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