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