BILL ANALYSIS Ó Bill No: SB 916 SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION Senator Lou Correa, Chair 2013-2014 Regular Session Staff Analysis SB 916 Author: Correa As Amended: March 19, 2014 Hearing Date: April 22, 2014 Consultant: Paul Donahue SUBJECT Biosynthetic lubricating oil: State procurement and retail sale DESCRIPTION Effective January 1, 2016, requires state agencies that procure lubricating oil for state vehicles to purchase biosynthetic lubricating oil that meets specified standards for biodegradability and that has been certified, as specified. Subject to certain conditions, prohibits the sale of lubricating oil in California after January 1, 2017 unless these specific standards are met and certifications obtained. Specifically, this bill : 1)Defines "lubricating oil" as motor oil intended for use in an internal combustion gasoline or diesel engine used in passenger cars, light-duty trucks, or vans. 2)Expands the definition of "used oil" in existing law to include synthetic oils composed of bio-based feedstock, not just oil or synthetic oil refined from crude oil. 3)States that "minimal standards for biodegradability" SB 916 (Correa) continued PageB means that the amount of biobased content<1> within the lubricating oil is not less than 25 percent and that the biobased content is biodegradable.<2> 4)Provides that, on and after January 1, 2016, every procuring agency<3> in state government that purchases lubricating oil shall only purchase biosynthetic lubricants<4> that meet the all of the following requirements: a) It is a biosynthetic lubricant and meets or exceeds minimal standards for biodegradability. b) It is, at the time of sale, certified for use by the American Petroleum Institute's Engine Oil Licensing Certification System. c) It is, at the time of sale and based on a life-cycle analysis, certified by a third party sustainable biomaterials certification entity to be both of the following: i) Produced without causing higher greenhouse gas ---------------------- <1> "Biobased content" is defined in the bill as the amount of biobased carbon within a biosynthetic lubricant, expressed as a percent of total weight (mass) of the organic carbon within the product, as determined by using the ASTM D6866-12 (standard test methods for determining the biobased content of solid, liquid, and gaseous samples using radiocarbon analysis), as that test method read on January 1, 2013. <2> This bill defines "biodegradable" to mean a substance that can demonstrate the removal of at least 70 percent of dissolved organic carbon; produces at least 60 percent theoretical carbon dioxide; consumes at least 60 percent of the theoretical oxygen demand; OR the substance meets other specified requirements. <3> "Procuring agency" means any state agency or any person or entity contracting with that agency for the supply of lubricating oil to the state. <4> A "biosynthetic lubricant" is lubricating oil that contains a biobased product. SB 916 (Correa) continued PageC or criteria pollutant emissions than comparable petroleum-based lubricants. ii) Produced without having significant negative impacts on food security.<5> 5)Specifies that before July 31, 2015, the Department of General Services (DGS) shall provide language for a state agency to include in a contract or grant that implements the above biosynthetic lubricating oil procurement requirements. 6)Specifies that, when procuring lubricating oil for gasoline or diesel engines used in passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and vans, a state agency, city, county, district, including a school district and community college district, may purchase lubricating oil that meets the standards and is certified according to the terms of this bill. 7)Requires DGS to list on its website the names of lubricating oil products that meet or exceed the standards and certifications of the bill, and transmit a copy of this list to the University of California (UC) to facilitate UC's procurement efforts. 8)Prohibits the sale of lubricating oil in the State after January 1, 2017 unless the producer of the lubricating oil files a document with the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), by which the producer verifies that the lubricating oil is in compliance with biodegradability standards and other certifications and requirements outlined above [See Paragraph 4), supra]. a) Requires CalRecycle to acknowledge receipt of this self-verification by providing the producer with a unique lubricating oil biodegradability compliance number for each product self-verified by the producer. ----------------------- <5> The bill authorizes a Director of the Department of Resources, Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), who has reason to believe that either of the certifications (greenhouse gas/criteria pollutant or food security) is not scientifically conclusive, to require another third party sustainable biomaterials certification entity to re-examine the certification. SB 916 (Correa) continued PageD b) Specifies that by acknowledging receipt of self-verification of compliance, CalRecycle shall not be deemed to be ensuring the veracity of the information provided by the producer. c) Specifies that a producer of lubricating oil shall verify that the biosynthetic oil meets all applicable standards and requirements each time the lubricating oil is re-certified by the American Petroleum Institute's Engine Oil Licensing Certification System. 9)Authorizes the Director of CalRecycle, in consultation with an advisory committee created by this bill , to grant one-year delays, beginning on July 1, 2015, in both the government procurement and retail sale mandates if the director finds that the biosynthetic lubricating oil is not commercially available.<6> 10)Provides that a procuring agency or sellers of oil are allowed no longer than the later of 12 months after the retail sale mandate, or after the end of the last of all extensions granted by the director of CalRecycle, to sell stock on hand, and requires that persons subject to these mandates to maintain records for review by CalRecycle to verify that the lubricating oil sold was in the legal possession of the seller before those times. 11)Requires CalRecycle to inform local agencies and individuals of the benefits of biosynthetic lubricating oils. 12)Contains several legislative findings and declarations claiming, among other things, that a significant source of stormwater pollution will be reduced with the use of biosynthetic lubricants; these lubricants will reduce greenhouse gases; and that the benefits to public health and the environment make biosynthetic oil a cost-effective alternative to petroleum-based lubricating oil. EXISTING LAW ------------------------- <6> In deciding whether to grant of deny an extension, the director of CalRecycle shall consider, but not be bound by, the recommendation of the advisory committee. SB 916 (Correa) continued PageE 1)Prohibits the sale of engine oil and lubricating oil unless the product conforms to certain specifications. 2)Regulates used oil as a hazardous waste, and defines "used oil" to mean oil that has been refined from crude oil, or any synthetic oil, that has been used, and, as a result of use or as a consequence of extended storage, or spillage, has been contaminated with physical or chemical impurities. 3)Requires state agencies and contractors with state agencies to purchase lubricating oil containing the greatest percentage of recycled oil, unless a specified certification is made. 4)Requires local agencies to purchase lubricating oil that contains recycled oil if the product meets specified conditions. 5)The California Oil Recycling Enhancement Act, administered by CalRecycle, imposes a charge upon the sale of lubricating oil to provide, among other things, grants and contracts to local governments, nonprofit entities, and private entities and recycling incentives to every industrial generator, curbside collection program, and certified used oil collection center for collected or generated used lubricating oil. 6)Establishes a goal of reducing or displacing the consumption of petroleum products by the State fleet when compared to the 2003 consumption levels. 7)Requires DGS, in consultation with the California Environmental Protection Agency, members of the public, industry, and public health and environmental organizations, to provide state agencies with information and assistance regarding environmentally preferable purchasing. BACKGROUND 1)Author's statement : According to the author's office, biosynthetic lubricating oils, formulated with a percentage of bio-based, biodegradable content, are newly developed technologies that can reduce the adverse SB 916 (Correa) continued PageF environmental impacts of motor oil, improve water and air quality, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, all while improving vehicle performance and fuel economy. The author's office states that these biosynthetic lubricating oils have performance qualities similar or superior to other synthetic lubricants, but with added environmental and public health benefits - the oils are biodegradable, non-toxic and do not bio-accumulate in marine organisms. The author notes that used motor oil is the largest volume of hazardous waste generated in California, with approximately 150 million gallons of motor oil purchased every year generating over 90 million gallons of used oil. The author states that an estimated 14-16 million gallons are illegally dumped, ending up in California's rivers, lakes and streams, degrading our drinking water supplies and adding to storm water and coastal pollution. Furthermore, about 60 million gallons of motor oil are lost in use, either burned in the combustion chamber or dripped onto streets and parking lots, creating a "silent oil spill." Federal reports indicate that used motor oil accounts for more than 40 percent of the total oil pollution of our nation's harbors and waterways. This oil is, by definition, uncollectable. That these materials are problematic to our nation's waterways and the oceans of the world is widely understood. Reducing the source of toxic contaminants such as petroleum oils has significant economic and environmental benefits. SB 916 will benefit California's water resources and foster accelerated development of this important, emerging technology. 2)Biosynthetic lubricants : According to the proponents, biosynthetic lubricant manufacturing technology is well established, and is capable of supplying a high-performance, bio-based, biodegradable blend of lubricating oil for use as a base oil<7> in gasoline and diesel engines in passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and vans. Proponents add that a recent life cycle analysis ------------------------- <7> According to Biosynthetic Technologies, a sponsor of SB 916, finished motor oils and lubricants are formulated by blending the base oil and additives to make the final product. SB 916 (Correa) continued PageG shows this new technology offers an 83% to 88% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions as compared to similar petroleum based synthetic oils. According to industry literature, there are a number of advantages to bio-based crankcase oils. Technically, when compared to mineral oils, bio-based oils have excellent lubricity, low evaporation rates, and high viscosity indices. The primary disadvantage of bio-based oils is that they lack sufficient oxidative stability in their natural form. Chemical additives and antioxidants are being used to address this problem.<8> Proponents state that, in the past, arguments against lubricants sourced from biological sources have cited poor engine protection performance, oil degradation and cleanliness with their use. Until recently, these were reasonable concerns, but new proprietary technologies have shown that the motor oils currently being used by automakers could perform equally well - or even much better - when co-blended with as much as 25% biosynthetic oil. 3)Is there sufficient production capacity ? Effective January 1, 2016, SB 916 requires state agencies and state contractors to purchase lubricating oil that meets minimal standards and certifications, and bans the sale of lubricating oil in California after January 1, 2017 unless it meets these minimal standards for biosynthetic lubricants. The author's office states that, if SB 916 were fully implemented, approximately 32 million gallons of biosynthetic base oil would be required, but that, per industry estimates, there are approximately 135 million gallons of base oil production capacity currently available, with expansion capacity at over 330 million ------------------------ <8> Josh Pickle; "The Advantages and Disadvantages of Biodegradable Lubricants," Machinery Lubrication, February, 2012. See also, European Renewable Resources & Materials Association, at http://www.errma.com/technologies/bio-based-lubricants/ SB 916 (Correa) continued PageH gallons.<9> The author states that, as markets develop, investment will continue to flow to production of these products. Many producers can manufacture bio-based synthetic esters, with little or no modification to existing equipment. All that is required in many instances is to switch to a bio-based feedstock. The author's office states further that procurement officials now have access to environmentally superior, cost-effective technologies such as that developed by the USDA. Many companies have developed this biosynthetic technology based on the USDA patents. Availability of large quantities of bio-based base oil definitely helps to accelerate prospects for widespread commercialization of biosynthetic lubricants.<10> Opponents dispute the fact that there is sufficient production capacity of biosynthetic oils to meet the mandates set forth in SB 916. They state that bio-based oils are classified in the American Petroleum Institute (API) Group V category, which requires each unique lubricant formulation with bio-based oils to be certified through a comprehensive testing program, which is rigorous, expensive and time-consuming, requiring laboratory and actual engine-use tests, and in some cases, lengthy field tests. Qualifying a single formulation can cost millions of dollars. The opponents state that few if any bio-based, biodegradable lubricants are currently approved for use, and contend that it would likely be impossible to have enough qualified lubricants by the 2016 state procurement deadline, let alone the 2017 retail sale mandate deadline. The author's office responds by first noting that biosynthetic motor oils are simply synthetic motor oils formulated with a percentage of bio-based and biodegradable content, and that feedstocks used to ------------------------ <9> According to information supplied by proponents, the largest existing suppliers of biosynthetic base oils currently operating include ExxonMobil (Louisiana), with annual production capacity of 45 million gallons, Elevance (Indonesia), with annual production capacity of 41 million gallons, and BASF (Texas, France, & Germany), with annual production capacity of 25 million gallons. <10> See, e.g., Fuels and Lubes International Journal, Quarter Four, pp 22- 28, 2013 SB 916 (Correa) continued PageI produce this motor oil are readily available. The author further notes that practically every major oil and chemical company in the world is investing in this technology, including BP, Shell and Exxon. Finally, the author states that, based on industry recommendations, SB 916 allows the Director of CalRecycle to grant one-year extensions to the mandates in the bill if biosynthetic motor oils are not commercially available. These safeguards will help ensure sufficient supply and give the market time to adjust. 4)API certification, auto manufacturer warranties, and related issues : As noted above, SB 916 requires state agencies and state contractors to purchase lubricating oil that meets minimal standards for biodegradability, and bans the sale of lubricating oil in California after January 1, 2017 unless it meets these minimal standards for biodegradability. However, the above mandates will not be imposed in California under SB 916 unless the biosynthetic lubricating oils are, at the time of sale, certified for use by the Engine Oil Licensing Certification System (EOLCS) of the American Petroleum Institute (API).<11> The International Lubricants Standardization and Approval Committee (ILSAC), was formed in 1992 by American and Japanese auto manufacturers to represent their interests to the API. Since 1992, there have been five successive ------------------------ <11> According to the API, the EOLCS is a voluntary licensing and certification program that authorizes engine oil marketers who meet specified requirements to use the API Engine Oil Quality Marks. Launched in 1993, API's Engine Oil Program is a cooperative effort between the oil and additive industries and vehicle and engine manufacturers Ford, General Motors, and Chrysler and those represented by the Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association and the Engine Manufacturers Association. The performance requirements and test methods are established by vehicle and engine manufacturers and technical societies and trade associations. The EOLCS Program is backed by an ongoing monitoring and enforcement program that ensures licensees adhere to program requirements. (http://www.api.org/eolcs) SB 916 (Correa) continued PageJ API/ILSAC standards that have become the minimum requirement for oil used in American and Japanese automobiles.<12> This standard is typically amended every 3-5 years, and the next ILSAC standard (ILSAC GF-6) is expected to be certified and introduced to the market in January 2017.<13> Opponents contend that, given the limitations of API and ILSAC classifications and certifications, it is highly unlikely that any of the biosynthetic engine oils mandated by SB 916 would receive next generation API/ILSAC approval in time for the planned introduction date of these oils in 2017. Therefore, opponents question the appropriateness of the statewide retail mandate for these oils in SB 916 that also begins in January 2017. The opponents add that auto manufacturers are reluctant to grant approvals to new components with which they are unfamiliar unless sufficient data has been developed and real world testing has demonstrated adequate performance, which they contend hasn't been done for bio-based lubricating oils. Opponents suggest that this API/ILSAC certification issue is hugely problematic for state purchasing programs, because it raises concerns about the risk that vehicle manufacturers will void warranties of any vehicles using bio-based motor oil products not licensed by API. The author counters, first by reminding opponents that the retail sale mandate does not take effect unless the biosynthetic lubricating oils are, at the time of sale, certified for use by the API. The author also notes that, due to superior performance, many new and high-performance vehicle manufacturers like Mercedes Benz, BMW and Volkswagen require the use of synthetic motor oil in their vehicles, and that biosynthetic motor oils meet or exceed all existing motor oil standards. The ------------------------ <12> The current standard is ILSAC GF-5. Introduced in October 2010 for 2011 and older vehicles, it is designed to provide improved high temperature deposit protection for pistons and turbochargers, more stringent sludge control, improved fuel economy, enhanced emission control system compatibility, seal compatibility, and protection of engines operating on ethanol-containing fuels up to E85. <13> See, e.g., http://www.pceo.com/ilsac_timeline SB 916 (Correa) continued PageK author reiterates that the API and ILSAC standards are the baseline, but states that vehicle manufacturers are prohibited by federal law from including the requirement of the use of a specific brand or trade name of product or service as a condition of a warranty.<14> 5)Recycling and rerefining of used oil : CalRecycle licenses used oil collection centers, which accept used lubricating oil from the public and are exempt from laws requiring hazardous waste facility permits.<15> CalRecycle also licenses used oil recycling facilities that convert used oil into recycled oil.<16> The recycled oil program administered by CalRecycle promotes advances in technologies, including use of rerefined oil in automotive and industrial lubricants.<17> According to CalRecycle, there are 4 used oil recycling facilities in California, and one used oil rerefining facilities. Used oil is managed as a hazardous waste under California law.<18> In 1991, the US EPA issued guidelines for used oil management standards that classified used oil as a hazardous waste only if it contained specific contaminants, such as chlorine. Federal law and regulations define used oil as "any oil that has been refined from crude oil, or any synthetic oil, that has ------------------------ <14> This is an apparent reference to the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C. § 2301 et seq.), which makes it illegal for companies to void a warranty, or deny coverage under the warranty, simply because an aftermarket or recycled part was used. If an aftermarket product is defective, and causes damage to another part that is covered under the warranty, the manufacturer or dealer has the right to deny coverage for that part and charge for any repairs. (See https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0138-auto-warranties-r outine-maintenance) <15> Pub. Res. Code § 48622. <16> Pub. Res. Code § 48624. <17> Pub.Res. Code § 48632. <18> Health & Safety Code 25250.4 (a) SB 916 (Correa) continued PageL been used and as a result of such use is contaminated by physical or chemical impurities." <19>According to the US EPA, the first criterion for identifying used oil is based on the origin of the oil. Used oil must have been refined from crude oil or made from synthetic materials. Animal and vegetable oils are excluded from EPA's definition of used oil. In a used oil guidance document, US EPA states that used oil is not vegetable and animal oil, even when used as a lubricant. <20> Relying on these federal documents and regulations, opponents to SB 916 contend that the inclusion of bio-based animal and vegetable oils in lubricating oil, and ultimately, used oil, is a direct violation of federal law and as a result, it jeopardizes the state's increasingly successful used oil management program, particularly since most oil recycling and all oil rerefining is done outside California. Opponents say that there has been no testing to determine whether bio-based oil can be rerefined and whether it is compatible with existing refining technology. Opponents contend that their own internal testing suggests that used material generated from bio-based lubricants cannot be rerefined. Regardless of the results of any testing, opponents state that re-refiners will not violate federal law by accepting used motor oil that is bio-based. The author and proponents counter argue that opponents are ignoring federal regulations that govern mixtures of used oil and products, such as bio-based materials, that are also subject to regulation as used oil. In particular, 40 CFR § 279.10(d) provides in part that "mixtures of used oils and fuels or other fuel products are subject to regulation as used oil?" The issue raised is whether or not a "mixture" of used oil containing bio-based materials would be classified as a mixture of used oil and fuel or other fuel products. Proponents argue that it is, and state that a clarifying letter from US EPA should be forthcoming. Moreover, ------------------------ <19> See 42 U.S.C. § 6903; 40 CFR § 279.1 <20> See, http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/materials/usedoil/usedoil.ht m SB 916 (Correa) continued PageM proponents say that this is clearly the intent of federal laws, noting that US Department of Agriculture's Bio-Preferred Program recently designated bio-based crankcase oils as a new product category under the federal procurement preference for bio-based products. Opponents state that mixtures of used oil and other products are expressly limited by federal regulation to fuels, i.e., diesel. The author and proponents also note that California regulations define synthetic oil and specify that "vegetable or animal oil used as a lubricant, hydraulic fluid, heat transfer fluid, or for other similar industrial purposes shall be managed as used oil if it is identified as a non-RCRA [California-only] hazardous waste." 6)Environmental benefits : The author states that, compared to petroleum based lubricants, biosynthetic lubricants biodegrade much faster, helping to reduce stormwater pollution at the source. In addition to biodegradability, biosynthetic lubricants have substantially lower toxicity and do not bioaccumulate. The author also notes that the Department of Defense has stated that the "control of pollutants from automobile use could be a more direct and cost effective method to reduce the level of contaminants entering water bodies statewide.<21> The author also states that, compared to petroleum based lubricants, biosynthetic lubricants biodegrade much faster, helping to reduce stormwater pollution at the source. In addition to biodegradability, biosynthetic lubricants have substantially lower toxicity and do not ------------------------- <21> Comment letter, C.L. Stathos, Regional Environmental Coordinator, Department of Defense, on Final Draft Industrial General Permit, State Water Resources Control Board, dated March 13, 2014 SB 916 (Correa) continued PageN bio-accumulate.<22> A third party life cycle analysis demonstrates biosynthetic motor oils have significantly lower greenhouse gas emissions.<23> These motor oils reduce piston deposits and allow for longer oil drain intervals, providing for cleaner engines and better fuel efficiency<24>. The author and proponents state further that product performance data on biosynthetic oils greatly reduced piston deposits, and that these products have oxidative stability, meaning that they will reduce petroleum consumption and prevent pollution. As to biodegradability, proponents state that testing of biosynthetic lubricants indicate that these oils achieved between 68% and 74% biodegradation, as compared to 41% to 47% for conventional motor oils. Among other things, opponents argue that the desired outcome of biodegradable lubricants will not be achieved because fully-formulated, additized lubricants will inhibit biodegradation of the base oil fraction and ecotoxicity impacts will remain essentially the same as petroleum-based lubricating oils. Opponents add that the metal and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon contaminants associated with used motor oil in storm water discharges do not originate from the base oil, but rather occur as a result of the lubricant being used in its intended application. ------------------------ <22>United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Waste Water Management, "Environmentally Acceptable Lubricants," EPA 800-R-11-002, Washington, DC, November 2011, http://nepis.epa.gov/EPA/html/DLwait.htm?url=/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi? Dockey=P100DCJI.PDF <23> Dustin Mulvaney, "Life Cycle Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Biosynthetic Base Oil (BBO) compared to Poly-Alpha Olefin (PAO) Base Oil," EcoShift Consulting, February 3, 2013, http://biosynthetic.com/wp-content/uploads/Biosynthetic-Tech nologies-GHG-LCA-Report2.pdf <24> "Lubricant Technical Performance," Biosynthetic Technologies, http://biosynthetic.com/lubricant-technical-performance SB 916 (Correa) continued PageO 7)State procurement mandate to purchase biosynthetic oil : Existing law requires state agencies to reduce consumption of petroleum products in their fleet of vehicles, including through the use of synthetic motor oils.<25> The author and proponents state that the use of biosynthetic lubricating oil will advance state policy to reduce the state fleet's petroleum consumption, and will also protect the environment. The author also notes that the State Petroleum Reduction Plan identifies the use of synthetic motor oil and extending the intervals between oil changes (which is an added benefit of synthetic oils) as a way to reduce the state fleet's consumption of petroleum. DGS reports that, in working to meet the statutory goals, the State fleet has reduced its petroleum consumption by 13% and is projected to attain the 2020 goal of a 20% overall reduction. Key to the success has been development and implementation of a plan that has improved the State fleet's overall use of alternative fuels, the reduction of unneeded fleet vehicles, and reducing unnecessary vehicle miles traveled. DGS concludes that the State fleet is on a trajectory to "meet or exceed the 20-percent petroleum reduction goal by 2020." <26> In further support of the state procurement mandate for biosynthetic motor oil in state vehicles, proponents cite the US Department of Agriculture's Bio-Preferred Program, noting that the USDA program also requires a minimum 25% bio-content for motor fuels. In addition, bio-based crankcase oils have recently been added to the Program as a new product category under the federal procurement ------------------------ <25> Public Resources Code § 25722.8 requires DGS to implement a plan to improve the overall state fleet's use of alternative fuels, synthetic lubricants, and fuel-efficient vehicles by reducing or displacing the consumption of petroleum products by the state fleet when compared to the 2003 consumption level. The goal is a 20% reduction or displacement by January 1, 2020. <26> 2012 Progress Report For Reducing or Displacing the Consumption of Petroleum Products by the State Fleet, available at http://www.dgs.ca.gov/ofam/Resources/PetrolReduc.aspx SB 916 (Correa) continued PageP preference. The USDA Bio-Preferred Program designates categories of bio-based products that are afforded preference by Federal agencies when making purchasing decisions. Opponents to SB 916 contend that SB 916 would impose significant new costs on state and local governments because bio-based lubricant ingredients can be substantially more costly than current base oil components. They state that SB 916 would force governmental agencies and the public to shoulder the higher production cost without corresponding, measurable reduction in environmental impacts. 8)Additional arguments in support and opposition : Supporters believe that SB 916 will offer California companies new opportunities to compete with the fossil fuel industry in motor oil as well as other lubricants and bio-based products not covered by this new standard. Additionally, the benefits of longer intervals between oil changes, the reduced consumption of lubricating oil over the life of a vehicle, and the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions make biosynthetic oils a cost-effective alternative for vehicles in the state fleet and in general use by Californians. Opponents are concerned that SB 916 would establish a troubling precedent by having the Legislature mandate an unproven technology based on speculative benefits and without regard for predictable impacts on the private and public sectors. If added testing bears out the sponsor's claims, opponents suggest that biosynthetic lubricating oil will succeed in the marketplace on its own merits, and it does not need a market share guaranteed in state law. 9)Lubricating oil definitions : The definition of "lubricating oils" in existing law differs from that which is contained in SB 916. In Section 48618 of the Public Resources Code, "lubricating oil" includes, but is not limited to, "any oil intended for use in an internal combustion engine crankcase, transmission, gearbox, or differential in an automobile, bus, truck, vessel, plane, train, heavy equipment, or other machinery powered by an internal combustion engine." In SB 916, "lubricating oil" means "oil intended for use in an internal combustion SB 916 (Correa) continued PageQ gasoline or diesel engine used in passenger cars, light-duty trucks, or vans." To avoid confusion, SB 916 should be amended to conform to the more complete definition of "lubricating oils" in Pub. Res. Code § 48618. Alternatively, SB 916 should be amended to expressly acknowledge that the definition of "lubricating oil" in SB 916 is intended to be narrower than that which exists in existing law. PRIOR/RELATED LEGISLATION SB 546 (Lowenthal), Chapter 353, Statutes of 2009. Raised the recycling fee paid by lubricating oil manufacturers from $0.16 to $0.26 per gallon; increased the incentives paid for recycling used oil; increased the testing requirements for used oil transporters and requires a life cycle analysis of used oil. AB 236 (Lieu), Chapter 593, Statutes of 2007. Among other things, established the goal of reducing or displacing the consumption of petroleum products by the State fleet when compared to the 2003 consumption levels AB 1201 (Pavley), Chapter 317, Statutes of 2001. Added stormwater pollution mitigation and education projects to the activities considered as eligible projects for the various competitive grant programs funded through the California Used Oil Recycling Fund, upon approval of the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). SB 1979 (O'Connell), Chapter 901, Statutes of 1996. Among other things, mandates a funding level for CIWMB grants and loans for used oil research, testing and demonstration projects designed to develop uses and markets for products resulting from the recycling of used oil. Includes asphalt flux produced from the reprocessing or re-refining of used oil as a recycled material to be used in specified paving materials purchased by the California Department of Transportation. SB 734 (Rosenthal), Chapter 939, Statutes of 1993. Requires state agencies to purchase rerefined products when they are of the same quality and not more than 5 percent more costly than virgin lubricants. AB 712 (Sher) Chapter 675, Statutes of 1993. Extended from SB 916 (Correa) continued PageR 70 to 120 the number of days the CIWMB has to report on accumulated industrial and lubricating oil sales and used oil recycling rates. Created a misdemeanor for making a false claim of exemption from payment of used oil recycling fees, punishable by imprisonment for not more than one year and a fine not to exceed $5,000. Made other technical amendments to the Used Oil Recycling Program. AB 2076 (Sher), Chapter 817, Statutes of 1991. Enacted the California Oil Recycling Enhancement Act, creating a Used Oil Recycling Program to promote and develop alternatives to the illegal disposal of used oil. Among other things, requires certified collection centers to accept used oil from the public, without charge, during business hours, and to remit recycling incentives to those who bring oil to the centers. SUPPORT: Biosynthetic Technologies (sponsor) Orange County Coastkeeper (sponsor) Algae Biomass Organization American Logistics Company American Neuro-Psychiatric Network, Inc. American Sustainable Business Council Arnel & Affiliates ASEA Holdings, LLC Athletes First Bioamerica Beta Analytic, Inc. Blue River Advisors California Black Health Network CleanTECH San Diego EcoShift Consulting (Dustin Mulvaney, Principal) Elevance Renewable Science, Inc. Environmental Defense Fund Flexi-Liner Corporation G-C Lubricants Company Green Earth Technologies Insight Accounting Insight Wealth Strategies Jerry Kohlenberger Marine Watch Mission Blue Modlar, Inc. SB 916 (Correa) continued PageS M-Wave International Nettleton Strategies, LLC Newport Bay Hospital Ohio State University, Bioproduct Innovation Center (Dennis Hall, Director) Preferred Hotel Group Redwood Innovation Partners Sapphire Energy, Inc. Scheweickert and Company Searles Company Solazyme, Inc. Strategic Ocean Solutions T2e Energy Verdezyne Wildcoast World Innovation OPPOSE: Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers American Chemical Council Associated Builders and Contractors of California Automotive Specialty Products Alliance California Chamber of Commerce California Construction Trucking Association California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance California Independent Oil Marketers Association California League of Food Processors California Manufacturers and Technology Association California Metals Coalition Center for Food Safety Chemical Industry Council of California Clean Harbors Coalition of Energy Users Consumer Specialty Products Association Enterprise Holdings (Enterprise Rent a Car) Independent Lubricant Manufacturers Association Independent Oil Producers Association Kern County Taxpayers Association Motor and Equipment Manufacturers Association National Federation of Independent Business Safety-Kleen Santa Barbara Technology and Industry Association Small Business Action Committee Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association Western States Petroleum Association SB 916 (Correa) continued PageT DUAL REFFERRAL : Senate Environmental Quality Committee FISCAL COMMITTEE: Senate Appropriations Committee **********