California 2025-2026 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SB34

Introduced
12/2/24  
Refer
1/29/25  
Refer
3/24/25  
Refer
4/10/25  
Refer
4/21/25  
Report Pass
4/23/25  
Refer
4/23/25  
Report Pass
4/29/25  
Report Pass
4/23/25  
Refer
4/23/25  
Report Pass
4/29/25  
Refer
4/30/25  
Report Pass
4/29/25  
Report Pass
5/23/25  
Refer
4/30/25  
Refer
4/30/25  
Report Pass
5/23/25  
Engrossed
6/3/25  
Report Pass
5/23/25  
Engrossed
6/3/25  
Refer
6/9/25  
Refer
6/9/25  
Report Pass
7/8/25  
Refer
7/9/25  
Report Pass
7/15/25  

Caption

Air pollution: South Coast Air Quality Management District: mobile sources: Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles.

Impact

By imposing additional requirements on the ports, SB 34 intends to bolster the environmental standards of operations within one of the largest port complexes in the world while ensuring that economic activity remains robust. The bill reflects California's larger goals of transitioning towards zero-emissions technologies and enhancing the operational efficiency of its seaports, which generate significant economic activity while addressing environmental concerns. The introduction of these assessments aims to create a clear path for the ports to adopt cleaner technologies and operations over time.

Summary

Senate Bill 34, introduced by Senator Richardson, addresses air pollution management specifically at the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles. This legislation aims to establish a structured process for assessing emissions and implementing emissions reduction measures associated with port operations. The bill mandates that the South Coast Air Quality Management District develop rules that ensure ports create comprehensive plans for the infrastructure necessary to support zero-emission equipment. Furthermore, it seeks to mandate that these assessments consider energy demand, cost estimates, and workforce impacts, without imposing limitations on cargo throughput or capping operations at the ports.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding SB 34 appears to be supportive among environmental organizations and stakeholders prioritizing clean air initiatives, reflecting a broader commitment to sustainable operations at major transport hubs. However, there exist sentiments of contention from industry stakeholders concerned about the potential economic impacts. Some in the maritime industry perceive the requirements as regulatory overreach that could complicate or hinder operations without providing sufficient operational flexibility.

Contention

One notable point of contention lies within the constraints set by the bill that prohibit limiting cargo throughput or operations at the ports in order to comply with emissions reduction regulations. Industry representatives argue that such restraints could become impractical, especially if advancements in technology create delays in available solutions for emissions reductions. There's also concern regarding whether the infrastructure required for zero-emission operations can be developed in a timely and economically viable manner, given the scale of the ports' operations.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Previously Filed As

CA SB563

Air pollution control districts and air quality management districts: dependent and independent special districts: funding.

CA AB343

Southern Los Angeles: ocean dumpsites: chemical waste.

CA AB1609

Air pollution: motor vehicle registration: pollution reduction.

CA AB1372

Vehicular air pollution: medium- and heavy-duty vehicles: land ports of entry.

CA AB985

San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District: emission reduction credit system.

CA AB2522

Air districts: governing boards: compensation.

CA AB627

Drayage trucks: voucher incentive project.

CA AB98

Planning and zoning: logistics use: truck routes.

CA SB674

Air pollution: covered facilities: community air monitoring systems: fence-line monitoring systems.

CA AB536

Bay Area Air Quality Management Advisory Council: compensation.

Similar Bills

No similar bills found.