BILL ANALYSIS
SB 983
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 9, 2000
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY AND TOXIC MATERIALS
Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair
SB 983 (Bowen) - As Amended: August 7, 2000
SENATE VOTE : 37-0 (The measure has been substantially
amended since this vote)
SUBJECT : Hazardous substances: controlled substances responses
action
SUMMARY : Directs the Department of Toxic Substances Control
(DTSC) to develop regulations governing the cleanup of illegal
drug laboratories. Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires DTSC to adopt regulations, by January 1, 2002 that
set procedures and standards to be used by state and local
agencies conducting removal actions of a hazardous material
resulting from the manufacture of illegal controlled
substances. DTSC will consult with the Office of
Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) in developing
these standards.
1)Specifies that the regulations shall set a level of cleanup
that will protect the health and safety of future occupants of
the site.
EXISTING LAW
1)Charges DTSC with conducting the "gross removal" of an illegal
drug lab as an emergency response to cleanup hazardous
substances that pose an immediate threat to public health or
safety. This portion of the cleanup is paid for by general
fund expenditures. Over $11.5 million in general funds is
budgeted for removal actions this year.
1)Allows the state to take civil action to recover the expenses
incurred for law enforcement actions, seizing and destroying
of substances, or taking remedial action.
1)Places the ultimate responsibility of further cleanup of a
former drug lab on the property owner. Supervision of this
"deep-cleaning" or "remedial action" is generally left to
SB 983
Page 2
designated local agencies (such as health and human services
departments, environmental health divisions, hazardous
materials divisions, fire departments, etc.).
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown.
COMMENTS : This bill would require DTSC to develop and adopt
uniform procedures and standards for the cleanup of sites that
have been used (a) as a laboratory for manufacturing illegal
drugs or (b) as a dumping ground for materials and waste used by
manufactures.
1)Laboratories used to make substances such as methamphetamine
("meth labs") are frequently set up in residential areas.
These residential sites include houses, apartment buildings,
and even motels. The chemicals used in the manufacture of
illegal substances, such as meth, present a variety of
hazards, both during the manufacture and after closure of the
laboratory. The author cites a report from San Bernardino
County which recounts the case of two people, who unknowingly
were permitted to move into a home that was formerly a meth
lab, and they subsequently developed rashes over their bodies
and severe headaches.
1)The cleanup of sites that have been used as illicit
laboratories to make meth and other drugs is an issue of
growing concern in California. According to the Western
States Information Network (WSIN), over the past two years,
Californian law enforcement has carried out the following
actions:
1998: 1717 Clandestine Drug Lab Seizures
238 Dump Site Removals
1999: 2034 Clandestine Drug Lab
Seizures
386 Dump Site Removals
1)The author asserts that, while state and local agencies may
possess the legal authority to insist that a property owner
cleanup the site used as a drug lab, current law provides them
with no statewide cleanup guidance. Without established
SB 983
Page 3
procedures and standards, the author feels that innocent
people are at risk of being harmed from the residue that's
left behind by these chemicals when the properties are rented
or sold without being adequately decontaminated.
1)Does current approach for cleaning up drug laboratories need
to be improved?
Supporters of this bill feel that current coordination between
local law enforcement and local health departments is haphazard,
for instance:
a) Even though drug enforcement agencies are required by
law to inform local health officials within 24 hours of an
action that uncovers this type of contaminated property, it
can be weeks before they are notified. The author cites an
assessment by OEHHA which concludes that the local health
department generally isn't involved in the cleanup and is
concerned with the lengthy notification process.
b) In some counties, the local health department simply
provides property owners with a list of "certified
industrial hygienists." The extent to which a "certified
industrial hygienist" decides to cleanup a meth lab is
ultimately at his or her discretion.
c) Some local health departments feel that they have no
legal authority to compel a property owner cleanup their
property. The author feels that, as a general rule, local
governments do not use the regulatory authority they have
over the control of hazardous substances. Many "potential"
opportunities exist for local health agencies to manage the
cleanup of meth labs, including local ordinances and local
authority regarding land use and public health regulations.
One reason given for the reluctance of local agencies to
be more fully involved in the secondary cleanup of these
sites is that the local agencies do not have the funding
resources, nor the expertise, to develop such ordinances
individually.
1)What are the Health Risks Associated with A Former Meth Lab?
a) In California, there have been no official studies done
on the correlation between ill health and living on a
premise which was once a meth lab. Such a study might be
difficult as the manufacturing process varies with the
custom of the illegal manufacturer. The Alliance for Drug
Endangered Children Resource Center determined that
chemicals found in meth labs are associated with: cancer,
short-term and permanent brain damage, developmental and
SB 983
Page 4
growth problems in children and teens, reproductive system
toxicity, internal and external chemical burns, immune
system problems, heart problems, and respiratory system
problems.
b) Other states have "established" safe levels for meth lab
residue. For instance, Washington will allow up to 5
micrograms per square foot, while Oregon has set its level
at 0.5 micrograms per square foot.
1)Can something be done to assure that residential areas are
sufficiently cleaned up?
According to the author, by establishing statewide,
scientifically-based standards for acceptable drug lab cleanup
levels, DTSC will establish a program that designated local
health and environmental agencies could adopt and use. The
author also feels that it is important to adopt standards to
assure that any funding assistance given to local agencies to
carry out the remedial cleanup are effective.
1)The author contends that because existing law requires DTSC to
take the initial removal actions at the site of an illegal
drug lab, it seems only logical that it should be involved in
the remedial portion of the cleanup action as well.
Related Legislation
SB 1989 (Poochigian) Establishes a fund and program to carry out
the complete cleanup of illegal drug lab sites and restore the
property to the condition that existed prior to the drug lab
chemicals contaminated it. Generally exempts property owner
from cleanup responsibility absent specific findings. Source of
money for the fund is unidentified. This bill was held in
Senate Appropriations Committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
Hazpak, Inc.
Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office
Western Center on Law and Poverty
Opposition
SB 983
Page 5
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Michael B. Endicott / E.S. & T.M. / (916)
319-3965