Law Center Search Results

On February 16, 2023, the NAM filed an amicus letter seeking intervention by the California Supreme Court in a case involving a party’s ability to challenge agency action under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This case arises from the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (the Department) listing spray foam systems as a priority product under California’s "Green Chemistry" law. This listing subjects the spray foam industry in California to potential restrictions or ban on the sale of its product. The petitioners--American Chemistry Council (ACC) and General Coatings Manufacturing Corp--sued the Department challenging the listing as a violation of the CEQA. The trial court found for the petitioners on their CEQA claim. On appeal, however, the Department maintained that the petitioners’ claim should have been dismissed as untimely under CEQA’s 180-day statute of limitations. In turn, the petitioners argued that their claim was timely because the statute of limitations period began to run after ACC fully exhausted the Department’s administrative appeals process under relevant regulations implementing the Green Chemistry law. The Court of Appeal agreed with the Department, concluding that litigants do not need to exhaust administrative remedies before initiating CEQA claims unless the underlying administrative review process specifically references CEQA--here, the relevant regulations make no reference to CEQA. We argued in our amicus letter that review is necessary because the Court of Appeal’s decision provides little guidance as to what level of detail is required to incorporate CEQA claims into administrative exhaustion procedures enumerated in other statutory schemes. Allowing the Court of Appeal’s decision to stand will undermine three key tenants of the California judicial system: (1) the efficiency and conservation of resources that administrative exhaustion affords; (2) legal clarity that precludes agencies from shielding their decision-making from judicial review; and (3) a preference for resolving disputes on the merits instead of on technicalities. All manufacturers involved in CEQA litigation would benefit from clear rules regarding what steps are required before CEQA litigation can be initiated. Unfortunately, on March 29, the California Supreme Court denied theh petition for review.