CK&E Attorneys Lobby California Legislature with PCPC

Posted by:

On March 20, 2018 Conkle, Kremer & Engel attorneys Eric S. Engel and Aleen Tomassian helped the Personal Care Products Council fulfill part of its mission by organizing and executing an effective lobbying day to advance the legislative interests of the industry.  Led by PCPC Senior Vice President Government Affairs Mike Thompson and PCPC Director of Government Affairs Karin Ross, a group of personal care product industry members, lobbyists and advisors heard presentations by pivotal regulatory agencies and then met with key legislators and their staffs to address issues of importance to the industry.

PCPC Chief Scientist Alex Kowcz seminar to Calif Legislative Staff

The PCPC held a luncheon at which it presented its first Legislator of the Year Awards to congresspersons who have been the most effective in advancing the important interests of both business and consumers in relation to personal care products.  Legislative staff also received an educational presentation from PCPC’s new Chief Scientist, Alex Kowcz, to help bring to Legislators the most current scientific information about issues affecting personal care products.  After a long day of meetings, participants unwound and connected at an informal reception for legislators, the governor’s office and administration officials at Ella, a popular restaurant near the State Capitol.

 

Eric S. Engel and Aleen Tomassian at PCPC Calif Lobby Day Reception

Some of the highlights of the 2018 PCPC California Lobby Day included a presentation by Meredith Williams, Deputy Director of Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), and Rick Brausch, Chief of DTSC’s Policy and Program Support Division, Hazardous Waste Management.  The mission of the DTSC is the Safer Consumer Products (SCP) program, directed toward advancing the design, development and use of products that are chemically safer for people and the environment.  The aim is to reduce toxic chemicals in consumer products and create new business opportunities in green chemistry.

Dr. Williams advised the PCPC group that DTSC’s SCP program intends to focus over the next three years on nail salon products, particularly to assure a safe working environment for salon employees as well as customers, such as by assuring adequate ventilation and safety equipment.  Dr. Williams also noted that Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) are not only within the ambit of California’s Air Resources Board (ARB) as to their effect on the environment, but they are also within the scope of DTSC’s authority when regulation of VOCs can meaningfully enhance protection of human health.

On February 8, 2018, DTSC released a draft 2018-2020 Priority Product Work Plan for public review, in which “Beauty, Personal Care and Hygiene Products” are identified as targets for possible regulation.  Of some concern to PCPC, the Priority Product Work Plan includes DTSC’s interest in broad classifications of chemicals without defining exactly which chemicals in what formulations are of concern.  For example, DTSC’s Priority Product Work Plan identifies oxybenzone, BPA, DEA, formaldehyde, phthalates, parabens, triclosan, titanium dioxide, tolulene and VOCs as classes chemicals being considered for possible regulation, but there are a great many specific chemicals, formulations and uses within such classes, and not all of them are likely to be of concern to DTSC.  PCPC expressed its concern that broad classifications can cause confusion among manufacturers and consumers, and unnecessarily inhibit product development and sales.  For example, oxybenzone (aka Benophenone-3) is one of just 16 chemicals approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as safe and effective for use as an ultraviolet (UV) filter to achieve broad-spectrum sun protection.  The health benefits of effective UV sunscreens are well documented, but the broad suggestion of “endocrine toxicity” or “dermatoxicity” in DTSC’s identification of oxybenzone is on shaky scientific footing.  Dr. Williams noted that the 2018-2020 Priority Product Work Plan is only in draft form, and that DTSC recognizes the broad nature of the chemical groups identified and is working on identifying specific chemicals of concern rather than entire classes of chemicals.

DTSC’s Richard Brausch spoke of the hazardous waste logistics issues facing the personal care product industry, affecting the entire supply chain from manufacturers to retailers.  The issue often occurs when products are returned from retailers, and questions arise as to whether they may be regarded as hazardous waste if they are no longer considered fit for regular sale, such as when new product labeling is introduced.  Issues can arise as to who has responsibility for proper transportation and disposal of the products, whether by sale in secondary markets, repair or refurbishment, donation to charities or recycling.  It is notable here that improper transportation and disposal has led some local authorities to sue retailers and wholesalers for failing to use hazardous waste transporters.  That in turn has caused retailers to impose anticipatory disposal charges on manufacturers and wholesalers for a wide range of products.  PCPC therefore supports Assembly Member Bill Quirk’s introduction of new legislation, AB 2660, which places the onus on the disposal company to determine the correct method of transportation, as that is not within the expertise expected of retailers.

The overriding hazardous waste concern is that California uses an “aquatic toxicity” (aka “fish kill”) test that is grossly out of alignment with federal law, and which results in most cosmetic products being characterized as hazardous under California law.  The “fish kill” test is exactly like it sounds – it tests only whether quantities of the subject product added to a water tank will kill fathead minnows.  The test is not regarded as especially accurate, notably because high viscosity products that are otherwise harmless can kill the fish by clogging their gills.  Further, the test presents a significant problem for the personal care products industry, which has taken a strong stand against animal testing, so manufacturers generally do not conduct this “fish kill” test on finished products.  PCPC therefore advocates a more modern approach to accomplish the same goal, by use of a more recently developed fish embryo test (FET), in which live fish are not killed.

An interesting side note is that SB 1249 was introduced by Senator Cathleen Galgiani to prohibit importation or retail sale of any cosmetic that was developed or manufactured using animal testing after January 1, 2020.  While PCPC takes a strong stand against animal testing, it could not support the bill as written because it included no exception for products marketed in countries (notably China) which require that products be subject to animal testing.  Rather, the PCPC has been working to obtain an amendment of the proposed legislation to make it conform to that of the European Union, which has strong anti-animal testing regulations but allows for accommodations to make products acceptable for sale in China.

Dr. Michael Benjamin, Air Resources Board Chief of Air Quality Planning and Science spoke about the substantial product data that ARB had collected from product manufacturers selling in California, through extensive annual surveys conducted over the past three years.  From that data, ARB is working to identify trends in emissions of VOCs.  Of particular interest is a February 15, 2018 publication in the academic journal Science of a study of VOC emissions from consumer products.  The Science publication (Volatile Chemical Products Emerging as Largest Petrochemical Source of Urban Organic Emissions, by Brian C. McDonald, Joost A. de Gouw, Jessica B. Gilman and others), Science Vol. 35, Issue 6377, pp. 760-764 (Feb. 16, 2018)) caught popular attention and some popular press because it found that vehicle emissions had become so much cleaner over the past decades that they were now responsible for less than half of VOC emissions.  Overall, the total volume of VOCs had diminished greatly.  Further, while the Science article authors made many assumptions on which they based their assessment of VOC contributions of consumer products, Mr. Benjamin pointed out that ARB has the actual data from its industry surveys to determine whether the author’s assumptions and conclusions are well founded.  ARB therefore intends to do its own assessment of the points made in the Science article to determine what further action is appropriate.

PCPC’s first Legislator of the Year Awards were presented to Senator Ed Hernandez, Assembly Member Bill Quirk and Senator Galgiani.  In his comments to PCPC members, Senator Hernandez emphasized, “We want business to stay here in California, we want businesses to be successful.  There’s a lot of people here that purchase your products.”   Assemblyman Quirk addressed the need for common sense limitations on legislation such as Proposition 65, remarking that “[Someone] sent me a package of Coors beer with a Prop 65 warning on it.  We now have cases in court where people want Prop 65 warnings on coffee. * * * One study after another shows it’s not a health risk. * * * We’ve got to do something about this.  I’m definitely going to be working as time goes on in the legislature so that we don’t end up with things that are harmless being labeled.”  Finally, Senator Galgiani observed that good legislative policy is not a zero sum game:  “It’s not about having a proposal that’s just good for the environment or just good for business but we can meet in the middle and have regulations and policies that work for both sides and help everybody involved.  It’s just harder to get there – it takes more work, it takes more time and it takes patience, and all of you [at PCPC] have done a great job.”

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
0

CK&E Sponsors 2016 PCPC Emerging Issues Conference

Posted by:

Conkle, Kremer & Engel is proud to once again sponsor the Personal Care Products Council Emerging Issues Conference on November 10, 2016 at the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Marina Del Rey, California.

John Conkle will attend the conference on behalf of CK&E to address current legal trends and developments in the cosmetic and personal care products industry.  This annual event by the PCPC – the leading national trade association for the cosmetic and personal care products industry – is a must-attend for beauty companies across the country, with its unique focus on the many challenges that are on the horizon for the beauty industry.  The presentation this year will include a particularly timely focus on international trade issues affecting the cosmetics industry, including appearances by industry representatives from Canada and Mexico.

This year’s conference is particularly topical panel discussion entitled “2016 Elections: What happened and what it means for you!”   The panel included Dan Schnur, a leading political strategist and Director of Jesse Unruh Institute of Politics at University of Southern California, which runs the USC-Los Angeles Times Daybreak Poll that was one of the few polls to correctly predict Donald Trump’s election.  In comments during their PCPC presentation, the panel noted that if President Trump follows through with pledges such as environmental regulation rollbacks, it is likely that California will respond by enacting its own additional rules and regulations.

2016-11-10-pcpc-mike-thompson-dan-schnur-darius-anderson-edited

Michael Thompson, Senior VP, PCPC Government Affairs; Dan Schnur Director, Jesse Unruh Institute of Politics, USC; Darius Anderson, CEO, Platinum Advisors

CK&E is pleased to once again participate in this annual event and to offer its experience and insight into legal issues affecting the industry to the PCPC and its members.

2016-emerging-issues-conference-cke-sponsor

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
0

CK&E to Present on Emerging Legal Issues at PCPC Emerging Issues Conference

Posted by:

Conkle, Kremer & Engel attorneys John Conkle and Kim Sim will once address current legal trends and developments in the cosmetic and personal care products industry at the Personal Care Products Council (PCPC)’s Emerging Issues Conference on November 18, 2015 at the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Marina Del Rey, California.

John and Kim will present on “Emerging Legal Issues in the Cosmetic and Personal Care Products Industry.”  The topics to be discussed include recent developments involving enforcement of prohibitions on container slack fill, trends in lawsuits and agency action concerning advertising, an update on the California Air Resources Board’s ongoing Consumer and Commercial Products Survey, as well as a discussion about protecting companies from counterfeiting and cybersquatting in the digital age.

CK&E’s presentation from last year’s Emerging Issues Conference can be found here.

The annual event by the PCPC – the leading national trade association for the cosmetic and personal care products industry – is a must-attend for beauty companies across the country, with its unique focus on the many challenges that are on the horizon for the beauty industry.

This year’s agenda will also include updates from the PCPC on key issues for the industry and from the California Department of Toxic Substances Control on the California Safer Consumer Products and Workplaces regulations, as well as presentations on emerging issues in the Americas, safety standards for cosmetics, current and future challenges for Proposition 65.  In addition, Deputy Attorney General Robert Sumner is slated to speak at the conference.

CK&E is pleased to once again participate in this annual event and to offer its experience and insight into legal issues affecting the industry to the PCPC and its members.

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
0

The Conkle Firm to Advance Legislative Awareness of Personal Care Product Issues

Posted by:

On April 22, 2015, Conkle, Kremer & Engel attorney John Conkle will again participate in the Personal Care Products Council California Lobby Day, an annual event organized by the PCPC and held at the California State Capitol in Sacramento.

The ambitious, single-day event puts the spotlight on the personal care industry as a key industry for the California economy.  According to the PCPC, the beauty and personal care products industry positively affects California in at least the following ways:

  • The industry contributes $22 billion to the state’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
  • The industry contributes $6 billion to the state in taxes
  • The industry employs over 500,000 workers associated with the manufacture, distribution and sale of cosmetics and personal care products
  • There are over 550,000 licensed beauty professionals in the salon and spa industry

The PCPC’s annual Lobby Day includes a full day of meetings with legislators and state officials, starting with a meeting at the Governor’s Office with top administrative officials.  The meetings are followed by educational briefings for legislative staff.  While the briefings for staff are taken place, PCPC staff and members will visit legislative offices to speak with lawmakers about bills of interest.  The day concludes with a legislative reception for California legislators, the Governor’s Office staff and Administration officials.

Among the legislation that is likely to be addressed with lawmakers at Lobby Day are

  • Assembly Bill (AB) 888 (Bloom), which would prohibit the sale of personal care products containing plastic microbeads after January 1, 2020, and
  • AB 708 (Jones-Sawyer), which would prohibit the manufacture, sale or distribution of certain consumer products unless the manufacturer discloses each ingredient contained in the product by posting that information on the product label and on the manufacturer’s website, and provides the website and web page address on the product label, along with a prescribed statement.

Other bills of interest to PCPC include the Proposition 65 bill AB 543 (Quirk), which would provide that a person in the course of doing business does not knowingly and intentionally expose an individual to a chemical known to the State of California to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity if there exists an exposure assessment that meets specified requirements.  In addition, the PCPC will present its positions on hazardous waste bill AB 1075 (Alejo) and pharmaceutical waste bills AB 901 (Gordon) and AB 45 (Mullin) with legislative officials.  Other key regulatory issues of importance to the personal care industry such as Green Chemistry, Proposition 65, Hazardous Waste, California Organic Products Act and Air Quality are also expected to be addressed at Lobby Day.

CK&E regularly participates in personal care product industry events.  As an active member of the PCPC, CK&E is pleased to support the industry’s efforts to advance the legal and regulatory interests of the PCPC and its member companies and is proud to have been invited to again participate in California Lobby Day.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
0

The Conkle Firm to Present on Emerging Legal Trends in Personal Care Products Industry

Posted by:

On November 19, 2014, Conkle, Kremer & Engel attorneys John Conkle and Kim Sim will speak on emerging legal trends in the cosmetic and personal care products industry at the Emerging Issues Conference in Santa Monica, California.  Their topics will include recent developments concerning hazardous waste regulation, trends in advertising and class action litigation affecting the personal care products industry, and an update on California’s regulation of volatile organic compounds in consumer products.

The Emerging Issues Conference is an annual presentation by the Personal Care Products Council.  The PCPC is the leading national trade association for the cosmetic and personal care products industry and represents the most innovative names in beauty today.  For more than 600 member companies, the PCPC is the voice on scientific, legal, regulatory, legislative and international issues for the personal care product industry. The PCPC is a leading and trusted source of information for and about the industry and a vocal advocate for consumer safety and continued access to new, innovative products.

Please join CK&E at the conference to hear important information on the latest legal trends affecting the industry.

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
0

The Conkle Firm is Featured in April 2014 Beauty Industry Report

Posted by:

Conkle, Kremer & Engel is proud to again be the subject of a feature interview in the industry-leading publication, Beauty Industry Report (BIR).  BIR is a monthly 24-page executive newsletter for professionals that focuses on the emerging trends affecting the beauty industry.  CK&E’s feature interview assessed the latest legal trends, based on CK&E’s decades of experience in the industry.  Topics covered included trademark and brand protection, both international and domestic, regulatory compliance issues such as California’s Proposition 65 and the Safe Cosmetics Act, issues in manufacturer-distributor relationships, and more.

The attached article includes links to topical blog posts and websites referenced in the interview.  CK&E wishes to thank BIR’s Mike Nave for taking the initiative to disseminate information about these important industry issues.  BIR proved again that working in the beauty industry without reading BIR is like working in finance without reading The Wall Street Journal.

BIR Feature Interview of CK&E

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
0

DTSC Announces Proposed Priority Products Subject to California Green Chemistry Initiative

Posted by:

The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has identified the first three groups of products that may become “Priority Products” subject to reporting and alternatives assessments requirements under California’s strict new Safer Consumer Products (SCP) Regulations.

The three groups of products on this initial list of proposed “Priority Products” are:

  • Children’s foam padded sleeping products containing the flame retardant Tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCPP or Tris)
  • Spray polyurethane foam (SPF) systems containing unreacted diisocyanates
  • Paint and varnish strippers and surface cleaners containing methylene chloride

Rulemaking on the proposed “Priority Products” list is expected to begin in late June 2014, with the final “Priority Products” list to be finalized by the following year by adoption of regulations.

If the product-chemical combinations announced by DTSC end up on the list of final “Priority Products,” manufacturers and other responsible entities (including importers, assemblers and even retailers) of these products will be required to notify DTSC and either remove the product from sale, reformulate to remove or replace the chemical of concern in the product, or perform a complex “Alternatives Analysis” to retain the chemical in the product.

As widely expected, the initial “Priority Products” list targets children’s foam padded sleeping products containing the flame retardant Tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCPP or Tris), such as nap mats and pads in soft-sided portable cribs, infant travel beds, portable infant sleepers, playards, play pens, bassinets and nap cots.

In addition, the initial “Priority Products” list targets all paint and varnish removers, paint and varnish strippers and surface cleaners that contain methylene chloride.  Spray polyurethane foam systems containing diisocyanates, both professional and consumer grade, are also proposed to be subject to regulation.  Such products are used for insulation, roofing, sealing and filling of voids and gaps.

TDCPP, methylene chloride, and toluene diisocynate are known carcinogens and exposures to the chemical to Californians above the no significant risk level require a warning under Proposition 65.  TDCPP was recently listed in October 2011 as a chemical regulated by Proposition 65.

The announcement of these three product groups as proposed “Priority Products” does not trigger any duty on product manufacturers until the DTSC finalizes the list of priority products by adopting regulations.  However, manufacturers of children’s foam padded sleeping products containing TDCPP, spray polyurethane foam systems containing diisocyanates, and paint and varnish strippers and surface cleaners containing methylene chloride are well advised to be proactive and take steps to determine whether the chemical can be removed from their products or replaced with a safer alternative chemical.

Conkle, Kremer & Engel regularly assists businesses to develop plans to ensure compliance with California’s ever-changing regulations, including the Safer Consumer Products Regulations and Green Chemistry Initiative.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
0

The Conkle Firm Presents Hot California Regulatory Compliance Issues in New York

Posted by:

Conkle, Kremer & Engel attorney John A. Conkle was the featured speaker at a special presentation given on February 11, 2014 in New York, New York to business executives and lawyers.

The presentation, entitled “Are Your Products California-Bound?  Dealing With California’s Unique Regulatory Schemes,” provided valuable information about and insight into such California regulatory laws and initiatives as:

  • Proposition 65 (California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986)
  • California Safe Cosmetics Act
  • California Green Chemistry Initiative (the Safer Consumer Products Regulations)
  • California Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Regulations
  • California Organic Products Act (COPA)
  • California Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA)

California’s vast and ever-changing regulations pose a challenge for businesses no matter where they may be located.  Any business manufacturing, distributing or selling products into California needs to comply with California’s regulatory schemes to stay out of difficulty with the California Attorney General, regulatory agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), bounty hunters, putative class action plaintiffs and even competitors.

CK&E was honored to team with the New York-based law firm Gottlieb, Rackman & Reisman, P.C., which specializes in intellectual property, to provide this presentation. CK&E has worked with the Gottlieb firm for nearly 25 years on matters of common intrest to our clients. CK&E’s active regulatory compliance practice has helped clients in numerous industries – including  such diverse areas as personal care products, alcoholic beverages, construction and recreational equipment.

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
0

Parabens Dropped as a Priority Chemical Under New Green Chemistry Regulations – DTSC Updates List of Initial Candidate Chemicals

Posted by:

On October 18, 2013, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) released an updated “Initial Candidate Chemicals List” – a list of chemicals that will be the first to receive the DTSC’s attention when it identifies “Priority Products” for regulation in 2014 under the new Safer Consumer Products Regulations.

The DTSC first released the list of “Initial Candidate Chemicals” on September 26, 2013, four days before the Safer Consumer Products Regulations implementing California’s Green Chemistry Initiative went into effect.  The Regulations require the list to be updated periodically.  With the update, the number of “Initial Candidate Chemicals” drops from 164 to 155.

The following chemicals were removed from the updated “Initial Candidate Chemicals List,” although each still appears on the “Candidate Chemical List”:

  • 4-Tert-Octylphenol; 1,1,3,3-Tetramethyl-4-butylphenol
  • Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether polymer; [2,2′-bis(2-(2,3-epoxypropoxy)phenyl)-propane]
  • Bisphenol B; (2,2-Bis(4-hydroxyphenyl)-n-butan)
  • Bromate
  • Dibromoacetic acid
  • Dichloroacetic acid
  • Dicyclohexyl phthalate and metabolite
  • Diethyl phthalate and metabolite
  • Nonylphenol, nonylphenol ethoxylates (NP/NPEs) (and related substances)
  • Parabens

In addition, Bis(2-chloro-1-methylethyl)ether,technical grade was added to the Initial Candidate List.

Scroll to the bottom of this post for the full list of the 155 priority chemicals, updated as of October 18, 2013.

Chemicals are placed on the “Initial Candidate Chemicals List” if they have both a hazard trait and environmental or toxicological effects.  Chemicals that have only a hazard trait or only environmental or toxicological effects are placed on the more extensive “Candidate Chemicals List,” of which the “Initial Candidate Chemicals List” is a subset.

The updated list of “Initial Candidate Chemicals” is significant in that it removes parabens as a priority chemical.  Parabens are commonly used in cosmetics as a preservative.  The family of parabens on the “Candidate Chemicals List” includes Butylparaben (includes n-butylparaben and isobutylparaben); Ethyl paraben, Ethyl 4-hydroxybenzoate; Methylparaben; Methyl p-Hydroxybenzoate; and n-Propylparaben.

What this means is that parabens will not be targeted by DTSC as a potential “chemical of concern” when the DTSC identifies priority products containing chemicals that will need to be subject to an alternatives analysis and regulatory response.  The DTSC must propose its list of up to five priority products, or categories of priority products, for regulation by April 1, 2014.  However, parabens continue to appear on the DTSC’s exhaustive list of more than 1,016 “Candidate Chemicals” so they may yet draw attention from the DTSC.

Conkle, Kremer & Engel attorneys stay up to date on the latest regulatory developments to provide expert guidance to clients seeking to avoid regulatory compliance issues and the potential liability that may follow.

DTSC list of 155 Priority Chemicals, updated as of October 18, 2013:

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane

1,1,1-Trichloroethane; Methyl chloroform

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

1,1,2-Trichloroethane

1,1-Dichloroethane

1,2,3-Trichloropropane

1,2-Diphenylhydrazine; Hydrazobenzene

1,2-Epoxybutane

1,3-Butadiene

1,3-Propane sultone; 1,2-Oxathiolane 2,2-dioxide

1,4-Dioxane

2,2-Bis(bromomethyl)propane-1,3-diol

2,4,6-Trinitro-1,3-dimethyl-5-tert-butylbenzene; musk xylene

2,4,6-Tri-tert-butylphenol

2,4.6-Trinitrotoluene (TNT)

2?Acetylaminofluorene

2-Methylaziridine (Propyleneimine)

2-Methylphenol, o-Cresol

2-Nitropropane

3-Methylphenol; m-Cresol

4,4′-Methylenedianiline; 4,4’-Diaminodiphenylmethane (MDA)

4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether, Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether

4-Nitrobiphenyl

Acetaldehyde

Acetamide

Acrylamide

Acrylonitrile

Allyl chloride

Aluminum

Aniline

Aromatic amines

Aromatic Azo Compounds

Arsenic and inorganic arsenic compounds

Asbestos (all forms, including actinolite, amosite, anthophyllite, chrysotile, crocidolite, tremolite)

Benzene

Benzene, Halogenated derivatives

Benzotrichloride

Benzyl chloride

Beryllium and Beryllium compounds

Biphenyl-3,3′,4,4′-tetrayltetraamine; Diaminobenzidine

Bis(2-chloro-1-methylethyl)ether,technical grade

Bisphenol A

Butylbenzyl phthalate and metabolite

Cadmium and cadmium compounds

Captan

Carbon monoxide

Carbon tetrachloride; CCl4

Catechol

Chlorendic acid

Chlorinated Paraffins

Chlorine dioxide

Chlorite

Chloroalkyl ethers

Chloroethane; ethyl chloride

Chloroprene; 2-chlorobuta-1,3-diene

Chromium hexavalent compounds (Cr (VI)

Chromium trioxide

Cobalt metal without tungsten carbide (including dust and cobalt compounds)

Cresols, Cresol mixtures

Cumene, [ isopropylbenzene]

Cyanide and Cyanide compounds

Cyclotetrasiloxane; Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4)

Diazomethane

Dibutyl phthalate and metabolites

Dichloroethylenes

Dichloromethane; methylene chloride

Diesel engine exhaust

Diethanolamine

Diethyl hexyl phthalate and metabolites

Diisobutyl phthalate and metabolite

Di-isodecyl phthalate and metabolite

Di-isononyl phthalate and metabolites

Dimethyl sulfate

Dimethylcarbamoyl chloride

Dinitrotoluenes

Di-n-Octyl Phthalate and metabolites

Dodecamethylcyclohexasiloxane (D6)

Emissions, Cokeoven

Epichlorohydrin; 1-Chloro-2,3-epoxypropane

Ethyl acrylate

Ethylbenzene

Ethylene dichloride; 1,2-Dichloroethane

Ethylene Glycol

Ethylene oxide; oxirane

Ethylene Thiourea

Ethyleneimine, Aziridine

Ethyl-tert-butyl ether

Formaldehyde

Fuel oils, high-sulfur; Heavy Fuel oil; (and other residual oils)

Gasoline (automotive, refined, processed, recovered, and other unspecified fractions)

Glutaraldehyde

Glycol ethers

Glycol ethers acetate

Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD), and mixed isomers

Hexachlorobuta1,3-diene

Hexachloroethane

Hexamethylene-1,6-diisocyanate

Hexamethylphosphoramide

HMX

Hydrazine, Hydrazine compounds and salts

Hydrogen sulfide

Jet Fuels, JP-4, JP-5, JP-7 and JP-8

Lead and Lead Compounds

Maleic anhydride

Manganese and manganese compounds

Mercury and mercury compounds

Methanol

Methyl chloride

Methyl isobutyl ketone, Isopropyl acetone; (MIBK)

Methyl isocyanate

Methylene diphenyl diisocyanates

Methylhydrazine and its salts

Methylnaphthalene; 2-Methylnaphthalene

Mineral Oils: Untreated and Mildly Treated

N,N-dimethylformamide; dimethyl formamide

N,N-Dimethylhydrazine

Naphthalene

n-Hexane

Nickel and Nickel Compounds; Nickel refinery dust from the pyrometallurgical process

Nickel oxides

Nickel, metallic and alloys

Nitrate+Nitrite

Nitrobenzene

Nitrosamines

Pentabromophenol

Perfluorochemicals

Petroleum; Crude oil

Phthalic anhydride

Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) congeners

Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) congeners

Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs)

Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-furans (PCDFs) and Furan Compounds

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)

Propylene oxide

Quinoline and its strong acid salts

Silica, Crystalline (Respirable Size)

Stoddard solvent; Low boiling point naphtha – unspecified;

Strong Inorganic Acid Mists Containing Sulfuric Acid

Styrene and derrivatives

Sulfur dioxide

Tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA)

Tetrachloroethylene; Perchloroethylene; (PERC)

Thallium

Toluene

Toluene Diisocyanates

Trichloroethene (TCE)

Trihalomethanes

Tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCPP)

Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl) phosphate

Tris(2-chloroethyl)phosphate (TCEP)

Vanadium pentoxide

Vinyl acetate

Vinyl Bromide, Bromoethylene

Vinyl chloride; chloroethylene

Xylenes; [o-xylene (95-47-6), m-xylene(108-38-3)and p-xylene (106-42-3)]

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
0

Navigating Civil Regulatory Issues: CK&E Presentation Highlights Key Regulations for Beauty Companies Doing Business in California

Posted by:

Conkle, Kremer & Engel attorneys were featured speakers at the Beauty Industry West presentation “Navigating in Challenging Regulatory Waters:  Updates on California and Federal Compliance.”  About 150 entrepreneurs, consultants, executives and beauty industry professionals attended the event at the Crowne Plaza Hotel LAX in Los Angeles on October 15, 2013, which included a valuable networking session and a post-presentation Q&A.

CK&E’s presentation about legal regulatory issues for personal care product companies doing business in California included an overview of the California Organic Products Act (COPA), Proposition 65 (California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act) and California’s Green Chemistry Initiative including the new Safer Consumer Products Regulations.  Conkle, Kremer & Engel’s materials from the BIW event, including the “Navigating Civil Regulatory Issues” presentation and its “Resource Guide for Regulatory Compliance,” are available for download on CK&E’s Regulatory Compliance web page.

Co-presenter Donald Frey, an industry veteran, regulatory expert and product development and innovation consultant, presented on key regulatory issues from the business perspective, including how to effectively deal with regulators. Mr. Frey has generously agreed to share his presentation, available for download here.

Among the questions and answers covered after the presentation were the addition of titanium dioxide (airborne, unbound particles of respirable size) to the Proposition 65 list of chemicals, responsible entities for purposes of compliance with the Safer Consumer Products Regulations, and the determination of organic ingredients under the National Organic Program standards.

Conkle, Kremer & Engel attorneys are frequent speakers at events of interest to the beauty industry due to their expertise in representing manufacturers, distributors, suppliers, retailers and salons in all aspects of their business, including the challenges of regulatory compliance.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
0
Page 1 of 2 12