Mandate on RMP Facilities Proposed

By CMTA Staff

Capitol Update, Aug. 8, 2013 Share this on FacebookTweet thisEmail this to a friend

Senate Bill 54(Loni Hancock, D-Berkeley) was “gut and amended” on Monday, August 5th, from urgency legislation having to do with Alameda County employee retirement to a bill which would mandate that contractors employed at facilities having Risk Management Plans  (RMP) be trained in a union-type apprentice system. The original bill passed the State Senate and is now in the Assembly.

Under existing law, stationary sources subject to the accidental release prevention program for the state are required to prepare a RMP under certain federal regulations or if the administering agency (as defined in each city or county, usually the Office of Emergency Services) determines there is a significant likelihood of a regulated substances accident risk.

The bill maintains that the use of unskilled and untrained workers at facilities that generate, store, treat, handle, refine, process and transport hazardous materials is a risk to public health and safety, and, proponents claim, the risk is particularly high when workers are employed by outside contractors because they are generally less familiar with the operations of the facility and its emergency plans and the owner will have less incentive to invest in their training.

This bill would require the owner of a facility with an RMP, when contracting for the performance of construction, alteration, demolition, installation, repair, or maintenance work, to require that its contractors and any subcontractors use a skilled and trained workforce to perform all onsite work within an apprenticeable occupation in the building construction trades and “pay at a rate equivalent to the prevailing journeyperson wage for the occupation, or be registered in an approved apprenticeship program, “to provide economic incentive for the employer to use only the most skilled workers to perform work that poses a risk to public health and safety.” 

These are only a couple of the requirements in the bill. Here is a link to the actual bill language: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/sen/sb_0051-0100/sb_54_bill_20130805_amended_asm_v95.pdf

CMTA is interested in hearing from members about the affect this legislation would have on your business. We intend to testify in opposition to SB 54. Please send your responses to Nicole Rice (nrice@cmta.net) or Mike Rogge (mrogge@cmta.net).

Read more Environmental Impacts articles

Capitol updates archive 989898989