BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 21
                                                                  Page  1


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
          AB 21 (Bonnie Lowenthal)
          As Amended  April 2, 2009
          Majority vote 

           AGRICULTURE         5-1         ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY              
               5-0                        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Galgiani, Arambula, Ma,   |Ayes:|Chesbro, Davis, Feuer,    |
          |     |Mendoza, Yamada           |     |Monning, Ruskin           |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |Nays:|Fuller                    |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           APPROPRIATIONS      12-5                                        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|De Leon, Ammiano, Charles     | |                          |
          |     |Calderon, Davis, Fuentes,     | |                          |
          |     |Hall, John A. Perez, Price,   | |                          |
          |     |Skinner, Solorio, Torlakson,  | |                          |
          |     |Krekorian                     | |                          |
          |     |                              | |                          |
          |-----+------------------------------+-+--------------------------|
          |Nays:|Nielsen, Duvall, Harkey,      | |                          |
          |     |Miller,                       | |                          |
          |     |Audra Strickland              | |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 

           SUMMARY  :  Requires the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR)  
          to review a report by the United Nations Technology and Economic  
          Assessment Panel (TEAP) on alternative and emission control  
          technologies for methyl bromide and submit comments to the  
          Legislature.  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  








                                                                  AB 21
                                                                  Page  2


            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 DPR to review a report by TEAP on alternative and  
            emission control technologies for methyl bromide and submit  
            comments to the Legislature.

          4)The review and comments on the TEAP report by DPR shall  
            include comments on the findings of the panel, focusing on  
            those issues that are relevant to California, including:

             a)   Alternatives to methyl bromide use;

             b)   Options or possibilities for recapture, containment, and  
               recycling of methyl bromide; and,

             c)   Technologies that could reduce or prevent emissions.

           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 United States (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,  








                                                                  AB 21
                                                                  Page  3


          vans, or rail cars are normally industrial use."

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, costs associated with DPR reviewing the assessment  
          and submitting that review to the Legislature would likely be  
          less than $50,000.

           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 U.S. 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  
          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.  Exceptions to  
          the phaseout are uses for quarantine or governmental control,  
          critical and emergency uses.  

          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.








                                                                  AB 21
                                                                 Page  4



           
          Analysis Prepared by  :    Jim Collin / AGRI. / (916) 319-2084 
                                                                FN: 0001049