Phthalate/Cosmetics Bill is Back

By Loretta Macktal, Executive Assistant to the Vice President, Government Relations

Capitol Update, Aug. 13, 2004 Share this on FacebookTweet thisEmail this to a friend

AB 2012 (Judy Chu, D-Monterey Park) would ban all phthalates in cosmetic and personal care products manufactured or sold in California by January 1, 2006. It is a June 24th "gut and amend" bill containing some of the same provisions as her previous bill AB 2025 which died in Senate Health. It.

In addition, all cosmetic and personal care product manufacturers would have until January 1, 2006, to submit to the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) a document listing all ingredients – including fragrance, flavoring and trade secret ingredients, along with any ingredient (regardless of concentration or quantity) that have been identified as causing cancer or reproductive toxicity. Chemicals that would be reportable are those that have been identified under California Proposition 65 or by an authoritative body, such as the National Toxicology Program, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, or the International Agency for Research on Cancer.

AB 2012 is unnecessary. The Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires each ingredient used in a cosmetic product and each finished cosmetic product to be adequately substantiated for safety before it is marketed and sold. Existing federal and state laws give the FDA and California abundant authority to ensure that cosmetics are safe for consumer use. Moreover, FDA stated in April of 2001 that it "believes that at the present time there is no reason for consumers to be alarmed at the use of cosmetics containing phthalates."

In November 2002, the Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel, an independent scientific panel that reviews the safety of cosmetic ingredients, reviewed extensive scientific data and confirmed that three phthalates used in cosmetics are safe for use in cosmetics. The FDA, USEPA, Health Canada, and other scientific bodies in Europe and Japan have also examined these phthalates and have not restricted their use in cosmetics.

The bill, now in the Senate Appropriations' Suspense file, is apparently being amended to eliminate the ban and the 2006 date, but the OEHHA reporting requirement of ingredients that are contained on lists such as Prop. 65, NTP, etc. remain and OEHHA would still establish the reporting schedule. CMTA remains opposed.
Read more Environmental Impacts articles

Capitol updates archive 989898989