BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1454|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
VETO
Bill No: SB 1454
Author: DeSaulnier (D)
Amended: 8/16/10
Vote: 21
SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 4/19/10
AYES: Simitian, Runner, Corbett, Hancock, Lowenthal,
Pavley, Strickland
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 7-1, 5/10/10
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Leno, Price, Wolk, Wyland, Yee
NOES: Cox
NO VOTE RECORDED: Corbett, Denham, Walters
SENATE FLOOR : 26-8, 6/2/10
AYES: Aanestad, Alquist, Calderon, Cedillo, Cogdill,
Corbett, DeSaulnier, Ducheny, Florez, Hancock, Harman,
Kehoe, Leno, Liu, Lowenthal, Negrete McLeod, Padilla,
Pavley, Romero, Runner, Simitian, Steinberg, Strickland,
Wolk, Wyland, Yee
NOES: Ashburn, Correa, Cox, Denham, Hollingsworth, Huff,
Walters, Wright
NO VOTE RECORDED: Dutton, Oropeza, Price, Wiggins,
Vacancy, Vacancy
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 42-28, 8/23/10 - See last page for vote
SENATE FLOOR : 24-7, 8/25/10
AYES: Aanestad, Alquist, Blakeslee, Cedillo, Cogdill,
Corbett, Correa, DeSaulnier, Florez, Hancock, Huff,
Kehoe, Leno, Liu, Lowenthal, Negrete McLeod, Padilla,
Pavley, Price, Romero, Simitian, Steinberg, Wolk, Yee
CONTINUED
SB 1454
Page
2
NOES: Ashburn, Calderon, Dutton, Runner, Strickland,
Walters, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Denham, Ducheny, Emmerson, Harman,
Hollingsworth, Oropeza, Wiggins, Wright, Vacancy
SUBJECT : Recycling: plastic products
SOURCE : California Against Waste
DIGEST : This bill repeals the existing separate
requirements for compostable" or "marine degradable"
plastic bags and food packaging and replaces them with a
uniform requirement for all plastic products.
Assembly Amendments add the provision that a person may
sell a plastic product labeled with a qualified claim for a
prohibited term, including the term "home compostable" if
the Department of Resources Recycling (DRRR) and Recovery
adopts a standard for that qualified claim that is more
stringent that the American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) standard and in the plastic product meets
the standard adopted by DRRR for that qualified claim.
ANALYSIS : Existing law, under the California Integrated
Waste Management Act of 1989:
1. Prohibits a plastic bag from being sold that is labeled
"compostable" or "marine biodegradable" unless the
plastic bag meets certain American Society for Testing
and Materials (ASTM) standards, and prohibits a plastic
bag from being sold that is labeled with the term
"biodegradable," "degradable," or "decomposable," or any
form of those terms. Certain related provisions,
including definitions and penalties, are specified.
2. Prohibits a food or beverage container from being sold
that is labeled "compostable" or "marine biodegradable"
unless the food or beverage container meets certain ASTM
standards, and prohibits a food or beverage container
from being sold that is labeled with the term
"biodegradable," "degradable," or "decomposable," or any
form of those terms. Certain related provisions,
CONTINUED
SB 1454
Page
3
including definitions and penalties, are specified.
This bill:
1.Repeals existing law relating to biodegradable plastic
bags and food packaging.
2.Prohibits a plastic product from being sold that is
labeled "compostable" or "marine biodegradable" unless
the product meets specified ASTM standards and prohibits
a plastic product from being sold that is labeled with
the term "biodegradable," "degradable," or
"decomposable," or any form of those terms.
3.Authorizes the Department of Resources Recovery and
Recycling (DRRR) to adopt an existing standard other
than an ASTM standard specification, if:
A. The existing standard is adopted or developed by
a standard-setting organization recognized by
DRRR.
B. The existing standard qualifies as an ASMT
standard specification.
C. DRRR determines that the existing standard is
more stringent than the ASTM standard
specification, as specified.
4.Defines "plastic product" as a product made from plastic,
whether alone or in combination with another material,
including, but not limited to:
A. A consumer product.
B. A package or packaging.
C. A bag, sack, wrap, or other thin plastic sheet
film.
D. A food or beverage container or container
component.
5.Specifies that a product in compliance with the bill is
not, solely based on that compliance, deemed to be in
CONTINUED
SB 1454
Page
4
compliance with any other applicable marketing
requirement or guideline established under state law or
by the Federal Trade Commission.
Prior/Related Legislation
SB 951 (Hart) Chapter 1076, Statutes of 1993, enacted the
Plastic Trash Bag Law to require recycled plastic
postconsumer material in certain types of plastic trash
bags.
SB 698 (Rainey) Chapter 44, Statutes of 1998, revised
various procedures relating to these provisions to enable
postconsumer materials to be in other plastic products of
the manufacturer. In response to concerns about
manufacturers that violate the law, SB 698 added a
debarment provision that made these violators ineligible
for state contract awards until they comply with the
requirements and prohibits the state from soliciting offers
from, or awarding contracts to, those firms. SB 698 also
required the California Integrated Waste Management Board
to publish a list of violators.
SB 1749 (Karnette) Chapter 619, Statutes of 2004,
prohibited persons from selling a plastic bag labeled as
"compostable," "biodegradable," "degradable," or any form
of those terms, unless the plastic bag meets certain
requirements.
AB 1023 (DeSaulnier) Chapter 143, Statutes of 2007, exempts
these bags from the Plastic Trash Bag Law.
AB 2147 (Harman) Chapter 349, Statutes of 2006, prohibited
persons from selling plastic food and beverage containers
labeled as "compostable," "biodegradable," "degradable," or
any form of those terms, unless the containers meet certain
requirements.
AB 2071 (Karnette) Chapter 570, Statutes of 2008, set
penalties for violations of the SB 1749 plastic bag
requirements and the AB 2147 food and beverage container
requirements.
AB 1972 (DeSaulnier) Chapter 436, Statutes of 2008, revised
CONTINUED
SB 1454
Page
5
prohibited actions under the plastic bag, as well as the
food and beverage container, requirements, while revising
definitions and providing for review of changing ASTM
standards.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, this
bill has minor, absorbable ongoing costs to DRRR to review
standards. Additionally, this bill has minor, absorbable
ongoing costs to DRRR to adopt standards and make
recommendations to the Legislature and potential ongoing
costs to DRRR of an unknown amount, but possibly in the
tens of thousands of dollars annually, to enforce and
oversee implementation of the bill's provisions.
(Integrated Waste Management Account) This bill has likely
ongoing costs to the Attorney General of an unknown amount
to enforce the provisions of this bill. (General Fund)
This bill will likely result in ongoing revenue of an
unknown amount from imposition of civil penalties.
(General Find)
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/25/10)
California Against Waste (source)
Association of Postconsumer Plastic Recyclers
Biodegradable Products Institute
California Resources Recovery Association
Cereplast
City and County of San Francisco
Clean Water Action
Department of the Environment
Heritage Bag and Plastics Company
Metabolix
Natural Resources Defense Council
NatureWorks
Recology
Talco Plastics
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/25/10)
ENSO Bottles, LLC
Environmental Plastic Coalition
CONTINUED
SB 1454
Page
6
Green Genius
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
under current law "manufacturers of plastic bags and food
packaging cannot claim that their products are
'biodegradable' and can only claim their products are
'compostable' if they meet the [ASTM] scientific technical
standard for 'compostability,' ASTM D6400. Currently there
are no restrictions on end-of-life claims for plastic
products, excluding plastic bags and food packaging. Many
plastic products that are currently sold in California
claim to be 'biodegradable,' even though there is no
technical standard to test against that term and numerous
studies have shown that even 'compostable' plastic does
quickly break down in the environment as one would expect a
'biodegradable' product to. Additionally, some plastic
products are claiming to be 'compostable' even though they
do not meet the technical standard for compostability,
making the material unacceptable in composting facilities."
The author's office also notes that "SB 1454 will expand
the scope of the current labeling restrictions for plastic
bags and food packaging in Public Resources Code Sections
42357-42359 to all plastic products: specifically
manufacturers would be prohibited from claiming their
plastic products are 'biodegradable' and could only claim
they are 'compostable' if it meets the relevant technical
standard."
Claims that plastic products are biodegradable may be
misleading and confusing to consumers. The environmental
conditions and timeline necessary for degradation of the
product are not disclosed and consumers mistakenly believe
that the product will degrade quickly if littered. In
fact, there is no standard to determine biodegradability
because the conditions are too variable.
Concerns also exist about compostable plastics. According
to DRRR, "many existing composting operations reject
compostable plastics because they have found that most of
them, even those certified by the Biodegradable Products
Institute [as meeting the ASTM D6400 standard], do not
undergo degradation at a rate consistent with other
compostable materials." Additionally, federal standards
CONTINUED
SB 1454
Page
7
for organics require that compost not contain plastic of
any kind. The inclusion of compostable plastics as
feedstock would make the finished compost ineligible for
use in organic farms.
This bill will create a uniform standard so that all
plastic products comply with the same requirements.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : According to Green Genius
writes: "Most Californians do not have Access to Compost
Facilities, Most compostable plastic in California is sent
to landfills because outside of San Francisco, no one else
has access to compost facilities! Why outlaw plastic
products designed to biodegrade in landfills in favor of
"compostable" products that are not getting composted and
being sent to landfills?? SB 1454 Outlaws Biodegradable
Trash Bags and Similar Non-Compostable Items. There are
some products you just can't compost, like trash bags, dog
"refuse" bags and other biodegradable disposables because
they contain material that is NOT COMPOSTABLE. It also
restricts the development of products like biodegradable
diapers, biodegradable cat litter bags, etc., because these
items are also not compostable."
Environmental Plastic Coalition writes:
We strongly object to the provisions in SB 1454
prohibiting a company from marketing their plastic
product as 'biodegradable'. SB 1454 does not provide a
mechanism for plastic products that exhibit significant
(10-40%) biodegradation in a matter of months in
anaerobic environments such as landfills as measured by
nationally recognized test methods, or that comply with
already established marketing guidelines like the FTC
Environmental Market Guidelines, to be labeled and
marketed as 'biodegradable'. SB 1454 does not take
into account the current ASTM definition of
'biodegradable plastic' and does not take into account
already established ASTM Test Methods like the ASTM D
5511 test method, which is a standard test method for
determining anaerobic biodegradation of plastic
materials under high-solids anaerobic digestion
conditions such as landfill.
CONTINUED
SB 1454
Page
8
In addition, we believe that SB 1454 fails to take
account the normal methods used for disposal of
everyday wastes. For example, waste loads including
pet wastes cannot be sent to composters. SB 1454 does
not consider whether the infrastructure presently
exists statewide to get acceptable wastes to commercial
composters, and finally, no consideration is given to
the value added propositions of the product after
disposal.
Our member companies share California's concern over
the bioaccumulation of plastic and other waste, and
they also deplore the opportunistic attempts by many
companies to capitalize on this concern with their
unethical harmful green-washing efforts. On the
contrary, our members' products are soundly and
demonstrably biodegradable according to the ASTM
definition of 'biodegradable plastic' and approved ASTM
test methods and comply with the FTC Environmental
Marketing Guidelines. At a time when we should be
promoting products that will biodegrade in a landfill
and are in compliance with already developed test
methods and marketing guidelines, SB 1454 seeks to
penalize companies that have embraced environmental
stewardship principles."
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE :
"I am returning Senate Bill 1454 without my
signature.
This bill greatly expands existing environmental
labeling requirements for plastic bags and plastic
food and beverage containers to apply to virtually
any and all types of plastic products.
I have signed into law the author's SB 228, which
requires manufacturers of compostable plastic bags
meeting specific American Society for Testing
Materials (ASTM) standards to ensure that the bag is
readily and easily identifiable from other plastic
bags. I think that bill represents a reasonable next
step in providing information to the consumer and
recyclers about the differences in biodegradable
CONTINUED
SB 1454
Page
9
products.
I am concerned about the much more expansive universe
of plastic products that this bill would regulate and
the unforeseen consequences that could result from
such a vast expansion.
For this reason, I am unable sign this bill.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Ammiano, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Block, Blumenfield,
Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Charles Calderon, Carter,
Chesbro, Coto, Davis, De Leon, Eng, Evans, Feuer,
Fletcher, Fong, Gatto, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huffman,
Jones, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Monning, Nava, V.
Manuel Perez, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Skinner, Solorio,
Swanson, Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Yamada
NOES: Adams, Anderson, Bill Berryhill, Tom Berryhill,
Caballero, Conway, Cook, DeVore, Fuller, Gaines,
Galgiani, Garrick, Gilmore, Harkey, Huber, Jeffries,
Knight, Lieu, Logue, Miller, Nestande, Niello, Nielsen,
Norby, Silva, Audra Strickland, Tran, Villines
NO VOTE RECORDED: De La Torre, Fuentes, Furutani, Hagman,
Hall, Portantino, Smyth, John A. Perez, Vacancy, Vacancy
TSM:do:kc 10/5/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED