BILL ANALYSIS AB 21 Page 1 Date of Hearing: March 25, 2009 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE Cathleen Galgiani, Chair AB 21 (Lowenthal) - As Amended: March 18, 2009 SUBJECT : Pesticides: methyl bromide: study and report. SUMMARY : Makes legislative findings and declarations; requires the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) to review existing and emerging emission control technologies to reduce specifically methyl bromide emissions; requires, by July 1, 2011 a report to the Legislature detailing availability of such control devices and techniques as specified. Specifically, this bill : 1)States the economic benefits of ports, listing the employment and wages, contributions by the seaport business to the economy, and revenues at a national level. 2)States that California seaports are critical to this state's economic health, that they handle one-fifth of the nation's international trade, that some trading partners require the use of methyl bromide on products, describes methyl bromide and its historic and current use and that it depletes ozone. Further states that ethyl bromide poses a threat to humans, animals and the environment, that its use is under careful and appropriate regulation, and those who perform work with it have the most stringent health and safety requirements possible. 3)Requires the DPR to examine existing and emerging emission control technologies for reducing industrial methyl bromide emissions and to report to the Legislature by July 1, 2011. Requires the report to detail available emission reducing control devises or techniques for each system to include, but not be limited to, the following: a) Process or operation, including installation, operation, scientific process and waste disposal; b) Locations where the systems are used in California and how long they have been used; c) Theoretical emission reduction or emission reduction AB 21 Page 2 achieved in practice if applicable; d) Type, quality, and toxicity of waste produced; e) Manufacturer of system; and, f) Cost of system. EXISTING LAW requires the Director (Director) of DPR to adopt regulations that govern the use of methyl bromide and chloropicrin as field fumigants, and authorizes the Director to prescribe the time when, and the conditions under which, methyl bromide and chloropicrin may be used in different areas of the state. DPR and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have classified methyl bromide as a "Restricted Use Pesticide" i.e., a pesticide that may be purchased and used only by certified applicators or persons under their direct supervision. Special use permits are required for the use of methyl bromide and it may only be used under specified conditions, with required buffers, supervision and other stated conditions. California Code of Regulations (3CCR Section 6000) define industrial use as "use within the confines of, or on property necessary for, the operation of factories, processing plants, packinghouses, or similar facilities, or use for or in a manufacturing, mining, or chemical process. In California, industrial use does not include use on rights-of-way. Post-harvest commodity fumigations at facilities or on trucks, vans, or rail cars are normally industrial use." FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown. This bill is keyed "fiscal" and will be referred to Assembly Appropriations Committee. COMMENTS : Methyl bromide comes from both natural and man-made sources. It naturally occurs in the oceans and is also produced in small quantities by certain terrestrial plants. Manufactured sources are used for agricultural and industrial purposes as a fumigant against a wide variety of pests including spiders, mites, fungi, plants, insects, nematodes, and rodents It was introduced as a pesticide in 1932, and was first registered in the United States in 1961. Methyl bromide is recognized as a potent ozone depleting substance. The Montreal Protocol is an international treaty designed to protect the ozone layer by phasing out the production of a AB 21 Page 3 number of substances believed to be responsible for ozone depletion. The treaty was opened for signature on September 1987 and entered into force on January 1, 1989, and has since gone through seven revisions. Of those ozone-depleting substances scheduled for phaseout, methyl bromide began at a 25% reduction in 1999, increased to 50% in 2001, 70% in 2003 and was 100% in 2005. It is recognized that many parties rely on methyl bromide for trade and conservation of biodiviersty uses, and will use it until viable alternatives become available and acceptable for quarantine and pre-shipment use. Exception to the phaseout are uses for quarantine or governmental control, critical and emergency uses. To qualify for a critcal or emergency use, the United Nations Technical and Ecomomic Assessment Panel (TEAP) must have a request from the signatory country stating the critical use, amounts, and locations. The TEAP must approve all critical use and bases approval upon there being no economic or technically feasiable alternatives to methyl bromide. The most recent set of 'critical use' exemptions in the US include uses for tomato, strawberry, and ornamental shrub growers, and fumigation of ham/pork products. According to the author's office, the focus of AB 21 is due to methyl bromide's global warming potential and that the majority of its uses continue to be vented into the atmosphere. Further, even though residents near commodity fumigation facilities are safe, trace amounts of the product contribute to poor ambient air quality in communities near the ports; hence, the state's need to examine any and all technologies that can reduce or eliminate methyl bromide emissions. According to industry sources, there are three closed methods currently used internationally, only one method is used in the U.S., known as the Great Lakes method and is found in three locations - two small units at airports in Texas and a larger unit in Watsonville, California. There is an alternative system being proposed for construction at the Port of Stockton. Other systems at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach may have been used in the past and have been abandoned. There are an estimated 10 sites at the ports that have been approved for fumigation purposes. Federal approval for use is based upon single treatments, while DPR's approval is based upon all uses and requires more stringent buffers and venting compliance. AB 21 Page 4 TEAP has been in the process of developing a report for the next convening of the Montreal Protocol signers in November 2009, with a pre-report due July 2009. This report is to include the technical and economic availability of alternative substances and technologies for the main methyl bromide uses, by volume, and of technologies for methyl bromide recovery, containment and recycling. This report is to highlight areas where sufficient information indicates opportunities for reductions in methyl bromide use or emissions for quarantine and pre-shipment purposes, including technically and economically feasible alternatives and technologies for recapture and destruction of methyl bromide, among other requirements. The committee may wish to consider, in lieu of a DPR report as described in AB 21, to have DPR review and comment on the TEAP report, forwarding the TEAP report and their comments to the Legislature. This could provide cost savings to DPR. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO Clean Water Action Coalition for Clean Air Consumer Attorneys of California International Longshore & Warehouse Union, AFL-CIO Pesticide Watch South Coast Air Quality Management District Opposition California Woman for Agriculture Western Plant Health Association Analysis Prepared by : Jim Collin / AGRI. / (916) 319-2084