BILL ANALYSIS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|Hearing Date:June 28, 2010 |Bill No:AB |
| |2256 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Senator Gloria Negrete McLeod, Chair
Bill No: AB 2256Author:Huffman
As Amended:June 1, 2010 Fiscal: Yes
SUBJECT: Product labeling: flushable products.
SUMMARY: Prohibits a person from packaging or labeling a consumer
product for distribution or sale in California as flushable, sewer and
septic safe, or other like term or phrase, unless the product meets
certain criteria, as specified.
NOTE : This measure failed passage in this Committee on June 21, 2010,
by a vote of 3-3, and
was granted reconsideration. It is before this Committee today for
Reconsideration and "Vote-Only."
Existing law:
1)Regulates the labeling requirements on various consumer products and
requires any person who represents in advertising or on the label or
container of a consumer good that the product is not harmful to, or
is beneficial to, the natural environment, through the use of terms
such as "environmental choice," "ecologically friendly," "earth
friendly," "environmentally friendly," "ecologically sound,"
"environmentally sound," "environmentally safe," "ecologically
safe," "environmentally lite," "green product," or any other like
term, to maintain in written form in its records specified
information and documentation supporting the validity of the
representation.
2)Makes it unlawful to make any untruthful, deceptive, or misleading
environmental marketing claim, whether explicit or implied.
This bill:
AB 2256
Page 2
1)Prohibits, beginning January 1, 2012, a person from packaging or
labeling a consumer product for distribution or sale in California
if that product is contained in a package, or has an affixed label,
that states that the consumer product is flushable, sewer and septic
safe, or other like term or phrase unless the product meets the
acceptance criteria as published in the January 1, 2012 version of
the Guidance Document for Assessing the Flushability of Nonwoven
Consumer Products (Guidance Document), published by the Association
of the Nonwoven Fabrics Industry (INDA).
2)Requires a person who has packaged or labeled a consumer product for
distribution or sale in California that is labeled as flushable,
sewer and septic safe, or other like term or phrase to maintain, in
written form, documentation of the testing substantiating the
validity of the claim that the product meets the acceptance
criteria, as well as documentation that the testing has been
performed by a laboratory that is capable of and qualified to
perform the testing as specified in the acceptance criteria.
3)Provides that if the consumer product is tested prior to January 1,
2012, and meets the acceptance criteria, or the equivalent criteria
for toilet, septic, and sewage systems, that any documentation may
be used to substantiate the validity of the claim that the product
meets the criteria.
4)Requires, beginning January 1, 2015, an annual audit for quality
assurance and quality control of laboratories that perform testing
for the purposes of this bill.
5)Makes the violation of the requirements of this bill punishable by a
fine not to exceed $2,500.
6)Exempts a wholesaler or retailer who does not initiate a
representation by advertising or by placing the representation on a
package from the requirements of the bill.
7)Defines "consumer product" for purposes of the bill as a solid
material that does not dissolve in water, and specifies that it does
not include, a liquid, gel, or powder cleaning product or septic
treatment product.
8)Makes legislative findings and declarations.
FISCAL EFFECT: The Assembly Appropriations Committee analysis, dated
May 12, 2010, indicates negligible state costs, if any.
AB 2256
Page 3
COMMENTS:
1. Purpose. This bill is sponsored by the Author who indicates that
there currently is no definition of what constitutes a "flushable"
consumer product in state or federal law or regulation. Companies
have used their own definitions and methods to determine the
flushability of products; and for consumers and sewage utilities,
this means there has been no single reference from which to assess
the flushability of products
The Author believes that the lack of consistency can lead to confusion
in the marketplace and a lack of clarity about when it is
appropriate for products to be labeled for disposal of via the
wastewater system. Where such confusion exists, there is a higher
risk that poorly flushable products are flushed down the toilet,
which has lead to costly problems for homeowners, wastewater
treatment operators and ratepayers.
According to the Author, many sanitation agencies around the state are
experiencing problems at their treatment plants with "flushable"
products. Many consumer products' packaging states that products
"break up like toilet paper after flushing" and are "sewer and
septic safe." However, not all products labeled flushable disperse
or break-up well in the sewer systems and sanitation districts have
been finding that these products get into the treatment system and
clog up various processes at the treatment plant. In some cities,
such as Petaluma, costly screening facilities have failed to stop
these poorly-dispersible products from finding their way through
the system, according to the Author.
2. Background. Minimum standards exist for the construction of
building drainage pipe systems; these include allowable pipe
diameters and slopes, venting requirements, and piping materials.
Increasingly, smaller diameter pipes are being installed in new
buildings. The passage of solid materials through these systems is
dependent on the water being able to move the product. In 1995,
the National Energy Policy Act (H.R. 776) mandated that all new
toilets must flush with no more than 1.6 gallons of water. If a
flushable product can pass through a low-consumption toilet after
one flush, there is a strong likelihood that product could pass
through a stronger toilet system.
In the 1980s, wipes advertised as "flushable" first appeared on the
market. Since then, two types of flushable wipes have been
designed and introduced; dispersible and low-strength wipes.
Low-strength has been one approach to making nonwovens with
AB 2256
Page 4
permanent bonds flushable. These wipes collapse in a toilet,
presenting a very small profile and the flexibility to travel
through pipes unencumbered. However, their low wet strength makes
them poor performers in most cleaning jobs. The second type of
flushable wipe is dispersible. These products perform like a
standard wipe as far as strength and softness, but in a toilet
disperse into individual fibers or small groups of fibers.
In recent years an increasingly diverse range of disposable hygiene
products has become available for consumer use in the home. The
growth of the markets for such products is evidence of their
popularity with the public, but their increased use brings with it
discussion about their disposal; especially the topic of
flushability. For disposable hygiene products, the wastewater
system can be an appropriate as well as a preferred means of
disposal. It is important to ensure that such products can be
disposed of in this way without causing problems.
To date there has been no consistent or widely accepted approach for
assessing what constitutes a 'flushable' nonwoven consumer product.
As a result, companies have used their own definitions and methods
to determine the flushability of their products. This lack of
consistency can lead to confusion in the market place and a lack of
clarity about when it is appropriate for products to be disposed of
via the wastewater system. This creates a higher risk that
products which were never intended to be flushable are disposed via
the wastewater system.
3. Guidance Document for Assessing the Flushability of Nonwoven
Consumer Products. After four years of work, involving some 40
companies, in 2008 INDA published the first edition of its Guidance
Document, which contains guidelines representing the first-ever
initiative to provide companies with a comprehensive framework for
testing products to determine their flushability.
According to the INDA Guidance Document, a flushable product must
clear toilets and properly maintained drainage pipe systems under
expected product usage conditions, be compatible with existing
wastewater conveyance, treatment, reuse, and disposal systems, and
become unrecognizable in a reasonable period of time and be sage in
the natural receiving environments.
The Guidance Document contains flow charts of key questions that need
to be answered for each route a product could follow post-flushing.
The questions are answered through a series of tests. Acceptance
criteria for each test and for each question either demonstrate
AB 2256
Page 5
compatibility with the disposal system or determine whether further
testing would be required before flushability could be clearly
established.
4. Arguments in Support. The California Association of Sanitation
Agencies (CASA) writes, "CASA member agencies have increasingly
witnessed the improper and potentially hazardous disposal of
inappropriate items in the waste stream. The lack of clarity for
'flushability' standards, along with the increase in popularity of
'fluashable' products, has created a major disruption in many
wastewater treatment facilities. Notably, because they do not
disperse like tissue or toilet paper, the 'flushable wipes' have a
tendency to rope or 'rag' together, forming giant blankets which
clog debris screens, tangle around grinders, and obstruct pumps,
even in the most modern and efficient treatment facilities.
CASA states that many agencies have attempted to address the issue
through community awareness campaigns, with limited success. CASA
contends that defining the threshold for what products meet, and do
not meet, guidelines for proper disposal in the waste stream will
be beneficial for consumers and wastewater treatment agencies
alike.
5. Arguments in Opposition. The Association of the Nonwoven Fabrics
Industry (INDA) writes in opposition on April 12, 2010, "AB 2256 is
unlikely to solve the primary source of clogging issues at
wastewater treatment facilities. Data and anecdotal information
indicates that many consumers are flushing products not intended to
be flushed and known to contribute to clogging and blockage of
pumps and screens. The bill is likely to cause manufacturers to
remove all labeling regarding flushability from bath tissue and
flushable wipes in California, rather than try and interpret
state-specific requirements. As a consequence, the consumer may
suffer for the resulting lack of flushability information and
continue to flush products not designed to be disposed in that
fashion."
INDA has requested that action on the bill should be deferred "until
INDA has an opportunity to meet with municipal wastewater treatment
facility officials to understand causes and explore non-legislative
solutions to problems at their treatment facilities."
The California Chamber of Commerce (CalChamber) writes in opposition,
"While we understand that sanitation districts are plagued by
problems caused by materials that are flushed down the commode that
shouldn't be, we have not been given any examples of instances
AB 2256
Page 6
where a product labeled as "flushable" caused such a problem. It
makes more sense to understand the root of the cause of the problem
before passing a state law that restricts the marketplace."
CalChamber suggests that the bill is likely to cause manufacturers
to remove all labeling regarding flushability, rather than try to
interpret state-specific requirements.
Kimberly-Clark has raised concerns that clogging problems experienced
by sanitary districts involve a broad spectrum of flushed products,
not just those designed to be flushed, and suggests the issue be
studied to better understand the root cause of the issue before
enacting a law that restricts the marketplace while failing to
address the real problems.
NOTE : Double-referral to Environmental Quality Committee (second.)
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:
Support:
California Association of Sanitation Agencies
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
City of Camarillo
City of Corona
City of Glendale Public Works Department
City of Healdsburg
City of Palo Alto
City of Petaluma
City of Thousand Oaks
East Bay Municipal Utility District
El Dorado Irrigation District
Inland Empire Utilities Agency
Las Virgenes Municipal Water District
League of California Cities
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors
Metro Commission/Metro Wastewater JPA
Moulton Niguel Water District
Padre Dam Municipal Water District
Ross Valley Sanitation District
South Bay Cities Council of Governments
Southern California Alliance of Publicly Owned Treatment Works
Victor Valley Wastewater Reclamation Authority
AB 2256
Page 7
Opposition:
Association of the Nonwoven Fabrics Industry (INDA)
California Chamber of Commerce
California Grocers Association
California Manufacturers & Technology Association
Grocery Manufacturers Association
Kimberly-Clark
Consultant:G. V. Ayers