 
 
 
 
 
 CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2020, VOLUME NUMBER 9-Z 
You may obtain a copy of the final statement of rea-
sons once it has been prepared, by making a written re-
quest to the contact person named below or by access-ing the website listed below. 
CONTACT PERSON 
Inquiries or  comments concerning the proposed rule-
making action may be addressed to: 
Name: 
Gabriel Nevin, Legislative and Regulatory Analyst 
Address: 
Dental Board of California 2005 Evergreen Street, Suite 1550 
Sacramento, CA 95815 
Telephone Number: 
(916) 263−2027 
Fax Number: 
(916) 263−2140 
E−Mail Address: 
gabriel.nevin@dca.ca.gov 
The backup contact person is: 
Name: 
Steve Long, Budget Analyst 
Address: 
Dental Board of California 
2005 Evergreen Street, Suite 1550 Sacramento, CA 95815 
Telephone Number: 
(916) 263−0967 
Fax Number: 
(916) 263−2140 
E−Mail Address: 
steve.long@dca.ca.gov 
Website Access:  Materials regarding this proposal 
can be found at the Board’s website at 
http://www.dbc.ca.  gov/lawsregs/index.shtml. 
TITLE 22. DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC 
SUBSTANCES CONTROL 
SAFER CONSUMER PRODUCTS 
REGULATIONS — Listing Carpets and Rugs 
Containing Perfluoroalkyl or Polyfluoroalkyl 
Substances as a Priority Product 
Department of Toxic Substances Control reference 
number: R−2019−02 
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Department 
of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) proposes to amend the California Code of Regulations, title 22, di
-
vision 4.5, chapter 10, section 66260.11 and chapter 55, 
section 69511, and adopt section 69511.4. This pro-
posed amendment pertains to identification of a Priority 
Product under the Safer Consumer Products (SCP) reg-
ulations, approved by the Office of A dministrative Law 
(OAL) and filed with the Secretary of State on August 28, 2013 (effective date: 10/01/2013; OAL Regulatory 
Action Number: 2013−0718−03). 
PUBLIC HEARING 
DTSC will hold a public hearing on the proposed reg-
ulation at the following time and location: 
DATE: 
April 13, 2020 
TIME: 
9:00 a.m.−1:00 p.m. 
LOCATION: 
CalEPA Building, Sierra Hearing Room 
1001 “I” Street 
Sacramento, California, 95814 
When the hearing convenes any person(s) may 
present statements or arguments, orally or in writing, relevant to this proposal. The public hearing will begin 
at 9:00 a.m. and will remain open until 1:00 p.m. or until 
all registered persons complete their testimony. 
Representatives of DTSC will preside at the hearing. 
Anyone wishing to sp eak must register before the hear-
ing. Pre−hearing registration is conducted at the loca-tion of the hearing from 8:45 a.m. until the hearing com-
mences. Registered persons will be heard in the order of 
their registration. Anyone else wishing to speak at the 
hearing will have an opportunity after all registered per-
sons have been heard. DTSC reserves the right to set time limits to ensure that everyone has an opportunity to 
speak. 
All visitors are required to sign in prior to attending 
any meeting at the Visitor and Environmental Services 
Center, located just inside and to the left of the build-ing’s public entrance. Please allow adequate time to 
sign in and receive a visitor badge before the public 
hearing begins. 
NOTICE PERTAINING TO ACCESSIBILITY AND 
REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION 
All documents related to these regulations can be 
made available in alternate format (i.e., Braille, large print, etc.) or in another language, as requested, in ac-
cordance with State and Federal law . Further, to ensure 
the public has equal access to all available services and 
information, DTSC will provide disability−related rea-
sonable accommodations and/or translator/interpreter 
316  
 
  
  
 CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2020, VOLUME NUMBER 9-Z 
needs, upon request. For assistance, please contact the 
staff person below as soon as possible, no later than 10 
business days prior to the scheduled hearing. 
Ms. Jackie Buttle Office of Legislation and Regulatory Review 
Department of T oxic Substances Control 
P.O. Box 806 
Sacramento, California 95812−0806 Fax Number: (916) 324−1808 
TTY/TDD/Speech−to−Speech users may 
dial 7−1−1 for the California Relay Service. 
WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD 
Any interested person(s) or their authorized repre-
sentative(s) may submit written comments relevant to the proposed regulatory action to DTSC in either elec-
tronic or hard−copy formats. W ritten comments may be 
submitted electronically through the SCP Information 
Management System, CalSAFER at: https://calsafer. 
dtsc.ca.gov/ . Please direct questions or concerns about 
CalSAFER to Simona Balan at 510−540−3888 or 
simona.balan@dtsc.ca.gov . While DTSC prefers that 
comments be submitted through the CalSAFER sys-tem, interested persons may also submit their com-ments in an email to: SaferConsumerProducts@dtsc. 
ca.gov. 
Written comments may also be submitted electroni-
cally through the DTSC regulations email address at regs@dtsc.ca.gov  or please direct hard−copy written 
comments to Ms. Jackie Buttle, Regulations Coordina-
tor, as specified above. 
The written comment period will close on April 13, 
2020. Only comments received at the DTSC office by 
that date and time will be considered. Any interested 
person(s) or their authorized representative(s) may sub-
mit written comments relevant to the proposed regula-tory action to DTSC in either electronic or hard copy 
formats. DTSC will only consider comments received 
on or before this date and time or submitted during the public hearing. 
AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE 
Authority 
This regulation is being adopted under the following 
authorities: 
 Health and Safety Code (HSC) section 25252 authorizes and requires DTSC to adopt regulations 
to establish a process to identify and prioritize those chemicals or chemical ingredients in consumer products that may be considered a Chemical of Concern. This section also directs DTSC to reference and use available information 
from various sources but does not limit DTSC to 
use only this information. 
 HSC section 25253 authorizes and requires DTSC to adopt regulations that establish a process for 
evaluating Chemicals of Concern in consumer 
products, and their potential alternatives, to determine how best to limit exposure to or to reduce the level of hazard posed by a Chemical of 
Concern. 
 HSC section 58012 (added by Government 
Reorganization Plan Number 1, section 146, effective July 17, 1991) grants DTSC authority to 
adopt regulations to execute its duties. 
Reference 
This regulation implements, interprets, or makes spe-
cific the following statutes: 
 HSC sections 25252 and 25253. 
INFORMATIVE DIGEST 
Policy Statement Overview: 
Sections Affected: DTSC proposes to amend sections 
69511 and add one Priority Product to the Priority Prod-
uct list (section 69511.4) in Article 11, Chapter 55, Di-
vision 4.5 of Title 22, of the California Code of 
Regulations. 
Background and Effect of the Proposed Regulatory 
Action: 
The SCP regulations were adopted in October 2013 
to meet the statutory requirements outlined in HSC sec -
tions 25252 and 25253. The regulations outline a 
science−based process for evaluating Chemicals of Concern in consumer products and safer alternatives 
by: 
 Establishing a list of Candidate Chemicals and 
specifying criteria by which these may be designated Chemicals of Concern; 
 Establishing a process to identify and prioritize 
product and Candidate Chemical combinations 
that may be listed as Priority Products; 
 Requiring manufacturers to notify DTSC when their product is listed as a Priority Product; 
 Requiring manufacturers of a Priority Product to perform an Alternatives Analysis (AA) to 
determine how b est to reduce exposures to, or the 
level of adverse public health or environmental 
impacts posed by, the Chemical(s) of Concern in 
the product; 
 Requiring DTSC to identify and require 
implementation of Regulatory Responses following completion of an AA; and 
 Creating a process for persons to petition DTSC to 
add chemicals to the Candidate Chemicals list, add 
317    
 
  
 
 
 CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2020, VOLUME NUMBER 9-Z 
or remove Candidate Chemicals lists in their 
entirety, or to add or remove a product−chemical 
combination from the Priority Products List. 
DTSC proposes to amend sections 66260.11 and 
69511 and add section 69511.4 to Article 11 of the SCP 
regulations. The proposed action will add carpets or 
rugs containing any perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl 
substances (PF ASs) as a Priority Product on the Priority 
Products List. 
This listing applies to any consumer product made 
from natural or synthetic fabric intended to be used as a 
floor covering inside commercial or residential build-ings that contains any PFASs. This includes carpeted 
door mats because they are also used inside buildings. 
This listing excludes the following: 
 Carpets and rugs intended solely for outdoor use; 
 Carpets and rugs intended solely for use inside airplanes, trains, automobiles, light duty trucks, 
vans, buses, or any other vehicles, as well as light 
duty trucks, vans, buses, or any other vehicles; 
 Carpets and rugs intended for use in any other indoor environments besides buildings; 
 Resilient floor coverings; 
 Artificial turf; 
 Wall hangings and coverings; 
 Table mats; and 
 Camping sleeping mats. 
Following extensive review of the scientific litera-
ture and analysis of the known hazard traits of PFASs, 
DTSC determined there is potential for the vast majori-
ty of California consumers including infants, school children, and pregnant women and their developing fe-
tuses to be exposed to PFASs while in their carpeted homes, offices, buildings, stores, and classrooms for prolonged periods of time daily. These exposures have 
the potential to contribute to or cause significant ad-verse health impacts including carcinogenicity, cardio-vascular toxicity, developmental toxicity, endocrine toxicity, hepatotoxicity, immunotoxicity, nephrotoxici-
ty, ocular toxicity, and reproductive toxicity. In addi-tion, PFASs are known to be environmentally persis-tent, bioaccumulative, highly mobile in the environ-ment, can be transported long distances, and undergo 
lactational and transplacental transfer in humans and 
animals. DTSC based this determination on an evalua-
tion of an abundance of publicly available, reliable sci-
entific information pertinent to the regulatory criteria. 
Benefits of the Pr oposed Regulatory Action: 
A primary goal of the SCP regulations is to mitigate 
widespread adverse health and environmental impacts of PFASs in commerce, as well as the overall costs of these impacts to the State of California. By listing car-pets or rugs containing any PFASs as a Priority Product, DTSC encourages manufacturers to evaluate whether 
PFASs are necessary in carpets and rugs or whether 
there are functionally safer alternatives that would re-
duce human exposure to PF ASs during manufacturing, 
use, and post−consumer recycling or disposal of carpets 
and rugs containing PFASs. Reduction in PFASs in con-
sumer products and the environment means healthier 
ecosystems, safer homes, offices, schools, workplaces, 
and a more sustainable environment, with cleaner 
drinking water and air. Reducing exposure to PFASs 
could reduce the prevalence of elevated serum concen-
trations of PFASs in the general population of Califor-
nia, and its associated potential for adverse health ef-
fects. Expanded use and development of new, safer al-
ternatives benefits California’s entire population and 
environment. 
Another primary goal of SCP regulations is to protect 
public health by reducing exposures to potentially 
harmful chemicals. By listing carpets and rugs contain-
ing any PFASs as a Priority Product, DTSC sets in mo-tion a strategy to reduce human exposure to PFASs from 
the manufacturing, use, and end−of−life of this product category. A reduction in exposure to PFASs could bene-
fit the health of California’s residents and wildlife. The 
development of safer alternatives benefits California 
workers, consumers, employers, and environment. 
DTSC cannot pre−determine the alternatives that 
each manufacturer will propose; therefore, it is impos-
sible to accurately predict or quantify the full range of 
potential benefits associated with their development. 
DTSC will maximize the use of alternatives of least 
concern and give preference to those that provide the 
greatest level of inherent protection. In general, eco-
nomic benefits to California workers and business own-
ers may include expanded employment opportunities in 
the fields of consulting, worker and consumer educa-
tion, and marketing. Additional benefits may accrue be-
cause of increased research and product development collaboration between manufacturers and California− 
based research entities. Institutional and corporate fi-
nancial support of chemical and material science pro-
grams focused on developing safer alternatives to 
PFASs could advance the field. These research initia-
tives could provide manu facturers with employees that 
are highly skilled in the research and design of products for newly emer ging global markets. 
Existing Laws and Regulations: 
The SCP regulations established a unique approach 
to regulating Chemicals of Concern in consumer prod-
ucts that grants DTSC authority to take actions to pro-
tect people and the environment when such actions are 
outside the scope of other regulatory programs. There 
are no equivalent federal or state regulations that re-
quire product manufacturers to determine if the chemi-
318 CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2020, VOLUME NUMBER 9-Z 
cal in their product is necessary and whether there is a 
safer alternative, with the goal of protecting consumers 
and the environment from adverse effects associated 
with a  product throughout its lifetime. 
As a class, PFASs are not currently regulated by the 
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), or the Occupa-tional Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), nor 
by any other state agencies. The United States Environ-
mental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) took some limit-
ed regulatory actions on a small number of PFASs (see below), but the proposed regulation does not duplicate 
or conflict with any of these regulations, which are dis-
cussed below. 
U.S. EPA’s Limited Regulatory Actions on PF ASs: 
Section 5 of Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 
authorizes U.S. EPA to issue Significant New Use 
Rules (SNURs) for new or existing chemicals used in a 
significant new way. A SNUR requires companies to notify U.S. EPA at least 90 days prior to manufacturing, 
importing, or processing substances for a significant 
new use, and submit a notification including informa-
tion about the chemical’s identity, physical characteris-tics, processing and use, and available toxicity data. U.S. EPA has 90 days to evaluate the new use and can 
request more data, prohibit or limit the manufacture, or 
allow the use. The following SNURs are related to PFASs: 
 A SNUR was issued regarding any future 
manufacture (including imports) of 75 PFASs 
specifically included in the 2000−2002 voluntary phaseout of  perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) 
by the 3M Company on December 9, 2002; 
 A SNUR was issued regarding any future 
manufacture (including imports) of 13 PFASs 
specifically included in the 2000−2002 voluntary phaseout of  PFOS by 3M on March 11,  2002; 
 A SNUR was issued for 183 PFASs believed to no longer be manufactured, imported, or used in the 
United States on October 9, 2007; 
 A SNUR was issued requiring companies to report 
their intent to manufacture certain perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)−related chemicals 
to treat carpets, and to import carpets containing 
these PFASs on September 30, 2013; and 
 A proposed SNUR was published affecting 
manufacturers (including importers) of PFOA and 
PFOA−related chemicals, including as part of 
articles, and processors of these chemicals on 
January 21, 2015; this has not been finalized. 
In 2006, U.S. EPA developed a 2010/2015 Steward-
ship Program for reducing emissions of PFOA, its pre-
cursors, and related higher homologues (U.S. EPA 2010). 
Through a Memorandum of Understanding 
(MOU) with U.S. EPA, eight major U.S. manufacturers 
agreed to  voluntarily eliminate PFOA in their emissions 
and products by 2015. Participating companies include: 
Arkema, Asahi, BASF Corporation, Clariant, Daikin, 3M/Dyneon, DuPont, and Solvay Solexis. 
Since 2000, U.S. EPA has been reviewing hundreds 
of substitutes for PFOA, PFOS, and other longer−chain 
PFASs, particularly regarding their toxicity, fate, and 
bioaccumulation under the New Chemicals Program. For many PFASs, U.S. EPA has been using TSCA sec-tion 5(e) Consent Orders to require testing while allow-
ing production and use. U.S. EPA is also investigating substitutes  for certain direct uses of PFOA. On January 
27, 2010, U.S. EPA amended the Polymer Exemption 
Rule for new chemicals under TSCA to exclude certain 
side−chain fluorinated polymers, due to potential risk to 
human health or the environment. 
Related State Laws and Regulations: No California state laws or regulations currently ad-
dress the use of PFASs in carpets and rugs. However,  a 
few current laws apply to carpet recycling. 
California AB 2398 was signed into law September 
30, 2010 to increase the diversion and recycling of car-
pet in the state of California. The law generates funding to meet its goals through an assessment on each square yard of  carpet sold in California. It does not address the 
use  of  PFASs in carpets and rugs. 
California AB 1 158 was signed into law October 14, 
2017, setting a goal for the state to achieve a 24 percent 
recycling rate for postconsumer carpet by January 1, 2020, and to meet and exceed that rate continually thereafter. It requires a carpet stewardship plan to achieve 24  percent recycling rate for postconsumer car-
pet by January 2020, and quantifiable 5−year and annu-al goals. It does not address the use of PFASs in carpets and rugs. 
Therefore, these proposed regulations will not be in-
consistent or incompatible with existing state laws or regulations. 
Comparable F ederal Regulation or Statute: 
This regulation is not based on, identical to, or in con-
flict with any federal regulations. 
OTHER APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS 
PRESCRIBED BY STATUTE 
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 
Compliance 
DTSC has determined that this rulemaking would be 
exempt from CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 
21000, et seq.) under the “general rule” or “common 
sense” exemption outlined in California Code of Regu-lations, title 14, section 15061(b)(3). A draft Notice of Exemption (NOE) is available for review during the 
319 CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2020, VOLUME NUMBER 9-Z 
public comment period upon request and will be filed 
with the State Clearinghouse if the regulation is 
finalized. 
California Environmental Policy Council Review 
Under the provisions of HSC section 25252.5, the 
California Environmental Policy Council (CEPC) re-
viewed the framework SCP regulations prior to their 
adoption in October 2013 (the CEPC Resolution may be viewed at: http://www.calepa.ca.gov/cepc/ ). Under 
HSC Section 25252.5(f), the CEPC determined that the 
proposed regulations would not have any significant 
adverse impact on public health or the environment and 
could be  adopted by DTSC without undergoing a multi-
media life cycle evaluation. 
DTSC determined that further review by the CEPC is 
not warranted for this rulemaking because the require-ments of HSC section 25252.5 apply only to the cre-
ation of the SCP program and not regulations that may 
be required to implement this program. 
Peer Review 
DTSC requested an external scientific peer review of 
the scientific basis of the proposed regulation pursuant 
to Health and Safety Code section 57004. The result of 
the external scientific peer review is posted to DTSC’s 
rulemaking  website at: https://dtsc.ca.gov/regs/. 
MANDATE ON LOCAL AGENCIES OR 
SCHOOL DISTRICTS 
DTSC has determined that adoption of this regulation 
will not impose a local mandate or result in costs subject to state reimbursement pursuant to part 7 of division 4, commencing with section 17500, of the Government 
Code or  other nondiscretionary costs or savings to local 
agencies. 
COST OR SAVINGS TO STATE OR 
LOCAL AGENCIES, OR SCHOOL DISTRICTS 
SUBJECT TO REIMBURSEMENT 
DTSC determined that adoption of this regulation 
will not result in costs or savings for any local agency or 
school district required to be reimbursed pursuant to 
Part 7 of  Division 4, commencing with section 17500 of 
the Government Code, or other nondiscretionary costs or savings imposed on local agencies. 
Costs or Savings to Any State Agency: 
DTSC will absorb additional costs associated with re-
viewing Notifications, Abridged AA Reports, or two− 
stage AA Reports submitted by manufacturers of car-
pets and rugs containing any PFASs by reallocating staff to this new task. DTSC estimates that the total fis-
cal costs to state government for reviewing all Notifica-tions, Abridged AA Reports, and two−stage AA reports 
submitted by manufacturers will range from 
$3,290,000 to $11,590,000. 
Local Agencies: 
DTSC determined that adoption of this regulation 
will not impose a local mandate or result in costs or sav-
ings for any local agency subject to reimbursement pur-
suant to Part 7 of Division 4, commencing with section 
17500, of the Government Code or other nondiscre-
tionary costs or savings to local agencies. 
School Districts: 
DTSC determined that adoption of this regulation 
would not result in costs or savings for any school dis-trict  required to be reimbursed pursuant to Part 7 of Di-
vision 4, commencing with section 17500 of the Gov-
ernment Code. 
Federal Funding to the State: 
DTSC determined that adoption of this regulation 
will not result in cost or savings in federal funding to the 
state. DTSC determined that no fiscal impact to federal funding or  state programs exists. 
DETERMINATION OF NO SIGNIFICANT 
STATEWIDE ADVERSE ECONOMIC IMPACT 
DTSC determined the proposed regulatory action has 
no significant statewide adverse economic impact di-
rectly affecting business. Following a review of avail-
able carpets and rugs market data and survey of af fected 
manufacturers and industry organizations, DTSC de-termined the proposed regulation is not a major regula-
tion and is unlikely to have a significant adverse impact 
on business. 
Types of  Businesses Affected: Manufacturers of car-
pets and rugs containing any PFASs have the principal duty to comply with the notification and reporting 
requirements. 
Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, or other Com-
pliance Requirements: In accordance with Government Code sections 11346.3(c) and 11346.5(a)(11), DTSC found that the reporting requirements of the proposed regulatory action, which apply to businesses, are neces-
sary for the health, safety, and welfare of the people of the State of California. The specific reporting require-ments and forms are: 
 Priority Product Notification [section 69503.7] 
 Removal/Replacement Notifications: 
 Chemical of Concern Removal Intent 
Notification [section 69505.2] 
 Chemical of  Concern Removal Confirmation 
Notification [section 69505.2] 
 Product Removal Intent Notification [section 
69505.2] 
320 CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2020, VOLUME NUMBER 9-Z 
 Product Removal Confirmation Notification 
[section 69505.2] 
 Product−Chemical Replacement Intent 
Notification [section 69505.2] 
 Product−Chemical Replacement 
Confirmation Notification [section 69505.2] 
 Product Cease Ordering Notification [section 
69501.2(b)(2)(B)] 
 AA Notifications and Reports: 
 AA Threshold Notification [section 69505.3] 
 AA Extension [section 69505.1(c)] 
 Preliminary AA Report [section 
69505.4(a)(2), section 69505.5, section 
69505.1(b)(2)(A),  section 69505.7] 
 Final AA Report [section 69505.4(a)(3), 
section 69505.6, section 69505.1(b)(2)(B), section 69505.7] 
 Abridged AA Report [section 69505.4(b)] 
 Alternate AA Work Plan [section 69505.4(c)] 
 Previously completed AA [section 
69505.4(d)] 
The reports and forms that will be submitted by a 
manufacturer depend on several factors including the 
Priority  Products produced, the availability of  viable al-
ternatives, and business decisions made by the manufacturer. 
The reporting requirements applicable to manufac-
turers may be fulfilled by a consortium, trade associa-
tion, public−private partnership, or other entity acting 
on behalf of, or in lieu of, one or more manufacturer. This does not apply to the Priority Product Notification 
or AA Threshold Exemption Notification requirements 
[section 69501.2(a)(2)]. 
DTSC has made an initial determination that the 
adoption of this regulation will not exert a significant, statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting 
business, including the ability of California businesses 
to compete with businesses in other states. DTSC has considered proposed alternatives that would lessen any 
adverse economic impact on business and invites inter-
ested parties to submit proposals. Submissions may in-clude the following considerations: 
i. The establishment of differing compliance or 
reporting  requirements or timetables that take into 
account the resources available to businesses. 
ii. Consolidation or si mplification of compliance and 
reporting requirements for businesses. 
iii. The use of performance standards rather than 
prescriptive standards. 
iv. Exemption or partial exemption from the 
regulatory requirements for businesses. COST IMPACTS ON REPRESENTATIVE 
PRIVATE PERSONS OR BUSINESSES 
DTSC estimates the cumulative cost for all 
California−based manufacturers of carpets and rugs 
containing any PFASs to submit Priority Product Noti-
fications and AA Reports and to respond to DTSC’s re-
views of these submittals to be from $2,259,200 to 
$6,099,200. DTSC relied on a variety of sources, such as U.S. Census Bureau County Business Patterns and D 
and B Hoovers databases, to estimate the number of 
manufacturers potentially impacted by this proposed regulation. From these data sources, DTSC estimates there are 20 manufacturers of carpets and rugs contain-
ing PFASs in California that would be impacted by this proposed regulation. 
RESULTS OF THE 
ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT 
Creation of New Businesses or Elimination of Existing Businesses: 
DTSC determined that it is: 
 Unlikely that this proposal will eliminate or create 
businesses or  jobs in manufacturing of carpets and 
rugs; 
 Possible that this proposal could create an unknown number of businesses to assist 
manufacturers of carpets and rugs containing 
PFASs in meeting regulatory obligations including consulting services, chemical and material science research services, and product 
development support; 
 Possible that this proposal could create an 
unknown number of public or private sector jobs 
in consulting services, product research and 
design, chemical and material science research and support and marketing. 
Expansion of Businesses Currently doing Business: 
DTSC determined that it is possible that this proposal 
could result in the expansion of businesses currently do-
ing business within the state, particularly those engaged in regulatory consulting services, chemical and materi-al science research and support, product research and design and marketing. 
Effect on Housing Costs: 
DTSC has made a determination that the proposed 
regulation will have no significant effect on housing 
costs. 
Effect on  Small Businesses: 
DTSC made an initial determination that the adoption 
of this regulation may affect small businesses. DTSC 
estimates that 17 of the 20 potentially impacted manu-facturers are small businesses. Costs to submit Priority 
321 CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2020, VOLUME NUMBER 9-Z 
Product Notifications and AA Reports are expected to 
be the same for all impacted businesses. Moreover, 
DTSC estimates that it will take each manufacturer a maximum of 16  hours at $60/hour to complete a Priori-
ty Product Notification, or a total of $960. DTSC esti-mates that the cost to each manufacturer for the Priority 
Product Notification, AA report, and responding to DTSC’s AA  report review will be $112,960 to $182,960 
for an Abridged AA (Table 1a), and $139,960 to $304,960 for a two−stage AA (Table 1b). DTSC ex-pects costs to individual manufacturers to be lower if they form a consortium and submit a combined AA. 
These are one−time notification and reporting require-
ments that manufacturers are expected to complete within one year of adoption of the proposed regulation; 
therefore,  there are no ongoing costs. 
Benefits of the Regulation on the Health and Welfare of  California Residents, W orker Safety,  and 
the State’s Envir onment: 
DTSC made an initial determination that the adoption 
of these regulations may positively affect the health and welfare of California residents, worker safety, and the 
State’s environment. A reduction in exposure to PFASs 
could benefit the health of California’s residents and 
wildlife. The development of safer alternatives benefits 
California workers, consumers, employers, and the en-
vironment.  DTSC cannot predetermine the alternatives 
that each manufacturer will propose; therefore, it is im-possible to accurately predict or quantify the full range 
of potential benefits associated with their development. 
DTSC will maximize the use of alternatives of least 
concern and give preference to those that provide the greatest level of inherent protection. In general, eco-
nomic benefits to California workers and business own-
ers may include expanded employment opportunities in 
the fields of consulting and marketing. Additional ben-efits may accrue because of increased research and 
product development collaboration between manufac-
turers and California−based research facilities. Institu-tional and corporate financial support of chemical and material science programs focused on developing safer 
carpet and rug protective treatments could advance the 
field. These research initiatives could provide manufac-
turers with employees that are highly skilled in the re-
search and design of products for newly emerging glob-
al markets. 
CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES 
DTSC must determine that no reasonable alternative 
it considered or that has otherwise been identified and brought  to the attention of DTSC would be more effec-
tive in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed, would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action, or 
would be more cost−effective to affected private per-
sons and equally effective in implementing the statuto-ry policy or other provision of law. 
CONTACT PERSONS 
Inquiries regarding technical aspects of the proposed 
regulation or CEQA documents may be directed to Si-
mona Balan of DTSC at 510−540−3888 or, if unavail-able,  Nancy Ostrom of DTSC at 916−445−3077. How-
ever, such oral inquiries are not part of the rulemaking record. 
A public comment period for the rulemaking has 
been established commencing on February 28, 2020 and closing on April 13, 2020. Statements, arguments, or contentions regarding the rulemaking and/or sup-
porting documents must be submitted in writing or pre-
sented orally or in writing at the public hearing in order 
for them to be considered by DTSC before it adopts, amends, or  repeals these regulations. 
DTSC will accept statements, arguments or con-
tentions, and/or supporting documents regarding this 
rulemaking submitted in writing either through Cal-
SAFER or by  mail, or they may be presented orally or in 
writing at  the public hearing. 
AVAILABILITY OF TEXT OF 
PROPOSED REGULATIONS, INITIAL 
STATEMENT OF REASONS, AND OTHER 
RULEMAKING DOCUMENTS 
Copies of the Notice of Proposed Action, Initial 
Statement of Reasons, all the information upon which 
this proposal is based, and the express terms of the pro-
posed regulation (also known as the proposed regulato-
ry text) are posted to DTSC’s Internet website at 
https://dtsc.ca.gov/regs/. 
After the close of the comment period, DTSC may 
adopt the proposed regulation. If substantial, suf ficient-
ly related changes are made to the regulatory text, the modified full text (with the changes clearly indicated) will be  made available for comment for at least 15 days 
prior to  adoption. Only persons who request the specific 
proposed regulation, attend the hearing, or provide written comments on this specific regulation will be sent a copy of the modified text if substantial, suffi-
ciently related changes are made. 
Once DTSC finalizes the regulatory text, DTSC will 
prepare a Final Statement of Reasons that updates the 
Initial Statement of Reasons, summarizes how DTSC 
addressed comments, and includes other materials. A 
copy of the Final Statement of Reasons will also be posted on DTSC’s Internet site at https://dtsc.ca.gov/ regs/, along with the date the rulemaking is filed with 
322 CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2020, VOLUME NUMBER 9-Z 
the Secretary of State and the effective date of  the regu-
lation. 
ALL OTHER 
QUESTIONS/COMMENTS/INQUIRIES/UPDATES 
Please direct all written comments, procedural in-
quiries,  and requests for documents by mail, e−mail, or 
fax to Ms. Jackie Buttle, Regulations Coordinator, as 
specified above. To be included in this regulation pack-
age’s mailing list and to receive updates of this rulemak-
ing, please visit https://dtsc.ca.gov/dtsc−e−lists/  and 
subscribe to the applicable E−List or e−mail: regs@dtsc.ca.gov. 
GENERAL PUBLIC INTEREST 
DEPARTMENT OF 
FISH AND WILDLIFE 
PROPOSED RESEARCH FOR A 
FULLY PROTECTED SPECIES 
Research on the Blunt−nosed 
Leopard Lizard (Gambelia sila) 
The Department of Fish and Wildlife (Department) 
received a proposal on August 7, 2019, from Dr. Brian 
Cypher requesting an amendment to his Memorandum 
of Understanding (MOU) that authorized take of the 
Blunt−nosed Leopard Lizard (Gambelia sila) (‘BNLL’) 
for scientific research purposes consistent with conser-
vation and recovery of the species. The BNLL is a Fully 
Protected  reptile and is also listed as Endangered under 
the California and federal Endangered Species Acts. 
Dr. Cypher is the Associate Director and Research 
Ecologist at the Endangered Species Recovery Pro-
gram at California State University, Stanislaus. He has 
been involved in studying BNLL for over 20 years. His 
previous MOU authorized (1) conducting capture mark 
recapture (CMR) surveys for BNLL population demog-
raphy studies (2) collecting tissue samples for genetic analyses, and (3) x−raying gravid females for reproduc-
tive ecology data. 
Dr. Cypher is proposing to include marking using 
passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags during CMR surveys, as well as additional activities deemed neces-sary for the recovery of the species and consistent with 
the Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley. These may include radio telemetry; conducting focused research experiments, such as in-vestigating climate change adaptation; head starting and captive breeding; and translocation. He is request-
ing authorization to conduct research on BNLL 
throughout the species’ range in accordance with meth-
ods approved by the Department and the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service (Service). 
The Department intends to issue, under specified 
conditions, an MOU to authorize qualified wildlife re-
searchers, with Dr.  Cypher as the Principal Investigator, 
to carry out the proposed activities. Dr. Cypher and the researchers are also required to have a valid federal re-covery permit for the BNLL, and a scientific collecting permit (SCP) to take other terrestrial species in 
California. 
Pursuant to California Fish and Game Code (FGC) 
Section 5050(a)(1), the Department may authorize take 
of Fully Protected reptile species after a 30 days’ notice 
has been provided to affected and interested parties through publication of this notice. If the Department de-
termines that the proposed research is consistent with 
the requirements of FGC Section 5050 for take of Fully 
Protected reptiles, it would issue the MOU on or after March 30, 2020, for an initial and renewable term of up 
to, but not to exceed, five years. 
Contact: Laura Patterson, Laura.Patterson@wildlife. 
ca.gov, 916−373−6633. 
DEPARTMENT OF 
FISH AND WILDLIFE 
PROPOSED RESEARCH FOR 
 FULLY PROTECTED SPECIES 
Research on the Blunt−nosed 
Leopard Lizard (Gambelia sila) 
The Department of Fish and Wildlife (Department) 
received a  proposal on February 13, 2020, from Dr.  Ro-
ry  Telemeco requesting authorization to take the Blunt− 
nosed Leopard Lizard (Gambelia sila) (‘BNLL’) for scientific research purposes consistent with conserva-
tion and recovery of the species. The BNLL is a Fully 
Protected  reptile and is also listed as Endangered under 
the California and federal Endangered Species Acts. 
Dr. Telemeco is an Assistant Professor in Biology at 
California State University, Fresno, with extensive ex-perience conducting research on lizards. His Master’s thesis and PhD dissertation research were on lizard 
ecology, and he has authored or co−authored over 20 
publications on reptile reproductive and thermal ecolo-
gy. His proposed research is entitled “Investigating population dynamics, life history, nesting, and develop-
ment of Blunt−Nosed Leopard Lizards (Gambelia sila) 
to inform management.” He is requesting authorization to conduct research on BNLL throughout the species’ range,  focusing on the northern−most population in the 
323 