BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                  SB 1118
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   August 16, 2012

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                  Mike Gatto, Chair

                  SB 1118 (Hancock) - As Amended:  August 13, 2012 

          Policy Committee:                             Natural 
          ResourcesVote:6-1

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program: 
          No     Reimbursable:              No

           SUMMARY  

          This bill creates a product stewardship recycling program for 
          the collection and recycling of used mattresses.  Specifically, 
          this bill:

          1)Requires, by April 1, 2013, every manufacturer of mattresses 
            sold in the state to submit, individually, collectively or 
            through a stewardship organization, an initial mattress 
            recovery and recycling plan, in an electronic format, to the 
            Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (Calrecycle) 
            that describes how the manufacturer will ensure recovery and 
            recycling of waste mattress generated by consumers who 
            purchase new mattresses, and, by April 1, 2014, to submit a 
            final mattress recovery plan to the department that ensures 
            the collection and recycling of specified percentages of waste 
            mattress by certain dates.

          2)Requires Calrecycle to post the initial plan on its website.

          3)Requires a manufacturer of mattresses sold in the state as of 
            July 1, 2013 to implement the initial plan. 

          4)Requires Calrecycle to review a final mattress plan and, 
            within 90 days of receipt, approve, disapprove or 
            conditionally approve the plan according to the requirements 
            of this bill.

          5)Prohibits, as of August 1, 2014, a mattress manufacturer from 
            selling a mattress in the state if the manufacturer is not 
            covered by a plan approved or conditionally approved by 
            Calrecycle.








                                                                  SB 1118
                                                                  Page  2


          6)Requires, as of July 1, 2013, Calrecycle to post on its 
            website a list of manufacturers in compliance with the 
            requirements of this bill.

          7)Requires a manufacturer submitting a mattress plan to pay 
            Calrecycle an administrative fee sufficient to cover the costs 
            of plan review, audits, enforcement and other related 
            administrative activities.

          8)Authorizes Calrecycle to impose an administrative civil 
            penalty for violations of the requirements of this bill, not 
            to exceed $1,000 per day, unless the violation is intentional, 
            knowing and negligent, in which case the penalty may not 
            exceed $10,000 per day.




          FISCAL EFFECT  

          1)One-time costs of approximately $100,000 to develop and adopt 
            the administrative fee amount, develop a database of mattress 
            manufacturers and retailers, and establish other 
            implementation procedures and systems (special fund).

          2)Ongoing costs of approximately $300,000 to $400,000 to 
            Calrecycle to review plans and determine their compliance with 
            the bill's requirements, and to enforce the requirements of 
            this bill, including audits, inspections and notifications 
            (special fund). 

          3)Fee revenue to Calyrecylce roughly equivalent to the 
            department's one-time and ongoing costs to implement this bill 
            (special fund).

          4)Penalty revenue of an unknown amount (special fund).

           COMMENTS 

           1)Rationale.   The author notes that mattresses, because of their 
            size and bulk, are inherently difficult to dispose of properly 
            and are hard to manage in landfills.  Mattress material, 
            however, mostly can be reused or recycled.  The author 
            describes an increasing number of mattresses being discarded 








                                                                  SB 1118
                                                                  Page  3

            illegally.  Such illegally disposed of mattresses, the author 
            adds, pose health and safety problem on communities and impose 
            costs on local governments who must collect the mattresses.  
            For example, the author cites numbers from the City of 
            Oakland, where city officials collect more than a dozen 
            discarded mattresses every day, with even greater numbers 
            reported by San Francisco and Los Angeles.  The author intends 
            this bill to result in a manufacturer-devised program of 
            mattress recovery and recycling that prevents mattresses from 
            ending up on our streets, vacant lots and open spaces.

           2)Background.   California has numerous programs to minimize and 
            manage the waste that results from the many products we 
            consume.  For example, state law requires local governments to 
            divert 50% of solid waste generated from landfill disposal 
            through source reduction, reuse, and recycling.  In addition, 
            legislatively established state programs levy fees on waste 
            motor oil and electronic goods to facilitate their collection 
            and recycling; require retailers of cell phones and 
            rechargeable batteries to accept them from consumers for 
            reuse, recycling or disposal; and compel producers of 
            home-generated medical sharps to develop a plan for the safe 
            collection and proper disposal of them.
                
             Rather than seeking to manage waste after it has been 
            produced, programs such as the mattress recovery and recycling 
            program envisioned by this bill seek to implement extended 
            producer responsibility (EPR), which addresses waste 
            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 a 
            financial incentive to reduce the generation of waste.  

            EPR was the adopted policy of the now-defunct Integrated Waste 
            Management Board and was supported by the League of California 
            Cities, California State Association of Counties, and the 
            Regional Council of Rural Counties.  Currently, California has 
            several statutorily required EPR programs, including the used 
            carpet recovery program (Chapter 681, statutes of 2010, (J. 
            Perez, AB 2398) and the used paint recovery program (Chapter 
            420, Statutes of 2010 (Huffman, AB 1343).)








                                                                  SB 1118
                                                                  Page  4


           3)Support.   This bill is supported by the cities of Oakland and 
            San Francisco and several waste management organizations.

           4)Opposition.   This bill is opposed by the California Chamber of 
            Commerce, the International Sleep Products Association and 
            other industry organizations who generally object to EPR 
            programs, describing them as costly and inefficient. 

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081