BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1224
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 1224 (Wright)
As Amended May 10, 2010
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :29-2
NATURAL RESOURCES 6-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Chesbro, Gilmore, De | | |
| |Leon, | | |
| |Hill, Huffman, Logue | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Authorizes an air district to adopt a rule or
regulation that ensures district staff and resources are not
used to investigate complaints alleging a nuisance odor
violation that are determined to be repeated and
unsubstantiated. Specifically, this bill :
1)Authorizes an air pollution control district (APCD) or air
quality management district (AQMD) to adopt a rule or
regulation, as specified, that ensures district staff and
resources are not used to investigate complaints alleging a
nuisance odor violation that are determined to be repeated and
unsubstantiated.
2)Requires, if an APCD or AWMD adopts such a rule, it be
submitted to the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources and
the Senate Committee on Environmental Quality within 30 days.
3)Sunsets on January 1, 2014.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Under the California Constitution, authorizes a city or county
to "make and enforce within its limits all local, police,
sanitary, and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict
with general law."
2)Defines "nuisance" to be anything injurious to health,
SB 1224
Page 2
including, but not limited to, the illegal sale of controlled
substances, or is indecent or offensive to the senses, or an
obstruction to the free use of property, so as to interfere
with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property, or
unlawfully obstructs the free passage or use, in the customary
manner, of any navigable lake, river, bay stream canal or
basin, or any public park, square, street, or highway.
3)Provides that APCDs and AQMDs have primary responsibility for
controlling air pollution from all sources, other than
emissions from mobile sources.
4)Under Nonvehicular Air Pollution Control Law:
a) Prohibits discharging from any source quantities of air
contaminants or other material that causes injury,
detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable
number of persons or to the public, or that endanger the
comfort, repose, health, or safety of any of those persons
or the public, or that cause or have a natural tendency to
cause injury or damage to business or property;
b) Exempts odors emanating from certain agricultural and
compost operations; and,
c) Authorizes an APCD or AQMD board, after notice and
hearing, to issue an order for abatement whenever it finds
that any person is constructing or operating any article,
machine, equipment, or other contrivance without a permit
required by the law or of any order, rule, or regulation
prohibiting or limiting the discharge of air contaminants
into the air.
FISCAL EFFECT : This bill is nonfiscal.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "SB 1224 seeks to find the
best use of air district resources, as well as company
resources, to handle complaints that are found to be repeated
and unsubstantiated. In today's economy where government and
company resources are diminishing, time and resources to handle
air contaminant issues must be organized and efficient. SB 1224
allows each air district to analyze how they handle repeated,
unconfirmed odor complaints and come up with a solution that
best utilizes finite resources."
SB 1224
Page 3
In response to the author's concerns, this bill authorizes APCDs
and AQMDs to adopt a rule or regulation ensuring that staff and
resources are not used to investigate repeated and
unsubstantiated complaints, or complaints made in bad faith,
alleging a violation of the prohibition on discharging air
contaminant or other materials, under specified conditions.
The author and supporters of the bill note two examples of "the
most serious cases where odor complaints are repeated and
unsubstantiated." In Oakland, the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (BAAQMD) has received over 80 complaints
since 2007 relating to the CASS facility. BAAQMD has not issued
a notice of violations for odors. The author states that for
each complaint, CASS staff spent 2-4 hours meeting with BAAQMD
staff and reviewing the operations. This adds up to "hundreds
of hours spent by employees without a problem."
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has
received 200 complaints since 2000, alleging one or both of
Griswold Castings Division facilities (Costa Mesa) as the source
of air contaminants. SCAQMD issued one notice to comply at one
facility - the equivalent to a California Highway Patrol "fix
it" ticket and no notices of violation.
Analysis Prepared by : Elizabeth MacMillan / NAT. RES. / (916)
319-2092
FN: 0004958