BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2137
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 2137 (Chesbro)
As Amended April 29, 2010
Majority vote
AGRICULTURE 5-2
--------------------------------
|Ayes:|Galgiani, Conway, Hill, |
| |Ma, Mendoza |
| | |
|-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Tom Berryhill, Fuller |
| | |
--------------------------------
SUMMARY : Adds to the definitions of fertilizing material labels
and labeling an exemption for certified lab (lab) analysis that
show nutrient contents of compost, cocompost or mulch.
Specifically this bill :
1)Requires a lab analysis showing the nutrient contents of
compost, cocompost or mulch, to clearly state that the
finished product may vary from the lab analysis.
2)Requires the lab analyses to be from random samples, as
provided for in California Code of Regulations.
3)Contains a sunset provision that will repeal the added
definitions from law on January 1, 2014.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Defines a fertilizing material label as "the display of all
written, printed, or graphic matter on the immediate container
of, or a statement, including the guaranteed analysis,
accompanying fertilizing material." (Food and Agriculture Code
(FAC) Section 14540)
2)Defines a fertilizing material labeling as "all written,
printed, or graphic matter on, accompanying, or used in
promoting the sale of any fertilizing material, including
advertisements, brochures, posters, and television and radio
announcements." (FAC Section 14542)
AB 2137
Page 2
3)Requires the California Department of Food and Agriculture
(CDFA) to evaluate organic input materials, which includes
compost, and report if and how these materials should be
regulated. The report is due by January 1, 2012. (FAC
Section 14853.5)
FISCAL EFFECT : This bill is keyed non-fiscal by Legislative
Counsel.
COMMENTS : According to the author, composters have been
informed by CDFA that they are not allowed to provide nutrient
lab analysis with bulk compost sales without that lab analysis
representing a labeling claim. Once a labeling claim has been
made, a product must be registered with CDFA and the nutrient
levels must remain consistent. Supporters maintain this is a
difficult standard for compost to maintain, due to the nature of
the product. This action is a result of AB 856 (Caballero),
Chapter 257, Statutes of 2009, which was responding to a lack of
oversight by CDFA in dealing with the organic fertilizers
industry.
Opponents state that plant nutrient products must meet the
nutrient guarantees of lab analysis provided to growers and
agricultural retailers. To expect growers or retailers to
differentiate between when a lab analysis is being presented as
a guarantee and when it is not, is unfair to consumers and will
contribute to confusion in the marketplace. Opponents say this
bill is contrary to the intent of AB 856. Furthermore,
opponents state the bill is inappropriate until the stakeholder
committee has reviewed the issue and made its recommendations to
CDFA.
Analysis Prepared by : Victor Francovich / AGRI. / (916)
319-2084
FN: 0004105