mook Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Santa Cruz ozone issue is that one (Scotts
> Valley?) monitor exceeds the tightest standards
> EPA is considering. If EPA goes that low, the
> whole county (not just the vicinity of the
> monitor) goes nonattainment based on normal
> practice. Just like in the 1990s the whole
> Monterey Bay area (SC+Monterey+San Benito Co.) was
> nonattainment for ozone because one monitor (on a
> mountaintop near Pinnacles NM) exceeded the
> standard occasionally. Davenport itself is
> unlikely to ever violate any air quality standards
> given its isolated location and sea breezes,
> unless of course the cement plant re-starts
> without any dust control!!
>
> Hmmm...on the plus side(?), if the area goes into
> nonattainment the air district might get money
> Sierra could use to buy a genset or Big Trees
> could use to clean up their diesel. That's the way
> MET did it, right? And with Sierra just sitting
> around several days a week, is there potential for
> UP to contract other local jobs to them?


Excuse me, but just what the hell does "nonattainment" mean??? Please define. Is this like a "negative declaration" when it comes to environmtal studies etc. or EPA reviews?? just to confuse the real people out there who want to ask questions but don't want to look stupid for not understanding the gobblydegook--------------"nonattainment"" Please define.
C.