Here's an interesting test case for California's much-debated business climate. <\/p>\n
Last week, 17 lawmakers from Gov. Jerry Brown's own party asked him to put a hold on recently issued regulations that could \"impact every manufacturer, business and consumer in California and beyond.\" <\/p>\n
The regulations concern California's 2008 \"green chemistry\" law requiring businesses to identify and, where judged necessary and feasible, find alternatives to approximately 1,200 \"chemicals of concern,\" like formaldehyde and lead, found in a wide range of products. <\/p>\n
Chewed over for four years with input from business groups and environmental and health care advocates, the regulations were issued by the Department of Toxic Substances Control on July 27, subject to a final comment period. <\/p>\n
\"We see this as a two-for-one initiative,\" said Debbie Raphael, the department's director, in a news release. \"Public health and the environment benefit by lessening our use of toxic chemicals, and California companies get a significant boost into markets that are rapidly expanding.\" Business executives praised the regulations as providing \"an orderly transition to safer materials and products\" and \"promoting a healthy economy, healthy environment and healthy people.\" <\/p>\n
Others don't see it that way. At a public hearing last month, a representative of the Association of Global Automakers warned that the regulations will result in the supply of older replacement parts being disrupted, and \"consumers' warrantees or repairs may not be able to be fulfilled.\" <\/p>\n
Pointing to conflicts with federal regulations, an attorney representing members of the construction, home appliance and aircraft industry said the provisions would result \"ultimately to the detriment of California's economy by encouraging businesses both large and small to exit California for a more predictable business climate.\" <\/p>\n
Enter state Sen. Michael Rubio, D-Shafter (Kern County), incoming chairman of the Senate Committee on Environmental Quality. <\/p>\n
In a letter to Brown, signed by 16 fellow Democrats, Rubio called for halting the \"open-ended, virtually unlimited in scope\" regulations \"until a robust economic impact study is completed,\" including the number of businesses affected, the costs entailed and jobs endangered (or created). <\/p>\n
Rubio said an analysis conducted by the Department of Toxic Substances Control left more questions than answers, and he cites another state law to back up his case. That would be SB617, signed last year by Brown, requiring a stricter cost-benefit analysis before new regulations are promulgated. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Read more from the original source: Here's an interesting test case for California's much-debated business climate. Last week, 17 lawmakers from Gov. Jerry Brown's own party asked him to put a hold on recently issued regulations that could \"impact every manufacturer, business and consumer in California and beyond.\" The regulations concern California's 2008 \"green chemistry\" law requiring businesses to identify and, where judged necessary and feasible, find alternatives to approximately 1,200 \"chemicals of concern,\" like formaldehyde and lead, found in a wide range of products Continue reading
\nLawmakers seek 'green chemistry' delay<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"