10 Spray March 2016 Pressure Points Doug Fratz CSPa aerosol Products Division Staff executive Ingredient Communication: The Long Road to Transparency When I joined the Chemical Specialties Manufacturers Association (CSMA) in 1980, the personal care products industry had just agreed to full ingredient labeling, and the Cosmetic Toiletry & Fragrance Association had created its Cosmetic Ingredients Dictionary to define ingredient nomenclature. One of my first assignments was to create a business plan for a CSMA ingredients dictionary in anticipation of mandates in our product sectors. Before affordable microcomputers, the project turned out to be far too resource-intensive and was never initiated. In the following decades, labeling regulations for consumer specialty products have required disclosure of those ingredients posing a significant hazard— as determined by the U.S. Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC) and the U.S. Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA)—and pesticide active ingredients, as per the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). No legislative or regulatory mandates for full ingredient disclosure were implemented. However, as the 21st century progressed, that changed. The first action was in Europe. The European Detergent Regulation was amended in 2004 (EC Regulation No. 648) to require full ingredient disclosure, including percent ranges and certain fragrance components considered allergens. In the U.S., a group of state attorneys general petitioned EPA to require disclosure of inert, as well as active, pesticide ingredients in 2006. In 2007–2008, legislation was proposed in California and in Congress, and lawsuits were filed to have New York State interpret legislation and regulation from the 1970s to mandate full ingredient disclosure. The Consumer Specialty Products Association (CSPA—formerly CSMA) opposed all of these proposals due to their broad scope, technical infeasibility and lack of trade secret protection. It became clear in 2008 to CSPA and many industry members that demands for mandated ingredient disclosure were growing. The association recognized that ingredient communication, if done correctly, could help the household and institutional products industry increase consumer confidence. Decades of cosmetics industry experience showed how it could be done. CSPA began work on two related projects aimed at providing a standard for engaging in effective ingredient communication: 1. A voluntary industry standard for ingredient communication, developed with other U.S. and Canadian trade associations; and, 2. The CSPA Consumer Product Ingredients Dictionary, developed to support consistent nomenclature in the voluntary initiative. Both of these projects began in 2009. CSPA engaged public interest groups in discussions about the initiative and the dictionary. Almost 30 years after its initial conception, an ingredients dictionary for our industry was in active development, and by 2009 consumer product companies were using their websites to engage in full ingredient communication for the first time. However, the voluntary program did not put an end to calls for mandated ingredient disclosure. There was revised, but still infeasible, California legislation in 2009, and EPA issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking on inert ingredients disclosure. In 2010, federal legislative proposals joined the California bill, and New York State proposed to implement its regulation. While these proposals were not feasible for industry, in 2011 enhancements were made to the voluntary industry initiative. To promote the provisions of the enhanced voluntary initiative, CSPA worked with the EPA Design for the Environment Program (DfE) to require ingredient communication consistent with the industry model for DfE-partner products and to reference the CSPA Dictionary. CSPA also successfully proposed a voluntary pilot project to EPA on pesticide inert disclosure. Beginning in 2012, CSPA made three indices to its Dictionary available free for public access, and in 2014 formed a Dictionary Advisory Group composed of regulatory agency and public interest group representatives. In 2014, Walmart adopted th CSPA model and the Dictionary nomenclature for its own supplier ingredient communication program. Consumer products companies are now employing a wide variety of methods for ingredient communication, and many are using the voluntary industry standard for ingredient communication. Despite the industry’s best efforts, California Assembly Bill 708 (Jones-Sawyer, D-Los Angeles) was introduced in 2015 with what we believe is an unacceptable scope in terms of products and ingredients to be disclosed with no trade secret protections. On Jan. 28, 2016, Assembly Bill 708 failed in the Assembly. CSPA, along with other industry stakeholders, worked to prevent the bill from moving off the Assembly floor to allow stakeholders to continue working with the author toward a consensus bill. Federally, an environmental group has just filed a new lawsuit challenging EPA’s abandonment of inert disclosure. CSPA and its members will continue to support meaningful ingredient communication, and seek to avoid regulatory mandates that compromise confidential business information. We know that it is feasible to engage in ingredient communication that demonstrates transparency and increases public confidence in our products, while protecting the confidential business information that allows us to continue to improve our products and support innovation. SPRAY
Spray March 2016
To see the actual publication please follow the link above