Date of Hearing: August 14, 2019

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 574

Author:(Leyva) – As Amended Ver:June 26, 2019

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

SUMMARY:

This bill requires manufacturers of cosmetic products to report flavor and fragrance ingredients in their products that are deemed toxic according to any of a set of specified lists published by regulatory authorities, with some exceptions for trade secrets, and requires the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) to publish the data.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. One-time costs of $180,000 GF to CDPH for information technology staff to enhance the database. It is likely this cost could be absorbed by a $1 million budget appropriation in the Budget Act of 2019 (discussed further below).
2. Ongoing costs of $240,000 GF to CDPH, beginning in the first year, for staff to develop and manage the reporting program. It is unknown whether this cost could be absorbed by an ongoing $500,000 budget appropriation in the Budget Act of 2019 (discussed further below).

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. According to the author, 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. This bill would empower consumers to choose products without chemicals deemed toxic and may encourage reformulation with safer additives. This bill is co-sponsored by Black Women for Wellness, Breast Cancer Prevention Partners, Women's Voices For The Earth and supported by a large number of health, environmental justice and women’s advocacy organizations. Prior versions of this bill were opposed by industry interests, but negotiated amendments have removed all formal opposition.
2. Background. The California Safe Cosmetics Program (SCP) collects information from manufacturers regarding ingredients known or suspected to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm, as required by the Act, and makes the data available to the public. . Under current law, any ingredient in a cosmetic product sold in California that appears on the California Prop 65 list of carcinogens and reproductive toxins must be reported to the SCP. The SCP is then required to make this information publically available on their website. This bill expands this disclosure program to include ingredients used in flavors and fragrances
3. Budget Act of 2019. AB 74 (Ting), Chapter 23, Statutes of 2019, augmented funding to the Safe Cosmetics Program by $1.5 million to CDPH to enhance the database and hire additional staff to enforce the reporting requirements. Of this amount, $500,000 is designated as ongoing.
4. Prior Legislation. 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 federal law.

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.

AB 2125 (Chiu), Chapter 564, Statutes of 2016, requires the Department of Toxic Substances Control to publish guidelines for cities, counties, and cities and counties to voluntarily implement local Healthy Nail Salon programs

1. Staff Comments. The author may wish to consider addressing the following implementation issues:
   1. Specify the process and timeline for how products are removed from the database if an offending fragrance or flavor ingredient is removed from the product.
   2. Clarify CPDH must develop a master list of reportable ingredients to enhance compliance and ease of oversight.

In addition, it is unclear whether six months from an ingredient being added to the list is adequate time to reformulate products based on rolling changes to the 22 different lists referenced in the bill. If the goal is ultimately to encourage removal of reportable ingredients from the product, it would encourage reformulation and minimize reporting volume to have a master list updated at specified intervals with adequate time to reformulate products to remove the ingredients newly deemed toxic.

Analysis Prepared by: Lisa Murawski / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: July 2, 2019

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY AND TOXIC MATERIALS

Bill Quirk, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 574

Author:(Leyva) – As AmendedVer: June 26, 2019

SENATE VOTE: 23-10

SUBJECT: Cosmetic Fragrance and Flavor Ingredient Right to Know Act of 2019.

SUMMARY: Establishes the Cosmetic Fragrance and Flavor Ingredient Right to Know Act (Act) of 2019. Specifically, this bill:

1. States that it is 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.
2. 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.
3. Defines "professional cosmetic" as a cosmetic product that is intended or marketed to be used only by a professional on account of a specific ingredient, increased concentration of an ingredient, or other quality that requires safe handling, or is otherwise used by a professional.
4. Defines "designated list" as any of the 22 authoritative lists identified in the Act, including any subsequent revisions to those lists when adopted by the authoritative body.
5. Requires, commencing January 1, 2021, 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;
   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 in exceedance of 0.01 percent (100 parts per million) or in a leave-on cosmetic product at a concentration at or in exceedance of 0.001 percent (10 parts per million). Requires those ingredients to appear in 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 ingredient or allergen that must be disclosed; and,
   5. The corresponding Universal Product Code for the cosmetic product.
6. 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 as a trade secret any ingredient or combination of ingredients that is not on a designated list or required to be disclosed. Provides that any fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient that constitutes a trade secret is not subject to the California Public Records Act.
7. Requires, commencing July 1, 2021, 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 described in, and disclosed:
   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.
8. Requires CDPH to create a voluntary electronic mailing list to provide covered manufacturers updates on changes to the designated lists.
9. Requires a manufacturer to report any fragrance or flavor ingredient within six months of a change in a designated list.
10. Requires the Division to identify whether an ingredient is a fragrance ingredient or a flavor ingredient.
11. Provides that 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 Code of Federal Regulations (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 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 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, "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.

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 574 will empower consumers so that they can make educated decisions about which products to use with their kids and families."

Chemical exposure: Decades of studies indicate that serious health issues (including, but not limited to, asthma, cancer, and infertility) are on the rise and are due in some part to our ongoing exposure to toxic chemicals—whether it is in the shower, on our commute, while we are at work, or when we clean our kitchens at home.

More than 84,000 chemicals have been registered for use in the United States, and more than 700 new chemicals enter the marketplace each year. Many do not have any safety data. As more and more chemicals enter our homes and workplaces, the need for transparency of those chemicals becomes more critical.

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 below.

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 health 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."

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.

In Fiscal Year 2018-19, the Legislature proposed including a $1.5 million General Fund appropriation for the Cosmetics Act in Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-19, plus $500,000 annually thereafter to CDPH to support one-time infrastructure (website) upgrades and additional enforcement and outreach staff to ensure full implementation of the Cosmetics Program requirements by manufacturers of covered products. Governor Jerry Brown line-item vetoed that funding.

On February 28, 2019, the Senate Budget Subcommittee #3 approved, 3-0, $1.5 million General Funds for FY 2019-20 and $500,00 annually thereafter to increase staffing for enforcement and program improvement activities in the Safe Cosmetics Program. The one-time funding was adopted in AB 74 (Ting, Budget Act of 2019) under CDPH's funding for the Safe Cosmetics Act (4265-001-0001). The Budget bill is pending before the Governor.

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 574 would require cosmetic manufactures, beginning July 1, 2021, 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 574 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 DTSC'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 574 could inspire some cosmetic manufactures to reformulate a product to obviate the need for disclosure in the Safe Cosmetics Program Product Database.

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 to one of the lists.

Public disclosure: SB 574 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 2019. 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.

Implementation timing: Manufacturers purchase their flavor and fragrance ingredients from fragrance houses, who keep their ingredients propriety for protection of their intellectual property. SB 574 is arguably much more expansive in scope than the Cleaning Products Right to Know Act, which means manufacturers will have to obtain the fragrance and flavoring ingredient information for many more products, and simply getting that information and reporting it will take time.

The Safe Cosmetics Act, which went into effect January 1, 2006, provided manufacturers one-year to comply by providing the specified ingredient information to the Division (January 1, 2007).

The Cleaning Products Right to Know Act, which went into effect January 1, 2018, provides manufacturers two years (until January 1, 2020) to comply with the online disclosure requirements and three years (until January 1, 2021) to comply with the product label disclosure requirements.

Should this bill be enacted, it provides manufacturers with one year (until January 1, 2021) to review the designated lists; identify all ingredients used in their products on those lists; and, comply with the Act.

Related legislation:

1. AB 2775 (Kalra, Chapter 3936, 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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)

Women's Voices For The Earth (Co-sponsor)
A Voice For Choice Advocacy
Able Differently
Act For Women And Girls
Alaska Community Action On Toxics
Alliance Of Nurses For Healthy Environments
American Academy Of Pediatrics, California
American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, Inc.
American Congress Of Obstetricians & Gynecologists - District IX
As You Sow
Breast Cancer Action
Breast Cancer Over Time
Business And Professional Women Of Nevada County
CA Coalition For Clean Air
California Association For Micro Enterprise Opportunity
California Communities Against Toxics
California Environmental Justice Alliance (CEJA)
California Health Coalition Advocacy
California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative

California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO
California League Of Conservation Voters
California Pan-Ethnic Health Network
California Product Stewardship Council
California Public Interest Research Group (CALPIRG)
Campaign For Healthier Solutions
Center For Environmental Health
Center For Oceanic Awareness, Research, & Education
Center On Reproductive Rights And Justice (CRRJ)
Central California Asthma Collaborative
Change Californians For A Healthy And Green Economy
Citizens For Choice
City and County of San Francisco
Clean Water Action
Coming Clean
Communities For A Better Environment 
Community Action To Fight Asthma
Consumer Federation Of California
Courage Campaign
Ecology Center
Educate. Advocate.
Empower Family California
Environmental Health Strategy Center
Environmental Working Group (EWG)
Friends Committee On Legislation Of California
Friends Of The Earth U.S.
Green Science Policy Institute
Healthcare Without Harm
Instituto De Educacion Popular Del Sur De California (IDEPSCA)
Just Transition Alliance
Keep A Breast
Learning Disabilities Association Of Arkansas
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
Lutheran Office Of Public Policy - California
National Stewardship Action Council
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
Non Toxic Revolution
Oregon Environmental Council
Physicians For Social Responsibility - Los Angeles
Physicians For Social Responsibility - San Francisco Bay Area Chapter
Plastic Pollution Coalition
Regional Asthma Management & Prevention (RAMP)
Safer States
Savvy Women's Alliance
Science And Environmental Health Network
Seventh Generation Advisors
Sierra Club California
Southern California Coalition For Occupational Health And Safety
The 5 Gyres Institute
UCLA Center For Study Of Women
US PIRG
Woodland Coalition For Green Schools
Worksafe

Opposition

Consumer Healthcare Products Association
Flavor & Extract Manufacturers Association

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

Date of Hearing: June 25, 2019

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

Jim Wood, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 574

Author:(Leyva) – As Amended Ver:June 17, 2019

SENATE VOTE: 23-10

SUBJECT: Cosmetic Fragrance and Flavor Ingredient Right to Know Act of 2019.

SUMMARY: Requires cosmetic manufactures, commencing July 1, 2020, to disclose to the Department of Public Health’s (DPH) Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control (DEODC) information related to cosmetic products that contain a fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient. Specifically, this bill:

1. Establishes the Cosmetic Fragrance and Flavor Right to Known Act which requires the disclosure of ingredients included in fragrances and flavors to be publically available.
2. Requires, by July 1, 2020, a manufacturer of a cosmetic product sold in the state to disclose the following information to the DEODC:
   1. A list of each fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient only if that ingredient 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%(100 parts per million) or in a leave-on cosmetic product at a concentration at or above 0.001% (10 parts per million). Requires 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 ingredient or allergen that requires disclosure under this bill; and,
   5. The corresponding Universal Product Code for the cosmetic product containing ingredients included on a designated list.
3. Defines the following:
   1. “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.
   2. “Professional cosmetic” as cosmetic product that is intended or marketed to be used only by a professional on account of a specific ingredient, increased concentration of an ingredient, or other quality that requires safe handling, or is otherwise used by a professional, which is consistent with existing law.
   3. “Designated list” as any of the following, including subsequent revisions when adopted by the authoritative body:
      1. Chemicals known to the 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 pursuant to Category 1A or 1B in Annex VI;
      3. Chemicals included in the European Union Candidate List of Substances of Very High Concern for endocrine disrupting properties.
      4. Chemicals for which a reference dose or reference concentration has been developed based on neurotoxicity in the federal Environmental Protection Agency’s 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 federal Environmental Protection Agency’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;
      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 in Annex VI as respiratory sensitizer category;
      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 federal Environmental Protection Agency 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 federal Environmental Protection Agency’s Toxics Release Inventory as Persistent, Bioaccumulative and Toxic Chemicals;
      14. The Washington Department of Ecology’s Persistent, Bioaccumulative, Toxic Chemicals;
      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;
      17. Chemicals for which primary maximum contaminant levels have been established under existing California regulations;
      18. Chemicals identified as toxic air contaminants under existing California regulations;
      19. Chemicals that are identified as priority pollutants in the California water quality control plans;
      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.
   4. “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.
   5. “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.
   6. “Intentionally added ingredient” as a chemical that a manufacturer has intentionally added to a cosmetic product and that has a functional or technical effect in the cosmetic product, including the components of an intentionally added fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient.
4. Exempts, to protect trade secrets, a manufacturer from disclosing the weight or amount of an ingredient required to be reported to DEODC or the way in which a cosmetic product or intentionally added fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient is formulated. Permits a manufacturer to protect as a trade secret any ingredient or combination of ingredients that is not on a designated list or required to be reported to DEODC. Requires disclosure of flavor or fragrance ingredients that are included in any of the specified designated list and declares that these ingredients do not constitute as a trade secret.
5. Defines “manufacturer” as any entity whose name appears on the label of a cosmetic product pursuant to federal regulations.
6. Prohibits a fragrance or flavor ingredient that constitutes as a trade secret from being subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act.
7. Requires manufacturers that must disclose a fragrance or flavor ingredient due to a change in any of the specified 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.
8. Requires DPH to create a voluntary electronic mailing list for DPH to provide updates on the inclusion of fragrance and flavor ingredients on the designated list.
9. Requires, by July 1, 2020, the DEODC to post on the existing cosmetic ingredient safety database, in an easily readable format, the following information:
   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 to DEODC; and,
   2. The health hazards associated with each fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient.
10. Requires DEODC to identify whether an ingredient is a fragrance ingredient or a flavor ingredient.
11. Finds and declares the importance of consumers and workers to have information about chemical ingredients that may have potential health impacts and are included in their cosmetics and personal care products.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Regulates the labeling of cosmetics under the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law. Permits DPH to require a cosmetic label to list ingredients under specified circumstances.
2. Requires cosmetic manufacturers, under the Safe Cosmetics Act (the Act), to provide the 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.
3. 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.
4. Requires DPH to develop and make operational a consumer-friendly, public website 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.
5. Requires, under Proposition 65, the state to publish and annually update a list of chemicals known to cause cancer or birth defects or other reproductive harm.
6. Requires, under the California Public Records Act, the disclosure of governmental records regarding the conduct of businesses, upon public request.
7. Exempts proprietary trade secrets from the California Public Records Act.
8. Establishes, under federal law, the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) and the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act that authorizes the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate the marketing, branding, and labeling of cosmetic products.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, DPH estimates $429,000 (General Fund) for year one, and $236,000, ongoing, for 1.0 full-time Office Technician, 1.0 Health Program Specialist, and one limited-term IT position.

COMMENTS:

1. PURPOSE OF THIS BILL. According to the author, we actually know more in California 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. The author concludes that this bill will empower consumers so that they can make educated decisions about which products to use with their kids and families.
2. BACKGROUND. The disclosure of cosmetics and their ingredients is currently facilitated by the DEODC at DPH. Additionally, in California, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has a Safe Consumer Products Program to ensure that consumers in California are aware of the potentially harmful chemicals in their products whether they are cleaning products or personal care products. These state databases serve as a central location for consumers and industry workers to obtain information about chemicals that may be harmful and are included in the formulations of their everyday products so that they can make informed choices in products for themselves.
   1. State Regulation of Cosmetics. The California Safe Cosmetics Program (SCP) collects information from manufacturers regarding ingredients known or suspected to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm, as required by the Act, and makes the data available to the public. Under current law, any ingredient in a cosmetic product sold in California that appears on the California Prop 65 list of carcinogens and reproductive toxins must be reported to the SCP. The SCP is then required to make this information publically available on their website. 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. This bill expands this disclosure program to include ingredients used in flavors and fragrances
   2. Federal Regulation of Cosmetics. Under the FD&C Act, cosmetic products and ingredients do not need FDA premarket approval, with the exception of color additives. However, FDA can pursue enforcement action against products on the market that are not in compliance with the law, or against firms or individuals who violate the law. A cosmetics manufacturer may use any ingredient in the formulation of a cosmetic, provided that the ingredient and the finished cosmetic are safe under labeled or customary conditions of use, the product is properly labeled, and the use of the ingredient does not otherwise cause the cosmetic to be adulterated or misbranded under the laws that FDA enforces. The safety testing of the cosmetic products, including the ingredients and how they are used is the legal responsibility of the manufacturers. Manufacturers must be sure that the chemicals used in their products, in the function and amount by which they are used, are safe for public used.

Fragrance and flavor ingredients in cosmetic products must meet the same safety requirements as all other ingredients in cosmetics, however, the ingredients are not requires to be listed. For example, the components of a fragrance in a product, can be simply listed as ‘fragrance.’ This provision is to allow the components and formulation of a flavor or fragrance to be protected under trade secrets.

This bill explicitly states that any ingredient included in a flavor or fragrance that is on any of the designated list, as specified, will not constitute as a trade secret, and thus will have to be disclosed under this bill. Proprietary information, such as the weight or amount of these ingredients or the formulation would still be protected and not required to be disclosed to DEODC.

1. SUPPORT. According to Breast Cancer Prevention Partners (BCPP), the use of fragrance in consumer products is pervasive and almost impossible to avoid. Fragrance chemicals are found in more than 95% of shampoos, conditioners, hair styling products, antiperspirants and shaving products as well as fine fragrances, body spray and lotions. BCPP states that the disclosure of toxic fragrance ingredients would give Californians the power to select safer products.
2. OPPOSITION. The Personal Care Products Council (PCPC) states that they have a shared goal with consumers, regulators and lawmakers to provide safe, high-quality cosmetics and personal care products. PCPC states that this bill is a flawed and costly approach to what is already being done at both the state and federal level.
3. PREVIOUS LEGISLATION.
   1. AB 1575 (Kalra) of 2017 and AB 2775 (Kalra), Chapter 393, Statutes of 2018, require 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 specific federal laws. AB 1575 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file.
   2. SB 258 (Lara), Chapter 830, Statutes of 2017, establishes the Cleaning Product Right to Know Act of 2017 which created a similar disclosure requirement to this bill for the chemicals used in cleaning products.
   3. AB 2125 (Chiu), Chapter 564, Statutes of 2016, requires the DTSC to publish guidelines for cities, counties, and cities and counties to voluntarily implement local healthy nail salon recognition programs.
   4. SB 977 (Yee) of 2012 would have raised fines for mislabeling of nail polishes from $1,000 to $2,000. Governor Brown vetoed this bill stating that it did not make sense to focus on one product.
   5. SB 1712 (Migden) of 2008, would have required a manufacturer of lipstick sold in this state to provide evidence to DPH that the lipstick contains no more than an unavoidable trace of lead. SB 1712 died in the Assembly Health Committee.
   6. SB 484 (Migden), Chapter 729, Statutes of 2005, establishes the Act requires cosmetics sold within the state that contain ingredients known or suspected to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm.
   7. AB 908 (Chu), of 2005, would have prohibited a person or entity from manufacturing, selling, or distributing in commerce any cosmetic that contains any of two specified phthalates, and would have defined a cosmetic as misbranded if sold by an internet website where the list of ingredients in the cosmetic is not easily viewable before the purchase. AB 908 failed passage in the Assembly Health Committee.
   8. AB 2012 (Chu), of 2004, would have required, by January 1, 2006, the manufacturer of any cosmetic or personal care product subject to regulation by the FDA and manufactured, processed, or distributed in commerce in the state to notify California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) of any ingredient in its product that is a chemical identified as causing cancer or reproductive toxicity, as specified. AB 2012 failed passage in the Assembly Health Committee.
      
4. DOUBLE REFERRAL. This bill is double referred; upon passage in this Committee, this bill will be referred to the Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee.
   
5. SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS: The author may wish to delete the definition for “intentionally added ingredients” as this phrase only appears in the definition of terms. If the intent of the author in including this term is to capture certain chemicals on the specified list that are constituents, or components, but not unavoidable contaminants of ingredients that are used in flavors and fragrances, it may be more appropriate to modify the existing definitions for flavors and fragrance ingredients. Additionally, the author may wish to extend the implementation date to give manufacturers adequate time to reformulate their flavors or fragrance ingredients if they wish.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Black Women for Wellness (cosponsor)

Breast Cancer Prevention Partners (cosponsor)

Able Differently

ACT for Women and Girls

Alaska Community Action on Toxics

Alliance of Nurses for a Health Environment

As You Sow

A Voice For Choice Advocacy
American Academy Of Pediatrics, California
American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network Inc.
American Congress Of Obstetricians & Gynecologists - District Ix

Breast Cancer Action
Breast Cancer over Time

California Association for Microenterprise Opportunity

CA Coalition for Clean Air

CA Environmental Justice Alliance

CA Health Coalition Advocacy

CA Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative

CA League of Conservation Voters

CA Pan-Ethnic Health Network

CA Product Stewardship Council

CA Communities against Toxics

Californians for a Healthy and Green Economy

CalPIRG

Campaign for Healthier Solutions

Center for Environmental Health

Center for Oceanic Awareness, Research and Education

Center on Reproductive Rights and Justice

Central California Asthma Collaborative

Citizens for Choice

Clean Water Action

Coming Clean

Communities for a Better Environment

Consumer Federation of California

Courage Campaign

Business and Professional Women of Nevada County

City and County of San Francisco
Community Action to Fight Asthma

Opposition

California Chamber Of Commerce
California Manufacturers & Technology Association
Consumer Healthcare Products Association
Flavor & Extract Manufacturers Association
Fragrance Creators Association
Personal Care Products Council

Analysis Prepared by: Marissa Kraynak / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SB 574

Author: Leyva (D)

Amended: 4/29/19

Vote: 21

SENATE HEALTH COMMITTEE: 5-2, 4/10/19

AYES: Pan, Durazo, Hurtado, Leyva, Monning

NOES: Stone, Grove

NO VOTE RECORDED: Mitchell, Rubio

SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE: 5-1, 4/24/19

AYES: Allen, Hill, Skinner, Stern, Wieckowski

NOES: Bates

NO VOTE RECORDED: Stone

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 4-2, 5/16/19

AYES: Portantino, Bradford, Hill, Wieckowski

NOES: Bates, Jones

SUBJECT: Cosmetic Fragrance and Flavor Ingredient Right to Know Act of 2019

SOURCE: Black Women for Wellness

Breast Cancer Prevention Partners

Women’s Voices for the Earth

DIGEST:

• 1. This bill requires cosmetic manufacturers, commencing July 1, 2020, 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.

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 July 1, 2020, 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 DEODC, commencing July 1, 2020, to post on the Safe Cosmetics Act Web site 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.

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 Senate Appropriations Committee, DPH estimates $429,000 (General Fund) for year one, and $236,000, ongoing, for 1.0 full-time Office Technician, 1.0 Health Program Specialist, and one limited-term IT position.

SUPPORT: (Verified 5/21/19)

Black Women for Wellness (co-source)

Breast Cancer Prevention Partners (co-source)

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

100% Pure

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

Breast Cancer Action

California Baby

California Coalition for Clean Air

California Communities Against Toxics

California Environmental Justice Alliance

California Health Coalition Advocacy

California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative

California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative

California Labor Federation

California League of Conservation Voters

California Pan-Ethnic Health Network

California Product Stewardship Council

California Public Interest Research Group

Californians for a Healthy and Green Economy

Center for Oceanic Awareness, Research and Education

Central California Asthma Collaborative

Citizens for Choice

City and County of San Francisco, Department of the Environment

Clean Water Action

Coming Clean

Communities for a Better Environment

Consumer Federation of California

Côte

Courage Campaign

Credo Beauty

Crunchi, LLC

DEMES Natural Products Inc.

Earth Mama Organic

Ecology Center

EcoPlum

Educate. Advocate.

Eighty2degrees Design Studio

Elavo Mundi Solutions, LLC

Empower Family California

Environmental Health Strategy Center

EO Products

Essential Skincare

Five Gyres Institute

Goddess Garden

HAN Skin Care Cosmetics

Happy Pretty You! Reiki Salon & Spa

Healthcare Without Harm

inHarmony Naturals

Innersense Organic Beauty

Intelligent Nutrients

Juice Beauty

just the goods

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 Stewardship Action Council

Natural Resources Defense Council

Oregon Environmental Council

OSEA Malibu

OZNaturals

Physicians for Social Responsibility – Los Angeles

Physicians for Social Responsibility – San Francisco Bay Area

Plastic Pollution Coalition

Regional Asthma Management & Prevention

Safer States

Savvy Women’s Alliance

Science and Environmental Health Network

Seventh Generation

Seventh Generation Advisors

Sierra Club California

SkinOwl

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

Woodland Coalition for Green Schools

Zorah Biocosmetiques

Two individuals

OPPOSITION: (Verified 5/16/19)

California Chamber of Commerce

California Manufacturers & Technology Association

Fragrance Creators Association

Personal Care Products Council

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

5/21/19 9:36:03

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anthony Portantino, Chair

2019 - 2020 Regular Session

SB 574 (Leyva) - Cosmetic Fragrance and Flavor Ingredient Right to Know Act of 2019

Bill Summary:

Senate Bill 574 would require, effective July 1, 2020, a manufacturer of a cosmetic product sold in California to disclose specified information to the Department of Public Health’s (CDPH) Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control. Would require, effective July 1, 202, the Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control to post on its database specified information, including a list of all fragrance ingredients and flavor ingredients and health hazards, related to a cosmetic product.

Fiscal Impact:

The CDPH estimates $429,000 (General Fund) for year one, and $236,000, ongoing, for 1.0 full-time Office Technician, 1.0 Health Program Specialist, and one limited-term IT position. For more detailed information, please see Staff Comments.

Background:

The California Safe Cosmetics Act of 2005 established the California Safe Cosmetics Program, where cosmetic manufacturers must report any products that contain ingredients known, or suspected to, cause cancer, birth defects, or reproductive harm. Since the online program launch in 2009, 63 percent of the reported products were makeup, 13 percent were nail products, 8 percent were skin care products, and six percent sun-related. There are a total of 77 unique ingredients that are carginogenic, or cause harm to development or reproductive toxicity.

The Department of Toxic Substances and Control promulgated the Safer Consumer Products Regulations, which outlines a process by which the department may identify and prioritize chemicals of concern in consumer products, possible alternatives analysis, and to take regulatory action (Green Chemistry Initiative, AB 1879, Chapter 559, Statutes of 2008; SB 509, Chapter 560, Statutes of 2008).

SB 258 (Lara), Chapter 830, Statutes of 2017, requires manufacturers of cleaning products to disclose information about ingredients and chemicals in products, including fragrances.

Proposed Law:

This bill includes the following provisions, among others:

• Requires, commencing July 1, 2020, 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 within the State Department of Public Health:
  • A list of each fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient that is included on a designated list.
  • A list of each fragrance allergen that is present in a rinse-off cosmetic product at a concentration at or above 0.01 percent (100 parts per million) or in a leave-on cosmetic product at a concentration at or above 0.001 percent (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.
  • Whether the cosmetic product is intended for professional use or retail cosmetic use.
  • The Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) number for each fragrance ingredient and flavor ingredient; and,
  • The corresponding Universal Product Code (UPC) for the cosmetic product.
• Provides, in order to protect trade secrets, that manufacturer is not required to disclose the weight or amount of an ingredient, or to disclose how a fragrance or flavor is formulated. Permits a manufacturer to protect as a trade secret any ingredient or combination of ingredients that is not on a designated list or required to be disclosed.
• Requires, commencing July 1, 2020, the Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control to post on the existing Safe Cosmetics Act website, a list of all fragrance and flavor ingredients that are included on a designated list, all fragrance allergens, and the health hazards associated with each fragrance or flavor ingredient.
• Provides that the provisions of this act are severable, and if any provision of this act or its application is held invalid, that invalidity must not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.
• Provides no reimbursement is required under the California Constitution.

Related Legislation:

• AB 1575 (Kalra of 2017) and AB 2775 (Kalra, Chapter 393, Statutes of 2018) require 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 specific federal laws. AB 1575 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file.
• AB 237 (Galgiani of 2011) and AB 595 (Dymally of 2007) would have required cosmetic product manufacturers that do not comply with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Voluntary Cosmetic Reporting Program (VCRP) to provide to DPH the same kind of information disclosed through the VCRP. AB 237 was held on the Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file, and AB 595 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file.
• AB 2012 (Chu of 2004) would have required, by January 1, 2006, the manufacturer of any cosmetic or personal care product subject to regulation by the FDA and manufactured, processed, or distributed in commerce in the state to notify California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) of any ingredient in its product that is a chemical identified as causing cancer or reproductive toxicity, as specified. AB 2012 failed passage in the Assembly Health Committee.

Staff Comments: The CDPH anticipates the following staff classifications would be needed to implement the bill:

• $40,452 (General Fund) in FY 2020-21 and ongoing, for 1.0 Office Technician to conduct an initial mass mailing to notify cosmetics companies of their new responsibility to report. CDPH currently receives approximately 25 phone or email inquiries about reporting per week, and this volume increases to about 50 per week after notifying new companies of reporting requirements. The volume of inquiries and notification mailings is expected to increase because SB 574 broadens the scope of ingredients, from 4 to 22 authoritative lists, and increases the number of companies affected.
• $73,836 (General Fund) for 1.0 Health Program Specialist I in FY 2002-21 and ongoing, to develop and regularly update the list of reportable ingredients according to the new designated authoritative lists, named in SB 574.
• $99,360 (General Fund) for 1.0 limited-term Information Technology Specialist I in FY 2020-21 to program, test, and troubleshoot the database.
• Ongoing costs of $9,737 for approximately 100 IT personnel hours annually to maintain and service the database.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Senator Allen, Chair

2019 - 2020 Regular

Bill No: SB 574

SUBJECT: Cosmetic Fragrance and Flavor Ingredient Right to Know Act of 2019

DIGEST: This bill would require cosmetic manufactures, commencing July 1, 2020, to disclose to the Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control information related to cosmetic products that contain a fragrance or flavor ingredient that is included on a “designated list,” as defined, and a list of fragrance allergens that are present in specified concentrations. Also requires the Division to post on its database a list of those fragrance, flavor, and allergen ingredients in the cosmetic product, as specified.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Enacts the Safe Cosmetics Act, which requires cosmetic manufacturers to provide the Department of Public Health (DPH) 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.
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.
3. Requires DPH to develop and make operational a consumer-friendly, public website 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.

Under Proposition 65:

4) Prohibits a person, in the course of doing business, from knowingly discharging or releasing a chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity into water or onto or into land where such chemical passes or probably will pass into any source of drinking water.

5) Prohibits a person, in the course of doing business, from knowingly and intentionally exposing any individual to a chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity without first giving clear and reasonable warning to such individual.

6) Requires the Governor to publish a list of chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity and to annually revise the list.

Under the California Green Chemistry statutes:

7) Requires the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), on or before January 1, 2011, to adopt regulations to establish a process to identify and prioritize those chemicals or chemical ingredients in consumer products that may be considered a chemical of concern. These chemicals of concern must be taken from a list of candidate chemicals, which unifies a number of hazardous chemical lists from other authoritative sources.

8) Requires DTSC, on or before January 1, 2011, to adopt regulations to evaluate chemicals of concern and their potential alternatives in consumer products and to determine how best to limit exposure or to reduce the level of hazard posed by the chemical of concern in the product.

9) Authorizes DTSC to take specified regulatory actions to limit exposure or to reduce the level of hazard posed by a chemical of concern.

10) Creates the Uniform Trades Secrets Act which establishes a legal framework for the protection of trade secrets for companies in California.

This bill:

1. Makes findings and declarations.
   
2. Requires cosmetic manufactures, commencing July 1, 2020, to disclose to DEODC:
   1. A list of each fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient that is included on a designated list, as defined;
   2. A list of each fragrance allergen that is present in the cosmetic product in specified concentrations. Specifies that those ingredients shall appear on the database in a unique manner that distinguishes them 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 fragrance ingredient and flavor ingredient; and,
   5. The corresponding Universal Product Code (UPC) for the cosmetic product.
3. Defines “designated list” as any of the 23 authoritative lists identified in the Act, including any subsequent revisions to those lists when adopted by the authoritative body.
4. Specifies, in order to protect trade secrets, that this bill does not require a manufacturer to disclose the weight or amount of a fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient, or to disclose how a fragrance or flavor is formulated. Permits manufacturers to protect, and not disclose, any fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient, or combination of fragrance ingredients or flavor ingredients that are not on a designated list.
5. Requires DEODC, commencing July 1, 2020, 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 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.

Background

1. 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.
2. 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 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for gathering health and safety and exposure data on pollutants and toxic substances that can affect public health. The U.S. 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 US.
   
3. Disclosing ingredients. Many employers can get information from product Safety Data Sheets (SDS). The California Division of Occupational Safety and Health's (CalOSHA) Hazard Communication Standard requires product manufacturers to provide salon owners with an SDS for each product used in the salon that may contain a hazardous chemical at 1% or more (or at 0.1% or more for chemicals that may cause cancer) or that could be released into the air at levels above limits set by CalOSHA or the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists. The SDS explain the health risks of the product and list precautions for worker protection. In general, the SDS must provide information about the hazards of chemicals in the product. The challenge is that employees may request SDSs from their employer, but they are difficult to obtain and do not necessarily have all the ingredients listed.

1. The California Green Chemistry regulation. The California legislature passed, and Governor Schwarzenegger signed the Green Chemistry law AB 1879 (Feuer, Chapter 559, Statues of 2008) and SB 509 (Simitian, Chapter 560, Statues of 2008) in 2008. The laws authorize and require DTSC to adopt regulations to identify and prioritize chemicals of concern in consumer products, and their possible alternatives, and to take regulatory action to best protect people and the environment. In response, DTSC promulgated the Safer Consumer Products Regulations. According to DTSC, the regulations provide for a continuous four-step, science-based, ongoing process to identify safer consumer product alternatives. DTSC describes the process as follows:
   1. Candidate Chemicals – Candidate chemicals have at least one quality that can cause harm to people or the environment (called a hazard trait). The regulations establish a list of candidate chemicals (approximately 1,200) based on the work of authoritative organizations, and specify a DTSC process to add to the list.
   2. Priority Products – Priority products are consumer products that contain one or more candidate chemicals and subsequently declared priority projects by DTSC’s Work Plan. An initial list of three product-chemical combinations was released on March 13, 2014, and on July 15 2016, a proposal to list Children’s Foam-Padded Sleeping Products containing the flame retardants TDCPP and TCEP as a priority product began. Before a priority product is finalized it goes through the rulemaking process, which may take up to one year. Sixty days after a priority product is finalized, responsible entities, e.g., manufacturers, will need to submit priority product notifications.
   3. Alternatives Analysis – The regulations require responsible entities (manufacturers, importers, assemblers, and retailers) to notify DTSC when their product is listed as a priority product. DTSC will post this information on its website. Priority product manufacturers (or other responsible entities) must perform an alternatives analysis on the product's candidate chemicals to determine how to limit exposure to, or reduce the level of, public health and/or environmental harm.
   4. Regulatory Responses – The regulations require DTSC to identify and implement regulatory responses that will protect public health and/or the environment, and maximize the use of acceptable and feasible alternatives of least concern. DTSC may require regulatory responses for a priority product if the manufacturer decides to keep it, or for an alternative product selected to replace it.
2. Proposition 65. In 1986, California voters approved a ballot initiative, the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, commonly referred to as Proposition 65, to address their concern that "hazardous chemicals pose a serious potential threat to their health and well-being, [and] that state government agencies have failed to provide them with adequate protection…" Proposition 65 requires the state to publish a list of chemicals known to cause cancer or birth defects or other reproductive harm. This list, which must be updated at least once a year, currently includes approximately 800 chemicals. The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) administers the Proposition 65 program, including evaluating all currently available scientific information on substances considered for placement on the Proposition 65 list.

Under Proposition 65, businesses in California are required to provide a "clear and reasonable" warning before knowingly and intentionally exposing anyone to a Proposition 65-listed chemical. Warnings can be made in many ways, including by labeling a consumer product, posting signs, distributing notices, or publishing notices in a newspaper. Once a chemical is listed, businesses have 12-months to comply with warning requirements.

Proposition 65 also prohibits companies that do business within California from knowingly discharging listed chemicals into sources of drinking water. Once a chemical is listed, businesses have 20-months to comply with the discharge prohibition.

Businesses with less than 10 employees and government agencies are exempt from Proposition 65’s warning requirements and its prohibition on discharges into drinking water sources. Businesses are also exempt from the warning requirement and discharge prohibition if the exposures they cause are so low as to create no significant risk of cancer or birth defects or other reproductive harm.

1. Disclosure for cleaning products. While existing law provides warnings to consumers under Proposition 65 and provides for a scientific evaluation process of chemicals in products under the Green Chemistry Initiative, prior to the passage of the Cleaning Product Right to Know Act of 2017 (SB 258, Lara, Chapter 830, Statutes of 2017), there was no uniform method of disclosing ingredients to consumers in state law or regulation. SB 258 addressed this deficiency by requiring manufacturers of cleaning products to disclose significantly more information about the ingredients and chemicals in their products, including fragrances. This ingredient disclosure now allows families to choose products that suit their needs; protects consumers diagnosed with asthma or allergies from unintentional exposure; and, assists poison control centers and physicians to properly diagnose and treat patients. Disclosure is particularly important to minimize acute and chronic health impacts, particularly for vulnerable populations such as children, pregnant women, cancer survivors, and individuals with health conditions and sensitivities.
   
   Additionally, passage of this law now provides valuable information to DTSC, which had not previously been privy to all of the ingredients in cleaning products, allows third parties to evaluate the toxicity of products for the safety of consumers, and provides key information to researchers and scientists studying causes of asthma, allergies, and even more serious conditions.

Comments

1. Purpose of 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 574 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.”

1. Right to know. Stakeholders opposed to the measure argue that the mere presence of an ingredient from a designated list does not mean that the product or fragrance is toxic. Further, they maintain that virtually any chemical can be toxic at some dose.
   
   The primary purpose of the California Safe Cosmetics Program (CSCP) is to collect information on hazardous and potentially hazardous ingredients in cosmetic products sold in the state and to make this information available to the public. The CSCP, the program this bill would expand, is intended to alert Californians to the presence of, not the threshold or concentration of, Proposition 65 chemicals in cosmetic products, chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm. The approach taken in SB 574 is consistent with the listing of products in the Safe Cosmetics Program.
2. Designated lists. Stakeholders opposed to the bill have also taken issue with some of the authoritative lists included in the bill. It is important to note that, with recent amendments taken in the Senate Health Committee, all of the authoritative lists included in SB 574 are identical to those included in the Cleaning Product Right to Know Act of 2017.
   
   However, since the bill now addresses allergen ingredients differently than flavor and fragrance ingredients, including one of the 23 remaining authoritative lists may not make sense. Per the Senate Health Committee, the bill’s disclosure requirements for fragrance allergens now only apply to allergen ingredients present at specified concentrations. The amendments further specify that those allergen ingredients “appear on the database in a unique manner that distinguishes them from other reportable ingredients and indicates that they are hazardous only to individuals who suffer from fragrance allergies.” The opponents make a reasonable argument that including a fragrance allergen list on the “designated list” for disclosure for fragrance and flavor ingredients could cause confusion and inadvertently cause double reporting under two different standards.
   
   To address this issue, the Committee may wish to amend the bill to delete the fragrance allergen list from the flavor and fragrance ingredients “designated lists” as follows:
   
   (W) Fragrance allergens included in Annex III of the EU Cosmetics Regulation No. 1223/2009, as required to be labeled by the EU Detergents Regulation No. 648/2004.
   
3. Compliance timelines. Stakeholders have also raised concerns about manufacturer compliance timelines for reporting when lists are updated with new chemicals and suggest following the language in the Cleaning Product Right to Know Act of 2017, SB 258 (Lara). SB 258 requires a manufacturer, within six months of a change to a designated trait list, to make revisions to the information disclosed pursuant to the Act.
   
   The Committee may wish to consider directing staff to work with the author and stakeholders on language that would address compliance timeline concerns, including providing manufacturers at least six months to comply after any of the designated lists or EU fragrance allergen list is updated.
   
4. Technical amendments needed. Several technical amendments are needed to conform with the recent Senate Health Committee amendments.

The Committee may wish to adopt the following technical amendments:

Page 7, lines 28 – 40:

(8) “Trade secret” means any fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient or combination of fragrance ingredients and flavor ingredients for which an exemption to ingredient public disclosure has been approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration pursuant to Section 720.8 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations, or for which the manufacturer or its supplier claims protection under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (Title 5 (commencing with Section 3426) of Part 1 of Division 4 of the Civil Code) and for which the manufacturer maintains justification in accordance with Section 108955. “Trade secret” does not include a fragrance ingredient, flavor ingredient, or a constituent of a fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient that is on a designated list, as defined in paragraph (2), or any fragrance allergen required to be disclosed under (b)(1)(B). 

Page 8, line 32 – 38:

To protect trade secrets, this section does not require a manufacturer to disclose the weight or amount of a fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient any ingredient that requires disclosure under subsection (1)(A) or (B) or to disclose how a fragrance or flavor cosmetic product or an intentionally added fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient is formulated. A manufacturer may protect, as a trade secret, and is not required to disclose, any ingredient, or combination of ingredients, that is not on a designated list or required to be disclosed under (b)(1)(A) or (B).

Page 9, lines 5 – 6:

(A) A list of all fragrance ingredients and flavor ingredients that are included on a designated list and all fragrance allergens required to be disclosed under (b)(1)(B).

Related/Prior Legislation

SB 258 (Lara, Chapter 830, Statutes of 2017) creates the Cleaning Product Right To Know Act of 2017 (Act), which requires manufacturers of cleaning products to disclose specified chemicals on a product label and on the manufacturers website.

AB 1575 (Kalra of 2017) and AB 2775 (Kalra, Chapter 393, Statutes of 2018) require 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 specific federal laws. AB 1575 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file.

AB 2125 (Chiu, Chapter 564, Statutes of 2016) requires the DTSC to publish guidelines for cities, counties, and cities and counties to voluntarily implement local healthy nail salon recognition programs.

AB 237 (Galgiani of 2011) and AB 595 (Dymally of 2007) would have required cosmetic product manufacturers that do not comply with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Voluntary Cosmetic Reporting Program (VCRP) to provide to DPH the same kind of information disclosed through the VCRP. AB 237 was held on the Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file, and AB 595 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file.

SB 1712 (Migden of 2008) would have required a manufacturer of lipstick sold in this state to provide evidence to DPH that the lipstick contains no more than an unavoidable trace of lead. SB 1712 died in the Assembly Health Committee.

AB 908 (Chu of 2005) would have prohibited a person or entity from manufacturing, selling, or distributing in commerce any cosmetic that contains any of two specified phthalates, and would have defined a cosmetic as misbranded if sold by an internet website where the list of ingredients in the cosmetic is not easily viewable before the purchase. AB 908 failed passage in the Assembly Health Committee.

AB 2012 (Chu of 2004) would have required, by January 1, 2006, the manufacturer of any cosmetic or personal care product subject to regulation by the FDA and manufactured, processed, or distributed in commerce in the state to notify California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) of any ingredient in its product that is a chemical identified as causing cancer or reproductive toxicity, as specified. AB 2012 failed passage in the Assembly Health Committee.

AB 2025 (Chu of 2004) would have required the manufacturer of any cosmetic or personal care product sold in California to submit to OEHHA a list of ingredients contained in the product, including the name of each ingredient for purposes of fragrance or flavoring and the name of each ingredient identified by the phrase “and other ingredients.” AB 2025 would have banned a cosmetic or personal care product that contains a chemical known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity unless OEHHA issued a safe use determination on that product. AB 2025 was not heard in the Assembly Health Committee at the request of the author.

DOUBLE REFERRAL: This measure was heard in Senate Health Committee on April 10, 2019 and passed out of committee with a vote of 5-2.

SOURCE:

Breast Cancer Prevention Partners

Black Women for Wellness

Women’s Voices for the Earth

SUPPORT:

100% Pure

Able Differently

Alaska Community Action on Toxics

Alliance of Nurses for a Healthy Environment (ANHE)

American Sustainable Business Council

As You Sow

Beautycounter

Breast Cancer Action

Breast Cancer Over Time

Breast Cancer Prevention Partners

CA Coalition for Clean Air

CA Environmental Justice Alliance

CA Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative

CA League of Conservation Voters

CA Pan-Ethnic Health Network

CA Product Stewardship Council

California Baby

California Communities Against Toxics

California Health Coalition Advocacy

California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative

California Labor Federation

Californians for a Healthy and Green Economy (CHANGE)

CalPIRG

Center for Oceanic Awareness, Research and Education (COARE)

Center on Reproductive Rights & Justice

Central California Asthma Collaborative

Citizens for Choice

City and County of San Francisco, Department of the Environment

Clean Water Action

Coming Clean

Communities for a Better Environment

Consumer Federation of California

Cȏte

Credo Beauty

Crunchi, LLC

DEMES Natural Products, Inc.

Earth Mama Organics

Ecology Center

EcoPlum

Eighty2degrees Design Studio

Elavo Mundi Solutions, LLC

Environmental Health Strategy Center

Environmental Working Group (EWG)

EO Products

Essential Skincare

Five Gyres Institute

Goddess Garden

Green Science Policy Institute

HAN Skin Care Cosmetics

Happy Pretty You! Reiki Salon & Spa

Healthcare Without Harm

inHarmony Naturals

Innersense Organic Beauty

Intelligent Nutrients

Juice Beauty

just the goods

Just Transition Alliance

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

Mindful Minerals

National Stewardship Action Council

Natural Resources Defense Council

Non toxic Revolution

Oregon Environmental Council

OSEA Malibu

OZNaturals

Physicians for Social Responsibility – Los Angeles

Physicians for Social Responsibility – SF Bay Area

Plastic Pollution Coalition

Regional Asthma Management & Prevention (RAMP)

Safer States

Savvy Women’s Alliance

Science and Environmental Health Network (SEHN)

Seventh Generation

Seventh Generation Advisors

Sierra Club California

SkinOwl

Southern California Coalition for Occupational Safety & Health

Suntegrity Skincare

Susanne’s Organics Salon

Sustain Natural

Tenoverten

UCLA Center for Study of Women

US PIRG

Women’s Voices for the Earth

Woodland Coalition for Green Schools

Zorah Biocosmetiques

1 Individual

OPPOSITION:

CalChamber of Commerce

California Manufacturers & Technology Association

Consumer Healthcare Products Association

Fragrance Creators Association

Personal Care Products Council

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:

According to Breast Cancer Prevention Partners, “BCPP has been focused for over a decade on securing more disclosure of the hidden fragrance and flavor ingredients in the personal care and beauty products that consumers and salon workers use every day. A federal labeling loophole coupled with an unregulated $84 billion cosmetic industry and a $70 billion global fragrance industry allows dozens – sometimes even hundreds – of chemicals to hide under the word “fragrance” on the product labels of beauty and personal care products. As a result, the public is exposed to a shocking number of unlabeled, unregulated toxic fragrance and flavor chemicals from common beauty and personal care products without their knowledge or consent.

The Toxic Fragrance and Flavor Chemicals Right to Know Act of 2019 (SB574) would address this lack of disclosure by requiring manufacturers selling cosmetic products in California to publicly report any hazardous ingredient used to make a fragrance or flavor, including those linked to cancer, reproductive or developmental harm, neurotoxicity, endocrine disruption, allergies, and asthma — as well as air and water contaminants, and persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic chemicals (PBTs). The reportable information would then be made publicly available through California’s Safe Cosmetics Database.

In our recent report, Right to Know: Exposing Toxic Fragrance Chemicals in Beauty, Personal Care and Cleaning Products — BCPP tested household products and revealed the presence of harmful fragrance chemicals linked to cancer, hormone disruption, reproductive harm, allergies, asthma and other respiratory problems that did not appear on the label. Shockingly, we found hat three out of four of the toxic chemicals detected in the personal care and beauty products we tested were fragrance chemicals. Flavor chemicals also pose potential harm to human health and the environment: California’s Proposition 65 list features 10 chemicals used to make flavors that are carcinogens or reproductive toxicants. A total of 35 flavors are on California’s Department of Toxic Substance Control’s Candidate Chemicals List due to their harmful properties. As an organization committed to preventing breast cancer by reducing exposures to chemicals linked to the disease, we believe that everyone has the right to know about the presence of hazardous chemicals in the personal care and beauty products they use at work, and in the products which they purchase for themselves and their families.

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION:

According to the Personal Care Products Council, CA Chamber of Commerce, and CA Manufacturers & Technology Association, “we’ve worked collaboratively to establish the existing regulations at both the federal and state levels to provide transparency and oversight of the health and safety of all cosmetics. Under federal law, personal care product companies disclose every individual ingredient on product labels, except for the proprietary ingredients that make up a fragrance which may be listed collectively as ‘fragrance’ in order to protect the intellectual property associated with those ingredients.

“In addition to the federal law, the personal care products industry faces further ingredient transparency in California under California’s Safe Cosmetics Act of 2005. SB 574 duplicates the work already being done under these existing California and U.S. laws and for the following additional reasons should be rejected:

1. It is trying to fix a problem that doesn’t exist. The belief that fine fragrances present a human health hazard is unfounded. There is a very robust, publicly available review undertaken by the RIFM panel of internationally recognized experts. Decades of consumer experience with our products demonstrate they are among the safest product category regulated by the FDA.
2. It threatens confidential business information. The bill, as written, does not provide adequate protection for cosmetic companies’ intellectual properties.
3. It relies on 27 “authoritative” lists, which are redundant, not grounded in sound science and could cause consumer confusion. More than 80 percent of the lists were already included in the Cleaning Product Right to Know Act of 2017 (SB 258), which includes Prop. 65.
4. SB 574 unfairly punishes an industry that has led the way on all intentionally-added ingredient disclosures.
   • Since the 1960s, all cosmetics have listed on the product label the name of each cosmetic ingredient “in descending order of predominance.” Thus, the ingredient present at the highest concentration is listed first, the one present at the next highest concentration is listed second, etc.
   • This label public disclosure along with use instructions is a model for effective communication with consumers.”

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Senator Allen, Chair

2019 - 2020 Regular

Bill No: SB 574

SUBJECT: Toxic Fragrance Chemicals Right to Know Act of 2019

DIGEST: This bill would require cosmetic manufactures, commencing July 1, 2020, to disclose to the Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control information related to cosmetic products that contain a fragrance or flavor ingredient that is included on a “designated list,” as defined, and a list of fragrance allergens that are present in specified concentrations. Also requires the Division to post on its database a list of those fragrance, flavor, and allergen ingredients in the cosmetic product, as specified.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Enacts the Safe Cosmetics Act, which requires cosmetic manufacturers to provide the Department of Public Health (DPH) 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.
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.
3. Requires DPH to develop and make operational a consumer-friendly, public website 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.

Under Proposition 65:

4) Prohibits a person, in the course of doing business, from knowingly discharging or releasing a chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity into water or onto or into land where such chemical passes or probably will pass into any source of drinking water.

5) Prohibits a person, in the course of doing business, from knowingly and intentionally exposing any individual to a chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity without first giving clear and reasonable warning to such individual.

6) Requires the Governor to publish a list of chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity and to annually revise the list.

Under the California Green Chemistry statutes:

7) Requires the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), on or before January 1, 2011, to adopt regulations to establish a process to identify and prioritize those chemicals or chemical ingredients in consumer products that may be considered a chemical of concern. These chemicals of concern must be taken from a list of candidate chemicals, which unifies a number of hazardous chemical lists from other authoritative sources.

8) Requires DTSC, on or before January 1, 2011, to adopt regulations to evaluate chemicals of concern and their potential alternatives in consumer products and to determine how best to limit exposure or to reduce the level of hazard posed by the chemical of concern in the product.

9) Authorizes DTSC to take specified regulatory actions to limit exposure or to reduce the level of hazard posed by a chemical of concern.

10) Creates the Uniform Trades Secrets Act which establishes a legal framework for the protection of trade secrets for companies in California.

This bill:

1. Makes findings and declarations.
   
2. Requires cosmetic manufactures, commencing July 1, 2020, to disclose to DEODC:
   1. A list of each fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient that is included on a designated list, as defined;
   2. A list of each fragrance allergen that is present in the cosmetic product in specified concentrations. Specifies that those ingredients shall appear on the database in a unique manner that distinguishes them 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 fragrance ingredient and flavor ingredient; and,
   5. The corresponding Universal Product Code (UPC) for the cosmetic product.
3. Defines “designated list” as any of the 23 authoritative lists identified in the Act, including any subsequent revisions to those lists when adopted by the authoritative body.
4. Specifies, in order to protect trade secrets, that this bill does not require a manufacturer to disclose the weight or amount of a fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient, or to disclose how a fragrance or flavor is formulated. Permits manufacturers to protect, and not disclose, any fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient, or combination of fragrance ingredients or flavor ingredients that are not on a designated list.
5. Requires DEODC, commencing July 1, 2020, 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 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.

Background

1. 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.
2. 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 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for gathering health and safety and exposure data on pollutants and toxic substances that can affect public health. The U.S. 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 US.
   
3. Disclosing ingredients. Many employers can get information from product Safety Data Sheets (SDS). The California Division of Occupational Safety and Health's (CalOSHA) Hazard Communication Standard requires product manufacturers to provide salon owners with an SDS for each product used in the salon that may contain a hazardous chemical at 1% or more (or at 0.1% or more for chemicals that may cause cancer) or that could be released into the air at levels above limits set by CalOSHA or the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists. The SDS explain the health risks of the product and list precautions for worker protection. In general, the SDS must provide information about the hazards of chemicals in the product. The challenge is that employees may request SDSs from their employer, but they are difficult to obtain and do not necessarily have all the ingredients listed.

1. The California Green Chemistry regulation. The California legislature passed, and Governor Schwarzenegger signed the Green Chemistry law AB 1879 (Feuer, Chapter 559, Statues of 2008) and SB 509 (Simitian, Chapter 560, Statues of 2008) in 2008. The laws authorize and require DTSC to adopt regulations to identify and prioritize chemicals of concern in consumer products, and their possible alternatives, and to take regulatory action to best protect people and the environment. In response, DTSC promulgated the Safer Consumer Products Regulations. According to DTSC, the regulations provide for a continuous four-step, science-based, ongoing process to identify safer consumer product alternatives. DTSC describes the process as follows:
   1. Candidate Chemicals – Candidate chemicals have at least one quality that can cause harm to people or the environment (called a hazard trait). The regulations establish a list of candidate chemicals (approximately 1,200) based on the work of authoritative organizations, and specify a DTSC process to add to the list.
   2. Priority Products – Priority products are consumer products that contain one or more candidate chemicals and subsequently declared priority projects by DTSC’s Work Plan. An initial list of three product-chemical combinations was released on March 13, 2014, and on July 15 2016, a proposal to list Children’s Foam-Padded Sleeping Products containing the flame retardants TDCPP and TCEP as a priority product began. Before a priority product is finalized it goes through the rulemaking process, which may take up to one year. Sixty days after a priority product is finalized, responsible entities, e.g., manufacturers, will need to submit priority product notifications.
   3. Alternatives Analysis – The regulations require responsible entities (manufacturers, importers, assemblers, and retailers) to notify DTSC when their product is listed as a priority product. DTSC will post this information on its website. Priority product manufacturers (or other responsible entities) must perform an alternatives analysis on the product's candidate chemicals to determine how to limit exposure to, or reduce the level of, public health and/or environmental harm.
   4. Regulatory Responses – The regulations require DTSC to identify and implement regulatory responses that will protect public health and/or the environment, and maximize the use of acceptable and feasible alternatives of least concern. DTSC may require regulatory responses for a priority product if the manufacturer decides to keep it, or for an alternative product selected to replace it.
2. Proposition 65. In 1986, California voters approved a ballot initiative, the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, commonly referred to as Proposition 65, to address their concern that "hazardous chemicals pose a serious potential threat to their health and well-being, [and] that state government agencies have failed to provide them with adequate protection…" Proposition 65 requires the state to publish a list of chemicals known to cause cancer or birth defects or other reproductive harm. This list, which must be updated at least once a year, currently includes approximately 800 chemicals. The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) administers the Proposition 65 program, including evaluating all currently available scientific information on substances considered for placement on the Proposition 65 list.

Under Proposition 65, businesses in California are required to provide a "clear and reasonable" warning before knowingly and intentionally exposing anyone to a Proposition 65-listed chemical. Warnings can be made in many ways, including by labeling a consumer product, posting signs, distributing notices, or publishing notices in a newspaper. Once a chemical is listed, businesses have 12-months to comply with warning requirements.

Proposition 65 also prohibits companies that do business within California from knowingly discharging listed chemicals into sources of drinking water. Once a chemical is listed, businesses have 20-months to comply with the discharge prohibition.

Businesses with less than 10 employees and government agencies are exempt from Proposition 65’s warning requirements and its prohibition on discharges into drinking water sources. Businesses are also exempt from the warning requirement and discharge prohibition if the exposures they cause are so low as to create no significant risk of cancer or birth defects or other reproductive harm.

1. Disclosure for cleaning products. While existing law provides warnings to consumers under Proposition 65 and provides for a scientific evaluation process of chemicals in products under the Green Chemistry Initiative, prior to the passage of the Cleaning Product Right to Know Act of 2017 (SB 258, Lara, Chapter 830, Statutes of 2017), there was no uniform method of disclosing ingredients to consumers in state law or regulation. SB 258 addressed this deficiency by requiring manufacturers of cleaning products to disclose significantly more information about the ingredients and chemicals in their products, including fragrances. This ingredient disclosure now allows families to choose products that suit their needs; protects consumers diagnosed with asthma or allergies from unintentional exposure; and, assists poison control centers and physicians to properly diagnose and treat patients. Disclosure is particularly important to minimize acute and chronic health impacts, particularly for vulnerable populations such as children, pregnant women, cancer survivors, and individuals with health conditions and sensitivities.
   
   Additionally, passage of this law now provides valuable information to DTSC, which had not previously been privy to all of the ingredients in cleaning products, allows third parties to evaluate the toxicity of products for the safety of consumers, and provides key information to researchers and scientists studying causes of asthma, allergies, and even more serious conditions.

Comments

1. Purpose of 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 574 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.”

1. Right to know. Stakeholders opposed to the measure argue that the mere presence of an ingredient from a designated list does not mean that the product or fragrance is toxic. Further, they maintain that virtually any chemical can be toxic at some dose.
   
   The primary purpose of the California Safe Cosmetics Program (CSCP) is to collect information on hazardous and potentially hazardous ingredients in cosmetic products sold in the state and to make this information available to the public. The CSCP, the program this bill would expand, is intended to alert Californians to the presence of, not the threshold or concentration of, Proposition 65 chemicals in cosmetic products, chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm. The approach taken in SB 574 is consistent with the listing of products in the Safe Cosmetics Program.
2. Designated lists. Stakeholders opposed to the bill have also taken issue with some of the authoritative lists included in the bill. It is important to note that, with recent amendments taken in the Senate Health Committee, all of the authoritative lists included in SB 574 are identical to those included in the Cleaning Product Right to Know Act of 2017.
   
   However, since the bill now addresses allergen ingredients differently than flavor and fragrance ingredients, including one of the 23 remaining authoritative lists may not make sense. Per the Senate Health Committee, the bill’s disclosure requirements for fragrance allergens now only apply to allergen ingredients present at specified concentrations. The amendments further specify that those allergen ingredients “appear on the database in a unique manner that distinguishes them from other reportable ingredients and indicates that they are hazardous only to individuals who suffer from fragrance allergies.” The opponents make a reasonable argument that including a fragrance allergen list on the “designated list” for disclosure for fragrance and flavor ingredients could cause confusion and inadvertently cause double reporting under two different standards.
   
   To address this issue, the Committee may wish to amend the bill to delete the fragrance allergen list from the flavor and fragrance ingredients “designated lists” as follows:
   
   (W) Fragrance allergens included in Annex III of the EU Cosmetics Regulation No. 1223/2009, as required to be labeled by the EU Detergents Regulation No. 648/2004.
   
3. Compliance timelines. Stakeholders have also raised concerns about manufacturer compliance timelines for reporting when lists are updated with new chemicals and suggest following the language in the Cleaning Product Right to Know Act of 2017, SB 258 (Lara). SB 258 requires a manufacturer, within six months of a change to a designated trait list, to make revisions to the information disclosed pursuant to the Act.
   
   The Committee may wish to consider directing staff to work with the author and stakeholders on language that would address compliance timeline concerns, including providing manufacturers at least six months to comply after any of the designated lists or EU fragrance allergen list is updated.
   
4. Technical amendments needed. Several technical amendments are needed to conform with the recent Senate Health Committee amendments.

The Committee may wish to adopt the following technical amendments:

Page 7, lines 28 – 40:

(8) “Trade secret” means any fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient or combination of fragrance ingredients and flavor ingredients for which an exemption to ingredient public disclosure has been approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration pursuant to Section 720.8 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations, or for which the manufacturer or its supplier claims protection under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (Title 5 (commencing with Section 3426) of Part 1 of Division 4 of the Civil Code) and for which the manufacturer maintains justification in accordance with Section 108955. “Trade secret” does not include a fragrance ingredient, flavor ingredient, or a constituent of a fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient that is on a designated list, as defined in paragraph (2), or any fragrance allergen required to be disclosed under (b)(1)(B). 

Page 8, line 32 – 38:

To protect trade secrets, this section does not require a manufacturer to disclose the weight or amount of a fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient any ingredient that requires disclosure under subsection (1)(A) or (B) or to disclose how a fragrance or flavor cosmetic product or an intentionally added fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient is formulated. A manufacturer may protect, as a trade secret, and is not required to disclose, any ingredient, or combination of ingredients, that is not on a designated list or required to be disclosed under (b)(1)(A) or (B).

Page 9, lines 5 – 6:

(A) A list of all fragrance ingredients and flavor ingredients that are included on a designated list and all fragrance allergens required to be disclosed under (b)(1)(B).

Related/Prior Legislation

SB 258 (Lara, Chapter 830, Statutes of 2017) creates the Cleaning Product Right To Know Act of 2017 (Act), which requires manufacturers of cleaning products to disclose specified chemicals on a product label and on the manufacturers website.

AB 1575 (Kalra of 2017) and AB 2775 (Kalra, Chapter 393, Statutes of 2018) require 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 specific federal laws. AB 1575 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file.

AB 2125 (Chiu, Chapter 564, Statutes of 2016) requires the DTSC to publish guidelines for cities, counties, and cities and counties to voluntarily implement local healthy nail salon recognition programs.

AB 237 (Galgiani of 2011) and AB 595 (Dymally of 2007) would have required cosmetic product manufacturers that do not comply with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Voluntary Cosmetic Reporting Program (VCRP) to provide to DPH the same kind of information disclosed through the VCRP. AB 237 was held on the Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file, and AB 595 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file.

SB 1712 (Migden of 2008) would have required a manufacturer of lipstick sold in this state to provide evidence to DPH that the lipstick contains no more than an unavoidable trace of lead. SB 1712 died in the Assembly Health Committee.

AB 908 (Chu of 2005) would have prohibited a person or entity from manufacturing, selling, or distributing in commerce any cosmetic that contains any of two specified phthalates, and would have defined a cosmetic as misbranded if sold by an internet website where the list of ingredients in the cosmetic is not easily viewable before the purchase. AB 908 failed passage in the Assembly Health Committee.

AB 2012 (Chu of 2004) would have required, by January 1, 2006, the manufacturer of any cosmetic or personal care product subject to regulation by the FDA and manufactured, processed, or distributed in commerce in the state to notify California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) of any ingredient in its product that is a chemical identified as causing cancer or reproductive toxicity, as specified. AB 2012 failed passage in the Assembly Health Committee.

AB 2025 (Chu of 2004) would have required the manufacturer of any cosmetic or personal care product sold in California to submit to OEHHA a list of ingredients contained in the product, including the name of each ingredient for purposes of fragrance or flavoring and the name of each ingredient identified by the phrase “and other ingredients.” AB 2025 would have banned a cosmetic or personal care product that contains a chemical known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity unless OEHHA issued a safe use determination on that product. AB 2025 was not heard in the Assembly Health Committee at the request of the author.

DOUBLE REFERRAL: This measure was heard in Senate Health Committee on April 10, 2019 and passed out of committee with a vote of 5-2.

SOURCE:

Breast Cancer Prevention Partners

Black Women for Wellness

Women’s Voices for the Earth

SUPPORT:

100% Pure

Able Differently

Alaska Community Action on Toxics

Alliance of Nurses for a Healthy Environment (ANHE)

American Sustainable Business Council

As You Sow

Beautycounter

Breast Cancer Action

Breast Cancer Over Time

Breast Cancer Prevention Partners

CA Coalition for Clean Air

CA Environmental Justice Alliance

CA Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative

CA League of Conservation Voters

CA Pan-Ethnic Health Network

CA Product Stewardship Council

California Baby

California Communities Against Toxics

California Health Coalition Advocacy

California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative

California Labor Federation

Californians for a Healthy and Green Economy (CHANGE)

CalPIRG

Center for Oceanic Awareness, Research and Education (COARE)

Center on Reproductive Rights & Justice

Central California Asthma Collaborative

Citizens for Choice

City and County of San Francisco, Department of the Environment

Clean Water Action

Coming Clean

Communities for a Better Environment

Consumer Federation of California

Cȏte

Credo Beauty

Crunchi, LLC

DEMES Natural Products, Inc.

Earth Mama Organics

Ecology Center

EcoPlum

Eighty2degrees Design Studio

Elavo Mundi Solutions, LLC

Environmental Health Strategy Center

Environmental Working Group (EWG)

EO Products

Essential Skincare

Five Gyres Institute

Goddess Garden

Green Science Policy Institute

HAN Skin Care Cosmetics

Happy Pretty You! Reiki Salon & Spa

Healthcare Without Harm

inHarmony Naturals

Innersense Organic Beauty

Intelligent Nutrients

Juice Beauty

just the goods

Just Transition Alliance

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

Mindful Minerals

National Stewardship Action Council

Natural Resources Defense Council

Non toxic Revolution

Oregon Environmental Council

OSEA Malibu

OZNaturals

Physicians for Social Responsibility – Los Angeles

Physicians for Social Responsibility – SF Bay Area

Plastic Pollution Coalition

Regional Asthma Management & Prevention (RAMP)

Safer States

Savvy Women’s Alliance

Science and Environmental Health Network (SEHN)

Seventh Generation

Seventh Generation Advisors

Sierra Club California

SkinOwl

Southern California Coalition for Occupational Safety & Health

Suntegrity Skincare

Susanne’s Organics Salon

Sustain Natural

Tenoverten

UCLA Center for Study of Women

US PIRG

Women’s Voices for the Earth

Woodland Coalition for Green Schools

Zorah Biocosmetiques

1 Individual

OPPOSITION:

CalChamber of Commerce

California Manufacturers & Technology Association

Consumer Healthcare Products Association

Personal Care Products Council

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:

According to Breast Cancer Prevention Partners, “BCPP has been focused for over a decade on securing more disclosure of the hidden fragrance and flavor ingredients in the personal care and beauty products that consumers and salon workers use every day. A federal labeling loophole coupled with an unregulated $84 billion cosmetic industry and a $70 billion global fragrance industry allows dozens – sometimes even hundreds – of chemicals to hide under the word “fragrance” on the product labels of beauty and personal care products. As a result, the public is exposed to a shocking number of unlabeled, unregulated toxic fragrance and flavor chemicals from common beauty and personal care products without their knowledge or consent.

The Toxic Fragrance and Flavor Chemicals Right to Know Act of 2019 (SB574) would address this lack of disclosure by requiring manufacturers selling cosmetic products in California to publicly report any hazardous ingredient used to make a fragrance or flavor, including those linked to cancer, reproductive or developmental harm, neurotoxicity, endocrine disruption, allergies, and asthma — as well as air and water contaminants, and persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic chemicals (PBTs). The reportable information would then be made publicly available through California’s Safe Cosmetics Database.

In our recent report, Right to Know: Exposing Toxic Fragrance Chemicals in Beauty, Personal Care and Cleaning Products — BCPP tested household products and revealed the presence of harmful fragrance chemicals linked to cancer, hormone disruption, reproductive harm, allergies, asthma and other respiratory problems that did not appear on the label. Shockingly, we found hat three out of four of the toxic chemicals detected in the personal care and beauty products we tested were fragrance chemicals. Flavor chemicals also pose potential harm to human health and the environment: California’s Proposition 65 list features 10 chemicals used to make flavors that are carcinogens or reproductive toxicants. A total of 35 flavors are on California’s Department of Toxic Substance Control’s Candidate Chemicals List due to their harmful properties. As an organization committed to preventing breast cancer by reducing exposures to chemicals linked to the disease, we believe that everyone has the right to know about the presence of hazardous chemicals in the personal care and beauty products they use at work, and in the products which they purchase for themselves and their families.

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION:

According to the Personal Care Products Council, CA Chamber of Commerce, and CA Manufacturers & Technology Association, “we’ve worked collaboratively to establish the existing regulations at both the federal and state levels to provide transparency and oversight of the health and safety of all cosmetics. Under federal law, personal care product companies disclose every individual ingredient on product labels, except for the proprietary ingredients that make up a fragrance which may be listed collectively as ‘fragrance’ in order to protect the intellectual property associated with those ingredients.

“In addition to the federal law, the personal care products industry faces further ingredient transparency in California under California’s Safe Cosmetics Act of 2005. SB 574 duplicates the work already being done under these existing California and U.S. laws and for the following additional reasons should be rejected:

1. It is trying to fix a problem that doesn’t exist. The belief that fine fragrances present a human health hazard is unfounded. There is a very robust, publicly available review undertaken by the RIFM panel of internationally recognized experts. Decades of consumer experience with our products demonstrate they are among the safest product category regulated by the FDA.
2. It threatens confidential business information. The bill, as written, does not provide adequate protection for cosmetic companies’ intellectual properties.
3. It relies on 27 “authoritative” lists, which are redundant, not grounded in sound science and could cause consumer confusion. More than 80 percent of the lists were already included in the Cleaning Product Right to Know Act of 2017 (SB 258), which includes Prop. 65.
4. SB 574 unfairly punishes an industry that has led the way on all intentionally-added ingredient disclosures.
   • Since the 1960s, all cosmetics have listed on the product label the name of each cosmetic ingredient “in descending order of predominance.” Thus, the ingredient present at the highest concentration is listed first, the one present at the next highest concentration is listed second, etc.
   • This label public disclosure along with use instructions is a model for effective communication with consumers.”

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

Senator Dr. Richard Pan, Chair

BILL NO: SB 574

SUBJECT: Toxic Fragrance Chemicals Right to Know Act of 2019

SUMMARY:

• 1. Requires cosmetic manufactures, commencing July 1, 2020, 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 to include 27 lists, and a list of each fragrance ingredient and flavor ingredient in the cosmetic product.

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 website 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.

This bill:

1. Requires cosmetic manufactures, commencing July 1, 2020, to disclose to DEODC:
   1. 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;
   2. Whether the cosmetic product is intended for professional use or retail cosmetic use;
   3. The Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) number for each fragrance ingredient and flavor ingredient; and,
   4. The corresponding Universal Product Code (UPC) 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 European Union (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 (PBT) 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 Environmental Protection Agency 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 (OEHHA);
   21. Chemicals identified as priority chemicals by the California Environmental Contaminant Biomonitoring Program;
   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;
   23. Chemicals that are identified on the CDC’s Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals and Updated Tables Volume 1 and Volume 2;
   24. Annex III of the EU Cosmetics Regulation, as required to be labeled by the EU Detergents Regulation, as specified;
   25. Chemicals designated as asthmagens by the Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics (AOEC);
   26. Chemicals included in the EU candidate list of Substances of Very High Concern for endocrine disrupting properties; and,
   27. Chemicals included in the Danish Environmental Protection Agency List of Endocrine Disrupting Compounds.
3. Prohibits this bill, in order to protect trade secrets, from requiring a manufacturer to disclose the weight or amount of a fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient, or to disclose how a fragrance or flavor is formulated. Permits manufacturers to protect, and not disclose, any fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient, or combination of fragrance ingredients or flavor ingredients that are not on a designated list.
4. Requires DEODC, commencing July 1, 2020, 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 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.

FISCAL EFFECT:

This bill has not been analyzed by a fiscal committee.

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 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for gathering health and safety and exposure data on pollutants and toxic substances that can affect public health. The U.S. 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 U.S..
4. Double referral. This bill has been double referred if it passes out of this Committee, it will be referred to the Environmental Quality Committee.
5. Prior legislation. AB 1575 (Kalra of 2017) and AB 2775 (Kalra, Chapter 393, Statutes of 2018) require 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 specific federal laws. AB 1575 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file.

AB 2125 (Chiu, Chapter 564, Statutes of 2016) requires the Department of Toxic Substances Control to publish guidelines for cities, counties, and cities and counties to voluntarily implement local healthy nail salon recognition programs.

SB 977 (Yee of 2012) would have raised fines for mislabeling of nail polishes from $1,000 to $2,000. Governor Brown vetoed this bill stating that it did not make sense to focus on one product.

AB 237 (Galgiani of 2011) and AB 595 (Dymally of 2007) would have required cosmetic product manufacturers that do not comply with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Voluntary Cosmetic Reporting Program (VCRP) to provide to DPH the same kind of information disclosed through the VCRP. AB 237 was held on the Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file, and AB 595 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file.

SB 1712 (Migden of 2008) would have required a manufacturer of lipstick sold in this state to provide evidence to DPH that the lipstick contains no more than an unavoidable trace of lead. SB 1712 died in the Assembly Health Committee.

AB 2689 (Tran of 2007) would have established the Vietnamese Nail Worker Information Act, requiring manufacturers and certain other persons that sell or use professional use-only nail care products to prepare, translate and provide material safety data sheets in the Vietnamese language to purchasers of the products as well as licensed professional nail care employees upon request. AB 2689 was held on the Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file.

SB 484 (Migden, Chapter 729, Statutes of 2005) establishes the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2005 and requires cosmetics sold within the state that contain ingredients known or suspected to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm.

AB 908 (Chu of 2005) would have prohibited a person or entity from manufacturing, selling, or distributing in commerce any cosmetic that contains any of two specified phthalates, and would have defined a cosmetic as misbranded if sold by an internet website where the list of ingredients in the cosmetic is not easily viewable before the purchase. AB 908 failed passage in the Assembly Health Committee.

AB 2012 (Chu of 2004) would have required, by January 1, 2006, the manufacturer of any cosmetic or personal care product subject to regulation by the FDA and manufactured, processed, or distributed in commerce in the state to notify California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) of any ingredient in its product that is a chemical identified as causing cancer or reproductive toxicity, as specified.  AB 2012 failed passage in the Assembly Health Committee.

AB 2025 (Chu of 2004) would have required the manufacturer of any cosmetic or personal care product sold in California to submit to OEHHA the a list of ingredients contained in the product, including the name of each ingredient for purposes of fragrance or flavoring and the name of each ingredient identified by the phrase “and other ingredients.” AB 2025 would have banned a cosmetic or personal care product that contains a chemical known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity unless OEHHA issued a safe use determination on that product. AB 2025 was not heard in the Assembly Health Committee at the request of the author.

1. Support. A number of supporters write that this bill is an important consumer and worker right to know bill requiring companies selling beauty or personal care products in California to report any fragrance or flavor ingredient to the California Safe Cosmetics Program that appears on one or more of the 27 authoritative hazard lists referenced in the bill. The Safe Cosmetics Program will publish this information on its public database. For the first time ever, this disclosure will give the public and professional salon workers the right to information they need to avoid harmful fragrance and flavor ingredients in the cosmetic products they bring into their homes -- or workplaces -- every day. Currently, there are no federal or state laws that require the disclosure of fragrance or flavor ingredients in retail cosmetics or professional salon products. With this bill, California has the opportunity to build on both the precedent-setting right to know legislation enacted last year requiring disclosure of ingredients in professional salon products and the Cleaning Product Right to Know Act of 2017. Supporters further write that the lack of disclosure of fragrance and flavor ingredients is concerning because of the numerous health risks associated with many of these chemicals. There are nearly 4,000 fragrance ingredients declared by the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) to currently be in use in fragrance and over 3,000 flavor ingredients designated by the International Organization of the Flavor Industry. These lists include carcinogens, reproductive toxicants, neurotoxicants, allergens and other chemicals of concern. Supporters state that the use of fragrance in consumer products is pervasive and almost impossible to avoid. Fragrance chemicals are found in more than 95% of shampoos, conditioners, hair styling products, antiperspirants and shaving products as well as fine fragrances, body spray and lotions. The problem of fragrance is not confined to consumers. Workers also face negative health impacts as a result of fragrance exposure and have a right to know what fragrance ingredients they are being exposed to so they can also better protect their health. Professional salon workers are disproportionately exposed to fragrance in the workplace. Hairdressers and beauticians have a 47-fold higher risk of fragrance skin allergies than people in other occupations. The California Work-Related Asthma Prevention Program has documented that use of fragranced products in the workplace is associated with work-related-asthma.
2. Opposition. A coalition of opponents, including the CalChamber of Commerce, California Manufacturers & Technology Association, and the Personal Care Products Council write that this bill duplicates the work already being done under existing California and U.S. laws and for the following additional reasons should be rejected:
   1. It is trying to fix a problem that does not exist. The belief that fine fragrances present a human health hazard is unfounded. There is a very robust, publicly available review undertaken by the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM) panel of internationally recognized experts. Decades of consumer experience with our products demonstrate they are among the safest product category regulated by the FDA;
   2. It threatens confidential business information. The bill, as written, does not provide adequate protection for cosmetic companies’ intellectual properties;
   3. It relies on 27 “authoritative” lists, which are redundant, not grounded in sound science and could cause consumer confusion. More than 80% of the lists were already included in the Cleaning Product Right to Know Act of 2017, and the additions in this bill are scientifically, highly problematic;
   4. This bill unfairly punishes an industry that has led the way on all intentionally-added ingredient disclosures. Since the 1960s, all cosmetics have listed on the product label the name of each cosmetic ingredient “in descending order of predominance.” Thus, the ingredient present at the highest concentration is listed first, the one present at the next highest concentration is listed second, etc. This public disclosure on the table along with use instructions is a model for effective communication with consumers; and,
   5. This bill expands a reporting program that is outdated and provides consumers with no direct benefit. More than 83% of the reports to the program are for one FDA-approved color additive that is also an FDA-approved colorant in food (i.e., titanium dioxide).
3. Oppose unless amended. The Fragrance Creators Association request the following amendments:
4. Rename the title that does not unfairly portray the industry;
5. Changes to intent language related to informed purchasing decisions;
6. Include the terms “intentionally added” in the definitions of fragrance and flavor ingredient;
7. Delete the following language to avoid confusion and over reporting: 111792.6 (b)(1)(A) - Cosmetic products that contain a fragrance ingredient or flavor ingredient that is included on a designated list, including fragrance allergens., and a list of each fragrance ingredient and flavor ingredient in the cosmetic product.;
8. Remove the specified lists from the bill;
9. Clarifications that thresholds for certain chemicals be used for reporting; and,
10. Include preemption language so that this bill will be the only cosmetic ingredient disclosure law in California.

SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:

Support: Black Women for Wellness (co-sponsor)

Breast Cancer Prevention Partners (co-sponsor)

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

100% Pure

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

Breast Cancer Action

CA Coalition for Clean Air

CA Environmental Justice Alliance

CA Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative

CA League of Conservation Voters

CA Pan-Ethnic Health Network

CA Product Stewardship Council

California Baby

California Communities Against Toxics

California Health Coalition Advocacy

California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative

California Labor Federation

Californians for a Healthy and Green Economy

CalPIRG

Center for Oceanic Awareness, Research and Education

Central California Asthma Collaborative

Citizens for Choice

City and County of San Francisco, Department of the Environment

Clean Water Action

Coming Clean

Communities for a Better Environment

Consumer Federation of California

Côte

Courage Campaign

Credo Beauty

Crunchi, LLC

DEMES Natural Products Inc.

Earth Mama Organic

Ecology Center

EcoPlum

Educate. Advocate.

Eighty2degrees Design Studio

Elavo Mundi Solutions, LLC

Empower Family California

Environmental Health Strategy Center

EO Products

Essential Skincare

Five Gyres Institute

Goddess Garden

HAN Skin Care Cosmetics

Happy Pretty You! Reiki Salon & Spa

Healthcare Without Harm

inHarmony Naturals

Innersense Organic Beauty

Intelligent Nutrients

Juice Beauty

just the goods

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 Stewardship Action Council

Natural Resources Defense Council

Oregon Environmental Council

OSEA Malibu

OZNaturals

Physicians for Social Responsibility – Los Angeles

Physicians for Social Responsibility – SF Bay Area

Plastic Pollution Coalition

Regional Asthma Management & Prevention

Safer States

Savvy Women’s Alliance

Science and Environmental Health Network

Seventh Generation

Seventh Generation Advisors

Sierra Club California

SkinOwl

Sustain Natural

Suzanne’s Organics Salon

tenoverten

The Praxis Project

The Women’s Foundation of California

Two Individuals

UCLA Center for Study of Women

US PIRG

Woodland Coalition for Green Schools

Zorah Biocosmetiques

Oppose: CalChamber of Commerce

California Manufacturers & Technology Association

Fragrance Creators Association (oppose unless amended)

Personal Care Products Council

-- END --