BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|Hearing Date:April 21, 2014 |Bill No:SB |
| |1019 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Senator Ted W. Lieu, Chair
Bill No: SB 1019Author:Leno
As Amended:April 21, 2014 Fiscal: Yes
SUBJECT: Upholstered furniture: flame retardant chemicals.
SUMMARY: Requires an upholstered furniture manufacturer to indicate
on the product label whether or not a product contains added flame
retardant chemicals, by including a specified statement; requires
manufacturer to retain documentation, as specified, of whether or not
flame retardant chemicals were added to the product, and provide that
documentation to the Bureau of Electronic and Appliance Repair, Home
Furnishings and Thermal Insulation (Bureau) upon request; and
authorizes the Bureau to assess fines for violations of the above
provisions, as specified.
NOTE : Double-referral to Environmental Quality Committee, first.
This bill was heard by the Environmental Quality Committee on April 2,
and approved on a 6-0 vote.
Existing law:
1)Establishes the Home Furnishings and Thermal Insulation Act (Act),
administered by the Bureau within the Department of Consumer Affairs
(DCA). The Bureau is under the supervision and control of a Chief
appointed by the Governor, and the Chief is under the supervision
and control of the Director of DCA.
2)The Act provides for the licensing and inspection of businesses that
manufacture and sell upholstered furniture, bedding and thermal
insulation, and requires all mattresses and box springs manufactured
for sale in this state to be fire retardant, as defined to meet the
federal standards for resistance to open-flame test, and authorizes
the Bureau to adopt regulations to implement those standards.
SB 1019
Page 2
(Business and Professions Code (BPC) � 19161)
3)The Act requires other bedding products to comply with regulations
adopted by the Bureau specifying that those products be resistant to
open-flame ignition; requires all seating furniture to be fire
retardant and labeled as specified. (BPC � 19161)
4)Requires all flexible polyurethane foam, except as specified, that is
offered for retail sale to be fire retardant, and defines "fire
retardant" to mean a product that meets the regulations adopted by
the Bureau. (BPC � 19161.3)
5)Authorizes the Chief, subject to the approval of the Director of DCA,
to exempt items of upholstered furniture which are deemed not to
pose a serious fire hazard from the fire retardant requirements.
(BPC � 19161.5)
6) Bureau regulations, beginning January 1, 2015, require all filling
materials and cover fabrics contained in upholstered furniture sold
in California to meet certain smolder resistant testing standards,
and to be labeled as specified. Specifically, the Bureau
regulations require filling materials and cover fabrics contained
in any article of upholstered furniture and added to reupholstered
furniture to be tested and meet the requirements of Technical
Bulletin (TB) 117-2013. (Article 13, Division 3, Title 4,
California Code of Regulations (CCR) � 1374)
This bill:
1)Requires a manufacturer of covered products to indicate whether or
not a product contains added flame retardant chemicals, by including
a specified statement on the product label.
2)Defines "covered products" to mean any flexible polyurethane foam or
upholstered or reupholstered furniture sold in California that must
meet the test requirements of TB 117-2013.
3)Requires, the manufacturer of a covered product sold in California to
retain documentation to show whether flame retardant chemicals were
added. Provides that a written affidavit by the supplier of each
component covered by TB 117-2013 attesting that flame retardant
chemicals were added or not added shall be sufficient documentation.
4)Requires, within 30 days of a request by the Bureau, a manufacturer
SB 1019
Page 3
of a product sold in California shall provide the Bureau with the
documentation establishing the accuracy of the flame retardant
chemical statement on the label.
5)Requires the Bureau to provide 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.
7)Provides that a manufacturer of covered products and component
suppliers shall be jointly and severally liable for violations of
these provisions, as specified.
8)Specifies that it shall be the duty of the Bureau to receive
complaints from consumers regarding covered products sold in
California.
9)Authorizes the Bureau to adopt regulations to carry out the
provisions of the bill.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill has been keyed "fiscal" by
Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS:
1.Purpose. This bill is sponsored by California Professional
Firefighters , CALFIRE Local 2881 , Center for Environmental Health ,
and Natural Resources Defense Council (Sponsors) in order to require
upholstered furniture manufacturers to disclose whether or not the
furniture contains added flame retardant chemicals. This disclosure
would be made by modifying an existing product label law and
specified point-of-sale information requirements. According to the
Author, retailers would display the point of sale information so
consumers can readily identify which products contain or do not
contain flame retardants. The bill also provides an opportunity for
retailers and manufacturers to utilize the information that is
disclosed to further the goal of helping their customers make
informed buying decisions, according to the Author.
SB 1019
Page 4
The Author states: "Consumers have the right to know whether the
furniture they are buying contains added flame retardants. SB 1019
will provide consumers who are purchasing furniture easily
accessible information on whether the product contains added flame
retardant chemicals. California's Bureau of Electronic and
Appliance Repair, Home Furnishing and Thermal Insulation (BEARHFTI)
found that flame retardant chemicals in furniture do not provide a
meaningful fire safety benefit. These chemicals are associated with
a variety of health concerns. Current labeling law does not provide
clear disclosure of the use of these chemicals even though many
consumers would like such information." The Author further adds:
"Ultimately, consumers want to be able to exercise an informed
choice and buy products that not only keep them and their families
safer, but also keep our firefighters safer."
2.Technical Bulletin 117. In 1975, California adopted TB 117,
requiring that each component material (such as polyurethane foam
used to fill furniture) be able to withstand a small open flame,
equivalent to a candle, for at least 12 seconds. The bureau is
responsible for publishing and enforcing TB 117. This
performance-based standard did not prescribe the use of
flame-retardant chemicals, manufacturing methods, or specific
materials to meet the standards. However, furniture manufacturers
typically meet TB 117 with additive halogenated organic flame
retardants. California is the only state to have established such a
standard, and since California provides such a large portion of the
national market many manufacturers have chosen to meet TB 117 in
products that they distribute across the United States.
The Bureau requires manufacturers to make upholstered furniture and
bedding products sold in California flame-retardant. The Bureau
encourages the industry to use innovative solutions and products to
achieve flame resistance without compromising the environment.
Manufacturers must strictly adhere to state and federal laws
governing the manufacture and sale of upholstered furniture and
bedding products.
Significant concern has been raised in recent years with the TB 117
standard and the environmental and health impacts of the chemicals
that are used by manufacturers to meet the standard.
3.New TB 117-2013 Flammability Standard. In 2012, Governor Brown
directed the Bureau to revise flammability standards for upholstered
furniture sold in the state. The Governor asked the Bureau to
review the state's four-decade-old flammability standards and
recommend changes to reduce toxic flame retardants while continuing
SB 1019
Page 5
to ensure fire safety.
"Toxic flame retardants are found in everything from high chairs to
couches and a growing body of evidence suggests that these chemicals
harm human health and the environment," stated Governor Brown. "We
must find better ways to meet fire safety standards by reducing and
eliminating wherever possible dangerous chemicals."
In recognition of TB 117's inadequacy in addressing the flammability
performance of upholstery cover fabric and its interactions with
underlying filling materials and the health concerns over the use of
these chemicals, the Bureau published TB 117-2013 to allow for a
smolder standard that does not require the use of flame retardant
chemicals to be in compliance. TB117-2013 supersedes TB 117.
The updated method of TB117-2013 changes from the open flame method of
testing to a smoldering test. These test methods consist of four
tests used to evaluate the cigarette ignition resistance of
upholstery cover fabrics, barrier (interliner) materials, resilient
filling materials, and decking materials (used for support under
loose seat cushions) used in the manufacture of upholstered
furniture.
The new TB117-2013 flammability standard applies to upholstered
furniture sold in California. Bedding products such as mattresses,
comforters, mattress pads, bed pillows as well as decorative pillows
are not subject to TB117-2013. They must, however, otherwise carry
a label as required by law. According to the Bureau, the TB117-2013
standard incorporates smoldering tests for several components of
up-holstered furniture. However, none of the components are tested
by themselves as was done under TB117. TB117-2013 is a
"semi-composite" test in which components are combined with standard
test materials to construct a test specimen.
The new TB117-2013 became effective on January 1, 2014.
Manufacturers will have a year to complete the transition and must
come into full mandatory compliance on January 1, 2015.
Under California law, it is ultimately the responsibility of the
furniture manufacturers to ensure products meet TB117-2013 and the
labeling requirements. However, wholesalers, importers and
retailers are also required to ensure products that they sell meet
all the applicable requirements. Retailers in California may
continue to sell furniture that meets the old standard until their
stock is depleted. Starting January 1, 2015, California retailers
SB 1019
Page 6
must purchase products that meet the new TB117-2013 standard.
California Business and Professions Code Section 19072 states:
"Responsibility for compliance with this chapter rests not only with
the manufacturer but also with the importer, wholesaler, retailer,
or any person having in his or her possession with the intent to
sell."
SB 1019 seeks to build off of the revised technical bulletin (TB
117- 2013) by seeking to provide greater transparency in regards to
the chemical content of upholstered furniture.
4.Lawsuit by Chemical Industry Regarding the Revision of TB117. In
January of this year, Chemtura Corporation (Chemtura) sent a letter
to Governor Brown, regarding the new regulation revising TB 117.
Chemtura contends the revised standard will harm consumers by
relaxing the open-flame resistance requirement and requiring only
that the furniture survive a cigarette-like smolder. Chemtura has
also filed a lawsuit (Chemtura Corporation vs. Denise D. Brown)
filed January 16, 2014, in Sacramento Superior Court, seeking a Writ
of Mandate to overturn the revised rules. Chemtura contends the
lawsuit is necessary to seek judicial review of the authority of the
Bureau to eliminate the essential requirement of the fire safety
standard. A hearing upon the Writ of Mandate is currently scheduled
for August.
5.Flame-Retardant Chemicals & Public Health Hazards. Manufacturers of
consumer products commonly add flame retardant chemicals to plastics
and other flammable materials to reduce the risk of fire. These
chemicals are released into the environment during manufacture, use,
and disposal of products. The following are the types of flame
retardants that were used (banned) or are currently used:
a) PCBs . The earliest flame retardants, polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) were banned in the United States in 1977 when it
was determined that they are toxic. With the ban, industries
shifted to using brominated flame retardants.
b) PBDEs . The most studied of the brominated flame retardants
are the polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), which were first
introduced into the market over thirty years ago. PBDEs are
closely related in structure and behavior to PCBs.
PCBs are known to have neurotoxic and carcinogenic effects and were
banned by Congress in 1977. Because of similarity of the
chemical's molecular structures, concerns were raised about
potential biological hazards of PBDEs.
SB 1019
Page 7
Studies in laboratory animals and humans have linked PBDEs to
thyroid disruption, memory and learning problems, delayed mental
and physical development, lower IQ, advanced puberty, and reduced
fertility.
A 2009 in vivo animal study conducted by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) noted that PBDEs are
particularly toxic to the developing brains of animals.
Peer-reviewed studies have shown that even a single dose
administered to mice during development of the brain can cause
permanent changes in behavior, including hyperactivity.
A 1998 study in Sweden found the first evidence of potential for
breast milk contamination from PBDEs. In the Swedish study,
archived samples collected between 1972 and 1997 were analyzed
for the presence of PBDEs to get an overall summed total of PBDEs
in milk. The data from Sweden show a drastic increase in the
quantity of PBDEs detected in women's breast milk from 1972 to
1997, with concentrations doubling every five years. Sweden's
voluntary phase-out of PBDEs by companies and branches of the
government began as early as 1990, and the Swedish government
strongly encouraged the European Union to ban PBDEs outright.
Since Sweden's voluntary PBDE controls were established, a number
of changes have been noted. Total PBDE levels in Swedish women's
breast milk fell about 30% between 1997 and 2000. The European
Union has banned several types of PBDEs as of 2008; 10 years
after the Swedish discovered that they were accumulating in
breast milk.
Sweden is the only nation with a comprehensive breast milk
monitoring program, so it has been difficult to track PBDE
concentration trends elsewhere. However, in regions where bans
and restrictions have not been established, available studies are
showing that PBDE concentrations in breast milk have risen far
past Sweden's 1997 peak.
The highest recorded PBDE levels in humans have been in the United
States. A 2002 study of PBDEs in San Francisco Bay Area women's
breast fat reported an average of 21.5 times higher than Sweden's
1997 peak. Studies of PBDEs in maternal blood and milk in Texas
and Indiana from 2001 and 2002 reported levels similar to those
found in the San Francisco Bay Area.
In 2003, concerned about the hazards posed by two types of PBDEs,
SB 1019
Page 8
especially to breast-fed infants, California enacted a ban on
these chemicals (AB 302, Chan, Chapter 205, Statutes of 2003).
c) Chlorinated Tris . Chlorinated Tris (TDCPP) has been in use
since the 1960s. TDCPP was banned from use in children's pajamas
in 1977, when it was found to be mutagenic, but remains in use as
a foam additive in furniture, car seats, and other products. Its
use has increased in the United States following the 2006 ban on
the common flame retardant PentaPBDE.
According to studies conducted in rats, TDCPP is associated with
increased tumor rates in kidneys and testes, some of which were
cancerous. Evidence further suggests that there may be an impact
on fertility by influencing hormone levels and semen quality in
men. A recently published study found that TDCPP was a
neurotoxin to brain cells. In an assessment conducted by the
Consumer Product and Safety Commission, TDCPP was found to pose a
threat to human health. Under Proposition 65, the State of
California has listed TDCPP as a chemical known to cause cancer.
On March 13, 2014, DTSC named TDCPP in children's foam padded sleep
products as a priority product to be evaluated in the Safer
Consumer Products Program for potential regulatory action.
Because of molecular similarity, other flame retardants are
similarly linked to cancer and other above-listed adverse health
effects. It has also been noted that many flame retardants may
degrade into compounds that are also toxic. This could arguably
make the chemical a danger even after its useful life as a flame
retardant is over.
6.Exposure to Flame Retardant Chemicals. People can be exposed to
flame retardants through several routes, including diet, inhalation
of dust from consumer products in the home, vehicle, or workplace,
or environmental contamination near their home or workplace.
Infants and toddlers are particularly exposed to flame retardants found
in breast milk and dust. Because many halogenated flame retardants
are fat-soluble, they accumulate in fatty areas such as breast
tissue and are mobilized into breast milk, delivering high levels of
flame retardants to breast-feeding infants.
As consumer products age, small particles of material become dust
particles in the air and land on surfaces around the home, including
the floor. Young children crawling and playing on the floor
SB 1019
Page 9
frequently bring their hands to their mouths, ingesting about twice
as much house dust as adults per day in the United States. Young
children in the United States tend to carry higher levels of flame
retardants per unit body weight than do adults.
Some occupations expose workers to higher levels of halogenated flame
retardants and their degradation products. Studies of foam
recyclers and carpet installers, who handle padding made from
recycled polyurethane foam often, have shown elevated levels of
flame retardants in their tissues. Workers in electronics recycling
plants were also found to have elevated body levels of flame
retardants relative to the general population.
U.S. firefighters also show elevated levels of PBDEs and high levels of
brominated furans, toxic degradation products of brominated flame
retardants.
7.Chicago Tribune Articles "Playing with Fire". In May 2012, the
Chicago Tribune (Tribune) published a series of articles titled
"Playing With Fire," which focused on the use of flame retardant
chemicals in the United States, and considered the scientific
evidence of the safety of flame retardant chemicals and their
effectiveness in reducing damage from fire.
The series noted that furniture first became treated with flame
retardants because of the tobacco industry, according to internal
cigarette company documents examined by the Tribune. A generation
ago, tobacco companies were facing growing pressure to produce
fire-safe cigarettes, because so many house fires started with
smoldering cigarettes. The tobacco industry worked with the
chemical industry to advocate for policies that would require
furniture to contain flame retardants rather than require fire-safe
cigarettes.
The documents examined by the Tribune show that cigarette lobbyists
secretly organized the National Association of State Fire Marshals
and then guided its agenda so that it pushed for flame retardants in
furniture.
The Tribune also found that the chemical industry established an
advocacy group called Citizens for Fire Safety. The Citizens for
Fire Safety describes itself as "a coalition of fire professionals,
educators, community activists, burn centers, doctors, fire
departments and industry leaders." The Tribune states, "the group's
efforts to influence fire-safety policies are guided by a mission to
SB 1019
Page 10
'promote common business interests of members involved with the
chemical manufacturing industry,' tax records show." According to
documents obtained from the California Secretary of State, the
organization is a trade association with only three members:
Albemarle Corporation, ICL Industrial Products, and Chemtura
Corporation. The Tribune article states, "Those three companies are
the largest manufacturers of flame retardants and together control
40% of the world market for these chemicals, according to The
Freedonia Group, a Cleveland-based research firm."
The Tribune reporters write: "These powerful industries distorted
science in ways that overstated the benefits of the chemicals,
created a phony consumer watchdog group that stoked the public's
fear of fire and helped organize and steer an association of top
fire officials that spent more than a decade campaigning for their
[the tobacco and chemical industries] cause."
According to the Tribune articles, Citizens for Fire Safety paid a
prominent Seattle physician, Dr. David Heimbach, the former
president of the American Burn Association, to testify before
California state lawmakers in a hearing of this Committee against SB
147 (Leno, 2011).
SB 147 would have required the Bureau to modify TB 117 regarding
product standards for fire
retardant furniture to provide an alternative method of compliance that
can be met without the use of chemical fire retardants and that
would not compromise fire safety.
Dr. Heimbach testified that he treated a 7-week-old girl who was burned
in a fire started by a candle that ignited a pillow that did not
have flame retardant chemicals. The Tribune's investigation found
that Dr. Heimbach made-up his testimony before the Committee. Their
investigation found that there was no 7-week-old burn victim and no
candle fire or patient that he treated as a result of fire where
flame retardants could have prevented injury. After the Chicago
Tribune investigation, Heimbach told the Tribune his testimony in
California was "an anecdotal story rather than anything which I
would say was absolutely true under oath, because I wasn't under
oath."
In March, 2014, the State of Washington's Department of Health
Medical Quality Assurance Commission issued disciplinary charges
against Dr. Heimbach. The Statement of Charges states, that from
2009 through 2012, Heimbach testified at legislative hearings in
Washington, California and Alaska. The medical licensing
SB 1019
Page 11
authorities allege that Heimbach fabricated testimony and failed to
disclose his ties to the chemical industry and falsely presented
himself as an unbiased burn expert when he was in fact collecting
$240,000 from flame retardant manufacturers. The charges state that
"Most of [Heimbach's] testimony, which he presented as documented
facts, was fabricated. [His] misrepresentations to legislators, to
burn experts and to other doctors is conduct which harms the
reputation of the profession . . . [T]his conduct demonstrates an
unfitness to bear the responsibilities, or enjoy the privileges, of
the profession." He faces numerous charges, including
unprofessional conduct and violating patient privacy. To date a
hearing has not been set.
This series of articles raises serious questions as to whether false
information and testimony provided to California's Legislature
influenced the failure of the previous legislation.
8.Prior Legislation. AB 127 (Skinner, Chapter 579, Statutes of 2013)
required the State Fire Marshal, in consultation with the Bureau, to
review the flammability standards for building insulation materials,
including whether the flammability standards for some insulation
materials can only be met with the addition of chemical flame
retardants and requires, if deemed appropriate by the State Fire
Marshal based on this review, the State Fire Marshal to, by July 1,
2015, propose, for consideration by the Building Standards
Commission, updated insulation flammability standards.
SB 147 (Leno, 2011) would have required the Bureau, on or before March
1, 2013, to modify TB 117 regarding product standards for fire
retardant furniture to include a smolder flammability test to
provide an alternative method of compliance that can be met without
the use of chemical fire retardants and does not compromise fire
safety; required the Bureau, in developing the smolder flammability
test, to consider the draft smolder standard proposed by the federal
Consumer Product Safety Commission, to take into consideration the
cost to manufacturers and consumers, and amend existing label
specifications to identify any products meeting that adopted
standard. The bill further authorized the Bureau Chief to
additionally exempt polyurethane foam from the fire retardant
requirements, as specified. Note : the provisions of this bill have
been largely implemented through the revision of TB 117 in TB 117 -
2013. ( Status : SB 147 failed passage in Senate BP&ED Committee.)
SB 1291 (Leno, 2010) would have required the DTSC to include, as a
chemical under consideration, any chemical that is used, or is
SB 1019
Page 12
proposed to be used, as a flame retardant, in accordance with the
review process (Green Chemistry Process) under the current chemical
of concern regulations. ( Status : SB 1291 was placed on the
inactive file on the Senate Floor and died on file.)
SB 772 (Leno, 2009) would have exempted "juvenile products," as
defined, from the fire retardant requirements pursuant to federal
law and the regulations of the Bureau, except that the Bureau could
have, by regulation modified this exemption if the Bureau determined
that any juvenile products posed a serious fire hazard. The
provisions of SB 772 have been largely implemented through
regulation by the Bureau effective December 29, 2010.
( Status : SB 772 died in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.)
AB 706 (Leno, 2008), commencing July 1, 2010, would have required
bedding products to comply with certain requirements, including that
they not contain a chemical or component not in compliance with
alternatives assessment requirements as specified, and required the
DTSC to develop and adopt methodology for the coordination and
conduct of an alternative assessment to review the classes of
chemicals used to meet the fire retardant standards set by the
Bureau and to meet other requirements as specified. ( Status : AB
706 failed passage on the Senate Floor.)
AB 302 (Chan, Chapter 205, Statutes of 2003) banned the use of penta
and octa PBDEs after January 1, 2008.
9.Arguments in Support. The California Professional Firefighters
Association (Sponsor) sates the bill promotes a consumer's right to
know by making information readily accessible and disclosing whether
upholstered furniture contains added flame retardant chemicals,
strengthening the truth in labeling provisions. CPF is concerned
not only with the health and safety of consumers, but also with the
health and safety of firefighters, who are routinely exposed to
toxic substances. CPF indicates that in a residential fire, large
amounts of cancer-causing dioxins and furans are produced by the
combustion of materials containing these chemicals and the exposure
to these compounds contributes to the high rates of cancer among
firefighters.
The Center for Environmental Health states the bill requires nothing
more of producers than simply adding text to already mandated
labels, "These small steps will provide consumers with vital
information they need to insure they are getting the safest products
for their families and children."
SB 1019
Page 13
A number of supporters, including Long Beach Firefighters Association,
Local 372 , Los Angeles County Fire Fighters, Local 1014 , Oceanside
Firefighters Association , Unified Firefighters of Los Angeles City ,
Stockton Professional Firefighters, Local 456 , argue that there is
no doubt that the toxins and compounds released by smoldering
furniture during house fires increases the risk of cancer. "These
gasses seep into our protective clothing and sometimes penetrate our
breathing apparatus. During 'overhaul' of a burn site and mop-up
operations, when the need for protective gear may not be apparent,
such toxins are still being produced and as firefighters we are
either directly inhaling them or our skin is in contact with the
soot that contains dioxin or furans from combusted chemical flame
retardants - both are key routes of occupational exposure for
firefighters. When we return to the station, these toxins can stay
on our protective equipment, adding another exposure pathway for my
fellow firefighters back at the firehouse." The Association states
the bill promotes a consumer's right-to-know, and requires the
disclosure of the presence or absence of chemical flame retardants
in the manufacturing of upholstered furniture. Ultimately, informed
consumers make better buying choices. "When consumers exercise that
knowledgeable choice to buy safer products, they're making
themselves, their families and California's firefighters safer."
Sierra Club California writes that SB 1019 will help consumers make
conscious buying decisions that can protect their families from
exposures to toxic chemicals.
10.Arguments in Opposition. A joint letter of opposition by the
American Chemistry Council , California Chamber of Commerce ,
California Manufacturers & Technology Association , California
Industry Council of California , and the National Federation of
Independent Businesses argues, "These new requirements lack
scientific justification, conflict with existing California consumer
product and chemical safety laws and regulations, and as proposed,
would mislead consumers about the safety of products that contain
flame retardant chemicals."
The letter contends that the bill would unnecessarily alarm consumers
over the safety of products they may purchase, and further conflicts
with current Proposition 65 warning labels for hazardous chemicals.
The letter also objects to the array of reporting requirements on
manufacturers which could expose them to a number of punitive
monetary penalties, and states, "California should be enacting
policies that encourage manufacturing, not imposing yet another
state-specific requirement that will only slow economic growth and
recovery."
SB 1019
Page 14
California Retailers Association has written that the bill's
requirement for the retailers to provide additional notification at
the "point of sale" would add another duplicative and unnecessary
layer of notice and create greater liability for retailers of these
products.
Committee staff notes that the latest amendments by the Author remove
the "point of sale sign requirement" from the bill.
The American Home Furnishings Alliance , North American Home Furnishings
Association , and the Polyurethane Foam Association have submitted a
joint position statement (Joint Statement) regarding SB 1019, which
states that the bill goes well beyond consumer disclosure and is
unworkable as written. The Joint Statement asserts that a reliable
chain of custody cannot be established because of the multiple parts
of the fabrication process, and that identification of flame
retardants is impractical and cost-prohibitive. The Joint Statement
further contends that the "point of sale signage requirement" of the
bill is unreasonable and creates confusion in the marketplace.
Finally, the Joint Statement states that the bill makes false
statements regarding the State's reasoning behind TB 117 - 2013,
pointing out Initial Statement of Reasons by the Bureau in adopting
the regulations made no finding regarding the efficacy of flame
retardant chemicals. Legislative intent language in the bill
containes statements regarding the efficacy and health impacts of
flame retardants related to the adoption of TB 117- 2013.
Committee staff notes that the latest amendments by the Author appear
to remove many of the provisions that are referred to in the Joint
Statement.
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:
Support:
California Professional Firefighters Association (Sponsor)
CALFIRE Local 2881 (Sponsor)
Center for Environmental Health (Sponsor)
Natural Resources Defense Council (Sponsor)
Alliance for Toxic-Free fire Safety
Architects, Designers and Planners for Social Responsibility
Breast Cancer Fund
California League of Conservation Voters
California Nurses Association
Californians for a Healthy and Green Economy
SB 1019
Page 15
CALPIRG
Clean Water Action
Commonweal Biomonitoring Resource Center
Consumer Federation of California
Consumers Union
EarthJustice
Environmental Working Group
Friends of the Earth
Health Care Without Harm
Long Beach Firefighters Association, Local 372
Los Angeles County Firefighters, Local 1014
Oceanside Firefighters Association. Local 3736
Perkins + Will
Sierra Club California
Stockton Professional Firefighters, Local 456
Solana Beach Firefighters, Local 3779
Unified Firefighters of Los Angeles City, Local 112
Opposition:
American Chemistry Council
American Home Furnishings Alliance
California Chamber of Commerce
California Industry Council of California
California Manufacturers & Technology Association
California Retailers Association
National Federation of Independent Businesses
North American Home Furnishings Association
Polyurethane Foam Association
Consultant:G. V. Ayers