|
U.S. EPA REGION IX LETTER Summary: An August
22, 2000, letter signed by former U.S. EPA Regional Administrator, Felicia
Marcus, is frequently cited by South Pasadena and other project opponents
as a basis to question the results of virtually every study that shows
the 710 Freeway Project will have a positive air quality impact. This
letter is the bald opinion of Ms. Marcus and it has absolutely no U.S.
EPA conducted study (or any other study) to substantiate her claim that
the 710 Project will not have a positive air quality benefit. The notorious
Marcus letter continues to be used by the 710 opponents for one simple
reason: In the debate over air quality, its all they have! The
Details: The only
governmental official who has given project opponents any support on the
air quality issue was the U.S. EPA Region IX Administrator, Felicia Marcus.
Although Ms. Marcus left her appointment at the close of the Clinton Administration,
South Pasadena continues to show her strange letter to other governmental
decisionmakers in an effort to deter them from taking action to advance
the 710 Freeway to completion. Ms. Marcuss
August 22, 2000, letter is perhaps the most bizarre single document in
the 710 Freeway debate. The Marcus letter purported to be a response to
an inquiry by State Senator Adam Schiff about the air quality impacts
of the 710 Project. At the time the letter was written, the City of South
Pasadena was pressing the state legislature to pass two bills intended
to kill the 710 Freeway Project. In the successful effort to defeat the
bills, the 710 Coalition and other project supporters pointed out that
every study ever conducted of the 710 Project demonstrated it will have
a positive air quality impact when constructed. In the transportation
planning process, U.S. EPA in Washington D.C. issues regulations regarding
how to determine whether regional transportation plans are in conformity
with the State Air Plan. The Air Plan sets targets for reducing air pollution
emissions in order to bring the State of California and its regions into
compliance with the Clean Air Act. Neither U.S. EPA nor any of its regional
offices is responsible for actually conducting the conformity studies
required of each region. In Southern California, that task is the responsibility
of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). When SCAG
completes its study to determine if the regional transportation plans
are in conformity with the State Air Plan, it is the responsibility of
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) to review SCAGs work and concur with the findings. If FHWA
or FTA do not concur, the region can be declared to be "out of conformity"
with the State Air Plan. During this process, U.S. EPA Region IX is consulted,
but the ultimate federal agency decision regarding conformity and air
quality lies with FHWA and FTA. In the August
22, 2000, letter Marcus wrote that:
It is clear
that 710 project opponents convinced Ms. Marcus to release this letter
at a critical time in the state legislative deliberation process when
the legislature was about to vote on the two 710 killer bills supported
by Mr. Schiff. Other than her naked opinion, the letter cities no U.S.
EPA study or any other study to support Ms. Marcuss conclusion that
the claims of the positive air quality benefit of the 710 project were
"not true." In fact, there is not one shred of evidence to support
her personal opinion set in a letter typed on U.S. EPA letterhead. The facts are that the 710 Project has consistently been included in the regional transportation plans and played a key role in maintaining regional conformity with the State Air Plan. The responsible federal agencies are FHWA and FTA who make the actually conformity determinations, not U.S. EPA which only confers and comments. These responsible federal agencies have found time and time again that the 710 Freeway will have regionally significant positive air quality impacts -- regardless what Ms. Marcuss personal opinion may be. |
|