The California Safer Consumer Product Regulations (SCP) were finally finalized and approved on October 1, 2013. This ambitious and pioneering regulation is likely to change market rules and even trigger litigation. Manufacturers, importers, and retailers in California are all on high alert.
As a precedent-setting regulation driving California’s Green Chemistry Initiative, the SCP has drawn significant attention from stakeholders—especially given the federal government’s long delay in reforming the important Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Combined with California’s enormous market influence, the strengthened consumer product safety regulations have become a major focus of concern. A draft list of SCP priority products is also expected to be released before April.
The definition of “consumer product” under the SCP follows Section 25251 of the California Health and Safety Code: “a product or part of a product that is used, bought, or leased for personal purposes.” Components of assembled products are also considered consumer products. However, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, dental restorative materials, food, and pesticides are excluded from the scope of consumer products.
Four Key Steps of the California Safer Consumer Product Regulations (SCP):
– Identify candidate chemicals
– Select priority products
– Perform alternative analysis
– Management decisions of the California Department of Toxic Chemicals Management (DTSC)
Implementation schedule:
– October 1, 2013: Enhanced regulations on consumer product safety came into effect.
– Before April 1, 2014: DTSC submitted initial drafts of priority products.
– Before October 1, 2014: The DTSC published its Priority Products Work Plan, outlining the types of products eligible for evaluation under the Priority Products/Substances of Concern combination assessment over the next three years.
– 2015: The final priority product list will be finalized through the legislative process, which is estimated to take up to one year (the uncertainty of the finalization time may affect subsequent regulatory actions).
– 2015: Within 60 days of the publication of the final priority product list, the responsible units shall submit the priority product reports;
– 2015: Within 180 days of the publication of the final priority product list, the responsible unit shall submit a preliminary alternative analysis report.
Under the SCP, the hierarchical responsibility for product alternatives (Section 69501.1(a)(60)) places the obligation first on manufacturers, and then on importers. The DTSC notes that some manufacturers sell products in California but are not based in the state. If a manufacturer is unwilling to comply with the regulations, the importer must assume responsibility, or the retailer must conduct the alternatives analysis; otherwise, the product can only be removed from the market.
The alternatives analysis is conducted in two stages. The responsible party must submit a preliminary alternatives analysis report within 180 days after the product listing is announced, performing an initial screening and scope assessment of the specific chemicals in the problem product. Subsequently, a more detailed comparison between existing chemicals and alternative options is conducted. The regulatory agency will issue a compliance notice for the preliminary report, and the responsible party must submit the final alternatives analysis report within 12 months of receiving the notice. The DTSC will develop guidance for alternatives analysis under the future regulatory framework and will hold a series of outreach and briefing sessions in early 2014.
After the final report is submitted, the DTSC evaluates whether the company has fulfilled its legal obligations based on the principle of selecting the alternative with the greatest potential for substitution and the lowest associated concerns. DTSC’s regulatory decisions tend to prioritize enhancing the product’s intrinsic safety by redesigning or adjusting manufacturing processes to eliminate or reduce adverse impacts/exposures, as well as negative effects related to product disposal and end-of-life. This approach replaces reliance on management or engineering controls to limit exposures or releases of hazardous chemicals or candidate alternatives in the product. Based on these principles, the regulatory agency may require manufacturers to provide consumer product information, restrict use by children, or even prohibit sales.
The SCP came into effect on October 1, 2013, and information on Candidate Chemicals of Concern (COC) has already been published. Considering the size of the California market and the potential future impact of the regulations, companies should respond proactively rather than passively.
Sources: International Chemical Trade Regulations Network (2014-02-21)
