BILL ANALYSIS
SB 759
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Senator S. Joseph Simitian, Chairman
2009-2010 Regular Session
BILL NO: SB 759
AUTHOR: Leno
AMENDED: April 16, 2009
FISCAL: Yes HEARING DATE: April 27, 2009
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT: Bruce Jennings
SUBJECT : AERIAL APPLICATIONS OF PESTICIDE: INERT
INGREDIENTS
SUMMARY :
Existing federal law :
1) Requires the manufacturers of pesticides or registrants to
submit specified information to the US Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to evaluate health and
environmental hazards, pursuant to the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Requires
registrants to report promptly any new evidence of adverse
effects of pesticides and authorizes EPA to require
registrants to conduct new studies to fill gaps in health
and environmental studies. As a result of a special review
EPA may conclude that registration is adequate, needs
amendment, or should be canceled.
2) Permits the unregistered use of pesticide products in
special circumstances, including "emergency exemptions"
from the provisions of FIFRA granted to federal or state
agencies if there is a virulent outbreak of a disease or
pest that cannot be controlled by registered products.
3) Defines an "active ingredient" as one that prevents,
destroys, repels or mitigates a pest, or is a plant
regulator, defoliant, desiccant or nitrogen stabilizer.
Requires the active ingredient to be identified by name on
the label together with its percentage by weight.
4) Defines an "inert ingredient" as any substance (or group of
structurally similar substances if designated by the EPA),
SB 759
Page 2
other than an active ingredient, which is intentionally
included in a pesticide product. Requires the total
percentage of inert ingredients to be on the pesticide
product label (does not require inert ingredients to be
identified by name or percentage on the label).
Existing state law :
1) Authorizes the Department of Pesticide
Regulation to obtain and review environmental and health
effects information on pesticide ingredients provided by
registrants, pursuant to the Birth Defects Prevention Act
of 1984.
2) Authorizes California Department of Food and
Agriculture (CDFA) to create quarantine areas and develop
eradication programs to combat plant diseases and pests.
Requires an environmental assessment on any activity that
could have an adverse impact on native plants or animals.
3) Requires CDFA or a county agricultural
commissioner, prior to aerial application of a pesticide
under an eradication project in an urban area to hold at
least one public forum, and have DPR and the Office of
Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) to jointly
seek a human and environmental health risk evaluation.
4) Requires pesticide manufacturers to provide
health effects information to the Department of Pesticide
Regulation (DPR). Requires DPR to protect public health
and safety and the environment from hazards associated with
pesticides.
5) Requires a physician and surgeon who knows, or
has reasonable cause to believe, that a patient is
suffering from pesticide poisoning or any disease or
condition caused by a pesticide to report that fact to the
local health officer by telephone within 24 hours and by a
written report within seven days, as specified. Requires
local health officers to report to DPR, OEHHA, and the
Department of Industrial Relations each case reported.
6) Requires OEHHA to develop and implement, in
SB 759
Page 3
cooperation with local health officers and state and local
medical associations, a program of medical education to
alert physicians and other health care professionals to the
symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, and reporting of pesticide
poisoning.
This bill :
1) Prohibits the aerial spraying of a pesticide within or near
residential or sensitive areas in this state where humans
are likely to become exposed to the pesticide, in the event
of aerial spraying of a pesticide as a result of a state of
emergency declared by the USDA, unless the manufacturer of
the pesticide has previously and voluntarily made the
complete ingredient list, including, but not limited to,
all inert ingredients, available at OEHHA.
2) Requires OEHHA, in the event of aerial spraying of a
pesticide as a result of a state of emergency declared by
the USDA, to provide a complete list of all pesticide
ingredients, including, but not limited to, all inert
ingredients, to local agricultural and health officials in
each county under a state of emergency, including, but not
limited to, county agricultural commissioners, local
emergency rooms, health care providers, health clinics,
hospitals, medical associations, school nurses, and
veterinarians.
3) Requires OEHHA to seek federal reimbursement for all state
costs associated with the emergency as permitted by federal
law.
4) Makes all provisions severable: if any provision of the
bill or its application is held invalid, that invalidity
cannot affect other provisions or applications that can be
given effect without the invalid provision or application.
COMMENTS :
SB 759
Page 4
1) Purpose of Bill . According to the author, Californians in
communities that are exposed to pesticides, especially
aerial pesticides, face a well-documented risk of
developing a broad array of acute and long-term adverse
health conditions. The author states that public health
agencies and emergency responders in these areas must be
provided with a complete list of every chemical contained
in aerial pesticides, however manufacturers shield the
ingredients they use from public disclosure, forcing the
first responders to operate in the dark. Federal
regulations only require pesticide manufacturers to freely
disclose those chemicals in their products that are
classified as "active" ingredients, but the author asserts
that manufacturers have succeeded in narrowing its
application to the point where it's become essentially
meaningless. As a result, they routinely classify the
majority of the ingredients in their pesticides as "inert,"
which they are not required to disclose. In some cases,
more than 99 percent of the ingredients in pesticides are
designated inert and kept hidden from the light of day.
The author states that the distinction between active and
inert ingredients is entirely arbitrary: more than 500
ingredients that have been classified as inert have also
been or are currently used as active ingredients.
2) Active vs. inert ingredients . According to the EPA, the
terms "active ingredient" and "inert ingredient" have been
defined in FIFRA since 1947. An active ingredient is one
that prevents, destroys, repels or mitigates a pest, and
each active ingredient must be identified by name on the
label together with its percentage by weight. An inert
ingredient is simply any ingredient in the product that is
not pesticidally active. Because FIFRA does not require a
review of the health or environmental effects of inert
ingredients (except for certain limited tests on formulated
products), the health and environmental effects of inert
ingredients are generally not known.
3) Light brown apple moth . According to an article in the San
Francisco Chronicle in February 2008, in late 2007 the USDA
provided CDFA with $74.5 million to commence aerial
spraying of a pesticide to prevent widespread infestation
of the light brown apple moth. The light brown apple moth
SB 759
Page 5
was detected in the Bay Area on February 27, 2007, and
infestation was said to be a threat to the agricultural
industry. Crops of concern are mainly stone fruit
(peaches, plums, nectarines, cherries and apricots),
apples, pears, grapes, and citrus. The pesticide used in
this case, called Checkmate, reduces the moth population by
interfering with its ability to reproduce.
Before aerial spraying began, the USDA obtained an "emergency
exemption from registration" from the EPA. Because of that
exemption, the spraying program was not subject to state
approval. The Chronicle article reported that hundreds of
people whose homes and yards were sprayed in Santa Cruz and
Monterey Counties from September to December 2007 filed
reports that said the pesticide seemed to cause coughing,
wheezing, muscle aches and headaches, among other symptoms.
In response, DPR, OEHHA, and DPH issued a statement that
acknowledged that eye, skin or respiratory irritations
reported by residents could have been caused by high
applications of Checkmate. The statement noted that the
toxicological information on the Checkmate product
indicates that exposure to high levels of the applied
material would be consistent with many of the reported
symptoms but cautioned that not all health effects can be
predicted and because the general population includes
susceptible people, such as children, the elderly and those
with chronic diseases, we cannot provide a definitive cause
for their symptoms. This year, a lawsuit against the EPA
was filed in the Northern California U.S. District Court as
a result of the spraying. The plaintiffs in the case
contend that the pesticide was improperly exempted from
registration, and that the application caused widespread
harm to public health and the environment.
4) Other eradication projects . Detection of the West Nile
virus (WNV) in Sacramento in 2005 prompted aerial
application of pyrethrin, a pesticide for mosquito control,
over a large urban area. During the spraying, the local
vector control agency recommended that people close their
windows, but stated that no further precautions were
necessary. A Center for Disease Control (CDC) study of
this event found that aerial mosquito abatement is
effective in reducing human illness and potential death
SB 759
Page 6
from WNV infection. While there were no widespread reports
of health reactions to the spraying, a subsequent study
released by UC Berkeley noted that a relatively benign
compound contained in the insecticide that was used can mix
with, and increase the toxicity of, existing pesticides in
the environment. The author recommended that regulators
not only consider the toxicity of individual active
ingredients in a product, but also how ingredients may
interact with other chemicals in the environment.
5) Prior Committee Action & Amendments . SB 759 was heard in
the Senate Committee on Health on April 22nd, where it was
passed by a vote of 9 - 2. In order to expedite the
movement of the bill to this Committee, the following
clarifying and technical amendments were agreed to be
transmitted to the Senate Environmental Quality Committee
for adoption; they are as follows:
On page 2, beginning on line 13:
105207. (a) In the event of aerial spraying of a
pesticide as a result of a state of emergency declared an
emergency exemption from registration pursuant to Section
18 of Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA), or a Federal Domestic Quarantine Order issued by
the United States Department of Agriculture, or that United
States Department of Agriculture declares an Extraordinary
Emergency no pesticide shall be used in aerial application
within or near residential or sensitive are known
sensitive sites such as schools, hospitals, day care
centers, senior citizen centers, residential care homes,
and farm labor camps within this state where humans are
likely to become exposed to the pesticide unless the
manufacturer of the pesticide has previously and
voluntarily made the complete ingredient list, including,
but not limited to, all inert ingredients, available to the
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. For
purposes of this section, "inert ingredient" has the same
definition as in FIFRA.
(b) In the event of aerial spraying of a pesticide as a
result of a state of emergency declared an emergency
exemption from registration pursuant to Section 18 of
SB 759
Page 7
Federal FIFRA or a Federal Domestic Quarantine Order issued
by the United States Department of Agriculture, or that
United States Department of Agriculture declares an
Extraordinary Emergency , the Director of Environmental
Health Hazard Assessment shall, for each pesticide
authorized for aerial application, provide a complete list
of all ingredients, including, but not limited to, all
inert ingredients, to local agricultural and health
officials in each county under a state of emergency,
including, but not limited to, county agricultural
commissioners, local emergency rooms, health care
providers, health clinics, hospitals, medical associations,
school nurses, and veterinarians.
SOURCE : Pesticide Watch and Center for Environmental
Health
SUPPORT : Action Now
Californians for Alternatives to Toxics
CALPIRG
Clean Water Action
El Comite para el Bienstar de Earlimart
Health Advocacy in the Public Interest
Oakland Unified School District
Pesticide Action Network North America
Pesticide Free Valley Ojai
Pesticide Free Zone, Inc
Physicians for Social Responsibility, Sacramento Chapter
Search for the Cause
Sierra Club California
Stop the Spray San Francisco
Stop the Spray East Bay
Worksafe
6 Individuals
OPPOSITION : None on file