PAINT COUNCIL REPORT MEMBER REPORT

Transcription

1 American Coatings TM PAINT COUNCIL REPORT ACA s Paint Councils are a network of grassroots organizations representing the association in its efforts to promote the interests of the paint and coatings industry at the state level. ACA s 10 Paint Councils provide a forum for companies doing business in those states California, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ohio, Texas, and the Pacific Northwest Paint (Oregon and Washington) to interact with each other and their elected officials. Paint council membership and participation is available to ACA corporate members only, since it is membership dues that support the work of the paint councils. Action taken by each paint council is determined by its membership at regularly scheduled meetings throughout the year. Each paint council has professional staff for lobbying and management. Administration and coordination of the paint council network is overseen by the association s Government Affairs and Industry Programs division. You are encouraged to get involved! The report below demonstrates in detail the real value that ACA and its paint councils deliver to members. If you are not participating in one of ACA s paint councils and would like to, or would like more information, please contact Alison Keane at or akeane@paint.org, or visit the Paint Councils website. CALIFORNIA Legislative Front The 2015 California Legislative Session concluded on Sept. 11, and it was a busy one for ACA s California Paint Council (CPC), which lobbied on a number of bills important to industry. Many bills that had the potential to negatively impact CPC members were made two-year bills and will be followed in the current legislative session that commenced on Jan. 4 and will run through Aug. 31, SB 662, PaintCare Annual Report Deadline ACA and its CPC were successful in gaining introduction and bipartisan passage of this committee on Environmental Quality omnibus bill, which changed the due date of PaintCare s annual report to CalRecycle from Sept. 1 of each year to Nov. 1. The bill was signed by Gov. Jerry Brown. PaintCare needed more time from the end of the fiscal year (June 30) to collect and verify the data needed to complete the report and obtain the independent financial audit required by statute. SB 633, Made in America Labeling ACA and CPC supported this bill, which was signed by the governor. The law amends the California Made in the USA requirements to more closely align with the federal standard. Existing law had prevented products sold in California from using a Made in USA label unless 100 percent of the product content is domestically produced; but the new law permits a very limited amount of non-domestic content in a product labeled as Made in USA five percent of product content could be from non-domestic sources. The law also provides some additional flexibility, up to 10 percent non-domestic content, for products that contain components not domestically produced. AB 45, Household Hazardous Waste Residential Collection This bill would require local jurisdictions to increase diversion of household hazardous waste (HHW) by creating a comprehensive program for the curbside collection of household hazardous waste. Paint was included in the list of HHW products that could have been part of this curbside program despite the fact that PaintCare has already been established, and working effectively, in California. ACA and CPC reached out to the bill author s office to make sure the author and staff understood how the PaintCare program works, and to request that any new HHW curbside collection program not negatively impact PaintCare. The bill had strong opposition from local governments responsible for running this new curbside program and, as a result, the bill didn t move forward this year, though it became a two-year bill that CPC will continue to monitor. AB 708, Ingredient Disclosure on Consumer Products ACA and CPC opposed this bill, which would have required a manufacturer of certain cleaning products to disclose the 20 most prevalent ingredients contained in the product by posting that information on the product label and on the manufacturer s website. The cleaning product categories included air care, automotive, general cleaning and floor polishes. The bill became a two-year bill, and CPC will continue to monitor it. AB 888, Microbeads This bill would have prohibited sale in California of personal care products containing plastic microbeads that are used to exfoliate or cleanse in a rinse-off product. ACA didn t have a position on the bill until last minute amendments were made that would have authorized the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) to exempt plastic microbeads contained in a personal care product if a manufacturer submitted a full alternatives analysis; DTSC made specific findings based on the analysis; and the RHODE ISLAND AVENUE N.W. WASHINGTON, DC T F

2 manufacturer reimbursed DTSC for the review of that analysis. These amendments would have bypassed the state s green chemistry process, and set up individual product bans, both of which are contrary to the Safer Consumer Products regulations. As a result, ACA and CPC along with many other industries not otherwise affected by the bill came out in opposition, causing many legislators to request immediate removal of these amendments. The author agreed, allowing ACA and CPC to go back to a neutral position. ACA is currently reviewing the use of micro-plastics in the paint and coatings industry, as microbeads are becoming an issue both nationally (President Obama enacted a law on Dec. 28, 2015, banning microbeads from personal care products) and internationally. The bill was signed by the governor. SB 84, Fees on Hazardous Materials by Rail ACA and CPC opposed this bill signed by the governor which establishes a new fee on shipments by rail of hazardous materials to support the Railroad Accident Prevention and Response Fund, mainly in response to legislative concerns about crude oil shipments in the state. The new fund will be used to pay for state and local emergency response planning, equipment, training and drills. The regulations specifying the amount of the new fee, as well as the final hazardous materials subject to the fee, are expected to be finalized early in 2016 through the recommendations of a technical advisory committee of stakeholders. The fees will be paid by the persons owning the 25 most hazardous material commodities transported by rail in California based on each loaded rail car. The fees will be collected from the hazmat owner by the railroads and submitted to the state quarterly. Regulatory Front CPC was equally active and engaged on the California regulatory front. Prop 65 Lead Agency Website and Clear & Reasonable Warning Regulations The state Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) on Jan. 15, 2015, released its proposal to amend Prop 65 s Clear and Reasonable warning regulations and also create a Lead Agency Website. Prop 65 prohibits a person in the course of doing business from knowingly or intentionally exposing any individual to a chemical known to the state of California to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity without first giving clear and reasonable warning to the individual. ACA and CPC submitted comments and participated in OEHHA workshops through various iterations of the draft proposal during the year. In fact, ACA and CPC secured several positive changes to the warning regulations, including: elimination of the GHS Health Hazard Pictogram requirement; modification of the warning language from will expose to can expose; making the lead agency website a separate section of the regulations; and providing for abbreviated warning requirements for on-product labels to accommodate size issues. However, on Nov. 24, 2015, OEHHA formally withdrew its proposal for the clear and reasonable warning regulations, and started a new formal regulatory rulemaking, in which ACA and CPC will remain engaged. The agency s Lead Agency Site Website proposal (which was not withdrawn), was finalized and released on Jan. 25, The new regulation will allow OEHHA to request Prop 65-related product information from manufacturers and post that information, as well as third-party information, on a newly created Prop 65 website. Throughout the rulemaking process, ACA and CPC commented (three times), and OEHHA made revisions and four changes in direct response to those critiques, including the following: OEHHA now provides a pathway for manufacturers to correct information on OEHHA s website; OEHHA will put a disclaimer on all information, not just information from industry, stating that it cannot assure the accuracy of information received; There is now a 90-day deadline for industry to respond to a request; and OEHHA will allow for trade groups to respond on behalf of industry, if OEHHA requests information from multiple manufacturers in the same trade group. The Lead Agency Website regulation takes effect on April 1, 2016, and the website will likely launch later in the year. State Lands Commission Hull Biofouling Regulations On Dec 18, 2015, the California State Lands Commission (CSLC) voted to approve its regulation: Biofouling Management to Minimize the Transfer of Nonindigenous Species from Vessels Operating in California Waters. The regulation establishes performance standards with a ranking system to determine if a ship s hull is clean enough to enter California waters. CSLC s Technical Advisory Group will now develop the biofouling assessment protocols. The regulations will become effective for ship owners/ operators on July 1, Most provisions will become effective for individual vessels with completion of the first regularly-scheduled out-ofwater dry docking on or after July 1, 2016, however, the fouling ranking protocols and percent-cover requirements still need to be developed before this regulation can become fully enforceable. Since 2011, ACA and its CPC have worked with CSLC on proposed amendments to the biofouling regulations. The final version of the regulations addressed most of the concerns and suggestions made by the marine industry and ACA/CPC comments specifically related to hull fouling coatings. As a result, industry believes that the regulations are feasible. FLORIDA ACA s Florida Paint Council (FPC) represented the paint and coatings industry during an interesting and volatile session of the Florida Legislature. Toward the end of the regular session, in April, both houses abruptly adjourned, leaving the state without a budget and causing many bills to die on the calendar. A month later, in special session, a budget was finally passed. Adding to the chaos, the Florida Supreme Court ruled the redistricting maps drawn by the legislature for congressional and state senate seats violated the state constitution. This caused the legislature 2

3 to call two additional special sessions in an attempt to draw constitution-compliant congressional and state senate districts. Both special sessions resulted in failure with each house refusing to agree, leaving to the Florida Supreme Court the responsibility of drawing new district maps in time for 2016 elections. Because of the acrimony, tax relief bills, such as SB 1230, Tax on Commercial Property, which would have provided a reduction in the sales tax on commercial leases and would have provided tax relief to paint industry members in Florida did not pass. Fortunately, also failing to gain traction was another attempt to require the Florida Department of Health to list dangerous chemicals in consumer products, SB 374, Chemicals in Consumer Products, which ACA and its FPC opposed. That measure, which surfaced back in 2014, would require the Department of Health to publish a list of chemicals of high concern present in consumer products designed for use by pregnant women and children. The measure would require the state to provide criteria for inclusion on the list and authorize the Department of Health to participate with other states in an interstate clearinghouse. ILLINOIS In 2015, the Illinois Paint Council (IPC) worked to ensure that no restrictions or regulations on paint products passed the General Assembly and that no measures eliminating industry tax incentives reached the governor. This objective was made easier given that Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner has so far kept his pledge to stand firm on his refusal to sign any tax increases into law, or lessen proposed cuts in the budget, without pro-business reforms like freezing property taxes, worker compensation reforms, tort reform and other reforms addressing pensions, legislative districting, and term limits. So far, Democratic leaders in the legislature have refused to adopt these pro-business reforms for fear of upsetting their traditional constituencies in organized labor and the state s trial bar. IPC s main objective this year was trying to advance ACA s model PaintCare legislation. Once again, bills were introduced in both the Illinois House and Senate, and negotiations ensued with the state s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), retail merchants, waste industry, and the environmental community. While many positive aspects of the bill were discussed, there s still work and outreach to be done on the proposal prior to reaching a consensus. On the regulatory side, IPC remains at the forefront of keeping the state s vital waterways open for navigation in light of invasive species such as Asian Carp and water quality standards. Many IPC members ship on these waterways. Cessation of navigation would sever the country s inland waterway superhighway, imperiling the shipment of critical cargoes for domestic consumption and for export, and threatening manufacturing, power generation and related jobs. KENTUCKY In 2015, the Kentucky Paint Council (KPC) focused on serving ACA member companies in the state. To that end, KPC and its members remained engaged with Kentucky lawmakers, hearing from Rep. Jerry Miller (R-36), a freshman Republican who served on newly elected Republican Gov. Matt Bevin s transition team; and Rep. Kevin Bratcher (R-29), who provided a preview of the 2016 Legislative Session at its meetings during the year. KPC also hosted Rachel Hamilton, assistant director of the Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District (APCD), who addressed the new national ozone standard, which was lowered to 70 parts per billion in October With the tighter ozone standards, it s unclear if APCD will remain in attainment. If not, there are few options on additional reductions from stationary sources. The district is looking at two areas that would affect the paint and coatings industry: lithography and technical coatings, though what would be included under technical coatings has yet to be defined. KPC will be participating in an upcoming stakeholder group discussion. On the legislative side, KPC continued to monitor a bill that would ban bisphenol A (BPA) in most consumer products. KPC, has lobbied and defeated the bill three times before, but the bill s sponsor will likely reintroduce the bill once again in Tort reform will also likely be on the 2016 legislative agenda, as will tax reform, a priority for the Bevin administration. In 2016, KPC will focus on building relationships with the new Energy and Environment Secretary and his management team. MASSACHUSETTS The Massachusetts Legislature began its two-year legislative session in January 2015 and quickly became mired in an internal rules debate between the House and the Senate over the power or lack thereof of the Senate to control bills filed by senators. In spite of the political wrangling, ACA and its Massachusetts Paint Council (MPC) succeeded in advancing PaintCare legislation, SB 408, An Act Establishing the Massachusetts Paint Stewardship Program. On July 21, the bill passed the Joint Committee on the Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture, and the Senate Ways and Means Committee on Nov. 12. On Jan. 21, 2016, it passed the full Senate. The bill now goes to the House, where work for passage will continue. ACA and its MPC will work with new Republican Gov. Charlie Baker s Administration to see this bill enacted. Following aggressive lobbying by ACA and its MPC, environmental legislation, including the so-called safer alternatives to toxic chemicals bills (SB 397, SB 453 and HB 696), did not move out of committee. Similarly, due to MPC s advocacy, legislation to study the implementation of extended producer responsibility programs, which may impact moving ACA s PaintCare bill (HB 693), also didn t move out of committee. 3

4 MINNESOTA ACA s Minnesota Paint Council (MNPC) spent much of 2015 working with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) on final regulatory details of the state s PaintCare program. Enacted by law in 2013, PaintCare enjoyed a successful launch in Minnesota on Nov. 1, 2014, and in its first reporting period (eight months), established 178 permanent paint drop-off locations. In addition, a final statewide contract was negotiated with MPCA in 2015, allowing all municipal HHW programs to participate in the program via MPCA s state contract and authorized haulers. Due in part to the prolonged regulatory process, legislation passed during the special session in 2015 extended the time period for administrative fees collected to be used for implementation and enforcement by MPCA. The Minnesota Legislature continued its heated debate in 2015 over its most recent green chemistry proposal. The Minnesota Toxic Free Kids Act (SB 1099) passed both houses and was brought to conference committee to reconcile differences in the versions, but was not included in either the final conference report or the ultimate special session agreement. The proposal would have identified chemicals of high concern and required publishing of these chemicals on MPCA s website and in the State Register. Manufacturers and distributors of children s products would have to disclose and report certain information, and the presence, concentration and total amount of a priority chemical in a children s product. MPCA would collect fees from manufacturer and distributors per each product containing a priority chemical. While the bill was narrowly scoped to children s products, ACA s MNPC closely monitored the bill s progress to ensure it would not impact the industry, and will continue to do so in 2016, since it will likely be reintroduced. NEW JERSEY Legislative Front PaintCare In 2015, ACA s New Jersey Paint Council (NJPC) worked with policymakers and other stakeholders to shepherd legislation SB 1420 and AB 1603 for the establishment of a PaintCare program in New Jersey. On Jan. 11, 2016, ACA s PaintCare bill, AB 1603, passed the New Jersey Assembly by a vote (SB 1420 passed the New Jersey Senate on May 18 by a 26-7 vote). Unfortunately, Gov. Chris Christie didn t sign the legislation, allowing a pocket veto. ACA believes NJPC is well poised to try again in the new session this year, without the 2016 presidential election influencing the governor s support. In fact, the PaintCare bill has been reintroduced in the Senate as SB 986. On Feb. 4, 2016, ACA staff testified in support of the bill at a hearing of the Senate Environment and Energy Committee. Lead Hazard Control, Environmental Justice, and Plastic Container Recycling NJPC also supported bills that would make FY 2013 supplemental Grants-in-Aid appropriation of $10 million to Department of Community Affairs for Lead Hazard Control Assistance Fund (SB 1279/ AB 2325), and require retailers to post warnings of lead poisoning from improper paint removal (SB 1527/AB 2885). This was also pocket-vetoed. NJPC also monitored several other lead-related bills involving prohibition of the sale of children s products containing the heavy metal (AB 626), and the Lead Hazard Control Assistance Act (AB 2398). NJPC strongly opposed environmental justice legislation concerning permits in burdened communities (AB 1594), as well as the Plastic Container Recycling Enhancement Act (AB 1752). Regulatory Front On the regulatory side, NJPC engaged the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) in an effort to drive reforms to improve three key areas: site (soil) remediation, water quality and permitting, and the air program and permitting. Site Remediation NJPC continued its collaboration with NJDEP on soil remediation via the state s Licensed Site Remediation Professional Program (LSRP). NJPC submitted comments to the agency on the program s proposed rules that have the potential to be too prescriptive and more stringent than the statutory requirements found in the Site Remediation Reform Act. NJPC also challenged the department s efforts to set Interim Ground Water Standards for 12 chemicals, including solvents and other chemicals used in manufacturing processes. Notably, interim standards have the same impact as standards adopted through formal rulemaking. Water Quality and Permitting The water quality program at NJDEP is important to the coatings and adhesives industry: water quality standards that are set and risk assessments that are completed by the water program led to similar rules, standards and guidance in other NJDEP programs. For this reason, in 2015, NJPC actively advocated for greater transparency related to standards setting and chemical risk assessments, particularly through the Drinking Water Quality Institute. NJPC also advocated for improvements to the fees associated with discharges. NJPC expects the fee structure for 2016 will follow the same formulas used in 2015, and as such, there should not be any significant fee changes for most members. Air Program and Permitting NJPC submitted comments during the NJDEP stakeholder process to address U.S EPA s Control Technique Guidelines (CTG) for Industrial Cleaning Solvents in the state s air quality regulations. The comments stated that the proposed volatile organic compound limits for solvents used for the cleaning of equipment in the manufacture of adhesives, surface coating formulations, inks, or resins will make cleaning of equipment very difficult, could lead to cross contamination of manufactured products, and have a negative impact on safety standards. 4

5 NJPC also advocated for reforms in the state air program and its fees with NJDEP leadership, focusing on the following concerns: The program is based on a flawed premise that all program costs should be funded through fee revenue; NJDEP has failed to provide detailed analyses on expenses and workload efficiency. Previous air fees have served their purpose of significantly lowering emissions from stationary sources on criteria air pollutants by over 70 percent just in the past decade, but NJDEP has not modified its air program to match the lower emissions and too much bureaucracy still exists; and NJDEP has not appropriately benchmarked the state s air program to compare New Jersey with other states with which New Jersey competes for economic investment and job creation. NJPC is helping to ensure that the NJDEP Air Program becomes much more effective and efficient, insisting that the program be supported by quantifiable goals, deadlines, and performance metrics that serve as a catalyst rather than a hindrance to economic growth. OHIO Legislative Front During the first half of 2015, much of Ohio s legislative focus was on passage of the state s $71.2 billion biennial budget that funds state government from July 1, 2015 through June 30, The budget increases funding for K-12 education, which will now be funded at approximately $10 billion per year and cuts taxes by approximately $2 billion. Gov. John Kasich announced that the state now has $2 billion in its rainy day reserve fund ; when he took office in January 2011, the fund had 89 cents. The Ohio House and Senate rejected Gov. Kasich s proposed expansion of the state sales tax to numerous additional business-to-business related services, and also rejected his proposed across-theboard 50-cent increase in the state sales tax and an increase in the Commercial Activity Tax. However, there was agreement between the Legislature and Kasich to further reduce the personal income tax and small business taxes as follows: Personal Income Tax Cut All income tax brackets were reduced by 6.3 percent for tax years beginning in Small Business Tax Cut The first 75 percent of business income up to $250,000 (up to $125,000 for taxpayers filing separately) is not taxable for 2015, and for 2016 and thereafter, 100 percent of the first $250,000 ($125,000 for spouses filing separately) is not taxable. There is a flat tax of three (3) percent on all business income in excess of these amounts. Regulatory Front Ohio s Universal Waste Rules In 2015, the Ohio Paint Council (OPC) continued to work toward updating Ohio s Universal Waste rules to include paint and paint-related wastes (PPRW). This joint effort with the Ohio Manufacturers Association culminated in an ACA/OPC meeting with Ohio EPA staff to answer more questions. The meeting resulted in ACA and OPC submitting additional comments that focused on (1) the environmental benefits that would result from classifying PPRW as universal waste; (2) how classifying PPRW as universal waste will create better facility management, and (3) providing specific examples of why classifying PPRW as universal waste will alleviate regulatory burdens, costs, and encourage more recycling and reuse. ACA believes that its concerted efforts through OPC on this matter will result in Ohio EPA s taking regulatory action during ACA hopes the regulation will serve as a model that can then be used to promulgate analogous regulations in other interested states. Currently, only Texas and New Jersey have universal waste rules for paint. Materials Management Advisory Council Ohio s state budget has merged the Solid Waste Advisory Council with the Recycling and Litter Prevention Advisory Council, now the singular Materials Management Advisory Council. Among other things, the new council is required to submit an annual report to the General Assembly on the state s solid waste management plan and its achievements, and develop partnerships that foster a productive marketplace for the collection and use of recycled materials. Notably, the governor is to appoint the now 13 members of the council, six of whom must have knowledge or experience in waste management, recycling, or litter prevention programs, and all six must come from private industry. OPC will attempt to get representation on the Materials Management Advisory Council in HUD Funding for Lead Poisoning As the year ended, the Cleveland Plain Dealer ran a series of articles relating to problems with Cleveland s efforts to curb childhood lead poisoning and provided coverage of a Cleveland City Council public hearing on the matter. It came to light that the City of Cleveland has not received federal Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) funding for over two and a half years, due to non-compliance with HUD grant requirements. As a result, the Ohio Department of Health (ODH) has entered into a Delegation of Authority agreement with Cleveland to enable the department to conduct public health lead investigations. The agreement calls for regular communication between Cleveland and ODH, with monthly ODH site visits and weekly conference calls. ODH has advised OPC that Cleveland will receive approximately $3.4 million of $20 million in HUD funds over a three-year period that will be spent in Ohio. OPC has a close working relationship with ODH through its participation in the Ohio Lead Advisory Committee, and will monitor the situation in

6 PACIFIC NORTHWEST The Pacific Northwest Paint Council (PNWPC) covers both Oregon and Washington states. Oregon in 2015, ACA and its PNWPC had a decisive victory in Oregon, defeating legislation, SB 30, which would have changed the Oregon Paint- Care program from an Extended Producer Responsibility program, to one where the revenue generated by the PaintCare assessment would have to be turned over to municipal governments to run the program. The bill, which was crafted by the counties of Oregon, would have allowed the counties to basically dictate their contracts with PaintCare at full-cost recovery. That would have allowed the counties to come up with their own costs and even potentially hire additional staff and bill it to the PaintCare program. Had the legislation passed, it would have set a terrible precedent, and stripped PaintCare of its underlying charter as an industry-run program for post-consumer paint management, whereby manufacturers fund, own, and operate the program. ACA s PNWPC also monitored legislation, the Toxic-Free Kids Act (SB 478), which passed by a vote of in the House, in the Senate, and was signed by Gov. Kate Brown in July. The law requires the Oregon Health Authority to establish and maintain a list of high priority chemicals of concern for children s health used in products. The bill also requires public online posting of the list and information on the health impacts associated with exposure to each chemical. PNWPC followed the bill throughout the legislative process to ensure it would not impact the paint and coatings industry. Washington In 2015, ACA and its PNWPC continued to pursue passage of PaintCare legislation in Washington, focusing on working a bill through the House of Representatives. ACA and its PNWPC were successful in moving HB 1571 sponsored by Rep. Strom Peterson, a member of the House Environment Committee through the State House with a solid bi-partisan vote of The no votes were all from Republicans, who are philosophically opposed to the assessment created to fund the program. That no tax philosophy is ultimately what led to the bill not being heard in the Senate Environment Committee and failing to pass in The bill has once again been reintroduced in 2016, and PNWPC will be working with Rep. Peterson to shepherd the legislation. Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee also pushed several pieces of legislation dealing with environmental issues in 2015, including ones relating to a carbon tax program, water quality standards, and chemical action plans. PNWPC paid close attention to the chemical action plan legislation, which sought to broadly expand the authority of the state s Department of Ecology to pursue action plans on an expanded list of consumer products. The bill progressed through the House but ultimately stalled in the Senate. While the bill is technically still alive in the current legislative session, it seems that Gov. Inslee has chosen a different path, with the state s Department of Ecology announcing that it will undertake more aggressive chemical action plans under its current statutory authority. Ultimately, these chemical action plans have to come back to the legislature for approval. ACA s PNWPC will be monitoring this issue as it progresses in TEXAS The Texas Paint Council (TPC) held its Paint the Capitol Day on Feb. 5, 2015 in Austin, visiting with legislators and their staff in order to introduce the paint industry to policymakers. ACA and TPC members, along with its new executive director, Mark Vane of Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP, passed out nearly 200 cans of paint filled with Tootsie Rolls to every House and Senate member. This was the ninth time that TPC has undertaken Paint the Capitol Day, and this year, the effort was in memory of Phil Cates, TPC s founding executive director who started it as the Tootsie Roll Campaign in the early 1990s. ACA staff also took the opportunity while in Austin to visit with the new governor and lieutenant governor s staff, as well as the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. ACA decided not to pursue PaintCare legislation in Texas in 2015, but rather, used the year to rebuild and gather support for possible reintroduction of the legislation in Toward that end, ACA and its TPC supported HB 2763, legislation in Texas for a commission to report on recycling and Extended Producer Responsibility. ACA wants to ensure that the industry s PaintCare approach for paint is included in any report by the commission for possible inclusion in Texas in the future. TPC also submitted a letter on behalf of ACA, in support of HB 351, relating to the exemption from the sales tax on certain school art supplies during limited periods. Like many sales tax holiday bills, this legislation did not pass in TPC also engaged on legislation, HB 942, to ensure that no language was included that would have a detrimental effect on the paint industry in Texas. The bill followed the deadly chemical explosion in West, Texas, in 2013, and would amend current law relating to the storage of certain hazardous chemicals, transfers enforcement of certain reporting requirements, including the imposition of criminal, civil, and administrative penalties, from the Department of State Health Services to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. 6