Labeling state legislation

Supportive State legislation is required only to cover activities of persons within one State, and specified areas (such as some aspects of labelling, packaging, distribution and fair trade) that are the responsibility of State governments. 

The NDPSC decisions in relation to the SUSDP have no force in Commonwealth law. However, State legislation refers to or reflects the SUSDP (occasionally with some differences in some States) and may impose warning statements and other labelling and packaging requirements additional to those covered by Commonwealth legislation and associated Therapeutic Goods Orders (TGOs). 

The two most important pieces of chemical control legislation enacted affecting the dye and pigment industries are the United States Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) and EEC s Classification, Packaging, and Labeling of Dangerous Substances and its amendments. Table 2 is a comparison of TSCA and the 6th Amendment of the EEC classifications. 

Since food colorants are used as food additives, they must also comply with legislative requirements. Food legislation in the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) differs with regard to additives and labeling. Therefore, this section provides an overview of legislation in the EU (Section 7.1.6.1) and the US (Section 7.1.6.2) and discusses colorants permitted for use in food products according to the different requirements. 

US legislation on food additives consists of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD C Act), the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act, and other applicable laws including the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act. The FD C Act states that foods are adulterated if they contain color additives that have not been approved as safe to the satisfaction of the Food Drug Administration (FDA) for a particular use. ... 

In almost 50 years of regulating the sale of economic poisons, the state of California has developed legislation to prevent sale of worthless products, to provide for adequate labeling, and to assure users that the products correspond to guarantee. Each product must be registered before it can be sold legally in the state, and conformity to guarantee is determined by analysis of samples. 

Legal Controls. These include a labeling law requiring all economic poisons to be clearly labeled according to content and amount of each ingredient, with appropriate statements on first aid measures and precautions and an adequate system of inspection for the presence of poisonous residues on the surface of, or within, the foods placed on the market. It is recommended also that the states adopt legislation consistent with the federal laws. 

Most of the commercially available azo dyes do not break down to produce these forbidden amines. The European legislation which states that leather articles that come into contact with human skin should not contain any of the 22 aromatic amines in concentrations above 30 ppm can be found in Annex XVII [12] of REACH. Furthermore, most eco-labels and RSL have the same criteria. 

Antioxidants should be labelled on the retail package with the specific chemical name or with the EC number. The legislation of member states of the EU is influenced by the decision taken within the EC. Some food standards are fully based on EC Directives and some are still based on national considerations. There may be differences between European states, for instance, the utilisation of ascorbic acid as antioxidant for egg products is permitted in France but prohibited in Germany. These differences concern usually the utilisation of antioxidants in various food commodities. The specification of antioxidants mentioned in EC Directives are respected by all member states. But it is still generally required that individual countries of the European Union as well as the central organisation should be approached. The requirements appearing in the EC Directives on additives must be applied by the member states. This means in the first place that for those categories of additives for which a Community positive list exists, member states may not authorise any additives which do not appear on the positive list. 

See, e.g., Trop v Dulles, 356 U.S. 86,95 (1958) [ even a clear legislative classification of a statute as nonpenal would not alter the fundamental nature of a plainly penal statute .] Knecht v Gillman, 488 F.2d 1136,1139-40 (8th Cir. 1973) [noting that the mere characterization of an act as treatment does not insulate it from eighth amendment scrutiny and that neither the label which a State places on its own conduct, nor even the legitimacy of its motivation, can avoid the applicability of the Federal Constitution ]. 

Legislation is passed by state, national or international regulatory agencies and creates a requirement to test emissions from one or more types of product/mate-rial. (Industry specific voluntary labeling schemes can create a similar requirement for emissions testing.) Examples of relevant regulations include ... 

---