California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB1197

Introduced
2/17/17  
Refer
3/9/17  
Refer
3/9/17  
Report Pass
4/6/17  
Report Pass
4/6/17  
Refer
4/18/17  
Refer
5/17/17  
Refer
5/17/17  
Report Pass
5/26/17  
Report Pass
5/26/17  
Engrossed
5/30/17  
Engrossed
5/30/17  
Refer
5/30/17  
Refer
5/30/17  
Refer
6/8/17  
Report Pass
6/27/17  
Report Pass
6/27/17  
Refer
6/27/17  
Refer
6/27/17  
Report Pass
7/6/17  
Report Pass
7/6/17  
Refer
7/6/17  
Refer
7/6/17  
Report Pass
8/21/17  
Report Pass
8/21/17  
Refer
8/21/17  
Refer
8/21/17  
Refer
8/28/17  
Report Pass
9/1/17  
Report Pass
9/1/17  
Enrolled
9/11/17  
Enrolled
9/11/17  
Chaptered
10/8/17  
Chaptered
10/8/17  
Passed
10/8/17  

Caption

Oil spill contingency plans: spill management teams.

Impact

The impact of AB 1197 on state oil spill laws is significant as it modifies the existing protocols for oil spill response and management. The bill does not require an oil spill contingency plan to identify a rated oil spill response organization (OSRO) for each rating level, but instead mandates identification of at least one OSRO as per specified provisions. This reduction in requirement aims to streamline compliance for facility operators while promoting preparedness for spill responses, which could ultimately lead to more efficient containment and cleanup efforts during an actual environmental crisis.

Summary

Assembly Bill 1197 amends various sections of the Government Code related to the state's oil spill prevention and response laws, specifically the Lempert-Keene-Seastrand Oil Spill Prevention and Response Act. A key change in the bill is the requirement for oil spill contingency plans to identify at least one certified spill management team (SMT), while also allowing operators to utilize their own rated response teams. This change aims to enhance the flexibility of spill management while maintaining a robust response framework for oil spills.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding the bill appears to be generally supportive among industry stakeholders. The changes are viewed as a proactive step towards modernizing spill response strategies and enhancing operational flexibility for facility operators. However, there may be contrasting concerns from environmental advocacy groups who might worry that loosening the requirements could lead to inadequate preparedness for oil spill incidents, prioritizing operational convenience over stringent environmental safeguards.

Contention

While the bill has gained majority approval, notable points of contention arise from the balance between facilitating business operations and ensuring environmental safety. Critics argue that reducing the stringent requirements for OSRO identification might create gaps in spill preparedness. Proponents counter that the certification of SMTs will maintain rigorous competency and accountability in spill response capabilities. The challenge remains in aligning effective spill management with regulatory flexibility, ensuring that state waters and resources remain protected from harmful incidents.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB936

Oil spills: response and contingency planning.

CA SB709

Oil spill response and contingency planning.

CA AB148

Public resources.

CA SB148

Budget Act of 2022.