BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                  AB 2738
                                                                  Page  1


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
          AB 2738 (Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee)
          As Amended  May 23, 2014
          Majority vote 

           ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY      6-1   APPROPRIATIONS      13-0        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Alejo, Dahle, Bloom,      |Ayes:|Gatto, Bocanegra,         |
          |     |Gomez, Lowenthal, Ting    |     |Bradford,                 |
          |     |                          |     |Ian Calderon, Campos,     |
          |     |                          |     |Eggman, Gomez, Holden,    |
          |     |                          |     |Linder, Pan, Quirk,       |
          |     |                          |     |Ridley-Thomas, Weber      |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |Nays:|Donnelly                  |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           SUMMARY  :  Contains technical and non-controversial revisions to  
          hazardous materials and safe drinking water provisions statutes.  
           Specifically,  this bill  : 

          1)Modifies the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of  
            1986 (Proposition 65) as follows:

             a)   Clarifies the provisions of Proposition 65 that require  
               the noticing party to inform the alleged violator of his or  
               her right to cure the violation.  

             b)   Specifies that the party alleging a Proposition 65  
               violation must send the notice of special compliance  
               informing an alleged violator of the right to correct the  
               violation, if any of the alleged violations in the 60-day  
               notice are subject to the right to cure.

          2)Modifies the use of funds generated from the fees paid by  
            applications for loans from the Safe Drinking Water State  
            Revolving Fund (SDWSRF) as follows:

             a)   Authorizes the use of the administrative fee charged to  
               recipients of SDWSRF loans to reimburse the Department of  
               Public Health (DPH) for the costs of reviewing  
               applications, and the loan disbursement fee to reimburse  
               the DPH for all other costs. 








                                                                  AB 2738
                                                                  Page  2



             b)   Authorizes the DPH to annually adjust the fee schedule.

          3)Removes duplicate references to the American National  
            Standards Institute (ANSI) for the DPH Point-of-Use Water  
            Treatment Device Certification.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, this bill would result in an increased annual cost to  
          DPH in the $200,000 range (SDWSRF) to calculate, review, and  
          track application and loan disbursement fees.  

           COMMENTS  :   

          Need for the bill:  This bill provides for a series of  
          technical, corrective, and non-substantive modifications to the  
          hazardous materials and drinking water laws.  The issues  
          addressed in this bill were the result of legislation passed in  
          2013 that include AB 227 (Gatto), Chapter 581, related to  
          Proposition 65, AB 21 (Alejo), Chapter 628, related to emergency  
          drinking water grants, and AB 119 (Environmental Safety and  
          Toxic Materials Committee), Chapter 403, related to point-of-use  
          water treatment devices.

          Proposition 65, AB 227.  AB 227 changed the enforcement  
          provisions of Proposition 65 by limiting recovery by private  
          citizen enforcement action for specified types of exposure to  
          chemicals causing cancer or birth defects or other reproductive  
          harm in those circumstances when failure to provide clear and  
          reasonable warning has been remedied and a penalty has been  
          paid.

          The technical amendments in this bill were suggested based on an  
          initial implementation of 
          AB 227 by the California Department of Justice.  The technical  
          amendment clarifies that the noticing party must immediately  
          inform the alleged violator of the right to cure the violation,  
          and not wait until after sending the 60-day notice.  The second  
          technical amendment to Proposition 65 makes it clear that the  
          noticing party must send the notice of special compliance  
          informing an alleged violator of the right to cure if any of the  
          alleged violations in the 60-day notice are the specific types  
          of exposures subject to AB 227.  Leaving the current statutory  
          language in place creates a potential unintended loophole by  








                                                                  AB 2738
                                                                  Page  3


          letting the noticing party allege at least one violation that is  
          not subject to AB 227 to avoid the entire process.
          
          Safe Drinking Water Small Community Emergency Grant Fund, AB 21.  
            AB 21 established the Safe Drinking Water Small Community  
          Emergency Grant Fund which is financed from a fee charged to  
          loan recipients in lieu of a similar amount of interest.  The  
          fees collected are provided to disadvantaged communities in the  
          form of grants to improve drinking water safety.  This bill  
          provides that fees collected may be used for prescribed  
          administrative costs of providing assistance under these  
          provisions, to the extent consistent with federal law.
          
          Certification of water treatment devices, AB 119.  AB 119  
          provided that a device may be sold, provided it meets the ANSI  
          standard or it had previously been approved by the DPH.  The  
          requirements of Health and Safety Code Section 116845, includes  
          the ANSI standards as well as alternative requirements for  
          previously approved devices. 

          The current inclusion of the ANSI requirement in addition to the  
          posting on the DPH Web page duplicates the requirements that  
          must be met in order to be placed on the DPH Web site.  The  
          provisions of this bill make it clear that previously approved  
          devices would be allowed to remain on the DPH Web site and  
          therefore, be authorized for sale in California.


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Bob Fredenburg / E.S. & T.M. / (916)  
          319-3965 


                                                                FN: 0003641