BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2490
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 18, 2006
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY AND TOXIC MATERIALS
Ira Ruskin, Chair
AB 2490 (Ruskin) - As Introduced: February 24, 2006
SUBJECT : California Toxic Release Inventory Program
SUMMARY : Establishes a California Toxic Release Inventory
Program that mirrors the federal Environmental Protection
Agency's (EPA) Toxic Release Inventory (TRI).
Specifically, this bill : Makes findings and declarations about
the federal TRI and grants authority to the California
Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) to develop regulations
by January, 2007 to establish the California Toxic Release
Inventory Program. This program shall impose requirements for
California that are the same or more stringent than those
currently in the Federal TRI.
EXISTING LAW
Authorizes Cal-EPA to request any business to submit the
information required to be submitted in the toxic chemical
release form pursuant to the federal Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA). Existing law
prohibits the Cal-EPA from requiring the form from certain
businesses or in an amount lower than the applicable threshold
amount specified in EPCRA.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
Background
According to the federal EPA, the goal of TRI is to empower
citizens, through information, to hold companies and local
governments accountable in terms of how toxic chemicals are
managed. In 1984 a deadly cloud of methyl isocyanate killed
thousands of people in Bhopal, India. Shortly thereafter, there
was a serious chemical release at a sister plant in West
Virginia. These incidents underscored demands by industrial
workers and communities for information on hazardous materials.
Public interest and environmental organizations around the
AB 2490
Page 2
country accelerated demands for information on toxic chemicals
being released "beyond the fence line" -- outside of the
facility. Against this background, the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) was enacted in 1986.
EPCRA's primary purpose is to inform communities and citizens of
chemical hazards in their areas. Sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA
require businesses to report the locations and quantities of
chemicals stored on-site to state and local governments in order
to help communities prepare to respond to chemical spills and
similar emergencies. EPCRA Section 313 requires EPA and the
States to annually collect data on releases and transfers of
certain toxic chemicals from industrial facilities, and make the
data available to the public in the TRI. In 1990 Congress
passed the Pollution Prevention Act which required that
additional data on waste management and source reduction
activities be reported under TRI.
The TRI program has expanded significantly since its inception
in 1987. EPA has issued rules to roughly double the number of
chemicals included in the TRI to approximately 650. Seven new
industry sectors have been added to expand coverage
significantly beyond the original covered industries, i.e.
manufacturing industries. Most recently, the EPA has reduced
the reporting thresholds for certain persistent, bioaccumulative
and toxic (PBT) chemicals in order to be able to provide
additional information to the public on these chemicals.
Armed with TRI data, communities have more power to hold
companies accountable and make informed decisions about how
toxic chemicals are to be managed. The data often spurs
companies to focus on their chemical management practices since
they are being measured and made public. In addition, the data
serves as a rough indicator of environmental progress over time.
Proposed Changes to the federal TRI Program
In October, 2005, the EPA proposed changes in regulations
governing TRI that would drastically reduce the amount and types
of information available. The EPA is calling the proposed
rulemaking the "Burden Reduction Proposed Rule" which includes:
raising the baseline reporting threshold for chemicals from the
current 500 pounds to 5,000 pounds; reducing the reporting for
some of the most dangerous chemicals known as PBT, or
persistent, bio-accumulative, and toxic (such as lead and
AB 2490
Page 3
mercury); and reducing the reporting frequency for some
polluters from once a year to once every two years. The comment
period on this proposed rulemaking closed on January 13, 2006.
The EPA is currently reviewing the comments.
On March 27, Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Senator James
Jeffords (I-VT) and Senator Olympia Snowe, (R-ME) wrote a letter
requesting that the General Accountability Office examine the
extent that EPA evaluated, prior to proposing various reforms to
the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) program, how the proposals
would impact the use of TRI data by EPA offices, other members
of the federal agencies, and the States.
Need for the bill
There was a tremendous reaction to the proposed federal
regulations. Dozens of state (including the author) and federal
legislators wrote letters to the federal EPA in opposition to
the proposed regulations. The Attorney's Generals from 12
states, including California, wrote letters in opposition.
Environmental justice groups and environmental groups are also
opposed.
According to the author, this bill is in response to the
proposed federal regulations and to ensure that, independent of
the action of the federal government, California will retain the
current level of reporting requirements.
Related Legislation
SB 1478, (Speier, 2006), also proposes to establish a California
TRI program.
Suggested Amendment
The author may wish to consider the following amendment to
clarify the intent of AB 2490 to mirror the federal TRI as it is
currently implemented. On page 4, line 12, delete the words "or
more stringent than" as shown below.
Section 25546.3 On or before July 1, 2007, the agency shall
establish the California Toxic Release Inventory Program. The
program shall impose requirements within this state that are the
same as or more stringent than, the federal act, including, but
not limited to, any regulation adopted pursuant to the federal
AB 2490
Page 4
act that is in effect on January 1, 2006, and not as the
regulation may be amended or revised after that date.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Sierra Club California
Clean Water Action
Breast Cancer Action
Planning and Conservation League
Opposition
California Chamber of Commerce
Western States Petroleum Association
Analysis Prepared by : Caroll Mortensen / E.S. & T.M. / (916)
319-3965