Environment

LOS ANGELES -- Attorney General Kamala D. Harris said today that the draft Environmental Impact Report for the Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan violates state law because it proposes inadequate remedies for increased air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and other environmental degradation.

In a letter to the Los Angeles County planning office, Attorney General Harris said the plan “neither provides complete information about all significant environmental impacts, nor does it adequately describe feasible mitigation to lessen the harm to the environment” caused by the plan, dubbed One Valley, One Vision.

Because of its shortcomings, Attorney General Harris said, the report fails to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act.

The Santa Clarita Valley is an area of 250,000 people just above the San Fernando Valley in northern Los Angeles County astride I-5 near the Angeles National Forest. The One Valley, One Vision plan would allow a population of more than 450,000 by 2035.

The Attorney General’s letter points out that the construction allowed by the One Valley plan would roughly double the car and truck emissions of nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons, which combine in the atmosphere to produce ozone. The increase would exacerbate “a severe, health-threatening air pollution problem” that already exists in the Santa Clarita Valley.

In 2008, ozone levels in the valley exceeded California standards on 81 days, especially troubling because children who are chronically exposed to ozone may suffer lifelong lung damage, according to a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The EIR also concludes that land-use decisions proposed in the One Valley plan would double the amount of particulate matter, or soot, in the air, putting children at increased risk of lung problems and the elderly at increased risk of death from heart and lung disease.

Instead of proposing land-use changes to reduce the need to drive, the Attorney General’s letter points out, the One Valley plan will result in a 120 percent increase in driving trips – a million more trips than were made in 2004.

State law requires that when an EIR makes a finding of significant environmental harm, as it does with the One Valley plan, the local agency implementing the plan must take all feasible measures to reduce that harm or adopt alternatives that do less damage. But, the Attorney General’s letter said, the Santa Clarita EIR falls far short, citing only potential mitigation measures that are “unenforceable and vague” and merely suggest, rather than require, that the county reduce driving.

The Attorney General’s letter also criticizes the EIR for failing to fully disclose all the environmental harm the One Valley plan new housing and suburban sprawl would cause.

The letter is co-signed by Deputy Attorney General Susan L. Durbin.

SAN FRANCISCO – Attorney General Kamala D. Harris hosted a Smart on Crime Policy Summit today with a veteran, bi-partisan group of leaders from across the state. Ten work groups – focusing on topics ranging from policing to victims’ rights – prepared briefing papers for Attorney General Harris. The papers, dealing with critical issues facing California, were the focus of the summit at U.C. Hastings College of the Law.

The 10 groups drew insights from best practices of other attorneys general, law enforcement leaders, universities, foundations, think tanks and others at the forefront of research, ideas and innovation. More information about the work groups, and the briefing papers, can be found at: www.smartoncrimepolicy.org.

The honorary co-chairs are William Bratton, former Los Angeles Chief of Police; Warren Christopher, former U.S. Secretary of State; Dolores Huerta, co-founder of the United Farm Workers; State Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco); Constance L. Rice, co-director of The Advancement Project; George Shultz, former U.S. Secretary of State; and Kathleen Sullivan, professor and former dean of Stanford Law School.

The following is a list of topic areas and chairs of the 10 work groups:

Civil Rights Enforcement
Bill Lann Lee, Shareholder, Lewis, Feinberg, Lee, Renaker & Jackson, P.C.

Education & Truancy
Carlos Garcia, Superintendent, San Francisco Unified School District
Laurene Powell, Co-founder & President of the Board, College Track

Environmental Enforcement
Rick Frank, Director, California Environmental Law & Policy Center, U.C. Davis School of Law
John Poyner, District Attorney, Colusa County

Organized Crime, Gangs and Gun Crime
Lee Baca, Sheriff, Los Angeles County
Charlie Beck, Chief of Police, Los Angeles Police Department
Rev. Jeff Carr, Chief of Staff, Mayor Antonio R. Villaraigosa, City of Los Angeles
Gilbert Otero, District Attorney, Imperial County
Mike Ramos, District Attorney, San Bernardino County
Jack Weiss, Managing Director & Head of Los Angeles Office, Kroll

Health
Paul Gallegos, District Attorney, Humboldt County
Jane Garcia, CEO, La Clincia de La Raza
Dr. Mitch Katz, Director, Los Angeles Public Health Department
Dr. Bob Ross, President & CEO, The California Endowment

Mortgage Fraud and Consumer Protection
Kelly Dermody, Partner, Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein
Dan Grunfeld, Co-Chair, Litigation Department, Kaye Scholer
Greg Totten, District Attorney, Ventura Country

Policing
Tony Batts, Chief of Police, Oakland Police Department
Ron Davis, Chief of Police, East Palo Alto Police Department
George Gascon, District Attorney, San Francisco
Bill Landsdowne, Chief of Police, San Diego Police Department

Reentry & Recidivism Reduction
Lee Baca, Sheriff, Los Angeles County
Bonnie Dumanis, District Attorney, San Diego County
Larry Morse, District Attorney, Merced County
Tim Silard, President, Rosenberg Foundation
Mimi Silbert, President & CEO, Delancey Street Foundation

Technology
Ed Berberian, District Attorney, Marin County
Jack Christin, Jr., Associate General Counsel, eBay/PayPal
David Drummond, Senior Vice President & Chief Legal Officer, Google
Fred Humphries, Managing Director, Microsoft
Bruce Ives, Vice President & Deputy General Counsel, Hewlett-Packard
Scott Forstall, Senior Vice President, iPhone Software, Apple
Mitchell Kapor, Founder, Lotus Development Corporation
Sheryl Sandberg, Chief Operating Officer, Facebook

Victims' Rights
Gary Lieberstein, District Attorney, Napa County
Nancy O’Malley, District Attorney, Alameda County
Esta Soler, Founder & President, Family Violence Prevention Fund

For additional information, please call the Attorney General’s press office at 510.622.4500.

###

LOS ANGELES – Seeking environmental justice for all Californians, Attorney General Kamala D. Harris has filed a friend-of-the-court brief in a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals case in support of efforts by the Port of Los Angeles to reduce air pollution through its Clean Trucks program.

The Port of Los Angeles, together with the Port of Long Beach, constitutes the fifth-largest port in the world. Every year, some 169 million tons of cargo flow through the Port of Los Angeles. Most of this cargo is transported on land by means of a fleet of 16,000 diesel trucks, which are prolific emitters of air polluting exhaust.

These diesel emissions posed a major safety hazard to the neighborhoods surrounding the Port, where residents were exposed to cancer risks estimated to be 60% higher than the overall cancer risks of individuals living in the entire South Coast air basin.

In 2008, in an effort to reduce air pollution caused by a fleet of largely decades-old, high-emission diesel trucks, the Port established its Clean Trucks program, which requires that trucks transporting cargo in and out of the Port must meet higher diesel emission standards. The program is a contract system that only allows port access to trucks that are clean, well-maintained, meet higher emissions standards and are driven by employees of the contracting companies. The Port also invested $56 million to purchase or subsidize the purchase of cleaner trucks.

In July 2008, the American Trucking Association and a group of independent owner-operators sued the Port of Los Angeles over the Clean Trucks program. In August 2010, a federal judge ruled in favor of the Port – thereby affirming it could combat air pollution in order to remain competitive in the marketplace. The American Trucking Association appealed that decision.

The Attorney General’s amicus brief urges the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold the district court’s decision and stresses that a public agency can make a business decision to go “green” when spending its own funds to contract for services.

Neighborhood and environmental groups filed numerous lawsuits against the Port. These lawsuits have delayed the Port’s plans to expand its cargo terminal facilities. The Clean Trucks program aimed to put an end to these lawsuits, protect the Port’s investment in clean and safe trucks, and establish a system of oversight to control which trucks enter and exit the terminals.

A copy of the amicus brief is attached to the online version of this release and can be found at: http://ag.ca.gov/.

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. announced today that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has settled two multi-state lawsuits by agreeing to set greenhouse gas emissions limits for power plants and oil refineries.

Today’s historic settlements mark the first time the EPA has agreed to greenhouse gas emissions limits for some of the nation’s biggest polluters. California took a key role in the litigation.

“Power plants and oil refineries are among the top three emitters of carbon dioxide in the country,” Brown said. “While California has been aggressive in regulating such emissions, until recently, the federal government has not. This is a tremendous achievement that will help the state reach its greenhouse gas emission goals under the state’s climate law, AB 32.”

The two lawsuits settled today include New York v. EPA (D.C. Cir. 06-1322), which was brought by 12 states and environmental groups in 2006 to compel the EPA to issue performance standards for greenhouse gas emissions from new and existing power plants, and American Petroleum Institute v. EPA (D.C. Cir. 08-1277), which was brought by 13 states and environmental groups in 2008 to require the EPA to issue standards for greenhouse gas emissions from new and existing petroleum refineries.

These cases were part of an integrated legal strategy pursued by the California Attorney General’s office and other states that resulted in the Supreme Court’s historic 2007 decision that greenhouse gases are pollutants subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act.

Both settlements would require the EPA to propose and adopt regulations for control of greenhouse gases. The agency will have to build an extensive and solid technical foundation for the proposed regulations. Under the power plant settlement, the EPA must propose standards for new sources and emission guidelines for existing sources by July 26, 2011 and enact the new guidelines by May 26, 2012. Under the petroleum refineries settlement, the EPA must propose standards for new sources and emission guidelines for existing sources by December 10, 2011 and enact the new guidelines by November 10, 2012.

September 15 of this year was the 40th anniversary of the enactment of the 1970 Clean Air Act. The standards that will be set by today’s settlements are among the most effective methods available for control of greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and oil refineries.

States will use the national emissions guidelines to help them set their own standards and implementation provisions. Under AB 32, California has set the toughest emissions reduction goals in the country.

SAN FRANCISCO – Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today announced a settlement that requires the U.S. Forest Service to reconsider its plans regarding wilderness lands in four national forests, including the Los Padres, home of the endangered California condor.

"With this settlement, the state of California will now play an active role along with the Forest Service in determining which areas of Southern California forests will be preserved as wilderness,” Brown said.

The settlement resolves a lawsuit brought by Brown and various state agencies and environmental groups against the U.S. Forest Service for its plans to allow roads to be built through hundreds of thousands of acres of wild lands in the Los Padres, Angeles, Cleveland, and San Bernardino national forests.

The four national forests cover more than 3.5 million acres stretching from Big Sur to the Mexican border. While much of this area is wilderness, development has already occurred in parts, and just 900,000 acres remain roadless.

The suit was brought because the Forest Service issued plans that failed to properly analyze the environmental impact of various non-wilderness uses and failed to consult with California state officials. If approved, these plans would have allowed new roads and trails for off-road vehicles and other uses.

“By working together, we’ve achieved our goal of helping to guide the forest management plans to ensure that California’s national forests remain pristine,” said Lester Snow, state Secretary for Natural Resources.

The settlement requires the Forest Service to consider designating as many as 37 new wilderness or roadless areas. While the plan is being redone, the Forest Service cannot allow new roads, and it must undertake restoration efforts. The state and environmental groups will collaborate with the Forest Service to make sure the forests are protected in the revised management plans.

Once completed, the final Forest Service plans will be presented to Congress to permanently protect designated areas as undisturbed wilderness.

A copy of the settlement is attached.

OAKLAND -- Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today announced an agreement to upgrade the quarter-century-old wind turbines in Altamont Pass to make them more efficient and less deadly to migratory birds.

“This landmark settlement mandates the replacement of outmoded wind turbines with newer models that are more efficient, generate more power and are less harmful to eagles, falcons and other birds,” Brown said.

The Altamont Pass Wind Resources Area in Alameda and Contra Costa counties is the site of the world’s first wind turbines. These units, constructed more than three decades ago, are now outdated, inefficient and deadly to thousands of birds each year.

Today’s settlement is between environmental groups, the state, and NextEra Energy Resources, the largest turbine operator at the site. Under the agreement, NextEra will upgrade all its older-model turbines. Scientific data shows that newer, larger turbines are more efficient and kill far fewer birds.

A 2004 study commissioned by the California Energy Commission found that the 5,400 older turbines operating at Altamont Pass killed an estimated 1,766 to 4,271 birds annually, including between 881 and 1330 raptors such as golden eagles -- which are protected under federal law -- hawks, falcons and owls. The bird fatalities at Altamont Pass -- an important raptor breeding area that lies on a major migratory route -- are greater than on any other wind farm in the country.

In September 2005, Alameda County renewed permits for the turbines, but several Audubon Society chapters and Californians for Renewable Energy (CARE), a local environmental group, challenged the permits in a lawsuit under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

After a settlement failed to substantially reduce the large number of bird fatalities, Brown stepped in and brokered today’s agreement.

Under the agreement, NextEra will replace some 2,400 turbines over the next four years and will shut down all its existing turbines no later than 2015. The company also has agreed to erect the new turbines in environmentally friendly locations.

NextEra agreed to pay $2.5 million in mitigation fees, half to the state Energy Commission’s Public Integrated Energy Research Program and half to East Bay Regional Park District and the Livermore Area Regional Park District for raptor habitat creation.

A copy of the agreement is attached.

OAKLAND — Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today announced a settlement to prevent Smoking Everywhere, one of the country's largest electronic cigarette sellers, from targeting minors and claiming that its products are a safe alternative to smoking.

“Smoking Everywhere aimed ads at minors and falsely claimed its products were safe,” Brown said. “This settlement stops the company from marketing these addictive products to kids or claiming they aren’t dangerous.”

Electronic cigarettes, or e-cigarettes, are battery-operated devices with nicotine cartridges designed to look and feel like conventional cigarettes. Instead of actual smoke, e-cigarettes produce a vapor from the nicotine cartridge that is inhaled by the user.

Smoking Everywhere and other electronic cigarette makers have claimed that e-cigarettes are safe because they contain no carcinogens or tar, and produce no second-hand smoke.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), however, found that some electronic cigarettes contain a variety of dangerous chemicals, including nicotine, carcinogens such as nitrosamines, and one brand also contained diethylene glycol, commonly known as antifreeze.

Some e-cigarettes come in strawberry, chocolate, mint, banana and cookies-and-cream flavors designed to appeal to a young audience.

Today's settlement prohibits Smoking Everywhere from marketing to minors and from making false or misleading claims about electronic cigarettes. Specifically, the company has agreed that it will not:

- Market or sell electronic cigarettes to minors. Its website will be age-restricted, and a customer will need to show a government-issued ID. Retail products will be behind a counter. Advertising must note the age restriction.

- Sell flavored electronic cigarette cartridges such as strawberry, mint or bubblegum that could appeal to minors.

- Advertise its products as a smoking cessation device unless the FDA approves them for that purpose.

- Claim that its products are safer than cigarettes or contain no tobacco, tar or carcinogens, and produce no second-hand smoke unless there is competent reliable scientific evidence to support the claims.

Smoking Everywhere also agreed to implement quality control standards to eliminate harmful substances in its products and submit to independent audits.

Smoking Everywhere will also provide a Proposition 65 warning that its products contain nicotine, a chemical known to be addictive and to cause birth defects or reproductive harm. The warning must appear on product packaging, Smoking Everywhere's website and at retail sites.

Smoking Everywhere and its owner will pay $170,000 in penalties and fees.

A copy of the consent judgment is attached.

RIVERSIDE – Bail of $300,000 was set today for a Riverside County recycling center owner arrested along with two employees last week by special agents with the Attorney General’s office for bilking the state’s beverage container recycling program out of $7 million. Bail was set at $30,000 each for the two employees.

“These people pretended to be recycling California aluminum cans when they were really importing tons of cans from Arizona, which are not eligible for California’s recycling refunds,” Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. said. “They brazenly defrauded the state’s successful recycling program.”

Howard Leveson, 68, owner of Perris Valley Recycling in Perris, Riverside County; Jose Barragan, 35, the center’s general manager, and Susie Ambriz-Molina, 25, an office worker, were arrested October 12. Leveson was also charged with illegal possession of an assault weapon.

They face a total of 18 felony counts on charges including recycling fraud, grand theft and conspiracy. If convicted of all charges, they could each spend seven years in prison.

Special agents with the Attorney General’s office, working with the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), conducted the investigation into Perris Valley Recycling with the help of the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department. The Attorney General’s office is prosecuting the case. CalRecycle oversees the state’s beverage container recycling program.

A search of Leveson’s home and business recovered $50,973 in cash and an Uzi assault rifle. In addition, Leveson’s assets and those of his business were frozen, including $4.2 million in bank accounts.

From February 2009 until July 2010, Perris Valley Recycling collected as much as 10,000 pounds per day in aluminum cans, far more than comparable facilities, which average about 500 pounds per day. The unusually high volume indicated the possibility that out-of-state containers were being brought to the facility.

In Arizona, aluminum is sold only for its scrap value. California, however, has the added incentive of the California Refund Value (CRV) deposit, which pays $1.57 for a pound of used aluminum cans.

Investigators estimate Perris Valley Recycling took in 4.4 million pounds of cans trucked from Arizona, then illegally claimed as much as $7 million in reimbursement from the California Beverage Container Recycling Fund.

As a deterrent to such fraud, recycling centers are required to report to CalRecycle purchases of more than 250 pounds of aluminum CRV material. According to investigators, Perris Valley Recycling hid the size of incoming loads by creating multiple weight tickets for trucks coming in with loads larger than 250 pounds, making it appear they were many individuals with smaller loads.

Over the past five months, 20 people have been arrested for making deliveries of out-of-state containers to the Perris center, whose slogan is “It’s Not Trash, It’s Cash.” Perris Valley Recycling remains open, however CalRecycle continues to conduct inspections and has placed restrictions on the center’s reimbursement claims.

In California, consumers pay CRV at the checkout stand when purchasing beverages in bottles or cans. When the empty container is redeemed at one of California’s more than 2,000 recycling centers, the CRV is returned to the consumer. Recycling centers recoup the CRV from the state and then make money by reselling the materials for scrap value. When an out-of-state can or bottle is fraudulently redeemed in California, the program loses money.

"By cracking down on fraud, we send an unmistakable message that criminal activity that undermines California’s beverage container recycling program will not be tolerated,” said CalRecycle Director Margo Reid Brown. “CalRecycle investigators will continue to work with law enforcement to put a stop to recycling fraud and hold accountable those responsible.”

California's program began in 1987. Last year, 82 percent of the CRV cans and bottles purchased in the state were returned for recycling. California is one of 11 states with a bottle and can redemption program.

To learn more about CalRecycle and the California Beverage Container Recycling Program, visit http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/. CalRecycle contact: Mark Oldfield (916) 319-9942 or (916) 616-9683 (cell) or mark.oldfield@CalRecycle.ca.gov.

The suspects’ booking photographs are available upon request.

SACRAMENTO – Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today hailed the signing of AB 2514 (Skinner), the country’s first energy storage bill, as “a major step towards energy independence.”

Brown sponsored the new law to facilitate the development of solar and wind power, create jobs and increase California’s energy independence by providing a mechanism for storing wind and solar power for use at times it can’t be generated, such as nighttime. Governor Schwarzenegger signed the bill this afternoon.

“Californians want clean, renewable energy, and energy storage is an important part of that,” said Brown. “This law will help reduce global warming emissions, improve air quality, and will be a major step towards energy independence.’

The law will jumpstart the state’s energy storage industry and lead to the creation of up to 10,000 manufacturing jobs, according to the California Energy Storage Alliance. Companies already have invested in some technologies for storing energy, such as using a thermal reserve or pumped hydroelectricity. Newer technologies include storing energy in various kinds of large-scale batteries, transforming it into flywheels and compressing it into air fields.

Energy storage is important for an expanding renewable energy future because solar and wind power are not available at all times. Increasing storage allows California to take greater advantage of its renewable resources while making our electric power grid more reliable.

Expanded storage will also protect public health by reducing the need for the most polluting “peaker plants” that only operate during peak demand, usually during the summer when air conditioners in the state are in most intense use.

Attorney General Brown has fought to protect California’s environment and worked to build a clean-energy infrastructure for the 21st century. He has successfully defended the state’s landmark clean cars law, leading to improvements in fuel efficiency nationwide, and has worked with local governments to ensure that their long-term growth plans improve air quality by reducing traffic and greenhouse gas pollution. For more information, please see: http://ag.ca.gov/globalwarming/

SACRAMENTO -- Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. encourages Californians to participate in “Prescription Drug Take-Back Day” tomorrow (Saturday, September 25) by taking their expired, unwanted and unused prescriptions to an official drop-off center, “a safe and easy way” to ensure proper disposal.

“Flushing unused prescription drugs down the toilet puts dangerous drugs into our waterways,” Brown said, “and throwing them into the trash can result in prescriptions landing in the wrong hands. Take-Back Day is a safe and easy way to clear your cabinets of leftover medication.”

Unused prescription drugs left sitting in a medicine cabinet contribute to drug abuse, especially among teenagers. In June, the Centers for Disease Control released a study showing that one out of five high school students in America abuses prescription drugs.

Other recent studies show that prescription drug abuse is soaring. The 2008 National Survey on Drug Use and Health found that there are some 6.2 million non-medical users of prescription drugs in the United States, and there are more Americans abusing prescription drugs than abusing cocaine, heroin and hallucinogenics.

Tomorrow’s National Take-Back Day provides a safe alternative to fouling our lakes and rivers or creating a risk of prescription drugs falling into the wrong hands. Californians can bring prescription medications and over-the-counter tablets and capsules to any of the nearly 200 collection centers participating in the state. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency’s website has a listing of all drop-off locations at http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/takeback/

Collection centers are open from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. and staffed by law enforcement officials. The medications will be destroyed in accordance with federal and state regulations.

Intravenous solutions, injectables, needles and illicit substances such as marijuana or methamphetamine will not be accepted.

Brown's office has been at the forefront of efforts to combat prescription drug abuse in California. In addition to costing the state millions of dollars each year, prescription drug abuse can have serious public safety consequences. Many abusers hold down regular jobs, including driving trucks, operating transit vehicles, and working in medical facilities.