Allen Matkins
ProfessionalsIndustries & ServicesNews & InsightsCareers

  • Professionals
  • Industries & Services
  • News & Insights
  • Careers
  • Offices
  • About
Manage Subscriptions

News & Insights

Legal Alert

Manufacturers, Importers and Retailers Must Take Action Following DTSC Reveal of Priority Products

Environmental & Natural Resources

3.07.14

Manufacturs, Importers and Retailers Must Take Action Following DTSC Reveal of Priority Products

Watch the video

Once again, California is on the leading edge of environmental programs. An approaching April 1, 2014, deadline for publication of a “Priority Products List” under “Safer Consumer Products Regulations” that first went into effect on October 1, 2013, has manufacturers, importers, and retailers awaiting news of which products will be selected for further scrutiny.

The regulations were developed by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (“DTSC”) and will be implemented in a series of steps over the next few years.

Step 1: Establish Candidate Chemicals List.

The “Candidate Chemicals” list is a list of chemicals that exhibit a “hazard trait and/or an environmental or toxicological endpoint.” This list is available here and includes about 1,200 chemicals, many of which are widely used in consumer products. The regulations also provide a mechanism for DTSC to add more chemicals to the list.

Step 2: Publish Priority Products List.

By April 1, 2014, DTSC will identify a short list of up to five “Priority Products” that contain a chemical on the Candidate Chemicals list for which there is a risk of human or environmental exposure. DTSC has not yet provided any indication of which specific products it might include on the Priority Products list. After the initial Priority Products list is published, DTSC must finalize the list through formal rulemaking, a process that may take up to a year.

Step 3: Notification and Preliminary Alternatives Analysis.

Once the Priority Products list is finalized, companies that manufacture, import, or sell a Priority Product (“responsible entities”) have 60 days to notify DTSC of its status as a “responsible entity” and 180 days to develop and submit to DTSC a preliminary “Alternatives Analysis” report. In the report, responsible entities must evaluate different ways of making the product to limit exposure to Candidate Chemicals. An Alternatives Analysis may include reducing or eliminating the chemical from the product entirely, or possibly constructing or formulating the product in a different way so that, even if the chemical is still used, the exposure risk to consumers and the environment is reduced. Because the analyses will likely contain valuable trade secret information about how the products are made and about the availability or viability of any potential reformulations, this disclosure requirement raises a host of questions regarding what companies must disclose, what they can withhold, and what the government will do to safeguard trade secret information.

Step 4: Final Alternatives Analysis.

After DTSC approves a preliminary Alternatives Analysis report, responsible entities will have one year to develop and submit a final report.

Step 5: Regulatory Responses.

Once DTSC has received the final Alternatives Analysis report, it will use that information to require implementation of “regulatory responses.” It is too early to tell what those responses will be, but they might include requiring companies to start making products in alternative ways to reduce chemical exposure or even banning products that manufacturers decline to reformulate.

Although no one knows yet which products will be identified as “Priority Products” requiring Alternatives Analysis, some major manufacturers have already taken proactive steps to remove Candidate Chemicals from their products. For example, Johnson & Johnson recently announced that it has completed the process of removing formaldehyde-releasing preservatives and reducing traces of 1,4 dioxane from all of its baby products.

Interestingly, Johnson & Johnson never added formaldehyde or 1,4 dioxane as ingredients in their products; those chemicals were byproducts of the manufacturing process. Johnson & Johnson’s experience illustrates the fact that even companies that never intentionally use Candidate Chemicals need to think about whether those chemicals might still end up in their products.

SUBSCRIBE

Author

Kamran Javandel

Partner

San FranciscoT(415) 273-7473kjavandel@allenmatkins.com
Email Kamran Javandel
Download Kamran Javandel Vcard
Kamran Javandel LinkedIn

RELATED SERVICES

  • Environmental & Natural Resources

News & Insights

Manage Subscriptions

Legal Alert

Birds, Trees, and Bees – Oh My! Practical Guidance for Addressing Candidate Species in CEQA Analysis

6.18.25

Legal Alert

California Battery Energy Storage Update

6.18.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Legal Alert

California Continues to Promote Clean Energy Transition Despite Federal Backstepping on Clean Energy and Hydrogen Funding

6.18.25

Legal Alert

California’s New Climate-Related Disclosure Laws: Requirements, Compliance Costs, and Deadlines for Impacted Businesses

6.18.25

Newsletter

Special Water Supply Edition: California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.25.25

Event

CEQA Reform Legislation and the Impact of AB 130 and SB 131

7.23.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.18.25

Legal Alert

Project Applicants Can Now Pay for Expedited Federal Environmental Review Under NEPA

7.16.25

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.11.25

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.03.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Press, Media, & Articles

How CEQA Reforms Address California's Housing Squeeze

7.03.25

Legal Alert

Effective Immediately: CEQA Reform Legislation

7.02.25

Press, Media, & Articles

Allen Matkins Elects Eight Lawyers to Partnership

7.01.25

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

6.27.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Press, Media, & Articles

2025 Land Use, Environmental & Natural Resources Update

6.18.25

Legal Alert

Beyond Sackett: California’s Expanding Role in Wetlands Permitting and the Future of “Waters of the State”

6.18.25

Legal Alert

Birds, Trees, and Bees – Oh My! Practical Guidance for Addressing Candidate Species in CEQA Analysis

6.18.25

Legal Alert

California Battery Energy Storage Update

6.18.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Legal Alert

California Continues to Promote Clean Energy Transition Despite Federal Backstepping on Clean Energy and Hydrogen Funding

6.18.25

Legal Alert

California’s New Climate-Related Disclosure Laws: Requirements, Compliance Costs, and Deadlines for Impacted Businesses

6.18.25

Newsletter

Special Water Supply Edition: California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.25.25

Event

CEQA Reform Legislation and the Impact of AB 130 and SB 131

7.23.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.18.25

Legal Alert

Project Applicants Can Now Pay for Expedited Federal Environmental Review Under NEPA

7.16.25

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.11.25

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

7.03.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Press, Media, & Articles

How CEQA Reforms Address California's Housing Squeeze

7.03.25

Legal Alert

Effective Immediately: CEQA Reform Legislation

7.02.25

Press, Media, & Articles

Allen Matkins Elects Eight Lawyers to Partnership

7.01.25

Newsletter

California Environmental Law & Policy Update

6.27.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Press, Media, & Articles

2025 Land Use, Environmental & Natural Resources Update

6.18.25

Legal Alert

Beyond Sackett: California’s Expanding Role in Wetlands Permitting and the Future of “Waters of the State”

6.18.25

Legal Alert

Birds, Trees, and Bees – Oh My! Practical Guidance for Addressing Candidate Species in CEQA Analysis

6.18.25

Legal Alert

California Battery Energy Storage Update

6.18.25

Photo of mountains with trees and grass in the foreground

Legal Alert

California Continues to Promote Clean Energy Transition Despite Federal Backstepping on Clean Energy and Hydrogen Funding

6.18.25

Legal Alert

California’s New Climate-Related Disclosure Laws: Requirements, Compliance Costs, and Deadlines for Impacted Businesses

6.18.25

View All
  • Contact Us
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Policy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Request Personal Data Information

Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP. All Rights Reserved.

Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter
Instagram

This publication is made available by Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP for educational purposes only to convey general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this website you acknowledge there is no attorney client relationship between you and Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP. This publication should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney applied to your circumstances. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Full Disclaimer