BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                               AB 2442
                                                                       

                      SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
                              Senator Jerry Hill, Chair
                              2013-2014 Regular Session
                                           
           BILL NO:    AB 2442
           AUTHOR:     Gordon
           AMENDED:    June 4, 2014
           FISCAL:     No                HEARING DATE:     June 18, 2014
           URGENCY:    No                CONSULTANT:       Rachel Machi
                                                             Wagoner
            
           SUBJECT  :    PORTER COLOGNE WATER QUALITY CONTROL ACT: REMEDIAL  
                          ACTION:  LIABILITY

            Existing law  :

           1)Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act  
             (Porter-Cologne), requires a person who discharges waste  
             into the waters of the state in violation of waste discharge  
             requirements or other order or prohibition issued by a  
             California regional water quality control board (regional  
             boards) or the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)  
             to clean up the waste or to abate the effects of the waste. 

           2)Authorizes the SWRCB and regional boards to investigate  
             actual or suspected waste discharges that threaten water  
             quality.  Provides that if no viable responsible party (RP)  
             or discharger is identified for a polluted site, the SWRCB  
             or regional boards may contract for the cleanup.

           3)Authorizes SWRCB and the regional boards to require a  
             person, who has discharged waste so as to cause or threaten  
             to cause pollution or nuisance, to clean up the waste and  
             abate the effects of the discharge. 

           4)Provides liability immunity for the Department of Toxic  
             Substances Control (DTSC) to enter upon any lands for the  
             purpose of taking removal or remedial action.

           5)Under the Polanco Act, authorizes a local agency to  
             investigate and clean up releases or spills within the  
             boundaries of the local agency, and provides immunity from  
             further liability to the local agency and any person who  









                                                               AB 2442
                                                                 Page 2

             enters into an agreement with that local agency to develop  
             the property as well as future property owners.  Defines  
             "local agency" as a county, a city, a city and county, or a  
             housing authority.

            This bill  provides SWRCB and the regional boards with limited  
           protection from civil liability related to investigating and  
           cleaning up water pollution.  

            COMMENTS  :

            1) Purpose of Bill  .  According to SWRCB, the sponsor of this  
              legislation, "Currently, the Water Boards often are  
              reluctant to fully exercise their authority to investigate  
              and/or clean up water pollution problems that may threaten  
              public health and the environment due to liability  
              concerns. 

              "Under current law, SWRCB can perform, or contract for, the  
              investigation, cleanup, abatement, or remedial work that is  
              required to address waste discharges that have polluted, or  
              threaten to pollute, waters of the State? However, the  
              Water Boards often are reluctant to exert their authority  
              to investigate and/or clean up water pollution problems  
              that may threaten public health or the environment due to  
              liability concerns including:  1) potential liability  
              claims that the Water Boards' actions at a site makes them  
              a responsible party and that their limited actions at a  
              site do not fully protect all affected persons, 2) claims  
              for reimbursement of incidental property damage, or 3)  
              potential trespass actions that may arise due to the Water  
              Boards' investigations or cleanups.  Thus, even when the  
              Water Boards are faced with a severe pollution problem and  
              there is no apparent financially viable responsible party,  
              the Water Boards are likely to decline to act due to  
              liability concerns."

            2) Penn Mine Case  .  The liability for SWRCB and the regional  
              boards for their actions in cleaning up toxic waste sites  
              was highlighted in the efforts to control runoff from the  
              Penn Mine. The Penn Mine is an abandoned copper and zinc  
              mine adjacent to the Mokelumne River that operated  
              intermittently from the 1860s through the 1950s.  In the  









                                                               AB 2442
                                                                 Page 3

              1960s, the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD)  
              acquired part of the Penn Mine property to build the  
              Comanche Reservoir.  In 1978, EBMUD and the Central Valley  
              Regional Water Quality Control Board constructed a  
              remediation project in an attempt to reduce the impacts  
              caused by acid mine drainage from the abandoned mine.  The  
              Central Valley regional board and EBMUD were subsequently  
              found jointly responsible under the Clean Water Act for the  
              acid mine drainage due to their operation of the  
              remediation project.  (Committee To Save Mokelumne River v.  
              East Bay Mun. Utility Dist. (9th Cir. 1993) 13 F.3d 305.) 

              In the appeal of the court order on the Penn Mine case, the  
              court pointed out that unlike the federal Comprehensive  
              Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act,  
              which provides a statutory liability exemption, the federal  
              Clean Water Act contains no such exemption.  Given the  
              absence of any statutory authority to exempt the Board or  
              District from liability under the Clean Water Act, the  
              district court was correct in establishing state liability  
              of their cleanup activities.  While state law cannot  
              provide liability relief from federal requirements,  there  
              would still be liability under federal law for cleanups  
              that result in unauthorized discharges to surface water  
              bodies that are covered under the Clean Water Act (such as  
              in the case of Penn Mine).  However, there are waters that  
              are not protected under the Clean Water Act but which are  
              protected under Porter-Cologne, such as groundwater.  In  
              those cases, there would only be potential liability under  
              state law for actions that we may take to clean up, or  
              partially clean up, water contamination.   

            3) State Remediation Intervention  .  SWRCB, regional boards,  
              and DTSC have statutory authority and responsibility for  
              the oversight of remediating contaminated water and land in  
              California.  

              The boards or department generally enter into a cleanup and  
              abatement order with RPs to require the RP to conduct or  
              contract for the cleanup of the contaminated site.

              When there is not a viable RP or the RP is found unable to  
              pay for the remedial action, contaminated brownfield sites  









                                                               AB 2442
                                                                 Page 4

              languish potentially causing economic, environmental and  
              public health harm.

              As funds are available, and sites are identified that are  
              in need of state intervention, the state's cleanup agencies  
              (DTSC, SWRCB and regional boards) investigate and cleanup  
              contaminated sites to prevent further environmental and  
              human health harm. 

              An example of this could be contamination of water by dry  
              cleaning solvents.   The primary solvent used in dry  
              cleaning is Perchloroethylene (Perc).  Perc can get into  
              the air, water and ground during the cleaning,  
              purification, and waste disposal phases of dry cleaning.    
              Perc can seep through the ground and contaminate surface  
              water, groundwater, and potentially drinking water. A small  
              amount of perc can contaminate a large amount of water and  
              people can be exposed by drinking or using the water.   
              Long-term exposure to perc can pose a potential human  
              health hazard to reproduction and development, and to the  
              kidney, liver, immune and hematologic systems, as well as  
              the human nervous system. 

              The remediation of this type of contamination is often  
              costly and has the potential to do significant damage to  
              groundwater plumes if left unaddressed.  In this case, a  
              regional board may deem this cleanup such a priority that  
              the regional board will conduct the remedial action.   
              However, under current law SWRCB and the regional board  
              cite potential liability as an RP, under Porter-Cologne, as  
              a reason to not undergo such a cleanup.   Because SWRCB and  
              the regional boards, unlike DTSC, do not have clear,  
              explicit statutory liability protection, the boards see the  
              opportunity for litigation against the state as an  
              impediment to intervening.

              Recognizing the value in having government agencies ensure  
              that brownfield sites are remediated, and because the  
              agencies are not responsible for causing the contamination,  
              but rather are attempting to remedy the problem, the  
              Legislature has provided DTSC and local governments (under  
              the Polanco Act) to enjoy broad liability immunity when  
              initiating or conducting a cleanup of a brownfield.  









                                                               AB 2442
                                                                 Page 5

               
              This bill would provide SWRCB and regional boards with  
              explicit protection from civil liability related to  
              investigating and cleaning up water pollution, by removing  
              a barrier in current law that deters the water boards from  
              taking actions to investigate, prevent, or clean up  
              pollution.  

            4) Previous Legislation  .  
               
              AB 440 (Gatto), Chapter 588, Statutes of 2013, amends the  
              Polanco Act to authorize local governments to investigate  
              and cleanup a release of hazardous materials in a blighted  
              area, as determined by the local agency, and provides  
              immunity from further liability to the local agency and any  
              person who enters into an agreement with that local agency  
              to develop the property as well as future property owners.

            5) Double Referral to Senate Judiciary Committee  .  If this  
              measure is approved by the Senate Environmental Quality  
              Committee, the do pass motion must include the action to  
              re-refer the bill to the Senate Judiciary Committee.



            SOURCE  :        State Water Resources Control Board  

           SUPPORT  :  None on file
            
           OPPOSITION  :    None on file