BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   SB 220|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                              UNFINISHED BUSINESS


          Bill No:  SB 220
          Author:   Corbett (D)
          Amended:  9/7/07
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE HEALTH COMMITTEE  :  6-4, 4/18/07
          AYES:  Kuehl, Alquist, Cedillo, Ridley-Thomas, Steinberg,  
            Yee
          NOES:  Aanestad, Cox, Maldonado, Wyland
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Negrete McLeod

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  9-6, 5/31/07
          AYES:  Torlakson, Cedillo, Corbett, Florez, Kuehl, Oropeza,  
            Ridley-Thomas, Steinberg, Yee
          NOES:  Cox, Aanestad, Ashburn, Dutton, Runner, Wyland
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Battin, Simitian

           SENATE FLOOR :  23-16, 6/7/07
          AYES:  Alquist, Calderon, Cedillo, Corbett, Ducheny,  
            Florez, Kehoe, Kuehl, Lowenthal, Migden, Negrete McLeod,  
            Oropeza, Padilla, Perata, Ridley-Thomas, Romero, Scott,  
            Simitian, Steinberg, Torlakson, Vincent, Wiggins, Yee
          NOES:  Aanestad, Ackerman, Ashburn, Battin, Cogdill,  
            Correa, Cox, Denham, Dutton, Harman, Hollingsworth,  
            Machado, Maldonado, Margett, McClintock, Wyland
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Runner

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  44-33, 9/10/07 - See last page for vote


           SUBJECT  :    Vended water

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 220
                                                                Page  
          2

           SOURCE  :     Clean Water Action
                      Consumer Federation of California
                      East Bay Municipal Utility District
                      Latino Issues Forum


           DIGEST  :    This bill enhances the Department of Public  
          Healths regulatory process governing water dispensed from  
          WVMs and the labeling requirements for bottled water. 

           Assembly Amendments  (1) changed the telephone hotline  
          number that must be referenced in the bottled water report  
          required in the bill from the United States Environmental  
          Protection Agency's Safe Drinking Water Hotline to the  
          United States Food and Drug Administration, Food and  
          Cosmetic Hotline, (2) clarified that the changes in the  
          bottled water labeling requirements only apply to water  
          bottled on or after January 1, 2009, (3) clarified that the  
          changes made to the labeling section of the bill do not  
          take effect until January 1, 2009, and (4) made other  
          technical and conforming changes.

           ANALYSIS  :    

          Existing federal law:

          1. Charges the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with   
             regulating bottled water as a food.  The Federal Food,  
             Drug, and Cosmetic Act  provides the FDA with broad  
             regulatory authority over food.

          2. Under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), sets the  
             framework for regulation of drinking water quality in  
             the United States by the Environmental Protection  
             Agency.  Under the SDWA, a state is authorized to assume  
             responsibility for managing the safety of its drinking  
             water quality if the state is certified as having a  
             program at least as stringent as, or more stringent  
             than, the federal program.  California has been given  
             that authority.

          Existing state law:

          1. Defines a "water-vending machine" (WVM) as any  







                                                                SB 220
                                                                Page  
          3

             self-service device that, upon payment, dispenses a unit  
             volume of water to be used for drinking, culinary, or  
             other purposes involving a likelihood of the water being  
             ingested by humans.   

          2. Prescribes various quality and labeling standards for  
             both bottled and vended water, including mineral water,  
             and also limits the levels of certain contaminants that  
             may be contained in those water products.  

          3. Establishes a fee schedule for bottled and vended water  
             licenses, and sets the annual fee for WVMs at $10.25.   
             Effective July 1, 2007, responsibility for the  
             administration of the above-mentioned provisions will be  
             transferred to the Department of Public Health (DPH).  

          4. Requires weights and measures sealers to inspect and  
             test packaged commodities and all commercially used  
             devices and to inspect the validity of transactions  
             derived from the use of such devices.  

          5. Requires bottled water, WVMs, and containers provided by  
             retail water facilities to contain specified information  
             and to be clearly labeled in an easily readable format.   


          6. Requires that WVMs, retail water facilities, and private  
             water sources that sell water at retail sites display  
             prescribed information.

          7. Permits bottled water to be labeled "drinking water,"  
             notwithstanding the source or characteristics of the  
             water, only if it is processed pursuant to the FDA Good  
             Manufacturing Practices, and any other requirements  
             established by the Department of Health Services (DHS).   
             Any vended water and any water from a retail water  
             facility may be labeled "drinking water,"  
             notwithstanding the source or characteristics of the  
             water, only if it is processed pursuant to current state  
             law related to vending machines and any other  
             requirements established by DHS.  Effective July 1,  
             2007, responsibility for the administration of the  
             above-mentioned provisions will be transferred to DPH.  
          







                                                                SB 220
                                                                Page  
          4

          This bill:

          1. Requires a WVM to be designed to remove turbidity,  
             off-tastes and odors, provide disinfection treatment,  
             and reduce or remove dissolved solids. 

          2. Requires, starting January 1, 2009, a WVM to be cleaned,  
             serviced, and sanitized at least once every 31 days,  
             requires WVM owners to keep inspection and consumer  
             complaint records and make them available to the DPH  
             upon request. 

          3. Requires DPH, starting January 1, 2009, to inspect at  
             least 20 percent of WVMs annually, allows DPH to conduct  
             more frequent and timely inspections of WVMs that  
             violate the above provisions, and allows DPH to embargo  
             a violating WVM and impose any penalty that DPH deems  
             appropriate. 

          4. Increases, from $16 to $40, the annual license fee paid  
             by WVM owners to DPH for each machine in operation.   
             This license fee is annually adjusted to reflect  
             inflation and other cost factors. 

          5. Requires the telephone number WVM owners and other  
             retail vendors of water must currently provide for  
             further information, service, or complaints to be  
             toll-free or local, and requires the applicable DPH  
             toll-free telephone to be posted. 

          6. Requires inspection information, container  
             recommendations, and the WVM license decal or seal to be  
             posted, and requires all information to be posted in  
             both English and Spanish. 

          7. Requires bottled water plants, as a condition of  
             licensure, to annually prepare a bottled water report  
             that includes various statements as prescribed and  
             requires the report be made available to consumers. 

          8. Requires bottled water sold in a beverage container to  
             include, on its label, additional label or on a package  
             insert, the name and contact information for the bottler  
             or brand owner, the source of the water in the bottle,  







                                                                SB 220
                                                                Page  
          5

             contact information for obtaining a bottled water report  
             on the quality of the water and other related  
             information, as prescribed. 

          9. Requires bottlers who sell directly to consumers to  
             include, on each billing statement, contact information  
             for the bottler or brand owner and the how to obtain a  
             bottled water report on the quality of the water. 

          10.Requires DPH, in its annual budget report to the  
             Legislature, to provide information on WVM and bottled  
             water licenses, inspections, violations and corrective  
             actions, and fines levied. 

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  Yes

          According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

                         Fiscal Impact (in thousands)

           Major Provisions        2007-08    2008-09     2009-10    Fund  

          Vendor inspections (DPH)       $0        $142      
          $142General

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  9/10/07)

          Clean Water Action (co-source)
          Consumer Federation of California (co-source)
          East Bay Municipal Utility District (co-source)
          Latino Issues Forum (co-source)
          Association of California Water Agencies
          California League of Conservation Voters
          California Trout
          California Watershed Network
          Culligan
          Environment California
          Environmental Justice Coalition for Water
          Environmental Working Group
          Food & Water Watch
          Irvine Ranch Water District
          Learning Disabilities Association of California
          Metropolitan Water District of Southern California







                                                                SB 220
                                                                Page  
          6

          National Resources Defense Council
          Planning and Conservation League
          San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
          San Jerardo Cooperative, Inc.
          Santa Clara Water District
          Santa Rosa Water District
          Sierra Club California
          Sonoma County Water Agency

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  9/10/07)

          California Bottled Water Association
          California Chamber of Commerce
          California Grocers Association
          International Bottled Water Association

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    The East Bay Municipal Utility  
          District (EBMUD), the co-sponsor of this bill, writes that  
          bottled water quality information is not consistently made  
          available to consumers and that many vended water  
          facilities are not clearly labeled or regularly inspected.   
          EBMUD contends that this bill will provide improved  
          consumer protection so that consumers can make informed  
          choices about the drinking water they consume.  The  
          Learning Disabilities Association of California writes that  
          this bill will ensure that purchasers of bottled and vended  
          water are getting a safer, toxic-free product and that  
          consumers have readable product information and phone  
          numbers to call if questions or problems arise.  The  
          Environmental Working Group (EWG) contends that consumers  
          pay 100 times more for vended water than for tap water and  
          even higher prices for bottled water, and they have a right  
          to know what is in this water.  EWG also writes that the  
          findings of their studies show that current laws governing  
          vended and bottled water are not properly enforced and that  
          this bill addresses this problem by setting up an  
          inspection program.  The Sierra Club of California and the  
          Natural Resources Defense Council write that the state  
          agency currently tasked with enforcing bottled and vended  
          water regulations exercise limited oversight.  They state  
          that, in the case of vended water, inspections are  
          conducted only when complaints are received and this puts  
          low-income communities, who rely on vended water as their  
          primary drinking water, at a disadvantage.







                                                                SB 220
                                                                Page  
          7


           ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION  :    The California Chamber of  
          Commerce writes that bottled water is regulated as a food  
          product under the FDA, which subjects the industry to  
          specific packaging, sanitation, and food processing laws  
          and that testing requirements, inspections and monitoring  
          rules are already in place.  The Chamber contends that  
          since their members market products nationally and  
          worldwide, it is more efficient to have national standards  
          rather than state-only requirements, which add costs to  
          products and complexities to distribution systems.  The  
          California Grocers Association (CGA) is concerned that the  
          requirements of this bill are unnecessary in light of  
          existing laws and regulations.  CGA states that federal law  
          already establishes maximum chemical contaminant levels and  
          state law already specifies labeling requirements.  CGA  
          further states that bottled water is considered a food  
          product under federal law and is subject to comprehensive  
          statutory and regulatory framework.  CGA contends that  
          given this food product status, it seems impractical to  
          change the state regulation, as bottled water will still be  
          subject to federal packaging, sanitation, and food  
          processing requirements.  The California Nevada Soft Drink  
          Association opposes this bill because existing state and  
          federal law(s) already provides for the licensure and  
          regulation of entities that produce bottled water, federal  
          law establishes requirements for maximum chemical  
          containment levels, and they fail to see the need for  
          distributing the kinds of information contained in the CCR.  
           The California Bottled Water Association writes that this  
          bill imposes added costs and regulations to the industry  
          but provides no greater consumer protections.


           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  : 
          AYES:  Arambula, Bass, Beall, Berg, Brownley, Caballero,  
            Charles Calderon, Carter, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De  
            Leon, DeSaulnier, Dymally, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fuentes,  
            Hayashi, Hernandez, Huffman, Jones, Karnette, Krekorian,  
            Laird, Leno, Levine, Lieber, Lieu, Ma, Mendoza, Mullin,  
            Nava, Portantino, Price, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Solorio,  
            Soto, Swanson, Torrico, Wolk, Nunez
          NOES:  Adams, Aghazarian, Anderson, Benoit, Berryhill,  
            Blakeslee, Cook, DeVore, Duvall, Emmerson, Fuller,  







                                                                SB 220
                                                                Page  
          8

            Gaines, Galgiani, Garcia, Garrick, Horton, Houston, Huff,  
            Jeffries, Keene, La Malfa, Maze, Nakanishi, Niello,  
            Parra, Plescia, Sharon Runner, Silva, Smyth, Spitzer,  
            Tran, Villines, Walters
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Hancock, Strickland, Vacancy


          CTW:mw  9/11/07   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****