(November 10, 2009) The California Chamber of Commerce is urging members to speak out about a state program affecting nearly all firms that manufacture or sell consumer products in the state.
The CalChamber is asking members to contact state officials and let them know that California’s developing “green chemistry” program needs to be designed so that the regulations are practicable, cost-efficient, based on sound science and developed in a way that protects the state’s economy from further harm.
On October 2, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) released its second “straw proposal” for regulations to implement 2008 legislation creating the state’s Green Chemistry Initiative—AB 1879 (Feuer; D-Los Angeles, Chapter 559) and SB 509 (Simitian; D-Palo Alto, Chapter 560).
A core element of the law calls for an analysis of “safer” alternatives to “chemicals of concern” in consumer products.
Sweeping Impact
Although the straw proposal is not a formal regulation at this time, the program described would have sweeping ramifications on virtually all industry sectors in California that manufacture or sell consumer products in the state, subjecting an estimated 10,000 chemicals and millions of consumer products to the proposed regulatory scheme. The proposal does not reflect the intent of the legislation creating the green chemistry program.
Some of the product categories specifically mentioned by DTSC include:
- products intended for infants and children like toys, clothing and furnishings;
- products for use in K-12 schools;
- personal care products, such as cosmetics;
- clothing, shoes, linens and textiles;
- cleaning products, fragrance, scent, deodorizers;
- home furnishings;
- food preparation, storage, packaging, pots and pans, utensils and bags.
Costly Process
Essentially, the proposal requires manufacturers and importers of consumer products for sale in California to identify whether their product contains a “chemical of concern.” If so, the business must go through a detailed and costly regulatory process to determine whether there are alternative ways to make the product without the chemical in question.
If the business cannot identify or chooses not to implement an alternative, the consumer product containing the chemical of concern would be banned in subsequent years.
The straw proposal contains no provision for insignificant levels of “chemicals of concern,” so the mere presence of such a chemical—regardless of potential or severity of exposure— places the chemical on the path for eventual phase-out.
For example, wood with detectable levels of formaldehyde and car batteries that contain corrosive acid eventually would be banned unless a safer alternative were identified and implemented. Solar panels in which trace amounts of certain metals might be detectable also could be scheduled for a ban.
Alliance Seeks Changes
The CalChamber is pointing out that California’s business community cannot afford to implement the proposed approach as it is unworkably broad, prohibitively expensive, and would lead to significant damage to California’s fragile economy.
The CalChamber and many other business organizations and trade groups representing some of California’s leading employers have formed the Green Chemistry Alliance to seek changes to the proposed draft regulations.
The alliance is working to promote a workable and practical approach that is grounded in generally accepted scientific principles and follows the intent and vision of the law.
Action Needed
The CalChamber is urging its members to let officials know that the state must take a more reasoned approach to green chemistry and support the proposed draft regulations offered by the Green Chemistry Alliance.
For a sample letter, visit www.calchambervotes.com.
Staff Contact: Robert Callahan