South Coast Air Quality Management District

Subscribe to South Coast Air Quality Management District

This is the first in a series of posts to provide the latest on environmental and legal developments affecting oil and gas operations and development and other industries in Los Angeles and adjacent counties, as well as the southern San Joaquin Valley. In this post, we’ll provide an update on legislation proposed in 2019 that affects industry in southern California, implementation of significant legislation previously adopted, and initiatives in Los Angeles to limit oil and gas operations.

AB 617 Implementation

The stated goal of AB 617 (Garcia, 2017) is to protect communities with disproportionate levels of air emissions and provide stricter penalties for certain infractions by regulated entities. In line with AB 617, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) is implementing the Community Air Protection Program and finalized its first annual selection of communities for participation in the Program in September 2018. Air districts are now identifying candidate communities to be considered for the second year of the Community Air Protection Program. CARB isn’t likely to vote on the selections until later in 2019.

In the first round of community selection, South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast Air District) chose (1) Wilmington/West Long Beach/Carson; (2) San Bernardino/Muscoy; and (3) Boyle Heights/East Los Angeles/West Commerce. On September 6, 2019, South Coast Air District’s Governing Board approved Community Emission Reduction Programs for these areas. Most of the plans set goals for action, and enhanced enforcement, rulemaking and incentive grants will follow. The plan for San Bernardino/Muscoy focuses on truck, rail bus traffic, warehouses (as an indirect source), concrete and asphalt batch plants, and rock and aggregate plants. The plan for Boyle Heights/East Los Angeles/West Commerce focuses on neighborhood and freeway truck and bus traffic, railyards, metal processing facilities, rendering facilities, auto body shops, and general industrial facilities, along with reducing exposure at schools, childcare facilities, community centers, libraries, and public housing projects.
Continue Reading Southern California Environmental Law Update

Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill 1132 (“AB 1132”) into law on August 7, 2017.  The bill, authored by Democratic Assemblymember Cristina Garcia, adds Section 42451.5 to the Health and Safety Code which authorizes air districts to issue interim orders for abatement pending an abatement hearing for non-vehicular sources of air pollution.  The South Coast Air Quality Management District sponsored the bill.

Existing law permits the governing boards and the hearing boards of California air districts to issue orders for abatement, after notice and an abatement hearing, whenever the air districts find a violation of any order, rule, or regulation prohibiting or limiting the discharge of air contaminants into the air.  Health & Safety Code § 42451.  AB 1132 goes one step further.  Effective on and after January 1, 2018, AB 1132 permits an air pollution control officer to issue an interim abatement order, without a hearing, if the officer finds there is an “imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health or welfare, or the environment.”  Id. § 42451.5(a) (emphasis added).  It is not hard to imagine that most air pollution control officers will exercise this new power with zeal and impunity.Continue Reading How Due Process Will Wither and Die under California’s New Air Contaminant Law: AB 1132 Authorizes Air Districts to Shut Down Facilities Without a Hearing

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals capped a saga of over seven years on June 18 by extending its March 11, 2015 ruling in support of alternatives to imposing hefty fees on individual companies which have complied with the law, but happen to do business in California’s Central Valley or South Coast. Environmental groups challenged USEPA’s approvals of the alternatives adopted by both the South Coast Air Quality Management District and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. The March 11 ruling, in Natural Res. Def. Council v. EPA (9th Cir. 2015) 643 F.3d 311, upheld the SCAQMD’s alternative, which pays the fees from surplus air quality plan funds. The June 18 ruling in Medical Advocates for Healthy Air v. US Environmental Protection Agency (9th Cir. June 18, 2015, No. 12-73386 (opinion ordered nonpublished)) clarified extension of the March ruling to uphold the SJVAPCD’s alternative, which pays the fees from motor vehicle fees.

Background:

The 1990 Amendments to the Federal Clean Air Act added Section 185 imposing “nonattainment fees” on any “Major Source” of emissions in any area that had severe or extreme air quality problems Southern California and the San Joaquin Valley fell squarely within this provision, which also would apply to businesses emitting over 10 tons per year (100 tons applies to many US regions). While failure was alleged for the region, yet the fees would be levied on individual businesses even though most were in full compliance with the strictest air quality requirements in the Country.
Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Limits Clean Air Act “Nonattainment Fees” in California’s San Joaquin Valley

The South Coast Air Quality Management District has scheduled its fifth working group meeting on the District’s proposed Rule 1304.1 for May 8, 2013.  The proposed Rule would impose substantial new fees for the replacement or repower of electrical generating facilities within the District, by charging developers who obtain air emissions offsets from the District’s…

The South Coast Air Quality Management District held its third working group meeting yesterday for the District’s proposed Rule 1304.1.  The proposed Rule would impose substantial new fees on developers repowering electrical generating facilities within the District, which encompasses Orange County and parts of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties.  Under the proposed…

About Stoel Rives Environmental Law

Learn More

Few firms view their Environment, Land Use, and Natural Resources practices as core legal services. Stoel Rives is one of them. The firm ranks #8 in the United States according to Law360’s list of the largest practices of its kind. Our sophisticated compliance counseling, permitting, regulatory development, and litigation practices continue a long tradition of specialization and deep experience. Our environment, land use, and natural resource attorneys incorporate prior agency experience, technical acumen, and industry knowledge into their legal advice. They also build strong relationships with agency officials and industry associations. Our litigation successes include landmark decisions. More than 60 attorneys, paralegals, and compliance analysts comprise Stoel Rives’ nationwide Environment, Land Use & Natural Resources practice.