Covering Proposition 65 News and Events Since 1987

CEH Report Claims 40% of Food Cans Still Contain BPA

CEH Report Claims 40% of Food Cans Still Contain BPA

Proposition 65 citizen enforcement group, The Center for Environmental Health (CEH) has published a new report, entitled “Kicking the Can? Major retailers still selling canned food with BPA.”  The nonprofit's report discusses its’ testing of more than 250 canned foods purchased from major grocery outlets such as Albertson’s/Safeway Kroger, and a host of dollar stores in eleven states.
Thursday, July 20, 2017/Author: Jack Schatz/Number of views (108)/Comments (0)/ Article rating: No rating
DART-IC to Reconsider Chloroform Listing

DART-IC to Reconsider Chloroform Listing

California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) is revisiting its 2009 listing of chloroform as a Proposition 65 reproductive toxicant.



Thursday, August 18, 2016/Author: Jack Schatz/Number of views (1756)/Comments (0)/ Article rating: No rating

OEEHA Releases Hazard Identification Materials for CIC...

California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has released Hazard Identification Materials for two chemicals that will be considered at the next meeting of the state’s Carcinogen Identification Committee (CIC). 
Tuesday, August 14, 2012/Author: Jack Schatz/Number of views (660)/Comments (0)/ Article rating: No rating

New Appointee to Join Short Handed Carcinogen Committee

Governor Schwarzenegger has made his first appointment to one of the two Science Advisory Board (SAB) panels that recommend chemicals for addition to the Proposition 65 lists of carcinogens and reproductive toxicants. The Governor appointed Los Angeles physician Dr. Martin Hopp to the Carcinogen Identification Committee (CIC). The appointment raises the number of members of the CIC to five.
Wednesday, August 04, 2004/Author: Jack Schatz/Number of views (181)/Comments (0)/ Article rating: No rating

OEHHA Proposes to List Herbal Medicines

The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment is proposing to include “aristolochic acids” and “herbal remedies containing plant species of the genus “Aristolochia” on Proposition 65’s list of carcinogens. 
In proposing this listing, OEHHA is not following its usual practice in recent years of either relying on the “authoritative body” mechanism or on the recommendation of the state’s “experts” (the Carcinogen Identification Committee and the Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Committee). Instead, the agency is reaching back to the beginning of Proposition 65 by basing the proposed listing on a statutory provision that has not been used for listing chemicals since the initial Proposition 65 list was formulated. 
Monday, June 14, 2004/Author: Roger Pearson/Number of views (651)/Comments (0)/ Article rating: No rating

OEHHA Calls for Info on Nine Possible Carcinogens

OEHHA has put out a data call-in for information on nine chemicals that will be evaluated by the agency’s experts for possible listing as Proposition 65 carcinogens. The targeted chemicals are part of a list of 17 chemicals that the agency proposed last September to place on a candidate list for consideration by the Carcinogen Identification Committee (see Prop 65 News, November 1, 2003). 

OEHHA finalized its candidate determination for 15 of the 17 chemicals, which it tentatively identified as of "high carcinogenicity concern." However, six of those 15 were determined to have less than a "high" level of "exposure concern." Those six are on the candidate list, but will not be subject to a data call-in, until the CIC has evaluated the nine others. Those six chemicals are 2-Chloro-1,1,1-triflouroethane, 4-Hydroxyben- zenediazonium and its salts, 4-Methyly- benzenediazonium and its salts, Ciprofibrate, Diallate, and Diftalone. 

Tuesday, April 20, 2004/Author: Roger Pearson/Number of views (84)/Comments (0)/ Article rating: No rating

Carcinogenicity Profile - Vanadium Pentoxide

Vanadium pentoxide is a metal oxide used in dyeing textiles, coloring ceramics, and in photographic developing solutions. It is also used as an oxidation catalyst in catalytic converters and as an intermediate in producing other vanadium compounds. Exposure to vanadium pentoxide dust can also occur during the mining of vanadium and from the cleaning of oil-fired boilers, gas turbines, and combustion chambers, where the dust was generated from the combustion of oil containing high levels of vanadium. 
While vanadium pentoxide is toxic by all routes (ingestion, inhalation, and dermal contact), the most likely route of exposure for humans is inhalation of dust or fumes. The highest levels of vanadium pentoxide will be encountered in the workplace. However, cities in the northeastern United States that use fuel oil for heating and electricity have ambient vanadium concentrations that range from 0.15 to 1.4 micrograms per meter cubed of air in the winter months, with an average of 0.62 micrograms/m3 of air. Vanadium pentoxide has been noted in some drinking water supplies, especially in states with high naturally occurring soil levels. It also is found in vegetables grown in vanadium rich soils. The daily dietary intake has been estimated to be on the order of a few tens of micrograms.
Sunday, March 21, 2004/Author: Catherine Zandonella/Number of views (420)/Comments (0)/ Article rating: No rating

CERHR Issues Draft Report on Fluoxetine

In a move that brings it one step closer to triggering a Proposition 65 listing for the active ingredient in Prozac and Sarafem, the federal Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction has issued a draft monograph summarizing the developmental and reproductive toxicity of fluoxetine and fluoxetine hydrochloride. Not only are these medications widely prescribed, but the draft report comes hard on the heels of announcements that antidepressants and their metabolites are making their way through sewage systems into the environment.

The 147-page document, posted to the center’s web site on November 12, does not reach final conclusions about whether the chemical causes developmental or reproductive toxicity. Instead, it tabulates approximately 225 studies, describing each one, cataloging its strengths and weaknesses, and assessing its usefulness for the evaluation process. Final conclusions will be written by the agency’s fluoxetine expert panel, early next year.
Monday, December 01, 2003/Author: Rick Lovett/Number of views (115)/Comments (0)/ Article rating: No rating

OEHHA Assigns Third Set of Draft Cancer Priorities

Almost two years after selecting 50 chemicals for prioritization, OEHHA has released draft data summaries and priority categories. 

The 50 were the result of the third round of random selection of chemicals eligible for consideration for possible listing by the Carcinogen Identification Committee. In November 2001, using the Super Lotto, OEHHA randomly selected the 50 from a list of 100 chemicals for which OEHHA had sufficient information to meet the prioritization procedure criteria. The remaining 50 chemicals were returned to the pool from which selections will be made in the future.
Monday, November 10, 2003/Author: Jack Schatz/Number of views (104)/Comments (0)/ Article rating: No rating

Committees Decline to List Chemicals

Both the Developmental and Reproductive Toxicity Identification Committee and the Carcinogen Identification Committee members chose not to list the chemicals that OEHHA presented to them at their annual meetings last month.

The DART Identification Committee met long enough to decide not to add propachlor or phenol as developmental or reproductive toxicants.
Monday, November 10, 2003/Author: Jack Schatz/Number of views (413)/Comments (0)/ Article rating: No rating

CIC Members Suggest A Public Education Campaign for...

With regard to acrylamide’s future status, OEHHA has found no consensus with its work plan to update the chemical’s no significant risk level. 

The NSRL originally assigned in 1990 to acrylamide—which at the time was thought to be a relatively minor chemical—has become a flashpoint of controversy. Last year the chemical was discovered to be present in many snack foods and baked goods at risk levels much higher than set by OEHHA. 

OEHHA’s work plan prompted 995 pages of written comments and several hours of discussion at the October 17 meeting of the Carcinogen Identification Committee. Finding consensus on revising the acrylamide NSRL will be as difficult as one might expect given the number of consumer products at issue.
Monday, November 10, 2003/Author: Tracie Thompson/Number of views (90)/Comments (0)/ Article rating: No rating

Nonprescription Drug Industry Urges DART to Reject...

An association representing over-the-counter drug is urging the Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee (DART) to reject the listing of phenol as a developmental or reproductive toxicant, emphasizing that no national or international health or scientific organization has reached such a conclusion. 

Phenol was first considered for authoritative body mechanism listing in 1996, based on toxicity assessments prepared by U.S. EPA. But due to objections raised by the Consumer Healthcare Products Association (CHPA)—that EPA assessments did not meet the standard for a formal listing by an authoritative body—OEHHA contacted the agency for clarification on phenol. EPA responded that "In no case do these evaluations specifically classify or label phenol as a reproductive toxicant." Based on this, OEHHA withdrew the chemical from authoritative-body listing, but under regulatory guidelines had to add it to its prioritization list for consideration by the DART Committee
Tuesday, October 14, 2003/Author: Jack Schatz/Number of views (346)/Comments (0)/ Article rating: No rating

OEHHA Prepares HID on Choroform

Withstanding an earlier challenge from industry, OEHHA is now gathering information on chloroform for a possible listing by the DART Identification Committee next year.

The chemical was initially considered for a draft priority of "high" in September 1997. At a workshop held in October of that year, Jay Murray, a San Jose consultant, raised several concerns about the chemical’s priority ranking, noting that OEHHA should have relegated the chemical to a lower priority because the agency was mislead by secondary sources that made only sporadic reference to maternal toxicity. He also was concerned that OEHHA did not distinguish between inhalation and oral exposures to the chemical. OEHHA should have also taken into account the fact that chloroform is a byproduct of disinfection, a process, he noted, of obvious public-health benefit.
Tuesday, October 14, 2003/Author: Lana Beckett/Number of views (397)/Comments (0)/ Article rating: No rating

DART Committee to Reconsider NTP as Authoritative Body

Less than two weeks before the 2001 meeting of the Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee, OEHHA amended the agenda to include a discussion of whether the National Toxicology Program should be designated as an authoritative body for the identification of reproductive toxicants.
Friday, December 14, 2001/Author: Rick Lovett/Number of views (18)/Comments (0)/ Article rating: No rating

2,4 Butyric Acid Listing Restricted

On June 22  OEHHA announced it has revised the listing for Toxic Release Inventory pesticide 2,4-D butyric acid.

Saturday, June 30, 2001/Author: Rick Lovett/Number of views (83)/Comments (0)/ Article rating: No rating


Sort by:

Filter by Authors

Proposition 65 Regulations

Implementing Regulations
Prop 65 Made Simple
Prop 65 Appellate Opinions

Proposition 65 Law Firms and Experts

            List Your Company Now!


Prop 65 Chemicals
Proposition 65 Chemical List 
Safe Harbor Levels
Chemicals Under Consideration


Proposition 65 Handbook 2013 Edition
The Proposition 65 Handbook - 2017 Edition is available for immediate shipment.
To learn more about the latest edition of this indispensable desk reference    
click here.


Terms Of UsePrivacy StatementCopyright 1987 - 2017 Cornerstone Publishing, LLC