California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has withdrawn styrene as a potential addition to the list of substances known to the state to cause cancer by means of the Labor Code mechanism. In 2009, a state judge tentatively enjoined its listing after determining that no known evidence supported a finding that styrene is a carcinogen and that its designation as such would likely have a devastating effect on the industry. Widely used in food packaging, styrene plastics are apparently crucial to the transportation and sale of strawberries, raspberries and blueberries, state industries worth more than $1 billion. The court further ruled at the end of 2012 that OEHHA’s reliance on the International Agency for Research on Cancer’s conclusion that styrene is “possibly carcinogenic to human” was insufficient to justify its listing. OEHHA has not reportedly appealed the decision. See InsideEPA.com, February 21, 2013.
Tag Archives Prop. 65
California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has issued a notice of its intent to list the chemical bisphenol A (BPA) as a reproductive toxicant under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Prop. 65). The agency has proposed the action “under the authoritative bodies listing mechanism,” noting that the National Toxicology Program—Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction published a report in 2008 concluding that “the chemical causes developmental toxicity in laboratory animals at high levels of exposure.” Comments are requested by February 25, 2013. OEHHA has also proposed adopting a maximum allowable dose level (MADL) for BPA of 290 micrograms per day. Comments on this proposal are requested no later than March 11, 2013. According to the agency, “Some businesses may not be able to afford the expense of establishing a MADL and therefore may have to defend litigation for a…
At the request of a polystyrene custom mold manufacturer, California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) will conduct a February 14, 2013, public workshop “concerning OEHHA’s intent to list styrene as a chemical known to cause cancer under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (commonly known as Proposition 65 [Prop. 65]).” According to the agency’s notice, discussions “should be limited to whether the National Toxicology Program (NTP) Report on Carcinogens has identified styrene as a human carcinogen or potential human carcinogen. OEHHA cannot consider scientific arguments concerning the weight or quality of the evidence considered by NTP.” The hearing will be webcast. OEHHA has also extended the public comment period until February 28. See OEHHA News Release, January 17, 2013.
California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has issued a notice of intent to list styrene as a chemical known to the state to cause cancer under Proposition 65 (Prop. 65), citing the National Toxicology Program’s (NTP’s) finding that styrene is “reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.” Comments are requested by February 4, 2013. According to the notice, the proposed listing “meets the standard set out in the recent Court of Appeal decision in the Styrene Information and Research Council v. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (3rd District, Nov. 15, 2012) case because the NTP conclusion is based on sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals.” Often used in food packaging materials, styrene occurs naturally at low levels in certain shrubs and trees. California consumers must be provided with warnings about those chemicals included on the Prop. 65 list. See OEHHA Notice of Intent, January 4, 2013.
A California appeals court has determined that the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) may not add styrene or vinyl acetate to the Proposition 65 (Prop. 65) list of chemicals known to the state to cause cancer because they have been identified as “possible” but not known carcinogens. Styrene Info. & Research Ctr. v. OEHHA, No. C064301 (Cal. Ct. App., 3d Dist., decided October 31, 2012). Styrene is used in food packaging. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) had categorized the substances as Group 2b chemicals, which are “possibly” carcinogenic to humans, based on less than sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. The court acknowledged that the California Health and Safety Code requires that the Prop. 65 list contain “at a minimum, the substances identified by reference in Labor Code section 6382, subdivision (d),” which addresses “hazardous substances” that extend “beyond those that cause cancer or…
Claiming that lead levels in candies imported from China, Taiwan and Hong Kong exceed Proposition 65 (Prop. 65) limits, the Center for Environmental Health has reportedly initiated legal proceedings against eight retailers and distributors in San Francisco’s Bay Area. The organization has apparently urged the companies to remove the products from store shelves after testing showed that typical serving sizes would expose consumers to 10 times or more lead than state and federal standards. One candy allegedly contained nearly 100 times more lead than the Prop. 65 limit. According to Center Executive Director Michael Green, “It is especially worrisome when we find lead in candy, since consumers are ingesting the lead with every bite. This candy may be very dangerous, particularly for children or pregnant women.” See Center for Environmental Health News Release, August 7, 2012.
A California court has reportedly dismissed claims filed by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) against fast-food chains, finding that the group failed to investigate its allegations before suing under Proposition 65 (Prop. 65). PCRM v. McDonald’s Corp., No. BC383722; PCRM v. KFC Corp., No. BC457193 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., decided August 15, 2012). Filed in 2008 and 2011, the suits alleged that the restaurants failed to warn consumers that their grilled chicken menu items contain PhIP, a chemical known to the state to cause cancer. Yet, PCRM did not apparently visit the restaurants until February 2012 to take pictures of the posted warnings. The restaurants reportedly post notices that some of their products contain cancer-causing chemicals and refer customers to nutritional brochures for additional details. They contend that their warnings comply with Prop. 65. Information about similar litigation filed in San Francisco County appears in Issue…
The United Kingdom’s (UK’s) Children’s Food Campaign (CFC) has reportedly urged the Ministry of Health to prohibit use of the chemical 4-Methylimidazole (4-MEI), a byproduct of fermentation often found in soy sauce, roasted coffee and the caramel coloring added to colas and beer. In January 2012, California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment adopted a no significant risk level for 4 MEI, with Proposition 65 cancer warnings unnecessary for exposures at or below 29 micrograms per day. The development was covered in Issue 424 of this Update. According to news sources, CFC’s effort was prompted by test results indicating that colas sold in Britain contain 135 micrograms of 4-MEI per can. Malcolm Clark, CFC campaign coordinator, asserts that only caramel colorings “free of known cancer-causing chemicals” should be used worldwide. See Daily Mail, June 25, 2012.
California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) is seeking public comments on its proposal to establish a Proposition 65 maximum allowable dose level for sulfur dioxide of 220 micrograms per day. Comments should be submitted by August 20, 2012. Requests for a public hearing must be made no later than August 6. Sulfur dioxide preserves the color and flavor of dried, light-colored fruits, such as golden raisins and dried apricots, peaches, apples, pineapple, papaya, and mango, and acts as an antimicrobial agent. According to OEHHA’s draft interpretive guideline, a warning for exposure to sulfur dioxide from consumption of dried fruit is not required under Proposition 65 because reasonably anticipated rates of exposure “will be below the proposed Maximum Allowable Dose Level.” Sulfur dioxide was added to the list of chemicals known to the state to cause reproductive toxicity in July 2011; the particular type of toxicity found was…
The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has issued interpretive guidance on chlorothalonil in tomato products, concluding that the average consumer does not eat enough fresh tomatoes or tomato products to exceed the No Significant Risk Level (NSRL) for the pesticide. According to OEHHA, a NSRL for chlorothalonil of 41 micrograms (µg) per day will take effect on June 15, 2012, at which point businesses causing exposures in excess of the NSRL must comply with Proposition 65 (Prop. 65) warning requirements. OEHHA evidently based its upper-bound limit estimates on USDA pesticide residue surveys taken in 2003, 2004, 2007, and 2008, as well as National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey data on tomato consumption. “Consumption of chlorothalonil residues by the average consumer of tomatoes does not result in exposures that exceed the Proposition 65 NSRL of 41 µg/day for the chemical, where the residue levels in tomatoes are at…
