BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 833|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 833
Author: Ruskin (D)
Amended: 8/20/07 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE ENV. QUALITY COMMITTEE : 5-2, 7/2/07
AYES: Simitian, Florez, Kuehl, Lowenthal, Steinberg
NOES: Runner, Aanestad
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 48-29, 6/6/07 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : California Toxic Release Inventory Program
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill enacts the California Toxic Release
Inventory Program Act of 2007 to require the Department of
Toxic Substances Control to develop and implement, by
January 1, 2009, the California Toxic Release Inventory
Program to require a facility to submit a toxic chemical
release form to the department, if the facility is not
required to submit a toxic chemical release form containing
that same information pursuant to the existing federal
regulations, as specified.
ANALYSIS :
Existing Law
CONTINUED
AB 833
Page
2
1.Requires certain California industrial facilities that
use any of approximately 650 chemicals annually to
disclose information about releases to air, land, and
water to the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA)
for the dissemination of information in a publicly
accessible, on-line data base, referred to as the Toxics
Release Inventory or TRI, pursuant to the federal
Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act of
1986 (EPCRA, Chapter 116 of Title 42 of the United States
Code).
2.Authorizes the California Environmental Protection Agency
(Cal EPA) to request any business to submit the
information required pursuant to EPCRA to also submit
such information to Cal EPA.
3.Prohibits Cal EPA, however, from requiring the form from
certain businesses or in an amount lower than the
applicable threshold amount specified pursuant to EPCRA.
This bill makes the following legislative findings and
declarations:
1.That the people of California have the right to know the
hazards posed by toxic releases near their homes,
schools, and workplaces. They have the right to know how
much pollution is being released into the water, air, and
soil.
2.Since its inception in 1986, as part of the federal
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of
1986, (EPCRA; Chapter 116 (commencing with Section 11001)
of Title 42 of the United States Code), the Toxic Release
Inventory (TRI) has supplied this essential information
on toxic chemical releases to the public. The goal of
the TRI is to empower citizens, through information, to
hold companies and local governments accountable for how
toxic chemicals are managed.
3.States that it is the intent of the Legislature that
California citizens do not lose access to the information
necessary to understand the potential threats to public
health and safety and the environment that is available
AB 833
Page
3
through the Toxic Release Inventory as it existed on
January 1, 2006, including the ease of accessibility.
This bill:
1.Requires the DTSC to develop and implement the California
Toxic Release Inventory Program which requires DTSC when
implementing the program to comply with the requirements
of the federal act with regard to ensuring that any
requirement imposed by this bill is no less stringent
than, not otherwise preempted by, any requirement imposed
pursuant to the federal act, including any changes to the
existing federal regulations that decrease the threshold
quantity or include additional toxic chemicals subject to
the federal act.
2.Requires a facility to submit a toxic chemical release
form to the DTSC, in accordance with the existing federal
regulations, if the facility is not required by the
federal regulations to submit a toxic chemical release
form containing that same information.
3.Provides that the program require that the information be
reported retroactively to the effective date of the
change in the federal act or the existing federal
regulations as to ensure no gap in data collection.
4.Requires DTSC to evaluate California-specific reporting
requirements and determine if this information can
substitute, in whole or in part, for the information
required under the program, as specified.
5.Requires DTSC to post a copy of each form received from
each facility that is subject to the program on the
department's publicly available Internet Web site.
6.Authorizes the DTSC to adopt regulations to implement the
program as emergency regulations and requires the Office
of Administrative Law to deem these regulations to be
necessary for the immediate preservation of the public
peace, health, safety, and general welfare.
Background
AB 833
Page
4
What is the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) ? The TRI
constitutes a body of information on the release of toxics
at the community level as part of what was for many years
regarded as the nation's premier right-to-know law - EPCRA.
Established in 1986, TRI simply required certain
industrial facilities that manufacture, process, or use
significant amounts of certain toxic chemicals, to annually
report the amount of chemicals they release and dispose of
each year.
The TRI report contains information about the types and
amounts of toxic chemicals that are released each year to
the air, water, and land. Additionally, TRI provides
information on the quantities of toxic chemicals sent to
other facilities for disposal or treatment.
Changes in Federal Regulatory Requirements . On September
21, 2005, the federal EPA announced its intention to roll
back reporting requirements for all chemicals under the
federal TRI. The federal EPA proposal had two major
components (1) Increase the amount of chemical releases
that trigger detailed TRI reporting from 500 to 5,000
pounds per year, and (2) eliminate annual reporting and
replace it with reporting every other year.
The federal EPA offered no rationale for the proposal other
than its desire to ease the regulatory burden on business.
It was met with much opposition and prompted the federal
EPA to modify its proposal. When the final rule was
published in December 2006, the proposal for alternate-year
reporting was gone, and the threshold for reporting
chemical use was raised not to 5,000 pounds, but 2,000
pounds. However, raising the threshold by a factor of four
rather than a factor of 10 still will eliminate report of
millions of pounds of toxics chemicals nationwide.
US EPA Science Advisory Board - Criticisms . On July 12,
2006 the US EPA Science Advisory Board wrote to the
Administrator of US EPA regarding their perspective on
proposed changes to federal law, "We are sufficiently
concerned about the potential negative impacts of these
changes on scientific research that we offer this
commentary." The SAB then noted that they anticipated that
the proposed changes would affect the value of TRI data in
AB 833
Page
5
the following two ways: First, it will obscure the extent
of facilities' releases of toxics chemicals; and second,
biennial reporting will make it impossible to track actual
emissions in communities (or by facilities) from year to
year (As noted above, the final change dropped the change
to biennial reporting).
GAO - More Criticisms . In a review by the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) released in February of this
year, GAO concluded the following regarding the federal
changes:
"We believe that the TRI reporting changes will likely
have a significant impact on information available to
the public about dozens of toxic chemicals?.We estimate
that 302 [facilities] in California would no longer
have to report any quantitative information to the
TRI?.and that California could have 33 percent fewer
chemical reports."
Prior Legislation .
AB 2490 (Ruskin), 2006-2007 Session a similar bill passed
the Senate Floor 21-13 on August 28, 2006, but was vetoed
by the Governor in September, 2006. The veto message
stated, "This bill is overly broad, premature and
duplicative."
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/22/07)
Breast Cancer Action
Breast Cancer Fund
Environmental Working Group
League of Women Voters of California
Planning and Conservation League
Sierra Club California
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/22/07)
California Chamber of Commerce
California Council for Environmental and Economic Reliance
AB 833
Page
6
California Manufacturers and Technology Association
Silicon Valley Leadership Group
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
this bill ensures that Californians will always have access
to information regarding the hazards posed by toxic
releases near their homes, schools, and workplaces. This
bill is in response to the recent federal regulations that
reduced information requirements for the federal act. It
is also needed to ensure that separate from federal
administrative actions, California will maintain access to
information about chemical releases.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : According to the California
Chamber of Commerce, "The Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has recently finalized changes to the TRI program
that are intended to streamline the reporting process for
certain types of chemicals that are used in smaller
amounts. Specifically, the new rules allow the use of a
simpler Form A instead of a more complicated Form R in
certain circumstances. The Form A can be used under the
new rules if the chemical is not persistent,
bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT). The Form A can also be
used for certain PBT chemicals if there have been no
discharges and the PBT chemical is used under certain
amounts. These changes simply allow for a more
cost-effective form of reporting under certain
circumstances.
"The "trigger" for California creating a state TRI program
is very subjective. Some may look at certain changes as
"less stringent", while others see those changes as a more
effective method of managing the program that indeed
reduces the use of some chemicals. For example, the
federal TRI program website indicates that the changes
allow the use of Form A for PBT chemicals when there is no
discharge involved because they feel that this would in
fact reduce discharge and provide an incentive to use
preferred practices such as recycling or treatment.
"AB 833 (Ruskin) would require California to create a
duplicative TRI program in the event that the federal
program is amended, repealed or in any way made less
stringent. The federal TRI program has been in effect for
AB 833
Page
7
years and has proven to be an effective tool for releasing
information to the public. Creating a duplicative program
would be costly for the California economy and would
provide no additional public benefit."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Berg, Brownley,
Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter, Coto, Davis, De La
Torre, De Leon, DeSaulnier, Dymally, Eng, Evans, Feuer,
Fuentes, Hancock, Hayashi, Hernandez, Huffman, Jones,
Karnette, Krekorian, Laird, Leno, Levine, Lieber, Lieu,
Ma, Mendoza, Mullin, Nava, Parra, Portantino, Price,
Richardson, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Smyth, Solorio,
Swanson, Torrico, Wolk, Nunez
NOES: Aghazarian, Anderson, Benoit, Berryhill, Blakeslee,
DeVore, Duvall, Emmerson, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani,
Garcia, Garrick, Horton, Houston, Huff, Keene, La Malfa,
Maze, Nakanishi, Niello, Plescia, Sharon Runner, Silva,
Spitzer, Strickland, Tran, Villines, Walters
NO VOTE RECORDED: Cook, Jeffries, Soto
TSM:do 8/23/07 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****