Recapping Significant 2012 Environmental Legislation in California — The Calm Before the Storm This 14-page report entitled Recapping Significant 2012 Environmental Legislation in California - The Calm Before the Storm highlights legislation enacted in eight areas of interest including air quality, climate change, energy and fuels, water quality, hazardous waste and hazardous materials, land use, California Environmental Quality Act, solid waste, and sustainability. This informative review gives you insight and analysis of: The significant environmental legislation enacted in 2012. The impact of enactment. What to expect in the upcoming 2013 legislative year.

1. Recapping Significant 2012 Environmental Legislation in California —
The Calm Before the Storm
By Gary A. Lucks
2012 California Environmental Year In Review

2. California Environmental Legislative Year in Review 2012
2
Last June, Sacramento reached an on-time budget for only the third time in the past two
decades. Despite an improving economy and deep cuts to health and welfare programs
in the budget, California was facing another yawning gap for the next fiscal year.
Governor Brown’s remedy was Proposition 30, authorizing additional tax revenue to be
collected over five years. He made Proposition 30 his top priority for the November 2012
election and won approval from voters by an eleven point margin. Had Proposition 30
failed, the state would have faced another $6 billion in cuts borne largely by schools and
welfare programs.
The passage of Proposition 30 in November 2012, combined with the unexpected
Democratic victories yielding a supermajority in both legislative houses, allows
Democrats to put the decades of political gridlock behind them.
A Year of Tinkering with Environmental Laws
As far as environmental laws are concerned, California’s performance during its
2011–2012 legislative session was much less eventful than during the 2010–2011
session. Industrial interests, while blocking much of the legislation advanced by the
environmental community, were unsuccessful in having business-friendly legislation
passed.
Despite strong Democratic majorities in both houses of the California legislature, the
environmental community was unable to deliver on its own environmental priorities.
There were few significant new laws, but the legislature kept busy tinkering with
the mechanics of existing environmental laws and offering some interesting new
developments on climate change, energy, water quality, and solid waste. Most of these
laws became effective on January 1, 2013, except for urgency laws that took effect
upon the governor’s signature.
SB 317 (Rubio)—An Example of 2012 Gridlock
The most noteworthy example of an impasse between the environmental and
business camps was the failure of efforts to reform the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
At the eleventh hour of the 2011–2012 legislative session, business interests allied
with union leaders came together in an effort to reform CEQA. This coalition,
known as the CEQA Working Group, succeeded in “gutting and amending” SB 317
(Rubio). This revised bill was designed to exempt from CEQA those projects that
meet environmental and land use regulatory requirements. Environmental groups
were able to defeat SB 317 in the final weeks of the legislative session.
introduction

3. California Environmental Legislative Year in Review 2012 3
Introduction 2
Air Quality and Climate Change 4
Energy and Fuels 5
Water Quality 7
Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials 8
Land Use 10
California Environmental Quality Act 19
Solid Waste 11
Sustainability 11
Looking Ahead 12
About the Author 13
contents

4. California Environmental Legislative Year in Review 2012
4
AIR QUALITY AND
CLIMATE CHANGE
AB 1459 (Huber)—Repeal of the Atmospheric Acidity
Protection Act of 1988
The Scientific Advisory Committee, which was established by
the Atmospheric Acidity Protection Program, issued a report
concluding that pollutants that cause acid rain (such as oxides of
nitrogen) have been declining since the 1970s because of other
air pollution laws that reduce these emissions. Based on these
results, the California legislature introduced AB 1459 (Huber)
to repeal the Atmospheric Acidity Protection Act of 1988. Four
decades of air pollution laws have yielded significant air quality
improvements in California, particularly due to controls over
stationary sources.
Notwithstanding this success, mobile source emissions from cars
and trucks continue to plague the Sacramento region, which is
the most populous nonattainment region in California that is not
represented on California’s Air Resources Board (ARB).
SB 1076 and SB 12—Reduction of GHGs from Vehicles
The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32
[Nunez, Pavley], Chapter 488, Statutes of 2006) envisioned a set
of command and control regulations to achieve greenhouse gas
(GHG) reductions. Recognizing the outsized contribution of GHGs
from the transportation sector (38%), the ARB adopted a number
of “early action” measures designed to reduce GHG emissions.

5. California Environmental Legislative Year in Review 2012 5
The Under Inflated Vehicle Tires Regulation is
one of these rules. It was designed to minimize
GHG emissions from vehicles with under-inflated
tires (UVTs). UVTs are a factor in generating GHG
emissions, due to increased tire rolling resistance,
which lowers fuel efficiency. This early action
regulation requires automobile service providers
(ASPs), when servicing passenger vehicles, to check
vehicle tire pressures and inflate tires. SB 1076
expands upon this rule and, until January 1, 2018,
requires ASPs to use tire pressure gauges that are
accurate within a range of plus or minus two pounds
per square inch of pressure. However, this law
provides that an ASP is not obligated to check and
inflate a tire that is determined to be an “unsafe tire.”
It defines a tire to be unsafe if, according to standard
industry practice, the tire exhibits tread wear, tread
irregularity, or damage
SB 12 (Corbett) is another law designed to improve
fuel efficiency and reduce greenhouse gases. This
law specifically allows aerodynamic devices—which
are designed to minimize drag and improve airflow
for tractor-trailer vehicles—to extend 3 inches on
each side of a tractor-trailer vehicle.
AB 296 (Skinner)—Cool Pavements to Reduce the
Heat Island Effect
The “heat island effect” (HIE) is caused by buildings,
pavement, and other infrastructure in the urban
environment that contribute to elevated localized
temperatures. It can result in increased demand for
air conditioning, contributing to air pollution and
increased GHG emissions. AB 296 (Skinner) responds
to this problem by embracing a strategy known as
“cool pavements” to reduce the HIE. Cool pavements
substitute for conventional building and paving
materials. These alternate materials reflect more
solar energy and increase water evaporation.
Currently there are no official standards governing
cool paving materials. AB 296 requires the California
Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to partner
with the Governor’s Climate Action Team to develop
HIE mitigation strategies. Together they are charged
with officially defining the HIE and establishing an
HIE index for cities that characterizes the severity of
localized surface and air conditions. This HIE index
will allow cities to establish a quantifiable goal to
reduce heat in the urban environment. This law
requires the California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) to establish a “cool pavement”
specification that the California Building Standards
Commission must consider incorporating into the
California Green Building Standards as an alternative
to conventional hardscapes.
ENERGY AND FUELS
For the past several years, the California legislature
has devoted much of its attention to advancing
energy policy. In 2012, the legislature approved
a significant number of laws promoting solar
energy and biofuels while expanding the amount
of renewable energy that investor-owned utilities
(IOUs) are obligated to purchase from small energy
suppliers and the Renewable Portfolio Standard
(RPS) eligibility for renewable energy. Further laws
promote pipeline safety.
SB 1122 (Rubio)—IOU Feed-in-Tariffs for Small
Renewable Energy Generators
The California Public Utilities Commission (PUC)
has been engaged in a rulemaking effort to require
investor-owned utilities (IOUs) to promote small
renewable generators. IOUs must enter into Feed-
in-Tariff (FiT) contracts that establish predefined
terms and conditions that obligate the IOU, without
contract negotiations. The rulemaking addresses
FiT contracts for renewable power generators sized
from 1.5 megawatts (MW) to 3 MW. Prior to SB
1122 (Rubio), all IOUs and publicly owned utilities
(POUs) that serve over 75,000 retail customers were
required to purchase renewable power from small
generators via FiT contracts. These utilities were
collectively obligated to purchase up 500 MW. SB
1122 requires the PUC, by June 1, 2013, to require
the IOUs to collectively increase procurement by
250 MW of renewable generating capacity from
small biomass or biogas technologies using low
emission technologies. This includes biogass from
dairies, wastewater treatment, municipal organic
waste diversion, food processing and codigestion,
agricultural bioenergy, and bioenergy using
byproducts of sustainable forest management.

6. California Environmental Legislative Year in Review 2012
6
SB 1332 (Negrete McLeod) and AB 2165 (Hill)—
Electric Utility Feed-in-Tariffs for Fuel Cell
Customers
The California legislature passed several other laws
expanding the obligation of electric corporations to
enter into a FiT for fuel cell customers that generate
power and are eligible for net energy metering
(NEM). Electric corporations must purchase up
to a cumulative total of 45 MW of the electrical
corporation. Fewer than half of the POUs have
implemented a FiT.
SB 1332 (Negrete McLeod) responds to this situation
by requiring that certain POUs adopt a FiT by July 1,
2013. This law also requires the governing board of
a POU, when establishing FiTs, to consider, among
other things, avoided costs of distribution and
transmission upgrades along with avoided current
and anticipated costs of environmental and GHG
reduction compliance.
AB 2165 (Hill) increases the NEM cap for eligible fuel
cell generators. This law increases the cumulative
amount of renewable energy that IOUs must accept
to include the “generating capacity level equals its
proportionate share of a statewide limitation of 500
megawatts cumulative rated generation capacity.”
This law also states that fuel cell NEM generators
must pay for interconnection costs.
SB 594 (Wolk)—Compensation for Net Surplus
Electricity from Private Power Generators
SB 594 (Wolk) is another law affecting NEM. It
requires electric utilities to pay private power
generators for electricity they supply to the grid,
including up to 5% of the electric utility’s aggregate
customer peak demand. Utilities are required to
compensate private power generators for their
net surplus electricity generated in the 12-month
period. SB 594 permits eligible customer-generators
to aggregate the electrical load from properties
adjacent or contiguous to the property. This is
allowed as long as those properties are solely
owned, leased, or rented by the eligible customer-
generator.
Reducing Barriers to Solar Energy Generation
The California legislature enacted laws that ease the
barriers to expanding solar energy generation while
also supporting biofuels.
AB 2249 (Buchanan) seeks to increase participation
in the Solar Water Heating and Efficiency Act of 2007
(see Stats. 2007 AB 1470 [Huffman]), which currently
has $250 million available in financial incentives.
This law expands program eligibility to include
non-residential solar pool heating systems such as
those of municipalities, schools and non-profits.
This program allows operators to avoid the up-front
cost obstacles to installing solar heating for their
swimming pools.
AB1801 (Campos), another solar law, establishes
more transparency, consistency, and certainty in
the solar permitting process at the local level. The
law is designed to ensure that solar energy system
permitting fees do not exceed the actual cost to
issue the permit. SB 1222 (Leno) limits permit fees
that local governments charge for installing rooftop
solar energy systems by prohibiting fees in excess
of the estimated reasonable cost of providing the
service for which the fee is charged.
AB 523 (Valadao)—Funding Cellulosic Ethanol
Fuels, Not Corn Ethanol
AB 523 (Valadao) changes the funding formula from
the Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle
Technology Program (ARFVTP) for biofuels. This law
shifts away from corn ethanol funding, which has
been criticized for diverting food to fuel. AB 523
changes policy to promote the next generation
of transportation fuels such as cellulosic ethanol.
Cellulosic ethanol offers substantial advantages
over current corn ethanol for transportation fuel
because it costs less to produce and can be grown
on marginal land without competing with traditional
food crops.

7. California Environmental Legislative Year in Review 2012 7
Improving Fuel Pipeline Safety
In the wake of the natural gas explosion in San Bruno,
California, in September 2010, Assembly member Hill
succeeded in enacting a package of laws establishing
standards governing the safe and reliable operation of
natural gas pipelines. AB 1456 (Hill) requires that the
PUC adopt safety performance metrics independent
of its rate of return assessment. This law requires that
safety performance metrics serve as an indicator
of safety performance and that the data inputs to
the metric are verifiable. The law further authorizes
the PUC to evaluate the safety performance of gas
corporations using these metrics and may implement
a rate incentive program. AB 1694 (Fuentes) authorizes
the PUC to use this risk-based approach and inspect
mobile home parks and propane suppliers at least
once every seven years. AB 861 (Hill) seeks to align
penalties between utilities and non-utilities that fail
to comply with utility law by increasing the maximum
penalty from $500 to $50,000.
Further, Assembly member Bradford authored three
laws addressing pipeline safety and electric utility
obligations with respect to preserving evidence
and agency reporting. AB 1511 (Bradford) is a
safety-focused measure that requires residential
sales contracts for real property executed on or
after July 1, 2013, to provide the following notice:
“NOTICE REGARDING GAS AND HAZARDOUS LIQUID
TRANSMISSION PIPELINES. This notice is being
provided simply to inform you that information
about the general location of gas and hazardous
liquid transmission pipelines are available to the
public via the National Pipeline Mapping System
(NPMS) Internet Web site maintained by the United
States Department of Transportation at http://www.
npms.phmsa.dot.gov/.”
WATER QUALITY
Thanks to technologic advances in hydraulic
fracturing (known as “fracking”), California may
be poised to unlock billions of barrels of shale
oil reserves lying within the Monterey Shale east
of Bakersfield. California could experience an
unprecedented oil boom if oil companies are
successful in deploying more intensive, deeper
fracking technologies. The environmental
community contends that the benefits of fracking
will be weighed down by potential air toxics
emissions, water quality impacts, and increased
seismic risks. AB 591 (Wieckowski) and AB 972
(Butler) were introduced last session to address some
of these issues, but failed passage. The legislature
nonetheless produced new laws affecting water
quality, water supply and infrastructure, recycled
water, and water conservation.
AB 685 (Eng)—Right to Clean, Affordable,
Accessible Water
AB 685 (Eng) states that every human being has
the right to clean, affordable, and accessible water
adequate for human consumption, cooking, and
sanitary purposes. California agencies, including
Department of Water Resources (DWR), the State
Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), and the
state Department of Public Health (DPH) must
consider this policy when establishing or amending
policies, regulations and grant criteria relevant to
human uses of water.
The Complete Guide to Hazardous Materials Enforcement and Liability California
Details relevant requirements and explains how they apply to the generation, handling, storage, transport, and use of
these materials. Read more.
• Provides clear interpretations of legal and technical jargon
• Explains complex federal and state environmental laws and how they relate to each other
• Discusses precedent-setting cases and how they illustrate points of law
• Cross-references case law, USCs, CFRs, and state codes and regulations

8. California Environmental Legislative Year in Review 2012
8
AB 2174 (Alejo)—Funding to Reduce
Contamination from Agricultural Activities
Assembly member Alejo introduced AB 2174 in
response to a recent University of California Davis’
Center report that evaluated nitrate contaminations
in groundwater in the Salinas Valley and Tulare
Lake Basin. The report concludes that agricultural
activities account for 96% of the pollution that
currently threatens the drinking water supply
of a quarter million people. This law provides
direction on how to spend funds generated from
the Fertilizer Research and Education Program
(FREP), which are generated from an assessment
from fertilizer sales for implementation projects.
The FREP funds must support best management
practices to reduce nitrate impacts from fertilizer
use. Specifically, this law establishes FREP funding
priorities and development of technical education
and research programs to provide agronomically
sound fertilizer materials and to minimize the
environmental impacts of fertilizer use.
AB 1422 (Perea)—Postponing the Vote on the
Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water
Supply Act
On October 11, 2009, Governor Schwarzenegger
called the California legislature into an
extraordinary session to, among other things,
address urgent water challenges involving water
quality, conservation, supply, and a water general
obligation bond. The Safe, Clean, and Reliable
Drinking Water Supply Act was originally scheduled
to appear on the November 2010 ballot and raise
$11.14 billion in general obligation bonds. In light
of the weak economy at that time, the legislature
chose to postpone this bond until the 2012 election.
AB 1422 (Perea) is an urgency law that moves the
election date once again, to the November 2014
general election.
AB 2230 (Gatto)—Water Recycling Systems for
Car Washes
AB 2230 (Gatto) is a water conservation measure that
requires commercial car washes that are permitted
and constructed after January 1, 2014, to employ
water recycling systems. These systems must be
capable of recycling and reusing at least 60% of the
wash and rinse water. Alternatively, the commercial
car wash must ensure that 60% of its wash and rinse
water is recycled water from a water supplier.
HAZARDOS WASTE
AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS
The California legislature approved three laws
involving hazardous waste exemptions and
another law reconfiguring aspects of the California
Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act (APSA).
AB 1620 (Wieckowski)—Exemption for Certain
Gases and Vapors
AB 1620 (Wieckowski) exempts from hazardous
waste treatment activities filtered exhaust gas,
flue gas, and other vapor streams. This exemption
is conditioned on the treatment activity taking
place onsite or at a facility operating pursuant
to a hazardous waste storage permit. This law
was sponsored by the California Association of
Environmental Health Administrators (CAEHA)
based on the premise that dust collection
represents a low risk waste treatment method and
that without the exemption it would discourage
dust collection activities.
AB 2205 (Pérez)—Exemption for Geothermal
Waste
The Hazardous Waste Control Law provides
an exemption for wastes generated from the
extraction, beneficiation, or processing of ores
and minerals regulated by the federal Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. Assembly
member Pérez introduced AB 2205 to clarify that
existing hazardous waste rules affecting geothermal
plants apply to new mineral extraction activities
generating geothermal waste. This application
is conditioned upon the activity being part of a
closed-loop system where water is re-injected and

9. California Environmental Legislative Year in Review 2012 9
recharged into the ground after producing steam.
Specifically, this law revises the definition of wastes
from the extraction, beneficiation, or processing
of ores and minerals and now includes geothermal
waste that includes spent brine solutions used to
produce geothermal energy.
AB 1442 (Wieckowski)—Transport of Expired
Drugs by Common Carriers
Until recently, expired drugs could not be shipped
using a common carrier because they were
considered “medical waste” under the Medical
Waste Management Act (MWMA). As a result,
expired drugs were required to be transported
using a licensed hazardous waste hauler regulated
by the Department of Public Health [DPH]). AB
1442 (Wieckowski) authorizes transportation
by common carrier for outdated or otherwise
unsalable, non-creditable pharmaceutical waste
(i.e., medical waste). These wastes can alternatively
be transported by the generator or health care
professional as long as the generator, health care
professional, and the facility receiving the medical
wastes maintain specified records.
AB 1566 (Wieckowski)—Imposing Statewide
Administration of a Revised APSA
According to CAEHA, APSA was the only localized
environmental health program without state
oversight. AB 1566 (Wieckowski) was introduced to
promote statewide consistency and to provide one
point of contact for APSA. AB 1566 accomplishes
these twin objectives by assigning the Office of
the State Fire Marshal to regulate activities subject
to APSA. AB 1566 also revises the definition of
“aboveground storage tank” to include tanks in an
underground area. Prior to this law, tanks located
in a below-grade structure that was connected
to an emergency generator tank system with a
cumulative capacity of 1,100 gallons or less was
exempt. This law changes the exclusion to include
tanks in an underground area and associated
piping where the below-grade structure has
capacity of less than 1,320 gallons. This law also
authorizes a certified unified program agency to
impose administrative or criminal penalties for
APSA violations.
AB 1701 (Wieckowski)—Improving Oversight of
UST Cleanup
The regulatory framework governing oversight
of underground storage tank (UST) cleanup is
administered by nine regional water quality control
boards, 22 local oversight programs (LOPs), and
over 90 local implementing agencies. According
to Assembly member Wiekowski, this agency
variability has resulted in differing requirements
governing UST cleanups and has caused delays
and increased costs to the state and businesses.
AB 1701 (Wieckowski) was enacted to implement
a number of recommendations that emerged
from Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials
Committee oversight hearings on the UST
program. AB 1701 is designed to speed up UST
cleanup and to standardize local agency oversight
of these cleanup efforts. AB 1701 (Wieckowski)
provides a state certification process for cities
and counties, for oversight of UST cleanups. Cities
and counties are required to apply to the SWRCB
to administer the local UST cleanup programs.
Only certified municipalities will be allowed to
implement the UST cleanup program after July 1,
2013.

10. California Environmental Legislative Year in Review 2012
10
LAND USE
AB 2207 (Gordon)—Continued Tax Exemption for
Properties Serving Conservation Objectives
Prior to AB 2207 (Gordon), property tax law provided
that property dedicated to preserving specified
natural resources or open-space was eligible for a
property tax exemption. AB 2207 is an urgency law
that allows the exemption as long as the activities
further conservation objectives. Further, the law
states that it is not necessary to “consider the use of
the property for activities resulting in direct or in-
kind revenues.”
AB 2680—Extension of Tax Reduction for
Agricultural and Open Space Uses
The Williamson Act (also known as the Land
Conservation Act) establishes a mechanism to
conserve agricultural and open space land. Land
owners can voluntarily enter into a contract to restrict
land uses to agricultural and open space uses in
exchange for reduced property tax assessments. AB
2680 (Committee on Agriculture) indefinitely extends
a provision of the Land Conservation Act that was to
sunset on January 1, 2013. This provision of the law
continues to allow lot line adjustments where the
land owner and a local government agree to rescind
a Land Conservation Act contract and where the
parties simultaneously enter into a new contract to
enable lot line adjustments.
CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT
The last legislative session held promise for
significantly reforming CEQA. In the end, the
California legislature was only able to approve a few
procedural amendments and exemptions to the law.
According to Assembly member Olsen, CEQA has
delayed or stopped many development projects. He
and other legislators were able to approve three laws
carving out narrow exemptions to CEQA.
AB 2564 (Ma)—Short Gas Pipeline Exemption
AB 2564 (Ma) is an urgency law that, until January
1, 2018, changes the CEQA exemption for pipeline
projects that was originally limited to pipeline
maintenance and replacement projects. This new
exemption applies to natural gas pipelines less than
one mile in length.
AB 2245 (Smyth)—Bike Lanes Exemption
AB 2245 (Smyth) is another law creating a CEQA
exemption. It was introduced to promote
development of bike-friendly communities by
establishing a limited CEQA exemption (up until
2018) for Class II bike lanes. Class II bike lanes
involve restriping existing streets and highways to
establish bicycle lanes in urbanized areas where the
project conforms to a bicycle transportation plan.
This Class II bike lane exemption does not apply to
other bike paths involving construction through the
environment (e.g., Class I and III bikeways).
AB 890 (Olsen)—Roadway Maintenance Exemption
AB 890 (Olsen) establishes a CEQA exemption for
activities (e.g., minor roadway improvements)
undertaken by cities and counties to improve public
safety involving the repair, maintenance, and minor
alterations of existing roadways.

11. California Environmental Legislative Year in Review 2012 11
SOLID WASTE
AB812(Ma)—MinimumRAPContentinAsphaltMixes
According to Assembly member Ma, AB 812 seeks to
encourage increased use of recycled asphalt materials
(known as “RAP”) for use in surface paving projects.
AB 812 (Ma) authorizes Caltrans to issue a specification
requiring a minimum of 40% RAP to be used for hot
asphalt mixes, effective on or before January 1, 2014.
SB 1219 (Wolk)—Extension of Plastic Bag
Recyclting Program to 2020
In 2006, the California legislature enacted AB 2449
(Stats. 2006 AB 2449 [Levine]), which required most
large grocery stores and other retailers to establish
recycling programs to collect and recycle plastic bags.
This law was intended to combat contamination
from plastics in storm water, which has formed the
North Pacific Gyre—a collection of plastic debris the
size of Texas that poses risk to marine organisms.
Senator Wolk introduced SB 1219, which extends this
plastic bag recycling program to January 1, 2020. This
law also repeals a preemption that prohibited local
governments from implementing their own plastic bag
recycling programs.
AB 837 (Nestande)—Regulating
Recycled-Content Greenwashing
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently
approved a number of regulations intended to
regulate businesses that overstate the “green”
properties of their products and packaging.
AB 837 (Nestande) is a state law that similarly
attempts to regulate “greenwashing” by companies
that make unfounded recycling claims. This law
requires manufacturers or suppliers that make
marketing claims about the recycled content
of plastic food container products to maintain
information and documentation of the claim. These
containers include, among other receptacles, plastic
trays and clamshell containers. Regulated companies
must state that the recycled content for materials
has been recovered or otherwise diverted from the
solid waste stream. In addition, the companies must
maintain and document that the recycled content
claim is in conformance with FTC uniform standards
addressing recycled content.
SUSTAINABILITY
SB 1128 (Padilla)—Financial Assistance for
Advanced Manufacturing Processes
The California Alternative Energy and Advanced
Transportation Financing Authority (CAEATFA) was
established to encourage development and utilization
of energy sources and commercialization of advanced
transportation technologies.
SB 1128 (Padilla) authorizes CAEATFA, until July
1, 2016, to provide financial assistance to eligible
projects that promote “advanced manufacturing
processes.” Advanced manufacturing processes
improve materials and products or are sustainable
manufacturing systems and manufacturing
technologies that minimize the use of resources while
maintaining or improving cost and performance. This
includes improvement of “ materials, products, and
processes through the use of science, engineering,
or information technologies, high-precision tools
and methods, a high-performance workforce, and
innovative business or organization models in
utilizing any of the following technology areas: micro-
and nano-electronics, including semiconductors,
advanced materials, integrated computational
materials engineering, nanotechnology, additive
manufacturing, or industrial biotechnology.”
These advanced technologies could include
electric vehicle manufacturing, solar photovoltaic
manufacturing, landfill gas capture and production,
biogas capture and production (e.g., at dairies and
waste water treatment plants), demonstration
hydrogen fuel production, electric vehicle battery
manufacturing, biomass processing, and fuel
production.
SB 1066 (Lieu)—Funds for Mitigating Coastal
Impacts of Climate Change
SB 1066 (Lieu) authorizes the California Coastal
Conservancy to manage the potential impacts
of climate change such as sea level rise, storm
surge, beach and bluff erosion, salt water
intrusion, flooding. This law empowers the Coastal
Conservancy to award grants to public agencies and
nonprofit organizations for mitigating these impacts
to California’s coastal communities, infrastructure,
and natural resources.

12. California Environmental Legislative Year in Review 2012
12
LOOKING AHEAD
Likely Democratic Supermajority in Both Houses
With Democrats in possession of a near
supermajority in both houses, we can expect them
to deliver more far reaching environmental policies
while putting the budget brinksmanship to rest.
Despite a recent Senate defection depriving the
Democrats of supermajority in the Senate, it is
likely that the special election in that district will
return the Senate to supermajority status. If that
happens, the Democrats will once again hold 83
seats of the 120-member legislature and all state-
wide constitutional offices, relegating California
Republican legislators to a status of irrelevancy. The
last time any party held a supermajority in both
legislative houses was in 1933.
Potential to Override Governor’s Veto and Change
the State Constitution
The implications of the supermajority control are
potentially far reaching. The California legislature can
potentially override Governor Brown’s veto for the
first time in decades and silence the Republicans who
for years have been able to stymie the Democrats’
budgets by denying the supermajority needed to
raise revenues. With their newfound power, the
Democrats may be able to place initiatives on the
ballot to change the dysfunctional state constitution
and lower the approval threshold for raising revenues
to balance the state budget. They could also approve
a ballot initiative to revisit Proposition 13 and lower
the approval threshold for raising property taxes
or remove property tax protections for business
properties.
The Risk of Overreaching
As Senate Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg put it, “What
the people have done is to grant [the legislature] a
tremendous opportunity, but it comes with great
responsibility.” The Democratic majority is within
reach of governing with unbridled control but faces
the risk of overreaching with their newfound power.
The Democrats will be under keen pressure to restore
several budgetary cuts in education and health care
that took place over the past several years. However,
Governor Brown is a fiscal moderate known for his
frugality and can be expected to push back and rein
in spending. He believes “the supermajority is not a
permanent condition … that can be more easily lost
than gained.” (12/17/12 NYT).
Expect Heavy Lifting on Environmental Policy
Objectives
Last year’s legislative session yielded relatively few
environmental laws of great import, due in part
to preoccupation with election-year politics and
challenges with the state budget. With California
on the financial mend, if the Democrats can keep
their caucus together, we can expect much more
heavy lifting on environmental policy during next
legislative session.

13. California Environmental Legislative Year in Review 2012 13
Gary A. Lucks, JD, CPEA, is a partner in the Performance and
Assurance Practice of ERM West in Walnut Creek, California,
where he advises clients on multimedia environmental
regulatory compliance, auditing, and sustainability. He is
a certified professional environmental auditor and regular
instructor at the University of California (U.C.) Berkeley and
U.C. Davis Extension Program where he teaches courses on
environmental law, legislation, auditing, compliance, and
sustainability.
He currently serves as an advisor to the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District and on the California State Bar
Environmental Legislation Committee. He also chairs the West
Coast Auditing Roundtable.
Mr. Lucks has published numerous articles and newsletters
addressing environmental legislation and policy and is the
coauthor of a book entitled California Environmental Law and
Policy: A Practical Guide.
You may also be interested in the following STP
Publications:
Environmental Auditing: Federal Compliance Guide
Environmental Auditing: Integrated Federal and California
Compliance Guide
Hazardous Materials Program Commentary: California
ISO 14001: Environmental Management Systems
The Complete Guide to Hazardous Materials Enforcement and
Liability: California
Federal Toxics Program Summary
Environmental State Differences - 49 states plus Puerto Rico,
California available separately
Environmental Compliance: A Simplified National Guide
About the Author

14. California Environmental Legislative Year in Review 2012
14
Head Office
Suite 306 – 267 West Esplanade
North Vancouver, BC, Canada V7M 1A5
1 800.251.0381
www.stpub.com
Copyright © 2013 Specialty Technical Publishers. All Rights Reserved.
This publication does not constitute legal, accounting or other professional advice. STP Specialty Technical Publishers and its authors make
no warranties, whether express or implied, regarding the accuracy of any information or materials contained herein or the results of any
course of action described herein, and STP and its authors expressly and specifically disclaim the implied warranties of merchantability and
fitness for a particular purpose.