BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   SB 797|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                                 THIRD READING


          Bill No:  SB 797
          Author:   Pavley (D) and Liu (D), et al
          Amended:  As introduced
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE ENV. QUALITY COMMITTEE  :  5-2, 4/20/09
          AYES:  Simitian, Corbett, Hancock, Lowenthal, Pavley
          NOES:  Runner, Ashburn

           SENATE HEALTH COMMITTEE  :  6-2, 4/29/09
          AYES:  Alquist, Cedillo, DeSaulnier, Leno, Pavley, Wolk
          NOES:  Aanestad, Cox
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Strickland, Maldonado, Negrete McLeod


           SUBJECT  :    Product safety: bisphenol A

           SOURCE  :     Environmental Working Group


           DIGEST  :    This bill enacts the Toxin-Free Toddlers and  
          Babies Act, which prohibits the manufacture, sale, or  
          distribution in commerce of any bottle, cup, or liquid,  
          food, or beverage in a can or jar that contains bisphenol A  
          at a level above 0.1 parts per billion, under specified  
          conditions.  This bill also requires manufacturers to use  
          the least toxic alternative when replacing bisphenol A in  
          containers in accordance with this bill.

           ANALYSIS  :    

           Existing Law
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               SB 797
                                                                Page  
          2

           
          1.Under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act  
            of 1986 (commonly known as Proposition 65), requires 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, or discharging into the drinking  
            water, such chemicals without first giving clear and  
            reasonable warning.

          3.Prohibits the manufacture, processing, and distribution  
            of products containing certain chemicals found to raise  
            health risks.  Existing law specifically prohibits the  
            use of phthalates in toys and child care articles  
            designed for children under three years of age.  Existing  
            law requires manufacturers to use the least toxic  
            alternative when replacing phthalates in their products.

          4.Defines "child care article" to mean all products  
            designed or intended by the manufacture to facilitate  
            sleep, relaxation, or the feeding of children, or to help  
            children with sucking or teething.

          This bill:

          1.Prohibits the manufacture, sale, or distribution of any  
            bottle or cup, and any liquid, food, or beverage in a can  
            or jar, containing bisphenol A (BPA), at a level above  
            0.1 parts per billion (ppb), if the item is designed or  
            intended to be used primarily for consumption by infants  
            or children three years of age or younger.  Specifies  
            that this prohibition does not apply to food and beverage  
            containers designed or intended to primarily to contain  
            liquid, food, or beverages for consumption by the general  
            population.

          2.Requires manufacturers to use the least toxic alternative  
            when replacing BPA in containers.

          3.Prohibits manufacturers from replacing BPA with  

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 797
                                                                Page  
          3

            carcinogens or reproductive toxicants as identified by  
            the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)  
            or listed in the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic  
            Enforcement Act of 1986, as specified.

           Comments

          According to the author's office, BPA is a known hormone  
          disruptor, and studies have firmly established that infants  
          and children are at the greatest risk of harm.  The  
          National Institutes of Health (NIH) are concerned that BPA  
          exposure in infants may lead to problems with brain  
          development and behavior, early puberty, breast cancer and  
          prostate cancer.  New research has also suggested that BPA  
          may interfere with metabolism and lead to obesity, heart  
          disease and diabetes in people.  Other recent research has  
          found that low levels of BPA reduces the effectiveness of  
          chemotherapy drugs.  The author's office states that out of  
          concern for children's safety, Canada has banned the use of  
          BPA in baby bottles and is restricting use in infant  
          formula cans.  Many U.S. companies have phased out BPA from  
          their products and major retailers have removed  
          BPA-containing products from their store shelves.  BPA-free  
          alternatives are affordable and widely available to  
          parents.  The author's office asserts that it is in the  
          best interest of California to significantly reduce  
          infants' and toddlers' exposure to BPA as soon as possible,  
          and to ultimately eliminate all exposure.  California's  
          Green Chemistry Initiative will not come to fruition soon  
          enough to protect the 550,000 babies born in California  
          each year from the unnecessary health risks posed by BPA.
           
          Bisphenol-A

           BPA is used as a primary monomer in polycarbonate plastic  
          and epoxy resins.  BPA is also used as an antioxidant in  
          plasticizers and as a polymerization inhibitor in polyvinyl  
          chloride (PVC).  Polycarbonates are widely used in many  
          consumer products, from sunglasses and compact discs to  
          water and food containers and shatter-resistant baby  
          bottles.  Some epoxy resins containing BPA are popular  
          coatings for the inside of cans used for food.  Although  
          disputed, BPA has been shown to have hormone disrupting  
          effects, and some mice studies have shown that it can  

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 797
                                                                Page  
          4

          produce hyperactivity, faster growth in females, and  
          earlier onset of puberty.
           
          California's Green Chemistry Initiative

           According to the final report of the California Green  
          Chemistry Initiative, green chemistry represents a major  
          paradigm shift that focuses on environmental protection at  
          the design and manufacturing stages of product production.   
          It intends to address chemicals before they become hazards,  
          with the goal of making chemicals and products "benign by  
          design."  Green chemistry seeks to dramatically reduce the  
          toxicity of chemicals in the first place, rather than  
          merely manage their toxic waste after use and disposal.   
          The California Green Chemistry Initiative was launched in  
          April 2007 as a collaborative arrangement with the  
          California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA),  
          boards, departments and offices, as well as other state  
          agencies.  The Department of Toxic Substances control  
          (DTSC) leads the initiative and conducted a broad public  
          process to generate ideas, develop overall policy goals and  
          made recommendations for a comprehensive green chemistry  
          policy framework in California:
           
           1.Expand pollution prevention to assist California  
            businesses to lead the world in greener design and  
            production.

          2.Create a network to disclose chemical ingredients in  
            products sold in the state to allow consumers and  
            businesses to make safer choices.

          3.Create an online toxics clearinghouse to increase our  
            knowledge about toxicity and hazards for chemicals.

          4.Make the transition to more sustainable, safer products  
            more quickly and science-based alternative analysis and  
            lifestyle thinking.

          5.Leverage market forces to produce products that are  
            "benign-by-design."

           Prior Legislation


                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               SB 797
                                                                Page  
          5

          SB 1713 (Migden), 2007-08 Session  .  Passed the Senate Floor  
          with a vote of 22-15 on 5/15/08.  Contained provisions  
          similar to this bill and would have prohibited the sale,  
          manufacture or distribution in commerce of food containers  
          for children that contain BPA above a specified level.   
          (Failed passage on the Assembly Floor)

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  No    
          Local:  No

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  5/4/09)

          Environmental Working Group (source)
          Asian Health Services
          Breast Cancer Fund
          California Association of Sanitation Agencies
          California League of Conservation Voters
          California Nurses Association
          CALPIRG
          California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
          California WIC Association
          City and County of San Francsico
          Clean Water Action
          Commonweal
          Consumer's Union
          County of Los Angeles
          Environment California
          Green California
          Moms Making Our Milk Safe
          Natural Resources Defense Council
          Physicians for Social Responsibility LA
          Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California
          San Diego Coastkeeper 
          Service Employees International Union
          Sierra Club California
          Women's Foundation of California
          Zero Breast Cancer

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  5/4/09)

          American Chemistry Council
          California Chamber of Commerce
          California Grocers Association
          Can Manufacturers Institute

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 797
                                                                Page  
          6

          Civil Justice Association of California
          Grocery Manufacturers Association
          International Formula Council

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    Environmental Working Group, who  
          is the sponsor of the bill, writes that, according to a  
          2003 Environmental Health Perspectives study, BPA  
          contamination of canned beverages and foods became a matter  
          of concern in Japan, and in 1997 most major manufacturing  
          companies changed the interior can coatings to eliminate or  
          reduce the use of BPA.  The California WIC Association  
          writes that in October 2008, the FDA's advisory science  
          board found that the FDA had previously overlooked a wide  
          range of potentially serious findings, and demanded that  
          the agency more carefully assess the risks of BPA for  
          children.  The California League of Conservation Voters  
          states that BPA is one of the world's highest  
          production-volume chemicals and that widespread and  
          continuous exposure to BPA is evident from the presence of  
          detectable levels of it in more than 90 percent of the U.S.  
          population.  A number of supporters write that BPA is known  
          to disrupt the endocrine system, and there are over 200  
          studies that document the adverse impacts of this dangerous  
          chemical on human development.  Supporters write that safe  
          alternatives for BPA are already on the market as some  
          major manufacturers have already taken the responsible path  
          toward eliminating these hazards from their products.  The  
          National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) writes that some  
          industry representatives claim that there are no  
          alternatives for can linings, but this is not true.  NRDC  
          states that Eden Foods, for example, notes on its web site  
          that is uses non-BPA coatings in cans of organic beans and  
          that they are only marginally more expensive than cans with  
          linings with BPA.  Commonweal stats that federal  
          regulations continue to rely on long-outdated assessments  
          of BPA, which makes action at the state level critical to  
          drive needed policy change.  Clean Water Action writes that  
          California must act to ensure that when parents feed their  
          children, they are providing nutrition and not harmful  
          chemicals.  Consumers Union would like to see BPA banned in  
          all products that come into contact with foods and  
          beverages, but applaud this bill that they assert will  
          protect infants and small children, who are most vulnerable  
          to developmental problems from exposure.

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 797
                                                                Page  
          7


           ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION  :    The American Chemistry Council  
          (ACC) writes that safety assessments of BPA have been  
          comprehensively examined by many government and scientific  
          bodies worldwide, which have all reached conclusions that  
          consistently support the continued safe use of BPA in its  
          current applications.  The International Formula Council  
          (IFC) states that switching to alternative packaging is not  
          a simple process and could take years as the industry must  
          go through a number of steps to ensure that any new  
          packaging materials provide at least the same level of  
          quality and safety provided by their current packaging.   
          IFC asserts that because few viable alternatives currently  
          exist, this bill would drastically reduce the availability  
          of infant formula for the hundreds of thousands of  
          California families who safety feed their babies infant  
          formula.  The California Chamber of Commerce3 writes that  
          in the case of BPA, there is clearly conflicting science  
          that the legislative process is simply not capable of  
          working through the competing science in an informed  
          manner.  The Grocery Manufacturers Association writes that  
          the CDC recently published biomonitoring data from a  
          large-scale study which shows that typical human daily  
          intake of BPA is one million times less than the levels  
          that showed no adverse effects in multi-generational animal  
          studies, and 1,000 times less than the very conservative  
          regulatory limits set by the U.S. and European governments.  
           The California Grocers Association writes that, to create  
          a California-only standard with regard to the use of BPA in  
          food packaging makes little sense given the consensus of  
          opinion in the scientific community regarding the safety of  
          the chemical.  The Civil Justice Association of California  
          writes that the science behind the proposed ban is weak and  
          will lead to more lawsuits, and that scientists, not  
          legislators should decide chemical safety.  
           

          TSM:cm  6/2/09   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****



                                                           CONTINUED