Existing law requires the State Air Resources Board to prepare, and to update at least once every 5 years, a statewide strategy to reduce emissions of toxic air contaminants and criteria air pollutants in communities affected by a high cumulative exposure burden. Existing law requires the state board to include in the statewide strategy, among other components, an assessment and identification of communities with high cumulative exposure burdens for toxic air contaminants and criteria air pollutants, prioritizing disadvantaged communities and sensitive receptor locations based on specified factors. Existing law requires the state board, based on the assessment and identification of communities with high cumulative exposure burdens, to select locations around the state for preparation of community emissions reduction programs. Existing law requires an air district encompassing any location selected by the state board to adopt, in consultation with the state board, within one year of the state boards selection, a community emissions reduction program to achieve emissions reductions for the location selected using cost-effective measures, as specified. Existing law also requires an air district to submit the community emissions reduction program to the state board for review and approval as prescribed. Existing law requires the air district and the state board to implement and enforce the measures in the community emissions reduction program consistent with their respective authority.

This bill would additionally require the air district, in adopting a community emissions reduction program, to consult with other relevant state agencies. By imposing additional duties on air districts, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would, for a community emissions reduction program adopted by an air district and approved by the state board that includes a measure that is not within the authority of the air district or the state board, authorize the state board to assign the measure to the state agency with authority over the measure. The bill would require other relevant state agencies a state agency to implement and enforce measures the measure assigned to them as a part of the community emissions reduction program it unless the relevant state agency finds that those measures are the measure is infeasible at a public meeting of its governing body, or, for an agency without a governing body, if the highest ranking officer of the agency finds and declares in writing, after allowing a 30-day opportunity for public comment, that the measures are measure is infeasible.

Existing law requires the state board to provide grants to community-based organizations for technical assistance and to support community participation in the implementation of the community emissions reduction program. In the implementation of the requirement for community participation, various air districts have established community steering committees for each location selected by the state board for the preparation of a community emissions reduction program.

This bill would specify that grants provided, to the extent the Legislature appropriates funds specifically for this purpose, include allocations of funds to serve as a budget for the committee of persons who are designated by a district to participate in the development and adoption of a community emissions reduction program for administrative items, which includes, but is not limited to, translation services, meeting venue, meeting coordination, training, and stipends, as authorized by the district, for members of the committee.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law requires the State Air Resources Board to prepare, and to update at least once every 5 years, a statewide strategy to reduce emissions of toxic air contaminants and criteria air pollutants in communities affected by a high cumulative exposure burden. Existing law requires the state board to include in the statewide strategy, among other components, an assessment and identification of communities with high cumulative exposure burdens for toxic air contaminants and criteria air pollutants, prioritizing disadvantaged communities and sensitive receptor locations based on specified factors. Existing law requires the state board, based on the assessment and identification of communities with high cumulative exposure burdens, to select locations around the state for preparation of community emissions reduction programs. Existing law requires an air district encompassing any location selected by the state board to adopt, in consultation with the state board, within one year of the state boards selection, a community emissions reduction program to achieve emissions reductions for the location selected using cost-effective measures, as specified. Existing law also requires an air district to submit the community emissions reduction program to the state board for review and approval as prescribed. Existing law requires the air district and the state board to implement and enforce the measures in the community emissions reduction program consistent with their respective authority.

This bill would additionally require the air district, in adopting a community emissions reduction program, to consult with other relevant state agencies. By imposing additional duties on air districts, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require other relevant state agencies to implement and enforce measures assigned to them as a part of the community emissions reduction program unless the relevant state agency finds that those measures are infeasible at a public meeting of its governing body. body, or, for an agency without a governing body, if the highest ranking officer of the agency finds and declares in writing, after allowing a 30-day opportunity for public comment, that the measures are infeasible.

Existing law requires the state board to provide grants to community-based organizations for technical assistance and to support community participation in the implementation of the community emissions reduction program. In the implementation of the requirement for community participation, various air districts have established AB 617 community steering committees for each location selected by the state board for the preparation of a community emissions reduction program.

This bill would specify that grants provided provided, to the extent the Legislature appropriates funds specifically for this purpose, include allocations of funds to serve as a budget for the AB 617 community steering committees the committee of persons who are designated by a district to participate in the development and adoption of a community emissions reduction program for administrative items. items, which includes, but is not limited to, translation services, meeting venue, meeting coordination, training, and stipends, as authorized by the district, for members of the committee.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law requires the State Air Resources Board to prepare, and to update at least once every 5 years, a statewide strategy to reduce emissions of toxic air contaminants and criteria air pollutants in communities affected by a high cumulative exposure burden. Existing law requires the state board to include in the statewide strategy, among other components, an assessment and identification of communities with high cumulative exposure burdens for toxic air contaminants and criteria air pollutants, prioritizing disadvantaged communities and sensitive receptor locations based on specified factors. Existing law requires the state board, based on the assessment and identification of communities with high cumulative exposure burdens, to select locations around the state for preparation of community emissions reduction programs. Existing law requires an air district encompassing any location selected by the state board to adopt, in consultation with the state board, within one year of the state boards selection, a community emissions reduction program to achieve emissions reductions for the location selected using cost-effective measures, as specified. Existing law also requires an air district to submit the community emissions reduction program to the state board for review and approval as prescribed. Existing law requires the air district and the state board to implement and enforce the measures in the community emissions reduction program consistent with their respective authority.

This bill would additionally require the air district, in adopting a community emissions reduction program, to consult with other relevant state agencies. By imposing additional duties on air districts, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require other relevant state agencies to implement and enforce measures assigned to them as a part of the community emissions reduction program unless the relevant state agency finds that those measures are infeasible at a public meeting of its governing body.

Existing law requires the state board to provide grants to community-based organizations for technical assistance and to support community participation in the implementation of the community emissions reduction program. In the implementation of the requirement for community participation, various air districts have established AB 617 community steering committees for each location selected by the state board for the preparation of a community emissions reduction program.

This bill would specify that grants provided include allocations of funds to serve as a budget for the AB 617 community steering committees for administrative items.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anthony Portantino, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular Session

AB 849 (Garcia) - Community emissions reduction programs

Bill Summary:

This bill would expand AB 617 (C. Garcia, Chapter 136, Statutes of 2017) by allowing the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to assign measures developed by communities in their Community Emission Reduction Plans (CERPs) to other relevant state agencies for them to promulgate and enforce regulations, unless they find those measures infeasible. The bill would also make changes regarding certain grants under AB 617.

Fiscal Impact:

• CARB estimates ongoing costs of between $8.8 and $13.8 million annually (Air Pollution Control Fund [APCF] and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund [GGRF]) to implement the provisions of this bill.
• The California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR) estimates ongoing costs of $5.8 million in the first year and $5.2 million annually thereafter (General Fund or special fund) for 22 positions to determine whether a measure is ”feasible” and increase rulemaking, local enforcement, online resources, outreach, language access efforts, air monitoring equipment, vehicles, equipment and vehicle maintenance, and laboratory and analysis costs.
• The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) estimates ongoing costs of at least $203,000 (General Fund or special fund) to implement measures assigned to it. OEHHA notes that its costs are uncertain, as the bill does not assign direct responsibility to OEHHA, but the office could have fiscal impacts ranging from several hundred thousand dollars to several million dollars annually depending on the responsibilities assigned to it through the CERPs approved by CARB and local air districts.
• The Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) estimates potential ongoing costs of between $250,000 to $1 million annually (General Fund or special fund) to oversee CERPs. CalRecycle also notes that its costs are uncertain, and would depend on the responsibilities assigned to it through the CERPs.

Background:

AB 617: giving pollution-burdened communities a seat at the table. Based on direction from AB 617, CARB established the Community Air Protection Program, which directs CARB and local air districts to more effectively measure and reduce exposure in communities most impacted by air pollution. Among other requirements, the program includes the following components:

• Community Emissions Reduction Programs: AB 617 requires CARB to select locations around the state for preparation of CERPs. AB 617 requires an air district with jurisdiction over a location selected by CARB to implement a CERP in consultation with a variety of entities, and within one year of CARB selecting the location, each air district must submit its CERP to CARB for approval, with specified timelines and public processes. AB 617 specifies that compliance with CERPs is enforceable by the local air districts and CARB.
  
• Community Air Monitoring Systems: AB 617 requires CARB to identify high priority areas subject to criteria pollutant and TAC exposure. A local air district with jurisdiction over a high priority area must deploy community air monitoring systems and provide ARB with data from the monitoring systems, which ARB must post on its internet website.
  

In the implementation of AB 617, and the development of CERPs through community steering committees, issues related to air pollution sources and exposure have arisen that may be outside the jurisdiction of the air districts or CARB. This may include local land use practices that increase exposure to air pollution, practices under the authority of another state agency, such as pesticide application or highway construction, and sources of air pollution regulated primarily by the federal government, such as rail and aviation.

“AB 617’s flawed implementation must not be repeated.” Successfully implementing AB 617 has been a fraught undertaking. In May of 2021, the California Environmental Justice Alliance (CEJA) wrote a report excoriating the implementation of AB 617 in California. In the report, CEJA stated, “While AB 617 has increased deliberation of air pollution concerns in 11 communities, the resource-intensive convenings and overall implementation over the last three years have largely failed to produce material protections from harmful air pollution impacting their health.”

As an example of the type of jurisdictional conflict that stymies AB 617 implementation, CEJA wrote of the CERP developed by Shafter, “While the Shafter Steering Committee overwhelmingly highlighted pesticides as a top area of concern, the CERP as originally drafted by the air district included no reductions of pesticide TACs. The air district also disavowed its authority to regulate pesticide TACs even once they volatilize in the air. Under pressure from the Steering Committee and allies, CARB reaffirmed its authority to regulate TACs beyond their pesticidal use, and acknowledged the overlapping jurisdictions. CARB also included a pilot plan to reduce emissions from a single TAC, 1,3-Dichloropropene. There is no across-the-board commitment to reduce pesticide TAC emissions.”

Defining equity. The concept of “equity” in policymaking is deceptively complex. The American Planning Association defines equity as “just and fair inclusion in a society so that all can participate, prosper, and reach their full potential.” Equity involves people having what they need to enjoy full, healthy lives. In contrast, equality aims to ensure that everyone gets the same things, no matter their starting place. Different groups of people — based on race, ethnicity, gender, immigration status, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic status — may need different types or amounts of resources and supports to enjoy full, healthy lives.

More specifically, equity is often broken down further into more detailed components, such as:

Procedural equity, when public decision making processes are transparent, accessible, fair, and inclusive;

Structural equity, when government institutions and systems have the processes, practices, and policies to operationalize equity in how they function and make decisions; and

Distributional equity, when there is an equitable distribution of resources, community burdens, and benefits.

Proposed Law:

This bill would expand AB 617 by allowing CARB to assign measures developed by communities in their CERPs to other relevant state agencies for them to promulgate and enforce regulations, unless they find those measures infeasible. The bill would also make changes regarding certain grants under AB 617. Specifically, this bill would:

1. Expand the existing AB 617 provisions that directs air districts and CARB to be responsible for measures implementing CERPs consistent with their respective authorities, by:
   1. Permitting CARB to assign measures that are not within the authority of the air district or CARB to a state agency with authority;
   2. Directing agencies who are assigned measures with implementing that measure; and
   3. Permitting agencies who are assigned measures to find the measure infeasible, provided they follow specified procedures including a 30-day opportunity for public comment.
      
2. Expand enforcement provisions for ensuring compliance with CERPs to include state agencies who are assigned measures as described above, unless they find such enforcement infeasible, as specified.
   
3. Expand the scope of eligible uses of grants provided to CBOs to include providing an allocation of funds to a committee designated by the air district as a budget for administrative items (including but not limited to translation services, meeting venues, meeting coordination, training, and stipends), to the extent the Legislature appropriates funds specifically for this cause.

Related Legislation:

AB 1749 (C. Garcia, Chapter 340, Statutes of 2022) updated AB 617 to permit an additional year for completion of CERPs, require CARB to identify specified emissions reduction measures, and enhance reporting by local air districts.

Staff Comments:

Recent budgets have approved $930 million (combination of Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) and General Fund) for CARB to support the AB 617 program over three fiscal years (FYs) – FY 2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24. In response to a multibillion budget shortfall, the Governor’s January budget for FY 2023-24 proposes to eliminate the full $300 million in planned General Fund spending for AB 617 in FY 2023-24, and instead, proposes to use $250 million from GGRF to mostly make up for this loss, resulting in a $50 million net reduction.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Senator Allen, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular

SUBJECT: Community emissions reduction programs

DIGEST: This bill expands AB 617 (C. Garcia, Chapter 136, Statutes of 2017) by allowing the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to assign measures developed by communities in their Community Emission Reduction Plans (CERPs) to other relevant state agencies for them to promulgate and enforce regulations, unless they find those measures infeasible. The bill also makes changes regarding certain grants under AB 617.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law, pursuant to AB 617, Health and Safety Code § 44391.2:

1. Requires a statewide emissions reduction strategy targeting pollution-burdened communities, as follows:
   1. Requires CARB to prepare a statewide strategy to reduce emissions of toxic air contaminants (TACs) and criteria pollutants in communities affected by a high cumulative exposure burden, and update the strategy at least once every five years.
   2. Requires the strategy to include criteria for development of CERPs, including:
      1. An assessment and identification of communities with high cumulative exposure burdens for TACs and criteria air pollutants, prioritizing disadvantaged communities (DACs) and sensitive receptor locations based on one or more of the following: best available modeling information, existing air quality monitoring information, existing public health data based on consultation with Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), and the results of community air monitoring systems (CAMS).
      2. A methodology for assessing and identifying the contributing sources or categories of sources, including, but not limited to, stationary and mobile sources, and an estimate of their relative contribution to elevated exposure to air pollution in impacted communities.
      3. An assessment of whether a district should update and implement the risk reduction audit and emissions reduction plan for any facility to achieve emission reductions commensurate with its relative contribution, if the facility's emissions either cause or significantly contribute to a material impact on a sensitive receptor location or DAC.
      4. An assessment of the existing and available measures for reducing emissions from the contributing sources or categories of sources.
2. Requires the adoption of CERPs in communities designated by CARB, as follows:
   1. Requires CARB to select locations around the state for preparation of CERPs, concurrent with the statewide strategy, with additional locations selected annually thereafter, as appropriate.
   2. Requires a district to adopt a CERP to achieve emissions reductions using cost-effective measures identified by CARB.
   3. Requires the CERP to be consistent with CARB's statewide strategy and include emissions reduction targets, specific reduction measures, an implementation schedule, and an enforcement plan.
   4. Requires the CERP to be submitted to CARB for review and approval within 60 days. Requires CERPs rejected by CARB to be resubmitted within 30 days. If a CERP is not approvable by CARB, requires CARB to initiate a public process to discuss options for achievement of an approvable CERP. Requires CARB to concurrently develop and implement the applicable mobile source elements to commence achievement of emission reductions.
   5. Requires CERPs to result in emissions reductions in the community, based on monitoring and other data.
   6. Requires CARB and the district each to be responsible for measures consistent with their respective authorities.
   7. Requires districts to prepare an annual report summarizing the results and actions taken to further reduce emissions pursuant to a CERP.
   8. Requires compliance with the CERP to be enforceable by the district and CARB, as applicable.
   9. Requires CARB to provide grants to community-based organizations (CBOs) for technical assistance and to support participation in implementation of CERPs and CAMS.
      

This bill:

1. Expands the existing AB 617 provisions that directs air districts and CARB to be responsible for measures implementing CERPs consistent with their respective authorities, by:
   1. Permitting CARB to assign measures that are not within the authority of the air district or CARB to a state agency with authority;
   2. Directing agencies who are assigned measures with implementing that measure; and
   3. Permitting agencies who are assigned measures to find the measure infeasible, provided they follow specified procedures including a 30-day opportunity for public comment.
      
2. Expands enforcement provisions for ensuring compliance with CERPs to include state agencies who are assigned measures as described above, unless they find such enforcement infeasible, as specified.
   
3. Expands the scope of eligible uses of grants provided to CBOs to include providing an allocation of funds to a committee designated by the air district as a budget for administrative items (including but not limited to translation services, meeting venues, meeting coordination, training, and stipends), to the extent the Legislature appropriates funds specifically for this cause.
   

Background

1. AB 617: giving pollution-burdened communities a seat at the table. Based on direction from AB 617, CARB established the Community Air Protection Program, which directs CARB and local air districts to more effectively measure and reduce exposure in communities most impacted by air pollution. Among other requirements, the program includes the following components:
   
   1. Community Emissions Reduction Programs: AB 617 requires CARB to select locations around the state for preparation of CERPs. AB 617 requires an air district with jurisdiction over a location selected by CARB to implement a CERP in consultation with a variety of entities, and within one year of CARB selecting the location, each air district must submit its CERP to CARB for approval, with specified timelines and public processes. AB 617 specifies that compliance with CERPs is enforceable by the local air districts and CARB.
      
   2. Community Air Monitoring Systems: AB 617 requires CARB to identify high priority areas subject to criteria pollutant and TAC exposure. A local air district with jurisdiction over a high priority area must deploy community air monitoring systems and provide ARB with data from the monitoring systems, which ARB must post on its internet website.
      

In the implementation of AB 617, and the development of CERPs through community steering committees, issues related to air pollution sources and exposure have arisen that may be outside the jurisdiction of the air districts or CARB. This may include local land use practices that increase exposure to air pollution, practices under the authority of another state agency, such as pesticide application or highway construction, and sources of air pollution regulated primarily by the federal government, such as rail and aviation.

1. “AB 617’s flawed implementation must not be repeated.” Successfully implementing AB 617 has been a fraught undertaking. In May of 2021, the California Environmental Justice Alliance (CEJA) wrote a report excoriating the implementation of AB 617 in California. In the report, CEJA stated, “While AB 617 has increased deliberation of air pollution concerns in 11 communities, the resource-intensive convenings and overall implementation over the last three years have largely failed to produce material protections from harmful air pollution impacting their health.”
   
   As an example of the type of jurisdictional conflict that stymies AB 617 implementation, CEJA wrote of the CERP developed by Shafter, “While the Shafter Steering Committee overwhelmingly highlighted pesticides as a top area of concern, the CERP as originally drafted by the air district included no reductions of pesticide TACs. The air district also disavowed its authority to regulate pesticide TACs even once they volatilize in the air. Under pressure from the Steering Committee and allies, CARB reaffirmed its authority to regulate TACs beyond their pesticidal use, and acknowledged the overlapping jurisdictions. CARB also included a pilot plan to reduce emissions from a single TAC, 1,3-Dichloropropene. There is no across-the-board commitment to reduce pesticide TAC emissions.”
   
2. Defining equity. The concept of “equity” in policymaking is deceptively complex. The American Planning Association defines equity as “just and fair inclusion in a society so that all can participate, prosper, and reach their full potential.” Equity involves people having what they need to enjoy full, healthy lives. In contrast, equality aims to ensure that everyone gets the same things, no matter their starting place. Different groups of people — based on race, ethnicity, gender, immigration status, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic status — may need different types or amounts of resources and supports to enjoy full, healthy lives.
   
   More specifically, equity is often broken down further into more detailed components, such as:
   
   1. Procedural equity, when public decision making processes are transparent, accessible, fair, and inclusive;
   2. Structural equity, when government institutions and systems have the processes, practices, and policies to operationalize equity in how they function and make decisions; and
   3. Distributional equity, when there is an equitable distribution of resources, community burdens, and benefits.
      

In the context of AB 617 and this bill, all three dimensions are demonstrated. AB 617 itself strives for enhancing procedural equity in a space where it has historically been minimal: local air quality regulations. AB 849 would arguably strengthen structural equity, in that CBOs could play a larger role in operationalizing equity across more agencies. On a larger scale, distributional equity could be said to be the broader goal of local air quality regulations in general. Pollution sources are not distributed equitably, and thus many air pollution control measures actively work to address that inequity.

Comments

1. Purpose of Bill. According to the author, “Since the passage of AB 617 (C. Garcia 2017), several communities throughout the state have been able to benefit from participating in this community air protection program. Community participation in this program helps contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions throughout the state. It is exceptionally exciting to see the positive impact the AB 617 program has had and the community collaboration that has resulted from it. Now it is time to make necessary changes to the program that will allow collaboration between the air districts and relevant state agencies for the purpose of continuing the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and improving air quality throughout the state.”
   
2. Community-driven regulation. In its most community-responsive and protective form, AB 617 should lead to additional, tangible actions taken because the community called for them. To quote the CEJA report again, “Many measures in the AB 617 CERPs are vague and refer only to potential future actions—not real actions that will lead to emissions decreases. For example, despite the fact that the rendering plants in the East Los Angeles/Boyle Heights/West Commerce area have a history of odor complaints, the CERP merely focuses on continuing to monitor these facilities, and fails to provide enforceable emissions reductions. These vague measures fail to meet CARB’s requirement to “maximize reductions” of emissions, and the vast majority of strategies in the CERPs that CEJA members participated in could and should have been required without AB 617.” While addressing the totality of this issue is beyond the scope of this bill, it is clear that some change is needed to realize the air quality improvements desired by the communities.
   
3. A spirit of cooperative collaboration… by any means necessary. This bill’s author and sponsors contend that AB 849 is intended to promote collaboration between community residents, air districts, CARB, and other agencies that may have jurisdiction over communities’ areas of concern. It is true that there is nothing entirely precluding those communities from engaging with other agencies’ public processes today. Nevertheless, it does make sense that it could be more a more efficient use of residents’ time if those issues could be both raised and addressed in the CERP process. It is easy to imagine the frustration that would come from working through a lengthy, arduous process to improve your community’s air quality, only to be told at the end that it would be more appropriate for you to go talk to a different governmental entity.
   
   The remedy to this situation proposed in AB 849 is not to simply “encourage collaboration” or something of that ilk: it is to give CARB the authority to “assign the measure” to a state agency with authority over it. This creates a novel process for developing and enforcing regulations, which may be easier said than done. However, even if actually assigning the measure or requiring agencies to adopt and enforce regulations from CERPs never come to pass, the mere threat of that option may give community members more leverage to engage in collaborative dialogue than they have today. Even though AB 849 includes provisions for those agencies to not adopt the regulations if they find them infeasible, it is still a new way to apply pressure.
   
4. Where do regulations come from? It bears repeating that, if carried out as written, this would be a novel process for agencies to develop regulations. The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) largely governs how agencies go about adopting their regulations, and each agency has its own prerogative as to when to do so alongside legislative direction. AB 849 creates an interesting new model, where communities can include a measure in a CERP that falls under a state agency’s jurisdiction, and CARB can subsequently assign that measure to that agency. In a worst case scenario, where agencies are handed requirements to develop regulations that do not comport (or even may conflict) with their practices, this could lead to an antagonistic and frustrating environment for all parties involved. In a best case scenario, this could lead to a collaborative effort to make the most of the CERP process and address harmful air pollution regardless of jurisdictional lines.
   
   If state agencies are concerned with the implications of implementing measures developed in CERPs, they hopefully will be more inclined to work proactively with the communities developing them. While this may be an imperfect solution, the state of AB 617 implementation and the frustrations of AB 617 communities continuing to breathe unhealthy air may justify action. Absent any ability to directly influence regulations, these communities may continue to find themselves engaged in a lengthy process without change to show for it.
   

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 1749 (C. Garcia, Chapter 340, Statutes of 2022) updated AB 617 to permit an additional year for completion of CERPs, require CARB to identify specified emissions reduction measures, and enhance reporting by local air districts.

SOURCE:

South Coast Air Quality Management District

SUPPORT:

Bay Area Air Quality Management District
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association

South Coast Air Quality Management District

OPPOSITION:

None received

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 849

Author:(Garcia)

As Amended Ver:March 29, 2023

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Requires a state agency to implement and enforce measures in a Community Emissions Reduction Program (CERP) adopted pursuant to AB 617 (Cristina Garcia), Chapter 136, Statutes of 2017, if assigned to the agency by the Air Resources Board (ARB). Provides that ARB grants to community-based organizations may include allocating funds to AB 617 community steering committees (CSCs) to serve as a budget for administrative items, to the extent the Legislature appropriates funds specifically for this purpose.

Major Provisions

1. Requires a relevant state agency to implement and enforce CERP measures assigned to it by ARB, unless the agency finds that those measures are infeasible at a public meeting of its governing body, or, for an agency without a governing body, if the highest ranking officer of the agency finds and declares in writing, after allowing a 30-day opportunity for public comment, that the measures are infeasible.
2. Provides that grants provided by ARB for technical assistance and to support participation in implementation of CERPs and Community Air Monitoring Systems (CAMS) may include providing the AB 617 CSC an allocation of funds to serve as a budget for administrative items, to the extent the Legislature appropriates funds specifically for this purpose, including, but not limited to, translation services, meeting venue, meeting coordination, training, and stipends, as authorized by the air district, for members of the CSC.

COMMENTS

Existing law establishes ARB as the air pollution control agency in California and requires ARB, among other things, to control emissions from a wide array of mobile sources and coordinate with local air districts to control emissions from stationary sources in order to implement the Clean Air Act. Air districts are required to adopt and enforce rules and regulations to achieve and maintain the state and federal air quality standards in all areas affected by emission sources under their jurisdiction, and to enforce applicable provisions of state and federal law.

AB 617 requires ARB to select pollution-burdened communities around the state each year for preparation of CERPs and requires the relevant air district to adopt a CERP to achieve emissions reductions. In recognition of the division of authority between ARB for mobile sources and air districts for stationary sources, AB 617 requires ARB and the district to each to be responsible for measures consistent with their respective authorities.

In the implementation of AB 617, and the development of CERPs through CSCs, issues related to air pollution sources and exposure have arisen that may be outside the jurisdiction of the air districts or ARB. This may include local land use practices that increase exposure to air pollution, practices under the authority of another state agency, such as pesticide application or highway construction, and sources of air pollution regulated primarily by the federal government, such as rail and aviation.

This bill intends to address CERP measures under the jurisdiction of a state agency by requiring the relevant agency to implement and enforce a measure, unless the agency affirmatively finds the measure is infeasible.

According to the Author

Since the passage of AB 617, several communities throughout the state have been able to benefit from participating in this community air protection program. Community participation in this program helps contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions throughout the state. It is exceptionally exciting to see the positive impact the AB 617 program has had and the community collaboration that has resulted from it. Now it is time to make necessary changes to the program that will allow collaboration between the air districts and relevant state agencies for the purpose of continuing the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and improving air quality throughout the state.

Arguments in Support

According to the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, some CERP strategies go beyond the authority of ARB and local air districts. In these cases, the cooperation of relevant state agencies is critical to addressing problems CERPs have identified. Without such involvement, critical CERP strategies may simply be abandoned and the communities will continue to suffer from the adverse impacts associated with pollution exposures that are outside the regulatory authority of air agencies. To address this, AB 849 requires state agencies to help implement and enforce CERP control strategies as feasible and appropriate. Additionally, AB 849 recognizes the significant time and expense commitments CSC members make to improve their communities by participating in the CERP development process, by creating a mechanism for ARB to provide funding for administrative and logistical costs such as translation services, meeting venue costs, meeting coordination, child care, training and stipends.

Arguments in Opposition

According to the Western State Petroleum Association (WSPA), the bill inappropriately places air districts in the role of adopting CERP measures for which other state agencies are authorized and more appropriate to implement and enforce. WSPA would like to make sure that state agencies implementing adopted measures from a CERP, developed under ARB's Community Air Protection Program, are also in the role of adopting those measures. WSPA believes that having the adopting and implementing agencies be the same is the commonsense framework across California's regulatory agencies; and maintaining it in this context is necessary to ensure CERP regulatory measures are effective, enforceable, and lawful.

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:

1. ARB estimates ongoing annual costs ranging from $500,000 to millions of dollars to implement this bill (General Fund or special fund), including, but not limited to, reviewing ideas and proposals for other agencies’ measures during the CERP development process; engaging with other state agencies, CSCs, and air districts during the development of those measures; weighing in on state agency projects that trigger California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review; and developing relevant ARB staff reports or board resolutions to formally approve and assign measures to state agencies.
2. Costs of an unknown but significant amount, likely in the low millions of dollars, for the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) to implement this bill (General Fund or special fund). If ARB assigns DPR a CERP measure, DPR anticipates significant ongoing costs and staffing requirements for its Environmental Monitoring Branch, Enforcement Branch, Office of Legal Affairs, Office of Technology Services, Office of Communications and Outreach, and other branches. These costs would be associated with determining whether a measure is "feasible" and increasing rulemaking, local enforcement, online resources, outreach, and language access efforts. Although three AB 617 communities currently have pesticide-related CERP measures, DPR anticipates this bill could result in an expansion in the number of communities with pesticide-related CERP measures. In 2021, DPR received $2 million over two years in limited-term funding to support community engagement, largely associated with AB 617 work. DPR anticipates this allocation would need to be made permanent and likely supplemented to meaningfully support implementation of this bill.
3. The Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) notes that while the immediate cost of this bill is uncertain, annual ongoing costs could range from $250,000 to $1 million (General Fund or special fund), depending on how many communities adopt measures that require CalRecycle's oversight. If a new measure in a CERP falls under CalRecycle's authority and requires additional oversight, technical assistance, compliance inspections, or enforcement actions, the department would require dedicated staff to coordinate with ARB and assist communities that adopt such measures as well as contract funds to conduct research or monitoring to support data collection, verification, and analysis.
4. The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) estimates ongoing costs of at least $203,000 for one new position to implement measures assigned to it (General Fund). However, OEHHA notes that actual costs could range from several hundred thousand dollars to several million dollars annually depending on the specific responsibilities assigned to it through CERPs.

VOTES

ASM NATURAL RESOURCES: 8-3-0

YES: Luz Rivas, Addis, Friedman, Muratsuchi, Pellerin, Ward, Wood, Zbur

NO: Flora, Hoover, Mathis

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 11-4-1

YES: Holden, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Mike Fong, Hart, Lowenthal, Papan, Pellerin, Weber, Ortega

NO: Megan Dahle, Dixon, Mathis, Sanchez

ABS, ABST OR NV: Robert Rivas

UPDATED

VERSION: March 29, 2023

CONSULTANT: Lawrence Lingbloom / NAT. RES. / FN: 0000470

Date of Hearing: April 19, 2023

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Chris Holden, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 849

Author:(Garcia) – As Amended Ver:March 29, 2023

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill requires, among other things, a state agency to implement a measure included in a community emissions reduction program (CERP) and assigned to it by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) unless the agency finds the measure to be infeasible.

Specifically, this bill, among other things:

1) Authorizes CARB, if a CERP adopted by a local air district and approved by CARB includes a measure that is not within the authority of the district or CARB, to assign the measure to the state agency with authority over the measure.

2) Requires the state agency to implement and enforce the measure assigned to it unless the agency finds, at a public meeting of its governing body, the measure is infeasible, or, for an agency without a governing body, the highest ranking officer of the agency finds and declares, in writing, after a 30-day opportunity for public comment, that the measure is infeasible.

3) Provides that compliance with a CERP, including its implementation, is enforceable by relevant state agencies, in addition to CARB and the air district.

4) Provides that CARB grants to community-based organizations may include allocating funds to “AB 617” community steering committees (CSC) to serve as a budget for administrative items authorized by the air district, to the extent the Legislature appropriates funds specifically for this purpose.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1) CARB estimates ongoing annual costs ranging from $500,000 to millions of dollars to implement this bill (General Fund or special fund), including, but not limited to, reviewing ideas and proposals for other agencies’ measures during the CERP development process; engaging with other state agencies, CSCs, and air districts during the development of those measures; weighing in on state agency projects that trigger California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review; and developing relevant CARB staff reports or board resolutions to formally approve and assign measures to state agencies.

2) Costs of an unknown but significant amount, likely in the low millions of dollars, for the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) to implement this bill (General Fund or special fund). If CARB assigns DPR a CERP measure, DPR anticipates significant ongoing costs and staffing requirements for its Environmental Monitoring Branch, Enforcement Branch, Office of Legal Affairs, Office of Technology Services, Office of Communications and Outreach, and other branches. These costs would be associated with determining whether a measure is “feasible” and increasing rulemaking, local enforcement, online resources, outreach, and language access efforts. Although three AB 617 communities currently have pesticide-related CERP measures, DPR anticipates this bill could result in an expansion in the number of communities with pesticide-related CERP measures. In 2021, DPR received $2 million over two years in limited-term funding to support community engagement, largely associated with AB 617 work. DPR anticipates this allocation would need to be made permanent and likely supplemented to meaningfully support implementation of this bill.

3) The Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) notes that while the immediate cost of this bill is uncertain, annual ongoing costs could range from $250,000 to $1 million (General Fund or special fund), depending on how many communities adopt measures that require CalRecycle’s oversight. If a new measure in a CERP falls under CalRecycle’s authority and requires additional oversight, technical assistance, compliance inspections, or enforcement actions, the department would require dedicated staff to coordinate with CARB and assist communities that adopt such measures as well as contract funds to conduct research or monitoring to support data collection, verification, and analysis.

4) The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) estimates ongoing costs of at least $203,000 for one new position to implement measures assigned to it (General Fund). However, OEHHA notes that actual costs could range from several hundred thousand dollars to several million dollars annually depending on the specific responsibilities assigned to it through CERPs.

COMMENTS:

1) Purpose. According to the author:

Since the passage of AB 617, several communities throughout the state have been able to benefit from participating in this community air protection program. Community participation in this program helps contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions throughout the state. It is exceptionally exciting to see the positive impact the AB 617 program has had and the community collaboration that has resulted from it. Now it is time to make necessary changes to the program that will allow collaboration between the air districts and relevant state agencies for the purpose of continuing the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and improving air quality throughout the state.

2) Background. AB 617 (C. Garcia), Chapter 136, Statutes of 2017, requires CARB to select pollution-burdened communities around the state for preparation of CERPs and requires each relevant air district to adopt a CERP to achieve emission reductions. A CERP is developed through a process led by a CSC, in collaboration with the local air district, and is meant to reflect local air quality priorities. According to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), the sponsor of this bill, CERPs contain a variety of strategies, including commitments to develop new regulations, incentives to accelerate the adoption of cleaner technologies, focused enforcement, outreach to businesses and the public, and collaborations with community stakeholders and other agencies. There are currently 17 AB 617 communities across the state.

In recognition of the separation of authority between ARB for mobile sources and air districts for stationary sources, AB 617 requires ARB and the air district to each be responsible for measures consistent with their respective authorities.

SCAQMD writes:

At times some CERP strategies go beyond the authority of the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and local air districts. In these cases, the involvement of relevant state agencies is critical to address problems the communities have come together to identify and resolve. Without such involvement, various critical CERP strategies will simply be abandoned and the communities will continue to suffer. Additionally, as part of the CSC process, community members engaged in creating CERPs and trying to improve their communities should be provided with an administrative budget to facilitate their autonomy to identify their own meeting places, to determine who is facilitating their meetings and providing them with expertise and training, and to allow them to be compensated with more than just nominal stipends for the valuable time they selflessly invest for the betterment of their communities.

This bill authorizes CARB to assign a measure outside CARB’s or a local air district’s authority to the relevant state agency with authority over the measure, and requires the state agency to implement and enforce the measure unless the agency finds the measure to be infeasible.

3) Implementation Considerations. A number of state agencies already support CARB, air districts, and local communities in AB 617 implementation. For example, OEHHA serves on the CARB-convened multi-stakeholder AB 617 Consultation Group; develops monitoring plans in collaboration with CSCs, CARB, and DPR; identifies and tracks community air pollution concerns; designs and implements targeted biomonitoring studies in AB 617 communities; and presents to CSCs on exposures to air pollution. OEHHA is working with a community organization and academic partners on a study to evaluate the effectiveness of advanced air filtration at a Stockton school in reducing children’s exposures to air pollution. OEHHA is also helping evaluate pesticide monitoring data in Eastern Coachella Valley.

However, as noted in the Assembly Natural Resources Committee analysis of this bill, this bill proposes a novel process, where a state agency could be assigned and required to implement and enforce a measure adopted by an air district and CARB through the CERP process. “Measure” is not defined, but if the measure is regulatory, the state agency might have to make its own determinations through its rulemaking process before it could enforce the measure. The Western States Petroleum Association, in an oppose-unless-amended position, writes:

The bill inappropriately places air districts in the role of adopting CERP measures for which other state agencies are authorized and more appropriate to implement and enforce. WSPA would like to make sure that state agencies implementing adopted measures from a CERP, developed under the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) Community Air Protection Program, are also in the role of adopting those measures. WSPA believes that having the adopting and implementing agencies be the same is the commonsense framework across California’s regulatory agencies; and maintaining it in this context is necessary to ensure CERP regulatory measures are effective, enforceable, and lawful.

4) Funding. Recent budgets have approved $930 million (combination of Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) and General Fund) for CARB to support the AB 617 program over three fiscal years (FYs) – FY 2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24. In response to a multibillion budget shortfall, the Governor’s January budget for FY 2023-24 proposes to eliminate the full $300 million in planned General Fund spending for AB 617 in FY 2023-24, and instead, proposes to use $250 million from GGRF to mostly make up for this loss, resulting in a $50 million net reduction.

Analysis Prepared by: Nikita Koraddi / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: March 27, 2023

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES

Luz Rivas, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 849 (

Author:Garcia) – As Amended Ver:March 15, 2023

SUBJECT: Community emissions reduction programs

SUMMARY: Requires a state agency to implement and enforce measures assigned to it in a Community Emissions Reduction Program (CERP) adopted by a local air district and the Air Resources Board (ARB) pursuant to AB 617 (Cristina Garcia), Chapter 136, Statutes of 2017. Provides that ARB grants to community-based organizations may include allocating funds to AB 617 community steering committees to serve as a budget for administrative items, to the extent the Legislature appropriates funds specifically for this purpose.

EXISTING LAW, pursuant to Health and Safety Code § 44391.2:

1. Requires a statewide emissions reduction strategy targeting pollution-burdened communities, as follows:
   1. Requires ARB to prepare a statewide strategy to reduce emissions of toxic air contaminants (TACs) and criteria pollutants in communities affected by a high cumulative exposure burden, and update the strategy at least once every five years.
   2. Requires the strategy to include criteria for development of CERPs, including:
      1. An assessment and identification of communities with high cumulative exposure burdens for TACs and criteria air pollutants, prioritizing disadvantaged communities (DACs) and sensitive receptor locations based on one or more of the following: best available modeling information, existing air quality monitoring information, existing public health data based on consultation with Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), and the results of community air monitoring systems (CAMS).
      2. A methodology for assessing and identifying the contributing sources or categories of sources, including, but not limited to, stationary and mobile sources, and an estimate of their relative contribution to elevated exposure to air pollution in impacted communities.
      3. An assessment of whether a district should update and implement the risk reduction audit and emissions reduction plan for any facility to achieve emission reductions commensurate with its relative contribution, if the facility's emissions either cause or significantly contribute to a material impact on a sensitive receptor location or DAC.
      4. An assessment of the existing and available measures for reducing emissions from the contributing sources or categories of sources.
2. Requires the adoption of CERPs in communities designated by ARB, as follows:
   1. Requires ARB to select locations around the state for preparation of CERPs, concurrent with the statewide strategy, with additional locations selected annually thereafter, as appropriate.
   2. Requires a district to adopt a CERP to achieve emissions reductions using cost-effective measures identified by ARB.
   3. Requires the CERP to be consistent with ARB's statewide strategy and include emissions reduction targets, specific reduction measures, an implementation schedule, and an enforcement plan.
   4. Requires the CERP to be submitted to ARB for review and approval within 60 days. Requires CERPs rejected by ARB to be resubmitted within 30 days. If a CERP is not approvable by ARB, requires ARB to initiate a public process to discuss options for achievement of an approvable CERP. Requires ARB to concurrently develop and implement the applicable mobile source elements to commence achievement of emission reductions.
   5. Requires CERPs to result in emissions reductions in the community, based on monitoring and other data.
   6. Requires ARB and the district each to be responsible for measures consistent with their respective authorities.
   7. Requires districts to prepare an annual report summarizing the results and actions taken to further reduce emissions pursuant to a CERP.
   8. Requires compliance with the CERP to be enforceable by the district and ARB, as applicable.
   9. Requires ARB to provide grants to community-based organizations for technical assistance and to support participation in implementation of CERPs and CAMS.

THIS BILL:

1. Requires a relevant state agency to implement and enforce measures assigned to it in a CERP, unless the agency finds that those measures are infeasible at a public meeting of its governing body, or, for an agency without a governing body, if the highest ranking officer of the agency finds and declares in writing, after allowing a 30-day opportunity for public comment, that the measures are infeasible. 
2. Provides that grants provided by ARB for technical assistance and to support participation in implementation of CERPs and CAMS may include providing the AB 617 community steering committee an allocation of funds to serve as a budget for administrative items, to the extent the Legislature appropriates funds specifically for this purpose, including, but not limited to, translation services, meeting venue, meeting coordination, training, and stipends, as authorized by the air district, for members of the committee. 

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown

COMMENTS:

1. Background. Existing law establishes ARB as the air pollution control agency in California and requires ARB, among other things, to control emissions from a wide array of mobile sources and coordinate with local air districts to control emissions from stationary sources in order to implement the Clean Air Act. Air districts are required to adopt and enforce rules and regulations to achieve and maintain the state and federal air quality standards in all areas affected by emission sources under their jurisdiction, and to enforce applicable provisions of state and federal law.

AB 617 requires ARB to select pollution-burdened communities around the state each year for preparation of CERPs and requires the relevant air district to adopt a CERP to achieve emissions reductions. In recognition of the division of authority between ARB for mobile sources and air districts for stationary sources, AB 617 requires ARB and the district to each to be responsible for measures consistent with their respective authorities.

In the implementation of AB 617, and the development of CERPs through community steering committees, issues related to air pollution sources and exposure have arisen that may be outside the jurisdiction of the air districts or ARB. This may include local land use practices that increase exposure to air pollution, practices under the authority of another state agency, such as pesticide application or highway construction, and sources of air pollution regulated primarily by the federal government, such as rail and aviation.

This bill intends to address CERP measures under the jurisdiction of a state agency by requiring the relevant agency to implement and enforce a measure, unless the agency affirmatively finds the measure is infeasible.

1. Author’s statement:

Since the passage of AB 617, several communities throughout the state have been able to benefit from participating in this community air protection program. Community participation in this program helps contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions throughout the state. It is exceptionally exciting to see the positive impact the AB 617 program has had and the community collaboration that has resulted from it. Now it is time to make necessary changes to the program that will allow collaboration between the air districts and relevant state agencies for the purpose of continuing the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and improving air quality throughout the state.

1. To what extent can another state agency implement and enforce a measure adopted by an air district and ARB through the CERP process? This bill proposes a novel process, where a state agency could be required to implement and enforce a measure adopted by an air district and ARB through the CERP process. “Measure” is not defined, but if the measure is regulatory in nature, presumably the state agency would have to make its own determinations through its rulemaking process before it could enforce the measure.
2. Technical suggestions. To be clear that the bill adds measures that are beyond the authority of ARB or air districts, and does not dilute the existing responsibilities of ARB or the air districts, the author and the committee may wish to consider amending the relevant provisions to clarify that other state agencies would only be assigned a measure if the measure is outside of the authorities of air districts and ARB, as follows:

(6) In implementing a community emissions reduction program, the district, and the state board, and other relevant state agencies shall be responsible for measures consistent with their respective authorities. If the community emissions reduction program adopted by the district and the state board includes a measure that is not within the authority of the district or the state board, the state board may assign the measure to the state agency with authority over the measure. A relevant state agency shall implement the measures measure assigned to it as a part of the community emissions reduction program unless that agency finds that those measures are the measure is infeasible at a public meeting of its governing body, or, for an agency without a governing body, if the highest ranking officer of the agency finds and declares in writing, after allowing a 30-day opportunity for public comment, that the measures are measure is infeasible. 

(8) Compliance with a community emissions reduction program prepared pursuant to this section, including its implementation, shall be enforceable by the district, state board, and other relevant state agencies, as applicable. A relevant state agency to which a measure is assigned pursuant to paragraph (6) shall enforce the measures assigned to it as a part of the community emissions reduction program measure unless that agency finds that those measures are the measure is infeasible at a public meeting of its governing body, or, for an agency without a governing body, if the highest ranking officer of the agency finds and declares in writing, after allowing a 30-day opportunity for public comment, that the measures are measure is infeasible. 

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Bay Area Air Quality Management District
San Diego County Air Pollution Control District
South Coast Air Quality Management District

Opposition

Western States Petroleum Association

Analysis Prepared by: Lawrence Lingbloom / NAT. RES. /