3 July 2019 / Prop 65, US states
California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment has announced it is no longer planning to change the process for calculating exposure to reproductive toxicants from consumer products under Proposition 65.
The announcement follows an October 2018 notice of a proposal to make “clarifying” changes to how a business determines if such an anticipated exposure will require a warning under the state’s scheme.
Specifically, it proposed to establish the arithmetic mean as default in calculating the reasonably anticipated rate of intake or exposure for average users of a consumer product. This, it said, would help businesses determine if a warning is required for a given exposure.
But a broad coalition of industry groups protested against the change, saying that it would “present entirely new regulatory requirements that will directly affect businesses in their Proposition 65 compliance efforts, as well as placing additional obstacles to a defendant meeting its burden of proof in litigation”.
It also cautioned that the change would result in a significant increase in warnings under the right-to-know regulations.
The groups urged the agency to abandon the proposal and to continue to allow case-by-case determinations for selecting an average measure.
Now, six months later, OEHHA has confirmed that it will abandon its plans accordingly. In a notice emailed to Prop 65 stakeholders on 2 July, the agency said that it “is not proceeding at this time with the amendment”.
The notice also sets out a revised regulatory proposal on calculating exposure to reproductive toxicants in food products.
Public comments on this will be accepted from July 5 to July 22.