HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04101987 - S.3 TO: BOARD OF' SUPERVISORS -3
FROM: Contra
Supervisor Nancy C. Fanden
Costa
"-BATE: March 3, 1987
@ County
SUBJECT: SUPPORT OF SENATE BILL 269
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
That the County Administrator draft a Board Resolution in
support of Senator Kopp' s bill 269 to remove exemption of
public agencies from toxics initiative.
BACKGROUND:
I have recently received a letter from Senator Quentin L.
Kopp advising me that he has introduced Senate Bill 269
which removes the exemption of governmental agencies from
the toxics initiative (Proposition 65 ) except for public
sewer systems.
In his letter he has requested a resolution of support from
the Contra Costa Co-dnty Board of Supervisors.
Attached is Senator Kopp' s letter and a copy of his bill.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: y;rS SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURES)
ACTION OF BOARD ON March 10, 1987 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER X
REFERRED to the county Administrator for analysis the request of senator Kopp that
the Board adopt a Position of support for proposed legislation SB 269.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT IV I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
AYES: NOES- AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
ABSENT: - ABSTAIN: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD'
OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN,
CC: County.Administrator ATTESTED
RIO Bstd.cr, 01srk of the Bond of
Supervisors and County Adm.inistratr_
M382/7-83
BY DEPUTY
Senator Quentin L . Kopp
February 26 , 1987
r
FiEG�,IV_a_,D
MAR 2 198?
ff 9H'.t.BATCHELOR
'
fLE K BOl, OF Sul1C ORS
E t":�A COSTA C pe ut
Honorable Sunne McPeak � '� . . .. 1.
Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors
651 Pine Street
Martinez , CA 94553
Dear Sunne:
I enclose Senate Bill 269 which removes the exemption
of governmental agencies from the toxics initiative (Proposition 65)
except for public sewer systems.
As an endorser (like me) of Proposition 65 , I know you' ll want
to plug the loopholes in the law. That' s why I 've authored SB 269 ,
and why I 'd like a resolution of support from your Board. Let me
know if you want me to appear personally on it.
Sincp-re,ly yours,
E TIN L. KOPP
QLK:bly
Enclosure
}� waer�}�:cTbcrs
d(— COLFKy Adnjin;s.iratof
--� Coe-:r„�;,i �evetopmeru
STATE CAPITOL, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814 (916) 445-0503
DISTRICT OFFICE: 363 EL CAMINO REAL, SO. SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080 (415) 952-5666
SENATE BILL No. 269
Introduced by Senator Kopp
February 2, 1987
An act to amend Section 25249.11 of the Health and Safety
Code, relating to toxic chemicals.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
BS 269, as introduced, Kopp. Toxic chemicals: discharges.
The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of
1986 (Proposition 65) prohibits any person in the course of
doing business from knowingly discharging or releasing a
chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive
toxicity into water, except as specified, and prohibits any
person in the course of doing business to knowingly and
intentionally expose any individual to such a chemical
without giving a specified warning. These provisions exclude
from the definition of a "person in the course of doing
business" a city, county, or district, a state or federal agency,
or an entity in its operation of a public water system.
This bill would include cities, counties, districts, and state
and federal agencies within these discharge and exposure
prohibitions and would instead exclude an entity in its
operation of publicly owned treatment works, as defined in
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
Vote: %. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.
i
99 50
SB 269 —2—
The people of the State of California do enact as follows.-
1 SECTION 1. Section 25249.11 of the Health and
'2 Safety Code is amended to read:
3 25249.11. Pe nitiens.
4 Fff For purposes of this chapter: i
5 (a) "Person" means an individual, trust, firm, joint `
6 stock company, corporation, company, partnership, and
7 association, city, county, district, and the state, or any
8 department or agency thereof, and, to the extent
9 permitted by federal law, the federal government or any
10 department or agency thereof.
11 (b) "Person in the course of doing business" does not
12 include any person employing fewer than tee 10
13 employees in his the person's business,aft�-eit-y-;eettft
14 e- district er edty departmefft ep ageney theree€ of the
15 state e-any er ageney theree€er the federal
16 er arm depaftmeftt er ageney thereof-,or any
17 entity in its operation of a die mer system as defifted
18 itt Seetien 4010.1 publicly owned treatment works, as
19 defined in Section 1292 of Title 33 of the United States
20 Code.
21 (c) "Person in the course of doing business"includes,
22 but is not limited to, any action taken by a public agency
23 in the course of its operations. t
24 (d) "Significant amount" means any detectable
25 amount except an amount which would meet the
26 exemption test in subdivision (c) of Section 25249.10 if an
27 individual were exposed to such an amount in drinking
28 water.
29 {d}
30 (e) "Source of drinking water"means either a present
31 source of drinking water or water which is identified or
32 designated in a water quality control plan adopted by a
33 regional board as being suitable for domestic or
34 municipal uses.
35 fie}
36 (f) "Threaten to violate" means to create a condition
37 in which there is a substantial probability that a violation
38 will occur.
99 90
—3— SB 269
2 (g) "Warning" within the meaning of Section 25249.6
3 few is not required to be provided separately to each
4 exposed individual and may be provided by general
5 methods such as labels on consumer products, inclusion
6 of notices in mailings to water customers, posting of
7 notices, placing notices in public news media, and the
8 like,provided that the warning accomplished is clear and
9 reasonable. In order to minimize the burden on retail
10 sellers of consumer products, including foods,
11 regulations implementing Section 25249.6 shall, to the
12 extent practicable, place the obligation to provide any
13 warning materials such as labels on the producer or
14 packager rather than on the retail seller, except where
15 the retail seller itself is responsible for introducing a
16 chemical known to the state to cause cancer or
17 reproductive toxicity into the consumer product in
18 question.
O
99 100
News from
Mate Senator
Quentin L. Kopp
Eighth Senatorial District
IRV—
CONTACT: Barbara Katz DATE:#3
(916) 445-0503 February 2, 1987
KOPP INTRODUCES BILL TO REMOVE EXEMPTION OF
PUBLIC AGENCIES FROM TOXICS INITIATIVE
Senator Quentin L. Kopp (I-San Francisco) introduced Senate
Bill 269 today (February 2) which removes the exemption of
governmental agencies from the toxics initiative (Proposition 65)
except for public sewer systems.
"The opponents of Proposition 65 make much of the fact that
it specifically excluded public agencies from its operation. The
explanation of the proponents was that public agencies have no
choice in the operations such as sewage systems where all wet
sewage must be accepted by a particular sewage system. The
proponents , however, concede that such an exemption was too
broad. There are many governmental agency operations which are
not in a situation similar to a sewage system. For example ,
public works operations , park and recreational facilities , hydro
power districts and other public buildings are clearly different
than sewer agencies, " said Kopp.
After further examination and reflection, I have concluded
that the only conceivable exclusion is the situation faced by our
public sewer agencies which have no choice or control over what
enters their systems, " Kopp said. "Any sensible regulation must
include government agencies because they should be as responsible
as private entities in preventing pollution. After all , what' s
good for the goose is good for the gander! " , noted Kopp.
The timing issue is important as noted by Senator Kopp: "We
shouldn' t wait to enact this legislation. It ought to be enacted
concomitantly with legislation that implements Proposition 65. "
1.1 CAPITOL OFFICE STATE CAPITOL, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814 TELEPHONE: (916) 4450503
1-1 DISTRICT OFFICE 363 EL CAMINO REAL, SO. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE (415) 952-5666