BILL ANALYSIS
AB 147
Page 1
GOVERNOR'S VETO
AB 147 (Saldana)
As Amended September 1, 2009
2/3 vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |42-32|(June 3, 2009) |SENATE: |23-15|(September 3, |
| | | | | |2009) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |49-28|(September 9, | | | |
| | |2009) | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: E.S. & T.M.
SUMMARY : Requires manufacturers and producers of electronic
devices to submit information showing that the electronic device
is not prohibited from sale, should the Department of Toxic
Substances Control (DTSC), based on reasonable cause to believe
that the device is prohibited from sale, request that
information.
The Senate amendments :
1)Define "reasonable cause" as knowledge of any of the
following:
a) Hazardous substance enforcement activities by another
state or country for the same or similar electronic device
that indicate that the electronic device may be prohibited
from sale;
b) Conflicting publicly available documentation regarding
AB 147
Page 2
hazardous substances for a specific electronic device that
indicates that the electronic device may be prohibited from
sale;
c) Homogenous material level testing of a specific
electronic device regarding hazardous substances, conducted
according to the International Electro technical
Commission's IEC 62321 or equivalent method that indicates
that one or more homogenous materials may result in the
electronic device being prohibited from sale;
d) Information from other companies or competitors, if it
is a documented allegation, based on homogenous materials
reports, for a specific electronic device, that indicate
that the electronic device may be prohibited from sale;
and,
e) Other comparable justification to question whether a
specific electronic device is prohibited from sale.
2)Require a manufacturer to submit information requested by DTSC
only if DTSC's request for information is based on reasonable
cause, as defined.
3)Specify that the information that a manufacturer is required
to submit is information typically maintained by the
manufacturer's industry under Directive 2002/95/EC, adopted by
the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union
(EU) on January 27, 2003 (RoSH Directive), showing that the
electronic device is not prohibited from sale.
AB 147
Page 3
4)Authorizes DTSC, upon request of the manufacturer, to extend
the 28-day response time to the request for information.
5)Specify that a manufacturer's failure to submit required
documentation is not grounds for prohibiting the sale of an
electronic device.
6)Delete provisions of the bill that:
a) Define electronic equipment and other terms for the
purposes of the section;
b) Require a producer of specified electronic equipment to
prepare and submit specified information about the
hazardous content and hazardous characteristics of the
device; and,
c) Prohibit DTSC from imposing any requirements or
conditions that are in addition to, or more stringent than,
the requirements of the bill.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill required manufacturers and
producers of electronic devices to submit information to DTSC
about the hazardous characteristics of the device.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, up to $100,000 per year for DTSC to review technical
documentation (Electronic Waste Recovery and Recycling Account).
COMMENTS: According to the author's office, "Current California
law prohibits hazardous materials from electronic devices with a
video screen larger than 4 inches, and just last year the
legislature enacted the Green Chemistry Initiative, which
requires DTSC to regulate chemicals of concern in consumer
AB 147
Page 4
products... In order for DTSC to effectively enforce the
existing hazardous materials ban and inform the Green Chemistry
Initiative, it needs authority to request documentation from
electronics manufacturers detailing the amount of hazardous
materials contained in their products?Without this authority,
DTSC is only able to resort to expensive product by product
testing to determine the hazardous materials content, if any, of
a consumer item sold in the state."
The RoHS Directive, or the "Restriction on the Use of Certain
Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment,"
Directive 2002/95/EC, was adopted by the European Union (EU) in
2003 and took effect on July 1, 2006. RoHS aims at controlling
the use of hazardous substances in the production of new
electrical and electronic equipment and prohibits the sale of
products that contain more than specified levels of mercury,
lead, hexavalent chromium, cadmium and a range of flame
retardants, such as polybrominated biphenyls and polybrominated
diphenyl ethers. Currently, RoSH requirements only apply to
products sold in the EU. As a result, other countries and
states, including California, are examining RoHS-type standards
consistent with the EU's requirements.
California's electronic waste, or e-waste, laws were established
by SB 20 (Sher, Chapter 526, Statutes of 2003) and SB 50 (Sher,
Chapter 863, Statutes of 2004). Along with collection and fee
requirements, the California e-waste law required DTSC to adopt
regulations prohibiting a covered electronic device (a video
display device containing a screen greater than four inches)
from being sold in California if that device is prohibited from
being sold in the EU due to the presence of lead, mercury,
cadmium or hexavalent chromium above certain maximum
concentration values. DTSC's regulations took effect January 1,
2007, and only apply to covered electronic devices, as defined.
Therefore, many electronic products are not regulated under
California's current laws.
Over the past several years, the California legislature has
considered numerous bills that would have expanded California's
AB 147
Page 5
e-waste laws to align the state's e-waste standards with those
in Europe. This bill requires manufacturers and producers to
report data on electronic devices sold in the state, based on
DTSC's reasonable cause to believe that that the device is
prohibited from sale.
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE :
This bill requires manufacturers of electronic devices
to submit documentation at the request of the
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)
demonstrating that the sale of their product is legal
in California.
The ability to obtain basic information is fundamental
to DTSC's ability to assess a manufacturer's
compliance with state laws and inform the Green
Chemistry Initiative. In order to obtain this
information, the bill requires DTSC to have
"reasonable cause," as prescribed in the bill, before
making a request.
I appreciate and agree with the author's attempt to
address manufacturer concerns about open-ended calls
for information about specific products.
Unfortunately, under the definition of "reasonable
cause" in the bill, DTSC's ability to request and be
provided information regarding the contents of covered
electronic devices under California's Electronic Waste
Recycling Act would be significantly limited.
Analysis Prepared by: Shannon McKinney / E.S. & T.M. / (916)
319-3965
FN: 0003423