ELK HILLS POWER v. BOARD OF EQUALIZATION (Mihara and Miller, JJ., justices pro tempore; Baxter and Werdegar, JJ., not participating)Respondent, Board of Equalization, Request for Judicial NoticeCal.March 21, 2012KAMALA D. HARRIS Attorney General of California FELIX LEATHERWOOD Supervising Deputy Attorney General BRIAN WESLEY Deputy Attorney General TIM NADER Deputy Attorney General State Bar No. 106093 110 West A Street, Suite 1100 San Diego, CA 92101 P.O. Box 85266 San Diego, CA 92186-5266 Telephone: (619) 645-2210 Fax: (619) 645-2489 Email: Tim.Nader@doj.ca.gov - Attorneysfor Defendants and Respondents California State Board ofEqualization SUPREME COURT FILED MAR g 1 2012 Frederick K. Ohirich Clerk Deputy Sn the Suprente Court of the State of California ELK HILLS POWER, LLC, Plaintiff and Appellant, V. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF KERNATION AND COUNTY OF Defendants and Respondents. Case No. $194121 Fourth Appellate District, Division One, Case No. D056943 San Diego County Superior Court, Case No. 37-2008- 00097074-CU-MC- CTL MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 8.520, subdivision (g), RespondentCalifornia State Board of Equalization hereby movesfor judicial notice of the attached document, California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources BoardInitial Statement of Reasonsfor Rulemaking, Public Hearing to Consider Statewide Regulation That Provides a Methodology to Calculate the Value of Interchangeable Emission Reduction Credits, April 4, 1997. This documentwas not cited in proceedingsin the trial court in this matter. The documentconstitutes an official act of the executive branch of the State of California within the meaning of Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (c). This request is madeto assure the Court has ready accessto the documentin question, the introduction to whichis cited in Respondent’s AnswerBrief on the Merits at p. 32-33 and which sheds light on the intent of regulations authorizing the Emission Reduction Credit (ERC) scheme whichis at issue in this case. While the intent of the ERC regulations was not central to arguments heard and decided bythetrial court, it has become more central to the issues on appeal, having been discussed by the Court of Appeal andraised in both Appellant’s Opening Brief and Respondent’s AnswerBrief on theMerits. Dated: March 16, 2012 Respectfully submitted, KAMALAD. HARRIS Attorney General of California FELIX LEATHERWOOD Supervising Deputy Attorney General BRIAN WESLEY Deputy Attorney General ) 91506. Generation and Use. (a) Districts shall adopt rules which, at a minimum, comply with the provisions ofthis subchapter and with sections 40920.6(c) & (d) and 40709-40714.5 of the Health and Safety Code prior to allowing the use of interchangeable credits to meet District requirements other than theoffset provisions of their new source review programs. (b) Interchangeable credits must be certified by the District in which the generation occurs and registered in that District's emission reduction credit bank prior to use. Districts within the same nonattainment area may establish a multi-district banking program. (c) Districts, in consultation with the Air Resources Board, shall adopt enforceable technical protocols that define how emission reductions will be calculated for purposes of certifying them as interchangeable credits. . (d) Use of interchangeable credits must, in the aggregate, result in no greater annual pollutant-specific emissions than would have occurred in lieu of trading, consistent with the District's portion of the air quality plan. The assessment of equivalency shall take into account the exceedance season for each affected nonattainment pollutant. (e) Districts shall ensure compliance with federal, state and District requirements governing credit generation and use through permit conditions or other enforceable instruments. (f) Districts shall not allow the use of emission reduction credits to comply with the "best available control technology” requirements of sections 40405 and 40918-40920.5 of the Health and Safety Code,or with any technology-based requirements of sections 111, 169, 171 and 173 of the federal Clean Air Act. (g) Districts may authorize the use of interchangeable credits consistent with any federal, state, or loca! requirements applicable to toxic air contaminants,only if allowed by regulations established pursuant to section 39665 et seq. of the Health and Safety Code, and section 112 of the federal Clean Air Act. (h) Surplus emission reductions that meet the requirements of Health and Safety Code section 40714.5 can be used to create interchangeable credits. If not already accountedfor in District air quality plans, baseline emissions from qualifying sources must be included and accountedfor in the next update to the plan. (i) Emission reduction credits from permitted stationary sources that were certified and banked solely for usein a District's new source review program mustbe included and accounted for in the air quality plan prior to use in an interchangeable credit trading program. 37 > (j) Emission reduction credits or market-based trading instruments generated under programs authorized by Health and Safety Code sections 39616 and 40440.1 may be used interchangeably only upon a determination by the District, based upon a study conducted by the District, with the concurrence of the ARB, that the interchangeable use of such credits complies with all applicable requirements, including the criteria in Health and Safety Code section 39616(c). (k) District rules shall provide for assessment and consideration of potential localized impacts that use of interchangeable credits may have on the public's exposureto air pollution. In no case shall emissionsof toxic air contaminants established pursuant to section 39665 et seq. of the Health and Safety Code and section 112 of the federal Clean Air Act be allowed to increase as a result of credit use. 91507. Calculation Methodology. (a) Interchangeable credits shall be calculated based on a District's adopted calculation protocol. The calculation protocol shall include the elements specified in subparagraph (b) and shall be consistent with the following criteria: (1) Emission reductions used to generate interchangeable credits shall be real, permanentfor the term of credit generation, enforceable, surplus, and quantifiable. (2) Emission reductions shall be calculated using the most stringent of historic actual emissions, applicable requirements, the District's air quality plan, or the federally approved SIP. (b) Districts shall provide for enforceable credit calculation protocols and procedures that contain the following elements: (1) Calculation methods to determine the amountof reductions being generated as credits, including formulae accounting for emissions rate, operating period, activity level, and technical uncertainty. (2) Proceduresfor calculating, certifying, and registering credits in one year increments when credits are generated from multi-year emission reductions. (3) Proceduresfor certifying that emission reductions are surplus and available for use as interchangeable credits. (4) Procedures to incorporate emission inventory updates and changesin source category baselines, air quality plans, and applicable regulatory requirements into the credit calculation protocols. (5) Methodologies used to determine the time period in which a banked creditis available for use, consistent with the air quality plan. 38 7 (6) Provisions for the use of ARB calculation methodologies, emission factors, certification standards, emission baseline data, and timeframesfor credit use for mobile sources andfor products under ARBregulatory authority. (7) Provisions for monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirementsto verify and enforce credit generation at the specified value overthe full generation period. 91508. Program Reporting (a) Districts shall prepare an annualreport on their interchangeable credit trading programsthat documentthe following: _ (1) Quantity of interchangeable credits generated and used, bypollutant; (2) Extent to which emission reduction credits were used, by rule and source category, to comply with Best Available Retrofit Control Technology and how they were accountedforin the air quality plan; (3) Summary of changes madeaffecting the calculation methodology elements defined in section 91507(b); and, (4) Actions taken to comply with applicable credit generation and use requirements contained in section 91506. (5) A finding as to whether use of interchangeable credits complied with section 91506(d) requirements. (b) As part of the triennial progress assessmentofthe air quality plan, Districts with interchangeable credit trading programs shall evaluate the performanceof the program as an alternative compliance approach to meetapplicable District requirements. The evaluation shall include the results of the annual reports andidentify what,if any, changes were incorporated into the emission inventory update as a result of program implementation. 39 Appendix B ASSEMBLYBILL 1777, BREWER. AIR POLLUTION: EMISSION REDUCTION CREDITS. 40 > Appendix B ASSEMBLYBILL 1777 CHAPTERED 10/13/95 CHAPTER805 FILED WITH SECRETARY OF STATE OCTOBER13, 1995 APPROVED BY GOVERNOR OCTOBER12, 1995 PASSED THE SENATE SEPTEMBER15, 1995 PASSED THE ASSEMBLY SEPTEMBER15, 1995 AMENDEDIN SENATE AUGUST31, 1995 AMENDEDIN SENATE JULY 26, 1995 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY30, 1995 -AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY2, 1995 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 17, 1995 INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Brewer FEBRUARY24, 1995 An act to add Sections 39607.5 and 39617 to the Health and Safety Code, relating toair pollution. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 1777, Brewer. Air pollution: emission reduction credits. (1) Existing law authorizes air pollution control districts and air quality management districts to establish a system to bank and use-emission reductionsto offset future increases. Existing law also authorizes the districts to establish a market-based incentive program to achieve emission reductions. This bill would require the State Air Resources Board to adopt a methodologyfor districts to calculate the value of emission reduction credits from stationary, mobile, except as specified, indirect, and areawide sources whenused interchangeably. The bill would require the districts to use that methodology, as specified, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program, and would authorize a district to use an alternative methodology, as specified, prior to its adoption by the state board. (2) Existing law requires the Department of ConsumerAffairs and authorizes the districts to establish programsfor the repair or replacement of high-emitting vehicles. Existing law requires the state board to develop a methodology for, and to undertake, a uniform data analysis to provide an accounting of the emission reductions achieved by all those programs. 4] This bill would require state, district, and local programsfor the repair or retirement of those vehicles to provide for the calculation of emission reductions based on actual emissions, as specified, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. (3) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursementis required by this act for a specified reason. SECTION 1. Section 39607.5 is added to the Health and Safety Code,to read: 39607.5. (a) The state board shall develop, and adoptin a public hearing, not later than June 30, 1997, a methodology for use by districts to calculate the value of credits issued for emission reductions from stationary, mobile, indirect, and areawide sources, including those issued under market-based incentive programs, whenthose credits are used interchangeably. (b) In developing the methodology, the state board shall do all of the following: (1) Ensure that the methodology results in the maintenance and improvementofair quality consistent with this division. (2) Allow those credits to be used in a market-based incentive program adopted pursuant to Section 39616 that requires annual reductions in emissions through declining annualallocations, and allow the useofall of those credits, including those from a market-based incentive program, to meet other stationary or mobile source requirements that do not expressly prohibit that use. (3) Ensure that the methodology does not do anyof the following: (A) Result in the crediting of air emissions which already have been identified as emission reductions necessary to achieve state and federal ambientair quality standards. . (B) Provide for an additional discount of credits solely as a result of emission reduction credits trading if a district already has discounted the credit as part of its process of identifying and granting those credits to sources. (C) Otherwise provide for double-counting emission reductions. (4) Consult with, and consider the suggestionsof, the public andall interested parties, including, but notlimited to, the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association and all affected regulated entities. 42 ) (5) Ensure that any credits, whether they are derived from stationary, mobile, indirect, or areawide sources, shall be permanent, enforceable, quantifiable, and surplus. (6) Ensure that any credits derived from a market-based incentive program adopted pursuant to Section 39616 are permanent, enforceable, quantifiable, and are in addition to any required controls, unless those credits otherwise comply with paragraph (2). (7) Considerall of the following factors: (A) How long credits should be valid. (B) Whether, and which, banking opportunities may exist for credits. (C) How to provide flexibility to sources seeking to use credits so that they remain interchangeable and negotiable until used. (D) How to ensure a viable trading process for sources wishing to trade credits consistent with this section. (E) How to ensurethat, if credits may be used within and between adjacentdistricts or air basins where sourcesare in proximity to one another, the use occurs while maintaining and improving air quality in both districts or air basins. (c) If necessary, the state board shall periodically update the methodologyasit applies to future transactions. 43 Appendix C SENATEBILL 456 KELLEY. AIR POLLUTION: BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY. 44 Appendix C SENATEBILL 456 CHAPTERED 10/13/95 Chapter 837 FILED WITH SECRETARY OF STATE OCTOBER13, 1995 APPROVED BY GOVERNOR OCTOBER12, 1995 PASSED THE SENATE SEPTEMBER5, 1995 PASSED THE ASSEMBLY SEPTEMBER1, 1995 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST31, 1995 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST21, 1995 AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLY JULY 19, 1995 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JUNE 27, 1995 AMENDEDIN SENATE APRIL 17, 1995 AMENDEDIN SENATE MARCH 30, 1995 INTRODUCEDBY SenatorKelley (Principal co-author: Assembly Member Goldsmith) FEBRUARY 16, 1995 An act to add Sections 40440.10, 40440.11, and 40920.6 to the Health and Safety Code, relating to air pollution. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 456, Kelley. Air pollution: Best Available Control Technology. SEC. 3. Section 40920.6is added to the Health and Safety Code, to read: 40920.6.(c) A district shall allow the retirement of marketable emission reduction credits under a program which complies with all of the requirements of Section 39616,or emission reduction credits which meetall of the requirements of state and federal law, including, but not limited to, the requirements that those emission reduction credits be permanent, enforceable, quantifiable, and surplus,in lieu of any requirementfor best available retrofit control technology, if the credit also complies withall district rules and regulations affecting those credits. 45 Appendix D SENATEBILL 1098 DILLS. AIR POLLUTION: MARKET-BASED INCENTIVE PROGRAM. 46 Appendix D SENATEBILL 1098 CHAPTERED 10/13/95 _ CHAPTER 856 FILED WITH SECRETARYOF STATE . OCTOBER13, 1995 APPROVED BY GOVERNOR OCTOBER12, 1995 PASSED THE SENATE SEPTEMBER13, 1995 PASSED THE ASSEMBLY SEPTEMBER9, 1995 AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 31, 1995 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JULY 28, 1995 AMENDED INASSEMBLY JULY 19, 1995 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JUNE22, 1995 AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 5, 1995 INTRODUCEDBY SenatorDills FEBRUARY 24, 1995 An act to add Section 40714.5 to the Health and Safety Code, relating to air pollution. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 1098, Dills. Air pollution: market-based incentive program. (1) Existing law authorizesair pollution control districts and air quality management districts to adopt market-based incentive programsto improveair quality. Thebill would require the districts, as to sources in the South Coast Air Quality ManagementDistrict and Ventura County until January 1, 1999, and statewide on and after that date, to grant emission reduction credits or marketable trading credits without discount or reduction, except as specified, to sources that are exempt from specified - district rules and regulations, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program by imposing new duties on thedistricts. Thebill would makelegislative findings and declarations in that regard. (2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bili would provide that no reimbursementis required by this act for a specified reason. 47 - SECTION 1. Section 40714.5 is added to the Health and Safety Code,to read: 40714.5. (a) The Legislature hereby finds and declaresall of the following: (1) Because ofpolicy considerations, certain sources ofair pollution are exempt from district permitting requirements or are not otherwise controlled by districts. (2) Emissions from some of these sources can be reduced through cost-effective measures, thereby creating additional emission reduction credits. (3) An increased supply of emission reduction credits is beneficial to local economies. (4) The purposeofthis section is to provide anincentive to generate additional and fully valued emission reduction credits by encouraging emission reductions from these sources without subjecting them to a district permitting process. (b) (1) With respect to any emission reduction that occurred since January 1, 1991, or occurs at any timein the future at a source that was and remains exemptfrom district rules and regulations, the district shall grant emission reduction credits or marketable trading credits without any discount or reductionin the quantity of the emissions reduced at the source unless otherwise provided by law. Emission reduction credits or marketable trading credits issued by the district for those exempt sources may be reduced only when applied to new source review permitting of other stationary sources, or according to any applicable requirement of a marketabletrading credit program. (2) Any credits issued by a district pursuant to this subdivision shall meet.all of the - requirements of state and federal law, including, all of the following: (A) That the credits do not result in the crediting of air emissions whichare already contemporaneously required by an emission contro! measure in a plan necessary to achieve state and federal ambientair standards. (B) That the credits do not provide for an additional discount of credits solely as a result of emission reduction credits trading if a district has already discounted thecredit as part ofits processof identifying and granting those credits to sources. (C) That the credits do not, in any manner, result in double-counting of emission reductions. (D) That but not limited to, the credits be permanent, enforceable, quantifiable, and surplus. (3) Until January 1, 1999, this subdivision applies only to sources within the boundaries of the south coastdistrict or in Ventura County. On and after January 1, 1999, this subdivision applies statewide. 48 N Y Appendix E EMISSIONS CREDITS AND TRADING REQUIREMENTS 49 Appendix E EMISSIONS CREDITS AND TRADING REQUIREMENTS The following requirements affect the approvability of generation, trading, and use of interchangeable credits: FEDERAL LEGISLATION: CLEAN AIR ACT Sections 172(c)(5) and 173, New Source Review Provides the regulatory mechanism to allow continued industrial growth while | minimizing the amount of emission increases from this growth. The two major components of New Source Review (NSR) programsrequire sources to apply best available control technology (BACT) or lowest achievable emission rates (LAER). Also establishes statutory mandates for the generation and use emission reduction credits to offset remaining and potential emissions from new sources. Sections 182(g)and 187, Economic Incentives Program The Clean Air Act requires states to adopt economic incentive programs (mandatory EIPs) to remedy shortfalls or plan deficiencies in the ozone or carbon monoxide State Implementation Plan (SIP). The Act also provides states with the option of adopting EIPs (discretionary EIPs) as part of the SIP control strategy to demonstrate attainment. U.S. EPA RULES Emission Offset Interpretative Ruling (40CFR51 Subpart |, Review of New Sources and Modifications) Introduced the concept of using surplus emission reductions, or credits, from existing sources to offset emission increases from new sources. This ruling allowed for the generation of credits through controls, equipmentorfacility shutdowns,or curtailing operations on existing sources. These reductions could be usedto offset the emission increases of a new source provided there was a netair quality benefit. Emissions Trading Policy Statement (December4, 1986; 51-R233) Provides a general framework for EPA-approvable emissions trading. Outlines regulatory criteria for qualifying emission reductions as credits, which includes the requirement that to qualify as a bankable credit, reductions must be surplus, permanent, enforceable, and quantifiable. Once qualified, credits can be sold or traded to offset emission increases of new or modified sources. This policy provides guidance for states to develop modeltrading rules that would allow specific two-sourcetrades 50 N Y without source-specific SIP revisions, as well as approvalcriteria for trades submitted as source-specific SIP revisions. Economic Incentives Program (EIP) Rule (March 16, 1994, 40CFR Part 51, Subpart U, Economic Incentive Programs) U.S. EPA rule to assist states in the development and adoption of federally approvable EIPs. One type of economic incentive identified in the EIP is emissions trading, in which a sourceis allowed to meet regulatory rule limits through the use of surplus reductions, or emission reduction credits, from sources outside of the facility. Interchangeable credit trading, or the interchangeable use of credits for compliance with technology-based control requirements, would fall under this category. Using this alternative compliance approach, sources with lower cost abatementalternatives are able to provide the necessary reductions to sources facing more expensive alternatives. \f a district elects to adopt an emissions trading program, it must meet requirements specified in the federal rule. Among these requirements are an assurance bythedistrict that the program will not interfere with any other applicable federal regulatory requirements; a program baseline from which quantifiable emission reductions can be determined; credible, workable, replicable procedures for quantifying emissions and/or emission-related parameters; source-specific requirements, such as monitoring, record- keeping, and reporting, that allow for compliance certification and enforcement; requirements for dealing with technical uncertainty; and a system for ensuring federal — and state enforceability of the program. In addition, trading to comply with reasonably | available control technology (RACT) requirements must be equivalent or better in the aggregate as source-by-source RACT; RACTtrading with non-RACT sourcesis allowableif there is an exceptional environmental benefit; and credits can be used to meet NSRoffset requirements, but there can be notrading of credits to comply with BACT.. STATE LEGISLATION: HEALTH & SAFETY CODE H&SC sections 40709-40713, Emission Reduction Credit Systems and Banking Requireslocaldistricts to adopt emission reduction credit banking programsaspart of NSR permitting program. As part of California's NSR program, affected stationary sources are required to apply the Best Available Control Technology (BACT) to reduce emissions and provide emission reduction offsets to mitigate the impact of emissions from the source remaining after the application of BACT. These emission reduction offsets are sometimes called emission reduction credits. Credits used as offsets for mitigation purposes must meetcertain criteria: they must be surplus to any federal, state, or local laws or regulations; and must be enforceable, quantifiable and permanent. Once created, emission reduction credits may be banked withthedistrict for future use by the source that generated them, used concurrently to offset new 51 projects, or sold to other sourcesfor use as mitigation. In all cases, credits must be generated pursuantto district rules and regulations, and must be reviewed and certified by the district to be used as mitigation. The variety of credit generating programswill depend ontherules in place in eachdistrict. H&SC sections 39616 and 40440.1, Market-Based Trading ProgramsforAttainment Strategies Authorizesair pollution control districts to adopt market-based incentive programs as an elementof their attainment plans. However, each program mustsatisfy specific criteria, including that the program: achieve equivalent or greater emission reductions at equivalentor less cost compared with command-and-controlrules and future measures; provide a comparablelevel of enforcementto that of command-and-control; establish a methodology that recognizes and treats equitably facilities which have reduced emissions in advance of program implementation; not result in greater job loss or significant shifts from higher to lowerskilled jobs on a district wide basis than under command-and-control; not delay, postpone or hinder compliance with the California Clean Air Act. Section 39607.5, Statewide Methodology for Calculating the Value of Credits Used Interchangeablility Requires the ARB to develop and adopt a methodology to ensure the interchangeability of emission reduction credits from stationary, mobile, indirect, and areawide sources, .. including credits issued under market programs. Requires the ARBto consider certain factors in developing the trading methodology related to creditlife, inter-temporality, flexibility and viability. Section 40714.5, Credits For Reductions From Sources Exempt From District Rules Specifies that emission reduction credits that are created by sources that are exempt from air district permitting requirements shall not be discounted. Provides an exemption for credits applied to new source review permitting of stationary sources and issued according to any applicable requirement of a marketable trading credit program. This provision only affects the South Coast and Ventura air districts until January 1, 1999. After that date, these provisions would apply statewide. 52 Section 40920.6(c), Use of Retired Credits In Lieu of BARCT Requirements Requires a district to allow the retirement of marketable emission reduction credits that meet applicable requirements of state and federal law to be usedinlieu of any requirement for BARCTif the credit also complies with all district rules and regulations affecting those credits. Section 39617, Methodologies For Use In Calculating The Value Of Credits From Vehicle Retirement Authorizes the use of a number of methods for determining the emissions reduced from scrappedvehicles. STATEWIDE REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES AFFECTING EMISSIONS TRADING Article 4, Sections 94540-94555, Title 17 CCR, Consumer Products, Alternative Compliance Plan (1995) An emissions bubble approachthat is designed to limit VOC emissions from consumer products to no more than the emissions that would have occurred from the products under existing VOC standards without the ACP. Credits from surplus reductions can be used by the product manufacturer or sold to a small or one-product business,or sold to another manufacturer who hasfailed to meetits emission reduction commitments. Suchcredits would havea lifetime of only one compliance period and used solely-to reconcile shortfalls. Sections 2330-2332, Title 17 CCR, Emissions Formula for Employer-BasedTrip Reductions Provides a formula for use by districts in calculating emissions from alternative strategies to achieve equivalent emission reductions to those associated with employer- basedtrip reduction regulations. Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credit (MSERC) Guidelines (November 1993, as amended February 1996) MSERCsare emission reductions from motor vehicles which go beyonddistrict, state, and federal requirements. ARB'srole in developing programs to generate MSERCshas been to issue guidelines on their generation and use. These guidelines are for use by districts as they develop rules governing mobile source credits, and affected sources. 53 Appendix F REFERENCES 54 Appendix F References All correspondencefrom the U.S. EPA,districts, and the public, received during the development of the proposed regulation. All notices of ARB public workshops and meetings held during the developmentof the proposed regulation. California State Implementation Plan, approved by the ARB on November15, 1995, and approved by U.S. EPA on September5, 1996. Code of Federal Regulations (51CFR51.860, Appendix S) regarding the Interpretative Ruling, Emissions Trading Policy Statement, and the Economic Incentives Program. Mobile Source Credit Guidelines (ARB, as amended February 1996) Motor Vehicle Emissions Inventory 7G - model and documentation (ARB, October 4, 1996) Methodology for Estimating Emissions From On-Road Motor Vehicles (ARB, Volume I-VI, November 1996). Initial Statement of Reasons for Proposed Amendments Pertaining to Hairspray. in the . California Consume Products Regulation (ARB, February 7, 1997). . Initial Statement of Reasons for Proposed Amendmentsto the California Regulations for Reducing Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from ConsumerProducts and Aerosol Coating Products (ARB, October 4, 1996) Title 17, California Code of Regulations, Division 3, Chapter 1, Subchapter 8.5, Article 1, Antiperspirants and Deodorants, Sections 94500-94506.5, effective February 29, 1996. Title 17, California Code of Regulations, Division 3, Chapter 1, Subchapter8.5, Article 2, Consumer Products, Sections 94507-94517, effective February 29, 1996. Title 17, California Code of Regulations, Division 3, Chapter 1, Subchapter8.5, Article 3, Aerosol Coating Products, Sections 94520-94528, effective February 29, 1996. Title 17, California Code of Regulations, Division 3, Chapter 1, Subchapter8.5, Article 4, Alternative control Plan, Sections 94540-94555, effective January 8, 1996. 55 -) initial Statement of Reasons for a Proposed Statewide Regulation to Reduce Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Aerosol Coating Products and Amendmentsto the Alternative control Plan for Consumer Products and Appendices(ARB, February 3, 1995). Staff Report, Proposed Alternative Control Plan Regulation for ConsumerProducts, (ARB, August 1994). Final Statement of Reasons for Rulemaking, Public Hearing to Consider the Adoption of Amendments to the Regulation for Reducing Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from ConsumerProducts -- PhaseIl, (ARB, January 9, 1992). Technical Support Document and Proposed Amendmentsto the Statewide Regulation to Reduce Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Consumer Products, PhaseII (ARB, October 1991). Final Statement of Reasons for Rulemaking, Including Summary of Comments and Agency Responses, Public Hearing to Consider the Adoption of a Statewide Regulation to Reduce Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from ConsumerProducts (ARB, October 11, 1990). Staff Report and Technical Support Document on the Proposed Regulation to Reduce Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from ConsumerProducts (ARB, August 1990). Guidelines to Generate Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credits Throughthe . Conversion of Off-Road Diesel Cycle engines at or Above 50 Horsepower of Low- - Emission Configurations (ARB, February 1995). Guidelines for the Generation of Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credits through the Purchase of New, Reduced-Emission Heavy-Duty Vehicles (ARB, September 1995). 56 DECLARATION OF SERVICEBY U.S. MAIL Case Name: Elk Hills Power v. CA State Board of Equalization,etal. No.: S$194121 I declare: I am employedin the Office of the Attorney General, whichis the office of a memberof the California State Bar, at which member's direction this service is made. Iam 18 years of age or older and not a party to this matter. I am familiar with the business practice at the Office ofthe Attorney Generalfor collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. In accordance with that practice, correspondenceplacedin the internal mail collection system at the Office of the Attorney General is deposited with the United States Postal Service with postage thereon fully prepaid that same day in the ordinary course of business. On March 20, 2012, I served the attached MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICEbyplacing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelopein the internal mail collection system at the Office of the Attorney General at 110 West A Street, Suite 1100, P.O. Box 85266, San Diego, CA 92186-5266, addressed as follows: Board of Equalization - Legal Division Mooney, Wright & Moore, PLLC - Robert W. Lambert Paul J. Mooney, Esq. . P.O. Box942879 MIC:82 Mesa Financial Plaza, Suite 16000. Sacramento, CA 94279-0082 1201 South Alma School Road Mesa, AZ 85210-0001 San Diego County Superior Court The Honorable Ronald L. Styn Jerri S. Bradley Hall of Justice, Department SD-62 County of Kern Public Defender 330 West Broadway 1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor San Diego, CA 92101 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Fourth Appellate District Julian W. Poon, Partner Division One Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP 750 B Street, Suite 300 333 South Grand Avenue San Diego, CA 92101 Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197 DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY U.S. MAIL Case Name: EJk Hills Powerv. CA State Board of Equalization,et al. No.: 8194121 Law Office of Peter Michaels Peter W. Michaels, Esq. 6114 La Salle Avenue, Suite 445 Oakland, CA 94611-2802 I declare under penalty of perjury underthe laws of the State of California the foregoingis true and correct and that this declaration was executed on March 20, 2012, at San Diego, California. K. Marugg Declarant SigndtzteV SD2012802026 80609520. doc
