BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                    AB 2059


                                                                    Page  1





          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING


          AB  
          2059 (Eduardo Garcia)


          As Amended  May 3, 2016


          Majority vote


           ------------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |Committee       |Votes|Ayes                  |Noes                |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
          |Business &      |12-2 |Salas, Brough, Bloom, |Baker, Chávez       |
          |Professions     |     |Campos, Dahle, Dodd,  |                    |
          |                |     |Eggman, Gatto,        |                    |
          |                |     |Holden, Jones,        |                    |
          |                |     |Eduardo Garcia, Wood  |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
          |Appropriations  |19-0 |Gonzalez, Bigelow,    |                    |
          |                |     |Bloom, Bonilla,       |                    |
          |                |     |Bonta, Calderon,      |                    |
          |                |     |Patterson, Daly,      |                    |
          |                |     |Eggman, Eduardo       |                    |
          |                |     |Garcia,               |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |Roger Hernández,      |                    |
          |                |     |Holden, Jones,        |                    |
          |                |     |Obernolte, Quirk,     |                    |
          |                |     |Santiago, Wagner,     |                    |
          |                |     |Weber, Wood           |                    |








                                                                    AB 2059


                                                                    Page  2





          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------ 


          SUMMARY:  Exempts junk dealers and recyclers from the three-day  
          payment restrictions if the junk dealer or recycler obtains a  
          surety bond, as specified, requires a study to be conducted on  
          the impact of the bond, and sunsets the provision authorizing  
          the exemption for the bond on January 1, 2020.  Specifically,  
          this bill:
          1)Authorizes a junk dealer or recycler to provide payment to a  
            seller by check or cash before the three-day waiting period  
            expires if the junk dealer or recycler carries a surety bond  
            in the minimum amount of $100,000, covering the business at  
            large, including all locations, which must be maintained  
            exclusively to cover the cost of loss to the verifiable owner  
            of stolen scrap metal proved to be purchased by the junk  
            dealer or recycler. 
          2)States that the recoverable loss to the verifiable owner of  
            the stolen scrap metal must be the damages specified in the  
            Civil Code, and further states that the reimbursement for the  
            value of stolen scrap metal is in no way to be treated under  
            law as an admission of culpability by the junk dealer or  
            recycler to any criminal activity involved in the alleged  
            theft of the scrap metal.  


          3)Requires on or before June 1, 2019, the California Research  
            Bureau (CRB) to provide a report to the Legislature on the  
            impact of the bond on efforts to reduce metal theft.  


          4)Sunsets the provision authorizing the exemption for the bond  
            on January 1, 2020.


          FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, costs to the California Research Bureau to conduct a  








                                                                    AB 2059


                                                                    Page  3





          study of the impact of this bill's change are estimated at  
          $25,000 General Fund.


          COMMENTS:


          Purpose.  This bill is sponsored by the West Coast Chapter of  
          the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries.  According to the  
          author, "this measure would bring about a fair and reasonable  
          alternative to current recycling laws without jeopardizing the  
          efforts to stop illegal transfers of nonferrous metals.  In  
          fact, this bill promises to make serious inroads in stopping  
          black market recycling."


          Background.  Current Junk Recycling Requirements.  AB 844  
          (Berryhill), Chapter 731, Statutes of 2008 imposed additional  
          recordkeeping requirements and payment restrictions on junk  
          dealers and recyclers when purchasing nonferrous materials.   
          Junk dealers and recyclers are currently prohibited from buying  
          nonferrous materials unless the buyer obtains a copy of the  
          seller's driver's license, a photograph or video of the material  
          being purchased, and a thumbprint of the seller.  Additionally,  
          payment is restricted to a check mailed to the seller or a cash  
          or check payment that can be collected by the seller three days  
          after the date of sale.  Junk dealers and recyclers are also  
          required to follow strict guidelines regarding the retention of  
          records, payment for materials, the photography or video of  
          items being purchased, and the collection of identification and  
          thumbprints of sellers, among others.  The payment restrictions  
          are exempted for individuals redeeming nonferrous materials with  
          a value less than $20 in a single transaction, when the primary  
          purpose of the transaction is the redemption of beverage  
          containers, or if the junk dealer and seller completed five or  
          more transactions per month.  


          However, other exemptions exist.  Under current law, if a seller  








                                                                    AB 2059


                                                                    Page  4





          does routine business with a junk dealer or recycler (i.e., at  
          least five separate transactions on five or more separate days a  
          month with the same junk dealer or recycler for three separate  
          months), the three-day payment requirement does not apply.   
          Additionally, if a seller has an established relationship with a  
          junk dealer or recycler and has provided the name, physical  
          business address, and business telephone number of the seller's  
          business, business license number or tax identification number  
          and a copy of the driver's license of the person delivering the  
          nonferrous material on behalf of the seller, he or she will be  
          exempt from the check-by-mail-only payment requirement, among  
          other provisions.  This bill would exempt a junk dealer or  
          recycler from the three day requirement if the junk dealer or  
          recycler carries a surety bond of at least $100,000, covering  
          the business entity including all of its locations, to cover the  
          cost of loss to the verifiable owner of stolen scrap metal  
          purchased by the junk dealer or recycler and the cost to local  
          law enforcement of investigating the theft.


          In addition, this bill sunset the exemption for the bond on  
          January 1, 2020 and requires the CRB to conduct a review on the  
          impact of the bond on efforts to reduce metal theft. 


          Nonferrous Metal Recycling Industry.  According to the Institute  
          of Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI), Inc., nonferrous (or not  
          iron-based) metals are among the few materials that do not  
          degrade or lose their chemical or physical properties in the  
          recycling process.  Because of this, these metals have the  
          capacity to be recycled a nearly infinite number of times.   
          Nonferrous materials include copper, copper alloys, stainless  
          steel, or aluminum (but not beverage containers, as defined in  
          the California Public Resources Code).  


          In addition, the ISRI notes that in the United States (U.S.),  
          the value of the nonferrous scrap industry approached $40  
          billion in 2014.  In terms of volume, nonferrous scrap materials  








                                                                    AB 2059


                                                                    Page  5





          make up a small percentage of the total quantity of material  
          recycled in the U.S., but by value they account for more than  
          half of the total earnings of the scrap recycling industry.  In  
          2014, the U.S. exported nearly $11 billion worth of nonferrous  
          scrap to more than 85 countries.  Those figures represent a  
          decrease from 2012, where the value of the scrap industry was  
          reported to be $50 billion while the United States exported $14  
          billion to more than 90 countries. 


          Legislative Trend in California.  Since the enactment of AB 844,  
          there have been a number of measures introduced and signed into  
          law with the intent of decreasing metal theft.  In the 2013-2014  
          legislative session, there were seven bills introduced to curb  
          the purported rise in metal theft.  Of those seven, two were  
          signed into law, two were vetoed by the Governor, two died in  
          the Assembly Committee on Business, Professions and Consumer  
          Protection, and one was amended to address and unrelated topic.   
          Both SB 485 (Calderon), Chapter 518, Statutes of 2013 and AB  
          2312 (Nestande), Chapter 608, Statutes of 2014 placed new  
          requirements on junk dealers and recyclers and were either  
          sponsored or supported by the West Coast Chapter of the  
          Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, the sponsor of this  
          bill.  SB 485 required a junk dealer or recycler to submit  
          additional information regarding its junk dealer business and  
          increased the fees that junk dealers or recyclers must pay for  
          each fixed location in an effort to reduce the number of  
          non-compliant dealers, and hopefully deter fraudulent  
          transactions and decrease the sale of stolen metal property.  AB  
          2312 required a junk dealer or recycler to request to receive  
          metal theft alert notifications from an Internet-based theft  
          alert system.  


          This bill does not eliminate the current payment restrictions,  
          but provides an additional exemption to the payment restrictions  
          for those junk dealers or recyclers who obtain a surety bond  
          (minimum of $100,000) to cover the cost of loss to the  
          verifiable owner of stolen scrap metal.  In addition, this bill  








                                                                    AB 2059


                                                                    Page  6





          specifies that if a junk dealer or recycler must reimburse a  
          verifiable owner of the loss, it shall not be treated as an  
          admission of culpability by the junk dealer or recycler for  
          criminal activity.  


          Metal Theft.  National Insurance Crime Bureau.  In 2013, The  
          National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) released a report  
          regarding metal theft, which stated, "thieves have been willing  
          to go to almost any length to obtain the metal.  They have  
          stripped sheets of metal from building rooftops, stolen memorial  
          decorations from cemeteries, ripped apart air conditioners for  
          the copper coils within, and stripped homes and buildings of  
          wiring and piping? The thieves can endanger the safety of  
          themselves and those in the surrounding community, and weaken  
          the infrastructure vital to our everyday lives.  Unoccupied  
          buildings have exploded due to gas lines being stolen, stretches  
          of highway have been left dark after thieves stole wiring from  
          utility poles, and tornado warning sirens have been rendered  
          inoperable due to wiring being stolen? Regardless of the motive,  
          the damage caused by such thefts is often several times the  
          value of the metal stolen, leaving the victims with hefty repair  
          costs which are then often passed on to insurance companies."   
          (Metal Theft Claims and Questionable Claim Referrals from  
          January 1 2010 to December 31, 2012, April 19, 2013, NICB).


          However, the NICB released an updated report which finds that  
          insured metal theft claims in 2014 were down 8% from 2012  
          levels.  "In 2012, a total of 13,731 metal theft claims were  
          processed.  The number dropped to 13,632 in 2013 and decreased  
          again in 2014 to 12,630-a decline of 8% from 2012.  During this  
          three-year period, 39,993 insurance claims for the theft of  
          copper, bronze, brass or aluminum were handled-38,985 of them  
          (98%) involving copper.  When the number of metal theft claims  
          per month and monthly average copper prices are compared, the  
          number of claims filed is found to have a  
          statistically-significant correlation with the price of copper."  
           (Metal Theft Claims and Questionable Claim Referrals from  








                                                                    AB 2059


                                                                    Page  7





          January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2014, July 15, 2015, NICB).  



          Legislative Trends Nationally.  Metal theft is not unique to  
          California and has been recognized as a problem by numerous  
          states.  As a result of legislative action in the United States,  
          the Council of State Governments (CSG) conducted a study in  
          2014, Scrap Metal Theft:  Is Legislation Working for States?,  
          which aimed to review the effectiveness of metal theft  
          legislation across the nation.  As noted in that study, the rise  
          of metal theft triggered some form of legislation in all 50  
          states.  Many of the legislative remedies included similar  
          frameworks to California laws such as identification  
          requirements for sellers, payment restrictions, and strict  
          record retention requirements for junk dealers and recyclers.   
          However, when the CSG began its statewide analysis,  
          comprehensive data was not available from the states because 1)  
          the sources of data were insufficient to determine the accurate  
          rate of metal theft; 2) no state tracks the number of metal  
          thefts; and, 3) at the local level, the quality and accuracy of  
          the accessible data is unknown and could not be used to explain  
          state trends.  The CSG report states, "although a number of  
          states have focused on metal theft, such as creating task forces  
          designed to study metal theft trends, and possible legislative  
          solutions, no state collects comprehensive data on metal theft."




          Analysis Prepared by:                                             
                          Elissa Silva / B. & P. / (916) 319-3301  FN:  
          0003019














                                                                    AB 2059


                                                                    Page  8