San Diego does less to regulate diesel emissions than other communities. Why is that?

Last week air pollution regulators in San Diego decided against developing a rule that would regulate diesel emissions from warehouses and distribution centers.

The decision comes as other California districts pass or consider similar regulations called indirect source rules following the federal rollback of environmental protections. It also comes after San Diego was named the fifth worst city in the nation for pollution from particulate matter, such as that produced by diesel emissions.

A divided board of the San Diego Air Pollution Control District voted 5-4 to instead follow staff recommendations to continue with incentive programs to persuade polluters to reduce emissions. It will also consider purchasing air filters for impacted residents.

The meeting lasted more than two hours and had several twists and turns.

One board member, Santee Councilmember Laura Koval, voted against her own motion which included an amendment she approved to consider the rule. And San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria voted against the rule even though, as a state assembly member, he wrote legislation that required San Diego to consider adopting a rule.

Members opposed to the rule argued the process was too expensive for the outcomes projected by a staff report commissioned by the board. Those in favor said that incentives would not be effective without regulation, and that the staff report had significant gaps.

Board member Marcus Bush, a National City councilmember, voted against the rule but acknowledged that the staff report is likely not accounting for all impacts on residents. He said costs would still not be justified.

“I don’t think that it would be that much more significant for all this time and money that we’re investing in this particular form of a rule,” Bush said.

Board member Paloma Aguirre, a San Diego County supervisor and the former mayor of Imperial Beach, disagreed.

“The reality is that South Bay families have heard for years that we should wait for another study, another pilot program, another voluntary effort,” she said before voting for creating a rule. “Meanwhile, families in my district deal with dirty air, respiratory illness, missed school days, chronic headaches, asthma and reduced quality of life in ways that many other communities in our region simply do not experience at the same level.” 

A coalition of nonprofit organizations have advocated for the rule since 2019, following Gloria’s state bill, saying that companies will not regulate themselves. The group includes the National City-based Environmental Health Coalition, the local chapter of the Sierra Club, Climate Action Campaign, Casa Familiar, Earthjustice, Pacific Environment, and San Diego 350. 

“Once you have a stick, the carrot looks a lot yummier, right?” said Jasmin Vargas, the air quality and clean ports campaign director with the Environmental Health Coalition.

Here is a breakdown of why this has become a statewide topic.

What is an indirect source rule? 

Federal and state governments face hurdles in regulating emissions from diesel trucks. An indirect source rule allows a regional air pollution district to instead establish standards for distribution centers that supply trucks and attract traffic.

Last year California abandoned its plan to implement rules for phasing out diesel trucks as well as other clean-air initiatives because the Trump administration was unlikely to allow the state to implement them.

That mobilized leaders and advocates throughout the state to take action locally. The regulation is aimed at cutting particulate matter, diesel particulate matter and nitrogen oxide pollution from heavy-duty truck traffic.

People in San Diego’s port and border communities breathe more diesel emissions than 90% of communities in California.

Some of these neighborhoods have been designated by the state as “Portside Environmental Justice Neighborhoods.” The program was designed to increase monitoring and to facilitate reduction of industrial emissions that have historically impacted residents.

Two districts in California have so far introduced a rule. They are the South Coast Air Quality Management District and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. The Bay Area Air District is also considering one.

Why was the board split in San Diego? 

The elected officials and others who make up the regulatory board in San Diego commissioned a staff report to analyze the impacts and benefits of creating a rule, and then they were divided about whether the information contained in the preliminary study was sufficient to make a decision.

Several board members were concerned that the report used databases that are typically used as screening tools and are not precise enough to accurately assess health impacts. They also pointed out that the staff document underreported how many people would benefit from the implementation of a rule. 

“These models are only as good as the variables that you put into them,” said board member Paula Stigler Granados, a public health researcher at San Diego State University.

She added that staff does not know how many warehouses there are or how active they are. Staff members used preliminary numbers from a private real estate information firm called CoStar to make an estimate and said in their report that the information was not verified.

Vargas from the Environmental Health Coalition said that is why they support a rule making process which would require defining and confirming warehouse activity.

If the board had agreed to create a rule, it would have gathered more concrete data and created more detailed impact reports.

Opponents of the rule sided with the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce as well as the Otay Mesa Chamber of Commerce saying that the rule would cost businesses money and not be an effective use of public funds.

“We actually cannot do everything,” said board member and Coronado Mayor John Duncan. “We actually do have burdens on our staff. We actually do have programs in National City that have not been funded and implemented fully.”

Supervisor Aguirre said that if the board voted to consider a rule, she would seek additional funding from the county.

So what happens now?

Though board members struck down the rulemaking process, they could still consider it down the line. Proponents say they are not giving up.

Last year the Environmental Health Coalition and another coalition of organizations and residents successfully stopped a fuel transfer station project that would have been situated in a part of National City that the state recognized for having high asthma rates.

The National City City Council rejected the project after numerous meetings where community advocates and residents showed up to voice their opposition, saying it would go against the state mandate and cause further harm instead of fixing existing health issues.

The coalition proposed its own plan for how the rule could be implemented, following a phased approach. The first phase would prioritize regulating warehouses over 100,000 square feet in communities most impacted by diesel emissions. The second would focus on warehouses over 50,000 square feet. Finally, the program would expand to less impacted communities.

It could bring much needed relief to residents like Alicia Sanchez who works as a promotora with the Environmental Health Coalition, helping educate the community. She worries for her husband who has cancer and her neighbors and extended family who live with trucks passing through their neighborhoods daily.

“Ya no podemos esperar más,” Sanchez said in Spanish in an interview with inewsource.

“We cannot wait any longer.”