HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem J (2400171`r
STAFF REPORT •
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Nancy L. Beard, Director of Parks, Recreation&
Community Services
SUBJECT: Letter of Response to Orange County Grand Jury re
Leaf Blower Pollution Hazards
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
Authorize response letter by Mayor to the Orange County Grand Jury regarding their report on
"Leaf Blower Pollution Hazards in Orange County" and instruct staff to forward to appropriate
parties.
BACKROUND:
The Orange County Grand Jury recently made recommendations calling for the restricted use of
gas powered leaf blowers. The restrictions do not have any effect on the private use of blowers,
restricting only county, city, school district and community colleges. Cities, the County, school
districts and community colleges throughout Orange County are responding to the report with the
effects on such a ban.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No effect on the current budget, however, a ban could have a great effect on person power and
contract pricing in future budgets.
RECOMMENDATION:
By motion of the Council, authorize Mayor's signature on response letter to Orange County
Grand Jury.
()Y./606k.
Nancy L. Beard, pia tor
Parks, Recreation . Community Services
•
NOTED I APPROVED:
- I /
Keith ' . Till, City Manager
Agenda Item
{ap, r "t•-:-
t ... I,
.1 .F'4. )" Tn t 1
..L `W ir ( .- �r .•f1` • '.�, iiiimr ., q 3f.it`i1,hyrC ,ae+ r -6.14,4g0„:":..: :s `e ",' �9. , r :'.
.L }a` f:`�Yi t !;;t •. �} 4;',4;!,4:74)',4„,'' k.. t }v4.!, � G 'ir i-,,"i 41r
•r :'..:',) ::i':'4::,,,,'? „,,,:;.... q` r a :It ) 4ik ,Y k', �r*{� .�1. q� a`—? L
,y� te { r I.Riut ��4ilr � y t *u F 7 1 !
' JEt,r ,;riv 'i-, , "s 71' l J "as�^� .' € } r 'S.4 .Ary ' n ltd..-N,:'
{::":,(,t':',. 3v''r"''G'r,�r'fti�_:If Y� 4.,to,..n,q.fizA A "w4-. �{y��„�airl 't'+y{ ���t j :. "W� 1x. i,� ,�t 'r ' .. y;if '�.(LHl .'I !' 1Y �Zp:'.,�a ., t I{ : � i 1111;: Nil t',..'. 't P:'•(':ci'4 i.„ $ 1 - 1.-..:
r.v.�) i SLS fi 1. i iC i� 6 4F 1' rn 4+�y r' a. t ', *y'j yny Y .� "rtt�T� I r.t � � a '.':',-;':.=.1:;,, .
1 c- ' i • i,' ''1 1 X. pv. 7-'7 �• .�' !IA 3 '` '^*�. '- '� idia cm, , ..- ! A F'{. r 4.•. ` I C, ��4 , , 'P , �;;;-:-%!'t,,-, '.*A, d r...
j1 • 1! o fig :' di tla� y +( a ' �. '•��
Cllr HALL • 211 EIGHTH STREET
SEAL BEACH CALIFORNIA 90740 6379
(5621 431.2527
April 12, 1999
Honorable Kathleen E. O'Leary
Presiding Judge of the Orange County
Superior Court
700 Civic Center Drive West
Santa Ana, CA 92701
RE: Finding 1 through 3 of the Orange County Grand Jury report— "Leaf Blower
Pollution Hazards in Orange County"
Dear Judge O'Leary,
• The City of Seal Beach agrees with Findings 1 through 3 of the Grand Jury's report.
We recognize the environmental and social hazards associated with the unregulated
use of gas powered leaf blowers. •
• The City of Seal Beach does not support Recommendation 2 to cease the use of
gasoline-powered leaf blowers in the City's maintenance and cleanup operations.
The City does not support the recommendation for the following reasons:
1. Fiscal Impacts: Gas powered leaf blowers are used by the Parks and Landscape
Maintenance Division to clear debris from sidewalk and tot lot areas in addition to
other hardscape areas in and around the City's parks and other public places. The
Street and Beach Maintenance Divisions utilize the blowers to clear sand and debris
from our Main Street sidewalks and the beach areas creating a hazard free
environment for our residents and visitors. These tasks would need to be performed
manually if gas blowers were eliminated. Over the past 5 years the City of Seal
Beach, as many other Orange County Cities, has greatly downsized its staff. Any
increase in time to perform these duties would create hardship. In addition, as the
City looks to contract maintenance services, a ban will drive up contract prices.
2. Limited Environmental Benefit: The Grand Jury's recommendations address only
gas-powered blowers owned by the county, cities, school districts and community
colleges. The City of Seal Beach utilizes 2 gas blowers, which are not used
continuously throughout any day. The vast majority of blowers are owned by the
private sector, either by landscape maintenance companies or private citizens. The
Grand Jury's report does not address this great number of unregulated blowers. There
fore any benefit derived from banning public-sector blowers would have very little
positive impact of the environment. Additionally, the City of Seal Beach offers a
training opportunity for any private or commercial user of a gas blower. The City's •
Parks and Landscape Maintenance Supervisor will train any potential user of a
blower. This training includes the appropriate hours to operate blowers, maintenance
practices and usage issues.
3. Study Methodology: Although the pollutant discharge of gas-powered blowers is
well documented, the Grand Jury's report does not provide basic data on the method
it used to arrive at its recommendations. The report (page 5 of 9) does say the Grand
Jury surveyed four cities that already ban the use of gas blowers, but there is no
indication it conducted a general survey to identify any cities or agencies that may
have considered, but rejected, a ban, or the reasons any many have opposed a ban
outright.
•
4. New Technology: The City of Seal Beach has been informed that the League of
Cities has been working with the manufacturers supplying gas-powered blowers
toward producing a more effective, environmentally acceptable model. We
understand that the manufacturers are close to achieving compliance with the
recommended AQMD emissions restrictions. Therefore, the City could comply with
emission reduction by purchasing compliant blowers.
Finally, legislation is pending, SCR 19 (Burton), which would request that the California
Air Resources Board (ARB), on or before January 1, 2000, prepare and submit to the
Legislature a report summarizing the potential health and environmental impacts of
gasoline powered leaf blowers, including recommendations for alternatives to the use of
leaf blowers if the ARB determine that alternatives are necessary. The League of
California Cities supports this legislation as there is currently no comprehensive study of
the information known about the health and environmental impacts of gasoline powered
leaf blowers. SCR 19 would result in an objective report that compiles the known
information about the noise, health and environmental impacts of gasoline powered leaf
blowers.
The City of Seal Beach is committed to providing the best possible quality of life to its
residents and visitors. While decreasing pollution is an important element in maintaining
the quality of life, the ability of the City to properly maintain its facilities is equally as
important. Presently, gas-powered blowers are a valuable tool that allows our employees
to clean large areas quickly and efficiently. There must be demonstrable and quantifiable
benefits to our residents for the City to consider eliminating gas-powered blowers from
its work force.
Respectfully Yours,
Paul Yost, MD
Mayor
cc: City Council
Sheldon S. Singer, Foreman
Orange County Grand Jury
4.4 9r O
U .. ti
0 II
.94 ti ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY
700 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE WEST•SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92701.714/8343320
February 8, 1999
Paul Yost, Mayor
Keith R. Till, City Manager
Seal Beach City Hall
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Dear Mayor and City Manager:
Attached is a copy of the 1998-99 Orange County Grand Jury report entitled "Leaf
Blower Pollution Hazards in Orange County." Pursuant to Penal Code 933.05(f), a copy
of the report is being provided to you two working days prior to its public release. Please
note that "No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall
disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report."
Emphasis added. (Public release date—February 16, 1999)
It is requested that you provide a response to each of the findings and recommendations
of this report directed to your office in compliance with Penal Code 933.05(a) and (b),
copy attached. For each Grand Jury recommendation, be sure to describe the
implementation status, as well as provide a schedule for future implementation.
It is requested the response to the recommendations be mailed to Kathleen E. O'Leary,
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, 700 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana, CA
92701, with a separate copy mailed to the Orange County Grand Jury, 700 Civic Center
Drive West, Santa Ana, CA 92701, no later than 90 days after the public release date
(February 16, 1999) in compliance with Penal Code 933, copy attached. The due date
then is May 16, 1999.
Mayor/City Manager Page 2 February 8, 1999
Should additional time for responding to this report be necessary for further analysis, Penal
Code 933.05(b)(3) permits an extension of time up to six months from the public release
date. Such extensions should be advised in writing, with the information required in Penal
Code 933.05(b)(3), to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, with a separate copy of the
request to the Grand Jury (address above).
Very truly yours,
1998-99 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY
•
1 _
_ --
Sheldon S. Singer, Foreman
SSS:cd
Attachments
Grand Jury Report
Penal Code 933, 933.05
PENAL CODE SECTION 933 AND SECTION 933.05
§ 933. Findings and recommendations; comment of govern- § 933.05. Responses to findings
ing bodies,elective officers,or agency heads (a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to
• ' '(a) Each grand jury ' ' shall submit to the presid- each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall
ing judge of the superior court a final report of its findings and indicate one of the following:
recommendations that pertain to county government matters (1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
during the fiscal or calendar year. Final reports on any (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the
appropriate subject may be submitted to the presiding judge of finding,in which case the response shall specify the portion of
the superior court at any time during the term of service of a the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of
grand jury. A final report may be submitted for comment to the reasons therefor.
responsible officers, agencies, or departments, including the (b) For purposes of subdivision of Section 933, as to
county board of supervisors,when applicable,upon finding of each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or
the presiding judge that the report is in compliance with this entity shall report one of the following actions:
title. One copy of each report found to be in compliance with
this title shall be placed on file with the county clerk and (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a
remain on file in the office of the county clerk. For 45 days
summary regarding the implemented action.
after the end of the term, the foreperson and his or her (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented,but
designees shall,upon reasonable notice,be available to clarify will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for
implementation.
the recommendations of the report.
(3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an
explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or
(b) No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for
report on the operations of any public agency subject to its discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department
reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency being investigated or reviewed,including the governing body of
shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not
the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under exceed six months from the date of publicationof the grand
the control of the governing body, and every elected county jury report.
officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibil- (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because
ity pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation
the presiding judge of the superior court,with an information therefor.
copy sent to the board of supervisors, on the findings and (c) However, if a finding or recommendation of.the grand
f recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of jury addresses budgetary-or personnel imatters of a-county
that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the
which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. In agency or department head and the board of supervisors shall
any city and county, the mayor shall also comment on the respond if requested by the grand jury,but the response of the •
findings and recommendations. All ' ' * of these comments board of supervisors shall address only those budgetary or
and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the presiding judge personnel matters over which it has some decisionmaking
of the superior court who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of authority. The response of the elected agency or department
all responses to grand jury reports shall be placed on file with head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommcnda-
the Berk of the public agency and the office of the county tions or her agency or department.
clerk,or the mayor when applicable,and shall remain on file in (d) A grand jury may request a subject person or entity to
those offices One copy shall be placed on file with the come before the grand jury for the purpose of reading and
applicable grand jury final report by,and in the control of the discussing the findings of the grand jury report that relates to
currently impaneled grand jury, where it shall be maintained that person or entity in order to verify the accuracy of the
for a minimum of five years. findings prior to their release.
(e) During an investigation,the grand jury shall meet with
(c) As used in this section"agency"includes a department.
the subject of that investigation regarding the investigation,
(Added by Stats.1961. c. 1284. p. 3064, § 1. Amended by unless the court, either on its own determination or upon
Stau.1963. c. 674.p. 1678. § 1; Stats.1974, c. 393,p. 977, § 6; request of the foreperson of the grand jury, determines that
Stats.1974.c. 1396.p. 3054,§ 3; Stats.1977, c. 107,p. 539, § 6; such a meeting would be detrimentaL
Stats.1977. c. 187.p. 709, § 1; Stau.1980,c. 543,p. 1499, § 1; • in A grand jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy
Stat 1981,c.203,p. 1126. 1; Stau.19 c. 1408,p.5365,§ 5; of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person
Stau.1985, c.221, § 1, urgency,elf.July 12, 1985; Stau.1987,c.
690,§ 1; Sears./988. c. 1297,§ 5; Stau.1997,c. 443(A.B.829), or entity two working days prior to its public release and after
the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency,
§ 4.) department,or governing body of a public agency shall disclose
any contents of the report prior to the public release of the
final report. (Added by Stau.1996, c. 1170 (S.B.1457), § 1.
Amended by Stau.1997,c.443(A.B.829),§ 5.
LEAF BLOWER POLLUTION HAZARDS
IN ORANGE COUNTY
SUMMARY
The widespread daily usage of two-cycle gasoline engine leaf blowers in the cities
and unincorporated areas presents a health hazard to all citizens of Orange County.
The hazards are four-fold:
• Toxic exhaust fumes and emissions are created by gas-powered leaf blowers.
Exhaust pollution per leaf blower per hour is the equivalent of the amount of smog
from 17 cars driven one hour and is localized in the area of blower usage.
• The high-velocity air jets used in blowing leaves whip up dust and pollutants.
The particulate matter(PM) swept into the air by blowing leaves is composed of dust,
fecal matter, pesticides, fungi, chemicals, fertilizers, spores, and street dirt which
consists of lead and organic and elemental carbon. About five pounds of PM per leaf
blower per hour are swept into the air and take hours to settle.
• The quantity of pollution products that are injected into county air.
The total amount of pollutants injected into the environment by blower usage in the
county is significant. The ARB calculates that leaf blowers inject 2.11 tons of
combustion pollutants per day into Orange County air. Leaf blowers in the County
sweep twenty tons per day of small size particulate matter into the air.
• Blower engines generate high noise levels.
Gasoline-powered leaf blower noise is a danger to the health of the blower operator
and an annoyance to the non-consenting citizens in the area of usage.
In light of the evidence, the Grand Jury determined the health hazards citizens are
exposed to by the use of leaf blowers outweigh the questionable economic benefit
blowers may bring to the cities and the County. The Grand Jury recommends that the
cities, school districts, community college districts, and the County cease using gas
powered blowers in their maintenance and cleanup operations.
Page 1 of 9
•
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The focus of this study was to describe and assess the health hazards caused by
gasoline-powered leaf blowers used in Orange County. The Grand Jury assessed
the air and noise pollution introduced into the county by gasoline-powered leaf
blowers (hereinafter-called leaf blowers).
The purpose of this report is to recommend that cities take actions to reduce health
hazards presented by leaf blowers. School districts and community college districts
should do likewise since children are most vulnerable to the pollution and noise caused
by leaf blowers. The Board of Supervisors should take similar action in the
unincorporated areas. Additionally, such actions would improve the quality of life in
Orange County.
METHOD OF STUDY
The Grand Jury gathered information and data from a variety of sources including:
• Leaf blower manufacturers
• California Air Resources Board (ARB)
• South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD)
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
• American Lung Association
• Consumer Reports magazine
• Various newspaper and magazine articles
• Personal activities and observations
Quantitative assessments were made of the nature and scope of leaf blower pollution
to the Orange County environment. The contribution of an individual leaf blower was
easy to determine. The Grand Jury utilized data obtained from the Air Resources Board,
the EPA and the Air Quality Management District to establish the total pollution
contributed by leaf blowers to the county environment.
Page 2 of 9
•
BACKGROUND AND HISTORY
Two-cycle gasoline-powered leaf blowers were introduced into the United States in
the 1970s. By 1985, 75,000 blowers were sold and by 1989, 464, 000 were sold.
California leads the nation in the number of leaf blowers used, estimated to be in
the millions, and sales are growing at 6 to 8 percent a year.
The city of Laguna Beach bans the use of leaf blowers, and over a dozen other
California cities have done likewise. Health and quality of life concerns related to leaf
blower use became an issue in California cities prior to 1975.
LEAF BLOWER OUTPUT
Leaf blowers are usually powered by a 2-cycle gasoline engine that provides the
motive power for a high velocity stream of air guided by a tubular duct toward the leaves
or debris to be swept or blown. The blower unit is either carried by hand or back-
mounted on the operator depending on the size of the engine and the power desired.
Generic output characteristics (averaged over several manufacturers) include:
LEAF BLOWER NOISE OUTPUT
TABLE 1
Hand Held Back Pack
Noise level at blower >95 dBA' >90 dBA
Noise level @ 50 feet >65 dBA >75dBA
Airjet velocity at nozzle - 180 miles per hour up to 250 miles per hour
'dBA=acoustic decibels, frequency-weighted measures of audible noise volume or power used in noise
analysis.
HAZARDS FROM BLOWER OPERATIONS
There are four major health hazards from the use of leaf blowers. They are
• exhaust pollution
• particulate pollution
• quantity of pollutants
• noise
EXHAUST POLLUTION
One gasoline-powered leaf blower generates as much exhaust pollution in one hour as
would 17 cars traveling slowly. Cars disperse their pollutants over long stretches of road,
while a blower concentrates its pollutants in one neighborhood. Two-stroke engine fuel is
a gas-oil mixture that is especially toxic compared to automobile emissions.
Page 3 of 9
Exhaust pollution from two-cycle engines is a large contributor of carbon monoxide
(CO), nitrous oxides (NO„), hydrocarbons (HC), and particulate matter(PM). The
particulate matter from combustion is small in size (2.5 or microns or less).2 Combustion
exhaust particulate matter remains suspended in the air for hours—sometimes days—and
is easily assimilated in the lungs. The EPA and ARB state that such PM can increase the
number and severity of asthma attacks, bronchitis and other lung diseases and reduce
ability to fight infections. Those particularly effected are children and the elderly.
2 PM2.5 microns refers to particulate matter size diameter in millionths of a meter or microns. PM2.5 particles are 2.5
microns in diameter or smaller. PM 10 particles are 10 microns in diameter or smaller and include PM2.5 particles. A
PMIO particle is about 1/17th the diameter of a human hair.
PARTICULATE POLLUTION
The airjet generated by blowers with velocities of 185 miles per hour or more
spreads dust, dirt,pollens, animal droppings, herbicides and pesticides into the air. The
effect lasts for hours on particulate matter that is 10 microns in diameter or smaller. The
ARB has estimated that each leaf blower entrains (puts into the atmosphere) 5 pounds of
particulate matter per hour about half of which is 10 microns or smaller. The EPA and
ARB state that such particulate matter can create the same health risks as does the
exhaust pollution.
QUANTITY OF POLLUTANTS
The ARB calculates that leaf blowers inject some 2.11 tons of combustion pollutants
per day into Orange County air. These pollutants contain organic gases, carbon
monoxide, nitrous oxides and exhaust-size particulate matter(PM2.5) as described
previously. Additionally, twenty tons per day of small size particulate matter(PM10) are
swept into the air by blower airflow.
NOISE
Noise interferes with communications, sleep, and work. The EPA claims noise
degrades quality of life by impairing social interaction. It also reduces work accuracy and
creates stressful levels of frustration and aggravation. The average blower generates noise
that measures 65 to 75 dBA or more at 50 feet, and even louder at close range. Leaf
blowers are often used fewer than 50 feet from non-consenting people. Neighboring
homes may be occupied by home workers, retirees, day sleepers, children and the ill or
disabled. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends general outdoor noise
levels of 55 dBA or less, and 45 dBA or less for sleeping. Thus, a 65-decibel leaf blower
would be 100 times too loud3 for healthful sleep. Blower noise can, and probably does,
impair the user's hearing. A blower generates upward of 95 decibels of noise at the
operator's ear(see Table 1 above). Office of Safety and Health Administration requires
hearing protection for noise over 85 dBA. Hearing protectors as worn in the field provide
only a fraction of the attenuation needed.for hearing protection. There is an increased risk
of hearing damage,and deafness from repeated exposure to noise above 75 dBA.
Deafness caused by noise is irreversible.
3 A decibel change from 45 to 65 dBA,is a 100-fold change in volume.
Page 4 of 9
ALTERNATE EQUIPMENT AND TECHNIQUES
Rakes, brooms and electric blowers are alternate equipment that can perform leaf
cleanup tasks. The first two have been in use since antiquity and have been proven
performers since that time. Rakes and brooms are quiet and consume no resources. They
produce minimal dust and little debris into the atmosphere and no pollutants from the
power source. Electric blowers are a recent technical innovation that minimize engine
pollution, lessen noise, but leave intact the hazards associated with airjet entrained
particulate matter.
ECONOMICS
It has been argued by leaf blower operators that the use of rakes and brooms would
cause cleanup jobs to take up to twice as long to complete. This allegation is not
supported by facts. For example, the city of Claremont decided not to use leaf blowers
(1990) in the maintenance of city property. They quantified the increase in workload
using rakes and brooms as 1/16 over using blowers, an increase of about 6%. Other
jurisdictions banning leaf blowers have experienced no increase in cleanup job hours.
COMPLIANCE IN CITIES BANNING LEAF BLOWERS
The Grand Jury surveyed four cities that banned or partially banned leaf blowers in or
near Orange County.
1. Los Angeles (population—3.6 million) banned gasoline powered leaf blowers on July
1, 1998. The city reported that compliance is good despite the fact that the police
enforce violations as an infraction, which puts them as a low priority. Alternatively,
the Public Works Department uses street enforcement inspectors as citing officials.
Citizen participation provides license plate numbers and times of violations for
subsequent violation citations.
2. Santa Barbara banned gasoline leaf blowers and regulated other types of blowers
since 1997. The city Parks Department incurred a one-time cost of$90,000 out of
a budget of$4 million (2.25%) to replace equipment and has seen little or no
additional impact on city cleanup.
3. Laguna Beach has banned all types of blowers since 1993 and enjoys 95%
compliance. The city uses brooms and rakes to maintain city parks with no impact on
costs or cleanliness.
4. Claremont banned gas-powered blowers in 1991, but allows electric blowers. Positive
citizen involvement is high.
Page 5 of 9
FINDINGS
Under California Penal Code § 933 and §933.05, responses are required to all
findings.
Based on documented evidence, it is the finding of the Grand Jury that leaf blower
operations represent health hazards to the citizens of Orange County. The hazards include
pollution from engine exhaust and the pollution caused by entrained particulate matter
being discharged from the blowers. The quantity of pollution injected into the air
represents health dangers to all citizens of the county. Additionally, operators risk
suffering permanent hearing loss from the high noise levels in close proximity to the
blowers. Non-consenting citizens are subject to loss of quality of life from the noise
forced upon them by blower operation in their area.
1. Exhaust pollution from two-cycle engines is a large contributor of carbon monoxide
(CO), nitrous oxides (NOr), hydrocarbons (HC), and particulate matter(PM). Exhaust
pollution per leaf blower per hour is the equivalent to the amount of smog from 17
cars driven one hour. Leaf blower exhaust pollution remains localized in the
neighborhood in which it is generated. Combustion exhaust PM remains suspended in
the air for hours and is easily assimilated in the lungs. Leaf blowers contribute to total
Orange County pollution.
A response is required to Finding 1 from Board of Supervisors and the Cities of
Anaheim, Brea, Buena Park, Costa Mesa, Cypress, Dana Point, Fountain Valley,
Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Irvine, Laguna Hills, Laguna
Niguel, La Habra, Lake Forest, La Palma, Los Alamitos, Mission Viejo, Newport
Beach, Orange, Placentia, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, Santa Ana, Seal
Beach, Stanton,Tustin,Villa Park,Westminster, and Yorba Linda, and School
Districts of Anaheim City, Anaheim Union High, Brea-Olinda Unified, Buena
Park, Capistrano Unified School District, Centralia, Cypress, Fountain Valley,
Fullerton Joint Union High, Fullerton, Garden Grove Unified, Huntington
Beach City, Huntington Beach Union High, Irvine Unified, La Habra City,
Laguna Beach Unified, Los Alamitos Unified, Lowell Joint, Magnolia, Newport-
Mesa Unified, Ocean View, Orange Unified, Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified,
Saddleback Valley Unified, Santa Ana Unified, Savanna, Tustin Unified,
Westminster, and Community College Districts Coastline Community, North
Orange County, Santiago, and South Orange County.
2. The particulate matter swept into the air by the high velocity air jet used in sweeping
or blowing leaves is composed of dust, fecal matter, pesticides, fungi, chemicals,
fertilizers, and street dirt consisting of lead and organic and elemental carbon. These
PM constituents are documented health hazards.
A response is required to Finding 2 from Board of Supervisors and the Cities of
Anaheim, Brea, Buena Park, Costa Mesa, Cypress, Dana Point, Fountain Valley,
Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Irvine, Laguna Hills, Laguna
Niguel, La Habra, Lake Forest, La Palma, Los Alamitos, Mission Viejo, Newport
Page 6 of 9
2 The 30 county cities, except Laguna Beach, which already does so, cease the use of
gasoline-powered leaf blowers in their city maintenance and cleanup operations.
(Findings 1 through 3)
(A response to Recommendation 2 is required from Anaheim, Brea, Buena Park,
Costa Mesa, Cypress, Dana Point, Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Garden Grove,
Huntington Beach, Irvine, Laguna Hills, Laguna Niguel, La Habra, Lake Forest,
La Palma, Los Alamitos, Mission Viejo, Newport Beach, Orange, Placentia, San
Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, Santa Ana, Seal Beach, Stanton,Tustin, Villa
Park, Westminster, and Yorba Linda.)
3 The 28 School Districts cease the use of gasoline powered leaf blowers in their school
maintenance and cleaning operations (Findings 1 through 3.)
A response to Recommendation 3 is required from 28 School Districts of Anaheim
City, Anaheim Union High, Brea-Olinda Unified, Buena Park, Capistrano
Unified School District, Centralia, Cypress, Fountain Valley, Fullerton Joint
Union High, Fullerton, Garden Grove Unified, Huntington Beach City,
Huntington Beach Union High, Irvine Unified, La Habra City, Laguna Beach
Unified, Los Alamitos Unified, Lowell Joint, Magnolia, Newport-Mesa Unified,
Ocean View, Orange Unified, Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified, Saddleback Valley
Unified, Santa Ana Unified, Savanna,Tustin Unified, Westminster.
4. The four Community College Districts cease the use of gasoline powered leaf blowers
in their school maintenance and cleaning operations (Findings 1 through 3.)
(A response to Recommendation 4 is required from the four Community College
Districts of Coastline Community, North Orange County, Santiago, and South
Orange County.)
Page 8 of 9
Beach, Orange, Placentia, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, Santa Ana, Seal
Beach, Stanton, Tustin,Villa Park, Westminster, and Yorba Linda, and School
Districts of Anaheim City, Anaheim Union High, Brea-Olinda Unified, Buena
Park, Capistrano Unified School District, Centralia, Cypress, Fountain Valley,
Fullerton Joint Union High, Fullerton, Garden Grove Unified, Huntington
Beach City, Huntington Beach Union High, Irvine Unified, La Habra City,
Laguna Beach Unified, Los Alamitos Unified, Lowell Joint, Magnolia, Newport-
Mesa Unified, Ocean View, Orange Unified, Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified,
Saddleback Valley Unified, Santa Ana Unified, Savanna,Tustin Unified,
Westminster, and Community College Districts Coastline Community, North
Orange County, Santiago, and South Orange County.
3. Noise from gasoline-powered leaf blowers is a significant danger to the health of the
blower operator and a severe annoyance to the non-consenting citizens nearby.
A response is required to Finding 3 from Board of Supervisors and the Cities of
Anaheim, Brea, Buena Park, Costa Mesa, Cypress, Dana Point, Fountain Valley,
Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Irvine, Laguna Hills, Laguna Niguel,
La Habra, Lake Forest, La Palma, Los Alamitos, Mission Viejo, Newport Beach,
Orange, Placentia, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, Santa Ana, Seal Beach,
Stanton, Tustin, Villa Park, Westminster, and Yorba Linda, and School Districts of
Anaheim City, Anaheim Union High, Brea-Olinda Unified, Buena Park, Capistrano
Unified School District, Centralia, Cypress, Fountain Valley, Fullerton Joint Union
High, Fullerton, Garden Grove Unified, Huntington Beach City, Huntington Beach
Union High, Irvine Unified, La Habra City, Laguna Beach Unified, Los Alamitos
Unified, Lowell Joint, Magnolia, Newport-Mesa Unified, Ocean View, Orange
Unified, Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified, Saddleback Valley Unified, Santa Ana
Unified, Savanna,Tustin Unified, Westminster, and Community College Districts of
Coastline Community, North Orange County, Santiago, and South Orange County.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Under California Penal Code § 933 and §933.05, the Grand Jury requires responses from
the appropriate agencies and officials to each of the following recommendations.
Based on the findings, the Grand Jury recommends that:
1. The Orange County Board of Supervisors ceases the County use of gasoline-powered
leaf blowers in maintenance and cleanup operations in the unincorporated areas of the
County. (Findings 1 through 3)
(A response to Recommendation 1 is required from Orange County Board of
Supervisors.)
Page 7 of 9
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Facsimile Transmission from Air Resources Board to the Grand Jury, Leaf Blowers- 1997
Orange County, Dec 10, 1998.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Base and Future Year Emission
Inventories Report, Appendix III, November 1996.
Internet Posting, SCAQMD AQMD Funds Development of Zero-Emission Mower, Leaf
Blower Website.
Pamphlet, Best Available Control Method (BACM) Particulate Matter Air Pollution: A
Threat to Our Health Working Group (Membership includes ARB, SCAQMD, EPA),
January 1997.
California Air Resources Board Public Information Office, Facts About Air Pollution and
Health Pamphlet, 1991.
American Lung Association of Sacramento-Emigrant Trails, Fact Sheet—Leaf Blower
Air Pollution Impacts Study Results, undated.
Letter, from Technical Support Division, ARB, to Air Quality Management Division,Air
Pollution from Leaf Blowers, Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management
District; July 9, 1991.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,Information on Levels of Environmental Noise
Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety,
550/9-74-004,March 1974.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,NTID 300.7, NTIS Document No. PB-206723
Effects of Noise on People, December 1971.
Consumer Reports,Power Blowers, September 1995, p. 586-9.
Consumer Reports, The world's quietest power blower? April 1997, p. 8.
Briggs and Stratton Corporation, Emissions, Internet Posting website
(www.briggsandstratton.com/emissions), December 1, 1998.
Tanaka Power Equipment Catalog,Blowers, Internet website:
(www.tanakapowerequipment.com), 1998, p. 8.
RedMax Catalog-Part Number A01098, Pro Power Blowers Komatsu Zenoah America,
Inc., Norcross, Georgia.
Echo Master Products Catalog, Part No. 999222-02916, Power Blowers, Echo Incorporated,
Lake Zurich, IL, 1998, p. 16-21.
Husqvarna Forest and Garden, Charlotte NC, Blowers, Husqvarna Catalog
#531 03 05-50, 1998, page 22.
Page 9 of 9