This is from OEHHA’s website; the colored comments are ours.
On July 30, 2013, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) will hold a public pre-regulatory workshop for the purpose of gathering input from interested parties on the content of a regulation that would address Proposition 65 warnings. Such a regulation, if formally proposed and adopted, would either supplement or replace existing OEHHA regulations governing Proposition 65 warnings and conform to any statutory changes if enacted.
The workshop will take place from 10 am to 3:30 pm in the Coastal Hearing Room at the Cal/EPA Headquarters Building, 1001 I Street, Sacramento, CA. The workshop will be webcast. The URL for the webcast (not active until the day and time of the meeting) is: http://calepa.ca.gov/Broadcast/.
Potential Regulatory Action OEHHA is considering a rulemaking that would provide for more informative and meaningful warnings to individuals concerning exposures to carcinogens and reproductive toxicants. The regulation would offer a variety of options for businesses that are required to provide these warnings, and would provide businesses with greater certainty that their warnings comply with Proposition 65.
At this time, OEHHA believes the regulation should include the following:
This will make warnings more difficult and present additional avenues for litigation, particularly if there are more than one Prop 65 chemical present and more than one avenue of ingestion
This may be adequate although previous attempts to make this change have been unsecessful, as many parties have asserted that warnings need to be at the point of sale.
Approved warning methods and content for use by manufacturers and retailers regarding exposures to listed chemicals in foods, including foods sold at retail establishments and food products sold via the internet. These approved methods may include alternatives to on-product warnings.
Same as above, there is a prejudice by the AG for having the warning at the point of sale, in the store. It would be useful to have specific standards set to ease compliance questions.
Makes sense, although it will cause manufactures and retailers to engage in additional efforts prior to sale.
We try to draft our settlement agreements to include this time.