BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                  SB 746
                                                                  Page  1

          SENATE THIRD READING
          SB 746 (Lieu)
          As Amended  August 30, 2011
          Majority vote 

           SENATE VOTE  :25-9  
           
           JUDICIARY           6-2         Business & ProFESSIONS           
           6-1                
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Feuer, Atkins, Dickinson, |Ayes:|Hayashi, Allen, Butler,   |
          |     |Huber, Monning,           |     |Eng, Hill, Ma             |
          |     |Wieckowski                |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |Nays:|Beth Gaines, Jones        |Nays:|Smyth                     |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           APPROPRIATIONS      11-5                                        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Fuentes, Blumenfield,     |     |                          |
          |     |Bradford, Charles         |     |                          |
          |     |Calderon, Campos, Davis,  |     |                          |
          |     |Hall, Hill, Lara,         |     |                          |
          |     |Mitchell, Solorio         |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |Nays:|Donnelly, Gatto, Nielsen, |     |                          |
          |     |Norby, Wagner             |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           SUMMARY  :  Prohibits minors from using ultraviolet tanning 
          devices.  

           EXISTING LAW  requires customers between the ages of 14 and 18 to 
          give the tanning facility a written consent from their parent or 
          legal guardian stating that the parent or guardian had read and 
          understands the warnings and consents to the minor's use of the 
          tanning facility.  

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations 
          Committee, potential minor costs to local enforcement agencies, 
          offset to some extent by penalty revenues.  (A first violation 








                                                                  SB 746
                                                                  Page  2

          of the Act constitutes an infraction, and subsequent violations 
          are misdemeanors.  Violations are also subject to civil 
          penalties of $2,500 per day.)
           
          COMMENTS  :  This bill seeks to prevent persons under the age of 
          18 from being exposed to potentially dangerous ultraviolet (UV) 
          radiation by tanning in UV tanning devices.  The author states 
          in support:  

               The connection between skin cancer and UV tanning is no 
               longer anecdotal.  Children who use indoor tanning 
               methods can be exposed up to 12 times the normal amount 
               of ultraviolet radiation per year, which makes them 74% 
               more likely to be a victim of melanoma.  Melanoma is 
               the most deadly type of skin cancer and is one of the 
               most common cancers diagnosed among young adults.  It 
               is the leading cause of cancer death in women ages 25 - 
               30 and is second only to breast cancer in women ages 30 
               -34.  As a result, the World Health Organization 
               elevated tanning beds to a level 1 carcinogen in 2009, 
               alongside plutonium, mustard gas, and cigarettes.  The 
               United States Department of Health and Human Services 
               and the United States Food and Drug Administration have 
               also added these UV emitting tanning beds to the their 
               list of most dangerous forms of cancer-causing 
               substances in humans.  And in February, the American 
               Academy of Pediatrics joined the world-wide chorus that 
               governments need to ban minors' access to UV tanning 
               beds.  As of today, several countries have banned 
               tanning for minors, including sun-rich Brazil, where 
               they have passed a complete ban on tanning, regardless 
               of age.  Several states and local governments have 
               tougher bans than California.  Surprisingly, Texas has 
               the most stringent.  SB 746 is a simple solution to a 
               dangerous problem - it will prevent minors from 
               accessing dangerous ultraviolet tanning devices.  The 
               health risk is just too great for children.

          According to the American Academy of Dermatology prolonged, 
          unprotected exposure to ultraviolet radiation can be as 
          carcinogenic as cigarette smoke.  In 2011, the American Academy 
          of Pediatrics noted that there has been a rapid increase in the 
          rate of skin cancer occurrences in the United States over the 
          past 30 years.  Skin cancer rates are growing fastest, 3% per 
          year, in young women ages 15 to 39 (the group most likely to 








                                                                  SB 746
                                                                  Page  3

          tan).  Alarmingly, skin cancer has overtaken all other forms of 
          cancer to become the most common cancer in the United States 
          with one in four Americans expected to suffer from some form of 
          skin cancer in their lifetime.  The California Nurses 
          Association notes that "Melanoma is the leading cause of cancer 
          death in women ages 25-30 and is second only to breast cancer 
          women aged 30-34."  

          In response to increased exposure to UV radiation, the skin will 
          tan in order to protect itself.  Cosmetically, tanning has 
          become extremely popular with many teenagers and young adults to 
          the point that many are seeking artificial sources of UV 
          radiation to increase their tans.  Nearly one-quarter of all 
          "tanners" are between the ages of 13 and 19, and studies suggest 
          35% of teenage girls tan regularly.  Important in considering 
          this legislation, overall 70% of those who tan regularly 
          reportedly are females ages 16 to 29.

          An American Academy of Pediatrics survey of 62 randomly chosen 
          tanning facilities found that UV tanning devices were actually 
          exposing customers to extremely high levels of UVA radiation 10 
          to 15 times greater than that emitted by the midday sun.  This 
          increased exposure to radiation has been shown to dramatically 
          increase the cancer rate of frequent tanners.  The American 
          Academy of Dermatology notes that a person that frequently tans 
          before the age of 35 (defined as tanning more than 50 hours or 
          100 sessions per year) has a 70% greater chance of developing 
          skin cancer than somebody who never tans.  Indeed, the increased 
          risk of UV tanning devices has led the World Health Organization 
          (WHO) to deem tanning devices a carcinogenic.  

          Many states, including California, currently regulate aspects of 
          the indoor tanning industry.  However a recent study showed that 
          only one of 32 randomly selected tanning facilities was fully 
          compliant will all Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and state 
          regulations.  The same study identified an average of seven 
          infractions per facility.  The FDA study noted that 95% of 
          tanners did not comply with FDA exposure guidelines, with some 
          tanners exposing themselves to three times the level of UV 
          radiation recommended by the FDA.  Furthermore, the American 
          Academy of Dermatology cites a study determining that many 
          tanning facility staff members were unequipped to properly 
          inform customers of the risks of tanning, and that many staffers 
          failed to properly supervise patrons. 









                                                                  SB 746
                                                                  Page  4

          Given the reported lack of compliance with federal and state 
          guidelines evident in some if not many indoor tanning 
          facilities, parents who provide their teenage tanner with 
          consent may not realize the full extent of the risk for skin 
          damage facing their children.  (And of course there is no way of 
          knowing how many children's "parental consent" forms have been 
          forged.)  Existing California law requires a parent or legal 
          guardian to sign consent forms, in person, once per year to 
          enable their teenage children to use tanning facilities.  After 
          the initial consent, the parent is not required to supervise or 
          accompany their child to tanning facilities so long as the 
          consent form remains valid.  If the tanning facility is failing 
          to properly warn or supervise tanners, teenagers may overuse the 
          facility and increase the harm to their skin from overexposure 
          to UV radiation.  Current analyses of the issue appear to make 
          clear a parental consent approach to this health and safety 
          issue is problematic, invites potential abuse by teenage 
          children, and is extremely difficult if not impossible for 
          tanning agencies to effectively oversee.

          Proponents of indoor tanning have claimed that artificial 
          tanning devices can help individuals suffering from a Vitamin D 
          deficiency.  

          In 2010, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) went so far as to 
          criticize and issue a citation against the Indoor Tanning 
          Association (ITA) for making false health and safety claims 
          about the benefits of indoor tanning.  In response to the false 
          advertisements, the FTC required the ITA to disclose the risks 
          of developing skin cancer related to the use of UV tanning 
          devices.  Despite the FTC's warnings, the author notes that the 
          tanning industry continues to make these claims in public.

          The ITA strongly opposes the bill claiming, among other things, 
          that the bill is based on distorted scientific claims:

               Proponents have failed to consider the many studies 
               demonstrating the benefits of ultraviolet light on 
               overall health and disease prevention through the 
               creation of Vitamin D in the skin.  Most teens do not 
               get enough vitamin D from their diets, and vitamin D 
               has been shown to protect against breast and other 
               cancers, lymphoma, cardiovascular disease, multiple 
               sclerosis, osteoporosis and other chronic conditions.
           








                                                                 SB 746
                                                                  Page  5

           Furthermore, the ITA argues that, "Teenagers interviewed 
          regarding this and similar legislation in other states have 
          flatly stated that they will just go out in the sun.  That will 
          mean more sunburns, which truly do create more melanoma risk."  

          Additionally, the industry argues that prohibiting minors will 
          have a negative economic impact.  Lewis Shender, the President & 
          CEO of Hollywood Tans, states that banning minors from UV 
          tanning devices would eliminate 5-10% of the consumer base for 
          sunless tanning facilities.  Finally, opponents argue that this 
          bill denies parents the right to make decisions for their 
          children.  


           Analysis Prepared by  :   Drew Liebert / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 


                                                                FN: 0002322