BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Senator Wieckowski, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 888
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Bloom |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|-----------+-----------------------+-------------+----------------|
|Version: |4/22/2015 |Hearing |6/17/2015 |
| | |Date: | |
|-----------+-----------------------+-------------+----------------|
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|Rachel Machi Wagoner |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Waste management: plastic microbeads
ANALYSIS:
Existing federal law:
1) Under the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act of
1987, prohibits all ships from disposing of plastic and other
solid materials in navigable waters within the United States
(33 U.S.C. §1901 et seq.).
2) Requires the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), Coast
Guard, Navy, and other agencies to identify, determine sources
of, assess, prevent, reduce, and remove marine debris (33
U.S.C. §1951 et seq.).
Existing state law:
1) Under the Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act, regulates
the discharge of pollutants in stormwater and urban runoff (WAT
§13000 et seq.).
2) Prohibits the release of preproduction plastic pellets to the
environment that could enter state waters (WAT §13367).
3) Prohibits the sale of expanded polystyrene loose fill packaging
material by a wholesaler or manufacturer (PRC §42390).
This bill:
AB 888 (Bloom) Page 2 of
?
Prohibits the sale of personal care products that contain plastic
microbeads on and after January 1, 2020. Specifically, this bill:
1)Defines terms used in this bill, including:
a) "Personal care product" as an article to be applied to the
human body for cleansing, beautifying, promoting
attractiveness, or altering the appearance, and an article
intended for use as a component of such an article, but
excludes prescription drugs.
b) "Plastic microbead" as an intentionally added plastic
particle that that is five millimeters or less in all
dimensions.
c) "Person" as an individual, business, or other entity.
2)Beginning January 1, 2020, prohibits a person from selling or
offering for promotional purposes a personal care product
containing plastic microbeads that is used to exfoliate or
cleanse in a rinse-off product. Specifies that this provision
does not apply to products that contain plastic microbeads in an
amount less than one part per million or products containing
natural exfoliants.
3)Establishes enforcement provisions, including civil penalties
not to exceed $2,500 per day for each violation, as specified.
Authorizes the Attorney General, a district attorney, a city
attorney, or a city prosecutor to enforce the requirements of
this bill.
4)Specifies that penalties collected be retained by the office
that brought the action.
AB 888 (Bloom) Page 3 of
?
5)States legislative findings and declarations relating to the
impacts of microplastics.
Background
1) Plastics: Use, Environmental Presence and Impact. Since the
beginning of commercial production of plastics 80 years ago,
plastic has become a common component of daily living. The
annual global plastic production has risen from 1.9 million
tons in the 1950s to 317 million tons in 2012. In addition,
some of the properties that make plastics a versatile material
also make them convenient to discard.
Although plastic represents a relatively small fraction of the
overall waste stream in California, plastic waste is the
predominate form of marine debris. Plastics are estimated to
compose 60-80% of all marine debris and 90% of all floating
debris. According to the California Coastal Commission, the
primary source of marine debris is urban runoff. Due to the
interplay of ocean currents, marine debris preferentially
accumulates in certain areas throughout the ocean. The North
Pacific Central Gyre is the ultimate destination for much of
the marine debris originating from the California coast. A
study by the Algalita Marine Research Foundation found an
average of more than 300,000 plastic pieces per square mile of
the Gyre and that the mass of plastic was six times greater
than zooplankton floating on the water's surface.
Most plastic marine debris exists as small plastic particles
due to excessive UV radiation exposure and subsequent
photo-degradation. Hydrophobic chemicals present in the ocean
in trace amounts (e.g., from contaminated runoff and oil and
chemical spills) have an affinity for, and can bind to, plastic
particles and may also enter and accumulate in the food chain
through the same mechanism. In 2011, the National Oceanic
Atmosphere Association found that plastic debris accumulates
pollutants such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) up to
100,000 to 1,000,000 times the levels found in seawater.
Once in the environment, the plastic pieces, or microplastics,
are ingested by aquatic organisms; an estimated 250 animal
species worldwide have already been negatively affected. The
AB 888 (Bloom) Page 4 of
?
plastic particles can become lodged in the bloodstreams or
digestive tracts of fish. Once inside a fish or other marine
organism, the pollutants that were absorbed into the plastic
are transferred to the tissues of the marine organism and can
result in long-term harm to reproduction and other functions.
Microplastics have also been found in predators that eat marine
life, including birds and reptiles.
2) Development of Microbeads. Microbeads are small, typically
spherical, plastic particles that commonly range in size from
50 to 500 microns (1 meter has 1 million microns). Microbeads
were introduced in personal care products as a uniform,
nonallergenic exfoliant. Prior to the widespread use of
microbeads in the 1990s, natural exfoliants such as ground
almonds, oatmeal, and sea salt were common. Today, over 100
cosmetics and personal care products contain microbeads, and
according to 5 Gyres Institute, some products contain over
350,000 microbeads in one tube.
When used as intended, microbeads are designed to enter municipal
sewer systems for disposal. Many sewer systems are unable to
remove microbeads during the water treatment process, resulting
in the general release of microbeads into state waters.
Microbeads enter the environment with similar physical
properties to the small plastic particles that result from
degradation of plastic in the environment.
3) Microbeads as Environmental Contaminants. In studying plastic
pollution in the Great Lakes in 2012, researchers from 5 Gyres
Institute and State University of New York College at Fredonia
found significant levels of microplastic particles throughout
the lakes. 58% of all identified pellets were microbeads, and
further evaluation linked these particles to personal care
products. Of particular concern were samples found in Lake
Erie in a location downstream from Detroit, Cleveland, and
Erie, where concentrations of microplastics rival those found
in ocean gyres (over 450,000 plastic pieces per square
kilometer).
Earlier this year, research by the 5 Gyres Institute found
microbeads in the Los Angeles River.
4) Efforts to Address Microplastics Usage. In light of the
environmental concerns associated with microplastics, and the
AB 888 (Bloom) Page 5 of
?
discovery of high concentrations of microbeads in various water
systems, there has been mounting pressure to remove plastic
microbeads from commercial products.
Ohio, New York, and Illinois have been moving legislation to ban
plastic microbeads. The Ohio legislation (SB 304, Skindell)
would ban the sale of a personal care product containing
microbeads. There is no specified timeline in the legislation,
so presumably the ban would begin in 2015.
The New York legislation (A08744, Sweeny) would ban the sale of a
personal cosmetic product that contains intentionally added
microbeads effective January 1, 2016. Products that are
regulated as drugs (such as over-the-counter acne medication)
would have until January 1, 2017 to comply.
The Illinois ban on microbeads (SB2727, Steans) was signed by
Governor Quinn on June 8, 2014. The legislation provides a
gradual timeline for the ban of microbeads. Personal care
products containing microbeads would not be accepted for sale
after December 31, 2017 and could not be sold in Illinois after
December 31, 2018. Over-the-counter drugs would have a
one-year extension.
In addition to legislative efforts, numerous companies have
responded to mounting public pressure by announcing voluntary
phase-outs of microbead-containing products. Ongoing
phase-outs include:
? Colgate-Palmolive - end of 2014
? Johnson & Johnson - end of 2015
? L'Oreal - no set date
? Proctor & Gamble - end of 2017 at the earliest
? The Body Shop - end of 2015
? Unilever - end of 2015
Comments
1) Purpose of Bill. According to the author, "Microplastic beads
are sold in consumer products as abrasives and exfoliants (such
as in soaps, facial scrubs, etc.). In some products there are
over 350,000 microbeads in one tube alone. They are directly
AB 888 (Bloom) Page 6 of
?
washed down the drain and too small to be captured by water
treatment facilities. Recent studies have shown microbeads to
be a pervasive marine pollutant, and have been found in
alarming quantities everywhere from the garbage gyres in the
Pacific Ocean to the Great Lakes to the LA River. Research has
also shown that these beads absorb toxins and are being
ingested by marine life, posing a threat to our marine
ecosystems. Currently there is no law banning their use in
consumer products. While some larger companies such as
Unilever, Proctor & Gamble and Johnson & Johnson have pledged
to phase microbeads out of their products and replace them with
natural alternatives, the proposed phase out dates range all
over the place and in some cases are only 50% by a certain
date, etc. Our bill would provide a hard phase out date to
ensure that plastic microbeads from personal care products are
no longer entering our waters."
2) Definition of "plastic microbead". The definition of "plastic
microbead" as specified in SB 888 reflects amendments suggested
pursuant to the Senate Environmental Quality Committee hearing
of AB 1699 (Bloom, 2014).
Related/Prior Legislation
AB 1699 (Bloom, 2014) would have prohibited the sale of microbead
containing products in California as specified. Specifically it:
A. Defined various terms, including "microplastic,"
"personal care products," "person in the course of doing
business," and "plastic."
B. Prohibited any person in the course of doing business
from selling or promoting personal care products with
microplastics after January 1, 2019. The bill offered an
exemption for products with less than 1 part per million
microplastic by weight.
C. Imposed a civil penalty of up to $2,500 per day for
violations, and allows the fees to be kept by the office
that prosecutes the violation.
AB 1699 passed the Senate Environmental Quality on a vote of
5-2 but failed passage on the Senate Floor on a vote of 20-14.
SOURCE:
AB 888 (Bloom) Page 7 of
?
Californians Against Waste
California Association of Sanitation Agencies
Clean Water Action
The Story of Stuff Project
5 Gyres Institute
SUPPORT:
ACURE
As You Sow
Aroma Naturals
Azul
Breast Cancer Fund
California Coastkeeper Alliance
California League of Conservation Voters
Campaign for Safe Cosmetics
Center for Biological Diversity
Center for Environmental Health
Center for Oceanic Awareness, Research and Education
City of Los Angeles, Mayor Eric Garcetti
City of Los Angeles, Councilmember Paul Koretz
City and County of San Francisco
ChicoBag
Clean Oceans Competition
Cleanups For Change
Coachella Valley Water District
Community Environmental Council
County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles
Defenders of Wildlife
Environment California
Environmental Action Committee of West Marin
Environmental Working Group
Green Sangha
Green Science Policy Institute
Heal the Bay
Health Care Without Harm
Hidden Resources
Klean Kanteen
Los Angeles Waterkeeper
Lunch Skins, by 3 Green Moms
LUSH Cosmetics
Manduka
Monterey Bay Aquarium
Napa Recycling and Waste Services
AB 888 (Bloom) Page 8 of
?
Natural Resources Defense Council
Ocean Conservancy
Physicians for Social Responsibility, SF Bay Chapter
Plastic Pollution Coalition
Plastic Soup Foundation
Preserve
San Francisco Bay Keeper
San Francisco Department of the Environment
Save Our Shores
Save The Bay
Sea Turtles Forever
Seventh Generation Advisors
Sierra Club California
Surfrider Foundation
Team Marine, Santa Monica High School
Turtle Island Restoration Network
UPSTREAM
WeTap
Wildcoast
World Centric
World Society for the Protection of Animals
1 Individual
OPPOSITION:
Advanced Medical Technology Association
Biocom
California Chamber of Commerce
California Life Sciences Association
California Healthcare Products Association
California Manufacturers & Technology Association
California Retailers Association
Chemical Industry Council of California
Grocery Manufacturers Association
Henkel Consumer Goods, Inc.
International Fragrance Association North America
Johnson & Johnson
Micro Powders, Inc.
National Federation of Independent Business
Proctor & Gamble
Reckitt Benckiser
ARGUMENTS IN
SUPPORT: The California Association of Sanitation Agencies
AB 888 (Bloom) Page 9 of
?
(CASA) writes that "Pollution prevention and source control are
significant concerns for our member agencies. Plastic pollution
is a prolific problem in California, and plastic microbeads in
particular are very difficult to filter out during the typical
wastewater treatment processes. Thus, microbeads that are flushed
down drains as part of their intended use can be discharged into
California waterways and released into the environment? The best
way to ensure that these pollutants are not discharged to
California waterways is to prohibit their introduction to the
wastewater stream on the front end."
A coalition of about 40 public health and environmental
organizations writes, "Studies indicate that plastic microbeads
attract and absorb toxins from the surrounding waters and can
leach toxic additives (that give microbeads their defined shape
and performance attributes) into the aquatic environment. They
are also mistaken for food by wildlife, including fish that humans
eat. Once ingested, the toxins accumulate in the tissues of
organisms and move their way up the food chain, creating a threat
both to natural ecosystems and human health? AB 888 is regarded
among stakeholders as the model policy that will not only result
in a cleaner environment, but also reduce hazards to both humans
as well as marine and aquatic wildlife."
ARGUMENTS IN
OPPOSITION:
A coalition of eight industry trade associations writes, "Last
year, similar legislation was moved out of the Assembly as a "work
in progress" as all parties were very close to agreement.
Unfortunately, changes made in the Senate ultimately made the bill
unworkable for the industry and we had no choice but to oppose on
the Senate Floor. AB 888 is equally problematic, as its scope goes
beyond a ban of plastic microbeads in personal care products and
would create a legal quagmire, leaving the interpretations of the
definitions and what is covered up to the courts?
"As you may know, the State of Illinois reached a reasonable
framework for legislation to address this issue in June 2014. The
Illinois legislation was ultimately included in the Council of
State Governments (CSG) "Suggested State Legislation" to help
shape future policy on this issue. Since that time, similar
legislation has been enacted in Colorado, Maine and New Jersey.
Specifically, the CSG legislation bans the manufacture of personal
AB 888 (Bloom) Page 10 of
?
care products and over-the-counter medications that contain
non-biodegradable solid plastic microbeads that are used to
exfoliate or cleanse in a rinse-off product."
DOUBLE REFERRAL:
Should this bill pass the Senate Environmental Quality Committee,
it is to be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary for
consideration of the provisions relating to the civil penalty.
-- END --