BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó




                   Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
                            Senator Kevin de León, Chair


          SB 1019 (Leno) - Upholstered furniture: flame retardant  
          chemicals.
          
          Amended: April 21, 2014         Policy Vote: EQ 6-0, BP&ED 9-0
          Urgency: No                     Mandate: Yes (see staff  
          comments)
          Hearing Date: May 12, 2014      Consultant: Marie Liu
          
          This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
          
          
          Bill Summary: SB 1019 would require upholstered furniture to  
          include a label indicating whether the product has added flame  
          retardant chemicals. This bill would also direct the Bureau of  
          Electronic and Appliance Repair, Home Furnishings and Thermal  
          Insulation (bureau) to ensure compliance with labeling and  
          documentation and to assess fines for violations.

          Fiscal Impact: 
              Ongoing costs, in the high hundreds of thousands to low  
              millions of dollars, from the Home Furnishing and Thermal  
              Insulation Fund (special) to the bureau for testing  
              associated with enforcing the labeling requirements of  
              upholstered furniture.

          Background: The Home Furnishings and Thermal Insulation Act  
          (act) requires mattresses, box springs, and all seating  
          furniture, manufactured for the sale in California to be fire  
          retardant. "Fire retardant" mattresses and boxsprings are  
          defined as a product that meets the standards for resistance to  
          an open-flame set in federal regulations (BPC §19161). The  
          bureau is authorized to adopt regulations to implement those  
          standards. These regulations are contained in Technical Bulletin  
          117 (TB-117). TB-117 was first adopted in 1975 and required that  
          a material be able to withstand a small open flame for at least  
          12 seconds. This standard was typically met by adding  
          halogenated organic flame retardants. In 2012, Governor Brown  
          directed the bureau to review the state's flammability standards  
          and recommend changes to reduce toxic flame retardants while  
          continuing to ensure fire safety. This review resulted in a  
          revision to the regulations in 2013 that allows upholstered  
          furniture to subject to a smolder standard instead of an  








          SB 1019 (Leno)
          Page 1


          open-flame standard, which does not require the use of flame  
          retardant chemicals in order to be in compliance.

          Proposed Law: This bill would require manufactures of  
          upholstered furniture to label the product with a specified  
          statement regarding whether the product has flame retardant  
          chemicals or not. The manufacturer would be required to retain  
          documentation supporting whether flame retardant chemicals were  
          added.

          This bill would charge the bureau with ensuring compliance with  
          the labeling and documentation requirements and to receive  
          customer complaints regarding the labeling requirement. The  
          bureau would be required to provide the Department of Toxic  
          Substances Control (DTSC) with samples to test for the presence  
          of flame retardant chemicals. DTSC would be required to provide  
          results to the bureau. If DTSC's tests indicate the presence of  
          flame retardant chemicals despite the product being labeled as  
          having no chemicals, the bureau would be able to request  
          additional testing at the manufacturer's expense to verify the  
          product's label.

          The bureau would be allowed to assess a fine for violation of  
          this bill's requirements. Fine levels would be based on  
          specified factors. This bill would establish maximum fines for  
          failing to maintain documentation and mislabeling a product.

          Related Legislation: AB 127 (Skinner) Chapter 579, Statutes of  
          2013 requires the State Fire Marshal to review the flammability  
          standards for building insulation materials.

          SB 147 (Leno, 2011) would have required the bureau to modify  
          TB-117 to include a smolder flammability test. (Measure failed  
          passage in the Senate BP&ED Committee)

          SB 1291 (Leno, 2010) would have required DTSC to include flame  
          retardants under the current chemical of concern regulations for  
          Green Chemistry. (Measure died on the Senate Floor inactive  
          file)

          SB 772 (Leno, 2009) would have exempted "juvenile products" from  
          the fire retardant requirements. (Measure failed passage in the  
          Assembly Appropriations Committee)









          SB 1019 (Leno)
          Page 2


          SB 706 (Leno, 2008) would have prohibited the use of certain  
          chemicals in bedding products. (Measure failed passage on the  
          Senate Floor)

          Staff Comments: The bureau indicates that it would incur minor  
          and absorbable costs to develop the regulations required to  
          implement this bill. 

          The bureau will incur costs associated with the enforcement of  
          the bill's requirements and associated regulations, particularly  
          the testing requirement. This bill does not specify the portion  
          of products that should be tested by the bureau or the frequency  
          of testing, although it would only test products that are  
          labeled as having no added flame retardant chemicals. However,  
          as a reference point, the bureau currently tests around 300  
          products annually for compliance with TB-117.

          Testing costs would include the cost to transport the samples to  
          DTSC (which may be minor), equipment costs, and staff time to  
          conduct the tests. Each product would potentially require 6 to  
          12 samples (e.g. different components of a couch) with each  
          sample costing in the range of $1,500 to test (each sample may  
          be subject to more than one analysis). Assuming the bureau would  
          only consider testing products that are also being tested for  
          compliance with TB-117 and assuming that a third of the products  
          are labeled as having no added flame retardant chemicals (i.e.  
          100 products), testing costs could range between $900,000 and  
          $1.8 million. These costs could be higher if DTSC needs to buy  
          new or additional equipment or if the testing workload would  
          necessitate the hiring additional staff. Staff notes that these  
          testing costs are based on testing for chemicals that are known  
          to be added for flame retardancy (approximately 60 chemicals).  
          Should the list of chemicals that are considered flame  
          retardants grow, testing costs could increase. DTSC would  
          conduct the tests, but the bureau would reimburse DTSC for its  
          costs. 

          This bill would also require the bureau to receive complaints  
          from customers concerning compliance with this bill's labeling  
          requirements. The Bureau currently has a Complaint Resolution  
          Unit. It is unknown how this bill might increase the workload of  
          this unit, but staff assumes that the change in workload would  
          be minor and absorbable.









          SB 1019 (Leno)
          Page 3


          This bill contains codified findings and declarations.  In the  
          interest of code clarity and efficiency, staff recommends this  
          bill be amended to place the findings and declarations in an  
          uncodified section of the bill.

          This bill is creates a state mandate as it creates a new crime.  
          However, this mandate is not reimbursable.