County air pollution chief blasts report by Calif. agency

Tuesday, June 20, 2000 | 11:09 a.m.

The director of the Clark County Health District's air pollution control agency fired back at a private consultant's report that harshly criticized the agency's performance.

In Michael Naylor's 12-page response to California-based Environ's draft report, released two weeks ago, he said the agency staff "agree with a substantial number of recommendations" but criticized "numerous characterizations that seem to bias" the report.

He also defended work by the health district in recent years and months to improve the effectiveness of air-pollution control in the Las Vegas Valley.

The four-part Environ report called for additional controls on airborne dust, increased staffing and funding for air-pollution control staff, better enforcement of existing rules and new, tougher rules; and finally the "termination" of the existing air pollution control administration and creation of a new agency, with a greater degree of state oversight.

A legislative committee on the region's environmental quality, chaired by State Sen. Jon Porter, R-Henderson, commissioned the Environ report. Following the report's release, Porter said the state will reorganize local air pollution control agencies if local governments fail to act.

Clark County Commissioner Erin Kenny responded to the report with a plan to create a new agency, under local control, that would unify the air pollution duties now split between the Clark County Comprehensive Planning Department and the Health District. Her proposal is up for discussion at today's county commission meeting and meetings by the Health District board and Southern Nevada Regional Planning Commission on Thursday.

"It has been frustrating that the (Environ) draft reports have led to a call for action by (Porter) regarding the reorganization of local air quality agencies even before written comments have been received on the draft recommendations," Naylor said in his response.

Noting that the management of air quality programs received particular attention in the Environ report, Naylor said the Health District administration weren't advised that they were a target, nor did Environ give the administration an opportunity to discuss the report findings.

"There are many technical misrepresentations and deficiencies within the report," Naylor said.

Dr. Donald Kwalick, the top for the Health District as chief health officer, had similar sentiments following the Environ report.

The district has been trying, and succeeding, to resolve many outstanding issues, he said. Among the improvements are increased staffing and better communication with the county Comprehensive Planning Department.

"All the things that weren't happening in the past are happening," Kwalick said. "I think the staff has been working hard to change things."

Naylor said the report appeared to be biased towards the administrative procedures and pollution-control mechanisms in California while ignoring agencies and efforts in other Western states such as Arizona and Utah and in Northern Nevada.

"Fundamentally, the problems throughout most of California differ significantly with the problems in the Las Vegas Valley Basin," he said.

Naylor also said some of the information cited by Environ is out-of-date and does not take into account significant work done over recent months. The Health District and Comprehensive Planning have been struggling to produce plans to control carbon monoxide and the more-troublesome airborne dust.

Part of those plans is a significant expansion of dust-control rules, which the Health District board will vote on Thursday, and an overall dust-control package, which the Clark County Commission should vote on next month.

"Given the compressed time frame to review and comment, there were many areas which we have not discussed," Naylor said. "The community has been abuzz with talk of consolidation of air agencies. We believe that the report's recommendation will lead to positive changes in air quality as well as organizational structure. We are disappointed that the process could not have been more collegial."