BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 763
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 19, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
SB 763
(Leno) - As Amended July 8, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Business and Professions |Vote:|12 - 0 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| |Environmental Safety and Toxic | |7 - 0 |
| |Materials | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: YesReimbursable:
No
SUMMARY: This bill requires a manufacturer of juvenile products
manufactured on or after July 1, 2016 and sold in California, to
affix a secure label on the product indicating whether or not
the product contains added flame retardant chemicals. This bill
also directs the Bureau of Electronic and Appliance Repair, Home
SB 763
Page 2
Furnishing and Thermal Insulation Fund (Bureau) to ensure
compliance with the labeling and documentation requirements.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Defines a "juvenile product" as a nonexclusive list of
products, including products such as bassinets, floor play
mat, changing pad, infant car seat, nursing pillow, infant
swing, and children's nap pads that do not have to meet
federal flammability standards for mattresses.
2)Defines a "flame retardant chemical" with language that is
consistent with the definition used for the labeling
requirements for upholstered furniture.
3)Requires manufacturers of juvenile products sold in California
to retain documentation indicating whether flame retardant
chemicals were added.
4)Requires, within 30 days of a request by the Bureau, a
manufacturer of a product sold in California to provide the
Bureau with the documentation establishing the accuracy of the
flame retardant chemical statement on the label.
5)Requires the Bureau to provide the California Department of
Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) with samples of the product or
components of the product sold in California from products
marked "contains NO added flame retardant chemicals" for
testing for the presence of added flame retardant chemicals.
Requires DTSC to provide the results of all testing to the
Bureau.
6)Authorizes the Bureau to issue citations and assess fines for
violations of the above provisions, as specified. Fines for
SB 763
Page 3
not affixing a label, regardless of the label's accuracy,
would be assessed at the same level as other violations of the
Home Furnishings and Thermal Insulation Act (HFTI Act).
7)Authorizes the Bureau to adopt regulations to carry out the
provisions of the bill.
8)Explicitly exempts juvenile products from flame retardant
requirements for mattresses.
FISCAL EFFECT:
1)Costs pressures, in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars,
to the Home Furnishing and Thermal Insulation Fund (HFTI Fund)
for the enforcement of these requirements, including testing
for label accuracy.
The testing for enforcement purposes would be performed by the
DTSC. The Bureau would be required to reimburse DTSC for its
costs. Testing costs include equipment costs and the staff
time to conduct the tests. For context, DTSC estimates that it
would cost approximately $150,000 to test 100 products
annually. DTSC notes that while it has the capability of
conducting these tests, it currently has no capacity to do so.
Unless the Bureau's enforcement budget increases, any testing
of juvenile products will come at the expense of testing other
products or other enforcement activities.
SB 763
Page 4
Staff notes that the HFTI fund currently has a structural
deficit in that its current fee structure does not provide
enough funds to cover its current appropriations. Future
appropriation requests for the bureau's enforcement activities
could result in the need for future fee increases.
2)Negligible costs associated with adopting regulations. The
bill authorizes, but does not require, the bureau to adopt
regulations to carry out this bill. The bureau does not
believe it will need to adopt regulations based on its
experience implementing SB 1019 (Leno), Chapter 862, Statutes
of 2014, which is the model for this bill. In implementing SB
1019, the bureau has found that the statutes provide
sufficient detail so that additional regulations have not been
necessary.
COMMENTS:
1)Purpose. According to the author, "Growing evidence show(s)
that many fire retardant chemicals have serious human and
environmental health impacts, including cancer, decreased
fertility, hormone disruption, lower IQ, and hyperactivity. A
typical household can contain up to several pounds of these
chemicals, and their extensive use to meet TB 117 has led to
contamination of the global environment? Tests have found
fire retardant chemicals present in polyurethane foam in baby
products which are in intimate contact with infants and young
children including nap mats, bassinets, changing pads,
strollers, playpens, swings, nursing pillows, high chairs and
toddler chairs? SB 763 will give parents the information they
SB 763
Page 5
need to choose safe and healthy products for their children."
2)Background. Existing law establishes the Bureau of Electronic
and Appliance Repair, Home Furnishings and Thermal Insulation
(Bureau) within the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA). The
Bureau is authorized to administer and enforce the HFTI Act
that provides for the licensing and inspection of businesses
that manufacture and sell upholstered furniture, bedding and
thermal insulation. Pursuant to the HFTI Act, mattresses, box
springs, and upholstered furniture sold in this state are
required to be flame retardant.
Existing law requires a manufacturer of upholstered furniture
to indicate whether or not the product contains added flame
retardant chemicals, as defined, by including a specified
statement. Manufacturers are required to retain documents and
to provide that documentation to the bureau. The bureau has
the authority to test for labeling accuracy and to assess
fines for violations of the requirements or inaccurate
labeling.
3)Arguments in Support. The Center for Environmental Health
argues, "Flame retardant chemicals can migrate out of products
into air and dust where children are exposed to them. These
chemicals are associated with a variety of health concerns,
including cancer, lower birth weight, decreased fertility,
hormone disruption, lower IQ, and hyperactivity. Due to
children's frequent hand to mouth behavior, young children
have 3-5 times higher levels of certain flame retardants than
their mothers. It is also of great concern that children of
color and children from low-income communities of color have
the highest exposure. Flame retardant chemicals can cross the
placenta and this chemical exposure places babies at greater
risk than adults because infants' brains, organs, and
reproductive systems are still developing? This legislation
would require manufacturers to label juvenile products as to
whether the product contains added flame retardant chemicals.
SB 763
Page 6
Without this type of label it will be impossible for parents
to identify products that either do or do not contain flame
retardant chemicals."
The Consumer Federation of California argues, "The proposed
disclosures would provide uniform information to consumers in
a simple and accessible manner. It would also provide
businesses a standard format to communicate the information to
consumers."
4)Arguments in Opposition. The American Chemistry Council, along
with a coalition of industry groups, argues, "These proposed
requirements lack scientific justification, conflict with
existing California consumer product and chemical safety laws
and regulations, and as a result, mislead consumers about the
potential safety of these products? Just as there are
different types of metals or gases, California should
recognize that there are many different types of flame
retardants with different exposure, health and environmental
profiles. Yet, under SB 763, manufacturers would be required
to label whether their product contains a flame retardant
chemical regardless of whether the particular chemical
presents any meaningful risk to human health or the
environment."
The Juvenile Product Manufacturer's Association (JPMA) argues,
"JPMA understands the importance of notifying consumers if a
product contains a flame retardant that has been found to be
harmful. However, SB 763 would also require a product
containing no flame retardants to be labeled as "not
containing flame retardants"? SB 763 would subject companies
that do not use flame retardants and are not presently subject
to labeling requirements, to comply with a new regulatory
program that requires record keeping and testing data when no
potential harm exists. This requirement will add significant
burdens to companies who are already complying with the
Federal Hazardous Substance Act, and the Consumer Product
Safety Improvement Act? SB 763 requires a permanently affixed
warning label which will cost manufacturers hundreds of
SB 763
Page 7
thousands of dollars, even when their product does not contain
flame retardants? JPMA believes it is very important that
labeling requirements provide information to the consumer that
is easily understood and does not dilute the message it is
trying to convey. This can be accomplished in SB 763 by
removing the labeling requirement for products and components
that do not contain intentionally added flame retardants."
5)Current Legislation. AB 1175 (Ridley-Thomas), Chapter 187,
Statutes of 2015, increases the licensure fee caps that
support the HFTI Fund.
6)Prior Legislation. SB 1019 (Leno) Chapter 862, Statutes of
2014, requires an upholstered furniture manufacturer to
indicate on the product label whether or not a product
contains added flame retardant chemicals.
Analysis Prepared by:Jennifer Swenson / APPR. / (916)
319-2081