyna
Title: A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to reducing the emission of pollutants from the city’s diesel fuel-powered motor vehicles.
Preconsidered Res. No.: By Council Member Gennaro
Title: Resolution finding that the enactment of Proposed
Int. No. 415-A does not have a significant adverse impact on the environment
and is consistent with the state environmental quality review act.
Proposed Int. No. 416-A: By
the Speaker (Council Member Miller) and Council Members McMahon, Gennaro,
Yassky, Quinn, Avella, Brewer, Clarke, Comrie, Fidler, Gerson, Gioia, Gonzalez,
James, Jennings, Koppell, Liu, Martinez, Monserrate, Nelson, Palma, Recchia
Jr., Reed, Rivera, Sanders Jr., Stewart, Vallone Jr., Weprin, DeBlasio, Lopez,
Gentile, Foster, Baez, Moskowitz, Katz, Jackson, Barron, Perkins and Reyna
Title: A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to reducing the emission of pollutants from vehicles that handle, transport or dispose of the City's solid waste and recyclable materials.
Preconsidered Res No.: By Council Member Gennaro
Title: Resolution finding that the enactment of Proposed Int. No. 416-A does not
have a significant adverse impact on the environment and is consistent with the
state environmental quality review act.
Proposed
Int. No. 417-A: By The Speaker (Council Member Miller) and
Council Members Gennaro, Yassky, Quinn, McMahon, Avella, Boyland, Brewer,
Clarke, Comrie, Fidler, Gentile, Gerson, Gioia, Gonzalez, James, Jennings,
Koppell, Liu, Martinez, Nelson, Palma, Recchia Jr., Reed, Rivera, Sanders Jr.,
Stewart, Vallone Jr., Weprin, DeBlasio, Lopez, Monserrate, Foster, Baez,
Moskowitz, Jackson, Barron, Perkins and Reyna
Title: A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to reducing the emission of pollutants from sight-seeing buses.
Preconsidered Res. No: By Council Member Gennaro
Title: Resolution finding that the enactment of Proposed Int. No. 417-A does not
have a significant adverse impact on the environment and is consistent with the
state environmental quality review act.
Proposed Int. No. 428-A: By Council Members Liu, Lopez, Gerson, The Speaker (Council
Member Miller), Moskowitz, Addabbo Jr., Boyland, Brewer, Clarke, Comrie,
Fidler, Gennaro, Gentile, James, Jennings, Koppell, Martinez, Monserrate,
Nelson, Palma, Reed, Rivera, Seabrook, Vallone Jr., Weprin, Yassky, Foster,
McMahon, DeBlasio, Recchia Jr., Baez, Katz, Avella, Jackson, Gioia, Quinn,
Sanders Jr., Barron, and Perkins
Title: A
Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation
to reducing the emission of pollutants from vehicles that transport children to
and from school.
Preconsidered Res. No: By Council Member Moskowitz
Title: Resolution finding that the enactment of Proposed Int. No. 428-A does not
have a significant adverse impact on the environment and is consistent with the
state environmental quality review act.
On April 19, 2005, the Committee on Environmental Protection, chaired by Council Member James Gennaro, will vote on revised versions of the following legislation: Proposed Int. No. 414-A, in relation to the City's purchase of cleaner vehicles and the repeal of sections 24-163.1 and 24-163.2 of the Administrative Code; Proposed Int. No. 415-A, in relation to reducing the emission of pollutants from the City’s diesel fuel-powered motor vehicles; Proposed Int. No. 416-A, in relation to reducing the emission of pollutants from vehicles that handle, transport or dispose of the City's solid waste and recyclable materials; Proposed Int. No. 417-A, in relation to reducing the emission of pollutants from sight-seeing buses; and, Proposed Int. No. 428-A, in relation to reducing the emission of pollutants from vehicles that transport children to and from school. The Committee will also vote on Preconsidered Resolutions finding that the enactment of each of the proposed bills does not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and is consistent with the State Environmental Quality Review Act. The Committee on Education, chaired by Council Member Eva Moskowitz, will vote on Proposed Int. No. 428-A and the Preconsidered Resolution regarding that legislation at a separate hearing on the same day. The Committees on Environmental Protection and Education held joint hearings on previous versions of the legislation on September 23, 2004 and April 7, 2005. In light of testimony received at and information received subsequent to those hearings, the legislation was changed to the form in which it exists today.
I. Introduction
Vehicle emissions pose serious health concerns for those who live and work in New York City. According to 1999 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates, on-road mobile sources contributed nationwide to 10% of fine particulate matter, 34% of nitrogen oxides, and 29% of hydrocarbons and nonroad mobile sources contributed to 18% of fine particulate matter, 22% of nitrogen oxides and 18% of hydrocarbons.
These pollutants may result in respiratory problems, such as aggravated asthma and decreased lung function. Thus, the health impacts associated with vehicle exhaust are particularly disturbing in New York City, where 700,000 adults and 300,000 children have been diagnosed with asthma at some point during their lives.[1] Also very troubling is the EPA’s finding that diesel exhaust, emitted by heavy-duty onroad and nonroad vehicles in New York City, is a likely carcinogen.[2]
Local Law 6 of 1991, which was a ground-breaking piece of legislation when it was passed by this Council, requires that 80% of the City’s purchases of motor vehicles of 8,500 pounds or less (not including emergency vehicles of the Police and Fire Departments) must be alternative fuel vehicles. That law also contains the requirement that owners of 15 or more buses in the City must ensure that 20% of their bus purchases within each year are alternative fuel buses.
In addition, the Council passed Local Law 77 of 2003, which was the first legislation of its kind in the country. That law requires that the City’s nonroad construction vehicles and such vehicles used in our public works contracts use ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuel and the best available technology for reducing the emission of pollutants.
The legislation considered by the Committees today would improve and/or expand upon both laws. The purchase of the cleanest vehicles by New York City agencies and the use of ULSD fuel (diesel with a sulfur content of no more than 15 parts per million (ppm)) and the best available retrofit technology to reduce emissions from the City’s diesel fuel-powered motor vehicles, and from sight-seeing buses, school buses and vehicles that are used in the handling, transport or disposal of our solid waste and recyclable materials will help the City to comply with the Clean Air Act. Such efforts will also help to reduce the adverse health impacts associated with mobile source pollutants and thus help to alleviate the City’s costs associated with increased asthma hospitalizations and reduced productivity.
II. Statutory and Regulatory Background
The Clean Air Act (the “Act”) is the comprehensive federal law that regulates air emissions from stationary and mobile sources. Pursuant to the Act, the EPA sets National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), which are limits on how much of a pollutant can be present in the air. These nationwide standards are intended to ensure “that all Americans have the same basic health and environmental protections.”[3] NAAQS exist for many pollutants, including those that are associated with diesel exhaust, such as ozone and particulate matter. States must develop and submit to the EPA State implementation plans (SIPs) that explain how each State will attain the national standards.
A.
Lower-Emitting Vehicles
Although there are no requirements relevant to New York City government
regarding the purchase of “cleaner vehicles”,[4] New York adopted California’s
requirements regarding the sale of such vehicles in the state.[5] New York’s Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) mandate requires “at least 10% of each auto manufacturer’s sales fleet of passenger cars and light duty trucks (weighing up to 3,750 lbs.) produced and delivered for sale in New York, to be ZEVs starting in 2005.”[6] An alternative compliance program provides automobile manufacturers with options to achieve this mandate through the sale of partial zero emission vehicles (PZEVs)[7] and alternative technology PZEVS (ATPZEVs),[8] in addition to ZEVs.[9] Other New York State requirements instituted pursuant to the State’s adoption of California’s Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) II standards, include “further reductions in tailpipe and evaporative emissions of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides for all passenger cars, light-duty trucks and sport utility vehicles up to 8,500 pounds offered for sale in New York State.”[10]
B. Diesel Fuel-Powered Vehicles
Pursuant to section 202 of the Act, which authorizes the EPA to set emissions standards for new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, and section 211(c) of the Act, which authorizes the EPA to regulate fuels, the EPA issued a final rule on January 18, 2001, which imposes more stringent emissions standards for onroad engines and requires, beginning June 1, 2006, that refiners begin producing diesel fuel for onroad vehicles that meets a maximum sulfur standard of 15 ppm.[11] According to the EPA, this sulfur standard is based on its “assessment of the impact of sulfur on advanced exhaust emission control technologies and a corresponding assessment of the feasibility of ultra low sulfur fuel production and distribution.”[12] The EPA issued a similar rule for nonroad vehicles on June 29, 2004, which imposes more stringent emissions standards for
nonroad engines and requires that, beginning June 1, 2007, refiners produce nonroad diesel fuel that meets a maximum sulfur level of 500 ppm and that beginning June 1, 2010, fuel used for nonroad diesel applications would meet a maximum sulfur level of 15 ppm. Neither of these EPA rules, however, would address technology for onroad or nonroad engines already in use.
In addition to the federal provisions that aim to reduce harmful diesel emissions, there is still a place for State and local governments to try to attain better quality of life for their residents by ensuring that their actions are protective of the public health and welfare. The Congressional findings and declaration of purpose of the Act states that, “air pollution prevention (that is, the reduction or elimination, through any measures, of the amount of pollutants produced or created at the source) and air pollution control at its source is the primary responsibility of States and local governments.”[13]
III. Health and Environmental Effects of
Vehicle Exhaust
Exposure to exhaust from mobile sources and from diesel fuel-powered vehicles, in particular, may result in serious, adverse health effects. In addition to particulate matter (PM), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulfur oxides, diesel exhaust contains a number of air toxins, including benzene, formaldehyde and dioxin. “Passenger cars and light-duty trucks emit [such pollutants as particulate matter and] a substantial portion of [ozone] precursors [such as volatile organic compounds (VOC) and NOx].”[14] In 1996, these vehicles contributed 25 percent of the VOC emissions and 21 percent of the NOx emissions from human sources in the nation.[15] The negative health impacts stemming from these emissions are especially detrimental to children and the elderly, the former of whom actually breathe fifty percent more air per pound of body weight than adults.[16] In addition, twenty percent of our nation’s carbon dioxide pollution – a greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming – is emitted into the air by cars, sport utility vehicles and other light trucks.[17]
What may be most alarming about diesel exhaust is the considerable evidence that it is a likely carcinogen. In the EPA’s Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust, “diesel exhaust was classified as likely to be carcinogenic to humans by inhalation at environmental exposures . . . .”[18] In addition, human epidemiological studies demonstrate an association between exposure to the exhaust and increased lung cancer rates in occupational settings.[19] A number of other agencies, such as the World Health Organization, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the California Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Department of Health and Human Services have made similar classifications.[20] In fact, as early as 1988, NIOSH first recommended that diesel exhaust be considered a potential occupational carcinogen.[21]
The connection between vehicle exhaust and asthma is also of great consequence to New York City, which suffers from some of the highest asthma rates in the country. According to the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, in 2000, children in New York City “were almost twice as likely to be hospitalized for asthma as children in the United States as a whole,” with the Bronx, in recent years, being the borough with “the overall highest rates of asthma hospitalizations, deaths and prevalence among children as well as adults.”[22] (emphasis in original) In addition, a recent study found that one out of every four children in central Harlem has asthma -- a rate that is far greater than experts had previously expected and that is “one of the highest rates ever documented for an American neighborhood.”[23]
Additional studies have concluded that “routine exposure to dirty air during childhood actually harms lung development, leading to a permanently reduced ability to breathe”[24] and that “[e]nvironmental pollutants in New York City – including combustion byproducts . . . – may increase the rate of low birth weight babies and babies with smaller heads, both [of] which may be linked to lower I.Q. and poorer school performance.”[25]
A.
Particulate Matter
Particulate matter “represents a broad class of chemically and physically diverse substances. It can be principally characterized as discrete particles that exist in the condensed (liquid or solid) phase spanning several orders of magnitude in size.”[26] The particles that tend to be of most concern, however, are the “fine” particles, which may deeply penetrate lung tissue. These tiny particles are “directly emitted from combustion sources and are formed secondarily from gaseous precursors such as sulfur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen, or organic compounds.[27]
The health effects associated with these fine particles include aggravated asthma, chronic bronchitis, decreased lung function and acute respiratory symptoms.[28] It is also believed that “the largest proportion of deaths caused by particulate matter [is] related to cardiovascular illness.”[29] According to the EPA’s National Air Toxics Assessment – the Agency’s ongoing, comprehensive evaluation of air toxics in the United States – New York City is among the areas of the country with the highest modeled ambient air concentrations of diesel particulate matter.[30] The EPA officially designated the New York Metropolitan Area as a nonattainment area for PM 2.5 at the end of last year.[31]
B. Nitrogen Oxides and Volatile Organic Compounds
Nitrogen oxides combine with VOCs in the air, such as hydrocarbons, to form
ground-level ozone, or smog, in the presence of heat and sunlight.[32] Ozone may cause a variety of respiratory problems, including aggravated asthma, decreased lung capacity and increased susceptibility to respiratory illnesses.[33] It is damaging to lung tissue in high concentrations and during long-term exposure.[34] New York City continues to be classified as a “severe-17 nonattainment area” for ozone.[35]
C. Sulfur Dioxide
“The major health concerns associated with exposure to high concentrations of sulfur dioxide (SO2) include effects on breathing, respiratory illness, alterations in pulmonary defenses, and aggravation of existing cardiovascular disease.”[36] Sulfur dioxide, which converts in the atmosphere to sulfate particles, also contributes to lower visibility and acid deposition, the latter of which has been of great concern in New York State.[37]
D. Toxins
Toxins, such as benzene, formaldehyde, lead, mercury and dioxins, may produce
harmful health effects. Benzene, a known carcinogen, may cause disorders of the blood and the blood-forming tissues, while formaldehyde, which is classified by the EPA as a probable human carcinogen, may cause irritation of the eyes, nose and throat.[38],[39] Lead and mercury may cause birth defects and other reproductive problems and may also affect the nervous system.[40] Finally, “[d]ioxins are toxic to the immune system, interfere with hormone function, and are toxic to reproduction.”[41]
E. Carbon Dioxide
“Scientists generally believe that the combustion of fossil fuels and other human activities are the primary reason for the increased concentration of carbon dioxide”[42] – a key greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming. It is clear that global warming may have a considerable, negative impact on New York City. In the New York Metropolitan Region, the temperature has warmed nearly 2° F over the past 200 years.[43] Global climate change models have projected that warming in the region will range from 1.7-3.5° F in the 2020s, 2.6-6.5° F in the 2050s and 4.4-10.2° F by the 2080s.[44]
According to the Metropolitan East Coast Assessment of Impacts of Potential Variability and Change, organized by the United States Global Change Research Program, global warming may result in an increase in the frequency of droughts and severe coastal flooding and erosion events and an increase in the loss of wetlands in the City, resulting in the reduction of wildlife habitat, protective barriers against coastal flooding and the filtering of pollutants.[45] The rise in sea-level due to global warming is considered to be one of the primary reasons for the increasing loss of marshlands in Jamaica Bay and would “contribute to the temporary flooding or permanent inundation of many of New York City’s and the region’s coastal areas” [46] thus threatening the City’s infrastructure.[47]
New York City is also expected to face many more days at 90 degrees and above, resulting in an increase in illness and death related to heat stress, as well as an increase in summer electricity demand in an already taxed power grid.[48] Smog concentrations would increase in a hotter climate, which, as mentioned in subsection B, supra, could cause a variety of respiratory problems.
IV. ULSD and Emissions-Reduction Technology
Reducing the level of sulfur in diesel fuel is an important aspect of the effort to
stem the negative health effects associated with diesel exhaust. Using ULSD with a sulfur content of 15 ppm rather than standard diesel, which is currently subject to a maximum sulfur content of 500 ppm for onroad vehicles and typically has an average sulfur concentration of 3,400 ppm for nonroad vehicles, results in significant reductions in sulfur dioxide, in addition to reductions in particulate matter and nitrogen oxides. More important, however, is the role that diesel with such a low sulfur content plays in facilitating the use of emissions-reduction technologies, typically called “retrofits”, which can achieve dramatic pollutant reductions.
Common pieces of such technology are diesel particulate filters and diesel oxidation catalysts.[49] Diesel particulate filters are capable of reducing particulate matter, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbon and toxic hydrocarbon emissions by ninety percent or more.[50] Such technology must be used in conjunction with diesel fuel with a very low sulfur content to prevent filter clogging and failure. Diesel oxidation catalysts, which may be used with standard diesel fuel, can achieve reductions in particulate matter of between twenty to fifty percent and reductions in carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons of up to ninety percent.[51] Other technologies, such as emulsified diesel fuel -- a blended mixture of diesel fuel, water and other additives -- can reduce harmful emissions, as well.
ULSD and retrofits are currently utilized in many locations throughout
the country, including a number of areas in the Northeast.[52] Thus, in addition to the benefits that will be obtained through Local Law 77 of 2003, there is already a good deal of experience associated with using a lower content sulfur fuel and emissions-reduction technology. A few examples of these programs are delineated below.
A. New York City
1. New York City Transit Authority
New York City is not a stranger to the use of retrofit technology and diesel fuel
with a low sulfur content. The New York City Transit Authority (NYCT) was one of the first bus fleets to use this fuel on a widespread basis.[53] This important step, which helped make the cleaner fuel commercially available, paved the way for many other entities across the country to use such fuel in their fleets. For example, since NYCT’s switch to this fuel, bus fleets in the District of Columbia, Boston and New Jersey have followed suit.[54] Since 1996, every diesel bus in NYCT’s fleet has had a diesel oxidation catalyst installed, while since September 2000, all such buses have been using diesel fuel with a sulfur content of no more than 30 ppm. As of May 2003, over 4,500 buses were operating on the cleaner fuel, of which more than 1,400 had also been fitted with diesel particulate filters.[55]
2. Lower Manhattan
In September 2002, New York State announced plans to use diesel fuel with a
low sulfur content and retrofit technology in the rebuilding of lower Manhattan to comply with the temporary waiver of deadlines of the Clean Air Act’s transportation conformity requirements[56] for the New York metropolitan region.[57] Pursuant to the plans, key state agencies and authorities – the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Lower Manhattan Development Corporation and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey –
“committed to the use of [ULSD] fuel (15 ppm) and best available retrofit technology (BART) for the control of fine particulate matter and oxides of nitrogen on construction machinery used in state agency and authority fleets and contracts in the reconstruction of lower Manhattan.”[58]
Diesel fuel with a sulfur content of no more than 30 ppm is currently being used in the rebuilding of 7 World Trade Center (WTC), which is being used as a “testing spot” and a first step towards retrofitting in the area. The project plan calls for “the immediate delivery of ULSD fuel to selected equipment on-site and the phase-in of retrofit technologies on diesel equipment owned by participating contractors or sub-contractors working on the 7 WTC site.”[59]
3. New York City Department of Sanitation
The City, too, has been using cleaner diesel fuel in sanitation vehicles
throughout the City.[60] In January 2002, the New York City Department of Sanitation (DOS) launched a pilot program for retrofits on four sanitation trucks and the use of the fuel. Building upon health benefits achieved with these efforts, the Department has also retrofitted over 150 collection vehicles and approximately 350 street sweepers with pollution control devices.[61]
4. New York City Department of Education
In the fall of 2003, the New York City Department of Education obtained
commitments from the New York Power Authority and the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority of $7.5 million to retrofit school buses in New York City with emissions reduction technology and to pay the cost differential between ULSD fuel and standard diesel fuel. To date, approximately fifty percent of City school buses, carrying approximately 90,000 children in grades K-6, use ULSD. In addition, approximately 200 buses have been retrofitted with oxidation catalysts and it is expected that another 800 – 1,000 buses will be retrofitted with diesel particulate filters or similar technology (leaving approximately 3,200 City school buses unmodified). City school buses are privately owned and operated, and thus the cooperation of bus companies has been and will be vital to these efforts.
B. Nationwide/Other Regions
1. EPA Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program
In March 2000, the EPA announced a new, voluntary program that aims to reduce
emissions from existing diesel engines. Pursuant to the “Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program”, the EPA “hopes to work with other federal agencies, state governments,
environmental groups and industries to encourage retrofitting of older diesel engines. Under the program, states can receive emission credits in their [SIPs] for retrofitting existing heavy-duty diesel engines with emission control devices.”[62] Through the program, the EPA also hopes to help fleet owners identify funding sources that are available to implement such efforts.
2. Big Dig
Perhaps the most ambitious construction project involving emissions-reduction technology that has been conducted to date is the Central Artery/Tunnel Project in Boston, more familiarly known as the “Big Dig”. The $14 billion transportation project, which started in 1991, has required the use of several hundred pieces of heavy-duty, nonroad equipment.[63] In September 1998, a voluntary diesel retrofit program was incorporated into the Big Dig, which involved the retrofitting of nonroad diesel construction equipment with oxidation catalysts. “No adverse operational problems or additional maintenance costs have been experienced by Big Dig construction equipment retrofitted with [the catalysts].”[64] In addition, preliminary environmental benefits resulting from the retrofit effort have already been estimated as reductions of 36 tons/year in CM, 12 tons/year in HC and 3 tons/year in PM.[65] Due to the positive experience associated with the retrofit element of the program, the Big Dig “elected to expand its . . . program and require that all off-road diesel equipment used until the end of the project be equipped with oxidation catalysts.”[66] (emphasis added)
3. Puget Sound
In 2001, a coalition of government entities and private companies launched a
program in Washington State to reduce air pollution in the Central Puget Sound area – including Seattle -- through clean diesel technology. The effort, known as the “Puget Sound Diesel Solutions Program”, involves retrofitting 5,000 engines in various types of vehicles, including trucks, buses, highway maintenance vehicles and other equipment.[67]
4. San Diego
In an effort to ensure that buses are not only the safest way to transport children but also the cleanest way, several United States cities are experimenting with cleaner diesel fuel for school buses. A year-long experiment at the San Diego City Schools Transportation Department has produced stunning results. According to the City of San Diego, “carbon monoxide emissions were practically eliminated, and . . . hydrocarbons and particulate matter were reduced to the point of being undetectable. The emission levels were comparable to those registered by buses using natural gas. In addition, the clean diesel buses showed no significant performance or mechanical problems.”[68] Approximately 80% of the San Diego school bus fleet has been converted and according to San Diego’s Transportation Services Director, San Diego intends to eventually convert the district’s entire fleet of 580 buses to cleaner diesel.
V.
Analysis of Legislation
A. Proposed Int. No. 414-A
Section one of Proposed Int. No. 414-A repeals § 24-163.1 of the Administrative
Code and adds a new § 24-163.1.
Subdivision (a) of new § 24-163.1 provides definitions of certain terms used in that section. The terms defined are “alternative fuel”, “alternative fuel motor vehicle”, “average fuel economy”, “bi-fuel motor vehicle”, “city agency”, “equivalent carbon dioxide”, “fuel economy”, “gross vehicle weight rating”, “light-duty vehicle”, “medium-duty vehicle”, “motor vehicle” and “purchase”.
The bill defines “alternative fuel” to mean natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas,
hydrogen, electricity, and any other fuel which is at least eighty-five percent, singly or in combination, methanol, ethanol, any other alcohol, or ether.
“Alternative fuel motor vehicle” means a motor vehicle that is operated using solely an alternative fuel or is operated using solely an alternative fuel in combination with gasoline or diesel fuel, and shall not include bi-fuel motor vehicles.
“Average fuel economy” means the sum of the fuel economies of all motor vehicles in a defined group divided by the number of motor vehicles in such group.
“Bi-fuel motor vehicle” means a motor vehicle that is capable of being operated
by both an alternative fuel and gasoline or diesel fuel, but may be operated exclusively by any one of such fuels.
“City agency” means a city, county, borough, administration, department,
division, bureau, board or commission, or a corporation, institution or agency of government, the expenses of which are paid in whole or in part from the city treasury.
“Equivalent carbon dioxide” means the metric measure used to compare the
emissions from various greenhouse gases emitted by motor vehicles based upon their global warming potential according to the California Air Resources Board or the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
“Fuel economy” means the United States Environmental Protection Agency city mileage published label value for a particular motor vehicle, pursuant to section 32908(b) of title 49 of the United States Code.
“Gross vehicle weight rating” means the value specified by the manufacturer of a motor vehicle model as the maximum design loaded weight of a single vehicle of that model.
“Light-duty vehicle” means any motor vehicle having a gross vehicle weight rating of 8,500 pounds or less.
“Medium-duty vehicle” means any motor vehicle having a gross vehicle weight rating of more than 8,500 pounds but not more than 14,000 pounds.
“Motor vehicle” means a vehicle operated or driven upon a public highway which is propelled by any power other than muscular power, except electrically-driven mobility assistance devices operated or driven by a person with a disability, provided, however, that this term shall not include vehicles that are specially equipped for emergency response by the Department, Office of Emergency Management, Sheriff’s Office of the Department of Finance, Police Department or Fire Department.
“Purchase” means purchase, lease, borrow, obtain by gift or otherwise acquire.
Paragraph one of subdivision (b) requires that, except as provided in paragraphs two and three of that subdivision, beginning July 1, 2006, each light-duty vehicle and medium-duty vehicle that the City purchases shall achieve the highest of the following ratings, with subparagraph one of that paragraph being the highest vehicle rating, applicable to motor vehicles certified to California LEV II available within the applicable model year for a light-duty vehicle or medium-duty vehicle that meets the requirements for the intended use by the city of such vehicle: (i) zero emission vehicle (ZEV); (ii) advanced technology partial zero emission vehicle (ATPZEV); (iii) partial zero emission vehicle (PZEV); (iv) super ultra low emission vehicle (SULEV); (v) ultra low emission vehicle (ULEV); and (vi) low emission vehicle (LEV).
Paragraph two of subdivision (b)
provides that the City does not need to purchase a ZEV or ATPZEV if the only
available vehicle or vehicles that achieve such a rating cost more than fifty
percent more than the average cost of the lowest bid as determined by the
applicable procurement process for a vehicle available in the next highest
rating category that meets the requirements for the intended use by the city of
such vehicle.
Paragraph three of subdivision (c)
provides that the requirements of paragraph one need not apply to a maximum of
five percent of the light-duty vehicles and medium-duty vehicles purchased by
the City within each fiscal year.
Paragraph four maintains the current
requirement that at least eighty percent of the light-duty vehicles the City
purchases in a fiscal year shall be alternative fuel motor vehicles for the
fiscal year beginning July 1, 2005.
Paragraph one of subdivision (c) provides that the City shall not purchase additional bi-fuel motor vehicles. Paragraph two of that subdivision provides that any bi-fuel motor vehicle owned or operated by the City shall be powered solely on the alternative fuel on which it is capable of operating. Such vehicle may, however, be operated on gasoline or diesel fuel where (1) as of the date of enactment of new § 24-163.1, such vehicle is no longer mechanically able to operate on such alternative fuel and cannot be repaired or (2) solely for the period of time recommended by the vehicle manufacturer.
Subdivision (d) contains provisions regarding the increase in the average fuel economy of the light-duty vehicles the City purchases. Paragraph one of that subdivision requires the City to complete an inventory of the fuel economy of each such motor vehicle purchased by the City during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2004, and to calculate the average fuel economy of all such motor vehicles. Paragraph two of that subdivision requires the City to achieve delineated minimum percentage increases over the next ten fiscal years in the average fuel economy of such motor vehicles purchased by the City, relative to the baseline determined pursuant to paragraph one of that subdivision. The minimum percentage increases are as follows:
(i) For the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2006, 5 percent;
(ii) For the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2007, 8 percent;
(iii) For the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2008, 10 percent;
(iv) For the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2009, 12 percent;
(v) For the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2010, 15 percent;
(vi) For the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2012, 18 percent; and
(vii) For the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and for each fiscal year thereafter, 20 percent.
Subdivision (e) sets forth reporting requirements and provides that, starting on January 1, 2007, the Mayor must submit annual reports on January 1st of each year to the Comptroller and the Speaker of the Council. That subdivision also provides that the information contained in such reports shall be included in the Preliminary Mayor’s Management Report and the Mayor’s Management Report for the relevant fiscal year.
Subdivision (f) provides that, beginning July 1, 2006, the City shall measure the fuel consumed and the equivalent carbon dioxide emitted, for each type of fuel used, by its motor vehicle fleet during each fiscal year and report on the estimated total amount of each. Such information shall be posted on the DEP’s website and be included in the Preliminary Mayor’s Management Report and the Mayor’s Management Report for the relevant fiscal year.
Subdivision (g) sets forth the circumstances in which new § 24-163.1 does not apply.
Subdivision (h) provides that, to the extent not prohibited by law, alternative fuel motor vehicles may be purchased by the city in concert with any public or private entity.
Section two of Proposed Int. No. 414-A repeals § 24-163.2 of the Administrative Code and adds a new § 24-163.2.
Subdivision (a) of new § 24-163.2 provides definitions of certain terms used in that section. The terms defined are “alternative fuel bus”, “alternative fuel sanitation vehicle”, “alternative fuel street sweeping vehicle”, “bus”, “recyclable materials”, “sanitation vehicle” and “solid waste”.
The bill defines “alternative fuel bus” to mean a bus that is operated using solely an alternative fuel or is operated using solely an alternative fuel in combination with gasoline or diesel fuel, and shall not include bi-fuel motor vehicles.
“Alternative fuel sanitation vehicle” shall mean a sanitation vehicle that is
operated using solely an alternative fuel or is operated using solely an alternative fuel in combination with gasoline or diesel fuel, and shall not include bi-fuel motor vehicles.
“Alternative fuel street sweeping vehicle” means a vehicle used by the Department of Sanitation for street cleaning purposes that is operated using solely an alternative fuel or is operated using solely an alternative fuel in combination with gasoline or diesel fuel, and shall not include bi-fuel motor vehicles.
“Bus” means a motor vehicle that is designed to transport more than twenty
individuals.
“Recyclable materials” means solid waste that may be separated, collected,
processed, marketed and returned to the economy in the form of raw materials or products, including but not limited to types of metal, glass, paper, plastic, food waste, tires and yard waste.
“Sanitation vehicle” means a vehicle used by the department of sanitation for
street cleaning purposes or for the collection of solid waste or recyclable materials.
“Solid waste” means all materials or substances discarded or rejected as being spent, useless, or worthless, including but not limited to garbage, refuse, industrial and commercial waste, sludges from air or water pollution control facilities or water supply treatment facilities, rubbish, ashes, contained gaseous material, incinerator residue, demolition and construction debris and offal, but not including sewage and other highly diluted water-carried materials or substances and those in gaseous forms.
Paragraph one of subdivision (b) requires that, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2005, and for each fiscal year thereafter, at least twenty percent of the buses the City purchases in such fiscal year shall be alternative fuel buses.
Subdivision
(c) provides that, by March 1, 2006, the Commissioner of Sanitation shall
implement a program for testing the mechanical reliability and operational
feasibility of alternative fuel street sweeping vehicles. Such program shall include a pilot project
to exclusively use alternative fuel street sweeping vehicles in at least four
sanitation districts, to be determined at the discretion of the Commissioner,
with at least one district located in an area where high rates of asthma are
found. The Commissioner shall consider asthma rates in his determination of
where such other districts will be located.
That subdivision also requires the Department of Sanitation to collect and analyze data to further develop its
initiatives for and assess the feasibility of incorporating new alternative
fuel sanitation vehicles (street sweepers and collection vehicles) and
technology into its fleet.
Paragraph one of subdivision (d) sets forth reporting requirements regarding the City’s purchase of alternative fuel buses and provides that, starting on January 1, 2007, the Mayor must submit annual reports, on January 1st of each year, to the Comptroller and the Speaker of the Council. That subdivision also provides that the information contained in such reports shall be included in the Preliminary Mayor’s Management Report and the Mayor’s Management Report for the relevant fiscal year.
Paragraph two of subdivision (d) sets forth reporting requirements regarding the City’s testing and pilot program regarding alternative fuel street sweeping vehicles and the analyses and assessments made pursuant to subdivision (c) and provides that, starting on January 1, 2007, the Commissioner of Sanitation must submit annual reports, on January 1st of each year, to the Comptroller and the Speaker of the Council.
Subdivision (e) provides that purchases of alternative fuel buses that exceed the minimum mandatory purchase requirements of subdivision (b) of new § 24-163.2 for a particular fiscal year may be used to satisfy the requirements for the immediately succeeding fiscal year.
Subdivision (f) provides that, to the extent not prohibited by law, alternative fuel buses and alternative fuel sanitation vehicles may be purchased by the City in concert with any public or private entity.
Subdivision (g) sets forth the circumstances in which new § 24-163.2 does not apply.
Subdivision (h) provides that the Commissioner of Environmental Protection may
by rule require periodic testing of alternative fuel buses and the submission of information concerning the operation and maintenance of such buses purchased or newly operated in the City to ensure compliance with new § 24-163.2 and to collect information for reports required by that section.
Subdivision (i) provides that the Commissioner of Environmental Protection may order the owner or operator of a bus to which new § 24-163.2 applies to conduct such tests, or the DEP may conduct such tests, as are necessary in the opinion of the Commissioner to determine whether such bus is in compliance with new § 24-163.2.
Subdivision (j) provides that the DEP may inspect at a reasonable time and in a
reasonable manner any equipment, apparatus, fuel, matter or thing that affects or may affect the proper maintenance or operation of an alternative fuel bus to which new § 24-163.2 applies.
Section three of Proposed Int. No. 414-A contains a severability clause.
Section four of Proposed Int. No. 414-A states that this local law shall take effect three months after its enactment, except that the Commissioner of Environmental Protection shall take all actions necessary, including the promulgation of rules, to implement this local law on or before the date upon which it shall take effect.
B. Proposed Int. No. 415-A
Section one of Proposed Int. No. 415-A amends Title 24 of the Administrative Code by adding a new § 24-163.4.
Subdivision (a) of new § 24-163.4 provides definitions of certain terms used in that section. The terms defined are “best available retrofit technology”, “city agency”, “gross vehicle weight rating”, “motor vehicle”, “person”, “reasonable cost” and “ultra low sulfur diesel fuel”.
The bill defines “best available retrofit technology” to mean technology, verified by the EPA or the California Air Resources Board, for reducing the emission of pollutants that achieves reductions in particulate matter emissions at the highest classification level for diesel emission control strategies, as set forth in subdivision (d) of new § 24-163.4, that is applicable to the particular engine and application. Such technology shall also, at a reasonable cost, achieve the greatest reduction in emissions of nitrogen oxides at such particulate matter reduction level and shall in no event result in a net increase in the emissions of either particulate matter or nitrogen oxides.
“City agency” means a city, county, borough, administration, department,
division, bureau, board or commission, or a corporation, institution or agency of government, the expenses of which are paid in whole or in part from the city treasury.
“Gross vehicle weight rating” means the value specified by the manufacturer of a motor vehicle model as the maximum design loaded weight of a single vehicle of that model.
“Motor vehicle” means a vehicle operated or driven upon a public highway which is propelled by any power other than muscular power, except electrically-driven mobility assistance devices operated or driven by a person with a disability, provided, however, that this term shall not include vehicles that are specially equipped for emergency response by the Department, Office of Emergency Management, Sheriff’s Office of the Department of Finance, Police Department or Fire Department.
“Person” means any natural person, co-partnership, firm, company, association,
joint stock association, corporation or other like organization.
“Reasonable cost” means that such technology does not cost greater than thirty percent more than other technology applicable to the particular engine and application that falls within the same classification level for diesel emission control strategies, as set forth in subdivision (d) of new § 24-163.4, when considering the cost of the strategies, themselves, and the cost of installation.
“Ultra low sulfur diesel fuel” means diesel fuel that has a sulfur content of no
more than fifteen parts per million.
Paragraph one of subdivision (b) provides that each diesel fuel-powered motor vehicle owned or operated by a City agency shall be powered by ultra low sulfur diesel fuel.
Paragraph two of subdivision (b) provides that diesel fuel-powered motor vehicles owned or operated by a City agency, having a gross vehicle weight rating of more than 8,500 pounds, shall utilize the best available retrofit technology or be equipped with an engine certified to the applicable 2007 EPA standard for particulate matter as set forth in section 86.007-11 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations or to any subsequent EPA standard for such pollutant that is at least as stringent, pursuant to the following schedule: 7% of all such motor vehicles by January 1, 2007; 14% of all such motor vehicles by January 1, 2008; 30% of all such motor vehicles by January 1, 2009; 50% of all such motor vehicles by January 1, 2010; 70% of all such motor vehicles by January 1, 2011; 90% of all such motor vehicles by January 1, 2012; 100% of all such motor vehicles by July 1, 2012.
Paragraph one of subdivision (c) directs the Commissioner of Environmental Protection to make determinations, and publish a list containing such determinations, as to the best available retrofit technology to be used for each type of diesel fuel-powered motor vehicle to which new § 24-163.4 applies. Each such determination shall be reviewed and revised, as needed, on a regular basis, but in no event less often than once every six months.
Paragraph two of subdivision (c) provides that the Commissioner of Environmental Protection may authorize pilot projects for the use of technology that is not best available retrofit technology for testing, on an experimental basis, on up to five percent or twenty-five (whichever is less) of each type of diesel fuel-powered motor vehicle owned or operated by a City agency.
Paragraph three of subdivision (c) provides that no City agency shall be required to replace best available retrofit technology or experimental technology utilized for a diesel fuel-powered motor vehicle in accordance with the provisions of new § 24-163.4 within three years of having first utilized such technology for such vehicle, except that technology that achieves reductions in particulate matter equivalent to a level four diesel emission control strategy as set forth in subdivision (d) shall not be required to be replaced until it has reached the end of its useful life. Such level four strategies achieve 85% or greater reduction in particulate matter emissions.
Subdivision (d) sets forth the classification levels for diesel emission control strategies, which are as follows:
i. Level 4 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by 85 percent or greater or reduces engine emissions to less than or equal to 0.01 grams diesel particulate matter per brake horsepower-hour;
ii. Level 3 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by between 50 and 84 percent;
iii. Level 2 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by between 25 and 49 percent;
iv. Level 1 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by between 20 and 24 percent.
Subdivision (e) provides that the Commissioner of Environmental Protection shall issue a written determination that permits the use of diesel fuel that has a sulfur content of no more than thirty parts per million to fulfill the requirements of new § 24-163.4 if ultra low sulfur diesel fuel is not available to meet the needs of City agencies to meet the requirements of that section. Such determination shall expire after six months and shall be renewed in writing every six months if such unavailability persists, but in no event shall be in effect after September 1, 2006.
Subdivision (f) provides that the Commissioner of Environmental Protection may issue a waiver where a City agency makes a written finding, which is approved, in writing, by the Commissioner, that a sufficient quantity of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel, or diesel fuel that has a sulfur content of no more than thirty parts per million where a determination is in effect pursuant to subdivision (e) of that section, is not available to meet the requirements of that paragraph, provided that such agency, to the extent practicable, shall use whatever quantity of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel or diesel fuel that has a sulfur content of no more than thirty parts per million is available for its diesel fuel-powered motor vehicles. Such waiver shall expire after two months, unless the City agency renews the finding, in writing, and the Commissioner of Environmental Protection approves such renewal, in writing.
Subdivision (g) sets forth reporting requirements and provides that, starting on January 1, 2007, the Commissioner of Environmental Protection must submit annual reports, on January 1st of each year, to the Comptroller and the Speaker of the Council.
Subdivision (h) sets forth the circumstances in which new § 24-163.4 does not apply.
Section two of Proposed Int. No. 415-A contains a severability clause.
Section three of Proposed Int. No. 415-A states that this local law shall take effect six months after its enactment, except that the Commissioner of Environmental Protection shall take all actions necessary, including the promulgation of rules, to implement this local law on or before the date upon which it shall take effect. The Commissioner shall publish proposed rules no later than ninety days from the date of enactment of new§ 24-163.4.
C. Proposed Int. No. 416-A
Section one of Proposed Int. No. 416-A amends Title 24 of the Administrative Code by adding a new § 24-163.5.
Subdivision (a) of new § 24-163.5 provides definitions of certain terms used in that section. The terms defined are “best available retrofit technology”, “city agency”, “contractor”, “motor vehicle”, “nonroad engine”, “nonroad vehicle”, “operate primarily within the city of New York”, “person”, “reasonable cost”, “recyclable materials”, “recyclable materials contract”, “solid waste”, “solid waste contract” and “ultra low sulfur diesel fuel”.
The bill defines “best available retrofit technology” to mean technology, verified by the EPA or the California Air Resources Board unless as otherwise deemed appropriate by the Commissioner for a nonroad vehicle, for reducing the emission of pollutants that achieves reductions in particulate matter emissions at the highest classification level for diesel emission control strategies, as set forth in subdivision (d) of new § 24-163.5, that is applicable to the particular engine and application. Such technology shall also, at a reasonable cost, achieve the greatest reduction in emissions of nitrogen oxides at such particulate matter reduction level and shall in no event result in a net increase in the emissions of either particulate matter or nitrogen oxides.
“City agency” means a city, county, borough, administration, department,
division, bureau, board or commission, or a corporation, institution or agency of government, the expenses of which are paid in whole or in part from the city treasury.
“Contractor” means any person or entity that enters into a solid waste contract or
recyclable materials contract with a city agency, or any person or entity that enters into an agreement with such person or entity, to perform work or provide labor or services related to such solid waste contract or recyclable materials contract.
“Motor vehicle” means a vehicle operated or driven upon a public highway which is propelled by any power other than muscular power, except electrically-driven mobility assistance devices operated or driven by a person with a disability.
“Nonroad engine” means an internal combustion engine (including the fuel
system) that is not used in a motor vehicle or a vehicle used solely for competition, or that is not subject to standards promulgated under section 7411 or section 7521 of title 42 of the United States code, except that this term shall apply to internal combustion engines used to power generators, compressors or similar equipment used in the fulfillment of any solid waste contract or recyclable materials contract.
“Nonroad vehicle” means a vehicle that is powered by a nonroad engine, fifty horsepower and greater, and that is not a motor vehicle or a vehicle used solely for competition, which shall include, but not be limited to, front loaders, excavators, backhoes, cranes, compressors, generators, bulldozers and similar equipment.
“Operate primarily within the city of New York” means that greater than fifty
percent of the time spent or miles traveled by a motor vehicle or nonroad vehicle during the performance of a solid waste contract or recyclable materials contract occurs within the city of New York.
“Person” means any natural person, co-partnership, firm, company, association,
joint stock association, corporation or other like organization.
“Reasonable cost” means that such technology does not cost greater than thirty percent more than other technology applicable to the particular engine and application that falls within the same classification level for diesel emission control strategies, as set forth in subdivision (d) of new § 24-163.5, when considering the cost of the strategies, themselves, and the cost of installation.
“Recyclable materials” means solid waste that may be separated, collected, processed, marketed and returned to the economy in the form of raw materials or products, including but not limited to types of metal, glass, paper, plastic, food waste, tires and yard waste.
“Recyclable materials contract” means a contract with a City agency, the primary purpose of which is to provide for the handling, transport or disposal of recyclable materials.
“Solid waste” means all materials or substances discarded or rejected as being
spent, useless, or worthless, including but not limited to garbage, refuse, industrial and commercial waste, sludges from air or water pollution control facilities or water supply treatment facilities, rubbish, ashes, contained gaseous material, incinerator residue, demolition and construction debris and offal, but not including sewage and other highly diluted water-carried materials or substances and those in gaseous forms.
“Solid waste contract” means a contract with a City agency, the primary purpose of which is to provide for the handling, transport or disposal of solid waste.
“Ultra low sulfur diesel fuel” means diesel fuel that has a sulfur content of no
more than fifteen parts per million.
Paragraph one of subdivision (b) provides that any solid waste contract or recyclable materials contract shall specify that all diesel fuel-powered motor vehicles and diesel fuel-powered nonroad vehicles used in the performance of such contract that operate primarily within the city of New York shall be powered by ultra low sulfur diesel fuel and all contractors in the performance of such contract shall comply with such specification.
Paragraph two of subdivision (b) provides that any solid waste contract or recyclable materials contract shall specify that, as of March 1, 2006, all diesel fuel-powered motor vehicles and diesel fuel-powered nonroad vehicles used in the performance of such contract that operate primarily within the city of New York shall utilize the best available retrofit technology and all contractors in the performance of such contract shall comply with such specification.
Paragraph one of subdivision (c) directs the Commissioner of Environmental Protection to make determinations, and publish a list containing such determinations, as to the best available retrofit technology to be used for each type of diesel fuel-powered motor vehicle and diesel fuel-powered nonroad vehicle to which new § 24-163.5 applies. Each such determination shall be reviewed and revised, as needed, on a regular basis, but in no event less often than once every six months.
Paragraph two of subdivision (c) provides that no contractor shall be required to replace best available retrofit technology or other authorized technology utilized for a diesel fuel-powered motor vehicle or diesel fuel-powered nonroad vehicle in accordance with the provisions of new § 24-163.5 within three years of having first utilized such technology for such vehicle, except that technology that falls within Level 4, as set forth in subdivision (d), shall not be required to be replaced until it has reached the end of its useful life. Such level four strategies achieve 85% or greater reduction in particulate matter emissions.
Subdivision (d) sets forth the classification levels for diesel emission control strategies, which are as follows:
i. Level 4 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by 85 percent or greater or reduces engine emissions to less than or equal to 0.01 grams diesel particulate matter per brake horsepower-hour;
ii. Level 3 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by between 50 and 84 percent;
iii. Level 2 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by between 25 and 49 percent;
iv. Level 1 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by between 20 and 24 percent.
Subdivision (e) provides that a City agency shall not enter into a solid waste contract or recyclable materials contract subject to the provisions of new § 24-163.5 unless such contract permits independent monitoring of the contractor’s compliance with the requirements of that section and requires that the contractor comply with § 24-163 of the Administrative Code, regarding engine idling. If it is determined that the contractor has failed to comply with any provision of new § 24-163.5, any costs associated with any independent monitoring incurred by the City shall be reimbursed by the contractor.
Subdivision (f) provides that the Commissioner of Environmental Protection shall issue a written determination that permits the use of diesel fuel that has a sulfur content of no more than thirty parts per million to fulfill the requirements of paragraph one of subdivision (b) of new § 24-163.5 if ultra low sulfur diesel fuel is not available to meet the needs of contractors to fulfill the requirements of that section. Such determination shall expire after six months and shall be renewed in writing every six months if such unavailability persists, but in no event shall be in effect after September 1, 2006.
Subdivision (g) provides that the Commissioner of Environmental Protection nay issue a waiver for the use of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel where the city agency that has entered into the applicable solid waste contract or recyclable materials contract makes a written finding, which is approved, in writing, by the Commissioner, that a sufficient quantity of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel, or diesel fuel that has a sulfur content of no more than thirty parts per million where a determination is in effect pursuant to subdivision (f) of that section, is not available to meet the requirements of paragraph one of subdivision (b), provided that such contractor in its fulfillment of the requirements of a solid waste contract or recyclable materials contract for such agency, to the extent practicable, shall use whatever quantity of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel or diesel fuel that has a sulfur content of no more than thirty parts per million is available. Such waiver shall expire after two months, unless the City agency renews the finding in writing and such renewal is approved, in writing, by the Commissioner of Environmental Protection.
Subdivision (h) provides that the Commissioner may issue a waiver for the use of the best available retrofit technology by a diesel fuel-powered motor vehicle or diesel fuel-powered nonroad vehicle where the city agency that has entered into the applicable solid waste contract or recyclable materials contract makes a written finding, which is approved, in writing, by the Commissioner, that such technology is unavailable for purchase for such vehicle, in which case the contractor shall be required to use the technology for reducing the emission of pollutants that would be the next best best available retrofit technology and that is available for purchase for such vehicle. Any waiver issued pursuant to subdivision (h) shall expire after three years.
Paragraph one of subdivision (i) provides that subdivision (b) of new § 24-163.5, regarding the use of the best available retrofit technology, shall not apply to a diesel-fuel powered motor vehicle that is equipped with an engine certified to the applicable 2007 EPA standard for particulate matter as set forth in section 86.007-11 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations or to any subsequent EPA standard for such pollutant that is at least as stringent.
Paragraph two of subdivision (i) provides that paragraph two of subdivision (b) of new § 24-163.5, regarding the use of the best available retrofit technology, shall not apply to a diesel-fuel powered nonroad vehicle that is equipped with an engine certified to the applicable EPA standard for particulate matter for such vehicle as set forth in the Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Nonroad Diesel Engines and Fuel; Final Rule, published in the federal register on June 29, 2004 at 69 Fed. Reg. 38,958 et seq., or to any subsequent EPA standard for such pollutant that is at least as stringent.
Subdivision (j) sets forth reporting requirements and provides that, starting January 1, 2007, the Commissioner must submit annual reports, on January 1st of each year, to the Comptroller and the Speaker of the Council.
Subdivision (k) sets forth the circumstances in which new § 24-163.5 does not apply.
Subdivision (l) states that any contractor who violates any provision of new § 24-163.5, except as provided in subdivision (m) of that section, shall be liable for a civil penalty of not less than $1,000 and not more than $10,000, in addition to twice the amount of money saved by such contractor for failure to comply with that section.
Subdivision (m) states that where a contractor has been found to have made a false claim with respect to the provisions of new § 24-163.5, such contractor shall also be liable for a civil penalty of $20,000.
Subdivision (n) provides that new §24-163.5 shall not apply to any solid waste contract or recyclable materials contract entered into or renewed prior to the effective date of that section.
Subdivision (o) states that nothing in new § 24-163.5 shall be construed to limit the City’s authority to cancel or terminate a contract, deny or withdraw approval to perform a subcontract or provide supplies, issue a non-responsibility finding, issue a non-responsiveness finding, deny a person or entity pre-qualification as a vendor, or otherwise deny a person or entity city business.
Section two of Proposed Int. No. 416-A amends the Table of Civil Penalties in § 24-178 of the Administrative Code by adding the penalties set forth for new section § 24-163.5.
Section three of Proposed Int. No. 416-A contains a severability clause.
Section four of Proposed Int. No. 416-A states that this local law shall take effect four months after its enactment, except that the Commissioner of Environmental Protection shall take all actions necessary, including the promulgation of rules, to implement this local law on or before the date upon which it shall take effect.
D. Proposed Int. No. 417-A
Section one of Proposed Int. No. 417-A amends title 24 of the Administrative Code by adding a new § 24-163.6.
Subdivision (a) of new § 24-163.6 provides definitions of certain terms used in that section. The terms defined are “best available retrofit technology”, “reasonable cost” and “sight-seeing bus”.
The bill defines “best available retrofit technology” to mean technology, verified by the United States environmental protection agency or the California air resources board, for reducing the emission of pollutants that achieves reductions in particulate matter emissions at the highest classification level for diesel emission control strategies, as set forth in subdivision (d) of new § 24-163.6, that is applicable to the particular engine and application. Such technology shall also, at a reasonable cost, achieve the greatest reduction in emissions of nitrogen oxides at such particulate matter reduction level and shall in no event result in a net increase in the emissions of either particulate matter or nitrogen oxides.
“Reasonable cost” means that such technology does not cost greater than thirty percent more than other technology applicable to the particular engine and application that falls within the same classification level for diesel emission control strategies, as set forth in subdivision (d) of new § 24-163.6, when considering the cost of the strategies, themselves, and the cost of installation.
“Sight-seeing bus” means a motor vehicle designed to comfortably seat and carry eight or more passengers operating for hire from a fixed point in the city of New York to a place or places of interest or amusements, and shall also include a vehicle, designed as aforesaid which by oral or written contract is let and hired or otherwise engaged for its exclusive use for a specific or special trip or excursion from a starting point within the city of New York.
Subdivision (b) provides that, beginning January 1, 2007, any diesel fuel-powered sight-seeing bus that is licensed pursuant to subchapter 21 of chapter 2 of Title 20 of the Administrative Code and that is equipped with an engine that is over three years old shall utilize the best available retrofit technology.
Paragraph one of subdivision (c) directs the Commissioner of Environmental Protection to make determinations, and publish a list containing such determinations, as to the best available retrofit technology to be used for each type of diesel fuel-powered sight-seeing bus to which new § 24-163.6 applies. Each such determination shall be reviewed and revised, as needed, on a regular basis, but in no event less often than once every six months.
Paragraph two of subdivision (c) provides that no owner or operator of a diesel fuel-powered sight-seeing bus licensed pursuant to the provisions of subchapter 21 of chapter 2 of Title 20 of the Administrative Code shall be required to replace best available retrofit technology or other authorized technology utilized for a diesel fuel-powered bus in accordance with the provisions of new § 24-163.6 within three years of having first utilized such technology for such vehicle, except that technology that falls within Level 4, as set forth in subdivision (d), shall not be required to be replaced until it has reached the end of its useful life. Such level four strategies achieve 85% or greater reduction in particulate matter emissions.
Subdivision (d) sets forth the classification levels for diesel emission control strategies, which are as follows:
i. Level 4 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by 85 percent or greater or reduces engine emissions to less than or equal to 0.01 grams diesel particulate matter per brake horsepower-hour;
ii. Level 3 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by between 50 and 84 percent;
iii. Level 2 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by between 25 and 49 percent;
iv. Level 1 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by between 20 and 24 percent.
Subdivision (e) provides that the
Commissioner may issue a waiver for the use of the best available retrofit
technology for a diesel fuel-powered sight-seeing bus where the Department of
Consumer Affairs (DCA) makes a written finding, which is approved, in writing,
by the Commissioner of Environmental Protection, that such technology is
unavailable for purchase for such bus, in which case the owner or operator of
such bus shall be required to use the technology for reducing the emission of
pollutants that would be the next best best available retrofit technology and
that is available for purchase for such bus.
Any waiver issued pursuant to subdivision (e) shall expire after three
years.
Subdivision (f) provides that subdivision (b) of new § 24-163.6, regarding the use of the best available retrofit technology, shall not apply to a diesel-fuel powered sight-seeing bus that is equipped with an engine certified to the applicable 2007 EPA standard for particulate matter as set forth in section 86.007-11 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations or to any subsequent EPA standard for such pollutant that is at least as stringent.
Subdivision (g) sets forth reporting requirements and provides that, starting January 1, 2008, the Commissioner of Environmental Protection must submit annual reports, on January 1st of each year, to the Comptroller and the Speaker of the Council.
Subdivision (h) states that any owner or operator of a diesel fuel-powered sight-seeing bus who violates any provision of new § 24-163.6, except as provided in subdivision (i) of that section, shall be liable for a civil penalty of not less than $1,000 and not more than $10,000, in addition to twice the amount of money saved by such contractor for failure to comply with that section.
Subdivision (i) states that where an owner or operator of a diesel fuel-powered sight-seeing bus has been found to have made a false claim with respect to the provisions of new § 24-163.6, such owner or operator shall also be liable for a civil penalty of $20,000.
Section two of Proposed Int. No. 417-A amends the Table of Civil Penalties in § 24-178 of the Administrative Code by adding the penalties set forth for new section § 24-163.6.
Section three of Proposed Int. No. 417-A amends subdivisions (c) and (d) of § 20-376 of the Administrative Code, regarding the inspection of sight-seeing buses. Subdivision (c) of § 20-376 includes new text that provides that grounds for refusal to issue a license shall include the failure to submit a bus or records pertaining to the operation and maintenance of such bus for inspection and being found to have violated the requirements for diesel fuel-powered sight-seeing buses contained in new § 24-163.6 of the Administrative Code.
Subdivision (d) of § 20-376 includes new text stating that the Commissioner of Consumer Affairs may adopt rules requiring the inspection by the DCA of records pertaining to the operation and maintenance of sight-seeing buses to determine compliance with new § 24-163.6 of the Administrative Code.
Section four of Proposed Int. No. 417-A amends § 20-383 of the Administrative Code by providing that the Commissioner of DCA may suspend or revoke any sight-seeing bus license for being found to have violated the requirements for diesel fuel-powered sight-seeing buses contained in new § 24-163.6 of the Administrative Code.
Section five of Proposed Int. No. 417-A contains a severability clause.
Section six of Proposed Int. No. 417-A states that this local law shall take effect six months after its enactment, except that the Commissioners of Consumer Affairs and Environmental Protection shall take all actions necessary, including the promulgation of rules, to implement this local law on or before the date upon which it shall take effect. The Commissioners shall publish proposed rules no later than ninety days from the date of enactment of this section.
E. Proposed Int. No. 428-A
Section one of Proposed Int. No. 428-A amends Title 24 of the Administrative Code by adding a new § 24-163.7.
Subdivision (a) of new § 24-163.7 provides definitions of certain terms used in that section. The terms defined are “best available retrofit technology”, “Department of Education”, “person”, “reasonable cost”, “school bus”, “school bus contract” and “ultra low sulfur diesel fuel”.
The bill defines “best available retrofit technology” to mean technology, verified by the EPA or the California Air Resources Board, for reducing the emission of pollutants that achieves reductions in particulate matter emissions at the highest classification level for diesel emission control strategies, as set forth in subdivision (e) of new § 24-163.7, that is applicable to the particular engine and application. Such technology shall also, at a reasonable cost, achieve the greatest reduction in emissions of nitrogen oxides at such particulate matter reduction level and shall in no event result in a net increase in the emissions of either particulate matter or nitrogen oxides.
“Department of Education ” means the New York City Department of Education, formerly known as the New York City Board of Education, and any successor agency or entity thereto, the expenses of which are paid in whole or in part from the City treasury.
“Person” means any natural person, partnership, firm, company, association, joint stock association, corporation or other legal entity.
“Reasonable cost” means that such technology does not cost greater than thirty percent more than other technology applicable to the particular engine and application that falls within the same classification level for diesel emission control strategies, as set forth in subdivision (e) of new § 24-163.7, when considering the cost of the strategies, themselves, and the cost of installation.
“School bus” means any vehicle operated pursuant to a school bus contract, designed to transport ten or more children at one time, of the designation “Type C bus” or “Type D bus” as set forth in 17 NYCRR §§ 720.1(Z) and (AA), and used to transport children to or from any school located in the city of New York, and excluding any vehicle utilized primarily to transport children with special educational needs who do not travel to and from school in vehicles used to transport general education students.
“School bus contract” means any agreement between any person and the Department of Education to transport children on a school bus.
“Ultra low sulfur diesel fuel” means diesel fuel that has a sulfur content of no more than fifteen parts per million.
Paragraph one of subdivision (b) states that, beginning July 1, 2006, any diesel fuel-powered school bus that is operated by a person who fuels such school bus at any facility at which ultra low sulfur diesel fuel is available, or of which such person has the exclusive use and control, or at which such person has the ability to specify the fuel to be made available, shall be powered by ultra low sulfur diesel fuel.
Paragraph two of that subdivision
provides that, beginning September 1, 2006, any diesel fuel-powered school bus
to which paragraph one of subdivision (b) does not apply shall be powered by
ultra low sulfur diesel fuel.
Subdivision (c) sets forth the schedule by which diesel fuel-powered school buses shall utilize the best available retrofit technology. Such schedule is as follows: (i) 50% of school buses used to fulfill each contract by September 1, 2006; and (ii) 100% of school buses used to fulfill each contract by September 1, 2007.
Paragraph one of subdivision (d) directs the Commissioner of Environmental Protection to make determinations, and publish a list containing such determinations, as to the best available retrofit technology to be used for each type of diesel fuel-powered school bus to which new § 24-163.7 applies. Each such determination shall be reviewed and revised, as needed, on a regular basis, but in no event less often than once every six months.
Paragraph two of subdivision (d) provides that no person shall be required to replace best available retrofit technology or other authorized technology utilized for a diesel fuel-powered school bus in accordance with the provisions of new § 24-163.7 within three years of having first utilized such technology for such bus, except that technology that falls within Level 4, as set forth in subdivision (e), shall not be required to be replaced until it has reached the end of its useful life. Such level four strategies achieve 85% or greater reduction in particulate matter emissions.
Paragraph three of subdivision (d) provides that for purposes of that subdivision, any best available retrofit technology, or substantially similar technology, purchased or installed in whole or in part with funds provided by the State of New York or the federal government pursuant to a specific diesel emissions reduction program in effect upon the date of enactment of new § 24-163.7, shall constitute the best available retrofit technology for a period of not less than three calendar years from the date on which such equipment was installed.
Subdivision (e) sets forth the classification levels for diesel emission control strategies, which are as follows:
i. Level 4 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by 85 percent or greater or reduces engine emissions to less than or equal to 0.01 grams diesel particulate matter per brake horsepower-hour;
ii. Level 3 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by between 50 and 84 percent;
iii. Level 2 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by between 25 and 49 percent;
iv. Level 1 – strategy reduces diesel particulate matter emissions by between 20 and 24 percent.
Subdivision (f) provides that the Commissioner of Environmental Protection shall issue a written determination that permits the use of diesel fuel that has a sulfur content of no more than thirty parts per million to fulfill the requirements of subdivision (b) of new § 24-163.7 if ultra low sulfur diesel fuel is not available to fulfill the requirements of that section. Such determination shall expire after six months and shall be renewed in writing every six months if such unavailability persists, but in no event shall be in effect after September 1, 2006.
Subdivision (g) provides that the Commissioner may issue a waiver for the use of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel where the Department of Education makes a written finding, which is approved, in writing, by the Commissioner of Environmental Protection, that a sufficient quantity of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel, or diesel fuel that has a sulfur content of no more than thirty parts per million where a determination is in effect pursuant to subdivision (f) of that section, is not available to meet the requirements of subdivision (b), provided that school buses, to the extent practicable, shall use whatever quantity of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel or diesel fuel that has a sulfur content of no more than thirty parts per million is available. Such waiver shall expire after two months, at which time the requirements of subdivision (b) of that section shall be in full force and effect unless the Department of Education renews the finding in writing and such renewal is approved, in writing, by the Commissioner of Environmental Protection.
Subdivision (h) provides that the Commissioner of Environmental Protection may issue a waiver for the use of the best available retrofit technology by a diesel fuel-powered school bus where the Department of Education makes a written finding, which is approved, in writing, by the Commissioner, that such technology is unavailable for purchase for such bus, in which case the owner or operator of such school bus shall be required to use the technology for reducing the emission of pollutants that would be the next best best available retrofit technology and that is available for purchase for such bus. Any waiver issued pursuant to subdivision (g) shall expire after three years.
Subdivision (i) provides that subdivision (c) of new § 24-163.7, regarding the use of the best available retrofit technology, shall not apply to a diesel-fuel powered school bus that is equipped with an engine certified to the applicable 2007 EPA standard for particulate matter as set forth in section 86.007-11 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations or to any subsequent EPA standard for such pollutant that is at least as stringent.
Subdivision (j) sets forth reporting requirements and provides that, starting on January 1, 2007, the Commissioner of Environmental Protection must submit annual reports, on January 1st of each year, to the Comptroller and the Speaker of the Council.
Subdivision (k) sets forth the circumstances in which new § 24-163.7 does not apply.
Subdivision (l) states that any person who violates any provision of new § 24-163.7, except as provided in subdivision (m) of that section, shall be liable for a civil penalty of not less than $1,000 and not more than $10,000, in addition to twice the amount of money saved by such person for failure to comply with that section.
Subdivision (m) states that where a person has been found to have made a false claim with respect to the provisions of new § 24-163.7, such person shall also be liable for a civil penalty of $20,000.
Subdivision (n) provides that new § 24-163.7 shall not apply to any school bus contract entered into or renewed prior to the effective date of that section.
Subdivision (o) provides that
nothing in new § 24-163.7 shall be construed to limit the authority of the
Department of Education or of the City of New York to cancel or terminate a
contract, deny or withdraw approval to perform a subcontract or provide
supplies, issue a non-responsibility finding, issue a non-responsiveness
finding, deny a person or entity pre-qualification as a vendor, or otherwise
deny a person or entity City business.
Section two of Proposed Int. No. 428-A amends the Table of Civil Penalties in § 24-178 of the Administrative Code by adding the penalties set forth for new section § 24-163.7. The reference in that section to § 24-163.7(n) is in error and should read § 24-163.7(m).
Section three of Proposed Int. No. 428-A contains a severability clause.
Section four of Proposed Int. No. 428-A states that this local law shall take effect immediately.
V. Amendments to the Legislation Considered on September 23, 2004
A.
Proposed Int. No. 414-A Compared to Int. No. 414
Int. No. 414, which was the subject of the hearing on September 23, 2004, was
revised as described, below.
In addition to technical changes to the legislation, the title of new § 24-163.1 was changed to “Purchase of cleaner light-duty and medium-duty vehicles” from “Lower emitting light-duty and medium-duty vehicles”. In addition, definitions were added to subdivision (a) of new § 24-163.1, regarding “alternative fuel motor vehicle”, “average fuel economy”, “equivalent carbon dioxide” and “fuel economy” while the definition of “person” was deleted and the definition of “motor vehicle” was changed to exclude vehicles specially equipped for emergency response by the DEP, Office of Emergency Management, Sheriff’s Office of the Department of Finance, New York City Police and Fire Departments.
In addition to technical changes made to the text of paragraph one of subdivision (b) and the clarification that such subdivision applies to motor vehicles available within the applicable model year, three new paragraphs were added to that subdivision. Paragraph two includes a cost analysis regarding the purchase of a zero emission vehicle or advanced technology partial zero emission vehicle in accordance with paragraph one of that subdivision. Paragraph three provides that up to five percent of the light-duty vehicles and medium-duty vehicles purchased within each fiscal year need not comply with the requirements of paragraph one. Paragraph four adds a requirement similar to the current requirement regarding the purchase of alternative fuel motor vehicles, so that there is no lapse in requirements applicable to the upcoming fiscal year.
Paragraph two of subdivision (c) permits the use of gasoline or diesel fuel in existing bi-fuel motor vehicles under certain prescribed circumstances, whereas Int. No. 414 did not permit any use of such fuel.
Subdivision (d) contains requirements regarding minimum percentage increases in the average fuel economy of light-duty motor vehicles purchased by the City during each fiscal year, relative to a baseline regarding such motor vehicles purchased by the City during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2004. These requirements replace provisions in Int. No. 414 that had required minimum percentage reductions in the emission of carbon dioxide from the City’s fleet of light-duty vehicles and medium-duty vehicles.
The reporting requirements contained in subdivision (e) were amended to reflect changes in the requirements made throughout other portions of the legislation.
New requirements were added, set forth in subdivision (f), which require that, for each fiscal year, the City measure the fuel consumed and the equivalent carbon dioxide emitted by its fleet of motor vehicles, for each fuel used. The estimated total amount of fuel consumed and equivalent carbon dioxide emitted by the City’s motor vehicles shall be posted on the DEP’s website and shall be included in the applicable Preliminary Mayor’s Management Report and Mayor’s Management Report.
Subdivision (g) provides that the requirements of new § 24-163.1, but for those contained in subdivision (f), do not apply to those diesel fuel-powered motor vehicles subject to § 24-163.4.
Section two of Proposed Int. No. 414-A consolidates provisions regarding alternative fuel buses and alternative fuel sanitation vehicles into one section.
In subdivision (a) of new § 24-163.2, the definition of “fleet” is deleted and the term “alternative fuel street sweeping vehicle” is added.
Subdivision (b) of new § 24-163.2 makes clear that the purchasing requirements regarding alternative fuel buses apply only to City purchases and changes the minimum percentage requirement for each fiscal year from fifty percent to twenty percent, which is the minimum percentage requirement included in the current § 24-163.2.
Subdivision (c) of new § 24-163.2
changes the requirement regarding alternative fuel sanitation vehicles. Instead of requiring that at least fifty
percent of the purchases of sanitation vehicles within each fiscal year are
alternative fuel sanitation vehicles, the legislation requires the Department
of Sanitation to implement a program for testing the mechanical reliability and
operational feasibility of alternative fuel street sweeping vehicles. Such program includes the initiation of a
pilot project by the Department of Sanitation to exclusively use alternative
fuel street sweeping vehicles in at least four sanitation districts, one of
which being located in an area with high asthma rates. In addition, the Department shall collect
and analyze data to further develop its
initiatives for and assess the feasibility of incorporating new alternative
fuel sanitation vehicles (street sweepers and collection vehicles) and
technology into its fleet.
The reporting provisions were amended to account for the revisions made to the requirements of new § 24-163.2.
The remaining provisions of new § 24-163.2 were revised to reflect changes in the requirements made throughout other portions of the legislation.
The amendment of § 24-178 of the Administrative Code, which had been contained in section four of Int. No. 414, was deleted, since new § 24-163.2 of Proposed Int. No. 414-A makes clear that such section only applies to buses purchased by the City.
B.
Proposed Int. No. 415-A Compared to Int. No. 415
Int. No. 415, which was the subject of the hearing on September 23, 2004, was
revised as described, below.
In addition to technical changes to the legislation, the title of the bill was changed to the current title and the term “diesel-powered motor vehicle” was changed to “diesel fuel-powered motor vehicle” throughout the document.
Definitions were added to subdivision (a) of new § 24-163.4, regarding “best available retrofit technology”, “gross vehicle weight rating” and “reasonable cost”. In addition, the definition of “diesel-powered motor vehicle” was deleted and the term “motor vehicle” was amended to include vehicles specially equipped for emergency response by the DEP, Office of Emergency Management, Sheriff’s Office of the Department of Finance, New York City Police and Fire Departments. An exemption for certain emergency vehicles had originally been included within the definition of “diesel-powered motor vehicle.”
The term “best available retrofit technology” is now defined and used instead of
the phrase “best available technology for reducing the emission of pollutants” throughout the bill. Such definition makes clear that best available retrofit technology shall achieve particulate matter emission reductions at the highest level possible, in accordance with the legislation. The definition also includes a “reasonable cost” analysis for the reduction in emissions of nitrogen oxides.
Paragraph two of subdivision (b) sets forth a phase-in for the use of the best available retrofit technology by the City’s diesel fuel-powered motor vehicles or the replacement of such vehicles with those equipped with engines certified to upcoming EPA standards for particulate matter, rather than requiring the use of best available technology by all such motor vehicles by January 1, 2006, and clarifies that such requirement shall only apply to diesel fuel-powered motor vehicles having a gross vehicle weight rating of greater than 8,500 pounds.
The requirements regarding the determination of the best available retrofit technology by the Commissioner of Environmental Protection, contained in subdivision (c) of Proposed Int. No. 415-A were amended to reflect the addition of the term “best available retrofit technology” to the legislation, which now contains some of the concepts formerly included in such requirements.
Paragraph two of subdivision (c) provides that the Commissioner of Environmental Protection may authorize the use of experimental technology on a small portion of each type of diesel fuel-powered motor vehicle owned or operated by City agencies.
Subdivision (c) was amended to provide that technology utilized in accordance with the provisions of new §24-163.4 shall not be required to be replaced within three years if such technology achieves emissions equivalent to a Level 4 diesel emission control strategy, as set forth in the legislation, which achieve 85% or greater reductions in particulate matter.
New subdivision (d) sets forth the four levels of diesel emission control strategies, based on the reduction in emissions of particulate matter, applicable to the requirements of the legislation.
New § 24-163.4 no longer provides for a waiver for the use of best available retrofit technology where such technology is unavailable for purchase for a diesel fuel-powered motor vehicle.
Technical changes were made to the provision regarding a waiver for the use of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel.
Changes were made to the reporting requirements to reflect changes made regarding the requirements of the legislation and information contained in the required annual reports need not be published in the Preliminary Mayor’s Management Report or Mayor’s Management report.
The provisions regarding circumstances in which new § 24-163.4 does not apply, waivers regarding the use of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel and the best available retrofit technology, and reporting requirements are included in different subdivisions of Proposed Int. No. 415-A.
The effective date of the legislation was changed from three months to six months from the date of enactment and the Commissioner of Environmental Protection is required to publish proposed rules regarding the legislation no later than ninety days from the date of enactment.
C.
Proposed Int. No. 416-A Compared to Int. No. 416
Int. No. 416, which was the subject of the hearing on September 23, 2004, was
revised as described, below.
In addition to technical changes to the legislation, the term “best available retrofit technology”, “operate primarily within the city of New York” and “reasonable cost” were added and the definitions of “recyclable materials contract” and “solid waste contract” were amended to clarify that such terms apply to contracts with a city agency, the primary purpose of which is to provide for the handling, transport or disposal of recyclable materials and solid waste, respectively. Furthermore, the terms “diesel-powered motor vehicle” and “diesel-powered nonroad vehicle” were changed to “diesel fuel-powered motor vehicle” and “diesel fuel-powered nonroad vehicle”, respectively, throughout the document.
The term “best available retrofit technology is now defined and used instead of
the phrase “best available technology for reducing the emission of pollutants” throughout the bill. Such definition makes clear that best available retrofit technology shall achieve particulate matter emission reductions at the highest level possible, in accordance with the legislation. The definition also includes a “reasonable cost” analysis for the reduction of emissions of nitrogen oxides.
Subdivision (b), regarding the use of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel and the best available retrofit technology, clarifies that such requirements shall only apply to diesel fuel-powered motor vehicles and non-road vehicles that operate primarily within the City of New York. In addition, the requirements to use the best available retrofit technology shall not apply until March 1, 2006, rather than upon the effective date of the legislation.
The requirements regarding the determination of the best available retrofit technology by the Commissioner of Environmental Protection, contained in subdivision (c) of Proposed Int. No. 416-A were amended to reflect the addition of the term “best available retrofit technology” to the legislation, which now contains some of the concepts formerly included in such requirements.
Paragraph two of subdivision (c) was amended to provide that technology utilized in accordance with the provisions of new §24-163.5 shall not be required to be replaced within three years if such technology achieves emissions equivalent to a Level 4 diesel emission control strategy, as set forth in the legislation, which achieve 85% or greater reductions in particulate matter.
New subdivision (d) sets forth the four levels of diesel emission control strategies, based on the reduction in emissions of particulate matter, applicable to the requirements of the legislation.
Technical changes were made to the provisions regarding waivers for the use of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel and the best available retrofit technology. In addition, requirements regarding the use of technology other than the best available retrofit technology, in the instance a waiver is issued, were clarified and the expiration date of such waiver was changed from six months to three years.
The provisions regarding circumstances in which new § 24-163.5 does not apply, waivers regarding the use of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel and the best available retrofit technology, and reporting requirements are labeled as different subdivisions of Proposed Int. No. 416-A.
Paragraph one of new subdivision (i) of Proposed Int. No. 416-A provides that the requirement to use the best available retrofit technology shall not apply to a diesel-fuel powered motor vehicle that is equipped with an engine certified to the applicable 2007 EPA standard for particulate matter as set forth in section 86.007-11 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations or to any subsequent EPA standard for such pollutant that is at least as stringent. Paragraph two of that subdivision provides that the requirement to use the best available retrofit technology shall not apply to a diesel-fuel powered nonroad vehicle that is equipped with an engine certified to the applicable EPA standard for particulate matter for such vehicle as set forth in the Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Nonroad Diesel Engines and Fuel; Final Rule, published in the federal register on June 29, 2004 at 69 Fed. Reg. 38,958 et seq., or to any subsequent EPA standard for such pollutant that is at least as stringent.
Changes were made to the reporting requirements to reflect changes made regarding the requirements of the legislation
The penalties that had been included in Int. No. 416 were changed from $10,000 to $30,000 for a violation of new § 24-163.5 to $1,000 to $10,000. The making of a false claim with respect to the provisions of new § 24-163.5 was amended from an additional $30,000 to an additional $20,000. Such changes were made to be consistent with Local Law 77 of 2003.
The effective date of the legislation was changed from three months to four months from the date of enactment.
D.
Proposed Int. No. 417-A Compared to Int. No. 417
Int. No. 417, which was the subject of the hearing on September 23, 2004, was
revised as described, below.
In addition to technical changes to the legislation, the requirements of Int. No. 417 that were retained were moved from Title 20 (Consumer Affairs) to Title 24 (Environmental Protection) of the Administrative Code to better reflect the content of the legislation and to be consistent with the other pieces of legislation and laws concerning the reduction of emissions. Proposed Int. No. 417-A adds a new § 24-163.6 to the Administrative Code, rather than just amending § 20-372 and § 20-376 of such Code.
Definitions of the terms “best available retrofit technology”, “reasonable cost” and “sight-seeing bus” were added and the definition of “ultra low sulfur diesel fuel” is no longer needed since Proposed Int. No. 417-A no longer contains requirements regarding the use of such fuel. The term “diesel-powered sight-seeing bus” was changed to “diesel fuel-powered sight-seeing bus” throughout the document.
As mentioned above, Proposed Int. No. 417-A does not contain any requirements regarding the use of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel, as were included in Int. No. 417.
The term “best available retrofit technology” is now defined and used instead of
the phrase “best available technology for reducing the emission of pollutants” throughout the bill. Such definition makes clear that best available retrofit technology shall achieve particulate matter emission reductions at the highest level possible, in accordance with the legislation. The definition also includes a “reasonable cost” analysis for the reduction of emissions of nitrogen oxides.
The requirements regarding the use of the best available retrofit technology, contained in subdivision (b), apply to any diesel fuel-powered sight-seeing bus, beginning January 1, 2007, that is licensed pursuant to subchapter 21 of chapter 2 of Title 20 of the Administrative Code and that is equipped with an engine that is greater than three years old. Int. No. 417 did not contain such a provision regarding the age of the engine involved, implemented the best available technology requirements as of the effective date of the legislation, and tied such requirements to the issuance or renewal of a license of a diesel fuel-powered sight-seeing bus. In Proposed Int. No. 417-A, rather, the requirement to use best available retrofit technology goes into effect on January 1, 2007 for any diesel fuel-powered sight-seeing bus that is equipped with an engine at least three years old and licensed as described by the DCA, regardless of when such license was issued.
The requirements regarding the determination of the best available retrofit technology by the Commissioner of Environmental Protection, contained in subdivision (c) of Proposed Int. No. 417-A were amended to reflect the addition of the term “best available retrofit technology” to the legislation, which now contains some of the concepts formerly included in such requirements.
Paragraph two of subdivision (c) was amended to provide that technology utilized in accordance with the provisions of new §24-163.6 shall not be required to be replaced within three years if such technology achieves emissions equivalent to a Level 4 diesel emission control strategy, as set forth in the legislation, which achieve 85% or greater reductions in particulate matter.
New subdivision (d) sets forth the four levels of diesel emission control strategies, based on the reduction in emissions of particulate matter, applicable to the requirements of the legislation.
Technical changes were made to the provision regarding a waiver for the use of the best available retrofit technology. In addition, requirements regarding the use of technology other than the best available retrofit technology, in the instance a waiver is issued, were clarified and the expiration date of such waiver was changed from six months to three years.
New subdivision (f) of § 24-163.6 of Proposed Int. No. 417-A provides that the requirement to use the best available retrofit technology shall not apply to a diesel-fuel powered bus that is equipped with an engine certified to the applicable 2007 EPA standard for particulate matter as set forth in section 86.007-11 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations or to any subsequent EPA standard for such pollutant that is at least as stringent.
Reporting requirements were added for the Commissioner of Environmental Protection regarding compliance with the provisions of Proposed Int. No. 417-A, contained in new subdivision (g), which are similar to reporting requirements contained in other legislation to reduce the emission of pollutants.
Penalties were added to Proposed Int. No. 417-A that are consistent with penalties included in other, similar legislation and are $1,000 to $10,000 for a violation of new § 24-163.6. The making of a false claim with respect to the provisions of new § 24-163.6 is an additional $20,000. Such changes were made to be consistent with Local Law 77 of 2003.
New section two was added to Proposed Int. No. 417-A to add the applicable penalties for new § 24-163.6 to § 24-178 of the Administrative Code.
Proposed Int. No. 417-A solely amends subdivisions (c) and (d) of § 20-376 of the Administrative Code and amends those sections to reflect the movement of the new requirements for diesel fuel-powered sight-seeing buses to new § 24-163.6 of such Code.
New section four of Proposed Int. No. 417-A amends § 20-383 of the Administrative Code to provide that being found to have violated the requirements for diesel fuel-powered sight-seeing buses contained in new § 24-163.6 of such Code is grounds for the suspension or revocation of a sight-seeing bus license.
The effective date of the legislation was changed from three months to six months from the date of enactment and the Commissioners of Consumer Affairs and Environmental Protection shall publish proposed rules no later than ninety days from the date of enactment of the legislation.
E. Proposed Int. No. 428-A Compared to Int. No. 428
Int. No. 428, which was the subject of the hearing on September 23, 2004, was
revised as described, below.
In addition to technical changes to the legislation, the terms “best available retrofit technology” and “reasonable cost” were added and the definition of “school bus” was amended. Furthermore, the term “school bus” was changed to “diesel fuel-powered school bus” throughout the document.
The term “best available retrofit technology” is now defined and used instead of the phrase “best available technology for reducing the emission of pollutants” throughout the bill. Such definition makes clear that best available retrofit technology shall achieve particulate matter emission reductions at the highest level possible, in accordance with the legislation. The definition also includes a “reasonable cost” analysis for the reduction of emissions of nitrogen oxides.
The legislation was changed to solely apply to school buses used in the fulfillment of school bus contracts with the New York City Department of Education.
The requirements to use ultra low sulfur diesel fuel shall not apply until July 1, 2006 or September 1, 2006, depending on the applicable fueling situation, rather than September 1, 2005.
Paragraph one of subdivision (c) sets forth a schedule for the use of the best available retrofit technology by diesel fuel-powered school buses, rather than requiring the use of such technology by all such school buses by September 1, 2005. Such schedule is as follows: (i) 50% of school buses used to fulfill each school bus contract by September 1, 2006; and (ii) 100% of school buses used to fulfill each school bus contract by September 1, 2007.
The requirements regarding the determination of the best available retrofit technology by the Commissioner of Environmental Protection, contained in subdivision (d) of Proposed Int. No. 428-A were amended to reflect the addition of the term “best available retrofit technology” to the legislation, which now contains some of the concepts formerly included in such requirements.
Paragraph two of subdivision (d) was amended to provide that technology utilized in accordance with the provisions of new §24-163.7 shall not be required to be replaced within three years if such technology achieves emissions equivalent to a Level 4 diesel emission control strategy, as set forth in the legislation, which achieve 85% or greater reductions in particulate matter.
Paragraph three of subdivision (d) was amended to make clear that such subdivision applies only to funding provided pursuant to a specific diesel emissions reduction program in effect upon the date of enactment of new § 24-163.7.
New subdivision (e) sets forth the four levels of diesel emission control strategies, based on the reduction in emissions of particulate matter, applicable to the requirements of the legislation.
Technical changes were made to the provisions regarding waivers for the use of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel and the best available retrofit technology. In addition, requirements regarding the use of technology other than the best available retrofit technology, in the instance a waiver is issued, were clarified and the expiration date of such waiver was changed from six months to three years.
New subdivision (i) provides that the requirement to use the best available retrofit technology shall not apply to a diesel-fuel powered school bus that is equipped with an engine certified to the applicable 2007 EPA standard for particulate matter as set forth in section 86.007-11 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations or to any subsequent EPA standard for such pollutant that is at least as stringent.
The provisions regarding circumstances in which new § 24-163.7 does not apply, waivers regarding the use of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel and the best available retrofit technology, and reporting requirements are labeled as different subdivisions of Proposed Int. No. 428-A.
The reporting requirements and other areas of the text were amended to reflect changes in the requirements made throughout other portions of the legislation. In addition, the DEP, rather than the Chancellor of Education, is now responsible for reporting to the Comptroller and the Speaker of the Council.
New subdivision (k), regarding circumstances in which new § 24-163.7 does not apply, was amended to provide that such section shall not apply “where federal or state law prohibits the application of the requirements of this section.”
The penalties that had been included in Int. No. 428 were changed from $10,000 to $30,000 for a violation of new § 24-163.7 to $1,000 to $10,000. The making of a false claim with respect to the provisions of new § 24-163.7 was amended from an additional $30,000 to an additional $20,000. Such changes were made to be consistent with Local Law 77 of 2003.
New subdivision (n) makes clear that new § 24-163.7 shall not apply to any school bus contract entered into or renewed prior to the effective date of that section.
Proposed Int. No. 428-A will take effect immediately, rather than one hundred eighty days after its enactment to ensure that the requirements of such legislation apply to school bus contracts that may be entered into over the next few months.