News

This page features excerpts from news about environmental justice advocacy in the San Joaquin Valley and links to their original sources. Use the features on the right to sort by topic, news source, date, key word or author. You may also subscribe to receive the news by e-mail or through an rss reader. Please note that links to original sources may expire over time.

California AB 32’s Cap-and-Trade Program Developments

Article by Randolph Visser, Olivier Theard and Whitney Hodges. Published October 6, 2011 in JDSUPRA.

This article is the latest in a series chronicling the first litigation challenge to AB 32 (the Global Warming Solutions Act) and the cap-and-trade program in Association of Irritated Residents, et al. v. California Air Resources Board, Case No. CPF-09-509562, (“Ass’n of Irritated Residents v. CARB”). Though environmental justice groups continue to object to cap-and-trade as the primary vehicle to reduce greenhouse (“GHG”) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, the California Supreme Court recently allowed California Air Resources Board’s (“ARB”) cap-and-trade implementation to move forward, and agency rule development continues.

On August 24, 2011, the ARB Board (“Board”) unanimously approved both ARB’s new supplemental assessment (“Supplement”) and re-approved its Scoping Plan, which provides the overall roadmap and rule measures to carry out AB 32. The Board also approved a more robust California Environmental Quality Act equivalent document supporting the supplemental analysis of the cap-and-trade program.


 

Arvin air monitor move could jeopardize fine’s removal

Article by Kellie Schmitt. Published October 6, 2011 in The Bakersfield Californian.

This summer, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District urged residents to do their part in keeping the air below the one-hour ozone standard, violations of which have resulted in a $29 million federal fee.

But, even if the valley’s air were to reach those standards — and it still hasn’t — the fine won’t be lifted until there’s resolution of an ongoing controversy over the relocation of a monitor in Arvin, according to an official with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

In 2009, the state’s Air Resources Board moved the Arvin monitor after the Arvin-Edison Water Storage District refused to continue housing it. The new Arvin location, which is near Di Giorgio Elementary School, has registered ozone readings that are about 10 percent cleaner, a difference that could pose a legal problem.

“That’s why we’re working so hard with the air district and the state to come up with a solution,” said Kerry Drake, an associate director for the EPA’s air division. “It is a much more complicated legal issue when the highest-reading monitor gets moved.”

Settlement reached in Valley water fight

Article by Russell Clemings. Published October 6, 2011 in The Fresno Bee.

A new state plan for improving the quality and reducing the cost of drinking water in small towns and rural areas will be required by a court settlement announced Thursday.

California Rural Legal Assistance, an advocacy group, sued the state Department of Public Health two years ago, asking a Fresno County Superior Court judge to order the department to complete a Safe Drinking Water Plan as required by a 1996 law.

The Fresno court refused but was overturned on appeal, setting the stage for the settlement, said Kara Brodfuehrer, CRLA’s lead attorney.

The settlement requires the department to submit the drinking water plan to the Legislature within three years. It includes a provision for CRLA and its clients to submit their own data.

“We really think this is a step forward,” Brodfuehrer said. “We’re really looking forward to this analysis and the five-year plan that is supposed to follow.”

California lawmakers must ensure clean H2O

Editorial published October 5, 2011 in The Fresno Bee.

The Fresno Bee’s three-part series on the San Joaquin Valley drinking water crisis has revealed an embarrassing secret about our region — our poorest residents might as well be drinking water in a third-world country.

In many rural Valley communities, the tap water is tainted by rotting vegetation, fertilizers, manure and outdated plumbing, according to the investigation by reporter Mark Grossi. It’s so bad that the United Nations visited the area and declared that residents in our region have a basic human right to clean drinking water. What does it say when the U.N. must remind us that cleaning drinking water isn’t a frill?

This crisis exists in the Golden State in the 21st century. It is outrageous that we treat the poorest among us this way.

S.J. joins effort to ease tough Valley ozone rules

Article by Zachary K. Johnson. Published October 5, 2011 in The Record.

STOCKTON – San Joaquin County officials voted Tuesday to support federal legislation that would ease regulations on ozone levels in the San Joaquin Valley and eliminate a $29 million fine Valley drivers have started paying through higher licensing fees.

Clean Air Action Day

Video by Central Valley Air Quality Coalition. Published October 5, 2011 in YouTube.

Valley air regulators win smog battle with home builders

Article published October 4, 2011 in Merced Sun-Star.

FRESNO — The Valley air district won a six-year battle Monday when the U.S. Supreme Court refused to take up a lawsuit from the National Association of Home Builders challenging fees to offset the smog that is caused from new subdivisions and other projects.

And there was more movement on air regulations Monday: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has OK’d California’s request to delay until 2015 reducing microscopic pollution caused by diesel trucks, ship traffic and other sources in Central and Southern California.

Both actions were anticipated, but the Supreme Court ruling has more immediacy because it signals a clear direction for air rules.

Water for crops, but farmworkers go thirsty

Article by Tom Laskawy. Published October 3, 2011 in Grist.

There are many hardships in the life of American farmworkers. One of the more shocking and pernicious of these is highlighted in a recent Fresno Bee series called “Don’t Drink the Water”: Many rural residents don’t have access to safe, clean drinking water.

Reporter Mark Gross went to Tulare Country in California’s Central Valley (our nation’s produce capital) to investigate reports of high nitrate contamination. This is the same area a U.N. water quality investigator visited recently, after stopping in Bangladesh, Uruguay, and Namibia to look at “social problems linked to a lack of access to clean water.” Things were so bad in Tulare County, said the U.N. investigator, that he “urged state and federal authorities to consider healthy drinking water a human right and clean up the mess.”

Environmental groups, state regulators win major smog case over home developers

Article by Paul Rogers. Published October 3, 2011 in San Jose Mercury News.

In an environmental case that is expected to have implications across the Bay Area and California, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to take up a lawsuit from the National Association of Home Builders that challenged whether air pollution officials in California can charge developers fees to offset the smog that is caused from new subdivisions and other housing developments.

Traditionally, government agencies have required developers to pay for the impacts their projects cause on schools, parks, sewer systems and roads. But in 2005, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, based in Fresno, passed a new rule requiring developers to pay to offset the air pollution caused by their construction equipment, and also for the new traffic generated by their projects.

The National Association of Home Builders sued, and first lost at the district level and again in December at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The news Monday that the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take the case hands a victory to air pollution regulators and environmental groups. It also means that Bay Area air regulators, who had been watching the case with interest, are likely to adopt a similar rule in the next few years.

Supreme Court refuses to hear Central Valley air pollution case

Article published October 3, 2011 in Central Valley Business Times.

Those putting up new home developments in the San Joaquin Valley must comply with air pollution regulations from the Valley’s air pollution control district, following a decision Monday by the U.S. Supreme Court not to review an appeals court ruling that went against the builders.

The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) has been trying to invalidate a regulation to reduce air pollution from new development projects. The regulation, known as the Indirect Source Rule (ISR) was adopted by the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District in December 2005 and took effect in March 2006. It requires developers to mitigate pollution from the increased traffic generated by new development.

← Previous Entries

Next Entries →