Toxics in Packaging Clearinghouse Issues Updates to its Packaging Model Legislation

The Toxics in Packaging Clearinghouse (TPCH) has announced that it has updated its model legislation to include the addition of the class of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and ortho-phthalates as regulated chemicals, as well as new processes and criteria for identifying and regulating additional chemicals of high concern in packaging.  The TPCH maintains the Model Toxics In Packaging Legislation and coordinates implementation of state legislation, based on the Model, on behalf of its member states, with the goal of promoting consistency across states.

Currently, there are 19 states  that have adopted TPCH’s earlier version of their model legislation prohibiting the intentional use of use of certain heavy metals that include cadmium, lead, mercury, and hexavalent chromium in any finished package or packaging component. The laws also limit the total incidental concentration of the four metals to 100 parts per million (ppm). States with current legislation in force will need to adopt amendments to existing laws if they decide to follow the model legislation.  

The implementation of this legislation impacts the printing industry as these limits are applicable to not only packaging, but all packaging components.  Packaging components have always been defined to include, among other items, inks, dyes, adhesives, and labels. 

The new legislative model also includes a new section outlining a process for states to adopt when considering revising the list of packaging chemicals of high concern.  There is no specific list of chemicals included in the model language, but it does define the characteristics of a chemical of high concern and that adding such a chemical requires action by the respective state agency. PRINTING United Alliance, in its comments to the TCPH on their proposed revisions, recommended that a requirement be added to conduct an alternative assessment to determine and document the availability and technical feasibility of a safer alternative be performed.  This recommendation was not accepted and under the model legislation, states would be able to add chemicals to the list as long as the chemical in question has been identified by an authoritative governmental agency and met the criteria defined. 

Both the new model legislation as well as existing state laws prohibit intentional use place the primary burden of compliance on the supply chain by requiring manufacturers and suppliers to verify that their products comply.

For more information on this new model legislation, please reach out to PRINTING United Alliance’s Government & Regulatory Affairs Department:  Marci Kinter,; or Gary Jones,

Also Tagged: SM Advocacy