[T]he Senate Committee on Health and Welfare has approved a bill that would update the state’s toxic substances regulations.
The legislation, S.55, changes the standard for review of toxic chemicals in children’s products and gives the Health Department commissioner sole discretion to regulate toys.
Industry groups oppose the changes. The Scott administration says the bill needs to be modified before the governor will sign off on it.
The committee voted 4-0 to send an amended version of S.55 to the Senate floor on Tuesday.
“I think this really makes an improvement to the process and allows the program and the Department of Health to work much more smoothly,” said Sen. Ginny Lyons, D-Chittenden, committee chair and lead sponsor of the bill, in an interview Tuesday.
Lawmakers, citing a lack of action by the federal government to regulate toxic substances, passed Act 188 in 2014, which established a list of 66 chemicals of high concern for exposure by children. Manufacturers of toys and other children’s products are required to notify the Department of Health if their products contain elevated levels of one of those chemicals.
Under current law, the health commissioner can add a chemical to the list if there is a “weight of credible, scientific evidence” that it is toxic and does not break down. The commissioner can also regulate the sale of children’s products containing a chemical of high concern upon the recommendation of a working group made up of scientists, advocates and industry representatives.
Under S.55, the weight of evidence standard would be replaced with a requirement that the commissioner use peer-reviewed scientific evidence when considering possible chemicals to place on the list. S.55 would also allow the commissioner to regulate the sale of children’s toys in consultation with, rather than on the recommendation of, the working group.
During a committee discussion Tuesday, Sen. Dick McCormack, D-Windsor, also expressed concerns over eliminating the weight of evidence criteria.
“The standard of credible, peer-reviewed scientific information — now that could describe the kind of stuff you get from the Heartland Institute,” he said, referring to the conservative think tank known for working to discredit climate change science and the health risks of secondhand smoke.
Lyons countered in committee that while any review standard has the potential to be abused, the Legislature is entrusting the commissioner to make scientifically sound determinations. The bill has checks and balances in the review process, she said. Washington and Maine have similar statutes.
“It’s not like it’s one person (with a) knee-jerk reaction (and) one study doing all of this overnight,” she said in an interview. “There’s a process in place and there is a timeline in the underlying bill and in the corrections that we’ve made.”
The new bill proposes that manufacturers also provide the health department with the brand name, model and universal product code of toys, which Lyons said would provide more “clarity” for parents.
“That’s one thing that’s in the bill that’s really important for transparency … and giving information for parents when they go shopping,” she said.
The bill has faced opposition from industry representatives who say it could allow the state to restrict products with insufficient evidence of harm. Bill Driscoll, vice president of the Associated Industries of Vermont, said during testimony in February that the group was concerned that S.55 would “undermine the integrity and credibility” of the state’s current regulation of children’s products.
Driscoll opposed giving the health commissioner sole discretion to regulate toys and the elimination of the weight of evidence burden standard.
“Health risk is clearly a significant factor,” he said. “However, considerations like economic impacts, customer needs, available feasible alternatives, and others are also important, especially if health concerns are not at critical levels.”
This is not the first time the Senate will vote on proposals to update how Vermont regulates toxic substances in children’s products. Last year, senators overrode the governor’s veto of a similar proposal, S.103. The House sustained Scott’s veto.
Rebecca Kelley, spokesperson for the governor, said in an email that, while it is still early in the legislative process, “we hope to reach consensus with the Legislature as this bill moves forward.” She attached a copy of the governor’s veto message last session for S.103, in which he expressed concerns that the bill duplicates existing efforts.
“The regulatory process is working and should proceed as originally envisioned,” wrote the governor. “With a robust process in place, children will not be any safer as a result of the proposed changes contained in this bill.”
Clarification: An earlier version of this story included a reference to establishment of an Interagency Committee on Chemical Management, which was removed in the amended version of the bill.
