AB 2298 — Hazardous waste.

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

"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.

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 2298 do?

(1) Existing law requires the Secretary for Environmental Protection to implement a unified hazardous waste and hazardous materials management regulatory program, known as the unified program. Existing law requires every county to apply to the secretary to be certified to implement the unified program, and authorizes a city or local agency that meets specified requirements to apply to the secretary to be certified to implement the unified program, as a certified unified program agency, or CUPA. Existing law authorizes a state or local agency that has a written agreement with a CUPA, and is approved by the secretary, to implement or enforce one or more of the unified program elements as a participating agency. Existing law defines "unified program agency," or UPA, to mean the CUPA or its participating agencies, as provided. Existing law authorizes the UPA, if the UPA determines that a person has committed, or is committing, a violation of any law, regulation, permit, information request, order, variance, or other requirement that the UPA is authorized to enforce or implement, to issue an administrative enforcement order requiring that the violation be corrected and imposing an administrative penalty. Existing law authorizes a UPA to suspend or revoke any unified program facility permit, or an element of a unified program facility permit, for not paying the permit fee or a fine or penalty associated with the permit in accordance with specified procedures. Existing law authorizes a UPA, if a permittee does not comply with a written notice from the UPA to the permittee to make those payments by a specified date, to suspend or revoke the permit or permit element. Existing law requires the permittee, if the permit or permit element is suspended or revoked, to immediately discontinue operating that facility or function of the facility to which the permit element applies until the permit is reinstated, or reissued. This bill would revise those requirements to explicitly require noncompliance with a written notice before a permit or permit element may be suspended or revoked, and would additionally authorize the UPA to withhold issuance of the permit or permit element if a unified program facility does not comply with a written notice. The bill would authorize a UPA to suspend, revoke, or withhold issuance of a unified program facility permit if conditions exist at the unified program facility that the UPA considers, consistent with criteria or factors, which the bill would require the UPAs in the state to develop, and are supported by written findings, an imminent or substantial endangerment to public health, safety, or the environment. The bill would require the permittee to immediately discontinue operating that facility or function of the facility to which the permit or permit element applies until the endangerment is abated and the permit or permit element is issued, reinstated, or reissued. The bill would authorize a UPA to suspend, revoke, or withhold the issuance of any unified program facility permit if a permittee of a facility, or the owner or operator, as appropriate, fails to take appropriate action to abate an endangerment. The bill would require the owner or operator of a unified program facility to be liable for a civil or administrative penalty of not less than $500 or more than $5,000 per day for failure to obtain or keep a permit as required pursuant to the provisions governing the unified program. The bill would provide that the provisions authorizing a UPA to issue an administrative enforcement order or to withhold issuance, or to suspend or revoke, a permit do not prevent the UPA from issuing an administrative enforcement order for the release of a hazardous substance, as defined, for any violation of specified provisions relating to, among other things, business and area plans and risk management plans. (2) Existing law requires a stationary source, as defined, with one or more processes that have certain substances present in more than a threshold quantity to prepare and submit a risk management plan, if the administering agency makes a specified determination. Existing law defines "administering agency" for these purposes to mean a UPA. Existing law requires an administering agency, for a stationary source not otherwise required to submit a risk management plan, to make a preliminary determination as to whether there is a significant likelihood that the use of regulated substances by a stationary source may pose a regulated substances accident risk. Existing law authorizes an administering agency, if it determines that there is not a significant likelihood of a regulated substances accident risk, to do one of two things, including requiring the stationary source to prepare and submit a risk management plan, as provided. This bill would revise these and related provisions to explicitly refer to an administering agency instead as a UPA. The bill would repeal the authorization to require a stationary source to prepare and submit a risk management plan under those circumstances, and would instead authorize a UPA to exempt the stationary source from certain requirements, including the preparation of a risk management plan. The bill would authorize a UPA to revoke that exemption at any time if it determines that there is a significant likelihood of a regulated substance accident risk. The bill would require a person or stationary source with one or more processes at or above the threshold quantity of specified regulated substances to comply with specified provisions and submit a risk management plan to the UPA before the date that the regulated substance is first present in a process above the listed threshold quantity. The bill would make other conforming changes. (3) Existing law requires a business that handles a hazardous material and that meets any of specified conditions to establish and implement a business plan for a response to a release or threatened release of the hazardous material. Existing law requires a business plan to contain certain information, including a site map that contains specified elements. This bill would require some of the elements, as provided, to be included on the site map only if they are present. (4) Because the bill would make changes to provisions enforced by unified program agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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 2298?

AB 2298 is sponsored by Carrillo, Juan (Democratic).

What is the current status of AB 2298?

This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” 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 2298?

Track AB 2298 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.