FROM:
American Chemistry Council
American Electronics Association
California Chamber of Commerce
California Grocers Association
California League of Food Processors
California Manufacturers and Technology Association
California Retailers Association
Food Products Association
Grocery Manufacturers of America
International Bottled Water Association
Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association
Metal Container Corp.
Phthalate Esters Panel
The Society of the Plastics Industry
Toy Industry Association

RE: OPPOSE: Assembly Bill 319 (Chan)

We are writing to convey our opposition to and concerns regarding AB 319 (Chan), legislation that seeks to ban a wide range of popular consumer products that are intended for use by children. A wide range of industry and business groups oppose the measure based on its lack of a scientific basis, potential dire economic impacts and the unworkable nature of being able to monitor for compliance.

Additionally, distinct industry groups oppose specific aspects of the bill as it pertains to two separate and unrelated chemicals – Bisphenol A and Phthalates.

Bisphenol A

Some of the targeted products are made from commonly used materials such as polycarbonate plastic and epoxy resins, both of which are made from Bisphenol A (BPA). This chemical has been studied extensively throughout the world and determined to be safe for use in polycarbonate plastic and epoxy resins. BPA is essential to thousands of consumer products, including many that were specifically developed to enhance safety and protect children from harm.

Concerning BPA, the following points are critical:

• Polycarbonate plastic and epoxy resins contain only minute levels of BPA remaining from the manufacturing process.

• BPA is one of the most extensively tested of all substances and has been safely used for more than 50 years.

• The totality of the scientific evidence indicates that BPA does not pose a risk to human health at the extremely low levels of exposure that may occur from consumer uses of products made with BPA.

• The scientific data on BPA has been recently reviewed by many government agencies and scientists around the world. Included are comprehensive reviews by the U.S. National Toxicology Program, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Food and Drug Administration, and government agencies in the European Union and Japan, as well as a panel of independent scientists under the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis – all support the conclusion that BPA poses no risk to human health at the low levels found in consumer products.

• Polycarbonate plastic and epoxy resins made from BPA are the basis for hundreds of products found in the marketplace that enhance the safety of children and adults. For example, BPA is essential for shatterproof bottles and reusable food containers, lifesaving medical devices, sports safety equipment and the coating inside most metal food and beverage cans to protect against contamination.

Phthalates

Regarding Phthalates, the body of scientific evidence is also significant and convincing in its findings.

• AB 319 ignores the fact that the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) did a peer reviewed health risk study on the primary phthalate in children’s toys (DINP) and found no demonstrated risk. 1 That’s right – the sponsors want to ban a chemical even though there is no demonstrated scientific basis.

• The ban also could have unintended impacts on the very children AB 319 claims to want to protect. The CPSC said in its findings:

“If DINP is to be replaced in children’s products, whether on a mandatory or voluntary basis, the potential risks of the substitutes must be considered. Weaker or more brittle plastics might break and result in a choking hazard. Other plasticizers might not be as well studied as DINP.”

• American and European scientific reviews and risk assessments have given high marks to DINP, the primary phthalate used in flexible plastic toys.

Other phthalates proposed for banning are rarely if ever used in children’s toys. AB 319 would needlessly deprive consumers of products with a distinguished safety profile - products they value for their performance characteristics in furtherance of what former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop called “a phony health scare.” 2

In summary, it makes no sense to ban or regulate substances without sound scientific data. AB 319 sets a dangerous precedent and deserves your NO vote.

We are happy to provide the referenced scientific studies and government/scientific analyses, or to answer any questions you might have. Please contact Tim Shestek of the American Chemistry Council (916) 448-2581 for additional information.

* * *

[back to top]