BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 304|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 304
Author: Williams (D)
Amended: 7/2/13 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE : 9-0, 6/26/13
AYES: Hill, Gaines, Calderon, Corbett, Fuller, Hancock,
Jackson, Leno, Pavley
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 7-0, 8/30/13
AYES: De Le�n, Walters, Gaines, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 78-0, 5/30/13 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Pesticides: toxic air contaminant: control
measures
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill sets a two-year deadline for the Director
of the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) to adopt control
measures for pesticides listed as a "toxic air contaminant"
(TAC) or Hazardous Air Pollutant Toxic Air Contaminants
(HAPTACs), to protect human health.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1.Defines TAC as an air pollutant that may cause or contribute
CONTINUED
AB 304
Page
2
to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious illness,
or that may pose a present or potential hazard to human
health. Specifies that pesticides that have been identified
as HAPs pursuant to federal law shall be identified by the
director as TACs.
2.Requires the director, in consultation with the Department of
Health Services (DHS) and the Air Resources Board (ARB), to
evaluate, as specified, the health effects of pesticides that
may be or are emitted into the ambient air of California and
that may be determined to be a TAC which poses a present or
potential threat to human health.
3.Requires the director to determine, in consultation with DHS,
the ARB, and the air pollution control districts or air
quality management districts in the affected counties, the
need for and appropriate degree of control measures for each
pesticide listed as a TAC.
This bill:
1.Requires the Director of DPR (Director) to adopt control
measures to protect human health from TACs within two years of
the director's determination that control measures are
necessary. For any TAC which was determined to need control
measures before January 1, 2014, the two-year period begins
January 1, 2014.
2.Requires that HAPTACs be subject to the same risk management
assessment as a TAC to determine if control measures are
needed, and if so, what those measures should be. The
adoption of control measures for HAPTACs must also occur
within two years of the determination that such measures are
needed.
3.Requires the Director, if the Director is unable to adopt
control measures within two years, to submit a report to the
Legislature explain the reasons for the delay. The Director
must also report on any pesticide that he/she determines no
longer needs control measures because the pesticide has been
banned or there has been a dramatic decline in use.
4.Makes the Director's written determination and any other
written comments made by the consulting agencies available to
CONTINUED
AB 304
Page
3
the public.
Background
Overview of DPR's Toxic Air Contaminant Program . DPR's process
for regulating pesticides as TACs follows a procedure that can
be summarized in six steps, listed below. DPR refers to steps
A) through D) as the risk assessment phase, and steps E) and F)
as the risk management phase.
A. DPR, in consultation with the Office of Environmental
Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and ARB, prioritizes
pesticides for risk assessment based on how much of the
pesticide is used and sold in California, its persistence
in the atmosphere, and health effects information.
B. DPR requests ARB to conduct monitoring studies to
measure the air concentrations of pesticides. For each
candidate pesticide, ARB collects samples near an
application site and in ambient air of nearby communities.
C. Continuing the evaluation for each pesticide, the law
requires DPR to prepare a report, as specified.
The draft report is peer-reviewed by OEHHA and the ARB and is
made available for public review. Based on the results of these
reviews, DPR scientists revise the draft report as appropriate,
which includes OEHHA's separate findings. The draft undergoes a
peer review for scientific soundness by the TAC Scientific
Review Panel (SRP). The SRP is a panel of experts representing
a range of scientific disciplines that hold, or have held,
academic or equivalent appointments at universities and their
affiliates in California.
D. DPR receives a recommendation from the SRP on whether
the pesticide meets the criteria for listing as a TAC. If
the pesticide meets the criteria, DPR adopts a regulation
listing it as a TAC.
E. Consulting with OEHHA, ARB and local air pollution
control districts, DPR examines the need for and suitable
degree of controls.
F. If reductions in exposure are needed, DPR develops
CONTINUED
AB 304
Page
4
control measures (also called mitigation measures) to
reduce emissions to levels that adequately protect public
health. At present, there is no statutory limit on the
amount of time from when a risk management decision is made
and control measures adopted. DPR must use the best
practicable control techniques available.
Differences in how TACs and HAPs are treated under the TAC
program . Chemicals the federal government classifies as HAPs
are administratively listed as TACs and not subject to the
evaluation and control provisions of the TAC statute. Such
chemicals are referred to as HAPTACs. Under existing statute,
DPR is not required to develop control measures for the HAPTACs;
this bill adds that requirement.
Health effects of pesticides listed as TACs . DPR maintains a
Pesticide Illness Surveillance Program database that tracks
cases of illness attributable to pesticides. The database lists
686 cases of illness definitely or probably due to drift of
chloropicrin in California from 2000 - 2010, and five due to the
drift of sulfuryl fluoride. These two pesticides are listed as
TACs, but DPR's final control measures are still pending.
Present timeline for adoption of control measures . Eight
chemicals are listed as TACs because DPR's evaluation process
determined they met TAC criteria. DPR has adopted control
measures for only one of the listed chemicals: Methyl
isothiocyanate (MITC) and other pesticides that generate MITC.
The Director of DPR recommended that MITC be listed as a TAC in
2002; control measures were adopted eight years later, in 2010.
Two chemicals have control measures pending. The first, sulfuryl
fluoride, was recommended for listing as a TAC in 2006; DPR is
awaiting further data before proceeding with control measures.
Chloropicrin was recommended for listing in 2010; control
measures are still in progress. The remaining five TACs are not
being considered for control measures because they are rarely
used, have an inactive registration or their registration for
use in California is being cancelled. Of the ten agricultural
pesticides that are listed as TACs because they are federal
HAPTACs, four have control measures in place and six do not.
New activities at DPR . At present, DPR is in the process of
commissioning a study from the National Academy of Science to
review the process and scientific methodology DPR employs in
CONTINUED
AB 304
Page
5
risk assessments. The final report is expected approximately at
the end of 2014. In the 2013-14 Budget, the Legislature
approved a total of ten new staff members for DPR, five of whom
DPR can assign duties at their discretion.
Prior Legislation
AB 1176 (Williams, 2011) would have required DPR to adhere to a
180-day deadline for specified steps in the TAC process and
required DPR to adopt control measures for at least two TACs
every year. The bill failed passage in the Assembly Agriculture
Committee. The bill was substantially amended to include
language similar to AB 304, but again failed passage in the
Assembly Agriculture Committee in 2012.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
No additional costs to DPR for the determination of control
measures for TACs.
Annual cost pressures up to $120,000 through 2016 from the DPR
Fund (special) for the OEHHA consulting responsibilities to
DPR regarding TACs.
Annual cost pressures up to $174,000 through 2016 from the DPR
Fund for the ARB consulting responsibilities to DPR regarding
TACs.
Minor and absorbable costs to the Department of Food and
Agriculture for its consulting responsibilities to DPR
regarding TACs.
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/30/13)
American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
Breast Cancer Fund
California Association of Professional Scientists
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
Californians for Pesticide Reform
Center for Environmental Health
Central Valley Air Quality Coalition
Clean Water Action
CONTINUED
AB 304
Page
6
Coalition for Clean Air
Organizacion en California de Lideres Campesinas, Inc.
Pesticide Action Network
Sierra Club California
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author, "In 1983, the
California Legislature passed the TAC Act with the intent of
protecting public health from toxic airborne pollutants,
including pesticides. However, California's law to protect the
public from airborne pesticides-most notably fumigants-is not
functioning as intended. Nearly three decades later, DPR has
listed seven pesticides and one product that is the result of
pesticide breakdown. This means DPR has listed eight products
out of 900+ pesticides registered in the state. The
exceptionally low rate at which pesticides have been listed is
concerning.
Of even greater concern, is the fact that DPR has taken far too
long to adopt mitigation measures for the listed products. For
example, the fumigant breakdown product MITC was declared a TAC
in 2002; it took eight years for DPR to issue suggested use
restrictions. What's worse, these restrictions only partially
mitigate exposure to MITC. We know that MITC is still a problem
because drift of MITC was responsible for 612 illnesses between
1997 and 2002 (DPR Pesticide Illness Database).
AB 304 would require the director of the DPR to adopt control
measures for pesticides determined to be TACs within two years
of the department determining that additional mitigation
measures are necessary. This will provide a definitive time
frame for DPR to adopt mitigation measures for TACs and HAPTACs.
Properly implemented and enforced, the TAC Act could do a
tremendous amount to reduce pesticide air pollution. AB 304
does this by creating an enforceable timeline by which DPR shall
adopt mitigation measures meant to protect public health."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 78-0, 5/30/13
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Bigelow, Bloom,
Blumenfield, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown,
Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau, Ch�vez, Chesbro, Conway,
Cooley, Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Fox,
Frazier, Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon,
Gorell, Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Roger Hern�ndez,
Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Logue, Lowenthal,
CONTINUED
AB 304
Page
7
Maienschein, Mansoor, Medina, Melendez, Mitchell, Morrell,
Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson,
Perea, V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas,
Skinner, Stone, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski,
Wilk, Williams, Yamada, John A. P�rez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Holden, Vacancy
RM:ej 8/31/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED