California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has extended the comment deadline on its proposal to establish a maximum allowable dose level for methanol, a substance the forms naturally in fruits and vegetables when they are prepared for consumption by methods including slicing, chopping, pureeing, and juicing. At the request of the Technology Sciences Group, OEHHA has extended the deadline to June 25, 2012. OEHHA added methanol to the list of chemicals known to the state to cause reproductive toxicity (Prop. 65) in March. Additional details about the listing and proposed dose level appear in Issue 431 of this Update. See OEHHA News Release, May 17, 2012.
Tag Archives Prop. 65
The Center for Environmental Health has reportedly sued several grocery chains in California alleging that independent testing has shown that the honey they were selling contains high levels of lead in violation of Proposition 65 (Prop. 65). Some of the honey purchased and tested allegedly contained lead levels more than double the legal limit. According to the center, honey suppliers sometimes use metal barrels with lead solder that can leach into the honey. It is seeking agreements that would bind the companies to use non-leaded containers for their honey and to test their supplies for lead content. See Center for Environmental Health News Release, May 2, 2012.
California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has added methanol to the list of chemicals known to the state to cause reproductive toxicity (Prop. 65). The listing, which is effective as of March 16, 2012, is based on the National Toxicology Program’s identification of the chemical as a reproductive toxicant. Because the chemical forms naturally in fruits and vegetables that contain pectin, OEHHA has determined that “methanol that is the by-product of naturally occurring pectin in the food is not considered an exposure under Section 25501. This applies to consumption of both unprepared and prepared fruits and vegetables.” This exception does not apply, however, where pectin is intentionally added “in the production or processing of food, or to nonfood exposures.” According to OEHHA, methanol is formed when “fruits and vegetables are physically prepared for consumption by methods that include, but are not limited to, slicing, chopping, pureeing and…
California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has extended until April 6, 2012, the public comment period for several chemicals, including benzophenone, a substance used in plastic packaging as a UV blocker, that the agency is considering adding to the list of chemicals known to the state to cause cancer (Prop. 65) under the Labor Code mechanism. An interested party apparently requested the extension. Because these are “ministerial listings,” OEHHA has indicated that comments should be limited “to whether the International Agency for Research on Cancer has identified the specific chemical or substance as a known or potential human or animal carcinogen.”
According to a news source, the industry interests that lost their challenge to the listing of 4-MEI as a chemical known to California to cause cancer have filed an appeal in the Third District Court of Appeals. Cal. League of Food Processors v. OEHHA, No. C070406 (Cal. Ct. App., 3rd Dist., appeal filed February 10, 2012). The chemical is commonly found in foods such as soy sauce, roasted coffee and the caramel coloring added to colas and beer. California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) added the chemical to the Proposition 65 (Prop. 65) list in January 2011, and a California Superior Court rejected the challenge filed by the California League of Food Processors, American Beverage Association, Grocery Manufacturers Association, and National Coffee Association in November. Additional information about the court’s ruling appears in Issue 420 of this Update. The plaintiffs reportedly argue that appellate intervention is needed “before…
California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has extended the comment period for several chemicals, including benzophenone, a chemical used in plastic packaging as a UV blocker, that the agency is considering adding to the list of chemicals known to the state to cause cancer (Prop. 65) under the Labor Code mechanism. Public comments are now requested by March 22, 2012. According to OEHHA, “[b]ecause these are ministerial listings, comments should be limited to whether the International Agency for Research on Cancer has identified the specific chemical or substance as a known or potential human or animal carcinogen.”
The Center for Environmental Health has filed a notice of violation under California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act (Prop. 65) to inform the manufacturer and retailers of several carbonated soft drinks containing caramel coloring that it will file a citizen enforcement lawsuit against them for violating Prop. 65’s warning provision since January 7, 2012, with respect to 4-methylimidazole (4 MEI). According to the notice, “No clear and reasonable warning is provided with these products regarding the carcinogenic hazards associated with 4-MEI exposure.” The notice also states that the lawsuit will be filed unless each “alleged violator enters into a binding written agreement to remedy the violations alleged herein by: (1) recalling products already sold; (2) reformulating such products to eliminate the 4-MEI exposure or taking appropriate measures to otherwise comply with Proposition 65; and (3) paying an appropriate civil penalty based on the factors enumerated” in California’s Health…
California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has proposed adding two food and beverage flavorings, as well as a fungicide and an herbicide contaminant to the list of chemicals known to the state to cause cancer under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Prop. 65).Comments are requested by April 10, 2012. The chemicals are beta-Myrcene and Pulegone, which are components of certain essential oils used to flavor foods and beverages and also used as a fragrance in cosmetics, soaps, detergents, and herbal medicines, and Isopyrazam, a fungicide used in Central and South America on bananas, and 3,3’,4,4’-Tetrachloroazo-benzene, a contaminant and degradation product of certain herbicides. OEHHA has proposed the action under the authoritative bodies listing mechanism, citing the National Toxicology Program and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as institutions that have found the chemicals to be carcinogens or “likely to be carcinogenic.”
California’s Office of Administrative Law has approved a no significant risk level for the chemical 4-Methylimidazole (4-MEI) proposed by California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). Beginning February 8, 2012, no Proposition 65 warning will be required for exposures to 4-MEI at or below 29 micrograms per day. The action follows a December 2011 court determination that OEHHA complied with the law when it found that 4-MEI, a chemical present in many common foods and beverages, is a carcinogen known to the state to cause cancer. Used in the manufacture of various products such as pharmaceuticals, the chemical is a by-product of fermentation often found in soy sauce, roasted coffee and the caramel coloring added to colas and beer. Additional information about the court challenge and ruling appears in Issue 420 of this Update.
A California court has determined that California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) complied with the law in determining that 4-methylimidazole (4-MEI), a chemical present in many common foods and beverages, is a carcinogen known to the state to cause cancer. Cal. League of Food Processors v. OEHHA, No. 34-2011-80000784 (Cal. Super. Ct., decided November 21, 2011). As noted by the court, “The chemical is used in the manufacture of various products like pharmaceuticals, and it is a by-product of fermentation found in food products like soy sauce, roasted coffee, and caramel coloring added to colas and beer.” A number of trade associations representing an array of food and beverage interests challenged the listing, which will require product warnings under the state’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Prop. 65). They claimed that OEHHA’s reliance on a National Technology Program technical report on 4-MEI did…
