SB 1118 Mattress Extended Producer Responsiblity - Top 10 Reasons Why It Failed

Top Ten Reasons SB 1118 (Hancock) Was Stopped

Mattress Extended Producer Responsibility
 

Lack of mattress recycling fee is severe financial burden.

Like existing California recycling programs, mattress recycling must be funded by a uniform fee collected at retail. It is unfair and completely unworkable to make the manufacturers pay 100% of the cost to implement an extended producer’s responsibility (EPR) program in the state. The bill should explicitly require that the recycling obligations imposed by the law be funded by a fee collected at retail. California has never enacted an EPR program that did not include a recycling / disposal fee paid up front by the consumer. This precedent would be extremely bad policy.

Major new costs imposed on manufacturers.

Mattress manufacturers will face MAJOR untold costs to set up new recycling centers, pick up and transport mattresses, store mattress, coordinate with retailers, consumers, waste companies, police illegal dumping, run a public relations campaign and otherwise become waste management experts (in areas where they have little or no expertise) to comply with the bill’s provisions. The cost to implement this EPR program statewide will be $10’s of millions of dollars.

 

Unrealistic recycling targets with draconian fines.SB 1118 also contains arbitrary and unrealistic recycling targets and there is no evidence to show that these mandatory targets are practical or achievable (75% recycle rate by 2020). As a result, the unattainable targets set by SB 1118 could guarantee excessive fines approaching $2 million annually (up to $5,000 per day) for every mattress manufacturer and retailer in the state. 

 

Retailer mandate to pick up mattresses but no ability to recover costs.

SB 1118 mandates that mattress retailers who deliver mattresses to their customers must offer a pickup service or provide a voucher for mattress recycling. However, it prevents them from charging for this service thus placing a great burden on the retailers.

On-line versus brick and mortar – unfair competition.
The bill exempts on-line retailers of mattresses from having to participate thus creating an unfair advantage over brick and mortar sellers. 

Unlimited fee authority by state Cal Recycle.

The bill grants unlimited fee authority to CalRecycle to pay for the regulatory scheme. These fees must be remitted by the manufacturers and the state can set the fees at whatever level it deems appropriate.

Higher prices to consumers / lost jobs in the economy.

The net effect of the EPR regulatory scheme in SB 1118 is going to be significantly higher prices for consumers and lost manufacturing and retail jobs as a result. This is an anti-business, anti-economic development piece of legislation that will hurt the state’s economy.

Where’s the problem?; Retailers already pick up old mattresses.

This bill appears to be a solution in search of a problem. Mattresses are already collected in a responsible manner.  Most retailers offer a collection service when a new mattress is purchased.  Retailers then dispose of these mattresses through the proper channels and established mattress recyclers.

Eight new recycling centers established in California.

The industry has not turned a blind eye to recycling. In fact, there have been 8 new recycling centers opened in California in the last decade including a very large and successful one right in the middle of the author’s district.

Recession hit industry hard in California.

The mattress industry was hit hard by the recession.  Sales dropped by over 20%, bankrupting large and small manufacturers and retailers in California and across the country.  As the industry struggles to recover from this very difficult period, now is not the time to impose substantial new costs on vulnerable businesses or impede their ability to sell new products.  Higher costs will jeopardize businesses and jobs.  But laws like SB 1118 will be a step backward for the industry by significantly increasing costs, reducing demand for new product and killing jobs.