BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2781
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 18, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
Das Williams, Chair
AB 2781
(Eduardo Garcia) - As Amended April 7, 2016
SUBJECT: Supplemental environmental projects
SUMMARY: Directs 10% of all penalties collected by California
Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) boards, departments,
and offices to fund environmental projects in disadvantaged
communities.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Defines "environmental justice" to mean the fair treatment of
people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the
development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of
environmental laws, regulations, and policies.
2)Defines "environmental justice community" as a community
identified by CalEPA based on geographic, socioeconomic,
public health, and environmental hazard criteria, including:
a) Areas disproportionately affected by environmental
pollution and other hazards that can lead to negative
public health effects, exposure, or environmental
AB 2781
Page 2
degradation; and,
b) Areas with concentrations of people that are of low
income, high unemployment, low levels of homeownership,
high rent burden, sensitive populations, or low levels of
educational attainment.
3)Requires CalEPA to:
a) Conduct its programs, policies, and activities and
enforce all health and environmental statutes within its
jurisdiction in a manner that ensures the fair treatment of
people of all races, cultures, and income levels, including
minority and low-income populations.
b) Convene a Working Group on Environmental Justice
(Working Group) comprised of the Secretary of CalEPA, the
Chairs of the Air Resources Board (ARB), the California
Integrated Waste Management Board (now CalRecycle), the
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the Director
of the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the
Director of the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR),
the Director of the Office of Environmental Health Hazard
Assessment (OEHHA), and the Director of the Office of
Planning and Research (OPR). Requires the Working Group to
examine existing data and studies on environmental justice
and recommending policies for implementation by CalEPA;
recommend criteria to the Secretary of CalEPA for
identifying and addressing any gaps in existing programs,
policies, or activities that may impede the achievement of
environmental justice; and, hold public meetings to receive
and respond to public comments prior to the finalization of
the recommendations.
c) Requires each board, department, and office within
CalEPA to review its programs, policies, and activities and
identify and address any gaps in its existing programs,
AB 2781
Page 3
policies, or activities that may impede the achievement of
environmental justice.
4)Names OPR as the coordinating agency in state government for
environmental justice programs.
5)Pursuant to AB 1071 (Atkins), Chapter 585, Statutes of 2015,
beginning January 1, 2016, requires each board, department,
and office within CalEPA to establish a policy on supplemental
environmental projects (SEPs) that benefits environmental
justice communities. Authorizes up to 50% of an enforcement
action to be allocated for SEPs. Requires CalEPA to compile a
list of SEPs developed by its boards, departments, and offices
and post the list on its website.
THIS BILL:
1)Requires that 10% of all enforcement action monetary penalties
collected by a CalEPA board, department, or office to be
deposited into the Supplemental Environmental Projects in
Disadvantaged Communities Fund (Fund).
2)Specifies that the Fund be available, upon appropriation, to
implement environmental projects in disadvantaged communities.
Prioritizes funding for projects on the list compiled by
CalEPA.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS:
1)Environmental justice. According to OEHHA, approximately 8
AB 2781
Page 4
million Californians (21%) live in zip codes that are
considered "highly impacted" by environmental, public health,
and socioeconomic stressors. Nearly half of all Californians
live within six miles of a facility that is a significant
greenhouse gas emitter (46%), and they are disproportionately
people of color (62%). Throughout California, people of color
face a 50% higher risk of cancer from ambient concentrations
of air pollutants listed under the Clean Air Act. These
impacts are felt by all Californians. ARB estimates that air
pollution exposure accounts for 19,000 premature deaths,
280,000 cases of asthma, and 1.9 million lost work days every
year.
In 2000, legislation [SB 89 (Escutia), Chapter 728] required
CalEPA to convene the
Environmental Justice Working Group and develop an agency-wide
environmental justice
strategy. In 2001, follow up legislation [SB 828 (Alarcon),
Chapter 765] established a
timeline for these requirements and required CalEPA to update
its report to the Legislature
every three years. In October of 2004, CalEPA released its
Environmental Justice Action Plan, but did not complete the
required updates for a decade.
SB 535 (DeLeon), Chapter 850, Statutes of 2012 requires the
Cap and Trade Proceeds Investment Plan to direct a minimum of
25% of the available moneys in the fund to projects that
provide benefits to identified disadvantaged communities; and,
a minimum of 10% of the available moneys in the fund to
projects located within identified disadvantaged communities.
SB 535 also required CalEPA to identify disadvantaged
communities (i.e., environmental justice communities). In
order to accurately identify environmental justice
communities, OEHHA, on behalf of CalEPA, created the
California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool
(CalEnviroScreen). CalEnviroScreen is a screening methodology
that can be used to help identify California communities that
are disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of
AB 2781
Page 5
pollution.
In February of 2014, CalEPA issued an Environmental Justice
Program Update, which included four main areas for future
actions: 1) increase efforts to eliminate discrimination on
the basis of race, national origin, ethnic group
identification, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, color,
genetic information, or disability in any program or activity
conducted or funded by the state; 2) develop guidance to
promote a sound legal framework for CalEPA to advance
environmental justice goals and objectives; 3) lead an
agency-wide working group dedicated to increase compliance
with environmental laws in communities with relatively higher
environmental burdens; and, 4) add additional indicators to
CalEnviroScreen.
2)Supplemental environmental projects. SEPs are environmentally
beneficial projects that a violator agrees to undertake as
part of a settlement for an enforcement action, but which the
violator is not otherwise legally required to perform. In
2003, CalEPA released guidelines for the use of SEPs for its
boards, departments, and offices. The guidelines specify that
an SEP must improve, protect, or reduce risks to public health
and the environment at large. The enforcing agency must have
the opportunity to help shape the scope of the project before
it is implemented and the project must not be commenced until
the enforcing agency has identified a violation. Finally, the
SEP must not be required by a federal, state, or local law or
regulation. CalEPA's SEP guidelines suggest limiting the SEP
to 25% of the total enforcement action.
Within CalEPA, ARB, DTSC, and SWRCB have adopted SEP policies.
ARB and DTSC's policies are consistent with CalEPA's
guidelines and allow SEPs up to 25% of the amount of the
enforcement action. SWRCB, consistent with authority granted
by SB 1733 (Aanestad), Chapter 404, Statutes of 2006, allow
SEPs up to 50% of the amount of the penalty. CalEPA's 2013
Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Report provides
information on the use of SEPs in California. The certified
AB 2781
Page 6
unified program agencies directed just over $2.1 million to
SEPs, approximately 25% of the penalties collected. According
to ARB, of the $9.97 million penalties assessed for
significant enforcement cases (over $10,000), $773,600 was
directed to SEPs. DPR directed only $8,000 of the $3.3
million in penalties collected to one SEP. The other boards,
departments, and offices did not report any SEP funding in
2013.
CalEPA is in the process of implementing AB 1071. According
to CalEPA, the draft SEP policy will be available for public
review this month; boards, departments, and offices will begin
soliciting SEP proposals from the public in late summer, and
CalEPA will post the compiled SEP list to the website by
December.
3)Author's statement:
Many communities in California continue to be
disproportionately burdened [by] multiple sources of
pollution. These communities are most vulnerable to
pollution and climate change than others. These
disadvantaged communities? require much more than resources
to tackle climate and environmental health impacts and to
implement community led projects.
Currently, many communities facing enforcement actions
would rather pay the fine than implement a SEP. This is
mainly attributed to the time and effort necessary to
implement a SEP. The inexperience of the violator also
contributes to the lack of SEP implementation.
As a result, there continues to be a disconnect that
prevents disadvantaged communities from benefitting from
pollution mitigation projects funded by enforcement
actions. Without requiring a mandatory Disadvantaged
Community Fund, DACs will continue to be overlooked and not
benefit from much needed environmental mitigation. By
securing resources that benefit disadvantaged communities,
AB 2781
Page 7
the state can help decrease many of the environmental
stressors affecting these communities.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
California Indian Environmental Alliance
Comite Civico Del Valle
Global Community Monitor
Idle No More SF Bay
La Union Hace La Fuerza
West Berkeley Alliance for Clean Air and Safe Jobs
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by:Elizabeth MacMillan / NAT. RES. / (916)
319-2092
AB 2781
Page 8