BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2398|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2398
Author: John A. Perez (D)
Amended: 8/17/10 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE ENV. QUALITY COMMITTEE : 5-2, 6/28/10
AYES: Simitian, Corbett, Hancock, Lowenthal, Pavley
NOES: Runner, Strickland
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 7-4, 8/12/10
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Corbett, Leno, Price, Wolk, Yee
NOES: Ashburn, Emmerson, Walters, Wyland
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 49-27, 6/2/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Product stewardship: carpet
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill requires carpet manufacturers to
implement stewardship programs to increase the recycling
rate of carpet in the state. After April 1, 2012, this
bill prohibits the sale of carpet in the state by a
manufacturer that is not part of a stewardship organization
with an approved plan. This bill requires an assessment
per unit of carpet sold in the state to pay for the costs
of the stewardship plans.
ANALYSIS :
CONTINUED
AB 2398
Page
2
Existing law:
1. Establishes procedures and requirements for the purchase
of recycled content items such as paper by state
agencies. (Section 12209 of the Public Contract Code
[PCC]).
2. Establishes procedures for the procurement by state
agencies of environmentally preferable products, as
defined, including providing state agencies with
information and assistance regarding environmentally
preferable purchasing including, but not limited to, the
development, to the extent fiscally feasible, of an
environmentally preferable purchasing best practices
manual for state purchasing employees. (PCC Section
12400 et seq).
This bill:
1. Requires, by September 30, 2011, a manufacturer of
carpets sold in this state, individually or through a
carpet stewardship organization, to submit a carpet
stewardship plan to the Department of Resources
Recycling and Recovery (DRRR), which will be required to
include specified elements, including a funding
mechanism that provides sufficient funding to carry out
the plan, including administrative, operational, and
capital costs of the plan.
2. Requires the funding mechanism to provide for a carpet
stewardship assessment per unit of carpet sold by a
manufacturer, to be paid by each member of the carpet
stewardship organization on and after January 1, 2013.
3. Requires, until January 1, 2013, the Carpet America
Recovery Effort (CARE), a 3rd-party nonprofit
stewardship organization established by the Carpet and
Rug Institute, to serve as the carpet stewardship
organization and allows, on and after January 1, 2013, a
carpet stewardship organization appointed by one or more
manufacturers to submit a plan.
4. Requires, as of April 1, 2011, until January 1, 2013, a
manufacturer of carpet to add an assessment of $0.05 per
AB 2398
Page
3
square yard upon the purchase price of all carpet sold
in the state by that manufacturer. Requires the
assessment to be remitted on a quarterly basis, as
appropriate, to CARE or allow the manufacturer to retain
that assessment.
5. Requires these revenues to be expended by CARE or by an
individual manufacturer, prior to approval of its carpet
stewardship plan, only to implement early action
measures that are consistent to achieve measurable
improvements in the landfill diversion and recycling of
postconsumer carpet.
6. Requires DRRR to, among other things, within 60 days
after it receives a plan, to review and determine
whether the plan complies with the bill's requirements
and notify the submitter of its decision.
7. Specifies that any plan not approved by March 31, 2012,
is out of compliance until determined to be complete by
the DRRR.
8. Provides that a manufacturer, wholesaler, or retailer,
on and after
April 1, 2012, that offers carpet for sale or promotional
purposes without an approved plan for that carpet is not
in compliance with the act's requirements.
9. Requires the carpet stewardship organization to
demonstrate to the DRRR that it has achieved continuous
meaningful improvement in the recycling rate in order to
be in compliance. Each manufacturer of carpet sold in
the state, individually or through a carpet stewardship
organization, will be required to prepare and submit to
the DRRR an annual report describing the activities
carried out pursuant to the carpet stewardship plan. A
manufacturer or carpet stewardship organization
submitting a carpet stewardship plan will be required to
pay the DRRR an annual administrative fee when
submitting the plan for review and approval, as
determined by the DRRR.
10.Provides for the imposition of administrative civil
penalties upon a person who violates the bill and
AB 2398
Page
4
provides that the manufacturer or carpet stewardship
organization whose plan is not approved by the DRRR by
March 31, 2012, is subject to those penalties until the
plan is approved.
11.Authorizes DRRR to expend those fees and penalties, upon
appropriation by the Legislature, to administer the
bill's provisions.
12.Requires DRRR and the Department of General Services to
complete a study, by January 1, 2014, that examines the
standard for carpet purchases by the state, in the
NSF/ANSI 140-2007 Standard, Platinum Level, and to
submit the study to the Governor and the Legislature,
including recommendations for any appropriate changes to
that standard.
13.Requires the Department of Toxic Substances Control to
fully consider the measures taken by the carpet industry
pursuant to the program established by the bill, and the
results of those measures, when considering whether to
include carpet in the product registry (chemicals of
concern) adopted under those provisions or to otherwise
regulate carpet pursuant to those provisions.
Comments
According to DRRR's "2008 Statewide Waste Characterization
Study," an estimated 1.3 million tons of carpet is disposed
in California landfills annually, comprising 3.2 percent of
all solid waste. Carpet can be recycled and can be
manufactured using recycled-content. According to the
United States Environmental Protection Agency, barriers to
effective recycling include the lack of an established
infrastructure for the collection and processing of waste
carpet, especially from residential sources.
Department of General Services (DGS) platinum/gold
standard . The California Gold Sustainable Carpet Standard
(standard) was developed through a collaborative effort by
members of California's Environmentally Preferable
Purchasing (EPP) Task Force, and was adopted by the
Department of General Services by State Administrative
Manual (SAM) Management Memo 06-08, on May 15, 2006. This
AB 2398
Page
5
action placed a requirement into the SAM for all state
carpet purchases to meet the standard. The standard was
based on the Draft American National Standard for Trial
Use, NSF 140 Sustainable Carpet Assessment Standard (Draft
Standard), developed as part of the ongoing efforts of a
number of interested parties to document and improve the
sustainability profile of carpet and rug products using
established and/or advanced scientific principles,
practices, materials and standards. Stakeholders involved
in developing the Draft Standard included carpet and rug
manufacturers, end users such as interior design
professionals, state agencies responsible for
environmentally preferable product procurement practices,
academics and non-governmental organizations. The standard
takes the NSF-140 national standard further by adding 14
additional prerequisites in areas important to California
and a full 100 percent audit by a third party certification
organization, as well as at least 52 credits overall from
all categories. California Platinum certification requires
all prerequisites and at least 71 credits overall from all
categories. Additionally, California Gold only recognizes
and accepts products that meet these highest two levels -
California Gold and California Platinum. The additional
prerequisites added include requirements such as:
1. Carpet must contain at least 10 percent postconsumer
content.
2. Carpet must meet the low-emission requirements of the
Carpet and Rug Institute's Green Label Plus" program or
Californias Section 01350 specification.
3. Carpet must not contain polybrominated diphenyl ether
(PBDE) flame retardants.
4. Manufacturers must have completed a life cycle
assessment (LCA) process for the product category.
5. Manufacturers must meet the Carpet America Recovery
Effort (CARE) recycling goals.
Extended producer responsibility (EPR) . Rather than
seeking to manage waste after it has been produced, this
bill seeks to implement EPR, which addresses waste
AB 2398
Page
6
generation at the point of product design. Typically,
producers do not consider recycling possibilities, disposal
costs, and environmental impacts when designing products
because public agencies and other entities, not the
producers, bear those costs, which each year amount to
hundreds of millions of dollars. By placing responsibility
for product disposal on the producer, EPR provides the
producer, rather than state or local government, a
financial incentive to reduce the generation of waste.
EPR was the adopted policy of the former Integrated Waste
Management Board (IWMB) (eliminated pursuant to SB 63
[Strickland], Chapter 21, Statutes of 2009, as of January
1, 2010). The IWMB's EPR Framework, developed and adopted
after two years of public workshops and meetings with local
governments, legislative members, retailers, and producers,
was supported by the League of California Cities,
California State Association of Counties, and the Regional
Council of Rural Counties. This bill is consistent with
that framework.
Current industry product stewardship efforts . The carpet
industry has attempted to address these issues through a
voluntary product stewardship program. CARE is a
third-party entity created in 2002 by a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) between carpet producers, federal,
state, and local government agencies, and non-governmental
organizations. The MOU was signed by the California
Integrated Waste Management Board (now DRRR) and three
California carpet manufacturers. The MOU established
national goals over a 10-year timeframe to increase the
amount of recycling and reuse of post-consumer carpet, with
a final goal of 40 percent diversion from landfill disposal
by 2012. CARE is tasked with monitoring, evaluating, and
assessing progress toward the MOU's goals. While the goals
of this program are laudable, the diversion numbers are not
keeping pace with the goals. In 2007, the percentage of
carpet recycled and diverted from landfill disposal was 4.9
and 5.3, respectively; in 2008, these percentages were 4.3
and 5.2. This lack of progress is part of the rationale
provided by DRRR when they opted out of MOU participation
in the next cycle, currently being negotiated for 2012.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
AB 2398
Page
7
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2010-11 2011-12
2012-13 Fund
Oversight of $290 $280 $280
Special*
stewardship plans
* Integrated Waste Management Account. Ultimately
to be covered by fees.
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/17/10)
Association of Bay Area Governments
California Product Stewardship Council
California Resource Recovery Association
California Retailers Association
California State Association of Counties
Californians Against Waste
Cities of Camarillo, Cupertino, Eureka, Sacramento, Santa
Monica, Sunnyvale, Torrance, Vernon, and Ventura
City and County of San Francisco
Clean Water Action
East Bay Municipal Utility District
League of California Cities
Marin County Hazardous and Solid Waste Management Joint
Powers Authority
Marin Sanitary Service and Marin Resource Recovery
Napa Recycling & Waste Services
Planning and Conservation League
San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments
Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors
Sierra Club California
Solid Waste Association of North America
StopWaste.Org - Alameda County Waste Management Authority
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/17/10)
Atlas Carpet Mills, Inc.
AB 2398
Page
8
Beaulieu Group LLC
Bentley Prince Street
California Manufacturers and Technology Association
Carpet Warehouse and Interiors
Cal-Tax
Carpet Man
Carpet and Rug Institute
Conklin Bros.
Dick's Carpet One
Dixie Group
Fabrica
Howards Carpet One
Isensee Floorcovering
Lassen Regional Solid Waste Management Authority
Metro Flooring
Mohawk
RJ's Carpet Service
Royalty Carpet Mills
Shaw Industries
WD-40 Company
Western Carpet Care
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Supporters generally purport an
EPR approach to the management of carpet removes the
financial burden of managing the end-of-life product from
local governments and ratepayers and taxpayers to the
producers to be included in the cost of doing business.
This approach also provides an incentive to design carpet
that is more environmentally friendly and more easily
recycled.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Opponents generally contend
that the EPR approach in general, and this bill
specifically, hinders job creation in the state and place
an additional burden on an industry that is struggling in
the current economic climate. Specifically, the Carpet and
Rug Institute, which has been working on a reclamation
program through CARE, states that recovery efforts
demonstrated to date show great progress and they are
committed to an on-going effort with staff and resources.
They are currently working on an updated MOU and believe
that a mandatory program is not necessary. Also, the
setting of mandated recycling goals is problematic as
recycling rates are influenced by not just recovery rates,
AB 2398
Page
9
but markets as well, which can be volatile.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Ammiano, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Block, Blumenfield,
Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles
Calderon, Carter, Chesbro, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De
Leon, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani,
Galgiani, Hall, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huber, Huffman,
Jones, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Monning, Nava, V.
Manuel Perez, Portantino, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana,
Skinner, Solorio, Swanson, Torlakson, Torres, Torrico,
Yamada, John A. Perez
NOES: Adams, Anderson, Bill Berryhill, Blakeslee, Conway,
Cook, DeVore, Emmerson, Fletcher, Fuller, Gaines,
Garrick, Gilmore, Hagman, Harkey, Jeffries, Knight,
Logue, Miller, Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, Norby, Silva,
Smyth, Tran, Villines
NO VOTE RECORDED: Tom Berryhill, Lieu, Audra Strickland,
Vacancy
TSM:mw 8/17/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****