BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1108
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 8, 2007
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HEALTH
Mervyn Dymally, Chair
AB 1108 (Ma) - As Amended: April 25, 2007
SUBJECT : Children's products: phthalates.
SUMMARY : Prohibits manufacturing, selling, or distributing in
commerce any toy or child care product, as defined, that
contains specified phthalates beginning January 1, 2009.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Prohibits beginning January 1, 2009 the manufacture, sale, or
distribution in commerce of toys and child care articles that
contain di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), dibutyl phthalate
(DBP), or benzyl butyl phthalate (BBP), in concentrations
exceeding 0.1%, beginning January 1, 2009.
2)Prohibits the use of phthalates in the manufacture, sale, or
distribution in commerce of any toy or child care article
intended for use by a child under three years of age if the
product can be placed in the child's mouth and it contains
diisononyl phthalate (DINP), diisodecyl phthalate (DIDP), or
di-n-octyl phthalate (DnOP), in concentrations exceeding 0.1%,
beginning January 1, 2009.
3)Requires manufacturers to use the least toxic alternative when
replacing phthalates.
4)Prohibits manufacturers from replacing phthalates with
carcinogens rated by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) as A, B, or C carcinogens, or
substances listed as known or likely carcinogens, known to be
human carcinogens, likely to be human carcinogens, or
suggestive of being human carcinogens, as described in the
"List of Chemicals Evaluated for Carcinogenic Potential," or
known to the state to cause cancer as listed in the California
Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986
(Proposition 65).
5)Prohibits manufacturers from replacing phthalates with
reproductive toxicants that cause birth defects, reproductive
harm, or developmental harm as identified by the USEPA or
listed in Proposition 65.
AB 1108
Page 2
6)Defines the following terms:
a) Toys means all products designed or intended by the
manufacturer to be used by children when they play; and,
b) Child care articles means all products designed or
intended by the manufacturer to facilitate sleep,
relaxation, or the feeding of children, or to help children
with sucking or teething.
7)Makes legislative findings and declarations on phthalates and
bisphenol-A.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires, under Proposition 65, the Governor to revise and
publish a list of chemicals that have been scientifically
proven to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity each year.
2)Prohibits any person in the course of doing business in
California from knowingly exposing any individual to a
chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive
toxicity without first giving clear and reasonable warning.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS :
1)PURPOSE OF THIS BILL . According to the author, this bill is
needed to limit the exposure of children to phthalates from
toys and child care articles. The focus of this bill is young
children because they are the most vulnerable, and the author
argues, these chemicals pose too much of a risk to the health
and proper development of babies and young children. The
author points out that Disney and Mattel no longer use
phthalates in mouthing products for children; Evenflo, First
Years, and Gerber stopped using phthalates in all of their
toys and childcare products.
2)PHTHALATES . According to the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), phthalates are chemicals used in the
manufacture of plastics, often called plasticizers.
Phthalates can prolong the lifespan or durability of plastics
AB 1108
Page 3
and increase the flexibility of some plastics, and have been
used as solvents for other materials. They are used in
hundreds of products, including vinyl flooring, adhesives,
detergents, lubricating oils, some pharmaceutical and
pesticide formulations, and personal-care products, such as
soap, shampoo, hair spray, and nail polish. Phthalates are
also used in flexible polyvinyl chloride plastics, such as
plastic bags, food packaging, garden hoses, inflatable
recreational toys, intravenous tubing, children's toys,
automotive plastics, and plastic clothing, such as raincoats.
According to the CDC, the health effects of phthalates in
people are not fully known; although several studies in people
have explored possible associations with developmental and
reproductive outcomes, more research is needed.
3)CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION . The U.S. Consumer Product
Safety Commission (CPSC) released the results of a study in
1998 of DINP used to soften some plastic toys and children's
products. The study concluded that few if any children are at
risk from the chemical because the amount that they ingest
does not reach a level that would be harmful. However, the
study identified several areas of uncertainty where additional
scientific research is needed. As a precaution while more
scientific work is done, CPSC staff requested the industry to
remove phthalates from soft rattles and teethers, and about
90% of manufacturers have indicated that they have or will
remove phthalates from soft rattles and teethers by early
1999. The CPSC staff also asked the industry to find a
substitute for phthalates in other products intended for
children under 3 years old that are likely to be mouthed or
chewed.
4)PROPOSITION 65 . Proposition 65 provides two primary
mechanisms for administratively listing chemicals that are
known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity.
A chemical may be listed under Proposition 65 when a body
considered to be authoritative by the state's qualified
experts has formally identified the chemical as causing cancer
or reproductive toxicity. The entities identified as
"authoritative bodies" for purposes of Proposition 65 include
the USEPA, the International Agency for Research on Cancer,
the Food and Drug Administration, the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health, and the National Toxicology
AB 1108
Page 4
Program.
5)SAN FRANCISCO BAN . On May 30, 2006, the San Francisco Board
of Supervisors passed an ordinance prohibiting the
manufacture, sale or distribution of toys or child care
articles intended for use by a child under three years of age
if the product contains biphesnol-A and phthalates. In
November 2006, the Toy Industry Association, Ambassador Toys,
the California Chamber of Commerce, and the American Chemistry
Council filed suit against the City of San Francisco against
the ban on phthalates. The suit maintains that because a
federal regulatory agency, the CPSC, charged with overseeing
the safety of children's toys has already reviewed the primary
phthalate used in toys and concluded that it is safe for
children, federal law prohibits states and localities from now
trying to step in.
6)OTHER STATES . New York and Maryland are currently considering
similar legislation, prohibiting the use of phthalates in toys
and other child care products.
7)PHTHALATES BAN IN OTHER COUNTRIES . In 1999, the European
Union (EU) temporarily banned the use of six phthalates (DEHP,
DBP, BBP, DINP, DIDP, and DnOP) on toys and child care items
because of fear that toxic chemicals were ingested by children
by chewing plastic toys. In 2005, this temporary ban became
permanent. Austria, Denmark, Finland, France Germany, Greece,
Norway, and Sweden banned the use of phthalates in
manufacturing soft vinyl toys. Since 2003, Japan has
permanently banned on the use of phthalates in objects
intended for the mouths of young children since 2003.
8)INFORMATIONAL HEARING . In January 2006 the Assembly
Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee and the
Assembly Health Committee held joint informational hearing on
the health effects of phthalates and Bisphenol-A on children.
During the hearing, studies documenting the developmental and
reproductive defects associated with phthalate exposure were
presented. The manufacturers and industry that use phthalates
in children's products also cited studies that support their
contention that the exposure levels to which people might be
exposed pose no risk to human health.
9)PREVIOUS LEGISLATION . AB 319 (Chan) of 2006, would have
prohibited the use of phthalates in toys and childcare
AB 1108
Page 5
products designed for babies and children under three years of
age. AB 319 failed passage in the Assembly Appropriations
Committee.
10)SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS . Since the subject matter of this bill
is phthalates and excludes bisphenol-A, the author may wish to
amend this bill and delete on page 2, lines 3-12.
11)CONCERN . The San Francisco Chamber of Commerce states that
the ban on phthalates proposed in this bill is not supported
by any scientific research.
12)SUPPORT . Supporters, such as the Breast Cancer Fund (BCF)
and Environment California, state that alternatives to
phthalates exist, and it is important to eliminate these
chemicals from children's toys because of their harmful
effects. Environment California state that phthalates used
in soft plastic toys and teethers have been linked to
developmental problems, such as premature breast development
in girls, male genital defects, and reduced sperm quality. In
addition, BCF states that even in extremely low doses,
emerging research on phthalates show that these chemicals
could increase breast cancer risk.
13)OPPOSITION . The American Chemistry Council (ACC) asserts
that the primary phthalate used in children's toys is DINP and
it has been used safely for over 40 years. ACC cites that the
CPSC conducted a five-year, peer reviewed, health risk study
which determined that children were not at risk from plastic
toys. ACC also contends that the alternatives to DINP, might
result in more brittle plastics that could break and create
chocking and other hazards. ACC points out that extensive
risk assessments conducted by European Chemicals Bureau,
within the European Commission (executive body of the EU), on
DBP, BBP, and DINP found that their current consumer
applications, including toys and childcare items, pose minimal
to no risk to children. ACC also argues that this bill
interferes with interstate commerce because of its prohibition
on the manufacture, sale or distribution of toys or child care
products containing DINP.
14)POLICY QUESTION . While research on the health effects of
phthalates continues, should state policy err on the side of
caution to protect children?
AB 1108
Page 6
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Environment California (Sponsor)
Breast Cancer Fund
California League of Conservation Voters
Heal the Bay
National Environmental Trust
Natural Resources Defense Council
Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California
Planned Parenthood Golden Gate
Planned Parenthood of San Diego & Riverside Counties
Planned Parenthood Shasta-Diablo
Planning and Conservation League
Sierra Club California
Women's Foundation of California
Opposition
American Chemistry Council
Analysis Prepared by : Rosielyn Pulmano / HEALTH / (916)
319-2097