Jessica Franken, Director of Government Affairs & Dawnee Giammittorio, Associate Director of Government Affairs INDA, Association of the Nonwoven Fabrics Industry11.05.14
The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) released on September12 a draft three-year work plan identifying seven consumer product categories (including several that could impact the nonwovens industry) that regulators plan to evaluate under the state’s Safer Consumer Products Regulations. The innovative law, part of California’s Green Chemistry Initiative, took effect October 1, 2013 and requires product manufacturers to examine whether they can replace existing chemical ingredients with alternatives that are deemed safer for consumers and the environment.
The regulations adopt a four-step process aimed at having manufacturers replace toxic chemicals used in their products with safer options and making information about product materials more available to the public. The four steps under the rules are:
DTSC will create a list of potentially toxic chemicals (“Candidate Chemicals”) based on chemicals identified by other authoritative organizations such as the EU’s European Chemicals Agency. DTSC established a list of more than one thousand chemicals and is adding to the list as necessary. The list can be found at: http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/SCP/ChemList.cfm
DTSC will develop a list of “Priority Products” containing these Candidate Chemicals for which alternative analyses must be conducted. A Candidate Chemical that is the basis for a product being placed on the Priority Products list will be designated as a Chemical of Concern (COC).
Manufacturers, importers, assemblers and retailers of Priority Products will be required to notify DTSC when one of their products has been listed as such and will have to perform an “alternatives assessment” to determine how best to limit exposures to the COCs in the product. DTSC is expected to release guidance on the steps involved in conducting an alternative assessment in the near future.
DTSC will then have the authority to impose conditions on Priority Products to limit potential adverse public health and environmental impacts from it or any of its COCs—or from any alternative chemical or product selected to replace the Priority Product. Possible regulatory responses available to DTSC include establishing end-of-life product stewardship programs, restricting the use of chemicals in a product or the use of a product or banning sales of a product in California.
DTSC released the draft work plan, pursuant to step two of the regulations, identifying seven product categories from which priority products will be selected for regulation within three years:
• Beauty, Personal Care and Hygiene Products
• Clothing
• Household, Office Furniture and Furnishings
• Building Products
• Cleaning Products
• Office Machinery (Consumable Products) and
• Fishing and Angling Equipment: Fishing Weight and Gear.
The draft work plan also identifies the chemicals of concern in each product category. In the category of Beauty, Personal Care and Hygiene Products, DTSC has identified the following chemicals as potential candidate chemicals: phthalates; toluene; aldehydes and formaldehyde; alkyl phenols and ethoxylates; azo dye, coal tars, lead and lead acetate and triclosan. In the Cleaning Products category, potential candidate chemicals include: alkyl phenol and ethoxylates; hydrogen fluoride, phthalates; triclosan and volatile organic compounds, such as n-hexane, methyl ethyl ketone, n-methyl-pyrrolidone, toluene and xylene. In the household, office furniture, and furnishings category, DTSC will consider brominated or chlorinated organic compounds and organophosphates used as flame retardants and perfluorinated compounds used as repellents.
These seven product categories join an initial list of three categories DTSC announced in March—children’s foam padding sleeping products; spray polyurethane foam systems and paint strippers, varnish removers and industrial-strength surface cleaners. DTSC is not limiting itself to regulating only those product/chemical pairings listed and expects to identify up to 10 priority products annually for regulation over the next three years.
Businesses selling consumer products in California need to be prepared and informed as this complex regulatory scheme is implemented. Companies should expect to make major investments in compliance because the centerpiece of the scheme—the new, untested approach of alternatives assessment—is expected to produce a steep and expensive learning curve. Responding to enforcement could also be costly, because as already noted, DTSC has an array of conditions and regulatory responses, including end-of-life product stewardship, chemical use restrictions or even product bans. Because California is often the leader in these types of initiatives and Congress has been unable to advance federal chemicals regulatory reform, other states may well follow in its footsteps in order to address potentially harmful chemicals in consumer products.
U.S.-EU Trade Pact Will Not Harmonize Regulations on Chemicals
The seventh round of talks toward a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnerships (TTIP) agreement concluded October 3 and lead negotiators from both sides announced that mutual recognition would be impossible for chemicals regulations because the EU’s and U.S.’s regimes differ significantly. Harmonizing regulations has been a sticking point throughout the talks. Under the EU rules known as REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals), chemicals must be proven safe before use. Meanwhile, currently in the U.S., chemicals must be shown to be harmful for them to be banned. Some EU stakeholders fear a deal would allow U.S. companies to import chemicals considered toxic or dangerous in Europe.
Responding to concerns raised during a stakeholder forum, U.S. chief negotiator, Dan Mullaney, said: “Let me be clear—our negotiators and regulators are not discussing how to harmonize or mutually recognize our chemical regulatory regimes—period. We are discussing how our regulators on both sides can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort and cost by sharing the work of assessing priority chemicals.” EU chief negotiator Ignacio Garica-Bercero supported Mullaney’s statements on harmonization but also stressed that any tactical measures taken to improve cooperation on chemicals would not slow the implementation of EU rules. Both emphasized that regulatory cooperation in this area will be focused on information sharing.
The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership launched in June 2013 at the G-8 meeting will create the world’s largest free trade area and generate more than $5 trillion in trade, investment and sales. n
The regulations adopt a four-step process aimed at having manufacturers replace toxic chemicals used in their products with safer options and making information about product materials more available to the public. The four steps under the rules are:
DTSC will create a list of potentially toxic chemicals (“Candidate Chemicals”) based on chemicals identified by other authoritative organizations such as the EU’s European Chemicals Agency. DTSC established a list of more than one thousand chemicals and is adding to the list as necessary. The list can be found at: http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/SCP/ChemList.cfm
DTSC will develop a list of “Priority Products” containing these Candidate Chemicals for which alternative analyses must be conducted. A Candidate Chemical that is the basis for a product being placed on the Priority Products list will be designated as a Chemical of Concern (COC).
Manufacturers, importers, assemblers and retailers of Priority Products will be required to notify DTSC when one of their products has been listed as such and will have to perform an “alternatives assessment” to determine how best to limit exposures to the COCs in the product. DTSC is expected to release guidance on the steps involved in conducting an alternative assessment in the near future.
DTSC will then have the authority to impose conditions on Priority Products to limit potential adverse public health and environmental impacts from it or any of its COCs—or from any alternative chemical or product selected to replace the Priority Product. Possible regulatory responses available to DTSC include establishing end-of-life product stewardship programs, restricting the use of chemicals in a product or the use of a product or banning sales of a product in California.
DTSC released the draft work plan, pursuant to step two of the regulations, identifying seven product categories from which priority products will be selected for regulation within three years:
• Beauty, Personal Care and Hygiene Products
• Clothing
• Household, Office Furniture and Furnishings
• Building Products
• Cleaning Products
• Office Machinery (Consumable Products) and
• Fishing and Angling Equipment: Fishing Weight and Gear.
The draft work plan also identifies the chemicals of concern in each product category. In the category of Beauty, Personal Care and Hygiene Products, DTSC has identified the following chemicals as potential candidate chemicals: phthalates; toluene; aldehydes and formaldehyde; alkyl phenols and ethoxylates; azo dye, coal tars, lead and lead acetate and triclosan. In the Cleaning Products category, potential candidate chemicals include: alkyl phenol and ethoxylates; hydrogen fluoride, phthalates; triclosan and volatile organic compounds, such as n-hexane, methyl ethyl ketone, n-methyl-pyrrolidone, toluene and xylene. In the household, office furniture, and furnishings category, DTSC will consider brominated or chlorinated organic compounds and organophosphates used as flame retardants and perfluorinated compounds used as repellents.
These seven product categories join an initial list of three categories DTSC announced in March—children’s foam padding sleeping products; spray polyurethane foam systems and paint strippers, varnish removers and industrial-strength surface cleaners. DTSC is not limiting itself to regulating only those product/chemical pairings listed and expects to identify up to 10 priority products annually for regulation over the next three years.
Businesses selling consumer products in California need to be prepared and informed as this complex regulatory scheme is implemented. Companies should expect to make major investments in compliance because the centerpiece of the scheme—the new, untested approach of alternatives assessment—is expected to produce a steep and expensive learning curve. Responding to enforcement could also be costly, because as already noted, DTSC has an array of conditions and regulatory responses, including end-of-life product stewardship, chemical use restrictions or even product bans. Because California is often the leader in these types of initiatives and Congress has been unable to advance federal chemicals regulatory reform, other states may well follow in its footsteps in order to address potentially harmful chemicals in consumer products.
U.S.-EU Trade Pact Will Not Harmonize Regulations on Chemicals
The seventh round of talks toward a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnerships (TTIP) agreement concluded October 3 and lead negotiators from both sides announced that mutual recognition would be impossible for chemicals regulations because the EU’s and U.S.’s regimes differ significantly. Harmonizing regulations has been a sticking point throughout the talks. Under the EU rules known as REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals), chemicals must be proven safe before use. Meanwhile, currently in the U.S., chemicals must be shown to be harmful for them to be banned. Some EU stakeholders fear a deal would allow U.S. companies to import chemicals considered toxic or dangerous in Europe.
Responding to concerns raised during a stakeholder forum, U.S. chief negotiator, Dan Mullaney, said: “Let me be clear—our negotiators and regulators are not discussing how to harmonize or mutually recognize our chemical regulatory regimes—period. We are discussing how our regulators on both sides can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort and cost by sharing the work of assessing priority chemicals.” EU chief negotiator Ignacio Garica-Bercero supported Mullaney’s statements on harmonization but also stressed that any tactical measures taken to improve cooperation on chemicals would not slow the implementation of EU rules. Both emphasized that regulatory cooperation in this area will be focused on information sharing.
The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership launched in June 2013 at the G-8 meeting will create the world’s largest free trade area and generate more than $5 trillion in trade, investment and sales. n