BILL ANALYSIS
SB 928
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 4, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
SB 928 (Simitian) - As Amended: August 2, 2010
Policy Committee: Environmental
Safety and Toxic Materials Vote: 5-3
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill requires a manufacturer of a cleaning or a maintenance
product to disclose the product's ingredients on the
manufacturer's Web site. Specifically, this bill:
1)Prohibits a manufacturer, effective July 1, 2011, from
manufacturing, selling or distributing a "consumer product" in
California unless the manufacturer discloses each product
ingredient on the manufacturer's Web site, as described on the
label of the product.
2)Defines a "consumer product" as an air care product, an
automotive appearance maintenance product, a cleaning product,
or a polish or floor maintenance product.
3)Exempts "trade secrets" from the Internet disclosure
requirement, but requires the manufacturer to disclose the
product's ingredients, along with justification, to the
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC).
4)Requires DTSC to determine if a trade secret exemption is
justified, to maintain the confidentiality of legitimate trade
secrets for six years, and to publicize ingredients it
determines do not qualify as trade secrets.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Annual costs to DTSC beginning in 2011-12 of approximately
$150,000 to $450,000 (equivalent to one to three science
positions) to review trade secret exemption requests, the
number of which DTSC will receive is unknown. (Toxic
SB 928
Page 2
Substances Control Account (TSCA)).
2)Annual costs to DTSC beginning in 2011-12 of approximately
$120,000 to $360,000 (equivalent to two to three employees) to
respond to public records act requests, the number of which
DTSC will receive is unknown. (TSCA)
3)Annual costs to DTSC beginning in 2011-12 of approximately
$500,000 to $800,000 to enforce provisions of this bill,
including auditing, outreach, testing and analysis. (TSCA)
(The bill does not require DTSC to enforce its provisions.
DTSC, however, assumes it is required to enforce the bill
because of the section of Health and Safety Code in which the
bill is placed, which includes enforcement authority for DTSC,
and the because of the department's responsibility to protect
Californians by working with businesses to reduce their
production of hazardous waste and toxic materials.)
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . The author notes consumers are increasingly aware
of and concerned by the potential dangers to health of
chemicals commonly used at home and at work. The author
contends that most consumers assume that some governmental
entity ensures that products meet safety standards. Aside from
food and pharmaceutical products, however, this generally is
not the case. The author intends this bill to make
information about the ingredients included in common consumer
products readily available to consumers to enable them to make
decisions about the products they regularly use and come in
contact with.
2)Background . The federal Toxic Safety Control Act authorizes
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to require reporting,
record-keeping and testing requirements, and set restrictions
relating to chemical substances and/or mixtures. The act
requires the submission of health and safety studies which are
known or available to those who manufacture, process, or
distribute in commerce specified chemicals. It also allows
USEPA to gather information from manufacturers and processors
about production and import volumes, chemical uses and methods
of disposal, and the extent to which people and the
environment are exposed.
Despite these provisions, there are concerns that the act is
SB 928
Page 3
insufficient to protect the public and the environment. In
2006, authors from UC Berkeley released a report commissioned
by the state Senate, entitled Green Chemistry in California:
A Framework for Leadership in Chemicals Policy and Innovation.
The report found three areas of concern with the act, which
the authors described as gaps-the data gap, the safety gap,
and the technology gap.
This bill is one of a number of California efforts to address
these gaps. In 2008, the Legislature passed AB 1879 (Feuer
and Huffman, Chapter 559), which requires DTSC to adopt
regulations by January 1, 2011, to identify and prioritize
chemicals of concern, to evaluate alternatives, and to specify
regulatory responses where chemicals of concern are found in
consumer products. SB 509 (Simitian and Feuer, Chapter 560)
requires DTSC to establish an online, public Toxics
Information Clearinghouse of science-based information on the
toxicity and hazard traits of chemicals as identified by the
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA).
3)Support . This bill is supported by numerous public health,
environmental and labor organizations, who contend the bill
completes a circle: Green Chemistry identifies chemicals of
concern; the Toxic Information Clearinghouse publicizes the
toxicity of dangerous chemicals; and this bill allows members
of the public to inform themselves of the chemicals in
products they use or have contact with and to take action as
they see fit.
4)Opposition . The bill is opposed by a long list of industry
groups, who contend it will obligate them to share trade
secrets vital to their product's success, even for ingredients
that pose no threat to consumers.
Analysis Prepared by : Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081