Judge Blocks Limits on Paint Emissions : Pollution: The ruling says a county agency must comply with state requirements for an environmental impact report on the rules.

A Los Angeles Superior Court judge has blocked the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District from implementing regulations aimed at controlling air pollutants emitted from certain oil- and water-based paints.

In an order entered Monday and distributed Tuesday, Judge William Huss said the county agency must comply with California Environmental Quality Act requirements.

Before the county can implement its regulations, adopted by the agency April 2, Huss said the air pollution district must first submit an environmental impact report on the new rules.

Noel A. Klebaum, an assistant Ventura County counsel, said the irony of the judge’s order was that it stemmed from an issue raised by “the polluters attacking regulations designed to control pollution and using CEQA to do it.”

Robert Wendoll, chairman of EL RAP, the Environmental Legislative & Regulatory Advocacy Program of the Southern California Paint and Coatings Assn., said it “probably was one of the few times” that the act has been used to stall regulations issued by an environmental agency.

At the same time Huss’ order was being distributed, the Ventura County Board of Supervisors was approving a 1991 air quality management plan containing stringent pollution controls affecting business and industry.

At issue are county regulations restricting the amount of paint thinners--solvents that contain potential air pollutants--that can be added to certain non-flat paint, such as that used on wood trim or quick-dry enamels.

The 120 mostly Southern California members of EL RAP argue that restricting the use of thinners would reduce paint quality. Moreover, they said, reducing thinner also means more paint would have to be used to cover the same area, resulting in more emissions of volatile organic compounds in the paint.

The county argued in court that new paint products work fine and would conform with the new county rules without adding additional thinner.

Ventura County also objected because a Los Angeles County judge took jurisdiction of the case. But Huss said he did so because two similar rules involving the South Coast Air Quality Management District were decided in Los Angeles County in August, 1990, and in July.

Additionally, in August, a San Francisco Superior Court judge issued a similar mandate to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.

Klebaum said Huss’ order would have to be studied by the Ventura County agency before it decides whether to appeal.