California 2017-2018 Regular Session Status: Enacted

AB 1583 — Proposition 65: enforcement: certificate of merit: factual basis.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 510, Statutes of 2017.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Assembly
  4. ✓
    Passed Senate
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 17, 2017. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 70% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 4 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Summary

The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, an initiative measure approved by the voters as Proposition 65 at the November 4, 1986, statewide general election (Proposition 65) , prohibits a person, in the course of doing business, from knowingly and intentionally exposing any individual to a chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity without giving a specified warning, or from knowingly discharging or releasing such a chemical into water, or into or onto land and passing into any source of drinking water, except as specified. The act imposes civil penalties upon persons who violate those prohibitions, and provides for the enforcement of those prohibitions by the Attorney General, a district attorney, or specified city attorneys or prosecutors. The act also provides for enforcement by an action brought by any person in the public interest, if that private action is commenced more than 60 days after the person has given notice of the violation that is the subject of the action to the Attorney General and the district attorney, the city attorney, or the prosecutor in whose jurisdiction the violation is alleged to have occurred, and to the alleged violator. If the notice made by a person bringing an action in the public interest alleges a violation of the act's warning requirement, existing law requires that the notice include a certificate of merit stating that the person executing the certificate has consulted with one or more persons with relevant and appropriate experience or expertise who has reviewed facts, studies, or other data regarding the exposure to the listed chemical that is the subject of the action, and that, based on that information, the person believes there is a reasonable and meritorious case for the private action. Existing law requires factual information sufficient to establish the basis of the certificate of merit to be attached to the certificate of merit that is served on the Attorney General. This bill would require, if the Attorney General believes there is no merit to the action after reviewing the factual information sufficient to establish the basis for the certificate of merit and meeting and conferring with the noticing party regarding the basis for the certificate of merit, the Attorney General to serve a letter to the noticing party and the alleged violator stating the Attorney General believes there is no merit to the action, as specified. Existing law authorizes the trial court, upon the motion of the alleged violator or the court's own motion, to review the basis for the certificate of merit upon conclusion of an action brought in the public interest and, as part of that review, requires the information in the certificate of merit to be disclosed to the court in an in-camera proceeding at which the moving party is not present. Existing law deems the action to be frivolous if the court finds in that review that there is no credible factual basis for the certified belief that an exposure to a listed chemical has occurred or was threatened. Existing law provides that, except when the trial court reviews the basis for the certificate of merit, the basis for the certificate is not discoverable. This bill would make the basis for the certificate of merit discoverable to the extent that the information is relevant to the subject matter of the action and not subject to the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product privilege, or any other legal privilege. Existing law authorizes the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development to provide various services and information to businesses relating to, among other things, business development, obtaining state and local permits, and other regulatory information pertinent to business operations in the state. This bill would require the office to post in a conspicuous location on its Internet Web site, and include with any informational materials provided to businesses relating to a business's obligations under state law, specified information relating to Proposition 65 requirements. Proposition 65 provides that it may be amended by a statute, passed by a 23 vote of each house of the Legislature, to further its purposes. This bill would find and declare that it furthers the purposes of Proposition 65.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 510, Statutes of 2017.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 12 p.m.

  4. Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 79. Noes 0. Page 3426.).

  5. Ordered to special consent calendar.

  6. In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.

  7. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 40. Noes 0. Page 2912.).

  8. Ordered to special consent calendar.

  9. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  10. Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  11. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  12. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (September 1).

  13. In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  14. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (July 11). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  15. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (June 21). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  16. Referred to Coms. on EQ. and JUD.

  17. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  18. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 77. Noes 0. Page 1859.)

  19. Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar.

  20. From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (May 24).

  21. In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.

  22. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  23. Read second time and amended.

  24. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (April 18).

  25. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (April 4). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  26. Re-referred to Com. on E.S. & T.M.

  27. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on E.S. & T.M. Read second time and amended.

  28. Re-referred to Com. on E.S. & T.M.

  29. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on E.S. & T.M. Read second time and amended.

  30. Referred to Coms. on E.S. & T.M. and JUD.

  31. From printer. May be heard in committee March 21.

  32. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Chau · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Chau

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

AB 1583 Chau Special Consent Calendar 1st Day

Passed 79 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 58000
Democratic 15000
Republican 6000
Total 79000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (79)
Member Party Vote
Acosta — Yea
Baker — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Yea
Levine — Yea
Mathis — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Thurmond — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Wood — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Chau — Yea
Chu — Yea
Gloria — Yea
Low — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Medina — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Ting — Yea
Gonzalez Fletcher — Yea
Fong — Yea
Salas — Yea
Burke — Yea
Gray — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Bocanegra — Yea
Harper — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Holden — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Kiley — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Chávez — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Yea
Steinorth — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Weber — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Cunningham — Yea
Dababneh — Yea
Daly — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Travis Allen — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea
Choi, Steven S. Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

AB 1583 CHAU Consent Calendar Second Day

Passed 77 Yea · 0 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 55002
Democratic 16000
Republican 6001
Total 77003
% of votes cast 96%0%0%4%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Acosta — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Yea
Harper — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Chau — Not Voting
Eggman — Not Voting
Dababneh — Yea
Daly — Yea
Gonzalez Fletcher — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Gloria — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Salas — Yea
Holden — Yea
Bocanegra — Yea
Gray — Yea
Kiley — Yea
Levine — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Baker — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Chu — Yea
Chávez — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Cunningham — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Medina — Yea
Melendez — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Steinorth — Yea
Thurmond — Yea
Ting — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Weber — Yea
Wood — Yea
Burke — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Low — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Travis Allen — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea
Choi, Steven S. Republican Not Voting
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea
Patterson, Joe Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass. To Consent Calendar.

Passed 17 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 12000
Democratic 4000
Republican 1000
Total 17000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Gloria — Yea
Gonzalez Fletcher — Yea
Bocanegra — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Chau — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

environment
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 1583 do?
The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, an initiative measure approved by the voters as Proposition 65 at the November 4, 1986, statewide general election (Proposition 65) , prohibits a person, in the course of doing business, from knowingly and intentionally exposing any individual to a chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity without giving a specified warning, or from knowingly discharging or releasing such a chemical into water, or into or onto land and passing into any source of drinking water, except as specified. The act imposes civil penalties upon persons who violate those prohibitions, and provides for the enforcement of those prohibitions by the Attorney General, a district attorney, or specified city attorneys or prosecutors. The act also provides for enforcement by an action brought by any person in the public interest, if that private action is commenced more than 60 days after the person has given notice of the violation that is the subject of the action to the Attorney General and the district attorney, the city attorney, or the prosecutor in whose jurisdiction the violation is alleged to have occurred, and to the alleged violator. If the notice made by a person bringing an action in the public interest alleges a violation of the act's warning requirement, existing law requires that the notice include a certificate of merit stating that the person executing the certificate has consulted with one or more persons with relevant and appropriate experience or expertise who has reviewed facts, studies, or other data regarding the exposure to the listed chemical that is the subject of the action, and that, based on that information, the person believes there is a reasonable and meritorious case for the private action. Existing law requires factual information sufficient to establish the basis of the certificate of merit to be attached to the certificate of merit that is served on the Attorney General. This bill would require, if the Attorney General believes there is no merit to the action after reviewing the factual information sufficient to establish the basis for the certificate of merit and meeting and conferring with the noticing party regarding the basis for the certificate of merit, the Attorney General to serve a letter to the noticing party and the alleged violator stating the Attorney General believes there is no merit to the action, as specified. Existing law authorizes the trial court, upon the motion of the alleged violator or the court's own motion, to review the basis for the certificate of merit upon conclusion of an action brought in the public interest and, as part of that review, requires the information in the certificate of merit to be disclosed to the court in an in-camera proceeding at which the moving party is not present. Existing law deems the action to be frivolous if the court finds in that review that there is no credible factual basis for the certified belief that an exposure to a listed chemical has occurred or was threatened. Existing law provides that, except when the trial court reviews the basis for the certificate of merit, the basis for the certificate is not discoverable. This bill would make the basis for the certificate of merit discoverable to the extent that the information is relevant to the subject matter of the action and not subject to the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product privilege, or any other legal privilege. Existing law authorizes the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development to provide various services and information to businesses relating to, among other things, business development, obtaining state and local permits, and other regulatory information pertinent to business operations in the state. This bill would require the office to post in a conspicuous location on its Internet Web site, and include with any informational materials provided to businesses relating to a business's obligations under state law, specified information relating to Proposition 65 requirements. Proposition 65 provides that it may be amended by a statute, passed by a 23 vote of each house of the Legislature, to further its purposes. This bill would find and declare that it furthers the purposes of Proposition 65.
Who sponsors AB 1583?
AB 1583 is sponsored by Chau.
What is the current status of AB 1583?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 17, 2017. Enacted.
Where can I track AB 1583?
Track AB 1583 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 1583

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 1583

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →