PARAMOUNT REFINERY Paramount, CA
LONG BEACH REFINERY Long Beach, CA
Revolutionizing The Way You Pave! Terminal Blends: The Tire Rubber Technology for Green, Long Lasting and Quiet Roads... Paramount AsphalT has the largest number of nbtc lab technicians on the west coast.
BIG SPRINGS REFINERY Big Springs, TX
BAKERSFIELD REFINERY Bakersfield, CA
ELK GROVE TERMINAL Elk Grove, CA
BAKERSFIELD TERMINAL Bakersfield, CA
FLAGSTAFF TERMINAL Flagstaff, AZ
PHOENIX TERMINAL Phoenix, AZ
Rubberized HMA Including Dense Graded, GAP Graded, Open Graded & Porous Pavement (Meets AB338 &
Grant Requirement)
Rubberized Slurry Seal and Fog Seal
MOJAVE TERMINAL Mojave, CA
NEVADA TERMINAL Fernley, NV
Rubberized Hot Applied ChipSeal (Meets Grant Requirement)
HPS, Trackless Tack and Crack Sealer
800-300-0023
www.ParamountAsphalt.com
SEATTLE TERMINAL Seattle, WA
Publisher’s Letter Black is the new Green You are holding in your hands one of the most important editions of California Asphalt magazine you will receive this year – our special environmental issue. I’m pleased to introduce this magazine because I believe that sustainability and environmentally sensitive practices are not only the right thing to do for our planet and future generations, but also essential to the success of our industry. I’m fortunate to work for a company, Skanska USA Inc., which has imbedded in its corporate DNA a strong commitment to the environment, stretching all the way back to our roots in Sweden. We constantly invest in new techniques and technology to work greener, which often also benefits our bottom line. For example, our estimators drive out to projects in hybrid vehicles, and our buildings employ the latest LEED features. Skanska USA Inc. celebrates Earth Day by embarking on team building exercises like cleaning trash from community streets or creating wildlife gardens. On the asphalt side, we utilize as much Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement in mixes as possible without sacrificing quality and durability, and we were an early adopter in using fuel-sipping Warm Mix Asphalt technologies. All of our diesel-powered vehicles are CARB Tier 4 compliant, which helps clear the air and reduces greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In California, the epicenter of the green movement, it’s nice to know that we have corporate backing for green initiatives. In fact, it’s our unofficial corporate motto to utilize the latest technology to be as green as possible. In this issue of California Asphalt magazine, you’ll read important reports about regulations and best practices that impact the environment. You’ll learn about the many changes to the industrial storm water permit in California, and changes to state air quality regulations as they apply to diesel-powered equipment. You’ll also find out about environmental-related public records requests, and benefit from an in-depth report on measuring sustainability. Our exclusive interview this month is with Jim Earp, executive director of the California Alliance for Jobs and a commissioner on the California Transportation Commission. His candid assessment of the transportation funding situation in California is a must-read. We hope you enjoy the issue, and don’t forget to share it with others and recycle it when you’re done. Remember, green is good for the planet and for our industry.
Sincerely,
John Greenwood Skanska USA Civil 4
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
Contents 4 10 12
Publisher’s Letter Industrial Storm Water Permit Changes Defining Environmental Impact
The What, How, and Why of Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs)
16
Diesel Regulation Update
20
Do You Know How Your Electronic Data is Being Used?
22
California Asphalt Magazine / Q&A with Jim Earp
Page 10
CleanFleets.net
30
Air Resources Regulatory Experts Offer Effective and Legal Solutions for Diesel Equipment and Truck Owners
38
Advertiser Index
Page 12
Page 16
Page 20
Page 30
On the cover:
An asphalt overlay on First Street in downtown Davis, Calif., featuring new green bike-lane pavement markings. Davis, widely considered the “Bicycle Capital of the U.S.” because of its extensive network of bike paths and bike lanes, has taken advantage of updated federal guidance on pavement markings to use green to mark a popular bike lane connecting downtown and the campus of the University of California, Davis.
CALIFORNIA ASPHALT PAVEMENT ASSOCIATION www.calapa.net
HEADQUARTERS: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: MEMBER SERVICES MANAGER: TECHNICAL CONSULTANT: GUEST PUBLISHER: PUBLISHED BY: GRAPHIC DESIGN: CONTRIBUTING EDITORS: ADVERTISING SALES:
P.O. Box 981300 • West Sacramento • CA 95798 (Mailing Address) 1550 Harbor Blvd., Suite 211 • West Sacramento • CA 95691 • (866) 498-0761 Russell W. Snyder, rsnyder@calapa.net Tony Grasso, tgrasso@calapa.net Sophie You, syou@calapa.net Rita Leahy, PhD., P.E., rleahy@calapa.net John Greenwood, Skanska USA Civil Construction Marketing Services, LLC • P.O. Box 892977 • Temecula • CA 92589 (909) 772-3121 • Fax (951) 225-9659 Aldo Myftari, aldo@ironads.com Joseph King, PE, CPESC, Sespe Consulting, Inc., Nicholas Santero, Heather Gadonniex and Sophia Wong, PE International, Mike Buckantz, Associates Environmental, Kathy Hubbard and Scott Taylor of Alta Environmental, Russell W. Snyder, CalAPA and Brian Hoover, CMS Kerry Hoover, CMS, (909) 772-3121 • Fax (951) 225-9659
Copyright © 2014 – All Rights Reserved. No portion of this publication may be reused in any form without prior permission of the California Asphalt Pavement Association. California Asphalt is the official publication of the California Asphalt Pavement Association. This bi-monthly magazine distributes to members of the California Asphalt Pavement Association; contractors; construction material producers; Federal, State and Local Government Officials; and others interested in ensuring that asphalt remains the high quality, high performance pavement choice in the state of California.
6
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
7
INDUSTRIAL STORM WATER PERMIT CHANGES By: Joseph King, PE, CPESC, Sespe Consulting, Inc.
A
fter 10 years of draft permits, workshops, comment periods and hearings, the State Water Resources Control Board has finally adopted a new Industrial General Permit (IGP) for storm water discharges. The new permit, which takes effect July 1, 2015, is significantly different from the current permit and operators subject to it will need to begin preparing to meet the new compliance requirements in advance of the 2015 implementation date. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) are still required under the new IGP. The major elements required in a SWPPP are substantially similar to the current requirements, but there are subtle and important changes that operators will need to consider as they update their plans. Under the new IGP, operators must register their facilities and upload their SWPPPs to the State’s Storm Water Multiple Application and Report Tracking System (SMARTS), an on-line database used to track storm water compliance. Documents uploaded to SMARTS, as well as sample results and other compliance data, will be available to the public, including neighbors and environmental groups. Operators are urged to carefully craft their SWPPPs and compliance documents to meet the IGP requirements while minimizing the potential for complaints and lawsuits. 10
The new IGP also adds the requirement to utilize a Qualified Industrial Storm Water Practitioner or QISP; an individual who has completed a state-sponsored or state-approved certification class. While QISP certification is not required for an individual to prepare a SWPPP, a QISP will be required to initiate compliance actions when pollutants in storm water discharges exceed certain levels. Inspection and sampling requirements have been changed significantly in the new IGP. Analyzing storm water discharge samples for Specific Conductance is no longer required. Furthermore, while the current permit allows operators to analyze samples for either Total Organic Carbon or Oil & Grease, the new permit requires Oil & Grease analysis. One change that will significantly impact operators is that, under the new IGP, pH analyses must be performed within 15 minutes of sample collection. This will require facilities to maintain analytical equipment (pH meters or, in some cases, pH paper) and have personnel who are trained in using the equipment and interpreting the results. The current IGP requires that samples be collected during the first hour of discharge when that occurs during facility operating hours. The new permit requires that samples be collected during the first four hours of discharge or the first four hours of facility operation if the discharge began
in the previous 12 hours. Many more storms will be eligible for sampling under this new sampling criteria. Additionally, the new permit increases the number of samples required from two per year to four per year: two in the first half of the year and two in the second half. There is no more “wet season.” An entirely new component of industrial storm water compliance is the Numeric Action Levels (NALs) for storm water discharges. While exceedances of an NAL will not subject operators to fines and other penalties (they are not “limits”), exceedances will require operators to take specific steps. If discharge sampling indicates pollutant levels above an NAL, the facility will enter “Level 1 Status” for that pollutant and the operator – with assistance from a QISP – will be required to review pollutant sources at the facility, review the corresponding BMPs, and update the SWPPP as necessary. An Exceedance Response Action report that summarizes this review and any changes made must be prepared by the QISP and submitted to SMARTS. If a facility is in Level 1 Status and a storm water sample exceeds the NAL for the same pollutant, the facility will enter “Level 2 Status” for that pollutant. When the facility enters Level 2 Status, an Action Plan must be prepared by a QISP and submitted in SMARTS. The Action Plan must identify which
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
of the Demonstration Reports will be prepared for the site. There are three possible Demonstration Reports: Industrial Activity BMPs Demonstration, Non-Industrial Source Demonstration, and Natural Background Pollutant Source Demonstration, each with its own requirements. Each of these reports will be a serious undertaking in which the source of pollutants will be identified and, depending on that source, which BMPs will be
implemented. These reports have to be prepared by a QISP and submitted in SMARTS. Finally, Annual Reports are still required under the new IGP. The biggest change to the Annual Reports is that — you guessed it! — they must be submitted to SMARTS. These are some of the highlights of the new IGP. The full, 208 page-long permit should be consulted for complete details on the requirements. While the
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
new permit does not take effect until July 1, 2015, operators are required to register their facilities in SMARTS and upload a SWPPP by that date. Early planning and preparation will be necessary to meet this deadline. CAM Please feel free to contact the author, Joseph King of Sespe Consulting, at 805.275.1515 or by email to jking@sespeconsulting. com with questions or comments about the new IGP.
11
Defining Environmental
IMPACT
The What, How, and Why of Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs)
By: Nicholas Santero, Heather Gadonniex, and Sophia Wong
W
hat is the environmental impact of a pavement? This is a challenging question to answer, requiring an understanding and merging of a host of topics, including sustainability calculations and metrics, pavement engineering, construction practices, and more. However, the most important aspect when determining and reporting environmental impact is consistency. For a fair and consistent analysis, an agreed-upon set of best practices is needed to determine environmental impact. Life-cycle assessment (LCA) is used to evaluate the potential environmental impacts over the life of a product. LCA is a sound methodology, but is sometimes criticized for being inconsistently applied between products. A solution to this inconsistency is the use of environmental product declarations (EPDs) developed in line with accompanying product category rules (PCRs). Guided by product-specific rules, EPDs offer a consistent and scientifically defensible approach for declaring the impact of products, including pavements. While well established in other countries, EPDs are just now becoming mainstream in the United States, and their use is expected to expand due to the inclusion of EPDs in the U.S Green Building Council’s LEED v4 rating system. 12
Figure 1: EPDs present the potential environmental impacts of a product, similar to the way a nutrition label presents nutritional facts for food (note: values are for illustration purposes only). What are EPDs? Like a food nutrition label, an EPD integrates diverse product performance information in a single, consumer-facing format. EPDs report the potential environmental impact of a product in terms of its global warming potential, acidification potential, primary energy demand, and other relevant metrics. A key strength of the EPD is simplicity: Complex environmental data and calculations are distilled into a readable document that can be used for businessto-business or business-toconsumer communication. The heart of an EPD is the life-cycle assessment, which models a product over its life cycle in order to determine its potential environmental
impacts. Analyses can take a “cradle-to-gate” or “cradleto-grave” view of the product. A cradle-to-gate perspective of pavements accounts for the environmental impacts of resource extraction through materials processing to product manufacturing; a cradle-to-grave view would take into account the additional impacts of construction (e.g., traffic delay, on-site equipment), the use phase (e.g., rolling resistance, road maintenance), and end-oflife (e.g., recycling, landfilling). The PCRs establish whether a cradle-to-gate or cradle-to-grave boundary is to be used for an EPD. Typically, EPDs are cradleto-gate due to the inherent complexities of characterizing the use-phase life-cycle impacts.
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
Figure 2. The relationship and roles of EPDs, LCAs, and PCRs. How are EPDs Developed? The EPD development process is specified in ISO 14025, “Environmental labels and declarations — Type III environmental declarations — Principles and procedures.” EPDs require both a PCR and an LCA to be complete; Figure 2 shows a brief overview of the process. Note that each step also requires a verification/review step to ensure that relevant standards and best practices are followed. The first step in the EPD development process is to choose a PCR that aligns with the product category in question. If a PCR does not exist for the product category, a PCR will need to be developed. This is done through a consensusbased process, where interested stakeholders develop the PCR by determining the methods by which the LCA and EPD are to be conducted and reported. The stakeholder group can include manufacturers, environmental advocates, LCA practitioners, government officials, contractors, and suppliers. The next step is to conduct an LCA. Developing a life-cycle assessment requires collecting primary environmental data related to the production of the
product. For the case of asphalt mixtures, this would include electricity consumption, air emissions, waste generation, and other flows into and out of the asphalt plant. Upstream data for inputs into the asphalt plant, such as production of bitumen, can be found in commercial LCA databases, such as the GaBi database. The data is then aggregated into an LCA model that represents the production of asphalt mixes produced at a plant. This model can be used to generate total potential environmental impacts, as well as identify sources of impact and help in reducing footprints. LCAs are typically a collaboration between companies and/or industry associations (e.g., NAPA) and an LCA practitioner (e.g., PE International). The EPD is developed once the LCA is complete. The LCA model and associated report are often long and complex, as they are required to include details about methodologies, calculations, data sources, and other technical information. Conversely, the EPD is succinct and designed to be a market-facing document. EPDs summarize the results of the LCA, disclose key
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
methodological information, and include relevant environmental information about the product or manufacturing company; the exact content requirements and options for the EPD are specified in the PCR. The EPD is usually created by the same parties that conduct the LCA, with the LCA practitioner guiding the company and/or industry association through the development process. The last step in EPD development is the review and verification of the LCA and EPD. A third-party entity, called a program operator, ensures that all methods and documentation follow the ISO standards and the selected product category rule. Once the program operator verifies the LCA and EPD, the EPD is registered and entered into a public repository. There are several program operators servicing the growing U.S. EPD market, including UL Environment, NSF International, and ASTM International, among others. The companies and/or industry association developing the EPD can choose any operator to fulfil these services; the LCA practitioner can provide guidance in the selection process. [ Continued on page 14 ] 13
[ Continued from page 13 ] Why Do EPDs Matter? The trend in building and construction is towards product transparency and disclosure. In particular, life-cycle information is in demand, with owners, designers, and engineers asking for a better understanding of the health and environmental impacts of the products that they specify. The Architecture 2030 Challenge for Products and the International Green Construction Code (IgCC) are also beginning to recognize the need for transparency and, in particular the demand for EPDs. This demand is expected to increase as EPDs continue to gain traction in the U.S. market. The key driver for EPDs in the building and construction sector is LEED v4. The newly released version of this green construction rating system includes a materials and resources credit that rewards project teams for using products that are accompanied by ISO 14044-compliant LCAs or ISO 14025-compliant EPDs. The goal of the credit is product transparency and optimization: disclose the impact of your product using an EPD and the product will contribute to this credit. In addition, demonstrating reduction in your product footprint will also contribute to this credit. For the asphalt pavement industry, availability of an industry-average or product-specific EPD will encourage decision-makers to use asphalt pavements in their designs. There are benefits to performing an LCA, regardless of LEED contributions. Nearly all major building and construction materials have developed and released LCA-based information about their products, including concrete, steel, wood, aluminum, copper, and others. This information is used to support comparative assertions, develop sustainability marketing campaigns, and protect the industry from inaccurate environmental claims. By developing and providing this information, the asphalt pavement industry can ensure that academics, industry, and government are using accurate and industry-verified information when conducting environmental performance analyses. Most importantly, information gathered from LCA studies help manufacturers optimize internal product development and production processes, contributing to overall cost and environmental footprint reduction. CAM Nicholas Santero, Heather Gadonniex, and Sophia Wong are with PE International, which offers software solutions and services for enterprise sustainability, life-cycle assessment, and innovation. For more information please call PE International at (303) 442-6969. 14
Toward an EPD for A sphalt Pavements Currently, no PCR or EPD program has been developed for the U.S. asphalt paving industry. Consequently, the industry is vulnerable to other stakeholders leading this decision-making process; essentially defining the how asphalt calculates and communicates its environmental impact. In addition, with the release of LEED v.4, an EPD is necessary for asphalt pavements to continue to achieve credits for using recycled materials or being manufactured locally. Over the past few months, NAPA has taken a strategic role in helping the industry move forward to develop a PCR and an EPD program for asphalt pavement. As part of this effort, it is important for the PCR to identify the environmental impact categories that parallel the industry’s environmental goals. In addition, it is essential that an industry-wide LCA be conducted for asphalt pavements to provide accurate data for inclusion in current life-cycle inventory databases and software used to compare pavement LCAs. A PCR/EPD Technical Working Group has been developed comprised of industry members to oversee the PCR and EPD development process. The project is in its initial stages and expected to be completed mid-year 2015. For more information, contact Dr. Heather Dylla, NAPA’s Director of Sustainable Engineering, at hdylla@asphaltpavement.org.
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
15
Diesel
Regulation Update
By: Mike Buckantz, Associates Environmental
The culmination of nearly 20 years of off-road diesel engine emissions reductions arrives Jan. 1, 2015 when engine manufacturers are required to begin producing Tier 4 Final (Tier 4F) engines in the 75 – 175 horsepower and greater than 750 horsepower ranges. The process began as the first Tier 1 engines rolled out in 1996. The figure below demonstrates the progression of new engine tiers from 1996 through 2015. Figure 1: Introduction of New Engine Tiers, 1996 Through 2015
16
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
A lot has happened in the world of engine technology and emissions. Electronic controls, cleaner fuels, particulate filters, Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) and Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) technology weren’t on our radar screens so much in the early 1990s. These terms are now a common part of vocabulary. Certainly, the transition has come with a cost attached and with an increased focus on maintenance. The emission reductions, however, have been dramatic. The figure below demonstrates the emissions differences between those Tier 1 engines we first saw in the mid-1990s and the Tier 4 Final engines that now represent the Best Available Control Technology (BACT). Figure 2: Emission Reductions Comparing Tier 1 to Tier 4 Final
Tier 1 (g/bhp-hr)
Tier 4 Final (g/bhp-hr)
Percent Reduction (%)
Hydrocarbons
1.0
0.14
86
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
6.9
0.3
96
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
8.5
2.2
74
Particulate Matter (PM)
0.4
0.015
96
Pollutant
Naturally, our friends in the regulatory community have seen this transition as an opportunity to speed the introduction of cleaner engines into the field. Specifically through the Statewide Portable Equipment Registration Program (PERP), the Portable Engine Air Toxics Control Measure (Portable ATCM) and the Off-Road Diesel Regulation, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has short-circuited the natural life of diesel engines and by introducing forced-replacement programs and barriers to obtaining new permits and registrations. This is most apparent in the PERP and in the Off-Road Regulation requirements. PERP Update: Beginning Jan. 1, 2014 portable diesel engines rated from 175 horsepower (hp) to 750 hp needed to meet the Tier 4F emission standards to qualify for registration in the PERP. Since 2011, engines in this horsepower range needed to meet Tier 4 Interim (Tier 4I) emission standards to qualify for registration in the PERP. The PERP program requires that engines meet the most stringent emission standard in order to qualify for registration [except for flex units under the provisions of 40 CFR Part 89.102 or 40 CFR 1039.625 and CCR 2423(d)]. The PERP provides a window to register an engine if the application is submitted within six months of the effective date of the change in emission standard. Therefore, Tier 4 Interim engines rated from 175 - 750 horsepower could still be registered through June 30, 2014. This window is now closed. With the exception of engines in the 75-174 and greater than 750 horsepower ranges, only Tier 4F engines are eligible for registration in the PERP. By July 1, 2015 only Tier 4F engines will be eligible for registration in the PERP. Off-Road Regulation Update: After nearly four years of relative hibernation, the Off-Road Regulation is waking up quickly with two 2014 compliance benchmarks related to Large Fleets (those with 5,000 horsepower or more). Large fleets that did not meet the Off-Road Regulation’s initial 2010 compliance requirements must be in a position to [ Continued on page 18 ] California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
17
[ Continued from page 17 ] demonstrate compliance with the 2014 fleet average target or should have replaced, repowered or retired 4.8 percent of the fleet horsepower by July 1, 2014. By Jan. 1, 2015 the first step down in the fleet average targets will take place with the replace/repower/retirement obligation kicking up to 8 percent of fleet horsepower. Effective Jan. 1, 2014 no fleet (Small, Medium or Large) is able to add a Tier 0 engine. Large and Medium fleets are also prohibited from adding Tier 1 engines as of Jan. 1, 2014. Project Owners Often Trump the Regulations: Finally, please be aware that more and more often, project owners are imposing requirements that go beyond what the regulations require. For example, here is an excerpt from L.A. County Metro’s Green Construction Policy: “From Jan. 1, 2015 and onwards: All off-road diesel-powered construction equipment greater than 50 hp shall meet Tier-4 off-road emission standards at a minimum. In addition, if not already supplied with a factory-equipped diesel particulate filter, all construction equipment shall be outfitted with Best Available Control Technology (BACT) devices certified by CARB. Any emissions control device used by the Contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 3 diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine as defined by CARB regulations.” CAM If you have questions about this article please contact Mike Buckantz of Associates Environmental at (714) 625-7020 or by e-mail at mbuck@associatesenvironmental.com.
18
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
19
By: Kathy Hubbard and Scott Taylor of Alta Environmental
T
he internet provides access to almost any question we have. That includes what is going on in our neighborhoods and even some businesses. As regulatory agencies move into the age of technology, electronic reporting has become the required method of data submittal. Agencies such as the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and legislation like AB2286 require it. As a matter of fact, LARWQCB will no longer accept paper reports and AB2286 requires the use of the internet to file all information required by the Unified Program Agencies throughout the state. In the past, most of the environmental reporting data supplied to a regulatory agency or their agents was retained in files and subsequently archived in accordance with their particular agency’s retention policy. To gain access to this information, the public was required to submit a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to review information. As a result, specific details on a facility remained largely confidential. If anything was published, it would often be a summary of present trends or overall stakeholder compliance. As the supply of electronic data continues to grow, so does public access for those who know how to navigate the maze of websites and databases. This new reality requires companies to more carefully think about the data being reported and how they and others are going to use it. Impact of Inaccurate Public Data As agencies transition to managing large databases, there is oftentimes a rush to populate them with readily available information. Sometimes this data does not reflect the current operations. This could be a result of incomplete or obsolete data that was submitted many years ago and now is being posted publicly and used for compliance purposes. 20
In a specific case, a facility operator was unaware about the existence of the information posted to a database. An audit of the database triggered a facility inspection by the fire department. Based upon the publically available data, the fire department inspector determined that the facility was required to prepare a document for reporting year 2010, which they had failed to prepare. However, the database had been pre-populated by the agency managing it and the operator was unaware of its existence. Following the Fire Department inspection, the operator was able to review the hard copy records and correct the information. Based on the update, an accurate applicability assessment was performed and determined that the facility was not subject to the 2010 reporting. Unfortunately, the outcome is not always in favor of the facility operator. Data from websites are being used as support for citizen lawsuits which are looking for a quick settlement from the operator or a bounty from the agency. In a recent case, a facility operator received a Notice of Intent to Sue under the Clean Water Act partially based on information collected from on-line databases. These notices are usually sent by attorneys on behalf of environmental groups with an interest in the environmental status of a particular geographic area. The letter documented information from publicly available reports, analytical results and plans from regulatory agency websites, city and county planning websites, and aerial photography obtained from the internet. The letter did not accurately depict the activities at the facility. The response and potential lawsuit cost the facility tens of thousands of dollars. Regardless of the outcome of the legal suit, the facility is not eligible to collect attorney fees spent on the case. Frequently the facility operators must reply to the letter within 60 days which requires the California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
facility to quickly assemble a response team. These citizen’s lawsuits are encouraged by federal law through the Clean Water Act. In some cases, the regulatory agency may take additional action against the facility if warranted. The data originally submitted by a facility, which was intended to meet regulatory Advantage of Public Data The posting of data and its ease of use has benefits to those that know how to maximize its value. It can be used for research in evaluating trends, easily determining industry standards, providing institutional history for research purposes, quickly sharing information and providing proof of compliance for inspections. Without these databases, each can be a time consuming activity for a company looking to establish standards or show compliance. Additionally, familiarity with the contents of the agency’s files can eliminate concern that they are out of date or missing critical information submitted when the time comes for inspection. Publicly available data is also used by facilities to perform studies to demonstrate and improve corporate social responsibility. Companies are using public data about their operations during community meetings and public hearings to illustrate their commitment to the community and regulatory agency rules and regulations. Information from similar industries or data from facilities in the same geographic area further enabled operators to show their dedication and corporate responsibility. Protecting your facility from unnecessary exposure to enforcement and lawsuits requires planning and research. Here are some suggestions of places to begin:
2. Take the time to review data for accuracy. A decimal slip or over reporting is a common problem which can cause a facility to show a greater impact on paper than it actually has.
3. Make sure you are aware of the current trends in citizen lawsuits and enforcement actions. This data can help you prepare and know where you might want to perform additional research or focus efforts.
4. Collect data on a regular basis. Trying to pull together a year’s worth of information at the end of the year can often result in overestimation. Increasingly more individuals and groups are using electronic data to monitor what your facility is doing. Make sure you know what data is available and how it could be potentially used. CAM Please call Scott Taylor or Kathy Hubbard of Alta Environmental at (562) 495-5777 if you have any questions or comments.
1. Make sure you know exactly what is required to be reported. Provide no more or less.
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
• CARB Portable Equipment Registration • Air Permits – State and Local Permiting • Buy & Sell Air Pollution Credits • Customized source testing for unique or challenging sources • Acquisition Due Diligence • Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans & Training (SWP3) • Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plans (SPCC) • Certified Visible Emissions Observations • New Source Performance Standards • AERs, TRIs and SB-14s • Air Dispersion Modeling • Subsurface Assessment and Remediation 3777 Long Beach Blvd, Annex Bldg, Long Beach, CA 90807 o. 562.495.5777 | f. 562.495.5877 | altaenviron.com
21
Q+A
with
Jim Earp
Executive Director of the pro-infrastructure California Alliance for Jobs By: Russell W. Snyder Executive Director, California Asphalt Pavement Association (CalAPA)
(Interview conducted May 19, 2014)
Editors Note: Jim Earp is one of the most influential figures in transportation circles in California. He’s executive director of the pro-infrastructure California Alliance for Jobs, which has the backing of employers and trade unions. He has been successful in promoting numerous ballot measures on the local and statewide level to generate money for road repair, transit systems and seismic upgrades to California’s vast network of bridges. He is also a member of the California Transportation Commission. And, by the way, he is also a distant relative of famed Western lawman Wyatt Earp, although he says Hollywood has been mispronouncing the family name for decades. Rather than “ERP,” which sounds like a belch, he says the correct pronunciation of his last name sounds more like “ARP” and rhymes with “tarp.” He recently took time out from his busy schedule to sit down with California Asphalt magazine to talk about the state of transportation funding and what lies ahead. California Asphalt Magazine: First off, please tell us a little bit about your organization, the California Alliance for Jobs. Jim Earp: The California Alliance for Jobs is a labor-management partnership that was formed back in the mid-1990s to advocate for the whole industry. The idea was that labor unions and 22
employers could come together and this entity could take the best of what both halves of the industry offer and be able to advocate for issues that will increase job opportunities for contractors and the union construction workers they employ. Much of our effort has been focused on securing funding at both the local and the statewide level for construction. CAM: Your organization boasts a string of successes on the transportation funding front, particularly with so-called “self-help” counties that have taxed themselves to raise money for transportation. Are there any campaigns you would like to highlight? JE: On the local level, Alameda County was the first one we really sunk our teeth into. We really jumped into that campaign, which led to additional ones down the road to the point where most of the counties in Northern or Central California, if they are looking to try to get something passed by the voters, they almost always come to us because they know we know how to get it done. So over the last 15 years that has amounted to more than $14 billion at the local and regional level in county and regional sales tax measures. Then, beginning in 2000, we began playing a lot more heavily at the state level, through the initial passage of Proposition 42. We were the largest funders of that campaign.
Jim Earp, Executive Director of California Alliance for Jobs
CAM: Proposition 42 was the initiative to protect fuel taxes from being diverted to other uses besides transportation, right? JE: Yes. Unfortunately, that measure was written by the Legislature, so it had loopholes in it big enough to drive a Mack truck through, so we went back at it in 2006 with a measure that we wrote on our own and were in the midst of qualifying for the voters, which would have put a total lock box on that money. The Legislature, realizing what we were about to accomplish, at the 11th hour sat down with us and we were able to hammer out a deal which basically brought about Propositions 1A through 1E, which were placed on the November 2006 ballot. [ Continued on page 24 ]
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
23
[ Continued from page 22 ] CAM: Those were the infrastructure bonds backed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who famously drove up to one press conference on a bulldozer to promote them. JE: Right. Proposition 1A was a slightly a modified version of our initiative. It still put very strong protections on the sales tax money on gas, and Propositions 1B through 1E were a huge bonus for us because they included $37 billion in infrastructure funding. None of that was coming together until we were on the verge of qualifying our measure. That was the real catalyst for making that happen. So, the reward I got for that was that I got to run the statewide campaign, which created a larger bald spot on the back of my head and a shortened lifespan (laughs). CAM: Sometime success comes at a great cost. JE: Exactly. But we passed the largest infrastructure bond measure in the history of the country, so it was a huge boon for our industry. Then, after that, in 2008, I was asked to head up the high-speed rail campaign which, after a lot of cajoling, I finally agreed to do. We managed to get that one passed, and in 2010 we went back to the ballot and fashioned Proposition 22, which not only tightened protections on transportation funding, but it also anticipated some of the antics that the Legislature likes to do to get around those protections by creating different funds. Basically, we put a road block on all of that, and they (the Legislature) hated that, but the voters liked it, and we passed Prop. 22 in 2010. That has been a great benefit to protecting a lot of transportation funds. The one pot 24
of money that somehow escaped everyone’s attention at the time was truck-weight fees, and now we are in the midst of trying to redirect truck-weight fees back to where they belong because the Legislature, true to form, has taken that money and used it to backfill the General Fund. CAM: That’s nearly $1 billion per year. JE: Correct. CAM: And your organization produced a pretty effective series of YouTube videos on the subject, right? JE: Well, we’re trying to get the word out on what’s going on. Truck-weight fees were taken in 2011 after chronic state budget deficits, and it was part of a complicated scheme to restructure gas taxes. CAM: And only about three people in California truly understand how that scheme, known as the “gas tax swap,” actually works. JE: Yes (laughs). I was neck-deep in it and I still don’t quite understand it. But one of the key aspects of that deal was the $1 billion in truck-weight fees. The deal permitted the Legislature to do this. We reluctantly went along with it at the time because everybody was sharing the pain of these chronic budget deficits. But that was several years ago. The economy and the budget are better now, and we’re saying, “Let’s put that money back where it belongs.” We’ve polled it, and voters are solidly behind it. I think we have the issue on our side. It’s very difficult for anyone to stand up with a straight face and say that they are entitled to use this money to backfill the General Fund. The one argument that they seem to be leaning
on is, “Well, we are using this money to pay off transportation bond debt.” I would argue that transportation bonds are the only bonds that I am aware of that are relying on a dedicated source to pay off the debt service. and Everyone else, whether it is education or social services, these programs are all paid for out of the General Fund, so we seem to have been placed in a special category. We’ve got to be able to turn that around. When we got together on Proposition 1B in 2006, there was never any discussion that they were going to take existing transportation funds to pay off that debt service. If that was the case, we would have never done it to begin with. We would have just used the money that was already dedicated to us and then bonded against that. The argument back then was, “Hey, transportation infrastructure is a critical need, and it deserves a thin slice out of the General Fund budget” and that’s how we proceeded. Now the rules have changed and they want funds dedicated for transportation to pay off those bonds and we’re saying, “No, that’s not right.” CAM: The average voter, when they hear things like this, must get frustrated. They approve money for something like transportation, on the front end, and the money is siphoned off the back end without their knowledge. It’s almost like baitand-switch. It’s a trust issue that we have had to deal with for quite a long time. JE: The biggest trust issue that we’re facing right now is voters’ general disenchantment with government’s ability to deliver on anything that costs money. Whether it’s ‘Obamacare,’ or big projects like the Bay Bridge, and possibly even High Speed Rail,
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
those big mega-projects oftentimes, because of their size and complexity, have problems and we see the negative side of that in the press. So we do have a hurdle to overcome there. But by the same token, voters fundamentally are aware of the importance of a good transportation system. They use it every day. They don’t like paying gas taxes. They don’t like paying the bill, but if they are going to pay the bill, they want to make sure the money is going where it’s supposed to. And that’s really where we’ve been able to have a lot of political success in the past – to point out to them that some of the money they are already paying is going to the wrong place, and they want that money going to where it’s supposed to go. CAM: Don’t so-called ‘Self-Help Counties,” where voters have approved taxing themselves to pay for transportation improvements, generate about half of the money for transportation system improvements in California? JE: It’s actually more than half now. It’s really edging closer to 60 percent. And in Southern California, which has quite a few large counties that have passed several measures, it’s actually even more than that. CAM: There are currently 19 such self-help counties out of 58 in California, right? JE: I believe we are up to 19 or 20 now. CAM: Speaking of Southern California, we hear that a group is in the process of forming an organization similar to the California Alliance for Jobs – which will be funded from collective bargaining agreements based in Southern California.
JE: Yes, I understand they are well along in that process, and I commend them for it. I think that it will be great for the industry and beneficial for California. CAM: Your organization has created some very effective advertising campaigns, including some great videos featuring humorist Will Durst to help educate voters about the importance of adequate infrastructure funding and the risk to our economy and our quality of life if we don’t continue to make those investments. Do you envision collaborating with the Southern California group on things like that? JE: I think on any statewide transportation issue there will be a benefit for us to work in partnership and collaborate, and combine resources so that we have a unified effort going forth. CAM: The California Department of Transportation, or Caltrans, continues to be in the news, but not necessarily in a good way. There have been the various controversies over testing of materials and construction on the new eastern span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, and recently the Legislature’s non-partisan Legislative Analyst’s Office concluded that Caltrans in the coming budget year will be overstaffed by 3,500 positions in the 20,000 employee department, with most of those excess positions in what the department calls “Capital Outlay Support.” Those are the engineers and others that help plan, design and deliver transportation improvement projects. As a commissioner on the California Transportation Commission, which is one of the many entities that oversees Caltrans, what do you think about the department and how it is functioning and staffed today? The LAO noted
California California Asphalt Magazine Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental • 2014 Environmental Issue Issue
that the overstaffing is largely due to the fact that transportation funds are drying up so there is less work for Caltrans to do. JE: We’re at a critical juncture right now. We need more funding, but voters aren’t in the mood to dip into their own pockets for more money. We always need more accountability and more efficiency. So does that mean anyone is exempt from that? No. I think we are all under that magnifying glass, and that includes Caltrans. So, yes, I think Caltrans will come under increasing scrutiny and there will probably be reforms that need to be implemented to make Caltrans more efficient and leaner, so that, hopefully, more dollars are going to creating and building projects and fewer dollars are spent on staffing that may or may not get the job done. In saying that, I want to make sure that people understand that I’m a big supporter of Caltrans. I think, overall, Caltrans does a great job and they have a lot of dedicated employees. CAM: And they have a tough job. JE: That’s right. They have a very tough job. Right now it seems like there is a lot of negative press, but there are a lot of positive things that they do. I sit on the California Transportation Commission and I see the work that comes out of that and, when you look at the implementation of Proposition 1B, that was a tremendously successful deal for the voters. They voted $20 billion to help fund infrastructure projects and transportation projects that, for the most part, had been sitting on the shelf for years due to lack of money. We were able to, over the last seven or eight years, to deliver about $13 billion of that which came under the CTC’s purview. [ Continued on page 26 ] 25
[ Continued from page 25 ] With that $13 billion we actually leveraged $35 billion worth of projects. Some of that leveraging came from federal funding. Some of it came from local funding. A lot of it came from just good management of projects and a very competitive private sector industry that submitted extremely competitive bids on these projects. CAM: Part of that was because when the economy plunged into the Great Recession, private work dried up and there was more competition for public work. At one point I recall that bids for Caltrans work were coming in an average of about 30 percent below the original engineer’s estimates. JE: That’s right, but from my standpoint, we got the projects out and we generated more jobs from it. Profits were narrower. I’ll be the first to say, there were a lot of grumpy contractors out there. It’s been tough times for them. But you know what? The flip side of that is, it probably kept them from going out of business. Yeah, it’s alright for them to be a little grumpy, because no one likes making less money. But the fact of the matter is we’re still here and we didn’t cede this market to out-of-state contractors or people from other parts of the world to come in here. We still have a great foundation of home-based contractors that do this work for us. CAM: The biggest story in transportation these days is the proposed High-Speed Rail project that is envisioned to connect Northern and Southern California. The projected $91.4 billion cost of the rail line originally approved by voters in 1998 has some worried that it won’t carry enough passengers to justify its cost, especially when 26
compared to other modes of travel. There is also a perception in the road-building industry that the huge cost of the rail project may eventually consume some dollars that might otherwise go to roads. What do you think? JE: California is a big state, and just by virtue of that we have built the largest highway system of any state in the nation. California has a huge economy, and so we need we need that system. But it’s also part of our problem. Now that we’ve built this huge system that moves a lot of people and goods and services, just maintaining it and keeping it in a state of good repair is becoming a very expensive proposition. So, we haven’t collectively been generating the revenue stream that’s needed to keep that system in a state of good repair. There’s a lot of people who are focusing on increasing transit services, and other forms of transportation as the answer. Well, yes, in certain parts of California where the geography and the demographics are there, transit is going to have to be a larger part of the future. I can’t see that we can put more asphalt along I-880 in the Bay Area. That freeway is as big as it’s going to get. And there are a lot of freeways like that in different parts of the state. So we’re going to have to start making more use of transit where it makes sense. But this idea that the word “highway” or “freeway” or “asphalt” have suddenly become bad words, I just don’t buy that. It is the basis for why California is the eighth largest economy in the world, and we have to maintain that system. CAM: What about the various alternative funding mechanisms that have been tossed around? Some say, with the advent of more electric cars, the days of the
gasoline tax to fund road repairs are rapidly coming to an end. JE: Everybody keeps talking about using a Vehicle Miles Traveled system for funding our transportation system. Well, I think that, ultimately, we may end up going there as more and more cars use an alternative means of power, because the current system only taxes gasoline. The problem is, a VMT program has a lot of hair on it. We have the technology to implement such a system. We can track people. But people don’t like the idea that every move they make is being watched and can be documented. So there’s a lot of resistance to it. It’s not a perfect system. It frustrates me that that people want to walk away from the gas tax so quickly, saying it’s imperfect and out of date. I just don’t buy that. It is a built-in user fee that has served us well for many decades. It doesn’t serve us quite as well now. Why? Because we’ve got hydrogen-powered cars and electric-powered cars. But part of it is our own doing. We haven’t indexed the gas tax to reflect current inflation and the current cost of living. So we start bad-mouthing gas taxes for not generating enough revenue. Well, it’s not generating enough revenue because the politicians didn’t have enough backbone to say, “Hey, we’ve got to keep the gas tax up to date with the cost of construction “ Secondly, there are all kinds of loopholes. For example, the Ethanol portion of the gas tax isn’t taxed because of the farm lobby. So you have all these little exemptions. If we indexed the gas tax and eliminated the exemptions, we’d have more money being generated. [ Continued on page 28 ]
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
27
[ Continued from page 26 ] Then we could just focus on placing a road user fee on alternative-powered vehicles, so that they are paying their fair share. To me, that would be a very logical and rational way between here and some day in the future when we make use of a totally different way of funding all of this. So those are things that should be done. But it’s all about political will. Or, should I say, the lack of political will. CAM: It also doesn’t help that gas prices happen to be high right now and people say, “I don’t want to pay more for gas” and they don’t really understand how the gas tax works and all the politics behind it. JE: No, people tend to assume that, because they are paying higher gasoline prices, that somehow it is generating more money for roads, and it’s not. That is frustrating for us in the transportation sector, knowing that all that extra money is really just going into stockholders’ pockets. It’s not going into improving the system. So we’re just trying to figure out how we can tap into that a little bit and make sure we have a system that is funding itself. It’s always been amazing to me – and we’ve done so much polling on this – but you can’t change human behavior. They’ll fight even a nickel increase in the gas tax, but in the last month gasoline has increased close to 30 cents a gallon and what are people doing? Well, we’re still rolling up to the pump and filling up their tanks. Maybe we’re grumbling a little bit, but we’re still doing it. CAM: What do you see in the future with transportation funding? As we are talking today, the MAP-21 federal reauthorization 28
of the surface transportation act is still bottled up in Congress and there is no consensus on how to fund highway programs. JE: I think we are at a very pivotal place, and in my thinking a very difficult place. We have gone off the fiscal cliff. The money is drying up. CAM: That’s funny. We’ve been saying it is coming, but now you say it’s here. JE: It’s here. We’ve gone off the fiscal cliff. We haven’t felt the pain yet because we haven’t hit bottom (laughs). We’re on our way. We’re in free-fall. It’s not a good place to be. I fear that we’re not really going to turn that around until we feel some pain. Voters are not feeling the pain right now in terms of transportation. We’ve actually fixed a lot of roads with Proposition 1B, the economy has actually taken cars off the road, and so people aren’t really feeling the pain that much. But that’s going to turn around – there will be a time in a few years when people look around and say, “What happened? We have to fix this.” It’s unfortunate that we have to get to that place, because then it takes time to get something passed and it takes time to actually get that money out on the street. But I fear that’s probably where we’re at. CAM: Unfortunately, it certainly seems that way. Look back to the 1989 Loma Prieta and 1994 Northridge earthquakes. You didn’t need to explain to anyone what happens to a bridge that is not designed to modern seismic standards in a powerful earthquake. You could see the rubble on TV. Those disasters galvanized public support for the Seismic Retrofit Bond Act of 1996, and Caltrans did a masterful job in
retrofitting thousands of bridges up and down the state to better withstand earthquakes. But it took a couple of disasters to make that happen. JE: Unfortunately, that phenomenon is not restricted to transportation. Take a look at water, which we’re deeply involved in as an organization. The bottom line is, as long as people turn the tap and there’s clean water coming out of it, they’re probably not going to move too much on improving our infrastructure even though the system is operating way beyond capacity. It’s interesting that this drought is beginning to focus people’s attention on the fact that we don’t have a system that can handle 38 million people right now so that crisis mentality seems to be required for a lot of these things. CAM: We’ve covered a lot of ground. Is there anything else you would like to add? JE: I think that, by the time this goes to press, we’ll probably have a new budget in place. We have a very heavy lift and we’re trying to get some short-term money so that we can have some money in the pipeline until we can get a longer-term solution in place. We worked two years to try to develop a long-term solution, but it became clear that we did not have a product that stood a good chance of winning, so we’re going back to the drawing board to put something together that the voters understand and will accept. Hopefully we can do that in the next couple of years. CAM
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
Industry News
Robert Cox 1932 – 2014
Bob was born July 13, 1932 in Oklahoma and he passed away on April 24, 2014. He leaves three living offspring, daughter Judy, son Robert, and daughter Susan. His other son, Greg died in an accident in 1981. The Cox Lyle Boxing program is a living memorial dedicated to his son, Greg. He also has four grandsons Josh, Jay, Spencer and Gregory. Bob graduated from East High in Denver and still has many friends from his high school days. Bob loved lots of sports. His favorites were football and, of course, boxing. Bob became a boxing fan at the age of 5. Bob felt that founding the Cox Lyle Boxing program was his greatest personal achievement. He often said he could not have done this without all the help from Ron & Roberta McKinney, Ron Lyle, Bob Leino and family support. Bob was proud of his work achievements. Work was a passion for him and he never quit. He won many sales awards and accolades, including national recognition, over the years. Up to his last days he continued to run his own sales company, specializing in asphalt plants and components and effecting mergers and acquisitions. He was also very active politically. He began working on the election commission at the age of 16. He did countless hours of volunteer work for his party and also managed Bill Daniels and Don Brotzman’s campaigns. Bob was a Christian and an upbeat guy. His sense of humor and perseverance were his main qualifications. He wanted his services to be a celebration. He often said “There are nobody’s shoes I’d rather walk in than my own!” He touched everyone he met and had so many circles of friends. Many of these folks have reached out from across the nation and internationally to pay their respects. They all have great stories of funny times, life lessons, Bob’s great business acumen and his Christian beliefs. Many spoke of what a “sweet, caring and powerful” man he was. All who knew him are better for the experience and will remember the twinkle in his eye. CAM California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
29
New Member Spotlight
CleanFleets.net AirResources Regulatory Experts Offer Effective and Legal Solutions for Diesel Equipment and Truck Owners
E
ver wish you had someone you could call to get the real scoop on CARB compliance issues? Do you have unanswered questions about what technology solutions are available and which ones would best fit your specific needs and budget? One of the California Asphalt Pavement Association’s newest members has these answers and much more to help your company remain efficient and compliant. CleanFleets Provides Solutions
CleanFleets.net provides engineering, regulatory compliance, and information technology solutions to owners of diesel engines. Asphalt contractors certainly have their fair share of equipment and trucks with diesel engines, all of which must be in compliance with the California Air Resources Board (CARB). On Sept. 13, 2013, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) granted authorization to the CARB to enforce all provisions of the In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation that was originally approved in May 2007 and amended in January 2009 30
and December 2010. CARB has been enforcing the reporting, labeling, sales disclosure and idle limitation requirements, while phasing in enforcement of various elements of the rule beginning Jan. 1, 2014. CARB plans to officially begin enforcing the emissions performance requirements for large fleets July 1, 2014. The emission performance and compliance dates for medium and small fleets will be enforced as of Jan. 1, 2017 and Jan. 1, 2019 for small fleets. These will continue until 2023 for large and medium fleets and 2028 for small fleets. Fleets that fail to comply will be subject to enforcement action, including fines. In 2013, CARB settled 256 cases involving violations by heavy-duty diesel trucks and bus fleets to the tune of $2,177,813. Through the hard work of your California Asphalt Pavement Association, other associations and companies like CleanFleets.net, CARB approved a new flexibility option that would defer compliance with the PM filter requirements until Jan. 1, 2017 for up to three trucks in a fleet for owners that are unable to afford
Sean R. Edgar is the Director of Operations at CleanFleets.net
compliance and cannot get financing to comply. This ruling is subject to change and must be finalized by end of summer, 2014. These approved amendments exempt vehicles that travel fewer than 5,000 total miles per year. The existing extension for vehicles that travel less than 1,000 miles annually also remains in effect. In addition, CARB approved an amendment to replace the low mileage construction truck extension with a new Low Mileage Work Truck Option that applies to trucks that travel less than 20,000 miles per year and are straight trucks, and tractors that exclusively pull low-boy or dump trailers. CARB also approved an amendment to extend the use of existing credits (for downsizing, early addition of PM filters, and adding cleaner vehicles) until Jan. 1, 2018. Several restrictions apply to all of the above amendments. All of this can make one’s head spin with confusion and guess what? These regulations will most likely continue to change and be amended several more times in the future. Keeping track of these rules and regulations can be daunting and having a
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
(Left & Below) Sean R. Edgar has educated more than 5,000 fleet owners in six western states.
company like CleanFleets.net around to help keep a small, medium or large construction company in compliance makes sense. CleanFleets.net was established in 2007, but the principles of the company have been diligently working in the environmental protection and compliance industry for many years. Sean R. Edgar is one the owners and the director of operations at CleanFleets.net. He has 23 years of public policy development and field experience in transportation, construction and air quality projects for clients in both the public and private sectors. Edgar grew up in Northern California and graduated from UC Berkeley with a degree in political science. During this time he worked for Gov. Pete Wilson as part of an internship program from 1991 to 1993, while also working on environmental policy and the formation of the California EPA. Base closures were big news in the 90s and directly out of college, Edgar went to work for International Technology Corporation, where he managed the closure of Hamilton Army Airfield in Marin County. For two years, Edgar coordinated waste storage, packaging, transportation and disposal for the U.S. Department of
Energy. For 14 years, he was immersed in the world of waste management and hazardous waste abatement. He was also the owner’s representative for the closure of the West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill. Soon after, he and his two brothers started their own construction engineering consultation company and began working heavily with associations, including the California Refuse Recycling Council (CRRC) and other waste oriented companies. Edgar was assigned to handle all of the CARB issues for the CRRC, not knowing that he would soon come full circle. Edgar has had an established presence at CARB since the September 2000 adoption of the Diesel Risk Reduction Plan (DRRP) and he has participated in every
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
major on-road and off-road rule making for more than 12 years. His accomplishments while working for associations like CRRC, Associated General Contractors (AGC), California Construction Trucks Association (CCTA), Beer and Beverage Distributors Association (BBDA), the Southern California Moving and Storage Association (SCMSA) and of course the California Asphalt Pavement Association (CalAPA) are too many to list in this short article. He has to-date successfully managed more than 1,000 fleets for both public and private sectors. In the past two years alone, Edgar has educated more than 5,000 fleet owners in six western states through more than 150 personal appearances. [ Continued on page 32 ] 31
(Left & Below) CleanFleets.net provides engineering, regulatory compliance and information technology solutions.
[ Continued from page 31 ] He is a recognized expert regarding on-road and off-road fleet rule implementation and technology options. Edgar has carved out a reputation as an individual and owner of a company that provides the critical link between developing regulatory programs, a dynamic technology market, and the equipment owner’s planning and execution of a compliance plan. His company is so qualified and well thought of that they were chosen by CARB in an open bid situation to represent them in the education and training of associations and businesses throughout the western states. “Today’s fleets need to quantify the emissions from their California-based diesel engines and plan for future reductions in air impacts from diesel particulate to greenhouse gas,” says Edgar. “We offer a one-stop integrated diagnostic, engineering, procurement and compliance monitoring service in the complex area of diesel risk reduction and management. We work directly with the fleet owner 32
to determine the most cost effective strategies and solutions.” When you call on CleanFleets.net they will start by obtaining or creating a full inventory of your trucks and equipment. From here they will determine if any diesel emission retrofit regulations apply and what the timeline may be to meet associated regulations. They will also review available technology options and help you develop a budget to set your mind at ease. Edgar and his team will work hard to create the most cost effective plan available under the law. They know just how to navigate the regulatory maze and part of their services include making sure that CalAPA members are compliant and reporting and registering properly, as well as making sure your vehicles and equipment are labeled and able to pass diagnostic and opacity testing. The hard working CleanFleets team will educate you and help you understand the complicated
ever-changing regulations and even help you to take advantage program credits or available delays. “We are currently assisting 12 CalAPA members with our services and we stand ready to assist you in keeping your heavy equipment, trucks and portable equipment compliant,” says Edgar. “Our goal is to identify the minimal steps needed in order for you to comply. If your budget will allow you to go further, we can educate you on the early compliance incentives, grant funding and even financing options.” CleanFleets.net is ready to help your company make sense of this compliance madness. Whether through retrofit or replacement, they have the solutions to get through this trying process intact. For more information on CleanFleets please log on to www.cleanfleets.net or call their Sacramento offices at (916) 520-6040. CAM
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
Day at the Races Saturday, July 19, 2014 Del Mar Racetrack 2260 Jimmy Durante Blvd Del Mar
2014 Golf Tournament (Pacific Palms Resort) Thursday, Sept. 18, 2014 Pacific Palms Resort One Industry Hills Parkway Industry
Fall Conference Wednesday & Thursday, Oct. 29 & 30, 2014 Doubletree Hotel 2001 Point West Way Sacramento
CalAPA Annual Meeting and Dinner Jan. 2015 (Tentative) Jonathan Club 545 S. Figueroa Street Los Angeles
Meeting dates are subject to change. Watch the weekly Asphalt Insider newsletter for meeting updates or call CalAPA at (866) 498-0761 to confirm meeting date and location.
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
33
Nixon-Egli Equipment Co. Honors Long Time Friend and Employee John Skaff on March 10 in Tracy California
John Skaff started his construction equipment sales and management career with Gomaco Corp. out of Ida Grove, Iowa. As a service engineer he traveled most of North America, Canada and had a trip to Europe. He was sent to Warsaw, Poland, which was Communist at that time. His Visa had an incorrect exit date and because of that Skaff accidentally overstayed his Visa and was detained by the authorities. This would be his last trip with Gomaco. In 1977, he got a job with Challenge-Cook Bros selling ready mix trucks, concrete pumps, batch plants and aggregate trailers. In 1978, he moved to California with this company and remained employed with Challenge-Cook Bros. until 1987. It was at this time that Skaff reconnected with an old business acquaintance and friend, Jack Rogers. Rogers was from Ida Grove, but now lived in California. Rogers let Skaff know that there was an opening at Nixon-Egli Equipment Co. (NEECO) located at that time in Santa Fe Springs. Skaff went to work for NEECO in 1987 and he remained there until March 14, 2014. He spent 26 and a half years happily working at Nixon-Egli, beginning his career as a heavy equipment salesman in Los Angeles and Orange counties from ‘87 to ‘90. In 1990, Skaff was promoted to Northern California Sales Manager and moved to work at the NEECO office in Hayward. Then in 1994, made he made the transition to General Manager, 34
running every aspect of sales for the company. A few years later he was promoted to his final position of VP of Construction Equipment Sales. Skaff accomplished many things during his years at Nixon-Egli. Perhaps his proudest achievement came when he was asked to write a business plan for Link-Belt Cranes to see whether or not NEECO would be accepted as the Northern California distributor. Link-Belt not only accepted Nixon-Egli, but they also commented that Skaff’s business plan was among the most comprehensive and best plans they had ever received. Gaining Link-Belt Cranes in Northern California represented a pivotal point in the company’s growth and Skaff is very proud to have been part of this process. “I remember when I first started out at Nixon-Egli. They were starting a 401(k) Plan and that sounded good to me. I just cannot say enough about Steve Nixon, his son, James and everyone at Nixon-Egli. They are family to me and I will miss working with everyone from Nixon-Egli.
I’d also like to personally thank Steve Nixon for the opportunity to work for his great company. I have always tried to do the very best for Steve, the company, the customers and myself” says Skaff. “Right now it just feels like I am on an extended vacation. It hasn’t sunk in yet.” A retirement party was held in Skaff’s honor March 10 at their Tracy branch offices. More than 50 people attended the event catered by Olive Garden. The party included long time customers and friends from companies such as ABSL, Delta Grinding, ANRAK and suppliers such as Link-Belt, Wirtgen Group, Midland Manufacturing, EZE Trucking, LeeBoy and Associated Wire & Rope. Nixon-Egli Equipment Company has been loyally serving their customers for 49 years with the best road construction equipment available. Their product line is extensive, specializing in road construction, cranes and municipal equipment. They sell the best names in the industry, all backed by the very best parts inventory and
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
1.
2. 3. 4. 5.
factory-trained service personnel. Names like Wirtgen, LeeBoy, Link-Belt, Vogele, Johnston, Hamm, Rosco, PB Loader, Midland Machinery, Arrow-Master, Gradall, Hi-Way, EAST,
John Skaff (left), Vern Gunderson, James Nixon and Steve Kekich of Nixon-Egli Equipment Co. at the CalAPA Annual Dinner held on January 16th at the Jonathan Club in downtown Los Angeles. Carl Bahnsen saying a few words at the retirement party for John Skaff. Steve Nixon has a few colorful words for John Skaff while presenting him with his retirement gift. Steve Nixon, John Skaff and Kathleen Arndt. John Skaff opens his retirement gifts.
Ferguson, Zieman, American Road Machinery, Aquatech, Peterson Industries, HTC, Miller Spreader Co., Lincoln Paving Products and Trinity Trailers. For more information on Nixon-Egli
Equipment Company, please log on to www.nixon-egli.com or call their Ontario headquarters at (909) 930-1822 or their Northern California office in Tracy at (209) 830-8600. CAM
Support your Industry and Your Future by Joining the California Asphalt Pavement Association
Contact Sophie You for further information
866.498.0761 syou@calapa.net
calapa.net
www. California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
35
Industry News L.A. Contractors heard the latest on CARB equipment regulations Upcoming deadlines and requirements for diesel-powered equipment to meet stringent new air quality regulations was the focus of the most recent CalAPA L.A. Contractors’ Dinner meeting. Mike Buckantz with CalAPA member Associates Environmental,
a consulting firm, walked the 40 attendees at the June 10 dinner through the maze of new regulations, requirements and potential penalties for non-compliance. “If you haven’t re-powered yet, do it soon,” Buckantz warned.
Vulcan Materials is the largest producer of construction aggregates in the United States. The West Region proudly supplies the highest quality materials for the production of roads, highways, dams, airports, seaports, commercial centers and residential housing as well as other Construction Material needs.
“Enforcement is beginning. We’re going to see it intensify the first of July.” His comprehensive presentation at the Dal Rae Restaurant in Pico Rivera also included some levity, such as when he informed the group about a new California Air Resources Board (CARB) requirement that diesel-powered equipment sellers must disclose to buyers “the misery you have just inflected on them” if the equipment is not CARB compliant. For further information or reservations for future CalAPA events please contact the CalAPA office at 916-791-5044. CAM
Serving all of California Southern California Area Los Angeles Basin Inside Sales: 626-633-4228 Customer Service Center (Dispatch) 626-856-6156
San Diego Area
Inside Sales: 858-530-9472 Customer Service Center (Dispatch) 858-530-9465
Central California Fresno
Inside Sales: 559-434-1202 Customer Service Center (Dispatch) 559-846-2852
Bakersfield
Technical Services Laboratories Northern California Technical Service Manager Phil Reid: 559-333-5647
Pleasanton Laboratory
Steve Cota with Patriot Risk gives the “Insurance Tidbit.”
Chris Melodia with Imperial Paving, Chris Barry with Beach Paving and Steve Cota with Patriot Risk (left to right).
From left: Marc Mitchell with Paramount Petroleum, Len Nawrocki with Valero Marketing & Supply and Ryan Shoemaker with Guardtop.
CalAPA’s Sophie You congratulates Tony Contreras with MTS for his good fortune.
CalAPA’s Sophie You (right) welcomes Tony Grasso, CalAPA Deputy Executive Director.
Greg Vinson: 925-485-5977 Lab # 925-485-5982
Fresno Laboratory
Gary Dunkel: 559-351-6650 Lab # 559-434-3223
Bakersfield Laboratory Bob Lee: 661-979-9211
Southern California Technical Service Manager Tim Reed: 626-856-6190
Customer Service Center (Dispatch) 661-835-4800
Senior Technical Services Superintendent
Northern California Bay Area, Pleasanton: 925-846-2852
Los Angeles Basin Laboratory (LA East)
Sacramento Area, Roseville
San Diego Basin Laboratory
HMA Inside Sales / Dispatch: 916-773-3968
Keynote speaker Mike Buckantz with Associates Environmental gives a CARB update.
Pascal Mascarenhas: 626-856-6190 Greg Reader: 626-856-6190
Robert Piceno: 858-547-4981
Grass Valley Area, Nev City, Auburn Area HMA Inside Sales: 530-273-4437
West Region Administration 818-553-8800
36
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
Industry News Noted industry leader Tony Grasso joins CalAPA as deputy executive director; will be based in Southern California Respected construction industry leader Tony Grasso will be joining the California Asphalt Pavement Association as Deputy Executive Director, effective July 1. He will be based in Southern California. Grasso, who previously held executive positions at Associated General Contractors of California and the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG), replaces Jim St. Martin, who retired from the association in 2012 but stayed on in a part-time consulting capacity until a permanent replacement could be named. “Tony has a well-deserved reputation in our industry as hard-working, knowledgeable and effective,” said Alan French, General Manager of DeSilva Gates Materials and vice chairman of CalAPA. “He will be an outstanding representative for our interests and a welcome addition to our team.” Grasso holds a Bachelor of Science degree from California State University, Fullerton, and teaching credentials from California State University, Los Angeles and California State University, San Bernardino, He began his professional career as a public school teacher, but later worked for AGC as district manager in Southern California and Chief Operating Officer of the statewide organization. He also was executive director of the Engineering Contractors’ Association, and executive director of SANBAG. His professional experience also includes stints at CalAPA-member Griffith Co. and Penhall Co. Recently he was
Tony Grasso a business consultant for MAP Consulting. While at AGC, Grasso oversaw the Joint Engineering Division and coordinated and established a joint AGC/Caltrans Task Group to address specification review and bid items for Storm Water Pollution Prevention Programs (SWPPP), which helped reduce exposure to contractors. Also while at AGC, Grasso led the industry arbitration efforts to get compensation for Wage Order 16 Rest Period regulation and the loss of productivity for contracts that were already in place before the implementation of the Wage Order. Will Kempton, Transportation California executive director and former Caltrans and OCTA chief, said: “I’m pleased to see that Tony Grasso has joined the California Asphalt Pavement Association. His knowledge and experience will be a very positive asset for the Association and for our industry.” Added Randy Iwasaki, another former Caltrans director and currently executive director of
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
the Contra Costa Transportation Authority: “I have had the privilege of working with Tony for many years and have always been impressed with his commitment to customer service and ability to find solutions that work for his clients.” “Tony is a vast storehouse of knowledge on many issues that are important to our membership,” said CalAPA Executive Director Russell Snyder. “He has served on numerous technical committees and represented the interests of contractors and suppliers in an evenhanded and resourceful way. His integrity and humility is widely known and respected.” Grasso, who lives in Rancho Cucamonga, Calif., will report to the executive director and will assist in all phases of managing the affairs of the statewide association, with a special emphasis on activities in Southern California. After July 1 he can be reached via e-mail at tgrasso@calapa.net . His mobile phone number is: (909) 362-9192. After the official announcement was made on Grasso’s appointment, numerous messages of support have flooded the association by phone, e-mail and social media. “Tony is a great guy and effective leader with tons of direct experience,” posted Robert Mahan with Mahan Insurance Brokers, an active AGC of California member, on LinkedIn. CAM
37
Alta Environmental............................................... 21 Pavement Recycling Systems............................. 33 Bomag America....................................................... 9 Peterson CAT........................................................... 5 Coastline Equipment.............................................. 9 Quinn Co.................................................................. 5 CEI........................................................................... 15 RDO Equipment Co............................................7, 39 Diversified Asphalt Products............................... 38 RDO Integrated Controls......................................18 E.D. Etnyre & Co.................................................... 29 Roadtec.................................................................... 8 GuardTop............................................................... 27 Sakai......................................................................... 7 Hawthorne CAT....................................................... 5 Sespe Consulting, Inc........................................... 27 Herrmann Equipment, Inc.................................... 23 Sully-Miller Contracting Co................................. 27 Holt of California..................................................... 5 Valero Marketing & Supply................................... 3 Johnson Machinery................................................ 5 Volvo Construction Equipment & Svcs...............11 Nixon-Egli Equipment Co...................... Back Cover Vulcan Materials Company.................................. 36 Paramount Petroleum Corp................................... 2 Western Oil Spreading Services......................... 19
38
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
California Asphalt Magazine • 2014 Environmental Issue
39
Unbeatable Team Ad_Mill_8x10.5.pdf
1
5/5/14
4:24 PM
UNBEATABLE TEAM.
C
M
Y
CM
MY
CY
CMY
K
The Wirtgen Group owes its strength to the excellence of its four product brands – Wirtgen, Vögele, Hamm and Kleemann – with their unique wealth of experience. Put your trust in the Wirtgen Group team.
ROAD AND MINERAL TECHNOLOGIES
www.wirtgenamerica.com
California’s Largest General Line Construction and Municipal Equipment Dealer. So. California: 2044 S. Vineyard Ave., Ontario, CA 91761 • (909) 930-1822 No. California: 800 E. Grant Line Rd., Tracy, CA 95304 • (209) 830-8600 www.nixon-egli.com