skip to Main Content

OEHHA Proposes Tailored Safe Harbor Warnings for Residential Rental Properties

On March 2, 2018, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) proposed tailored Proposition 65 safe harbor warning regulations for exposures occurring in residential rental properties. The deadline for comments is April 16, 2018. More information about OEHHA’s proposal may be found here. OEHHA’s new Proposition 65 safe harbor warnings include a number of “tailored warnings,” i.e., specific warning language and methods of transmission for specific types of exposures. To benefit from the safe harbor afforded by the regulations, businesses causing such exposures must use the tailored warnings, and not the generic safe harbor warnings for the general…

Read More

Between A Rock and A Hard Place – Or, When Is A Proposition 65 Exempt Business Not Really Exempt?

By Ann Grimaldi and Jennifer Karpinski Singh It happens too often to overlook: a supplier that is exempt from Proposition 65’s requirements, because it employs less than 10 employees, receives a defense and indemnity demand from its retailer customer who, in turn, received a Proposition 65 Notice of Violation. The supplier believes itself exempt from Proposition 65’s requirements - or, more likely, is not even aware of this California right-to-know law. Yet the retailer’s supply agreement requires the supplier to “comply with all applicable laws” and to warrant that its products are labeled in compliance with “all applicable regulations.” Now,…

Read More

Federal Judge Prohibits Enforcement of Proposition 65 Warning Requirement for Glyphosate – But The Devil Is in The Details

An ongoing lawsuit against California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and the California Attorney General reached a critical point on February 26, 2018, when a federal district court applied First Amendment principles to prohibit the enforcement of the Proposition 65 warning requirement for glyphosate. (National Association of Wheat Growers, et al. v. OEHHA, et al. (Eastern District California Case No. 2:17-2401 WSB EFB).) The ruling is notable for its acknowledgement that the glyphosate listing does not reflect worldwide scientific consensus regarding the chemical's actual cancer risk. However, the prohibition on enforcement may not be as broad as the…

Read More
Back To Top