UNFINISHED BUSINESS  

Bill No: SB 312

Author: Leyva (D)

Amended: 7/27/20

Vote: 21

PRIOR VOTES NOT RELEVANT

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 72-0, 8/25/20 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Cosmetic Fragrance and Flavor Ingredient Right to Know Act of 2020

SOURCE: Black Women for Wellness

Breast Cancer Prevention Partners

California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative

Women’s Voices for the Earth

DIGEST:

• 1. This bill requires cosmetic manufacturers, commencing January 1, 2022, to disclose to the Department of Public Health Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control information related to cosmetic products that contain a fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient that is included on a “designated list,” as defined, and a list of each fragrance ingredient and flavor ingredient in the cosmetic product.

Assembly Amendments delete the prior version of this bill and replace it with language contained in SB 574 (Leyva) of 2019.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Regulates the labeling of cosmetics under the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law. Permits the Department of Public Health (DPH) to require a cosmetic label to list ingredients under specified circumstances. [HSC §109875, et seq.]
2. Defines “cosmetic” as any article, or its components, intended to be rubbed, poured, sprinkled, or sprayed on, introduced into, or otherwise applied to, the human body, or any part of the human body, for cleansing, beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance, but does not include soap. [HSC §109900]
3. Enacts the Safe Cosmetics Act, which requires cosmetic manufacturers to provide the Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control (DEODC) with a complete and accurate list of its cosmetic products that, as of the date of submission, are sold in the state and that contain any ingredient that is a chemical identified as causing cancer or reproductive toxicity, including any chemical that:
   1. Is contained in the product for purposes of fragrance or flavoring; or,
   2. Is identified by the phrase “and other ingredients” and determined to be a trade secret, as specified. [HSC §111791-111792]
4. Requires DPH to develop and make operational a consumer-friendly, public Web site that creates a database of the information collected pursuant to the Safe Cosmetics Act. Requires the database to be searchable to accommodate a wide range of users, as specified. [HSC §111792(e)]

This bill:

1. Requires cosmetic manufactures, commencing January 1, 2022, to disclose to DEODC:
   1. A list of each fragrance or flavor ingredient that is included on a “designated list,” as defined;
   2. A list of each fragrance allergen included in Annex III of the European Union (EU) Cosmetics Regulation No. 1223/2009, as required to be disclosed pursuant to the EU Detergents Regulation No. 21 648/2004, and subsequent updates to those regulations, that is present in a rinse-off cosmetic product at a concentration at or above 0.01% (100 parts per million) or in a leave-on cosmetic product at a concentration at or above 0.001% (10 parts per million). Requires those ingredients to appear on the database in a unique manner that distinguishes those ingredients from other reportable ingredients and indicates that they are hazardous only to individuals who suffer from fragrance allergies;
   3. Whether the cosmetic product is intended for professional use or retail cosmetic use;
   4. The Chemical Abstracts Service number for each fragrance ingredient and flavor ingredient; and,
   5. The corresponding Universal Product Code for the cosmetic product.
2. Defines “designated list” to mean:
   1. Chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity that are listed pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986;
   2. Chemicals classified by the EU as carcinogens, mutagens, or reproductive toxicants, as specified;
   3. Chemicals included in the EU Candidate List of Substances of Very High Concern for endocrine disrupting properties, as specified;
   4. Chemicals for which a reference dose or reference concentration has been developed based on neurotoxicity in the federal Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Integrated Risk Information System;
   5. Chemicals that are identified as carcinogenic to humans, likely to be carcinogenic to humans, or as Group A, B1, or B2 carcinogens in the EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System;
   6. Chemicals included in the European Chemicals Agency Candidate List of Substances of Very High Concern for persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic, or very persistent and very bioaccumulative, properties, as specified;
   7. Chemicals that are identified as persistent, bioaccumulative, and inherently toxic to the environment by the Canadian Environmental Protection Act Environmental Registry Domestic Substances List;
   8. Chemicals classified by the EU respiratory sensitizer category 1, as specified;
   9. Group 1, 2A, or 2B carcinogens identified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer;
   10. Neurotoxicants that are identified in the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry’s Toxic Substances Portal, Health Effects of Toxic Substances and Carcinogens, Nervous System;
   11. Persistent bioaccumulative and toxic priority chemicals that are identified by the EPA National Waste Minimization Program;
   12. Reproductive or developmental toxicants identified in Monographs on the Potential Human Reproductive and Developmental Effects published by the federal National Toxicology Program, Office of Health Assessment and Translation;
   13. Chemicals identified by the EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory as Persistent, Bioaccumulative and Toxic Chemicals that are subject to reporting under federal law, as specified;
   14. The Washington Department of Ecology’s Persistent, Bioaccumulative, Toxic Chemicals, as specified;
   15. Chemicals that are identified as known to be, or reasonably anticipated to be, human carcinogens by the 13th Report on Carcinogens prepared by the federal National Toxicology Program;
   16. Chemicals for which notification levels have been established by DPH or the State Water Resources Control Board, as specified;
   17. Chemicals for which primary maximum contaminant levels have been established and adopted under specified California regulations;
   18. Chemicals identified as toxic air contaminants under specified California regulations;
   19. Chemicals that are identified as priority pollutants in the California water quality control plans, as specified, or identified as pollutants by the state or the federal EPA for one or more water bodies in the state, as specified;
   20. Chemicals that are identified with noncancer endpoints and listed with an inhalation or oral reference exposure level by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment;
   21. Chemicals identified as priority chemicals by the California Environmental Contaminant Biomonitoring Program; and,
   22. Chemicals that are identified on Part A of the list of Chemicals for Priority Action prepared by the Oslo and Paris Conventions for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic.
3. Prohibits this bill, in order to protect trade secrets, from requiring a manufacturer to disclose the weight or amount an ingredient that requires disclosure or to disclose the manner in which a cosmetic product or intentionally added fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient is formulated. Permits manufacturers to protect, and not disclose, any ingredient or combination of ingredients that is not on a designated list or required to be disclosed.
4. Requires manufacturers that are required to disclose a fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient due to a change in a designated list to disclose the ingredient no later than six months after the revised list is adopted by the authoritative body, or six months after the revised list becomes effective, whichever is later.
5. Requires DPH to create a voluntary electronic mailing list to provide updates on the inclusion or deletion of fragrance allergens, fragrance ingredients, and flavor ingredients on the designated lists.
6. Requires DEODC, commencing January 1, 2022, to post on the Safe Cosmetics Act website a list of all fragrance ingredients and flavor ingredients that are included on a designated list, and all fragrance allergens required to be disclosed. Requires DEODC to also report the health hazards associated with each fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient, as specified. Requires DEODC to identify whether an ingredient is a fragrance ingredient or a flavor ingredient.
7. Makes the provisions of this bill severable, so if any provision or its application is held invalid, that invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.

Comments

1. Author’s statement. According to the author, in California, we actually know more about the fragrance ingredients in products that we use to clean our homes than those that we put on our faces or bodies. Consumers have a right to know what ingredients are in the beauty and personal care products they bring home to their families and use daily on their bodies. The bottom line is that no toxic ingredients should be kept secret. This bill will empower consumers so that they can make educated decisions about which products to use with their kids and families. No federal law requires the disclosure of fragrance or flavor ingredients in personal care and beauty products to consumers, workers, manufacturers or even regulatory agencies. This loophole allows dozens – sometimes even hundreds – of chemicals to hide under the word “fragrance” on the labels of cosmetic products with no regulatory oversight of the safety of those ingredients. Fragrance chemicals can be found in more than 95% of shampoos, conditioners, hair styling products, antiperspirants and shaving products as well as fine fragrances, body spray and lotions, and 1/3 of the fragrance chemicals currently in use have been linked to negative health impacts ranging from allergic reactions to reproductive harm and increased risk of breast cancer. The same loophole exists for chemicals used to flavor a product, which are appearing more and more frequently in lip gloss and chap sticks marketed to kids.
2. Hazardous ingredient reporting. The California Safe Cosmetics Act of 2005 established the California Safe Cosmetics Program (CSCP), where manufacturers of cosmetics are required to report any products that contain ingredients known or suspected to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm. CSCP collects this data and makes it available online to the public. Since the launch of the online program in 2009, a total of 77 unique ingredients that are carcinogens or developmental or reproductive toxins have been reported in over 57,313 products by 481 companies. Sixty-three percent of the reported products were makeup, 13% were nail products, 8% skin care products, and 6% sun-related products. However, DPH states that not all companies are complying with the reporting requirements and that the extent of non-compliance is difficult to assess.
3. Federal authority. The Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) regulation of cosmetics is different than its regulation of other products like drugs and medical devices. Certain cosmetic products and their ingredients are not subject to the FDA authority and the FDA has maintained that cosmetic firms are responsible for ensuring that their products are safe prior to marketing them. FDA regulations do, however, prohibit or restrict the use of several ingredients in cosmetic products and require warning statements on the labels of certain types of cosmetics. The EPA is responsible for gathering health and safety and exposure data on pollutants and toxic substances that can affect public health. The United States Department of Labor’s Occupational Health and Safety Administration sets permissible exposure limits at which many chemicals are considered safe. Certain chemicals found in products used in establishments are of concern and listed on California’s Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity, but are not prohibited for use in cosmetics in the United States.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, enactment of this bill would result in minor annual ongoing costs of approximately $50,000 for DPH to modify and update the Divisions' Safe Cosmetics Program database to accommodate the information required by this bill (General Fund).

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/25/20)

Black Women for Wellness (co-source)

Breast Cancer Prevention Partners (co-source)

California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative

Women’s Voices for the Earth (co-source)

100% Pure

5 Gyres Institute

A Voice for Choice Advocacy

Able Differently

Alaska Community Action on Toxics

Alliance of Nurses for a Healthy Environment

American Academy of Pediatrics, California

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists

American Lung Association, California

As You Sow

Beautycounter

Berkeley Law, Center on Reproductive Rights & Justice

Brand Geek

Breast Cancer Action

Breast Cancer Over Time

Business and Professional Women of Nevada County

California Baby

California Coalition for Clean Air

California Communities Against Toxics

California Environmental Justice Alliance

California Health Coalition Advocacy

California Labor Federation

California League of Conservation Voters

California Pan-Ethnic Health Network

California Product Stewardship Council

California Public Interest Research Group

California School Nurses Organization

Californians for a Healthy and Green Economy

CALPIRG

Center for Biological Diversity

Center for Oceanic Awareness, Research and Education

Central California Asthma Collaborative

Change Californians for a Healthy and Green Economy

Citizens for Choice

City and County of San Francisco, Department of the Environment

City of Glendora

Clean Water Action

Clorox Company

Coming Clean

Communities for a Better Environment

Consumer Federation of California

Côte

Courage California

Courage Campaign

Credo Beauty

Crunchi, LLC

DEMES Natural Products Inc.

Dignity Health

Dr. Bronners Earth Mama Organics

Earth Mama Organic

Ecology Center

EcoPlum

Educate. Advocate.

Eighty2degrees Design Studio

Elavo Mundi Solutions, LLC

Empower Family California

Environmental Health Strategy Center

Environmental Working Group

EO Products

Equal Rights Advocates

Essential Skincare

Five Gyres Institute

Friends Committee on Legislation of California

Goddess Garden

Grassroots Recycling Network (Dba Zero Waste USA)

Green Science Policy Institute

Greenpeace USA

Grove Collaborative

HAN Skin Care Cosmetics

Happy Pretty You! Reiki Salon & Spa

Heal the Bay

Healthcare Without Harm

In Harmony Naturals

Innersense Organic Beauty

Intelligent Nutrients

Juice Beauty

Just the Goods

Keep a Breast

Learning Disabilities Association of Georgia

Learning Disabilities Association of Illinois

Learning Disabilities Association of Iowa

Learning Disabilities Association of Maine

Learning Disabilities Association of Maryland

Learning Disabilities Association of New Jersey

Learning Disabilities Association of Oklahoma

Learning Disabilities Association of South Carolina

Learning Disabilities Association of Tennessee

Learning Disabilities Association of Texas

Learning Disabilities Association of Utah

Los Angeles Black Worker Center

National Employment Law Project

National Stewardship Action Council

National Veterans Group

Natural Resources Defense Council

Northern California Recycling Association

Oregon Environmental Council

OSEA Malibu

OZ Naturals

Physicians for Social Responsibility – Los Angeles

Physicians for Social Responsibility – San Francisco Bay Area

Plastic Oceans International

Plastic Pollution Coalition

Regional Asthma Management & Prevention

Safer States

Save Our Shores

Savvy Women’s Alliance

Science and Environmental Health Network

Seventh Generation Advisors

Sierra Club California

SkinOwl

Sprout San Francisco

Suntegrity

Sustain Natural

Suzanne’s Organics Salon

Tenoverten

The Praxis Project

The Women’s Foundation of California

UCLA Center for Study of Women

Unilever United States

United States Public Interest Research Group

Upstream

W.S. Badger Foundation

Woodland Coalition for Green Schools

Worksafe

Zorah Biocosmetiques

Two individuals

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/25/20)

Natural Products Association

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 72-0, 8/25/20

AYES: Aguiar-Curry, Arambula, Bauer-Kahan, Berman, Bigelow, Bloom, Boerner Horvath, Bonta, Brough, Burke, Calderon, Carrillo, Cervantes, Chau, Chen, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Cunningham, Megan Dahle, Daly, Diep, Eggman, Fong, Friedman, Gabriel, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gipson, Gloria, Gonzalez, Grayson, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Kamlager, Kiley, Lackey, Levine, Limón, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, O'Donnell, Patterson, Petrie-Norris, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Salas, Santiago, Smith, Mark Stone, Ting, Voepel, Waldron, Weber, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Choi, Flora, Frazier, Gallagher, Gray, Obernolte, Wicks

Prepared by: Melanie Moreno/ HEALTH / (916) 651-4111

8/25/20 15:57:59

**** END ****

SENATE THIRD READING

STR Bill Id:SB 312

Author:(Leyva)

As Amended Ver:July 27, 2020

Majority vote

SUMMARY:

Establishes the Cosmetic Fragrance and Flavor Ingredient Right to Know Act of 2020 (Act) to require disclosure of specified flavor and fragrance ingredients in cosmetic products.

Major Provisions

1. Requires, commencing January 1, 2022, a manufacturer of a cosmetic product sold in the state to disclose information to the Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control (Division) within the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) on fragrance and flavor ingredients present on a designated list; a list of allergens present at specified amounts; and, other information identifying the specific product for which the information is being reported.
2. Provides specified trade secret protections, but exempts any fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient that is included on a designated list, or a fragrance allergen that requires disclosure, from constituting a trade secret.
3. Requires a manufacturer that is required to disclose a fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient due to a change in a designated list to disclose the ingredient no later than six months after the revised list is adopted by the authoritative body, or six months after the revised list becomes effective, whichever is later.
4. Requires CDPH to create a voluntary electronic mailing list, for which manufacturers can opt-in to, to provide updates on the inclusion or deletion of fragrance allergens, fragrance ingredients, and flavor ingredients on the designated lists.
5. Requires, commencing January 1, 2022, the Division to post on the database created pursuant to the California Safe Cosmetics Act of 2005 (Safe Cosmetics Act), in an easily readable format, the fragrance and flavor ingredient information related to a cosmetic product, as well as any known hazard traits of those ingredients.

COMMENTS:

Federal laws on fragrance disclosure: The 1966 Federal Fair Packaging and Labeling Act (FPLA) requires manufacturers to list all of the ingredients on a cosmetic product label; however, fragrance and flavoring ingredients are specifically exempt from the FPLA's labeling requirements. The current practice for ingredient disclosure has been to identify fragrances as a separate category of product content, as a parenthetical "fragrance," without identifying the specific chemical composition used in the fragrances.

Why chemical disclosure in cosmetic products matters: Consumers may want or need to avoid certain chemical exposures for various, personal reasons.

While a direct link between endocrine disrupting chemicals and cancer is not yet definitive, certain cancers are hormonally-driven, such as breast cancer, prostate cancer, ovarian cancer, and endometrial cancer. According to Dr. Lorenzo Cohen, Ph.D., MD, director of the Integrative Medicine Program at the University of Texas, even a low dose of endocrine disrupting chemicals could cause concern, especially if a product is used every day. He also notes some personal care products may contain endocrine disrupting chemicals and allergens under the guise of "fragrance." Because those fragrance ingredients are not disclosed, though, it is unknown which fragrances do and how many.

This bill: SB 312 would require cosmetic manufactures, beginning July 1, 2022, to disclose to the Division information related to cosmetic products that contain a fragrance or flavor ingredient that is included on one of the designated lists and a list of fragrance allergens that are present in specified concentrations. It would also require the Division to post in the Safe Cosmetics Act database a list of those intentionally added fragrance and flavor ingredients and fragrance allergens in the cosmetic product.

Disclosure provided under this bill would provide consumers greater information to make more informed choices, and it could potentially lead to safer products designed without hazardous chemicals.

According to the Author:

"In California, we actually know more about the fragrance ingredients in products that we use to clean our homes than those that we put on our faces or bodies. Consumers have a right to know what ingredients are in the beauty and personal care products they bring home to their families and use daily on their bodies. The bottom line is that no toxic ingredients should be kept secret. SB 312 will empower consumers so that they can make educated decisions about which products to use with their kids and families.

No federal law requires the disclosure of fragrance or flavor ingredients in personal care and beauty products to consumers, workers, manufacturers or even regulatory agencies. This loophole allows dozens – sometimes even hundreds – of chemicals to hide under the word "fragrance" on the labels of cosmetic products with no regulatory oversight of the safety of those ingredients. Fragrance chemicals can be found in more than 95% of shampoos, conditioners, hair styling products, antiperspirants and shaving products as well as fine fragrances, body spray and lotions and 1/3 of the fragrance chemicals currently in use have been linked to negative health impacts ranging from allergic reactions to reproductive harm and increased risk of breast cancer. The same loophole exists for chemicals used to flavor a product, which are appearing more and more frequently in lip gloss and chap sticks marketed to kids.

SB 312 would remove trade secret protection from any fragrance or flavor ingredient, for purposes of disclosure via the Safe Cosmetics Program, deemed harmful to human health or the environment, defined as whether that ingredient appears on any of the 22 designated lists referenced in the bill."

Arguments in Support:

Proctor & Gamble (P&G) writes in support, "P&G supports providing consumers with important ingredient communication while also maintaining the flexibility to continue providing unique and innovative products in the State of California."

Arguments in Opposition:

According to the Natural Products Association, "The proposal under consideration today [SB 312] would place onerous restrictions, most notably on small businesses by requiring additional labeling requirements for cosmetic and personal care products. We support efforts to ensure consumer safety, as noted by the over 800 ingredients the NPA has certified as "natural" because they have met our certification’s high standards for excellence. In times of economic strain, additional regulatory hurdles that increase the cost of doing business in California like SB 312 do not benefit consumers or industry."

FISCAL COMMENTS:

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, enactment of this bill would result in minor annual ongoing costs of approximately $50,000 for CDPH to modify and update the Divisions' Safe Cosmetics Program database to accommodate the information required by this bill (General Fund).

VOTES:

SENATE FLOOR: 38-0-0

YES: Allen, Archuleta, Atkins, Bates, Beall, Borgeas, Bradford, Caballero, Chang, Dodd, Durazo, Galgiani, Glazer, Grove, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Hurtado, Jackson, Jones, Leyva, McGuire, Mitchell, Monning, Moorlach, Morrell, Nielsen, Pan, Portantino, Roth, Rubio, Skinner, Stern, Stone, Umberg, Wieckowski, Wiener, Wilk

ASM RULES: 9-0-3

YES: Cunningham, Carrillo, Flora, Grayson, Kamlager, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Robert Rivas, Wicks

ABS, ABST OR NV: Cooley, Maienschein, Mathis

ASM ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY AND TOXIC MATERIALS: 7-0-2

YES: Quirk, Arambula, Bauer-Kahan, Cristina Garcia, Holden, Mathis, Muratsuchi

ABS, ABST OR NV: Flora, Obernolte

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 15-0-2

YES: Gonzalez, Bauer-Kahan, Bloom, Bonta, Calderon, Carrillo, Chau, Megan Dahle, Voepel, Eggman, Gabriel, Eduardo Garcia, Petrie-Norris, Quirk, Robert Rivas

ABS, ABST OR NV: Bigelow, Fong

UPDATED:

VERSION: July 27, 2020

CONSULTANT: Paige Brokaw / E.S. & T.M. / (916) 319-3965 FN: 0003176

Date of Hearing: August 11, 2020

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 312

Author:(Leyva) – As Amended Ver:July 27, 2020

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill requires manufacturers of cosmetic products sold in the state to disclose, beginning January 1, 2022, flavor and fragrance ingredients in their products deemed to be harmful or toxic according to specified lists published by regulatory authorities. This bill provides some exceptions for trade secrets and requires the Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control (Division) within the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) to post the cosmetic product information and associated health hazards on its existing Safe Cosmetics Program database.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Minor annual ongoing costs of approximately $50,000 for CDPH to modify and update the Divisions’ Safe Cosmetics Program database to accommodate the information required by this bill (GF).

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. Cosmetics and their ingredients are not required to be approved before they are sold to the public. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not have the authority to require manufacturers to file health and safety data on cosmetic ingredients or order the recall of a dangerous cosmetic product.

The federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) requires ingredients to be identified by the names established or adopted by regulation; those accepted by the FDA as exempt from public disclosure may be stated as "and other ingredients." The FD&C Act exempts chemicals used as fragrances or flavoring from being identified as ingredients on the labels of cosmetic products.

The current practice for ingredient disclosure has been to identify fragrances as a separate category of product content, as a parenthetical "fragrance," without identifying the specific

chemical composition.

According to the author, “SB 312 will empower consumers so that they can make educated decisions about which products to use with their kids and families.”

1. Background. The California Safe Cosmetics Program (Program) was created within CDPH by the California Safe Cosmetics Act of 2005. Manufacturers of cosmetics whose total sales exceed $1 million in California are required to report any products that contain intentionally added ingredients that have been identified as known or suspected carcinogens or reproductive or developmental toxicants. The Program maintains an online reporting system used by reporting companies and a searchable database which provides the public with access to the information reported by cosmetics manufacturers.

According to CDPH, as of March 27, 2020, there were 602 companies that reported 85,057 products containing one or more ingredients linked to cancer or reproductive or developmental harm. Although not mandated, the Program has the authority to conduct investigations related to concerns about toxic ingredients in cosmetic products and may require manufacturers to submit additional information.

This bill broadens the Safe Cosmetics Act by expanding the disclosure of flavor and fragrance ingredients beyond carcinogens and developmental toxicants to any chemical listed on any of 22 designated lists of chemical health hazards – the same lists included in the Cleaning Product Right to Know Act and the Department of Toxic Substances Control's candidate chemical lists, plus allergens listed in Annex III of the EU Cosmetics Regulation No. 1223/2009, when present at designated levels.

1. Related Legislation. SB 574 (Leyva) is substantially similar to this bill and was held on the suspense file in this committee.

Analysis Prepared by: Jennifer Galehouse / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: July 30, 2020

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY AND TOXIC MATERIALS

Bill Quirk, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 312

Author:(Leyva) – As Amended Ver:July 27, 2020

SENATE VOTE: 38-0 (unrelated bill content)

SUBJECT: Cosmetic Fragrance and Flavor Ingredient Right to Know Act of 2020.

SUMMARY: Requires disclosure of specified flavor and fragrance ingredients in cosmetic products. Specifically, this bill:

1. Establishes the Cosmetic Fragrance and Flavor Ingredient Right to Know Act of 2020 (Act).
2. Declares the intent of the Legislature to provide consumers and salon workers with ingredient information about cosmetic products that encourages informed purchasing decisions and reduces public health impacts from exposure to potentially harmful chemicals by requiring product manufacturers to provide a specific list of chemicals used in their fragrance and flavor formulations.
3. Defines "cosmetic product" as an article for retail sale or professional use intended to be rubbed, poured, sprinkled, or sprayed on, introduced into, or otherwise applied to the human body for cleansing, beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance.
4. Defines "designated list" as any of the 22 authoritative lists of chemicals with hazard traits identified in the Act, including any subsequent revisions to those lists when adopted by the authoritative body.
5. Defines "flavor ingredient" as any intentionally added substance or complex mixture of aroma chemicals, flavor chemicals, natural essential oils, and other functional ingredient or ingredients for which the purpose is to impart a flavor or taste, or to counteract a flavor or taste.
6. Defines "fragrance ingredient" as any intentionally added substance or complex mixture of aroma chemicals, natural essential oils, and other functional ingredient or ingredients for which the purpose is to impart an odor or scent, or to counteract an odor.
7. Defines "manufacturer" as any entity whose name appears on the label of a cosmetic product pursuant to the requirements of Section 701.12 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
8. Requires, commencing January 1, 2022, a manufacturer of a cosmetic product sold in the state to disclose all of the following information to the Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control (Division) within the California Department of Public Health (CDPH):
   1. A list of each fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient that is included on a designated list and present in the cosmetic product;
   2. A list of each fragrance allergen included in Annex III of the European Union (EU) Cosmetics Regulation No. 1223/2009, as required to be disclosed pursuant to the EU Detergents Regulation No. 21 648/2004, and subsequent updates to those regulations, that is present in a rinse-off cosmetic product at a concentration at or above 0.01 percent (100 parts per million (ppm)) or in a leave-on cosmetic product at a concentration at or above 0.001 percent (10 ppm). Requires those ingredients to appear on the database in a unique manner that distinguishes those ingredients from other reportable ingredients and indicates that they are hazardous only to individuals who suffer from fragrance allergies;
   3. Whether the cosmetic product is intended for professional use or retail cosmetic use;
   4. The Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) number for each ingredient or allergen that requires disclosure; and,
   5. The corresponding Universal Product Code (UPC) for the covered cosmetic product.
9. States that, to protect trade secrets, the bill does not require a manufacturer to disclose the weight or amount of an ingredient that requires disclosure or to disclose the manner in which a cosmetic product or intentionally added fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient is formulated. Authorizes a manufacturer to protect an ingredient as a trade secret if it is not on a designated list or required to be disclosed. Exempts any fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient that is included in a designated list, or a fragrance allergen that requires disclosure, from constituting a trade secret.
10. Provides that a fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient that constitutes a trade secret is not subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act.
11. Requires a manufacturer that is required to disclose a fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient due to a change in a designated list to disclose the ingredient no later than six months after the revised list is adopted by the authoritative body, or six months after the revised list becomes effective, whichever is later.
12. Requires the CDPH to create a voluntary electronic mailing list for CDPH to provide updates on the inclusion or deletion of fragrance allergens, fragrance ingredients, and flavor ingredients on the designated lists.
13. Requires, commencing January 1, 2022, the Division to post on the database created pursuant to the California Safe Cosmetics Act of 2005 (Safe Cosmetics Act), in an easily readable format, all of the following information related to a cosmetic product:
    1. A list of all fragrance ingredients and flavor ingredients that are included on a designated list and all fragrance allergens required to be disclosed; and,
    2. The health hazards associated with each fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient.
14. Requires the Division to identify whether an ingredient is a fragrance ingredient or a flavor ingredient.
15. Provides that the provisions of this Act are severable.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires, pursuant to the federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), cosmetics produced or distributed for retail sale to consumers for their personal care to bear an ingredient declaration. (21 CFR 701.3)
2. Pursuant to the Sherman Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act:
   1. Defines "cosmetic" as any article, or its components, intended to be rubbed, poured, sprinkled, or sprayed on, introduced into, or otherwise applied to, the human body, or any part of the human body, for cleansing, beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance. Provides that the term "cosmetic" does not include soap. (Health & Safety Code (HSC) § 10990)
   2. Considers any cosmetic to be adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance that may render it injurious to users under the conditions of use prescribed in the labeling or advertisement of the cosmetic, or under conditions of use as are customary or usual. (HSC § 111670)
3. Requires, pursuant to the Safe Cosmetics Act, a manufacturer of a cosmetic subject to regulation by the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to submit to CDPH a list of its cosmetic products sold in California that contain any ingredient that is a chemical identified as causing cancer or reproductive toxicity. (HSC § 111792)
4. Requires a professional cosmetic for sale in this state manufactured on or after July 1, 2020, to have a label affixed on the container that satisfies all of the labeling requirements for any other cosmetic pursuant to the FD&C Act (21 United States Code (USC) Sec. 301, et seq.), and the federal Fair Packaging and Labeling Act (15 USC Sec. 1451, et seq.). (HSC § 110371)
5. Requires, pursuant to the Cleaning Products Right to Know Act, manufacturers of cleaning products to disclose specified chemical ingredients on a product label and on the manufacturer's website. (HSC § 108950)

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown.

COMMENTS:

Need for the bill: According to the author,

"In California, we actually know more about the fragrance ingredients in products that we use to clean our homes than those that we put on our faces or bodies. Consumers have a right to know what ingredients are in the beauty and personal care products they bring home to their families and use daily on their bodies. The bottom line is that no toxic ingredients should be kept secret. SB 312 will empower consumers so that they can make educated decisions about which products to use with their kids and families.

No federal law requires the disclosure of fragrance or flavor ingredients in personal care and beauty products to consumers, workers, manufacturers or even regulatory agencies. This loophole allows dozens – sometimes even hundreds – of chemicals to hide under the word "fragrance" on the labels of cosmetic products with no regulatory oversight of the safety of those ingredients. Fragrance chemicals can be found in more than 95% of shampoos, conditioners, hair styling products, antiperspirants and shaving products as well as fine fragrances, body spray and lotions and 1/3 of the fragrance chemicals currently in use have been linked to negative health impacts ranging from allergic reactions to reproductive harm and increased risk of breast cancer. The same loophole exists for chemicals used to flavor a product, which are appearing more and more frequently in lip gloss and chap sticks marketed to kids.

SB 312 would remove trade secret protection from any fragrance or flavor ingredient, for purposes of disclosure via the Safe Cosmetics Program, deemed harmful to human health or the environment, defined as whether that ingredient appears on any of the 22 designated lists referenced in the bill."

Cosmetics: Cosmetic products are used as part of daily beauty and cleansing routines, often times on the skin’s most sensitive areas, like the face, eyelids, and lips. Cosmetic products are most heavily used by women, including those of childbearing age, increasing the likelihood of exposing mothers, fetuses, and nursing children to substances that can cause cancer and reproductive toxicity.

Cosmetic products contain a wide variety of chemical ingredients to which cosmetic users, both consumer and professional salon workers, are exposed to on a daily basis. The average consumer uses 12 different cosmetic products a day (including soaps and shampoos). According to the United States Department of Labor, "These exposures can 'add up,' especially when many products are being used at the same time [and] the products are used day after day."

Federal laws on fragrance disclosure: Pursuant to the FD&C Act, cosmetics and their ingredients are not required to be approved before they are sold to the public, and the FDA does not have the authority to require manufacturers to file health and safety data on cosmetic ingredients or to order a recall of a dangerous cosmetic product.

The FD&C Act requires ingredients to be identified by the names established or adopted by regulation; those accepted by the FDA as exempt from public disclosure may be stated as "and other ingredients" (21 CFR 701.3(a)). The FD&C Act exempts chemicals used as fragrances or flavoring from being identified as ingredients on the labels of cosmetic products.

The 1966 Federal Fair Packaging and Labeling Act (FPLA) requires manufacturers to list all of the ingredients on a cosmetic product label; however, fragrance and flavoring are specifically exempt from the FPLA’s labeling requirements.

The current practice for ingredient disclosure has been to identify fragrances as a separate category of product content, as a parenthetical "fragrance," without identifying the specific

chemical composition used in the fragrances. Examples are provided, on the next page.

INGREDIENTS: Ricinus Communis (Castor) Seed Oil, Cetyl Acetate, Beeswax/Cire d'Abeille, Euphorbia Cerifera (Candelilla) Wax/Cire de Candelilla, Flavor/Aroma, Polybutene, Sesamum Indicum (Sesame) Seed Oil, Ozokerite, Copernicia Cerifera (Carnauba) Wax/Cire de Carnauba, Acetylated Lanolin Alcohol, Mineral Oil/Huile Minerale, Hydrogenated Soy Glycerides, Paraffin, Propylene Glycol , Triticum Vulgare (Wheat) Germ Oil, Stearic Acid, Propyl Gallate, Citric Acid, Sucralose, Stevia Rebaudiana Leaf/Stem Extract, Neotame, Benzyl Alcohol, Benzyl Benzoate, Citral, Amyl Cinnamal, Limonene, Linalool, Methyl 2-Octynoate. MAY CONTAIN/PEUT CONTENIR (+/-): Red 7 Lake (Cl 15850), Red 6 Lake (Cl 15850), Yellow 5 Lake (Cl 19140), Blue 1 Lake (Cl 42090), Red 28 (Cl 45410), Carmine (Cl 75470), Titanium Dioxide (Cl 77891).

ACTIVE INGREDIENTS: Aqua/Water; Glycerin; Alcohol Denat.; Butylene Glycol; Sodium Chloride; Sodium Citrate; Dipotassium Phosphate; Panthenol; PPG-26-Buteth-26; Potassium Phosphate; Citric Acid; Benzophenone-4; Disodium EDTA; PEG-40 Hydrogenated Castor Oil; Capryloyl Salicylic Acid; Rosa Centifolia Flower Water/Rosa Centifolia Flower Water; Diazolidinyl Urea; Cl 14700/Red 4; Cl 17200/Red 33; Parfum/Fragrance; Limonene; Linalool; Benzyl Benzoate; Alpha-Isomethyl Ionone; Hydroxycitronellal; Butylphenyl Methylpropional.

INGREDIENTS: Active: Sodium Monofluorophosphate 0.76% (0.14% W/V Fluoride Ion)...Purpose: Anticavity. Inactive: Glycerin, Water, Hydrated Silica, Calcium Carbonate, Xylitol, Sodium Lauryl Sulfate, Mentha Viridis (Spearmint) Leaf Oil And Other Natural Flavors, Chondrus Crispus (Carrageenan), Glycyrrhiza Uralensis (Licorice) Root Extract.

Why chemical disclosure in cosmetic products matters: Consumers may want or need to avoid certain chemical exposures for various, personal reasons.

While a direct link between endocrine disrupting chemicals and cancer is not yet definitive, certain cancers are hormonally-driven, such as breast cancer, prostate cancer, ovarian cancer, and endometrial cancer. According to Dr. Lorenzo Cohen, Ph.D., MD, director of the Integrative Medicine Program at the University of Texas, even a low dose of endocrine disrupting chemicals could cause concern, especially if a product is used every day. He also notes some personal care products may contain endocrine disrupting chemicals and allergens under the guise of "fragrance." Because those fragrance ingredients are not disclosed, though, it is unknown which fragrances do and how many.

Several cosmetic manufacturers, including BeautyCounter, 100% Pure, HAN Skincare Cosmetics, EO Essential Oils, and others, state that, "It is perfectly legal for companies to hide chemicals that have documented negative impacts on public health under the word "fragrance" or "flavor" on product labels, because there is no federal or state law that requires the disclosure of these ingredients in retail cosmetics or professional salon products … Giving consumers product-specific fragrance ingredient information enables them to make value comparison between products, and thus the ability to avoid certain products that may contain chemicals of concern."

Furthermore, the disease and health conditions plaguing Americans (diabetes, obesity, heart disease, immune system diseases/dysfunction and respiratory diseases) have been linked to exposure to a variety of endocrine disrupting compounds in animal models and human epidemiology studies, according to Dr. Linda S. Birnbaum, Ph.D., Scientist Emeritus (Retired) Former Director, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and National Toxicology Program. Endocrine-disrupting chemicals can weaken our immune systems, making us more susceptible to diseases like COVID-19. Therefore, giving consumers more information about products' chemical makeup can lead to consumers making choices that limit harmful exposures, which in turn can help make the public more defensible against various diseases and viruses.

Safe Cosmetics Act: California's Safe Cosmetics Act (SB 484, Migden, Chapter 729, Statutes of 2005) requires that for all cosmetic products sold in California, the manufacturer, packer, and/or distributor named on the product label shall provide CDPH a list of all cosmetic products that contain any ingredients known or suspected to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm, including any chemical that:

• 1. Is contained in the product for purposes of fragrance or flavoring; or,
  2. Is identified by the phrase "and other ingredients" and determined to be a trade secret, as specified.

Keeping an eye on what chemicals are required for disclosure is the onus of the manufacturer. The Safe Cosmetics Act provides that, if an ingredient identified pursuant to this law subsequently is removed from the product in which it was contained, is removed from the list of chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity, or is no longer a chemical identified as causing cancer or reproductive toxicity by an authoritative body, the manufacturer of the product containing the ingredient is required to submit the new information to the Division. The Safe Cosmetic Act further provides that, upon receipt of new information, the Division, after verifying the accuracy of that information, is required to revise the manufacturer’s information on record with the Division to reflect the new information, and the manufacturer is not under obligation to submit subsequent information on the presence of the ingredient in the product unless subsequent changes require submittal of the information. (HSC § 111792 (c))

CDPH maintains an active, searchable database with all of the ingredient information collected from manufacturers under the Safe Cosmetics Act to make that data user-friendly and available to the public. It is called the California Safe Cosmetics Program Product Database. Anyone can search the database for a type of product; a specific product name; or, a brand or company name to get more information about whether a product contains a covered chemical.

Since the launch of the online program in 2009, a total of 77 unique ingredients that are carcinogens or developmental or reproductive toxins have been reported in more than 57,313 products by 481 companies. Sixty-three percent of the reported products are makeup, 13% are nail products, 8% are skin care products, and 6% are sun-related products. However, CDPH states that not all companies are complying with the reporting requirements and that the extent of non-compliance is difficult to assess.

For Fiscal Year 2018-19, the State Budget Act included a $1.5 million General Fund appropriation for the Safe Cosmetics Act, plus $500,000 annually thereafter to CDPH to increase staffing for enforcement and program improvement activities in the Safe Cosmetics Program.

Cleaning Product Right to Know Act of 2017: SB 258 (Lara, Chapter 830, Statutes of 2017) requires a manufacturer of a cleaning product, including an air care product, general cleaning product, or janitorial floor cleaning product, to disclose on the product label and on the product’s internet website information related to chemicals contained in the product. Manufacturers of those products are allowed to protect certain chemicals from disclosure by use of a generic name.

The law requires any chemical to be disclosed if it is included on any of the 22 authoritative lists of chemicals that exhibit hazardous traits and/or an environmental or toxicological endpoint, as identified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the state of California, the European Union, Canada, the International Agency on Cancer Research, the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, among others.

The Cleaning Product Right to Know Act requires a manufacturer, within six months of a change to a designated trait list, to make a revision to the information disclosed online, and requires a manufacturer, within eighteen months of a change to a designated list, to make a revision to the information disclosed on the product label. (HSC § 108956 (e)-(g))

This bill: SB 312 would require cosmetic manufactures, beginning July 1, 2022, to disclose to the Division information related to cosmetic products that contain a fragrance or flavor ingredient that is included on one of the designated lists and a list of fragrance allergens that are present in specified concentrations. It would also require the Division to post in the Safe Cosmetics Act database a list of those intentionally added fragrance and flavor ingredients and fragrance allergens in the cosmetic product.

SB 312 would broaden the Safe Cosmetics Act by expanding the disclosure of flavor and fragrance ingredients beyond carcinogens and developmental toxicants to any chemical listed on any of 22 designated lists of chemical health hazards – the same lists included in the Cleaning Product Right to Know Act and the Department of Toxic Substances Control's candidate chemical lists, plus allergens listed in Annex III of the EU Cosmetics Regulation No. 1223/2009, when present at designated levels.

Disclosure provided under this bill would provide consumers greater information to make more informed choices, and it could potentially lead to safer products designed without hazardous chemicals.

The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, known as Proposition 65, provides a good example. According to the Office of the Attorney General, Proposition 65 has motivated some businesses to eliminate or reduce listed, or likely to be listed, toxic chemicals in numerous consumer products, such as ceramic tableware, jewelry, potato chips, and vitamin supplements. Thus, Proposition 65 has prompted reformulation of products to be safer to avoid the warning label prescribed under the law. Similarly, SB 312 could inspire some cosmetic manufactures to reformulate a product to obviate the need for disclosure in the Safe Cosmetics Program Product Database.

Unilever, the manufacturer of Dove, TRESemmé, Suave, and Vaseline personal care product lines, writes in support of SB 312, "We believe that consumers have a right to know what's in their products. That is why we currently disclose fragrance ingredients on SmartLabel for all of our mass-market beauty and personal care products sold in the US. We are pleased that SB 312 will help increase ingredient transparency in our industry."

Facilitating compliance: Manufacturers and CDPH alike will need to track the designated lists of chemicals for changes for purposes of complying or tracking compliance, respectively. Given the magnitude of chemicals covered and the scope of disclosure, to facilitate compliance, the bill would require CDPH to create a voluntary listserv for manufacturers to opt-into to provide updates on the inclusion of fragrance ingredients and flavor ingredients on the designated lists. The bill also provides manufacturers up to six months to disclose any chemical that is added or removed to one of the designated lists.

Public disclosure: SB 312 requires covered fragrance and favoring information to be submitted to the Safe Cosmetics Act database. That database is and would be a central hub for all cosmetics ingredient information covered under the Safe Cosmetics Act and the Cosmetic Fragrance and Flavor Ingredient Right to Know Act of 2020. Having all of the information in one publicly-facing portal provides a one-stop shop for professionals and consumers wanting information on myriad products. It also simplifies enforcement: CDPH will know who is in compliance based on who has submitted information or not.

Related legislation:

1. SB 574 (Leyva, 2019). Would have required disclosure of specified flavor and fragrance ingredients in cosmetic products. This bill was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
2. AB 2775 (Kalra, Chapter 393, Statutes of 2018). Requires a professional cosmetic manufactured on or after July 1, 2020, for sale in this state to have a label affixed on the container that satisfies all of the labeling requirements for any other cosmetic pursuant to the federal FD&C Act and FPLA.
3. SB 258 (Lara, Chapter 830, Statutes of 2017). Requires a manufacturer of a cleaning product manufactured or sold in California on or after July 1, 2020, to disclose each ingredient contained in the product on the product label.
4. AB 2125 (Chu, Chapter 564, Statutes of 2016). Requires DTSC to publish guidelines for cities, counties, and cities and counties to voluntarily implement local Healthy Nail Salon programs. Requires the guidelines to include, but not be limited to, specified criteria, such as the potential for exposure of nail salon workers and customers to chemicals.
5. SB 928 (Simitian, 2010). Would have required manufacturers to disclosure the chemical content of specified types of cleaning products sold in California. This bill was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Black Women for Wellness (Co-Sponsor)
Breast Cancer Prevention Partners (Co-Sponsor)
California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative (Co-Sponsor)
Women's Voices for The Earth (Co-Sponsor)
100%pure
5 Gyres Institute
A Voice for Choice Advocacy
Alaska Community Action on Toxics
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists District IX
American Lung Association in California
As You Sow
Beautycounter
Brand Geek
Breast Cancer Action
Breast Cancer Over Time
Business and Professional Women of Nevada County
CA Coalition for Clean Air
California Health Coalition Advocacy
California League of Conservation Voters
California Product Stewardship Council

California School Nurses Organization
CALPIRG
Center for Biological Diversity
Center for Oceanic Awareness, Research, & Education
Central California Asthma Collaborative
Change Californians for a Healthy and Green Economy
City and County of San Francisco
Clean Water Action
Clorox Company
Consumer Federation of California
Courage California
Demes Natural Products, Inc.

Dignity Health
Dr. Bronners
Earth Mama Organics
Educate. Advocate.
Eighty2 Degrees
Empower Family California
Environmental Health Strategy Center
Environmental Working Group
EO Essential Oils
Equal Rights Advocates
Friends Committee on Legislation of California

Grassroots Recycling Network DBA Zero Waste USA
Green Science Policy Institute
Greenpeace USA
Grove Collaborative
Han Skincare

Heal The Bay
Innersense Organic Beauty
Intelligent Nutrients
Just the Goods
Keep a Breast
National Employment Law Project
National Stewardship Action Council
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)

Northern California Recycling Association
Oz Naturals
Physicians for Social Responsibility - Los Angeles
Physicians for Social Responsibility - San Francisco Bay Area Chapter

Plastic Oceans International
Plastic Pollution Coalition
Regional Asthma Management and Prevention (RAMP)
Safer States

Save Our Shores
Seventh Generation
Seventh Generation Advisors
Sierra Club California
Skin Owl
Sprout San Francisco
Suntegrity
UCLA Center for Study of Women
Unilever

Upstream
W.S. Badger Company

Wishtoyo Chumasch Foundation
Woodland Coalition for Green Schools
Worksafe

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Paige Brokaw / E.S. & T.M. /

SENATE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS

Senator Bob Archuleta, Chair

2019 - 2020 Regular

Bill No: SB 312 Hearing Date: 4/23/19

Subject: Veterans: service dog assistance

DESCRIPTION

Summary:

This bill requires the Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVet), to establish a program to provide assistance to cover costs including, among other things: the purchase, training, and equipment for a dog to veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Existing law:

1) Establishes CalVet within state government and sets forth its powers and duties, including, but not limited to, the administration of various programs providing benefits to veterans.

2) Authorizes CalVet to contract with veterans service organizations (VSOs) and compensate the VSO for services within the scope of this section rendered by VSO to any veteran, dependent, or survivor.

3) Finds and declares that services provided by VSOs play an important role in the CalVet's responsibilities to assist veterans and their dependents and survivors in presenting and pursuing claims against the United States, and that it is an efficient and reasonable use of state funds to provide compensation to VSOs for these services.

4) Finds and declares that contracts shall not be undertaken until the annual budget for county veterans service officers (CVSOs) reaches a minimum of five million dollars ($5,000,000).

This bill:

1) Requires CalVet, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to establish a competitive grant program to provide assistance for the cost of service dogs to veterans with PTSD.

2) Awards grants to certified veteran service dog providers, as defined, that provide services including, among other things, the purchase of the dog, training of the dog, and equipment for the dog.

3) Requires CalVet to publicize the program.

4) Requires a veteran service dog provider to meet specified criteria to become certified, including, among other things, that the provider demonstrates the knowledge, experience, and cultural competency to provide veterans with service dogs.

5) Makes a certification valid for 3 years, unless the department decertifies the service dog provider.

6) Requires CalVet to send a progress report on the implementation of these provisions to the Legislature on or before March 1, 2021.

7) Requires CalVet to develop regulations for implementation by no later than July 21, 2021.

BACKGROUND

The latest Veteran Population Projection Model 2016 (VetPop 2016), estimates there are approximately 1.6 million veterans in California. In some cases these women and men who have fought bravely to protect our country’s freedom return home from service mentally and/or physically disabled. Unlike the physical wounds of war that maim or disfigure, PTSD, major depression, and TBI are often invisible to other service members, family members, the military, and the broader society. The lack of adequate access to mental health services has made reintegration into civilian life challenging for many veterans and their families. The trauma that some veterans endured during service has led to increased rates of suicide and PTSD.

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), estimates the number of veterans with PTSD as follows:

1) Operations Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Enduring Freedom (OEF): About 11-20 out of every 100 Veterans (or between 11-20%) who served in OIF or OEF have PTSD in a given year.

2) Gulf War (Desert Storm): About 12 out of every 100 Gulf War Veterans (or 12%) have PTSD in a given year.

3) Vietnam War: About 15 out of every 100 Vietnam Veterans (or 15%) were currently diagnosed with PTSD at the time of the most recent study in the late 1980s, the National Vietnam Veterans Readjustment Study (NVVRS). It is estimated that about 30 out of every 100 (or 30%) of Vietnam Veterans have had PTSD in their lifetime.

In addition, sexual harassment or assault that occurs while in the military, known as military sexual trauma (MST), may also be a cause of PTSD. MST can happen to both men and women and can occur during peacetime, training, or war.

1) 23 out of 100 women and 1 out of 100 men reported sexual assault when in the military.

2) 55 out of 100 women and 38 out of 100 men have experienced sexual harassment when in the military.

3) Almost half (40%) of all veterans who tell a VA provider they experienced MST are men.

Veterans Benefits. In recent years the rate at which military veterans have been relocating to California has increased. These veterans vary in age, years of service, combat service, education, physical and mental health, and transferability of military skills to civilian employment. While most veterans simply need education (college or technical training) and job-seeking assistance, others face physical, emotional, and family challenges, often directly related to their military service, which are barriers to full reintegration into civilian society.

Federal, state and local governments provide veterans a wide variety of benefits. In addition, non-profit organizations offer an array of services, many of which are tailored to meet the specific needs of discrete subpopulations of the veteran community.

Service dogs v. Emotional Support dogs. According to the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), a service dog is one that has been trained and certified to work with people with disabilities and perform tasks related to the person’s disability. Service dogs for veterans with PTSD can be trained to enter a room ahead of their handler to turn on lights, retrieve items from a distance, interrupt nightmares and anxious behaviors, as well as perform positional commands that help their handler feel more comfortable in public. For example, if a veteran is about to experience an anxiety attack, a service dog can be trained to sense the anxiety attack is about to happen and take a specific action to help avoid the attack or lessen its impact.

An emotional support/comfort dog may play an equally important role to someone who needs the emotional support, but comfort animals are not necessarily trained in certain tasks or certified as a support animal.

VA study on service and emotional support dogs and PTSD. Currently, VA provides service dogs only for veterans with certain physical disabilities. However, a research study was mandated in the Department of Defense Bill of 2010, to examine the effectiveness of service and emotional support dogs for veterans with PTSD. Importantly, one requirement for Veterans in the study is that they be in some form of mental health treatment for their PTSD. The findings of the new study could potentially change VA’s policy on providing emotional support dogs for veterans with PTSD, and is expected to be complete in June 2019.

VA Mental Health Mobility Service Dog Initiative. The Mental Health Mobility Service Dog Initiative, is offered for veterans with substantial mobility limitations associated with a mental health disorder. It provides comprehensive coverage for the canine’s health and wellness and any prescription medications necessary to enable the dog to perform its duties in service to the veteran.

In order to begin the application process for this benefit, veterans meet with a mental health provider and care team who evaluate and determine whether the mental health condition is the primary cause of the veteran’s substantial mobility limitations. The team assesses whether a mobility service dog would be the optimal intervention or treatment approach for the veteran. If the team considers a service dog to be the optimal intervention, they will apply to receive the benefit on behalf of the veteran by contacting the VA Offices of Mental Health Services and Prosthetic and Sensory Aids Service.

Each veteran’s case is reviewed and evaluated by a prescribing clinician for the following:

1) Goals that are to be accomplished through other assistive technology or therapy.

2) Goals that are to be accomplished through the use of a service dog.

3) Ability and means, including potential co-caregivers, to care for the dog currently and in the future.

The veteran will be informed if the veterinary benefit has been granted. Veterans approved for the benefit are then referred to Assistance Dogs International (ADI)-accredited agencies to apply for a service dog.

Purdue University College of Veterinary Medicine Study. A preliminary study by researchers at the Veterinary Medicine College at Purdue University found that overall symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) are lower among veterans with service dogs. The pilot research project provided scientific evidence of mental health benefits experienced by veterans with PTSD who have service dogs. According to Ms. Maggie O’Haire who led the study, “we found that the group of veterans with service dogs had significantly lower levels of PTSD symptomology that those who did not have a service dog. They also had lower levels of depression, lower anxiety and increased social participation, meaning a willingness to leave their house and go engage with society in different activities.”

According to one of the sponsors of the study, “pairing service dogs with our nation’s veterans should be recognized as a significant complementary method of treatment. This study is a significant step in providing scientific documentation, and I hope the promising results from this study will prompt a renewed focus on the benefits that service dogs provide.”

COMMENT

Author’s statement. According to the Author, “California is home to the greatest number of veterans in the country. These brave men and women risk their lives during their military service and, in some cases, suffer severe trauma that ultimately results in Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). When they return home from service, we must make sure that we are doing everything possible to provide veterans with the necessary support in readjusting to civilian life. Studies show that service dogs have many benefits for veterans returning from service. SB 312 will help to bridge these gaps in our system that currently make it difficult for our veterans with PTSD to be paired with service dogs needed for their safety and independence.”

Related/Previous legislation. SB 245 (Chang, 2019) would prohibit a public animal shelter from charging an adoption fee for a dog or cat if the person adopting the animal presents a current and valid driver’s license or identification card with the word “VETERAN” printed on its face.

AB 1618 (Cervantes, Chapter 416, Statutes of 2017), established a competitive grant program for California veteran service providers (VSPs) and a process for certifying VSPs applying for the competitive grants.

POSITIONS

Sponsor: USA Strong for Veterans

Support:

American Legion Post 6^th Area

American Legion District 18

American Legion Post 30

American Legion Post 56

American Legion Post 70

American Legion Post 78

American Legion Post 125

American Legion Post 176

American Legion Post 206

American Legion Post 247

American Legion Post 261

American Legion Post 279

American Legion Post 280

American Legion Post 471

American Legion Post 502

American Legion Post 508

American Legion Post 534

American Legion Post 790

American Legion Post 817

City Of Glendora

Freedom Dogs

Girl Scout Troop 6674

John D. Baca, Medal of Honor Recipient, Army MOH

Kiwanis International Glendora

Rotary Club of Pomona

Town of Bedford, NY

Veterans Canine Intelligence Academy

Several individuals

Oppose: None on file.

-- END --

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SB 312

Author: Leyva (D)

Amended: 4/22/19

Vote: 21

SENATE VETERANS AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 4/23/19

AYES: Archuleta, Grove, Hurtado, Nielsen, Roth, Umberg, Wilk

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 6-0, 5/16/19

AYES: Portantino, Bates, Bradford, Hill, Jones, Wieckowski

SUBJECT: Veterans: service dog assistance

SOURCE: USA Strong for Veterans

DIGEST:

This bill requires the California Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVet) to establish a grant program to provide assistance for the cost of service dogs to veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes CalVet within state government and sets forth its powers and duties, including, but not limited to, the administration of various programs providing benefits to veterans.
2. Authorizes CalVet to contract with veterans service organizations (VSOs) and compensate the VSO for services within the scope of this section rendered by VSO to any veteran, dependent, or survivor.
3. Finds and declares that services provided by VSOs play an important role in the CalVet's responsibilities to assist veterans and their dependents and survivors in presenting and pursuing claims against the United States, and that it is an efficient and reasonable use of state funds to provide compensation to VSOs for these services.
4. Finds and declares that contracts shall not be undertaken until the annual budget for county veterans service officers (CVSOs) reaches a minimum of five million dollars ($5,000,000).

This bill:

1. Requires CalVet, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to establish a competitive grant program to provide assistance for the cost of service dogs to veterans with PTSD.
2. Awards grants to certified veteran service dog providers, as defined, that provide services including, among other things, the purchase of the dog, training of the dog, and equipment for the dog.
3. Requires CalVet to publicize the program.
4. Requires a veteran service dog provider to meet specified criteria to become certified, including, among other things, that the provider demonstrates the knowledge, experience, and cultural competency to provide veterans with service dogs.
5. Makes a certification valid for 3 years, unless the department decertifies the service dog provider.
6. Requires CalVet to send a progress report on the implementation of these provisions to the Legislature on or before March 1, 2021.
7. Requires CalVet to develop regulations for implementation by no later than July 21, 2021.

Background

According to a 2016 report from the RAND Center for Military Health Policy Research, nearly 20 percent of the veterans who served in either Iraq or Afghanistan suffer from either major depression or PTSD.

According to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), a service dog is one that has been trained and certified to work with people with disabilities and perform tasks related to the person’s disability. Service dogs for veterans with PTSD can be trained to enter a room ahead of their handler to turn on lights, retrieve items from a distance, interrupt nightmares and anxious behaviors, as well as perform positional commands that help their handler feel more comfortable in public. Currently, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provides service dogs only for veterans with certain physical disabilities. However, a research study was mandated in the Department of Defense Bill of 2010, to examine the effectiveness of service and emotional support dogs for veterans with PTSD.

The VA Mental Health Mobility Service Dog Initiative, is offered for veterans with substantial mobility limitations associated with a mental health disorder. It provides comprehensive coverage for the canine’s health and wellness and any prescription medications necessary to enable the dog to perform its duties in service to the veteran.

[NOTE: See the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee analysis for a detailed background of this bill.]

Related/Prior Legislation

SB 245 (Chang, 2019) prohibits a public animal shelter from charging an adoption fee for a dog or cat if the person adopting the animal presents a current and valid driver’s license or identification card with the word “VETERAN” printed on its face.

AB 1618 (Cervantes, Chapter 416, Statutes of 2017), established a competitive grant program for California veteran service providers (VSPs) and a process for certifying VSPs applying for the competitive grants.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

• One-time costs to CalVet to develop regulations for the administration of the grant program. (GF)
• CalVet would require $243,000 in the first year and $232,000 ongoing for additional personnel to develop and administer the grant program. (GF)
• Unknown, significant costs to fund the grants. Training a service dog can range from $20,000 to $27,000 per service dog. This grant would cover the purchase, training, equipment, and veterinary needs for an unspecified number of services dogs. The costs would likely be in the millions of dollars to provide assistance for the cost of an adequate number of services dogs for veterans with PTSD. (GF)

SUPPORT: (Verified 5/16/19)

USA Strong for Veterans (source)

American Legion District 18

American Legion Post 125

American Legion Post 176

American Legion Post 206

American Legion Post 247

American Legion Post 261

American Legion Post 279

American Legion Post 280

American Legion Post 30

American Legion Post 471

American Legion Post 502

American Legion Post 508

American Legion Post 534

American Legion Post 56

American Legion Post 6^th Area

American Legion Post 70

American Legion Post 78

American Legion Post 790

American Legion Post 817

City Of Glendora

Freedom Dogs

Girl Scout Troop 6674

Kiwanis International Glendora

Rotary Club of Pomona

Town of Bedford, NY

Veterans Canine Intelligence Academy

Several individuals

OPPOSITION: (Verified 5/16/19)

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author, “California is home to the greatest number of veterans in the country. These brave men and women risk their lives during their military service and, in some cases, suffer severe trauma that ultimately results in Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). When they return home from service, we must make sure that we are doing everything possible to provide veterans with the necessary support in readjusting to civilian life. Studies show that service dogs have many benefits for veterans returning from service. SB 312 will help to bridge these gaps in our system that currently make it difficult for our veterans with PTSD to be paired with service dogs needed for their safety and independence.”

Prepared by: Veronica Badillo / V.A. / (916) 651-1503

5/18/19 10:54:47

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anthony Portantino, Chair

2019 - 2020 Regular Session

SB 312 (Leyva) - Veterans: service dog assistance

Bill Summary:

SB 312 would require the California Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVet) to establish a grant program to provide assistance for the cost of service dogs to veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Fiscal Impact:

• One-time costs to CalVet to develop regulations for the administration of the grant program. (GF)
• CalVet would require $243,000 in the first year and $232,000 ongoing for additional personnel to develop and administer the grant program. (GF)
• Unknown, significant costs to fund the grants. Training a service dog can range from $20,000 to $27,000 per service dog. This grant would cover the purchase, training, equipment, and veterinary needs for an unspecified number of services dogs. The costs would likely be in the millions of dollars to provide assistance for the cost of an adequate number of services dogs for veterans with PTSD. (GF)

Background:

According to a 2016 report from the RAND Center for Military Health Policy Research, nearly 20 percent of the veterans who served in either Iraq or Afghanistan suffer from either major depression or PTSD.

According to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), a service dog is one that has been trained and certified to work with people with disabilities and perform tasks related to the person’s disability. Service dogs for veterans with PTSD can be trained to enter a room ahead of their handler to turn on lights, retrieve items from a distance, interrupt nightmares and anxious behaviors, as well as perform positional commands that help their handler feel more comfortable in public. Currently, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provides service dogs only for veterans with certain physical disabilities. However, a research study was mandated in the Department of Defense Bill of 2010, to examine the effectiveness of service and emotional support dogs for veterans with PTSD.

The VA Mental Health Mobility Service Dog Initiative, is offered for veterans with substantial mobility limitations associated with a mental health disorder. It provides comprehensive coverage for the canine’s health and wellness and any prescription medications necessary to enable the dog to perform its duties in service to the veteran.

Proposed Law:

This bill would require CalVet, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to establish a grant program to provide assistance for the cost of service dogs to veterans with PTSD. Specifically, this bill would:

• Authorize CalVet to cover reasonable administrative costs using appropriated funds;
• Require the competitive grants to be awarded to certified veteran service dog providers, as defined, that provide services including, but not limited to the purchase of the dog, training of the dog, equipment for the dog, and veterinarian services for the dog;
• Require competitive grants to be awarded in support of the state’s strategic plan for providing veterans with mental health assistance;
• Require CalVet to publicize the services provided by recipients of grants to disabled veterans;
• Require CalVet, no later than July 1, 2021, to develop regulations for the grant program including, but not limited to, the application criteria, application process, data collection, and accountability for program expenditures and metrics for evaluation of assistance provided;
• Require CalVet, on and after December 1, 2021, to accept and either approve or reject applications to certify veteran service dog providers. A certification approved by CalVet shall be valid for three years after the date the department accepts credentials for certification, unless the CalVet decertifies the veteran service dog provider;
• Require CalVet to maintain a list of certified veteran service dog providers on its internet website, including the type of services provided by each provider;
• Require CalVet, on or before March 1, 2021, to provide a progress report to the Legislature on its implementation of the grant program;
• Authorize other departments or agencies to use CalVet’s certification.

Related Legislation:

SB 245 (Chang, 2019) would prohibit a public animal shelter from charging an adoption fee for a dog or cat if the person adopting the animal presents a current and valid driver’s license or identification card with the word “VETERAN” printed on its face.

AB 1618 (Cervantes, Chapter 416, Statutes of 2017), established a competitive grant program for California veteran service providers (VSPs) and a process for certifying VSPs applying for the competitive grants.

-- END --