Bill Text: CA AB1628 | 2023-2024 | Regular Session | Introduced
NOTE: There are more recent revisions of this legislation. Read Latest Draft
Bill Title: Microfiber filtration.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 2-0)
Status: (Vetoed) 2024-01-29 - Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file. [AB1628 Detail]
Download: California-2023-AB1628-Introduced.html
Bill Title: Microfiber filtration.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 2-0)
Status: (Vetoed) 2024-01-29 - Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file. [AB1628 Detail]
Download: California-2023-AB1628-Introduced.html
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE—
2023–2024 REGULAR SESSION
Assembly Bill
No. 1628
| Introduced by Assembly Member McKinnor |
February 17, 2023 |
An act to add Chapter 11 (commencing with Section 119425) to Part 15 of Division 104 of the Health and Safety Code, relating to environmental health.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 1628, as introduced, McKinnor.
Microfiber filtration.
Existing law, to protect public health and water quality, regulates a broad range of consumer products and processes, including water softeners, water treatment devices, and backflow prevention devices, among others.
This bill would require, on and after January 1, 2029, all new washing machines sold for residential, commercial, and state use in California contain a microfiber filtration system with an unspecified filtration rate or an unspecified mesh size. The bill would also include legislative findings and declarations.
Digest Key
Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: NOBill Text
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1.
Chapter 11 (commencing with Section 119425) is added to Part 15 of Division 104 of the Health and Safety Code, to read:CHAPTER 11. Microfiber Filtration
119425.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(a) California is in the midst of a plastic pollution crisis with plastics of all sizes—from milk jugs to nylon fibers—increasingly accumulating in our natural environment. New scientific research estimates that under the current trajectory, plastic production will double by 2030. While all shapes and sizes of plastic pollution and waste are problematic, microplastics, which are small plastic pieces that are less than 5 mm in size, are a largely invisible and particularly challenging form of plastic pollution to address. Microplastics are highly mobile, distribute easily and widely, and are nearly impossible to capture once released into the environment.
(b) Californians are exposed to microplastics through the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the food we eat. Researchers have estimated that Americans ingest tens of thousands of microplastic particles per person each year through foods including fruits, vegetables, meats, table salt, honey, and beverages like beer and water. Microplastics have been detected in human pulmonary tissues, intestines, and even placentas. While the long-term health impacts of human ingestion of microplastics are still an area of active research, the ubiquity of microplastics in the environment raises concerns about plastic ingestion.
(c) Synthetic microfibers—shed or fragmented from polyester, nylon or rayon clothing and textiles—are one of the most abundant and ubiquitous types of microplastic. With global production of synthetic textiles expected to triple by 2050, microfiber pollution in California is expected to continue to grow. Additionally,
there are approximately 11,000,000 residential and 600,000 commercial washing machines operating in California. Without intervention, it is estimated that annual microfiber emissions to California’s natural environments from machine washing of synthetic textiles will continue to increase.
(d) Microfibers may be the most prevalent type of microplastic found in oceans. In a study conducted in San Francisco Bay, microfiber concentrations in surface waters reached 580,000 particles per square kilometer compared to 520,000 particles per square kilometer for all nonfiber particles combined, including tire wear fragments, films, spheres, and foam pieces.
(e) Microfibers, given their shape, may be the most readily absorbable of the types of microplastics. In marine and freshwater systems, synthetic fibers, relative to other forms of microplastics, appear to have higher potential for
entering the food chain because their size and form allow them to be readily consumed by aquatic animals and to be more prone to entanglement and gut retention.
(f) In addition, like all microplastics, microfibers can serve as a vector for the dyes, flame retardants, and waterproof chemicals associated with them, and also for additional harmful chemicals. With a high surface-to-volume ratio, microfibers in particular can absorb a wide range of toxins, and therefore serve a vehicle for introducing additional waterborne toxins into the food chain.
(g) In California, the majority, estimated at 94 percent, of synthetic microfibers are fairly effectively captured by wastewater treatment plants in sewage sludge, known as biosolids. Many of these microfibers, however, are then released into the natural environment through the spreading of biosolids on agricultural lands, and to a lesser
degree through the use of recycled wastewater on agricultural fields.
(h) When biosolids are applied to agricultural fields, microfibers can accumulate in the soil where they are nearly impossible to eliminate. Microfibers can be taken up by plants, resulting in decreased growth rates and nutrient uptake, diminished food production yields, and irreversible damage to terrestrial ecosystems and soil health. The presence of microfibers can increase the uptake of toxic chemicals by plants, posing further concerns about food safety and human health impacts.
(i) The pattern of spreading microfiber-laced biosolids onto California’s agricultural fields—primarily fields for livestock feed—has significant environmental justice implications. Notably, this current practice directs the flow of microfibers from high-population and higher income urban counties to lower income rural communities
residing near agricultural lands, potentially exposing agricultural works and adjacent communities.
(j) California has proven to be a national leader on controlling plastic pollution. Among other important actions, the state has passed a ban on microbeads in wash-off products like face scrubs and toothpaste, and on the distribution of single-use plastic bags, as well as comprehensive extended producer responsibility and source reduction legislation. In addition, as part of ensuring safe drinking water for all Californians, the State Water Resources Control Board is creating the first standardized methods for testing microplastics in drinking water, and leveraging the latest research to better monitor and identify the sources of microplastics in drinking water. The Ocean Protection Council has also prioritized the need to address microfibers pollution through requiring use of filters in washing machines in their Statewide Microplastics
Strategy.
(k) Research suggests microfiber capture filters added to clothes washers can dramatically reduce the number of microfibers that enter wastewater treatment plants and surface waters. A study suggested that full adoption of filters across washing machines in California decreased annual synthetic microfiber emissions to natural environments by almost 80 percent.
(l) Policies are being considered and adopted around the globe to address the use of microfiber capture. France recently passed a law requiring all new clothes washers sold in France to be equipped with built-in filters by 2025.
(m) A variety of filtration technologies, which could be used in-washer, installed on the out, or built directly into washing machines, already exist that are capable of effectively capturing microfibers before they can
enter the environment. Washing machines with built-in filters are already widely available in Japan among manufacturers like Hitachi, Panasonic, and Toshiba. Energy efficient clothes washers with built-in microfiber filters are also commercially available in Europe, and some washers with built-in microfiber filters are also available at a smaller scale in the United States.
(n) While interventions to address microfiber pollution are needed across the full life cycle of synthetic textiles, filtration technologies provide a critical and near-term solution to reduce the amount of microfibers released into California’s lands and waters.
