BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 646
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 17, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
SB 646 (Pavley) - As Amended: June 20, 2011
Policy Committee: Environmental
Safety and Toxic Materials Vote: 7-2
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill extends to all parties enforcement provisions of the
Metal-Containing Jewelry Law. Specifically, this bill deletes
from existing statute provisions that exempt from the
enforcement provisions of the Metal-Containing Jewelry Law a
party that is a signatory to the consent judgment, People vs.
Burlington Coat Factory Warehouse Corporation, et al., or to
substantially similar judgments.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Negligible costs to the Department of Toxic Substances Control
(DTSC), which currently inspects jewelry retailers, importers
and suppliers that are signatories to the judgment and those
that are not.
2)Potential increased penalty revenue of an unknown amount
resulting from enforcement activity against signatories who
violate the Metal-Containing Jewelry Law. (Special fund.)
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . The author intends this bill to close what she
describes as a loophole in the Metal-Containing Jewelry Law,
which prevents DTSC from taking enforcement actions against
signatories to the consent judgment. The author notes that an
increasing number of entities are becoming signatories to
judgments similar to the consent judgment, thereby avoiding
enforcement actions for violation of the Metal-Containing
Jewelry Law, including penalties.
SB 646
Page 2
2)Background. AB 1681 (Pavley, Chapter 415, Statutes of 2006)
created the Lead-Containing Jewelry Law, which prohibited the
manufacture, shipping, sale or offering for sale of jewelry,
children's jewelry, or jewelry used in body piercing that is
made from materials with more than specified levels of lead.
AB 2901 (Brownley, Chapter 575, Statutes of 2008),
strengthened and expanded DTSC's enforcement authority for the
Lead-Containing Jewelry Law. SB 929 (Pavley, Chapter 313,
Statutes of 2010) added prohibitions for jewelry containing
cadmium, at which point the statute became known as the
Metal-Containing Jewelry Law. Under the law, DTSC may impose
an administrative or civil penalty against violators of the
Metal-Containing Jewelry Law, not to exceed $2,500 per day for
each violation.
AB 1681 was developed concurrent with a settlement between the
Attorney General and several California retailers regarding
the retailers' jewelry sales practices. The author intended
AB 1681 to apply the same standard to all retailers as were
applied in the AG settlement or a later, substantially
identical settlement. However, the terms of the judgment
subject signatories to enforcement only by the AG, not DTSC.
The effect is dual-track enforcement with an increasing number
of parties becoming signatories, thereby becoming exempt from
DTSC enforcement of the Metal-Containing Jewelry Law
Analysis Prepared by : Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081