BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 282 Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 28, 2015 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES Kansen Chu, Chair AB 282 (Eggman) - As Amended April 22, 2015 SUBJECT: Corded window coverings SUMMARY: Prohibits the sale of corded window coverings in California and requires their removal or alteration in licensed community care and child day care facilities serving children under the age of 6. Specifically, this bill: 1)Defines "accessible cord" as any cord with a length over seven and three-quarter inches, including a cord that can be extended or pulled to exceed that length. 2)Defines "corded window covering" as a window covering, such as blinds or shades, that has an accessible cord. 3)Makes it unlawful, as of January 1, 2018, to sell a corded window covering to anyone located in California unless the cord cannot be eliminated, in which case the window covering may be sold if the cord is made inaccessible through the use of a passive guarding device, such as a cord cover. AB 282 Page 2 4)Requires, by January 1, 2019, every child day care facility, and every state-licensed or -certified community care facility, as specified, that serves children under the age of 6 to remove all corded window coverings or to make the accessible cord inaccessible through the use of an effective passive guarding device, such as a cord cover. EXISTING LAW: 1)Regulates, among other things, the sale of consumer goods within California. (BPC 18400 et seq.) 2)Establishes the California Community Care Facilities Act to provide for the licensure and regulation of community care facilities. (HSC 1500 et seq.) 3)Defines "community care facility" to mean any facility, place, or building that is maintained and operated to provide nonmedical residential care, day treatment, adult day care, or foster family agency services for children, adults, or children and adults, including, but not limited to, individuals with physical disabilities or mental impairments and abused or neglected children. Includes within this definition, among a number of other facilities: foster family homes, small family homes, full-service adoption agencies, noncustodial adoption agencies, and transitional shelters. (HSC 1502) 4)Establishes the California Child Day Care Facilities Act, creating a separate licensing category for child day care centers and family day care homes within the Department of Social Services' (DSS) existing licensing structure. (HSC AB 282 Page 3 1596.70 et seq.) 5)Defines "day care center" to include infant centers, preschools, extended day care facilities, and school-age child care centers. (HSC 1596.76) 6)Requires community care facilities and child day care facilities operating in California, as specified, to have a valid license. (HSC 1503.5 and 1596.80) 7)Requires DSS to conduct unannounced visits of each licensed community care facility, except for foster family homes, and each licensed day care center and requires that no facility or center be visited less frequently than once every five years. Further requires DSS to conduct annual unannounced visits of licensed facilities and centers under specified circumstances, such as when a license is on probation. Additionally requires annual visits of a random sample of at least 20% of facilities and centers not subject to annual inspections for specified circumstances and states that, should the total citations for this 20% of facilities and centers exceed the previous year's by 10%, the random sample subject to annual inspection shall increase in the next year by 10%. Because of this trigger, 30% of eligible facilities and centers are now randomly sampled each year for inspection. (HSC 1534 and 1597.09) FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown COMMENTS: Licensing and oversight of community care facilities and child care centers: The Community Care Licensing Division (CCLD) AB 282 Page 4 within DSS licenses a variety of facilities, including: child care centers, family child care homes, adult day care facilities, foster family care homes, other children's residential facilities, and adult and senior residential facilities, including RCFEs. There are approximately 65,000 licensed care facilities in the state, with the capacity to serve 1.3 million Californians. CCLD conducts random inspections of 30% of facilities annually, and each facility must be visited at least once every five years. Some exceptions triggering more frequent inspections exist, and federal funding requires approximately10% of facilities to be inspected annually. Approximately 500 licensing analysts are employed by CCLD to conduct inspections and complaint investigations. Prior to 2004, annual inspections were required for most facilities; the 2003-04 state budget reduced this to once every five years. The 2014-15 budget included a 10% increase in annual licensing and application fees, and investments in quality enhancement, including increased staff, training, a quality assurance unit, and centralization of application and complaint processes. Dangers associated with corded window coverings: There are a wide range of window covering products, including blinds, shades, curtains and draperies. Blinds (window coverings typically made up of slats or similar) and shades (generally, containing a continuous roll of material) can both have a cord mechanism used for opening, closing, and otherwise moving them. Curtains and draperies may also have a loop-type cord. These cords can present a risk of strangulation for young children, and numerous deaths have been attributed to window covering cords. According to research conducted by the U.S. AB 282 Page 5 Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) staff, a minimum of 11 fatal strangulations related to window covering cords occurred on average annually among children under the age of 5 between the years 1999 and 2010. Additionally, CPSC estimated that between 1996 and 2012, 1,590 children across the country received treatment resulting from entanglement with window covering cords. To get a better understanding of the problem, CPSC staff conducted a review of available data, gathering a sample representing 285 incidents, 184 of which resulted in death. Of this sample, CPSC staff was able to review details for 249 incidents, determining that the most common types of window coverings involved were: horizontal blinds (53% of incidents), vertical blinds (17%), and Roman shades (11%). The most common types of cords involved in these incidents were: pull cords (41% of incidents), continuous loops (28%), and inner cords (19%). While the sample of incidents used in this analysis was not a statistical sample of known probability, these results do point to the association of risk with a variety of window coverings and types of cords. Existing standards for corded window coverings: In 1996, the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the Window Covering Manufacturers Association (WCMA) first published a voluntary standard to address the dangers of window covering cords. This standard has been updated periodically, most recently in 2014. The 2014 ANSI/WCMA voluntary standard - the ANSI/WCMA A100.1-2014 American National Standard for Safety of Corded Window Covering Products - applies to all corded window covering products and includes definitions, product requirements, labeling and operational tag requirements, and tests and parameters. CPSC staff assessed the 2014 ANSI/WCMA voluntary standard and found that, of the incidents they had investigated, 57% were not sufficiently addressed by the standard. The standard does AB 282 Page 6 address the hazards found in about one-quarter of the incidents, and another 18% of incidents yielded insufficient information to make a determination either way. Proposed rulemaking regarding corded window coverings: In 2013, the sponsor of this bill, along with a number of other parties, petitioned the CPSC, requesting it to promulgate a mandatory standard containing the same provision found in this bill: forbidding window covering cords, unless they are made inaccessible through a passive guarding device when a feasible cordless alternative does not exist. In October of 2014, the CPSC granted this petition to initiate rulemaking regarding window covering safety standards, and began seeking information and public comment. This comment period has been extended until June 1, 2015. CPSC will reviews comments upon closure of the comment period and publish a preliminary analysis. Whether or when CPSC will publish a final rule is as yet undetermined. Critics have pointed to the "decades of back and forth on cord risks" since the CPSC first called window blind cords a "particularly insidious hazard" in 1981. Additionally, the perceived ineffectiveness of the voluntary standards has drawn attention, including that of the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). In an October 2014 report on the CPSC, the GAO stated: "CPSC does not control the voluntary standards development process, and the laws do not establish a time frame within which standard-development organizations must finalize a voluntary standard. As a result, the voluntary standards development process can, in some instances, last for prolonged periods of time. For example, CPSC has worked with the window-covering industry since 1994 to develop voluntary standards to address strangulation hazards stemming from AB 282 Page 7 window blind cords, but conflicting consumer and industry goals have prolonged the process. The first voluntary standard to address this hazard was developed in 1996 and has been revised at least six times. However, some consumer groups argue that none of the revisions include designs aimed at eliminating the strangulation risk. Between 2007 and 2011, CPSC negotiated with 38 individual companies to voluntarily recall hazardous window blinds and issued multiple consumer safety alerts about hazards related to window blind cords. Consumer groups have asked standard-setting organizations to consider technologies, such as cordless window coverings, that would eliminate window cord-related hazards. Some manufacturers have said that while cordless window blinds would eliminate the hazard, a voluntary standard asking manufacturers to produce such window coverings would be too costly for some firms and could create a product that would be unaffordable for some consumers. In 2011, a coalition of consumer groups [those that in 2013 petitioned CPSC to promulgate a mandatory standard] announced that they had withdrawn from the voluntary standard development process because it lacked transparency, and because resulting revisions to the standard still did not consider existing technologies that could eliminate strangulation hazards from accessible cords." Safer cord alternatives: According to the CPSC's response to the aforementioned 2013 petition requesting a mandatory standard: "The market for window coverings includes safer alternatives to products with hazardous cords, such as window covering products designed to function without an operating cord or cordless window coverings, cord shrouds, and cord retractors. These safer alternatives address the hazard created by looping cords by eliminating cords (cordless, crank or wand), by eliminating access to operating cords (shroud), limiting the length of the cord, loop, or bead chain, or restraining the AB 282 Page 8 cord to keep the loop taut. Cordless window coverings, either manual or motor operating systems, are available for virtually every product. In general, retail prices for cordless window coverings are higher than retail prices for similar corded products. Aesthetics, price, technical applicability, and usability all play a role in determining if a safer option is offered with each type of window covering. Even though limitations exist in the availability of safer options due to large size or weight of a window covering, the majority of the window coverings involved in the incidents that were reported to CPSC could have included a technology to make the product safer, at least from a technical standpoint, if the products were manufactured today." Need for this bill: Very disturbing stories can be read in the news depicting parents finding their young children hanging from, or otherwise harmfully entangled in, the cords of window coverings. The data collected by CPSC staff further show that such stories occur with an unfortunate frequency. This bill seeks to allow California to more immediately address the dangers associated with window covering cords than the federal government has been able to, and does so using provisions very similar to those being requested of CPSC rulemaking by the sponsor and other petitioners. According to the author: AB 282 Page 9 "This bill will protect children from the preventable strangulation hazard posed by cords on window coverings. The federal Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) identified window coverings as one of the top five hidden home hazards in the country. Certain window covering cords may present an unreasonable risk of injury, specifically strangulation, to young children. For almost 20 years, the voluntary standard to mitigate the dangers of accessible operating cords - published by the American National Standards Institute and Window Covering Manufacturers Association - has failed to eliminate or significantly reduce the hazards posed by these products. According to the CPSC, the current voluntary standard would not have effectively addressed 57% of the window covering cord incidents investigated. Furthermore, for more than a decade, manufacturers have been producing products that eliminate accessible, hazardous cords, as well as designs that render window covering pull cords inaccessible. Despite their availability, safe window coverings are not widely used by consumers, because they are more expensive than corded window coverings. Due to the high risk of injury to children, failure of the voluntary standard to address cord hazards, and the availability of products and technology in the marketplace that can reduce the risks caused by corded window coverings, it is necessary to prohibit hazardous accessible operating cords on these products." SECOND COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE . This bill was previously heard in the Assembly Business and Professions Committee, on April 21, 2015 and was approved on an 11-0 vote. AB 282 Page 10 REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION: Support Consumer Federation of America (Sponsor) Consumers Union, Kids in Danger Parents for Window Blind Safety Consumer Federation of California Consumer Action California Public Interest Research Group Independent Safety Consulting CALPIRG Opposition AB 282 Page 11 None on File. Analysis Prepared by:Daphne Hunt / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089