BILL ANALYSIS Ó SB 763 Page 1 Date of Hearing: August 19, 2015 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Jimmy Gomez, Chair SB 763 (Leno) - As Amended July 8, 2015 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Policy |Business and Professions |Vote:|12 - 0 | |Committee: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------| | |Environmental Safety and Toxic | |7 - 0 | | |Materials | | | | | | | | | | | | | |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: YesReimbursable: No SUMMARY: This bill requires a manufacturer of juvenile products manufactured on or after July 1, 2016 and sold in California, to affix a secure label on the product indicating whether or not the product contains added flame retardant chemicals. This bill also directs the Bureau of Electronic and Appliance Repair, Home SB 763 Page 2 Furnishing and Thermal Insulation Fund (Bureau) to ensure compliance with the labeling and documentation requirements. Specifically, this bill: 1)Defines a "juvenile product" as a nonexclusive list of products, including products such as bassinets, floor play mat, changing pad, infant car seat, nursing pillow, infant swing, and children's nap pads that do not have to meet federal flammability standards for mattresses. 2)Defines a "flame retardant chemical" with language that is consistent with the definition used for the labeling requirements for upholstered furniture. 3)Requires manufacturers of juvenile products sold in California to retain documentation indicating whether flame retardant chemicals were added. 4)Requires, within 30 days of a request by the Bureau, a manufacturer of a product sold in California to provide the Bureau with the documentation establishing the accuracy of the flame retardant chemical statement on the label. 5)Requires the Bureau to provide the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) with samples of the product or components of the product sold in California from products marked "contains NO added flame retardant chemicals" for testing for the presence of added flame retardant chemicals. Requires DTSC to provide the results of all testing to the Bureau. 6)Authorizes the Bureau to issue citations and assess fines for violations of the above provisions, as specified. Fines for SB 763 Page 3 not affixing a label, regardless of the label's accuracy, would be assessed at the same level as other violations of the Home Furnishings and Thermal Insulation Act (HFTI Act). 7)Authorizes the Bureau to adopt regulations to carry out the provisions of the bill. 8)Explicitly exempts juvenile products from flame retardant requirements for mattresses. FISCAL EFFECT: 1)Costs pressures, in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars, to the Home Furnishing and Thermal Insulation Fund (HFTI Fund) for the enforcement of these requirements, including testing for label accuracy. The testing for enforcement purposes would be performed by the DTSC. The Bureau would be required to reimburse DTSC for its costs. Testing costs include equipment costs and the staff time to conduct the tests. For context, DTSC estimates that it would cost approximately $150,000 to test 100 products annually. DTSC notes that while it has the capability of conducting these tests, it currently has no capacity to do so. Unless the Bureau's enforcement budget increases, any testing of juvenile products will come at the expense of testing other products or other enforcement activities. SB 763 Page 4 Staff notes that the HFTI fund currently has a structural deficit in that its current fee structure does not provide enough funds to cover its current appropriations. Future appropriation requests for the bureau's enforcement activities could result in the need for future fee increases. 2)Negligible costs associated with adopting regulations. The bill authorizes, but does not require, the bureau to adopt regulations to carry out this bill. The bureau does not believe it will need to adopt regulations based on its experience implementing SB 1019 (Leno), Chapter 862, Statutes of 2014, which is the model for this bill. In implementing SB 1019, the bureau has found that the statutes provide sufficient detail so that additional regulations have not been necessary. COMMENTS: 1)Purpose. According to the author, "Growing evidence show(s) that many fire retardant chemicals have serious human and environmental health impacts, including cancer, decreased fertility, hormone disruption, lower IQ, and hyperactivity. A typical household can contain up to several pounds of these chemicals, and their extensive use to meet TB 117 has led to contamination of the global environment? Tests have found fire retardant chemicals present in polyurethane foam in baby products which are in intimate contact with infants and young children including nap mats, bassinets, changing pads, strollers, playpens, swings, nursing pillows, high chairs and toddler chairs? SB 763 will give parents the information they SB 763 Page 5 need to choose safe and healthy products for their children." 2)Background. Existing law establishes the Bureau of Electronic and Appliance Repair, Home Furnishings and Thermal Insulation (Bureau) within the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA). The Bureau is authorized to administer and enforce the HFTI Act that provides for the licensing and inspection of businesses that manufacture and sell upholstered furniture, bedding and thermal insulation. Pursuant to the HFTI Act, mattresses, box springs, and upholstered furniture sold in this state are required to be flame retardant. Existing law requires a manufacturer of upholstered furniture to indicate whether or not the product contains added flame retardant chemicals, as defined, by including a specified statement. Manufacturers are required to retain documents and to provide that documentation to the bureau. The bureau has the authority to test for labeling accuracy and to assess fines for violations of the requirements or inaccurate labeling. 3)Arguments in Support. The Center for Environmental Health argues, "Flame retardant chemicals can migrate out of products into air and dust where children are exposed to them. These chemicals are associated with a variety of health concerns, including cancer, lower birth weight, decreased fertility, hormone disruption, lower IQ, and hyperactivity. Due to children's frequent hand to mouth behavior, young children have 3-5 times higher levels of certain flame retardants than their mothers. It is also of great concern that children of color and children from low-income communities of color have the highest exposure. Flame retardant chemicals can cross the placenta and this chemical exposure places babies at greater risk than adults because infants' brains, organs, and reproductive systems are still developing? This legislation would require manufacturers to label juvenile products as to whether the product contains added flame retardant chemicals. SB 763 Page 6 Without this type of label it will be impossible for parents to identify products that either do or do not contain flame retardant chemicals." The Consumer Federation of California argues, "The proposed disclosures would provide uniform information to consumers in a simple and accessible manner. It would also provide businesses a standard format to communicate the information to consumers." 4)Arguments in Opposition. The American Chemistry Council, along with a coalition of industry groups, argues, "These proposed requirements lack scientific justification, conflict with existing California consumer product and chemical safety laws and regulations, and as a result, mislead consumers about the potential safety of these products? Just as there are different types of metals or gases, California should recognize that there are many different types of flame retardants with different exposure, health and environmental profiles. Yet, under SB 763, manufacturers would be required to label whether their product contains a flame retardant chemical regardless of whether the particular chemical presents any meaningful risk to human health or the environment." The Juvenile Product Manufacturer's Association (JPMA) argues, "JPMA understands the importance of notifying consumers if a product contains a flame retardant that has been found to be harmful. However, SB 763 would also require a product containing no flame retardants to be labeled as "not containing flame retardants"? SB 763 would subject companies that do not use flame retardants and are not presently subject to labeling requirements, to comply with a new regulatory program that requires record keeping and testing data when no potential harm exists. This requirement will add significant burdens to companies who are already complying with the Federal Hazardous Substance Act, and the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act? SB 763 requires a permanently affixed warning label which will cost manufacturers hundreds of SB 763 Page 7 thousands of dollars, even when their product does not contain flame retardants? JPMA believes it is very important that labeling requirements provide information to the consumer that is easily understood and does not dilute the message it is trying to convey. This can be accomplished in SB 763 by removing the labeling requirement for products and components that do not contain intentionally added flame retardants." 5)Current Legislation. AB 1175 (Ridley-Thomas), Chapter 187, Statutes of 2015, increases the licensure fee caps that support the HFTI Fund. 6)Prior Legislation. SB 1019 (Leno) Chapter 862, Statutes of 2014, requires an upholstered furniture manufacturer to indicate on the product label whether or not a product contains added flame retardant chemicals. Analysis Prepared by:Jennifer Swenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081