Back to California

AB-2752 • 2026

Bay Area Air Quality Management District and South Coast Air Quality Management District: policies: oil refineries.

Bay Area Air Quality Management District and South Coast Air Quality Management District: policies: oil refineries.

Education Energy Taxes
Passed Legislature

This bill passed both chambers and reached final enrollment, even if later executive action is not shown here.

Sponsor
Ávila Farías
Last action
2026-04-20
Official status
In committee: Set, first hearing. Testimony taken.
Effective date
Not listed

Plain English Breakdown

The official source does not provide specific details on how the districts will fund these analyses or what policies might be affected.

Air Quality Districts: Oil Refinery Policies

This law requires two air quality management districts in California to analyze their policies affecting oil refineries and consider additional socioeconomic impacts before adopting new rules.

What This Bill Does

  • Requires the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and South Coast Air Quality Management District to analyze existing and future policies that affect oil refineries by December 31, 2027.
  • Expands the definition of 'socioeconomic impact' for these districts when making decisions about oil refinery rules or regulations to include cost to consumers, impacts on state and local tax revenue, and impacts on statewide gasoline supply.
  • Requires these districts to consider additional socioeconomic factors before adopting new policies related to oil refineries.

Who It Names or Affects

  • The Bay Area Air Quality Management District
  • The South Coast Air Quality Management District
  • Oil refineries located within the districts' boundaries

Terms To Know

Socioeconomic impact
Effects on society and economy, such as costs to consumers or impacts on employment.

Limits and Unknowns

  • The bill does not specify how the districts will fund these analyses.
  • It is unclear what specific policies might be affected by this requirement.

Bill History

  1. 2026-04-20 California Legislative Information

    In committee: Set, first hearing. Testimony taken.

  2. 2026-04-07 California Legislative Information

    Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES.

  3. 2026-04-06 California Legislative Information

    From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on NAT. RES. Read second time and amended.

  4. 2026-03-23 California Legislative Information

    Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES.

  5. 2026-03-19 California Legislative Information

    From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on NAT. RES. Read second time and amended.

  6. 2026-03-19 California Legislative Information

    Referred to Com. on NAT. RES.

  7. 2026-02-21 California Legislative Information

    From printer. May be heard in committee March 23.

  8. 2026-02-20 California Legislative Information

    Read first time. To print.

Official Summary Text

AB 2752, as amended, Ávila Farías.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District and South Coast Air Quality Management District: policies: oil refineries.
Existing law establishes the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, which is vested with the authority to regulate air emissions located in the boundaries of the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara and portions of the Counties of Solano and Sonoma.
Under existing law, the Lewis-Presley Air Quality Management Act establishes the South Coast Air Quality Management District in those portions of the Counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino included within the South Coast Air Basin as the local agency with the responsibility for comprehensive air pollution control within the basin.
This bill would require the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and the South Coast Air Quality Management
District
District, on or before December 31, 2027,
to analyze
all of their
policies that have been adopted and all future policies that they are considering adopting that impact oil refineries located in their districts and
specified policies to
determine the cost of compliance, potential cost to consumers, impacts on state and local tax revenue,
and refinery employment.
refinery employment, and impacts on the statewide gasoline supply, as provided. The bill would also require those districts, on or before January 1, 2028, to make a good faith effort to minimize any adverse impacts identified pursuant to that requirement.
By requiring a higher level of service of local entities, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
Existing law requires, whenever a district intends to propose the adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule or regulation that will significantly affect air quality or emissions limitations, that district to perform an assessment of the socioeconomic impacts of the adoption, amendment, or repeal of the rule or regulation. Existing law defines “socioeconomic impact” for these purposes.
With respect to the adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule or regulation related to oil refineries by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the bill would expand the definition of ”socioeconomic impact” to also mean the cost to consumers, impacts on state and local tax revenue, and impacts on the statewide gasoline supply. The bill would also require those districts to actively
consider those additional socioeconomic impacts and make a good faith effort to minimize any adverse impacts, as provided, before adopting, amending, or repealing a rule or regulation related to oil refineries.
This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and the South Coast Air Quality Management District.
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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory
provisions noted above.

Current Bill Text

Read the full stored bill text
Download Bill PDF