Glass beads: lead and arsenic.
Summary
Existing law, part of the hazardous waste control law, requires the Department of Toxic Substances Control to adopt regulations to establish a process by which chemicals or chemical ingredients in products may be identified and prioritized for consideration as being a chemical of concern and to adopt regulations to establish a process by which chemicals of concern may be evaluated. That law prohibits, until January 1, 2015, a person from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, or offering for promotional purposes in this state, glass beads that contain more than a specified amount of arsenic or lead if those glass beads will be used with certain types of blasting equipment and requires, until January 1, 2015, each container or bag of glass beads sold for surface preparation to be labeled in a specific manner. Existing law also prohibits, until January 1, 2015, these glass beads from being considered as a product category subject to the chemicals of concern regulations. A violation of the hazardous control law is a misdemeanor. This bill would revise the process for determining the amount of arsenic or lead that glass beads may contain, and would authorize the department to require any person who manufactures, sells, or offers for sale glass beads to provide to the department specified information relating to documentation and information about the manufacturer or supplier of those glass beads. The bill would authorize an authorized representative of the department, for purposes of administering and enforcing these provisions regulating the manufacture of glass beads, upon obtaining consent or after obtaining an inspection warrant, to, upon presenting appropriate credentials and at a reasonable time, take specified actions to enter and inspect a factory, warehouse, or establishment where glass beads are made. The bill would require the above-described glass bead prohibitions and requirements to be effective until January 1, 2020. This bill would require the department, no later than January 1, 2019, to prepare an evaluation of existing research and data to determine if the standard of 75ppm or more of arsenic or 100ppm or more of lead is an appropriate standard for the use of those substances with regard to the prohibitions specified above, and to submit its findings to the Legislature. The bill would require that, if the department determines that not enough data exists to complete the evaluation, the department notify the Legislature and recommend a process for conducting the evaluation. By extending the effective date of the prohibitions specified above, a violation of which is a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2013
Committee Review
Aug 2013
Assembly Passage
Apr 2013
Senate Passage
Aug 2013
Signed into Law
Sep 2013
Introduced Feb 13, 2013
Signed Sep 6, 2013
Floor votes · Senate Aug 19, 2013 · Assembly Aug 22, 2013
How they voted
33–0
Passed · 2 other
Total votes 35
Aug 19, 2013
D
Democratic25
92% Yea
R
Republican10
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
24
Key actions
12
Committee
10
Amendments
3
Sep 6, 2013
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Aug 22, 2013
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (62-0-1)
assembly
Aug 22, 2013
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 77. Noes 0. Page 2647.).
lower
Aug 19, 2013
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (33-0-2)
senate
Aug 19, 2013
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 21 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
lower
Aug 13, 2013
Upper · Passed
From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8 and be amended.
upper
Jul 2, 2013
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jul 1, 2013
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (June 26).
upper
Jun 18, 2013
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on E.Q.
upper
Jun 11, 2013
Upper · Passed
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
upper
May 29, 2013
Upper · Passed
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
upper
May 9, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on E.Q.
upper
Apr 17, 2013
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. To consent calendar. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (April 17).
lower
Apr 2, 2013
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (April 2). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Feb 28, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on E.S. & T.M.
lower
Feb 14, 2013
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 16.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Richard Bloom
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 324
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 324. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline