California 2019-2020 Regular Session Status: To Executive Bipartisan · 6 D · 1 R cosponsors

AB 995 — Hazardous waste.

Last action — Vetoed by Governor.

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

This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “To Executive” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

(1) Existing law provides that the Department of Toxic Substances Control regulates the handling and management of hazardous substances, materials, and waste. Existing law requires the department to, among other things, issue hazardous waste facilities permits to facilities handling hazardous waste and to enforce the requirements of the hazardous waste control laws. This bill would create the Board of Environmental Safety in the California Environmental Protection Agency. The bill would provide requirements for the membership of the board and would require the board to conduct no less than 6 public meetings per year. The bill would provide for the duties of the board, which would include, among others, reviewing specified policies, processes, and programs within the hazardous waste control laws; proposing statutory, regulatory, and policy changes; and hearing and deciding appeals of hazardous waste facility permit decisions and certain financial assurance decisions. The bill would establish an office of ombudsperson in the board to receive complaints and suggestions, to evaluate complaints received, to report findings and make recommendations to the Director of Toxic Substances Control and the board, and to render assistance. (2) Existing law requires the department to prepare and adopt a state hazardous waste management plan with certain elements, to be reviewed annually and revised at least every 3 years. Existing law requires the plan to be prepared in conjunction with, and to take into account, hazardous waste management plans adopted by counties and regional councils of governments. Existing law requires the department to conduct at least 2 public workshops, as provided, as part of the preparation and adoption of the plan. This bill would repeal those requirements and instead require the department, by March 1, 2024, and every 3 years thereafter, to prepare and present to the board for approval a state hazardous waste management plan containing certain information, goals, and recommendations. The bill would require the department, by March 1, 2022, and every 3 years thereafter, to prepare a report containing an analysis of available data related to hazardous waste and hazardous waste management facilities, and would require the state hazardous waste management plan to be based on the information contained in that report and any other relevant source of information. The bill would require the board, before approving the plan, to conduct at least 3 public hearings to receive comments from the public and would require the board and department to consider the comments received and revise the plan as they deem appropriate. (3) Existing law imposes various fees, including a disposal fee, generator fee, and facility fee, that are deposited in the Hazardous Waste Control Account and that, upon appropriation by the Legislature to the department, are authorized to be expended for, among other things, the administration and implementation of the hazardous waste control laws. Existing law establishes the Toxic Substances Control Account in the General Fund and requires that specified funds be deposited in that account, including the charge imposed on organizations that use, generate, store, or conduct activities in this state related to hazardous materials, and penalties imposed pursuant to the hazardous waste control laws or the Carpenter-Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act. Existing law authorizes the appropriation of funds from the Toxic Substances Control Account to the department for specified purposes, including, among other things, site remediation and response costs. This bill would require the Secretary for Environmental Protection to convene a fee task force with specified membership to review the existing fee structure supporting the Hazardous Waste Control Account and the funding structure supporting the Toxic Substances Control Account. The bill would require the Secretary to provide recommendations to the Legislature by January 10, 2022, as part of the Governor's Budget, on a fee system for the Hazardous Waste Control Account and a funding structure for the Toxic Substances Control Account, as provided. (4) Existing law requires a person who disposes of hazardous waste in this state to pay a disposal fee for the disposal of hazardous waste to land, based on the type of waste placed in the disposal site. Existing law imposes, except for certain specified exceptions, a manifest fee for each California Hazardous Waste Manifest form or electronic equivalent used by a person. Existing law authorizes the Department of Toxic Substances Control to impose an annual verification fee on certain generators, transporters, and facility operators that possess a valid identification number issued by the Department of Toxic Substances Control or by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. This bill would repeal the provisions establishing the disposal fee, manifest fee, and verification fee. (5) Existing law requires specified money to be deposited in the Hazardous Waste Control Account, including money from the disposal fee, generator fee, facility fee, and manifest fee, from specified fees for the oversight of corrective action, and from the federal government pursuant to the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. Existing law authorizes funds deposited in the account to be expended, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for specified purposes, including for the administration and implementation of the hazardous waste control laws, including, but not limited to, for programs regulating specific products, including, among others, metal-containing jewelry, lead wheel weights, and consumer products. This bill, on January 1, 2022, would revise those provisions to require the generation and handling fee to be deposited in the account, as discussed in paragraph (6) , and to authorize other money to be deposited in the account only if that money is for costs at sites that are not operated by authorized hazardous waste facilities, as provided. The bill would prohibit expenditure from the account for hazardous waste regulatory activities at sites operated by an authorized hazardous waste facility and for other specified programs regulating specific products under the hazardous waste control laws. The bill would additionally authorize expenditure from the account to the department for costs incurred by the Board of Environmental Safety, as provided. The bill would make other conforming changes. The bill, on January 1, 2022, would establish the Hazardous Waste Facilities Account in the Hazardous Waste Control Account, to be administered by the Director of Toxic Substances Control. The bill would require specified money for costs at sites operated by authorized hazardous waste facilities to be deposited in the Hazardous Waste Facilities Account, as provided. The bill would authorize expenditure from the account, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for specified purposes relating to hazardous waste regulatory activities at sites operated by an authorized hazardous waste facility or related to the owner or operator of an authorized hazardous waste facility, as provided. (6) Existing law requires a generator of hazardous waste who generated 5 or more tons of hazardous waste in the prior calendar year to pay a generator fee, pursuant to a tiered payment structure, based on a specified base rate. Existing law authorizes the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to annually adjust the base rate to reflect the increase or decrease in the cost of living, as provided. Existing law provides certain exemptions to the generator fee. Existing law requires the generator fee to be deposited in the Hazardous Waste Control Account. Existing law requires the department, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to pay refunds to generators from surplus funds in the Hazardous Waste Control Account, as provided. This bill would repeal the generator fee and would instead require a generator to pay to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration a generation and handling fee of $35.50 for each ton of hazardous waste generated. The bill would require the generation and handling fee to be deposited in the Hazardous Waste Control Account. The bill would not extend certain generator fee exemptions to the generation and handling fee. The bill would repeal the provision requiring the department to provide refunds to generators from surplus funds in the Hazardous Waste Control Account. Because the failure to pay the generation and handling fee would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (7) Existing law requires an operator of a hazardous waste facility to pay a facility fee for each reporting period, or any portion of a reporting period, to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration based on the size and type of the facility. Existing law sets the amount of the facility fee in a flat amount for facilities with a postclosure permit or a standardized permit and sets the facility fee for all other facilities pursuant to a tiered payment structure, based on a specified base rate. Existing law requires the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to annually adjust the base rate to reflect the increase or decrease in the cost of living, as provided. Existing law provides certain exemptions to the facility fee, including, among others, for household hazardous waste collection facilities and facilities operated by a local government agency. Existing law requires the facility fee to be deposited in the Hazardous Waste Control Account. This bill would increase the base rate and revise the tiered payment structure for the facility fee, as provided. The bill would require the facility fee to be deposited in the Hazardous Waste Facilities Account, instead of the Hazardous Waste Control Account. The bill would eliminate certain exemptions to the facility fee, as provided. By eliminating certain exemptions to the facility fee, of which the failure to pay would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (8) Existing law requires a facility handling hazardous waste to obtain a hazardous waste facilities permit from the department. Existing law requires the department to impose certain conditions on each hazardous waste facilities permit and authorizes the department to impose other conditions on a hazardous waste facilities permit, as specified. Existing law prohibits the department from issuing or renewing a permit to operate a hazardous waste facility unless the owner or operator of the facility establishes and maintains financial assurances. This bill would require the department to review, at least once every 5 years, the financial assurances required to operate a hazardous waste facility and the cost estimates used to establish the amount of financial assurances required. If the department's review finds that the cost estimates forming the basis for the financial assurances for a facility are inadequate, the bill would require the department to notify the owner or operator of the facility and would require the owner or operator to provide an updated cost estimate and establish financial assurance mechanisms for the approved revised cost estimate amounts within 60 days of the department's approval of the revised cost estimate. (9) Existing law requires an owner or operator of a facility intending to renew the facility's permit to submit a complete Part A application for a permit renewal before the expiration of the permit. Existing law requires the owner or operator to submit a complete Part B application when requested by the department. Existing law, when a complete Part A renewal application, and any other requested information, has been submitted before the end of a permit's fixed term, deems the permit extended until the renewal application is approved or denied and the owner or operator has exhausted all applicable rights of appeal. Existing law requires the department to issue a permit if the facility meets specified requirements. Existing law provides for the issuance of standardized hazardous waste facilities permits in lieu of other specified permit procedures under prescribed circumstances. This bill would require the department to issue a permit decision within specified deadlines, as discussed below. If the department has not issued a final permit decision by the applicable deadline, the bill would require the department to, among other things, issue a report, to be released publicly, that includes the reasons why the final permit decision was not made on time and a proposed schedule for issuing the final permit decision. The bill would require the department, after preparation of a report, to do certain things, including requesting that the board schedule a hearing for the department to present the report. The bill would require, for a hazardous waste facilities permit that will expire before January 1, 2024, the owner or operator of a facility intending to extend the term of that permit to submit a Part A and Part B application for a permit renewal at least 180 days before the fixed term of the permit expires. The bill would require, for a hazardous waste facilities permit that will expire on or after January 1, 2024, the owner or operator to submit a Part A and Part B application for a permit renewal at least 2 years before the fixed term of the permit expires. The bill would provide that, if a Part A and Part B renewal application and any other requested information has been submitted in accord with these requirements, the permit is deemed extended until the application is approved and the new permit is effective or denied and all parties have exhausted all applicable rights of appeal. The bill would require the department, no later than 90 days after receiving an application for a hazardous waste facilities permit, to post on its internet website a timeline with the estimated dates of key milestones in the application review process, to note on its internet website that these dates are estimates, and to update the dates as needed. The bill would require the department, on or before March 31, 2021, to post a timeline with those estimated dates for a hazardous waste facility permit application under review as of January 1, 2021. (10) Existing law requires an applicant for a final hazardous waste facilities permit who receives a notice of deficiency from the department concerning the permit application to submit the information specified in the notice of deficiency by a specified date. The bill would require that an applicant not be required to submit a full application, but only that information that is required within the department's notice of deficiency, when submitting information pursuant to a notice of deficiency. The bill would require the department to review the information and determine if it is complete within 60 days of receipt of the information. (11) Existing law requires the department, in the case of a release of hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents into the environment from a hazardous waste facility that is required to obtain a permit, to pursue available remedies, including the issuance of an order for corrective action, before using available legal remedies, except in specified circumstances. A violation of the hazardous waste control law is a crime. This bill would require the department, under specified circumstances, to request an owner or operator of a hazardous waste facility to submit to the department for review and approval a written cost estimate to cover activities associated with a corrective action based on available data, history of releases, and site activities, as specified. The bill would require the owner or operator to submit the corrective action cost estimate within 60 days of the department's request. The bill would require the owner or operator, within 90 days of the approval of a corrective action cost estimate, as specified, to fund the cost estimate or enter into a schedule of compliance for assurances of financial responsibility for completing the corrective action. The bill would establish procedures for an owner, operator, or responsible party to demonstrate and maintain financial assurance under specified circumstances. Because a violation of these provisions would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (12) Existing law requires a person who applies for, or requests, among other things, a hazardous waste facilities permit or a renewal of an existing hazardous waste facilities permit, to enter into a written agreement with the department to reimburse the department for the costs incurred by the department in processing the application or responding to the request, as provided. Existing law requires that agreement, except for an agreement entered into by a facility owned by a federal agency, to provide for at least 25% of the reimbursement to be made in advance of the processing of the application or the response to the request. This bill would additionally exempt from that requirement relating to advanced reimbursement an agreement entered into by a facility operated by a federal agency. (13) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Vetoed by Governor.

  2. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.

  3. Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 61. Noes 9. Page 5470.).

  4. Assembly Rule 63 suspended. (Ayes 57. Noes 15. Page 5466.)

  5. In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.

  6. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 28. Noes 9.).

  7. (Ayes 29. Noes 10.)

  8. Ordered to third reading.

  9. Withdrawn from committee.

  10. In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.

  11. From committee: Be re-referred to Com. on EQ. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10(b). (Ayes 3. Noes 0.) Re-referred to Com. on EQ.

  12. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10(b).

  13. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

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

  15. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  16. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 1.) (August 20).

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

  18. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 0.) (August 11). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  19. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on EQ.

  20. Re-referred to Com. on EQ.

  21. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.

  22. Withdrawn from committee.

  23. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on HUMAN S.

  24. Referred to Com. on HUMAN S.

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

  26. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 77. Noes 0. Page 2089.)

  27. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  28. Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.

  29. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 18. Noes 0.) (May 16).

  30. In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  31. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (April 9). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  32. Coauthors revised.

  33. Referred to Com. on HUM. S.

  34. From printer. May be heard in committee March 24.

  35. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 13 co-sponsors · 108 not signed on · 4 voted No

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (13)

Not signed on (108)

108 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 108 →

"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 995 GARCIA, C. Concurrence in Senate Amendments

Passed 61 Yea · 9 Nay · 9 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 39804
Democratic 22000
Republican 0105
Total 61909
% of votes cast 77%11%0%11%
How each member voted (79)
Member Party Vote
Diep — Yea
Cunningham — Yea
Daly — Yea
Salas — Yea
Gray — Yea
Ting — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Levine — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Wood — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Holden — Yea
Medina — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Burke — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Weber — Yea
Kamlager — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Smith — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Gloria — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Chu — Yea
Low — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Chau — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Bigelow — Nay
Fong — Nay
Brough — Nay
Obernolte — Nay
Mathis — Nay
Kiley — Nay
Waldron — Nay
Frazier — Not Voting
Eggman — Not Voting
Voepel — Not Voting
Mayes — Not Voting
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Nay
Luz Rivas — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse 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
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Not Voting
Choi, Steven S. Republican Not Voting
Dahle, Megan Republican Not Voting
Flora, Heath Republican Not Voting
Gallagher, James Republican Not Voting
Lackey, Tom Republican Nay

Official roll call →

3rd Reading AB995 Cristina Garcia et a By Leyva

Passed 28 Yea · 9 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 10000
Unaffiliated 18801
Republican 0102
Total 28903
% of votes cast 70%23%0%8%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Hertzberg — Yea
Pan — Yea
Roth — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Monning — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Beall — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Allen — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Hill — Yea
Wilk — Nay
Chang — Nay
Borgeas — Nay
Melendez — Nay
Bates — Nay
Moorlach — Nay
Morrell — Nay
Nielsen — Nay
Wieckowski — Not Voting
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Not Voting
Grove, Shannon Republican Nay
Jones, Brian W. Republican Not Voting

Official roll call →

Do pass

Passed 5 Yea · 1 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 5001
Republican 0100
Total 5101
% of votes cast 71%14%0%14%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Bradford — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Hill — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Bates — Not Voting
Jones, Brian W. Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Placed on suspense file

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 6000
Republican 1000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Hill — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Bates — Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

AB 995 Ting Assembly Third Reading

Passed 77 Yea · 0 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 49003
Democratic 22000
Republican 6000
Total 77003
% of votes cast 96%0%0%4%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Mathis — Yea
Diep — Yea
Chau — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Low — Yea
Burke — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Smith — Yea
Cunningham — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Cooley — Not Voting
Frazier — Not Voting
Bloom — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Gray — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Kamlager-Dove — Yea
Medina — Yea
Chu — Yea
Ting — Yea
McCarty — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Salas — Yea
Brough — Yea
Gloria — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Holden — Yea
Daly — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Weber — Yea
Fong — Yea
Kiley — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Levine — Yea
Wood — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Not Voting
Jim Patterson — Yea
Luz Rivas — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse 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
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy 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 →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 18 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 7000
Unaffiliated 11000
Total 18000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (18)
Member Party Vote
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Diep — Yea
Chau — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with recommendation: To Consent Calendar

Passed 8 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 4000
Democratic 3000
Republican 1000
Total 8000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (8)
Member Party Vote
Friedman — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Choi, Steven S. 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 995 do?
(1) Existing law provides that the Department of Toxic Substances Control regulates the handling and management of hazardous substances, materials, and waste. Existing law requires the department to, among other things, issue hazardous waste facilities permits to facilities handling hazardous waste and to enforce the requirements of the hazardous waste control laws. This bill would create the Board of Environmental Safety in the California Environmental Protection Agency. The bill would provide requirements for the membership of the board and would require the board to conduct no less than 6 public meetings per year. The bill would provide for the duties of the board, which would include, among others, reviewing specified policies, processes, and programs within the hazardous waste control laws; proposing statutory, regulatory, and policy changes; and hearing and deciding appeals of hazardous waste facility permit decisions and certain financial assurance decisions. The bill would establish an office of ombudsperson in the board to receive complaints and suggestions, to evaluate complaints received, to report findings and make recommendations to the Director of Toxic Substances Control and the board, and to render assistance. (2) Existing law requires the department to prepare and adopt a state hazardous waste management plan with certain elements, to be reviewed annually and revised at least every 3 years. Existing law requires the plan to be prepared in conjunction with, and to take into account, hazardous waste management plans adopted by counties and regional councils of governments. Existing law requires the department to conduct at least 2 public workshops, as provided, as part of the preparation and adoption of the plan. This bill would repeal those requirements and instead require the department, by March 1, 2024, and every 3 years thereafter, to prepare and present to the board for approval a state hazardous waste management plan containing certain information, goals, and recommendations. The bill would require the department, by March 1, 2022, and every 3 years thereafter, to prepare a report containing an analysis of available data related to hazardous waste and hazardous waste management facilities, and would require the state hazardous waste management plan to be based on the information contained in that report and any other relevant source of information. The bill would require the board, before approving the plan, to conduct at least 3 public hearings to receive comments from the public and would require the board and department to consider the comments received and revise the plan as they deem appropriate. (3) Existing law imposes various fees, including a disposal fee, generator fee, and facility fee, that are deposited in the Hazardous Waste Control Account and that, upon appropriation by the Legislature to the department, are authorized to be expended for, among other things, the administration and implementation of the hazardous waste control laws. Existing law establishes the Toxic Substances Control Account in the General Fund and requires that specified funds be deposited in that account, including the charge imposed on organizations that use, generate, store, or conduct activities in this state related to hazardous materials, and penalties imposed pursuant to the hazardous waste control laws or the Carpenter-Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act. Existing law authorizes the appropriation of funds from the Toxic Substances Control Account to the department for specified purposes, including, among other things, site remediation and response costs. This bill would require the Secretary for Environmental Protection to convene a fee task force with specified membership to review the existing fee structure supporting the Hazardous Waste Control Account and the funding structure supporting the Toxic Substances Control Account. The bill would require the Secretary to provide recommendations to the Legislature by January 10, 2022, as part of the Governor's Budget, on a fee system for the Hazardous Waste Control Account and a funding structure for the Toxic Substances Control Account, as provided. (4) Existing law requires a person who disposes of hazardous waste in this state to pay a disposal fee for the disposal of hazardous waste to land, based on the type of waste placed in the disposal site. Existing law imposes, except for certain specified exceptions, a manifest fee for each California Hazardous Waste Manifest form or electronic equivalent used by a person. Existing law authorizes the Department of Toxic Substances Control to impose an annual verification fee on certain generators, transporters, and facility operators that possess a valid identification number issued by the Department of Toxic Substances Control or by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. This bill would repeal the provisions establishing the disposal fee, manifest fee, and verification fee. (5) Existing law requires specified money to be deposited in the Hazardous Waste Control Account, including money from the disposal fee, generator fee, facility fee, and manifest fee, from specified fees for the oversight of corrective action, and from the federal government pursuant to the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. Existing law authorizes funds deposited in the account to be expended, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for specified purposes, including for the administration and implementation of the hazardous waste control laws, including, but not limited to, for programs regulating specific products, including, among others, metal-containing jewelry, lead wheel weights, and consumer products. This bill, on January 1, 2022, would revise those provisions to require the generation and handling fee to be deposited in the account, as discussed in paragraph (6) , and to authorize other money to be deposited in the account only if that money is for costs at sites that are not operated by authorized hazardous waste facilities, as provided. The bill would prohibit expenditure from the account for hazardous waste regulatory activities at sites operated by an authorized hazardous waste facility and for other specified programs regulating specific products under the hazardous waste control laws. The bill would additionally authorize expenditure from the account to the department for costs incurred by the Board of Environmental Safety, as provided. The bill would make other conforming changes. The bill, on January 1, 2022, would establish the Hazardous Waste Facilities Account in the Hazardous Waste Control Account, to be administered by the Director of Toxic Substances Control. The bill would require specified money for costs at sites operated by authorized hazardous waste facilities to be deposited in the Hazardous Waste Facilities Account, as provided. The bill would authorize expenditure from the account, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for specified purposes relating to hazardous waste regulatory activities at sites operated by an authorized hazardous waste facility or related to the owner or operator of an authorized hazardous waste facility, as provided. (6) Existing law requires a generator of hazardous waste who generated 5 or more tons of hazardous waste in the prior calendar year to pay a generator fee, pursuant to a tiered payment structure, based on a specified base rate. Existing law authorizes the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to annually adjust the base rate to reflect the increase or decrease in the cost of living, as provided. Existing law provides certain exemptions to the generator fee. Existing law requires the generator fee to be deposited in the Hazardous Waste Control Account. Existing law requires the department, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to pay refunds to generators from surplus funds in the Hazardous Waste Control Account, as provided. This bill would repeal the generator fee and would instead require a generator to pay to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration a generation and handling fee of $35.50 for each ton of hazardous waste generated. The bill would require the generation and handling fee to be deposited in the Hazardous Waste Control Account. The bill would not extend certain generator fee exemptions to the generation and handling fee. The bill would repeal the provision requiring the department to provide refunds to generators from surplus funds in the Hazardous Waste Control Account. Because the failure to pay the generation and handling fee would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (7) Existing law requires an operator of a hazardous waste facility to pay a facility fee for each reporting period, or any portion of a reporting period, to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration based on the size and type of the facility. Existing law sets the amount of the facility fee in a flat amount for facilities with a postclosure permit or a standardized permit and sets the facility fee for all other facilities pursuant to a tiered payment structure, based on a specified base rate. Existing law requires the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to annually adjust the base rate to reflect the increase or decrease in the cost of living, as provided. Existing law provides certain exemptions to the facility fee, including, among others, for household hazardous waste collection facilities and facilities operated by a local government agency. Existing law requires the facility fee to be deposited in the Hazardous Waste Control Account. This bill would increase the base rate and revise the tiered payment structure for the facility fee, as provided. The bill would require the facility fee to be deposited in the Hazardous Waste Facilities Account, instead of the Hazardous Waste Control Account. The bill would eliminate certain exemptions to the facility fee, as provided. By eliminating certain exemptions to the facility fee, of which the failure to pay would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (8) Existing law requires a facility handling hazardous waste to obtain a hazardous waste facilities permit from the department. Existing law requires the department to impose certain conditions on each hazardous waste facilities permit and authorizes the department to impose other conditions on a hazardous waste facilities permit, as specified. Existing law prohibits the department from issuing or renewing a permit to operate a hazardous waste facility unless the owner or operator of the facility establishes and maintains financial assurances. This bill would require the department to review, at least once every 5 years, the financial assurances required to operate a hazardous waste facility and the cost estimates used to establish the amount of financial assurances required. If the department's review finds that the cost estimates forming the basis for the financial assurances for a facility are inadequate, the bill would require the department to notify the owner or operator of the facility and would require the owner or operator to provide an updated cost estimate and establish financial assurance mechanisms for the approved revised cost estimate amounts within 60 days of the department's approval of the revised cost estimate. (9) Existing law requires an owner or operator of a facility intending to renew the facility's permit to submit a complete Part A application for a permit renewal before the expiration of the permit. Existing law requires the owner or operator to submit a complete Part B application when requested by the department. Existing law, when a complete Part A renewal application, and any other requested information, has been submitted before the end of a permit's fixed term, deems the permit extended until the renewal application is approved or denied and the owner or operator has exhausted all applicable rights of appeal. Existing law requires the department to issue a permit if the facility meets specified requirements. Existing law provides for the issuance of standardized hazardous waste facilities permits in lieu of other specified permit procedures under prescribed circumstances. This bill would require the department to issue a permit decision within specified deadlines, as discussed below. If the department has not issued a final permit decision by the applicable deadline, the bill would require the department to, among other things, issue a report, to be released publicly, that includes the reasons why the final permit decision was not made on time and a proposed schedule for issuing the final permit decision. The bill would require the department, after preparation of a report, to do certain things, including requesting that the board schedule a hearing for the department to present the report. The bill would require, for a hazardous waste facilities permit that will expire before January 1, 2024, the owner or operator of a facility intending to extend the term of that permit to submit a Part A and Part B application for a permit renewal at least 180 days before the fixed term of the permit expires. The bill would require, for a hazardous waste facilities permit that will expire on or after January 1, 2024, the owner or operator to submit a Part A and Part B application for a permit renewal at least 2 years before the fixed term of the permit expires. The bill would provide that, if a Part A and Part B renewal application and any other requested information has been submitted in accord with these requirements, the permit is deemed extended until the application is approved and the new permit is effective or denied and all parties have exhausted all applicable rights of appeal. The bill would require the department, no later than 90 days after receiving an application for a hazardous waste facilities permit, to post on its internet website a timeline with the estimated dates of key milestones in the application review process, to note on its internet website that these dates are estimates, and to update the dates as needed. The bill would require the department, on or before March 31, 2021, to post a timeline with those estimated dates for a hazardous waste facility permit application under review as of January 1, 2021. (10) Existing law requires an applicant for a final hazardous waste facilities permit who receives a notice of deficiency from the department concerning the permit application to submit the information specified in the notice of deficiency by a specified date. The bill would require that an applicant not be required to submit a full application, but only that information that is required within the department's notice of deficiency, when submitting information pursuant to a notice of deficiency. The bill would require the department to review the information and determine if it is complete within 60 days of receipt of the information. (11) Existing law requires the department, in the case of a release of hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents into the environment from a hazardous waste facility that is required to obtain a permit, to pursue available remedies, including the issuance of an order for corrective action, before using available legal remedies, except in specified circumstances. A violation of the hazardous waste control law is a crime. This bill would require the department, under specified circumstances, to request an owner or operator of a hazardous waste facility to submit to the department for review and approval a written cost estimate to cover activities associated with a corrective action based on available data, history of releases, and site activities, as specified. The bill would require the owner or operator to submit the corrective action cost estimate within 60 days of the department's request. The bill would require the owner or operator, within 90 days of the approval of a corrective action cost estimate, as specified, to fund the cost estimate or enter into a schedule of compliance for assurances of financial responsibility for completing the corrective action. The bill would establish procedures for an owner, operator, or responsible party to demonstrate and maintain financial assurance under specified circumstances. Because a violation of these provisions would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (12) Existing law requires a person who applies for, or requests, among other things, a hazardous waste facilities permit or a renewal of an existing hazardous waste facilities permit, to enter into a written agreement with the department to reimburse the department for the costs incurred by the department in processing the application or responding to the request, as provided. Existing law requires that agreement, except for an agreement entered into by a facility owned by a federal agency, to provide for at least 25% of the reimbursement to be made in advance of the processing of the application or the response to the request. This bill would additionally exempt from that requirement relating to advanced reimbursement an agreement entered into by a facility operated by a federal agency. (13) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors AB 995?
AB 995 is sponsored by Bloom, Reyes, Eloise Gómez (Democratic), Santiago, Kalra, Ash (Democratic), Leyva, Wieckowski, Holden, Mullin, Smith, Stern, Henry I. (Democratic), Gonzalez, Jeff (Republican), Rivas, Robert (Democratic), Garcia, Robert (Democratic), and Carrillo, Juan (Democratic).
What is the current status of AB 995?
This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “To Executive” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 995?
Track AB 995 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 995

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 995

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →