California

Subscribe to California via RSS

The State and eNGOs seek to defend an emissions rule that trucking and airline trade groups are challenging in federal court.

By Joshua T. Bledsoe and Jennifer Garlock

On October 13, 2021, the State of California, on behalf of the Office of the Attorney General and the California Air Resources Board (CARB, and together, the State), filed a motion to intervene in a federal lawsuit challenging the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD or the District) adoption of Rule 2305. Rule 2305 is the Warehouse Indirect Source Rule (ISR) – Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions (WAIRE) Program. Plaintiff, the California Trucking Association (CTA), filed a complaint in the US District Court for the Central District of California on August 5, 2021, to which the District filed an answer on October 7, 2021.[i] In addition to the State, Airlines for America filed a motion to intervene as a proposed plaintiff, while a group of environmental NGOs seek to intervene as proposed defendants. Each proposed intervenor is discussed further below.

Developers and municipalities must continue to evaluate potential wildfire impacts on projects under CEQA and consider recent legislative changes.

By Marc T. Campopiano and Shivaun A. Cooney

Wildfires have posed increasing risks in recent years to the public and environment in California. The importance of understanding how wildfires may impact new development and infrastructure is more relevant than ever. Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), developers and agencies are prompted to evaluate wildfire impacts.

Latham & Watkins recently hosted…

A local air district approved a rule requiring warehouses to adopt clean technologies or pay a mitigation fee.

By Joshua T. Bledsoe and Jennifer Garlock

At a contentious board hearing on May 7, 2021, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) approved a first-in-the-nation rule to regulate trucking emissions from warehouses by a 9-4 vote. Rule 2305, the Warehouse Indirect Source Rule (ISR), establishes the Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions (WAIRE) Program to reduce emissions associated with warehouse activity. The WAIRE Program essentially requires warehouse operators to take actions to electrify warehouse activities and the trucks that visit warehouses in order to reduce nitrogen oxides (NOx) and diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions. As previewed in a 2019 Latham blog post, despite the warehouse sector’s limited control over the types of trucks servicing its facilities (warehouses generally do not own or operate trucking fleets), the ISR imposes obligations on warehouses to indirectly reduce trucking emissions. The WAIRE Program applies to warehouses with more than 100,000 square feet of warehouse space in a single building, and will phase in over three years based on warehouse size, with the largest warehouses (i.e., more than 250,000 square feet) having the earliest compliance period.

SB 7 expands project eligibility, provides additional guidance regarding GHG emissions, and changes some procedural requirements.

By Nikki Buffa and Brian McCall

On May 20, 2021, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law SB 7, the Jobs and Economic Improvement Through Environmental Leadership Act of 2021. SB 7 reinstates, with amendments, the Environmental Leadership Development Project (ELDP) provisions of the Public Resources Code — more commonly known as AB 900 — which expired on January 1, 2021. The basic premise of AB 900 and now SB 7 is to provide litigation streamlining under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a certain class of projects that meet heightened environmental and labor standards. This blog post examines how SB 7 departs from AB 900 in a few key ways.

Project applicants and agencies alike should think carefully about developing robust analyses that demonstrate the adequacy of water supply.

By Marc T. Campopiano, Diego Enrique Flores, and Lucas I. Quass

Mark Twain is often credited with saying, “Whiskey is for drinking; water is for fighting over.” This remains true in California, where drought conditions, climate change, and population growth throughout the state’s history have made water an increasingly valuable and regulated resource. The legal landscape involves complex questions related to water quality, water sustainability, and competing claims to water rights. One notable area of controversy involves the adequacy of water supply for new development projects.

Two decades ago, in 2001, the state legislature enacted Senate Bill (SB) 610 and SB 221 to promote sustainable long-term water planning. Collectively, SB 610 and SB 221 require public agencies to determine whether adequate water supply exists for certain large development projects as part of the environmental review process under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by, in part, requesting water supply assessments (WSAs) from water service providers.

The program will include a multi-jurisdictional cap-and-invest program and aims to address environmental justice and equity concerns.

By Jean-Philippe Brisson, Joshua T. Bledsoe, Benjamin Einhouse, and Brian McCall

On December 21, 2020, the Governors of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, as well as the Mayor of the District of Columbia, announced that their respective jurisdictions would establish the Transportation & Climate Initiative Program (TCI-P) and released a memorandum of understanding (MOU) describing the agreed-upon principles for adoption and implementation of the TCI-P. While not part of the MOU, the states of New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Vermont, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina released a statement signaling their desire to work with the states party to the MOU and the Transportation & Climate Initiative (TCI) in general. On March 1, 2021, the TCI released draft Model Rules for public review. Once finalized, the Model Rules are intended to be adapted for use by each TCI-P signatory jurisdiction via state-specific rulemaking processes.

Public agencies prevailed in 68% of CEQA cases analyzed.

By James L. Arnone, Daniel P. Brunton, Nikki Buffa, Marc T. Campopiano, and Winston P. Stromberg

Latham & Watkins is pleased to present its fourth annual CEQA Case Report. Throughout 2020 Latham lawyers reviewed each of the 34 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) appellate cases, whether published or unpublished. Below is a compilation of the information distilled from that annual review and a discussion of the patterns that emerged. Latham’s webcast discussing this publication and the key CEQA cases and trends of 2020 is available here.

The proposed amendments seek to clarify when short-form product warnings may be used and create new requirements for information about harmful chemicals.

By Michael G. Romey, Lucas I. Quass, and Kevin Homrighausen

Update: On February 19, 2021, OEHHA announced that the public comment period has been extended until March 29, 2021. OEHHA also scheduled a virtual public hearing to discuss the proposed amendments on March 11, 2021, at 10 a.m. PT.

On January 8, 2021, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) proposed amendments to the regulations of California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Proposition 65 or Prop 65). The proposed amendments seek to clarify the circumstances under which short-form product label warnings are permitted and create new requirements for identification of hazardous chemicals in short-form warnings.

The agency has further strengthened electrification targets and provided additional details on compliance options for Transportation Network Companies.

By Joshua T. Bledsoe, Charles C. Read, and Jen Garlock

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is developing the Clean Miles Standard and Incentive Program (Clean Miles Standard), a first-of-its kind regulation designed to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from ride-sharing vehicles and increase the use of zero-emission vehicles.

CARB staff presented updates to the regulation at a November 2020…

California appeals court decision increases the potential for CEQA challenges to power plant projects under the CEC’s jurisdiction.

By Marc T. Campopiano, Charles C. Read, and Kevin A. Homrighausen

In Communities for a Better Environment v. Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission, the California First District Court of Appeal recently held that the State Legislature violated the California Constitution by limiting the scope of judicial review for California Energy Commission (CEC) decisions involving power plant siting to the California Supreme Court. Although the California Constitution gives the Legislature express authority to limit the scope of judicial review for California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) decisions, the court found there is no similar authority regarding appeals of CEC decisions.

The Supreme Court has rarely, if ever, agreed to hear CEQA challenges of CEC power plant decisions. Now, developers seeking to construct new power plants or modify existing power plants under the CEC’s jurisdiction may see an increase in legal challenges — including California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) challenges — in California’s trial courts. As a result, CEQA challenges to power plants may closely resemble other land use challenges in the state.