BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2481
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 2481 (Frommer)
As Amended August 28, 2002
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |49-29|(May 29, 2002) |SENATE: |25-11|(August 29, |
| | | | | |2002) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: E. S. & T.M.
SUMMARY : An agency omnibus measure that updates provisions
governing underground storage tank programs (UST), certified
unified program agencies (CUPA), and enforcement provisions
under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. It also
extends the waiver for onsite sewer systems to June 30, 2004,
and grants certain immunities to state agencies and personnel
under the environmental insurance program.
The Senate amendments make modifying changes to the Assembly
version of the measure and add some new sections affecting the
environmental insurance program and extending the waiver for
onsite septic systems. The more significant amendments:
1)Exclude unburied fuel piping connected to an emergency
generator tank from being classified as an UST if the owner
conducts a visual check each time the system is operated, or
at least monthly, and the owner keeps a log of the
inspections. This exclusion is void if the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopts regulations governing
the unburied fuel piping.
2)Provide the owners or operators ("owners") of USTs with seven
days to correct a significant violation before the local
agency can shut down deliveries of fuel to the UST ("red
tag"). The local agency can still red tag the UST immediately
if it is determined that the UST poses an imminent threat to
human health or safety.
3)Require local agencies to inspect the UST system within five
days of receiving notice that the violation has been
corrected, and if it has been corrected, the red tag shall be
immediately removed.
AB 2481
Page 2
4)Direct SWRCB to notify the owners of USTs within 1,000 feet of
a public drinking water well of their responsibilities under
this measure.
5)Require that owners of USTs that are within 1000 feet of a
drinking water well to perform an enhanced leak detection test
(ELDT) on the system at least once before January 1, 2005.
The owner must correct any problem if a leak is detected.
This requirement does not apply to USTs installed after July
1, 2003 that meet the new requirements for product tight
primary and secondary containment or to USTs that have passed
an ELDT.
6)Require that USTs installed after July 1, 2003 meet certain
requirements, including:
a) The UST installation must be tested using an ELDT, an
inert gas pressure test or its equivalent.
b) Secondary containment shall be product tight and capable
of containing 100 percent of the volume of the primary
tank, or in the case of multiple primary tanks, the
secondary containment tank shall be 150% of the volume of
the largest primary tank or 10 percent of the aggregate
internal volume of all the primary tanks, whichever is
greater.
c) The UST system must have a continuous monitoring system
capable of detecting entry of liquid or vapor leaks from
the primary containment into the secondary containment and
of detecting water intrusion from the outside into the
secondary containment.
7)Require a tank tester who conducts a tank or piping integrity
test to prepare a detailed report under penalty of perjury and
to keep a record of that report for three years.
8)Increase the minimum amount of a grant that can be provided
from the Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Financing Account
("financing funds") from $3,000 to $10,000. It expands the
uses of the financing funds to cover the requirements of this
bill. These financing funds are continuously appropriated.
9)Authorize the use of the Underground Storage Tank Cleanup
Trust Fund Act of 1989 for reimbursing the expenses of the
AB 2481
Page 3
SWRCB in discovering violations and enforcing provisions of
the requirement regulating the petroleum underground storage
tanks.
10)Reestablish the Drinking Water Treatment and Research Fund
("drinking water fund"), which expired on January 1, 2002,
until January 1, 2010 in the State Treasury for use by the
State Department of Health Services (DHS) to make payments to
public water systems (PWSs) for the costs of treating
contaminated groundwater and surface water for drinking water
purposes, investigating the contamination and acquiring
alternate water supplies. DHS can also spend up to $1 million
for research into treatment technologies. DHS can also cover
its administrative costs which cannot exceed 5 percent.
11)Exempt PWSs from the requirement to aggressively pursue cost
recovery of funds it receives from the drinking water fund
under $1 million.
12)Require PWSs that detects an oxygenate at any level in its
groundwater supply to notify the SWRCB and the RWQCB. Either
of the boards is required to determine whether to shut down or
curtail the use of the well within 30 days of receiving the
notification.
13)Make changes to the procedures to be followed when a person
is subject to an administrative action complaint, to wit:
a) Administrative hearings before the SWRCB and the RWQCB
shall be held within 90 days from the date the party is
served. This is an extension from the current 60 days
requirement.
b) If the party has been served by the RWQCB, the hearing
shall be before the regional board, but if the hearing is
before the SWRCB, it can be either before the state board
or before a member of the state board.
14)Extend the waiver that is in effect for onsite sewage
treatment systems until June 30, 2004 unless the RWQCB
terminates the waiver prior to that date.
15)Clarify that the state does not become liable as an insurer
and cannot be construed to be transacting insurance in
implementing the Financial Assurance and Insurance for
AB 2481
Page 4
Redevelopment Program (FAIR). The immunity provisions also
extend to the California Environmental Protection Agency
(CalEPA), its related agencies, boards and employees.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Regulates, generally, the storage of hazardous substances in
USTs and requires USTs that are used to store hazardous
substances and that are installed after January 1, 1984, to
meet certain requirements, including that the primary
containment be product tight and that the tank's secondary
containment meet specified standards (often referred to as the
1998 standards). These requirements are mostly implemented by
the local agency or the regional water quality control board
(RWQCB).
2)Establishes the UST Cleanup Fund (USTCF) to assist certain
owners or operators in correcting the effects of unauthorized
releases from petroleum USTs. UST owners pay a fee into the
USTCF for every gallon of petroleum stored in a UST. The
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) then uses USTCF to
reimburse eligible UST owners and operators for certain costs,
including eligible cleanup costs, resulting from an
unauthorized release from their UST. SWRCB may reimburse an
eligible owner or operator up to $1.5 million per occurrence,
less a deductible, for USTCF-reimbursable costs.
3)Requires the Secretary for Environmental Protection (CalEPA)
to adopt regulations and implement the Unified Hazardous Waste
and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program. A city
or local agency that meets the requirements can be authorized
to assume enforcement of the program as a CUPA.
4)For a more detailed description of the above programs, please
see analysis of the Environmental Safety Committee dated April
24, 2002.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill revised the provisions
regulating the storage of hazardous substances in USTs. It
redefined "product tight" to specify that it means being
impervious to the liquid and vapor of the substance, so as to
prevent seepage from the containment, and deletes the
requirement that the tank not be subject to physical or chemical
deterioration over the useful life of the tank. It made the
corrective action requirements that govern petroleum USTs
AB 2481
Page 5
applicable to all USTs, and imposed a civil penalty upon any
person who violates a corrective action requirement.
It also permitted certain persons who acquire real property, on
which a UST is located, to be reimbursed from the USTCF even
though the person from whom the property was acquired was not
eligible for reimbursement for a claim. In order to be eligible
the subsequent purchaser must meet the same eligibility
requirements that other applicants must meet, and the subsequent
purchaser cannot be "an affiliate of any person whose act or
omission caused" the original ineligibility.
The bill also detailed the process to be followed by a CUPA in
carrying out administrative enforcement actions and hearings.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to Senate Appropriations Committee
analysis, minor and absorbable costs.
COMMENTS :
1)This bill, sponsored by SWRCB, seeks to strengthen and
reorganize the law related to USTs in order to protect the
environment against unauthorized releases of methyl tertiary
butyl ether (MTBE) by: 1) prohibiting fuel delivery to USTs
that have significant water quality violations; 2) increasing
the number of UST cleanup sites by providing funding, under
restricted conditions, to previously ineligible parties; and,
3) streamlining the Health and Safety Code (HSC) to make it
easier to implement and for the public and private parties to
comprehend.
2)Most of the changes made by the Senate add further definition
and specificity to the UST program elements contained in the
Assembly version of the bill. The most significant changes
are noted above. The Senate amendments address three new
subject areas that were not part of the Assembly discussions
on this measure, although the Environmental Safety Committee
has had significant discussion of these subject areas in its
review of other bills that have passed through committee.
a) Environmental Insurance: The amendments to the FAIR
program add more specific details to the state immunity
provisions that were in the environmental insurance program
which was recently established by SB 468 (Sher) (Chapter
549, Statutes of 2001). CalEPA is seeking to clarify that
AB 2481
Page 6
by establishing the environmental insurance program, the
state in no fashion intends to be the ultimate "reinsurer"
should the underwriter fail to perform as anticipated.
b) Onsite Sewer Systems: The Senate amendment extending
the waiver for the onsite sewer systems to June 30, 2004
corresponds with the date that the SWRCB is supposed to
implement statewide regulations or standards for onsite
septic systems as required by AB 885 (Jackson) (Chapter
781, Statutes of 2000).
c) Drinking Water Fund for PWSs: The Senate amendments
reestablish the drinking water fund program which sunset on
January 1, 2002. This program advances funds to PWS to
help them cope with investigation, cleanup and purchase of
replacement water when they have water supplies
contaminated by oxygenates such as methyl tertiary butyl
ether (MTBE).
Analysis Prepared by : Michael B. Endicott / E.S. & T.M. /
(916) 319-3965
FN: 0007791