MINUTES OF THE

SENATE Committee on Natural Resources

Seventy-second Session

April 2, 2003

 

 

The Senate Committee on Natural Resources was called to order by Chairman Dean A. Rhoads, at 1:33 p.m., on Wednesday, April 2, 2003, in Room 2144 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Senator Dean A. Rhoads, Chairman

Senator Mike McGinness, Vice Chairman

Senator Raymond C. Shaffer

Senator Mark Amodei

Senator Bob Coffin

Senator Michael Schneider

Senator Maggie Carlton

 

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

 

Senator Ann O’Connell, Clark County Senatorial, District No. 5

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Fred Welden, Committee Policy Analyst

Gina Rasner, Committee Secretary

 

OTHERS PRESENT:

 

Beverlee McGrath, Lobbyist, Doris Day Animal League

Lawrence P. Matheis, Lobbyist, Nevada State Medical Association

Fred L. Hillerby, Lobbyist, Nevada Veterinary Medical Association

Woodrow Allen, D.M.V.

Robert Reder

Stacy H. Heiser, Lobbyist, Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada

Raymond C. McAllister, Lobbyist, Professionals Firefighters of Nevada

Gary H. Wolff, Lobbyist, Teamsters Local 14

Nancee Goldwater

Anthony M. Bandiero, Lobbyist, Nevada Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association

Andrew R. Hackman, Lobbyist, Consumer Specialty Products Association

Samantha A. Fearn, Lobbyist, Honeywell International

Vern Rosse, Deputy Administrator, Corrective Actions, Federal Facilities and Waste Management Programs, Division of Environmental Protection, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

Peter D. Krueger, Lobbyist, Nevada Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association

Don Henderson, Acting Director, State Department of Agriculture

Christopher J. Mason, Ph.D., Chief Chemist, State Department of Agriculture

Hugh Ricci, P.E., State Engineer, Division of Water Resources, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

R. Michael Turnipseed, P.E., Director, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

Ray Bacon, Lobbyist, Nevada Manufacturers Association

Richard Mirgon, Co-Chairman, State Emergency Response Commission, Department of Public Safety

 

Chairman Rhoads:

We will open this meeting with a hearing on Senate Bill (S.B.) 304.

 

SENATE BILL 304: Requires addition of bittering agent to certain antifreeze to render it unpalatable. (BDR 51-842)

 

Senator Ann O’Connell, Clark County Senatorial District No. 5:

I will read written testimony (Exhibit C) in support of S.B. 304.

 

Beverlee McGrath, Lobbyist, Doris Day Animal League:

I will read written testimony (Exhibit D) in support of S.B. 304.

 

Chairman Rhoads:

There are a series of letters and the names of industries that support S.B. 304 to be entered into the record (Exhibit E).

 

Senator Shaffer:

Are there statistics on the number of cats and dogs killed from drinking antifreeze?

 

Ms. McGrath:

There are statistics and a subsequent witness will relate them to the committee.

 

Lawrence P. Matheis, Lobbyist, Nevada State Medical Association:

The Nevada State Medical Association supports S.B. 304. The risk to children drinking this chemical, whether accidental or suicidal, is a significant issue in Nevada. The American Academy of Pediatrics did studies because the numbers are so compelling. In 2000 the study showed out of 4084 poisonings, 699 were children less than 6 years of age. This issue is similar to the problem of lead paint, which is also toxic to children. The trend line of ingesting antifreeze seems to be steadily increasing. In 2001 Nevada had 22 human ingestions of antifreeze, which required assistance from the poison control center. A number of those were related to suicide attempts.

 

Senator Coffin:

Who manufactures the bittering agent denatonium benzoate?

 

Ms. McGrath:

The companies that manufacture the agent are the Bitrex Company and Aversion Company.

 

Senator Coffin:

When there is a good cause, we like to know the motives behind it. Is a particular manufacturer trying to get the edge over another by applying laws excluding a company, which might use a different ingredient?

 

Ms. McGrath:

No, S.B. 304 includes any bittering agent of the same quality. There are many bittering agents.

 

Fred Hillerby, Lobbyist, Nevada Veterinarian Medical Association:

Let the record reflect we support S.B. 304.

 

Woodrow Allen, D.M.V.:

Antifreeze poisoning is a problem we see every year in our practice. The figures that were accumulated by the Doris Day Animal League surveyed 13 pet clinics. Out of 136 cases that were documented, 29 of the animals died from antifreeze poisoning. One of the problems with antifreeze is it is so palatable. Animals usually get into an accidental spillage. Parking lots are a favorite spot because of coolant leaking onto the pavement. It takes a very small amount to kill an animal. Antifreeze oxidizes in the liver forming crystals which causes liver failure within a couple of hours. The animal goes from producing too much urine to producing no urine and dies of uremia. As the past president of a veterinarian association, I urge support for this bill.

 

Robert Reder:

I am representing the United States Humane Society and the 88,000 members here in Nevada. Every year numerous children, pets, wildlife, and livestock ingest antifreeze either accidentally or intentionally. The introduction of this bittering agent has proven to be safe and distasteful to children and animals. The cost of this agent has been estimated to be less than 2 cents per gallon. We would urge you to vote yes on S.B. 304, which we believe would save lives, medical costs, veterinarian costs, and our environment.

 

Stacy H. Heiser, Lobbyist, Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada (PLAN):

I represent the Crisis Call Center Incorporated of Reno, the Suicide Prevention Advocacy Network, and the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. Our agencies support S.B. 304. If you reduce access to lethal substances, you reduce risks of suicide. To have a substance as lethal as antifreeze be so palatable makes it an ideal choice for somebody who plans to ingest a toxic substance. If you are able to add a bittering agent, there is the possibility of keeping somebody from making the choice to harm themselves. If you make any sort of intervention, you interfere with their choice to die by suicide. Decreasing palatability will increase a person’s inhibition to ingest a substance. The costs for an attempted suicide are more than $40,000 per case, and there were over 400 suicides in 2001 in Nevada. It is estimated there are 25 attempts for every completed suicide.

 

Senator Carlton:

I did not realize how popular this method of suicide has become. Can you tell how often this method has been used as a means of suicide in the teen population?

 

Ms. Heiser:

I have not seen reports broken down by types of toxic substance. From talking to people on the crisis line, antifreeze does come up more so than bleach or other substances. The reason is very clear in a caller’s mind between drinking bleach, which tastes awful, or antifreeze, which might be a less horrific way to make this decision.

 

Senator Carlton:

Teenagers seem to be more prone toward the poisoning.

 

Raymond C. McAllister, Lobbyist, Professional Firefighters of Nevada:

In emergency medical services we see a large number of people, typically children, who are suffering from ingest error. Often the substance is household bleach. Individuals end up with burns around the mouth, because it tastes so bad they spit it out before it is totally ingested. Several years ago a firefighter in southern Nevada was having a bad day. He walked out of the recreation room and on to the equipment bay. Fifteen minutes later, when the firemen found him, he had already ingested antifreeze and died from it. If there had been a bittering agent, which tasted bad, he might have been saved. Anything we can do to reduce opportunity is good.

 

Gary H. Wolff, Lobbyist, Teamsters Local 14:

People use antifreeze to commit suicide because it tastes okay. We have been told to not leave it where dogs and cats like to get into it. Some people claim a bittering agent will be harmful to a vehicle. I have been told by various mechanics the agent would have no effect on vehicles.

 

Nancee Goldwater:

As an animal control officer with Douglas County, I support S.B. 304. I will read prepared testimony (Exhibit E, page 8).

 

Anthony M. Bandiero, Lobbyist, Nevada Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association:

My concern regarding S.B. 304 is the actual bittering agent itself, denatonium benzoate. By the disposal of this chemical in the rural areas where there is no proper disposal site, there could be an impact on wells and municipal water supplies. Research I have done indicates that denatonium benzoate cannot be broken down by treatment plants.

 

The teenage suicide rate is a concern. I spoke with Laura Valentine, Quality Assurance Specialist, Division of Mental Health and Developmental Services, Department of Human Resources, regarding the number of teenagers drinking antifreeze when attempting suicide. Ms. Valentine stated she had not encountered an attempt of that nature. She had recently completed a survey of chemicals used in suicide. Of that survey liquid Drāno was an example, but not antifreeze. Various surveys of suicide trends show there were no antifreeze poisonings from 1997 to 2001.

 

Andrew R. Hackman, Lobbyist, Consumer Specialty Products Association:

I will read my written testimony (Exhibit F) discouraging the use of denatonium benzoate as a bittering agent.

 

Chairman Rhoads:

Is denatonium benzoate used for anything else other than antifreeze?

 

Mr. Hackman:

It is in some household pesticides and furniture polish.

 

Samantha A. Fearn, Lobbyist, Honeywell International:

I will read my written testimony (Exhibit G) in opposition of S.B. 304.

 

Senator Carlton:

It was my impression the reason the agent was not added to 55-gallon drums is because shops follow certain standards and already have protocols in place to make sure they deal with antifreeze as a dangerous product.

 

Ms. Fearn:

The 55-gallon-drum exemption varies. Auto manufacturers and lubrication stations are regulated by their state environmental quality authorities for the proper disposal, use, and recycling of all of their automotive products. Therefore, they were successful in receiving the exclusion, which carries forward in this legislation. There are continuing concerns about the degradation of the engine parts. I would like to add that California legislation has a two-stage implementation, not yet into effect. California says any product manufactured after July 1, 2003, must contain a bittering agent.

 

Senator Carlton:

I would like Mr. Rosse to come forward with information on the environmental effect of denatonium benzoate.

 

Vern Rosse, Deputy Administrator, Corrective Actions, Federal Facilities and Waste Management Programs, Division of Environmental Protection, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources:

We regulate antifreeze as hazardous waste if it is not going to be recycled. If it is to be recycled, we are not as concerned because it is not going into the environment. Adding a bittering agent to antifreeze will not change regulations of those materials. The disposing or handling of antifreeze is a great concern.

 

Senator Carlton:

There is some confusion about the environmental impact of denatonium benzoate. One group is saying there will be no impact on the environment, and the other group is saying there is a risk. If antifreeze enters a water source, it will contaminate it immediately.

 

Mr. Rosse:

That is a concern. It does not matter if an additional chemical is added to antifreeze; it still has the potential to pollute a water source. Improper disposing of antifreeze is not acceptable.

 

Senator Carlton:

Has there been any research on the long-term environmental effects of denatonium benzoate?

 

Mr. Rosse:

I have not seen any data that causes me to believe that a bittering agent will add to the environmental issue.

 

Senator Carlton:

Would it still be a problem with antifreeze entering groundwater whether or not denatonium benzoate was added?

 

Mr. Rosse:

Yes, the proper disposal of antifreeze is always a concern.

 

Senator Coffin:

There is the possibility we need to change the language used in S.B. 304. Specifying the additive denatonium benzoate to be used does not allow an alternative chemical choice to competitive companies. It is possible to propose language that will not create a competitive advantage for different manufacturers of denatonium benzoate, which require companies using denatonium benzoate to pay for a licensing fee.

 

Mr. Bandiero:

Ethylene glycol is fully biodegradable and denatonium benzoate is not.

 

Peter D. Krueger, Lobbyist, Nevada Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association:

We are a trade association that represents people who buy, distribute, sell, and recycle ethylene glycol. The association would like to propose amendments clarifying language in the bill (Exhibit H).

 

Don Henderson, Acting Director, State Department of Agriculture:

Joining me today is Dr. Mason who oversees our laboratory relative to antifreeze, fertilizers, and pesticides. The State Department of Agriculture is responsible for regulating the sale and labeling of antifreeze in Nevada. This guarantees the quality of the consumer product.

 

Christopher J. Mason, Ph.D. Chief Chemist, State Department of Agriculture:

The State Department of Agriculture reviews and registers 187 brands of antifreeze at a fee of $50 per brand. There are approximately 58 formulas. If all brands were sampled, we estimate analysis costs to be approximately $25 per sample. We would generally sample a portion of the available formulas. Three formulas would be exempt. In the original wording of the bill, no additional labeling requirements appear to be needed. We believe we can carry out the requirements of the bill without an increase in registration fees.

 

Senator Coffin:

Did I understand you correctly when you said there are several brands of propylene glycol? How much of the market does propylene glycol control in comparison to ethylene glycol.

 

Dr. Mason:

Yes, there are several brands of propylene glycol. Ethylene glycol corners the bulk of the market.


Senator Coffin:

Do you check the shelf efficacy of antifreeze? Can you measure the degradation of ethylene glycol under different conditions such as engine temperatures or dry storage?

 

Dr. Mason:

The analysis method would be the same. The testing at the State Department of Agriculture determines whether it has reached the limit.

 

Senator Coffin:

Will you check with your peers to determine if the efficacy does register at a lower strength?

 

Dr. Mason:

I have spoken to the California State Department of Agriculture and they have not done any testing.

 

Mr. Henderson:

The State Department of Agriculture tests antifreeze during the registration of the product, not after sitting on the shelf for 6 months.

 

Chairman Rhoads:

If anyone has further testimony, please submit it to the committee secretary. I will close the hearing on S.B. 304 and open the hearing on S.B. 369.

 

SENATE BILL 369: Makes various changes concerning use of water for watering livestock. (BDR 48-938)

 

Hugh Ricci, P.E., State Engineer, Division of Water Resources, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources:

I will read written testimony opposing S.B. 369 (Exhibit I).

 

R. Michael Turnipseed, P.E., Director, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources:

There are five basic elements to a water right. They are name, priority date, point of diversion, a place of use, and a matter of use. The reason the water law exists is to provide protection. If it is groundwater or surface water, there is a priority date. It is the State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources’ responsibility to ensure that priority is met and there is sufficient water to meet it. I oppose S.B. 369, and I do not believe there is any need.

 

Chairman Rhoads:

I will close the hearing on S.B. 369 and open the work session on S.B. 67 and S.B. 127.

 

SENATE BILL 67: Makes various changes to provisions governing regulation of highly hazardous substances and explosives. (BDR 40-297)

 

SENATE BILL 127: Makes various changes to provisions governing hazardous materials. (BDR 40-296)

 

Fred Welden, Committee Policy Analyst:

One of the recommendations to the committee is to combine S.B. 67 and S.B. 127. Vern Rosse has put together a proposed amendment.

 

Mr. Rosse:

I have prepared a proposed amendment to combine S.B. 67 and S.B. 127 (Exhibit J).

 

Chairman Rhoads:

If the bills are combined, is there still a fiscal impact of $78,000 per year?

 

Mr. Welden:

There is, because of the cost of investigations. This amount is not in the Governor’s budget.

 

Chairman Rhoads:

If the amount remains, this legislation will be required to be heard by the Senate Committee on Finance.

 

Senator McGinness:

Is it true the fiscal note would be paid by fees?

 

Mr. Welden:

That is the case, and we will check with the chairman of the Senate Committee on Finance to verify the committee will hear this.

 

Ray Bacon, Lobbyist, Nevada Manufacturers Association:

I will read suggested changes to S.B. 127 (Exhibit K).

 

SENATOR MCGINNESS MOVED TO AMEND BY COMBINING S.B. 67 AND S.B. 127 AND DO PASS THE AMENDED BILL AS S.B. 127.

 

SENATOR SHAFFER SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

*****

 

Chairman Rhoads:

We will open the hearing on S.B. 201.

 

SENATE BILL 201: Eliminates limitations on amount of fees that State Emergency Response Commission may impose for certain services of Commission or activities relating to extremely hazardous materials. (BDR 40-1047)

 

Mr. Welden:

This bill was requested by the State Emergency Response Commission. It eliminates the statutory cap on the fees the commission can charge for services, and the storage or manufacture of extremely hazardous materials. Most statutes incorporate some form of limitation. There were no proposed amendments during the hearing. The executive director of the commission has indicated they would prefer to retain the existing language of the bill, but if the committee desires to include caps, they have prepared a proposed number.

 

Richard Mirgon, Co-Chairman, State Emergency Response Commission, Department of Public Safety:

We would like page 1, line 6, to be changed to “a fee not to exceed $15,000 per year,” and retain the amounts that were stricken. We would set the fees by regulation to be under the $15,000. The fee is for anything over and beyond the quantities established. If an individual is allowed to store 1000 pounds of a product, and has that amount, the fee is not imposed. If there are 2000 pounds, then the fee would be imposed. The amount would be set within the Nevada Administrative Code.

 

Senator Carlton:

They still can store the materials, but the maximum amount they can be charged is $15,000. Will this limit the amount of storage?

 

Mr. Mirgon:

Our intent is to limit the amount of storage. If they choose to go over that amount, then the fee would be required.

 

Senator Carlton:

My question is if the cap is paid, can an individual then store an unlimited amount of hazardous materials?

 

Mr. Mirgon:

This is the charge if they exceed the cap. Incrementally, as the amount is exceeded, the fee gets higher. The total amount could be $15,000. Depending on how the Nevada Administrative Code is written, they could end up paying the $15,000 and storing as much as they want.

 

Senator Carlton:

That is the point I have been trying to make.

 

Mr. Mirgon:

The intent is to keep that cap below the $15,000. Once that dollar amount is reached, then it does not matter how much is stored.

 

SENATOR MCGINNESS MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 201.

 

SENATOR COFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

*****

 

Chairman Rhoads:

We will open the hearing on S.B. 336.

 

SENATE BILL 336: Makes various changes relating to water rights. (BDR 48-848)

 

Mr. Welden:

This bill was proposed by Senator Warren B. Hardy II, Clark County Senatorial District No. 12. It would direct the State engineer to quantify some of the older water rights in the Las Vegas Valley Groundwater Basin. There are two proposed amendments (Exhibit L).

 

Mr. Ricci:

I want to comment on the proposed amendment to S.B. 336. Subsection 3 is really not going to be something brand new. This is a clarification of a process that is already being done.

 

SENATOR COFFIN MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 336.

 

SENATOR SHAFFER SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

*****

 

Chairman Rhoads:

There being no further business for the committee today, we are adjourned at 3:57 p.m.

 

 

 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

                                                           

Cynthia Cook,

Committee Secretary

 

APPROVED BY:

 

 

                                                                                         

Senator Dean A. Rhoads, Chairman

 

DATE: