The purity of the Pacific Ocean and the rivers and bodies of water throughout the state have never been more important to Californians. That’s why the Legislature should pass AB 888 and ban the use of the tiny pieces of plastic known as microbeads in all personal care products by Jan. 1, 2020.

One of the nation’s toughest bans on plastic exfoliating beads in cosmetics cleared the Assembly on Friday, and that’s a good first step. It’s the second attempt at prohibiting the sale of soap, toothpaste and other products with tiny “microbeads” that make their way into waterways and animals’ stomachs. Similar legislation stalled last year over industry opposition.

Illinois has a similar ban, but unlike that state, the California proposal wouldn’t make an exception for beads made with biodegradable plastic. Supporters of AB 888 say those beads still pose environmental dangers.

Few Californians realize that virtually every time they brush their teeth, clean their face or wash their hair, the products they use contain those tiny pieces of plastic that go down drains and eventually wind up in our waterways. The legislation offers a rare opportunity to stop further pollution and serve as a model law for other states to emulate.

Microbeads are used by product manufacturers to give products a textured feel and make them more pleasing to the eye. But the colorful, tiny dots of plastic look just like fish eggs to aquatic organisms. Dozens, if not hundreds, of them would fit on a penny.

Assemblyman Richard Bloom, D-Santa Monica, is pushing his bill to remove microbeads from the food chain.

Overall, Bloom’s legislation would ban putting micorbeads in all personal care products starting in 2020.

Lobbyists for personal care products are expected to oppose the bill, pushing for an exemption for what they describe as biodegradable plastic. But no one has been able to write a clear standard of what constitutes biodegradable plastic. Lawmakers shouldn’t be fooled into passing a watered-down version of the legislation that allows the industry to continue to pollute our waterways.

Product manufacturers have better alternatives, including apricot pits and walnut husks, at their disposal. And some industry leaders are voluntarily acknowledging the damage caused by microbeads by volunteering to remove them from their products.

Proctor and Gamble said it would phase microbeads out of its Crest toothpaste by March 2016, and Johnson and Johnson has announced it will remove them from its products in 2017. But that won’t cover all of the hundreds of thousands of microbeads contained in each cleanser made by other manufacturers.

Earlier this year, the industry won that loophole when lawmakers in New Jersey and Colorado banned microbeads but allowed biodegradable plastic. The governor of Illinois signed a law last year with the same guidelines.

Supporters of the California ban say there are already lots of products for sale with natural alternatives, such as apricot shells and cocoa beans, and that they do not want to allow biodegradable plastics.

Those plastics simply break into tiny pieces and are not consumed by microorganisms and decomposed as part of the natural food chain, particularly in cold ocean waters, they note.

Scientists skimming the water surface over nine large areas of San Francisco Bay in January found between 14,000 and 440,000 plastic particles — including microbeads — per square kilometer (roughly the size of 250 footballs fields). Researchers studying the Great Lakes discovered that the amount of microplastics in Lakes Huron, Superior and Erie had reached record highs in 2012.

Don’t be fooled by manufacturers’ claims that microbeads are safe because the FDA has approved them for use as a food additive. The ruling shouldn’t be construed as evidence that the tiny particles are environmentally sound.

Microbeads are as problematic as plastic bags in our rivers, lakes and oceans. California’s lawmakers should force them to be removed from personal care products.