BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



          SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                             Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
                                2015 - 2016  Regular 

          SB 47 (Hill) - Environmental health:  synthetic turf
          
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |                                                                 |
          |                                                                 |
          |                                                                 |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
          |                                |                                |
          |Version: March 25, 2015         |Policy Vote: E.Q. 5 - 0         |
          |                                |                                |
          |--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
          |                                |                                |
          |Urgency: No                     |Mandate: No                     |
          |                                |                                |
          |--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
          |                                |                                |
          |Hearing Date: April 13, 2015    |Consultant: Marie Liu           |
          |                                |                                |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


          This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.


          Bill  
          Summary:  SB 47 would require the Office of Environmental Health  
          Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) to conduct a study by July 1, 2017  
          analyzing potential adverse health impacts from synthetic turf  
          made from waste tires. This bill would also prohibit the  
          awarding of grants or other funding assistance for the  
          manufacturing or installation of synthetic turf made from waste  
          tires.


          Fiscal  
          Impact:  
           One-time minimum costs of $6.092 million from the Tire  
            Recycling Management Fund (special/General Fund) OEHHA for the  
            required study.
           One-time costs of $81,000 from the fund in FY 2016-17 to DTSC  
            for collaborating with OEHHA for the required study.


          Background:  The California Tire Recycling Act requires the Department of  







          SB 47 (Hill)                                           Page 1 of  
          ?
          
          
          Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) to manage and  
          regulate waste tires within the state and requires the  
          collection of $1.75 for each new tire purchased in the state.  
          Pursuant to PRC §42889, of the $1.75 per tire collected, $1 is  
          deposited into the Tire Recycling Management Fund for oversight,  
          enforcement, and market development grants related to waste tire  
          management and recycling. One of the grant programs is for  
          Tire-Derived Products (TDP), which provides funding to certain  
          entities for tire-derived products made from 100 percent  
          California generated waste tires. According to CalRecycle's  
          webpage, the categories generally fall into one of three  
          categories: agricultural/landscape, recreational, or  
          transportation. The recreational category includes fields,  
          playgrounds, and running tracks. CalRecycle is required to have  
          a five-year plan for spending of the fund, which is updated  
          every two years, that establishes goals and priorities for the  
          waste tire program. 
          On January 1, 2024, the per-tire charge will be reduced to $0.75  
          and the fund and its uses sunset. 




          Proposed Law:  
            This bill would require OEHHA, in consultation with  
          CalRecycle, the state Department of Public Health (DPH), and the  
          Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) to provide to the  
          Legislature by July 1, 2017 an analysis of the potential adverse  
          health impacts from synthetic turf. Specifically the study is  
          required to have the following elements:
          1.A hazard analysis of exposure to specific chemicals that may  
            be found in synthetic turf.


          2.An analysis of whether chemicals found in tires have negative  
            human health impacts when used in indoor and outdoor fields  
            and parks, considering varying exposure pathways and under  
            various weather conditions.


          3.Biomonitoring of children or adults exposed to synthetic turf  
            to determine potential human health impacts.










          SB 47 (Hill)                                           Page 2 of  
          ?
          
          
          4.An examination of the potential for synthetic turf to cause  
            adverse health impacts including non-Hodgkin lymphoma,  
            testicular cancer, prostate cancer, sarcoma cancer, and  
            leukemia.


          5.An examination of the health impacts associated with synthetic  
            turf fields and playgrounds of varying age.


          6.An evaluation of the differences in the manufacturing of  
            synthetic turf and different turf, field, and playground  
            products, including those that don't use recycled tires and  
            how those differences may affect health impacts.


          7.An evaluation of the different health impacts between fields  
            and playground covered with synthetic turf and non-synthetic  
            turf.


          8.A review of current research on the health impacts of  
            synthetic turf.


          9.Research to fill any data gaps.


          10.An examination of the health impacts of exposures to many low  
            level volatile organic compounds and polycyclic aromatic  
            hydrocarbons found in synthetic turf.


          11.An analysis that compares the temperatures on synthetic turf,  
            non-waste tire turf, and grass turf during high-temperature  
            periods and the impact that those differences may have on  
            health.


          This bill would prohibit any public or private school or local  
          government from installing or contracting for the installation  
          of a new field or playground surface made from synthetic turf   
          unless: (1) the bid specifications include at least one option  
          that does not use crumb rubber from waste tires, (2) the entity  








          SB 47 (Hill)                                           Page 3 of  
          ?
          
          
          receives at least one estimate from a company that does not use  
          crumb rubber from waste tires in its synthetic turf, and (3) the  
          entity holds at least one public meeting regarding the  
          installation of synthetic turf to receive public comment.


          This bill would prohibit the state from awarding financial  
          assistance to private entities, schools, or local governments  
          that would offset the cost of manufacturing or installing  
          synthetic turf. 


          This bill would explicitly expand the existing tire recycling  
          program to include grants to businesses that produce crumb  
          rubber from waste tires in order to find alternative markets  
          other than fields and playgrounds for their products.


          For the purposes of the grant and study provisions in this bill,  
          synthetic turf is defined to include any material that contains  
          recycled crumb rubber from waste tires and is used to cover or  
          surface a field or playground. 


          This bill would explicitly specify that a study to analyze the  
          potential health impacts of using waste tires in crumb rubber is  
          an allowable use of the fund.




          Related  
          Legislation:  AB 1179 (Bocanegra) Chapter 589, Statutes of 2014  
          gave CalRecycle specific authority to award grants to public  
          works projects that used tire-derived products, including  
          recycled tire lumber, to create parklets and greenways. AB 1179  
          required that priority be given to projects in disadvantaged  
          communities.


          Staff  
          Comments:  This bill would require a detailed report regarding potential  
          health impacts associated with using crumb rubber from waste  
          tires in fields and playgrounds. This report is estimated to  








          SB 47 (Hill)                                           Page 4 of  
          ?
          
          
          cost at least $6.173 million with $6.092 million needed by  
          OEHHA, the lead of the study, and $81,000 by DTSC. CalRecycle  
          anticipates that any costs to collaborate on the study would be  
          minor and absorbable. There would also be only minor costs to  
          DPH, assuming DPH just acts as a reviewing body (discussed  
          further below). 

          This cost is for all aspects of the report. However, OEHHA notes  
          that of the 11 required study tasks, only seven could be  
          finished in time for July 1, 2017 report due date. Specifically,  
          the biomonitoring, epidemiological studies, and additional  
          research necessitated by requirements 3, 4, and 9 (as enumerated  
          in the "Proposed Law" of this analysis) would require at least  
          three years to complete. These longer term elements of the  
          report attribute for $4.852 million of the study costs. Thus  
          should this bill be passed, $1.321 million of the costs ($1.24  
          million to OEHHA and $81,000 to DTSC) would likely be incurred  
          in FY 2016-17. The remaining $4.852 million of the study cost  
          would start to be incurred in FY 2016-17, but would be spread  
          out over at least three years.

          Staff notes that the costs of biomonitoring study may vary  
          significantly based on design study, and thus the estimated  
          report costs should be considered a minimum. For just the  
          biomonitoring requirement, OEHHA estimates that a "minimum  
          limited" study would cost $1.155 million over three years if  
          they led the study. However, the state has an existing  
          biomonitoring program, named Biomonitoring California, which is  
          a tri-governmental program led by DPH in collaboration with  
          OEHHA and DTSC. If the required biomonitoring study in this bill  
          was conducted similar to other "minimum effort" studies  
          conducted under Biomonitoring California, the estimated cost  
          would be $3.15 million. It is unclear what are the drivers for  
          this large difference in minimum cost estimates, but it may be  
          in part to different assumptions about access to equipment and  
          other lab resources. For example, in order to conduct the study  
          in three years, DPH estimates $780,000 in equipment and  
          equipment maintenance costs. These costs could potentially be  
          avoided by using existing resources, though it would  
          significantly extend the study's timeline. 

          The costs of the study would be borne by the fund, which  
          currently has a projected balance of $51 million. Additionally,  
          in FY 2017-18, the fund is anticipated to receive $27 million  








          SB 47 (Hill)                                           Page 5 of  
          ?
          
          
          from the General Fund as the final repayment for a General Fund  
          loan. Staff notes that while there is a large reserve in this  
          fund, the expenditures from this fund are outpacing revenues by  
          about $11 million per year. The additional costs as a result of  
          this bill would somewhat accelerate the date at which this fund  
          would drop below its prudent reserve. 

          This bill would prohibit the tire recycling program from issuing  
          grants that would financially assist with the manufacturing and  
          installation of synthetic turf made from waste tires for fields  
          and playgrounds. This prohibition would likely cause a  
          significant change the demand for CalRecycle's existing TDP  
          grant program as 13 of the 17 grants issued in the 2013-14 grant  
          year included the use of waste tires for a playground or field  
          for at least part of the grant project. However, should demand  
          drop for the TDP grant program, CalRecycle has administrative  
          authority to redirect the unused funds to its other tire  
          recycling grant programs. Thus, the grant prohibition provision  
          of the bill should not have any impact on state costs.

          This bill would establish bid requirements for any public or  
          private school or local government seeking to install a new  
          field or playground surface made from synthetic turf from waste  
          tires. As this requirement does not apply to the state nor is it  
          a mandate on local agencies, there are no state costs from this  
          provision of the bill. 


                                      -- END --