Provides for the maximum civil penalty for citations issued through the expedited enforcement program (EN NO IMPACT See Note)
Summary
HB 286 amends Louisiana law governing the Department of Energy and Natural Resources’ expedited enforcement program. The bill increases the maximum civil penalty that may be imposed through that streamlined citation process for minor or moderate violations of the subtitle and related regulations. Under the amended law, the expedited enforcement program may now be used for violations resulting in an assessment of up to $5,000 per violation, with an aggregate cap of $10,000 per violator, replacing the prior $3,000 per violation and $5,000 aggregate limits.
The bill does not create a new enforcement program or change the underlying violations subject to enforcement; instead, it expands the penalty range available for citations handled without the more formal legal review process. It preserves the secretary’s authority to adopt rules, issue citations with compliance deadlines, and delegate program operations to staff, while making the expedited process available for somewhat larger civil penalties than before.
Impact
HB 286 directly amends R.S. 30:2025(D)(1), which governs expedited enforcement for minor and moderate violations under Louisiana’s environmental and natural resources laws. The practical effect is to raise the ceiling on civil penalties that can be assessed through this faster administrative process, allowing the agency to resolve more cases without full legal review and with higher penalty exposure for violators. Affected parties include regulated entities subject to the subtitle and the department personnel who administer enforcement actions under the program.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been broadly supported and noncontroversial in the legislature. It passed the House overwhelmingly and also cleared the Senate by a strong margin, suggesting general agreement that the penalty limits needed updating. The bill’s caption notes “EN NO IMPACT,” indicating it was viewed as having no fiscal impact on the state budget.
Contention
There is little evidence of major opposition in the available record, but the only likely point of contention is the policy choice to increase civil penalty exposure for minor and moderate violations. Supporters would view the change as giving regulators a more effective tool and better aligning penalties with enforcement needs, while any critics might worry that higher caps could increase costs for regulated businesses or expand administrative enforcement discretion. The recorded votes show only a small number of dissenting members in both chambers, indicating limited but present resistance.