HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE 

Division 26 Air Resources 

Part 1 General Provisions and Definitions 

Chapter 2 Definitions 

§ 39011.5. “Agricultural source of air pollution” or “agricultural source”; Applicability of 

certain district rules or regulations; Authority of district to regulate a source 

(a) “Agricultural source of air pollution” or “agricultural source” means a source of air 

pollution or a group of sources used in the production of crops, or the raising of fowl or 

animals located on contiguous property under common ownership or control that meets 

any of the following criteria: 

(1) Is a confined animal facility, including, but not limited to, any structure, building, 

installation, barn, corral, coop, feed storage area, milking parlor, or system for the 

collection, storage, treatment, and distribution of liquid and solid manure, if 

domesticated animals, including, but not limited to, cattle, calves, horses, sheep, goats, 

swine, rabbits, chickens, turkeys, or ducks are corralled, penned, or otherwise caused 

to remain in restricted areas for commercial agricultural purposes and feeding is by 

means other than grazing. 

(2) Is an internal combustion engine used in the production of crops or the raising of 

fowl or animals, including, but not limited to, an engine subject to Article 1.5 

(commencing with Section 41750) of Chapter 3 of Part 4 except an engine that is used 

to propel implements of husbandry, as that term is defined in Section 36000 of the 

Vehicle Code, as that section existed on January 1, 2003. Notwithstanding subdivision 

(b) of Section 39601, the state board may not revise this definition for the purposes of 

this section. 

(3) Is a Title V source, as that term is defined in Section 39053.5, or is a source that is 

otherwise subject to regulation by a district pursuant to this division or the federal 

Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 7401 et seq.). 

(b) Any district rule or regulation affecting stationary sources on agricultural operations 

adopted on or before January 1, 2004, is applicable to an agricultural source. 

(c) Nothing in this section limits the authority of a district to regulate a source, 

including, but not limited to, a stationary source that is an agricultural source, over 

which it otherwise has jurisdiction pursuant to this division, or pursuant to the federal 

Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 7401 et seq.) or any rules or regulations adopted 

pursuant to that act that were in effect on or before January 1, 2003, or to exempt an 

agricultural source from any requirement otherwise applicable under Section 40724 or 

42301.16, based upon a finding by the district in a public hearing that the aggregate 

emissions from that source do not exceed a de minimis level of more than one ton of 

particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, or volatile organic compounds per year. 

Added Stats 2003 ch 479 § 2 (SB 700). Amended Stats 2004 ch 183 § 215 (AB 3082). 

Amendments: 

2004 Amendment: (1) Substituted “applicable to an agricultural source” for “applicable 

to an agriculture source” in subd (b); and (2) amended subd (c) by substituting (a) 

“under Section 40724 or 42301.16” for “under Sections 40724 or 42301.16”; and (b) 

“de minimis level” for “de minimus level”. 

Note- Stats 2003 ch 479 provides: 
SECTION 1. (a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: 

(1) Agricultural operations necessary for growing crops or raising animals are a 

significant source of directly emitted particulates, and precursors of ozone and fine 

particulate matter. These emissions have a significant adverse effect on the ability of 

areas of the state, including, but not limited to, the San Joaquin Valley, to achieve 

health-based state and federal ambient air quality standards. 

(2) Since 1999, the agriculture industry has reduced emissions of oxides of nitrogen 

(NO X ) by more than 2000 tons per year, emissions of particulate matter of 10 microns 

in diameter (PM 10) by more than 500 tons per year, and emissions of volatile organic 

compounds (VOCs) from agricultural chemicals by more than 20 percent. According to 

the state board, however, agricultural sources of air pollution still contribute twenty-six 

percent of the smog-forming emissions in the San Joaquin Valley. 

(3) In the San Joaquin Valley, a large portion of the sources of particulate emissions 

are areawide sources whose emissions are directly related to growth in population and 

the resulting vehicle miles traveled. According to the State Air Resources Board, 

however, agricultural sources of air pollution account for over fifty percent of the 

directly emitted particulate air pollution generated in the valley during the fall, 

amounting to over 170 tons per day of emissions. 

(4) All parties living or operating a business in an area that has been classified as being 

a nonattainment area with respect to the attainment of federal or state ambient air 

quality standards share the responsibility of reducing emissions from air pollutants. 

(5) The federal Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 7401 et seq.) prohibits the state from 

adopting emission standards or limitations less stringent than those established under 

the federal act, including limitations on emissions from agricultural sources. 

(6) Division 26 (commencing with Section 39000) of the Health and Safety Code 

establishes numerous policies and programs to reduce air pollutants for the protection 

of public health. 

(7) The purpose of the act adding this section is to establish a new set of programs at 

the state and regional levels to reduce air emissions from agricultural sources in order 

to protect public health and the environment. 

(b) It is therefore the intent of the Legislature to require the State Air Resources Board 

and air quality management districts and air pollution control districts in the state to 

regulate stationary, mobile, and area sources of agricultural air pollution. 

SEC. 14. The provisions of the act adding this section are severable. If any provision of 

this act or its application is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions 

or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application. 

SEC. 15. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB 

of the California Constitution for certain costs that may be incurred by a local agency or 

school district because in that regard this act creates a new crime or infraction, 

eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within 

the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a 

crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. 

In addition, no reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article 

XIIIB of the California Constitution for certain other costs that may be incurred by a 

local agency or school district because a local agency or school district has the authority 

to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level 

of service mandated by this act, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the 

Government Code. 

NOTES OF DECISIONS 

Cal. Health & Safety Code § 39011.5 confirmed that the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air 

Pollution Control District had authority to regulate agriculture sources that were subject 
to the Clean Air Act and made the District's permitting requirements applicable to a 

dairy. Because the District had the authority to issue New Source Review 

(NSR)construction permits before the dairy obtained its building permits and before it 

began construction, a complaint that expressly alleged that the dairy failed to do so, 

stated a claim for which relief could be granted. Association of Irritated Residents v. 

Fred Schakel Dairy (2005) 2005 US Dist LEXIS 36769. 

Cal. Health & Safety Code § 39011.5 gave the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution 

Control District authority to regulate agriculture sources that were subject to the Clean 

Air Act and made the District's permitting requirements applicable to a dairy. Because 

the District had the authority to issue New Source Review (NSR) construction permits 

before the dairy obtained its building permits and before it began construction, a 

complaint that expressly alleged that the dairy failed to do so, stated a claim for which 

relief could be granted. Association of Irritated Residents v. Fred Schakel Dairy (2005) 

2005 US Dist LEXIS 36769.