Bill Text: HI HB704 | 2020 | Regular Session | Introduced
Bill Title: Relating To Cosmetics.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 6-0)
Status: (Engrossed - Dead) 2019-12-01 - Carried over to 2020 Regular Session. [HB704 Detail]
Download: Hawaii-2020-HB704-Introduced.html
|
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES |
H.B. NO. |
704 |
|
THIRTIETH LEGISLATURE, 2019 |
|
|
|
STATE OF HAWAII |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
A BILL FOR AN ACT
RELATING TO COSMETICS.
BE IT
ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII:
SECTION 1. The legislature finds that for more than fifty years, cosmetic manufacturers have used animals in painful tests to assess the safety of chemicals used in cosmetic products. Today, modern approaches that are cheaper, faster, and more reliable at predicting adverse human reactions are widely available and are becoming more accessible each year. In addition, companies now have thousands of existing cosmetic ingredients with histories of safe use that have long been sold and utilized.
California was the first state to prohibit the sale of cosmetics tested on animals, which was supported by dozens of cosmetic companies and industry associations including the Personal Care Products Council, California Retailers Association, and the California Manufacturers and Technology Association. The California ban takes effect in 2020. In 2013, the United State's largest trading partner, the European Union, ended the importation and sale of cosmetics that have been tested on animals. Today, more than thirty countries have banned cosmetic animal testing and several others have legislation pending.
The purpose of this Act is to prohibit manufacturers from selling cosmetic products in the State that are tested on animals after 2020. It is not the intent of this Act to penalize retailers or consumers who rely on manufacturers to meet state laws or rules, nor is it the intent to prohibit the continued import or export of cosmetic products into the State from other countries, regardless of the testing requirements of other countries, if the safety of the product sold in the State does not rely on animal testing data that was performed after 2020. This approach is consistent with the implementation of the European Union regulations and the recently adopted California law.
SECTION 2. Chapter 328, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new section to part I to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:
"§328- Cosmetics; animal testing; prohibition. (a) Notwithstanding
any other law, it shall be unlawful for a manufacturer to import for profit,
sell, or offer for sale in this State, any cosmetic, for which an animal test
was conducted or contracted by or on behalf of the manufacturer, or any
supplier of the manufacturer, on or after January 1, 2021.
(b) For purposes of this section:
"Animal
test" means the internal or external application of a cosmetic, either in
its final form or any ingredient thereof, to the skin, eyes, or other body part
of a live, nonhuman vertebrate.
"Cosmetic"
means any article intended to be rubbed, poured, sprinkled, or sprayed on,
introduced into, or otherwise applied to the human body or any part thereof for
cleansing, beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance,
including, but not limited to, personal hygiene products such as deodorant,
shampoo, or conditioner.
"Drug"
means an article as defined in section 201(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act.
"Ingredient"
means any component of a cosmetic as defined by title 21 Code of Federal
Regulations section 700.3.
"Manufacturer"
means any person whose name appears on the label of a cosmetic product pursuant
to the requirements of title 21 Code of Federal Regulations section 701.12.
"Supplier"
means any entity that supplies, directly or through a third party, any
ingredient used in the formulation of a manufacturer's cosmetic.
(c)
The prohibitions in subsection (a) shall not apply to:
(1) An animal test of the cosmetic that is required by a federal or state regulatory authority if all of the following apply:
(A) The ingredient tested is in wide use and cannot
be replaced by another ingredient capable of performing a similar function;
(B) A specific human health problem is
substantiated and the need to conduct animal tests is justified and is
supported by a detailed research protocol proposed as the basis for the
evaluation; and
(C) There is no nonanimal testing method
accepted for the relevant endpoint by the applicable federal or state
regulatory authority;
(2) An animal
test that was conducted to comply with a requirement of a foreign regulatory
authority, if no evidence derived from such tests was relied upon to
substantiate the safety of a cosmetic sold within the State by the
manufacturer;
(3) An animal
test that was conducted on any product or ingredient subject to the requirements
of subchapter V of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C 351 et
seq.); and
(4) An animal
test that was conducted for noncosmetic purposes in response to a written requirement
of a federal, state, or foreign regulatory authority; provided that no evidence
derived from such test is relied upon to substantiate the safety of a cosmetic
sold within the State by the manufacturer.
A manufacturer is not prohibited from reviewing, assessing, or retaining
evidence from an animal test conducted pursuant to this paragraph.
(d)
A violation of this section shall be punishable by a fine of $5,000 and
an additional $1,000 for each day the violation continues.
(e)
A violation of this section may be enforced by the prosecuting attorney
of the county in which the violation occurred. The fine shall be paid to the county in which
the violation occurred.
(f)
A prosecuting attorney may, upon reasonable belief that a violation has
occurred under this section, review the testing data upon which a cosmetic manufacturer
has relied in the development or manufacturing of the relevant cosmetic product
sold in the State.
(g)
Any information disclosed under this section shall be protected as a
trade secret and a prosecuting attorney shall enter into a protective order
with a manufacturer before receipt of the information from a manufacturer. A prosecuting attorney shall take other
appropriate measures necessary to preserve the confidentiality of the
information produced pursuant to this section.
(h)
This section shall not apply to animal testing conducted on an
ingredient or cosmetic in its final form if the animal testing took place prior
to the effective date of Act , Session Laws of
Hawaii 2019."
SECTION 3. New statutory material is underscored.
SECTION 4. This Act shall take effect on January 1, 2020.
|
INTRODUCED BY: |
_____________________________ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report Title:
Cruelty-free; Animal Testing; Cosmetics; Prohibition; Fines
Description:
Bans, beginning January 1, 2020, the import for profit, sale, and offer for sale of any cosmetic in the State, if the final product or any component of the product was developed or manufactured using animal testing performed on or after January 1, 2020. Effective January 1, 2020.
The summary description
of legislation appearing on this page is for informational purposes only and is
not legislation or evidence of legislative intent.
