BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 553
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 18, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 553 (Monning) - As Introduced: February 16, 2011
Policy Committee: Labor and
Employment Vote: 5-1
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill requires the Occupational Safety and Health Standards
Board (Standards Board) to adopt standards specifying
permissible exposure limits (PELs) for workplace hazardous
substances, using existing quantitative risk assessments
determined by state and federal agencies, as specified.
1)Requires the Standards Board, when adopting a PEL regarding
toxic substances, to use existing quantitative risk
assessments prepared by the California Environmental
Protection Agency (CalEPA), the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health, The US EPA, and the National
Toxicology Program Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human
Reproduction, as specified.
2)Requires the Standards Board to do the following: (a) set the
PEL at a level that corresponds to a health-based Occupational
Exposure Limit (OEL) (level of contaminant determined by
specified agencies not to cause risk); (b) requires the
health-based OEL to be calculated from lowest quantitative
risk assessment that addresses cancer or reproductive,
developmental, or other serious physical harm; (c) ensure
there is a rebuttal presumption that any PEL adopted be the
same as the health-based OEL, unless it is not feasible.
3)Requires the Standards Board, when determining feasibility
regarding employee workplace exposure to toxic substances, to
consider the most cost-effective available approach in
achieving compliance with the specified PEL.
4)Requires the Standards Board, if it adopts a PEL that is less
AB 553
Page 2
protective than the health-based OEL, to do the following: (a)
make a findings of fact regarding feasibility, including
giving more weight to independently verified evidence and (b)
identify the degree of excess cancer risk and risk of
reproductive, developmental, or serious physical harm for the
PEL compared to the health-based OEL.
FISCAL EFFECT
Unknown GF costs, likely between $125,000 and $200,000, to the
Standards Board to determine a PEL utilizing the process set
forth in this measure, including conducting an analysis and
determining feasibility, as specified.
COMMENTS
1)Background . Existing law establishes the Standards Board as
the only agency in the state authorized to adopt occupational
safety and health standards. These standards must be at least
as effective as federal standards, and must adequately assure,
to the extent feasible, that no employees suffer material
impairment of health or functional capacity, even if the
employee has regular exposure over his or her working
lifetime. The board is required to base standards on research,
demonstrations, experiments and other information that may be
appropriate.
The issue of permissible exposure limits (PELs) for hazardous
substances is generally dealt with by the Division of
Occupational Safety and Health and the Standards Board through
a regulatory rulemaking process. Under this process, an
advisory committee (the Airborne Contaminants Advisory
Committee) reviews scientific information and makes
recommendations to the Standards Board. The advisory
committee often relies upon the recommendations made by the
American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists
(ACGIH) for the establishment of PELs, although it sometimes
recommends PELS below the ACGIH recommendations.
2)Rationale . Proponents of this bill state that, because of
shortcomings in the current process, many workers remain
exposed to chemical known to cause cancer other health risks.
They state that industry representative have been able to
AB 553
Page 3
defeat or stall efforts to strengthen workplace standards.
According to the author, "The process for setting PELs in
California can take years. One reason for the delay is that
before the chemicals are even brought to the Standards Board
for a public hearing, these chemicals are re-evaluated by
numerous advisory committees made up of volunteers with
varying credentials and interests. The volunteers re-evaluate
the research and findings regarding what is a protective
health-based OEL, findings that were made previously by expert
staff scientists from the governmental agencies specified in
this bill, not by volunteers. In essence, the current process
'reinvents the wheel' and often does so without sufficient
expertise and control for conflict of interest."
This bill requires the Standards Board to adopt standards
specifying PELs for workplace hazardous substances, using
existing quantitative risk assessments determined by state and
federal agencies.
3)Opposition . Opponents (CalChamber, biotechnology and
manufacturing companies) argue this bill is an attempt to
undermine the Standards Board's authority and ability to adopt
consensus standards for workplace exposure to hazardous
substances. BioCom states, "There has been no conclusive
evidence confirming the need to dramatically change the PEL
setting process. The Standards Board has already developed
over 600 PELs and has revised the PEL setting process to make
it more efficient and responsive."
Opponents further contend that simply utilizing a quantitative
risk assessment determined by another agency does not mean
this assessment will directly translate into PEL for a
workplace environment. Specifically, they argue that the
different government agencies referenced in this bill have
determined risk assessment against different standards and
criteria not necessarily applicable to a workplace
environment. As a result, the Standards Board will have to
conduct its own analysis in order to determine an appropriate
PEL, as specified.
4)Previous legislation . AB 515 (Lieber), similar to this bill,
was held in the Senate Rules Committee in September 2007.
AB 553
Page 4
Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916)
319-2081