The California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of
Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has proposed an
emergency action to temporarily allow the use of standard point-ofsale
warning messages for bisphenol A (BPA) exposures from canned
and bottled foods and beverages. Under Proposition 65 (Prop. 65)
regulations, consumer products that contain any chemical known to
the state to cause reproductive toxicity or cancer must display a “clear
and reasonable” warning on “labeling, shelf tags, shelf signs, menus
or any combination thereof as long as the warning is prominent and
conspicuous.”

Starting May 11, 2016, all foods and beverages that result in BPA
exposure must display a similar warning “unless the person causing
the exposure can show that the exposure is 1,000 times below the no
observed effect level for the chemical.” To avoid consumer confusion and
give manufacturers time to transition to BPA-free packaging, OEHHA
proposes allowing the temporary use of point-of-sale warnings in lieu of
product and menu labeling or shelf signs.

“Widespread Proposition 65 warnings for numerous canned food
products may prompt such individuals to reduce, or to forego entirely,
purchasing canned or bottled vegetables and fruits, to the detriment of
their own health,” notes OEHHA. “Proposition 65 warnings typically help
consumers make informed decisions about which products to purchase.
But BPA warnings will be unusual in that they will apply to a wide range
of nutritious canned food products where alternative choices are not
always available.”

In addition, OEHHA has issued a notice of proposed rulemaking under
Prop. 65 that would amend Section 25805(b) of Title 27 of the California
Code of Regulations to set a maximum allowable dose level (MADL) of
3 micrograms per day for dermal BPA exposure from solid materials,
such as paper receipts. To this end, OEHHA relied on a 2014 study
that identified a subcutaneous lowest observable effect level of “0.05
milligrams BPA per kilogram body weight per day (mg/kg-day) for
female reproductive toxicity.”

“This proposed regulatory amendment would adopt a MADL that
conforms with the Proposition 65 implementing regulations and
reflects the currently available scientific knowledge about BPA,” states
OEHHA. “The MADL provides assurance to the regulated community
that exposures or discharges at or below it are considered not to pose
a significant risk of developmental or reproductive harm. Exposures
at or below the MADL are exempt from the warning and discharge
requirements of Proposition 65.”

 

Issue 598

About The Author

For decades, manufacturers, distributors and retailers at every link in the food chain have come to Shook, Hardy & Bacon to partner with a legal team that understands the issues they face in today's evolving food production industry. Shook attorneys work with some of the world's largest food, beverage and agribusiness companies to establish preventative measures, conduct internal audits, develop public relations strategies, and advance tort reform initiatives.

Close