Welcome to the Coleman & Horowitt, LLP Agricultural and Environmental Law Blog. In this blog, we will focus on developments in California Agricultural and Environmental Law.

Nothing in this blog should be construed as legal advice. ch-law.com is a public website, so communications are not privileged. Copyright Coleman & Horowitt, LLP Attorneys at Law (CH Law © 2017. All rights reserved.)

Tuesday, January 23, 2018

Valley Air District will Receive 88 Million in Cap & Trade Funds

The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District received more than $88 million in Cap and Trade funds from the California Air Resources Board (CARB), the air district reported on January 22, 2018.
The largest portion of the  $80 million, will be used to support programs to help farmers, truck drivers and businesses replace heavy-polluting trucks, diesel equipment and school buses with low- or zero-emission vehicles and equipment.
The funds also will be used in the  District’s implementation of AB 617, which requires the state CARB and air districts to come up with additional plans to report, monitor and reduce emissions.
The specific projects may include:
• Heavy-duty diesel agricultural equipment (tractor) replacement
• Medium- and heavy-duty on-road truck replacement with zero/near-zero emission technology
• Heavy-duty emergency vehicle replacement of diesel with natural gas technology
• Agricultural irrigation pump replacement/electrification and associated infrastructure
• Agricultural zero-emission utility vehicle deployment/replacement
• Alternative fuel infrastructure (fueling stations)
• Locomotive (line-haul, short haul, switcher) replacement with cleaner diesel/hybrid/zero-emission technology
• Yard truck replacement with zero-emission technology
• Forklift/cargo handling equipment replacement with zero/near-zero emission technology
• School bus replacement with zero/near-zero emission technology

FDA Discretionary Enforcement under FSMA

 The FDA announced in  early January that the agency would be using its discretion not to enforce certain of the rules promulgated under the Food Safety Modernization Act the as they apply to specific entities or activities.  The enforcement discretion applies to provisions in the : Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food rule, Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Food for Animals rule Foreign Supplier Verification Programs Rule, and Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption rule.  The discretion relates to facilities impacted by the confusion under the definition of "Farms;" written assurance provisions in the  rules concerning  the control of identified hazards or microorganisms that could be a risk to public health. Their discretion will also be applied to animal food preventive controls  for certain manufacturing/processing activities performed on human food by-products that are to be used as animal food; and initially as to the verification requirements for importers of food contact substances.