Prop 65 and Related Sites and Resources

Index to Links

• Legal Information
• WWW Sites of Interest
• Prop 65 Articles, Resources, and Information
  • General Interest
  • Administrative Issues, Chemical Listing, etc.
  • Policy, Politics, etc.
  • Science and Risk Assessment
  • Litigation
    • From the Attorney General's Office
    • Miscellaneous

• Previous Issues of calprop65.com

Legal Information

• Proposition 65 View the text of the statute (as amended by SB 471).
• Current list of Prop 65 Chemicals. {For chemicals currently under consideration, go to our regulatory update.}
• Prop 65's warning regulation, 22 CCR section 12601.
• Prop 65's "authoritative bodies" listing regulations.  Section 12306 (the authoritative bodies listing reg), and Section 12902 (the formally required to be labeled reg).
• Prop 65 no significant risk and acceptable intake levels. A 1994 status report from OEHHA, setting forth NSRLs and MADLs for carcinogens and reproductive toxins under Prop 65. The report includes levels published in the California Code of Regulations, as well as unofficial draft levels for many more chemicals. Download the report in pdf.
• A Comparison of the Proposition 65 Warning Requirement and the Designated Government Employee Disclosure Requirement.  A fact sheet from OEHHA.
• From OEHHA February 2001 [all in pdf]
  • Process for Developing Safe Harbor Numbers
  • Proposition 65 Status Report on No Significant Risk Levels for Carcinogens and Maximum Allowable Daily Levels for Chemicals Causing Reproductive Toxicity
  • Public Input on the Process for Developing Safe Harbor Numbers: Issues Raised at the November 2000 Workshop and in Written Submissions
• California Attorney General's Proposition 65 Web Site.  Provides forms for reporting complaints and lawsuits, a searchable database of 60-day notices (searchable by by name of plaintiff, defendant, chemical, product, date range, or AG control number), and will allow for electronic filing (and data retrieval?) in the future.
• Proposition 65 Status Report on No Significant Risk Levels for Carcinogens and Maximum Allowable Daily Levels for Chemicals Causing Reproductive Toxicity (March 2002)

WWW Sites of Interest

• California Environmental Protection Agency. Home page with links to various Cal/EPA information and programs.
• Cal/EPA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. OEHHA is the agency charged with implementing Prop 65. Provides a number of documents relating to Prop 65 [most of which are available directly on the Prop 65 Page] and other programs.
• The Prop 65 News. Now has back issues of the paper version on-line and searchable.
• Pine Lane Resources provides a collection of information relating to consumer products and chemical components. Resources are provided on chemical safety and regulation issues on a national and state-by-state basis, as well as industry and standards associations.
• Risk World an international World Wide Web publication, providing risk-focused news articles, government reports, paper abstracts, Web site profiles, and more.
• National Toxicology Program. NTP publishes the Annual Report on Carcinogens and its bioassays often form the basis for chemical listings under Prop 65.  You can search for references to specific chemicals.
• ATSDR HazDat Database summarizes information on numerous chemicals, and is easily searchable.
• United States Environmental Protection Agency. EPA's site also has a searchable database of chemical information.
• Natural Resources Defense Council
• Environmental Defense
• Roger Beers' Environmental Litigation Page
• Environmental Law Foundation
• As You Sow
• OSHA Defense League. Comprehensive information on OSHA compliance issues.

Prop 65 Articles, Resources, and Information

General Interest

• Prop 65 in Plain English (from OEHHA).
• Prop 65 Overview from calprop65.com.
• Proposition 65: Three Strategies in Managing the Risks, by Ken Mennemeier, Norm Hile, and Bill Kealey, originally published in Prop 65 News, May 1994.
• Proposition 65's Application to Discharges to Drinking Water Sources, from the Roger Beers' Environmental Litigation Pages.
• "Proposition 65: Is Your Business Safe?" By Brian W. DeWitt.

Administrative Issues, Chemical Listing, etc.

• Get on the OEHHA Prop 65 Mailing List (since Laurie Monserrat gets the official notices out faster than I summarize them here).
• Mechanism for Listing of Chemicals is an OEHHA publication, dated November 13, 1995. It discusses the procedures by which chemicals are included on the Prop 65 list.
• Mechanism for De-Listing of Chemicals is another OEHHA publication dated November 13, 1995. It describes the procedures for reconsidering and removing agents from the Prop 65 list.
• Procedure for Prioritizing Candidate Chemicals for Consideration under Proposition 65 by the 'State's Qualified Experts' [pdf/html] from OEHHA.    Also available is a summary of the comments received on the prioritization procedure [pdf/html].
• OEHHA's Prop 65 Progress Report. A July 1999 report from OEHHA Director Denton [pdf].
• IARC is Not "Authoritative" on Reproductive Toxicity," by F. Jay Murray, Ph.D. From The Prop 65 News, May 1998.
• Final Guidance Criteria for Identifying Chemicals for Listing as "Known to the State to Cause Cancer."  Issued by OEHHA on March 5, 2001.   The document is available in pdf as well.
• OEHHA Director Joan Denton's August 16, 2001 status report on Prop 65 activities.  [html/pdf]

Policy, Politics, etc.

• The Boy Who Cried Rodent Carcinogen, by Henry I. Miller, a fellow at the Hoover Institution and a member of the board of directors of the American Council on Science and Health. According to the article, "The principle that "the dose makes the poison"—in other words, that almost any substance can be toxic at high levels—has been lost on Californians."
• "Court Ruling Reveals Absurdity of California's Proposition 65." A February 8, 2002 article by Jeffrey B. Margulies, published by the Washington Legal Foundation, discussing the Smilecare decision and its potential impact on Prop 65 litigation.
• American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) stated that a study found Prop 65 failed to meet its stated intent of informing consumers about exposures to dangerous chemicals. acsh.html.
• "Toxic Avengers; For the hard work of informing us that dentists and fire logs cause cancer, lawyers get rich." From Forbes Magazine, 10/15/01 (membership required).
• Government: Regulation by Shaming, by Mary Graham of The Atlantic Monthly. Sometimes the best way to get companies to change is to make them come clean."   A discussion of Prop 65, TRI, and other disclosure laws affecting corporations.
• Why Prop 65 Should be a National Model. Get National Resource Defense Council Senior Attorney Al Meyerhoff's view on what Prop 65 has achieved.
• "A National Proposition?" A 1995 article appearing in Environmental Health Perspectives discusses potential national implications for Prop 65.
• "Identifying Chemical Hazards for Regulation: The Scientific Basis and Regulatory Scope of California's Proposition 65 List of Carcinogens and Reproductive Toxicants." An article by William S. Pease, then an environmental planner with the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (and now with EDF). Although it is a bit dated, it provides an extensive look into the political fights over the initial listing of chemicals under Prop 65, and a discussion of some unintended consequences of Prop 65's identify and regulate scheme.
• "Should Everything Be Labeled?" From the National Center for Policy Analysis. The authors' position is stated in the article, " Proposition 65 is not a law with a few errors that can be corrected by amendment or patchwork reform. It is a law fundamentally flawed by faulty assumptions about the nature and role of science. Among other unstated assumptions, Proposition 65 is based on the beliefs that (1) we are exposed to only a few carcinogenic substances, (2) we have reliable means of identifying those substances; and (3) we can eliminate our exposure to those substances with minimal discomfort. As we shall see in the next section, all of these beliefs are wrong."
• "International Trade, the Environment, and the States: An Evolving State-Federal Relationship." An article by Paul M. Orbuch (Trade Counsel) and Thomas O. Singer, PhD (Director of Research) of the Western Governor's Association. It doesn't focus specifically on Prop 65, but has an extensive discussion of the tension between state environmental regulation and international treaties such as GATT and NAFTA.
• "Bounty Hunters," by Tim W. Ferguson of Forbes Magazine.
• "WARNING: OBSESSIVE ACTIVISM MAY BE HAZARDOUS" By Daniel J. Popeo of the Washington Legal Foundation.
• "Rising Toxic Tide: Pesticide Use in California, 1991-1995," by James Liebman, Ph.D., Staff Scientist with Research Assistance from Colin Brewer, Martin Bourque, Anne Katten, Corrina Marie Rice and Kelly Campbell, Pesticide Action Network & Californians for Pesticide Reform
• "Voters reach for the green lever: Environmental steps -- from gill-net ban to cougar protection -- taken by initiative," by Nancy Vogel, Sacramento Bee Staff Writer (Published Aug. 4, 1996). This article discusses the use of initiatives in the environmental movement in California.
• "Proposition 65 Comes of Age."  By Peter Fairley of Chemical Week (published April 7, 1999).
• GMA White Paper: "Warning on Product Labels--Proposition 65."  GMA's views on Prop 65 and a similar proposed Massachusetts bill.  Dated 12/23/98.

Science and Risk Assessment

• A Review of the California Environmental Protection Agency's Risk Assessment Practices, Polices and Guidelines issued by an expert panel called by state legislation to review the risk assessment practices of OEHHA on December 3, 1996 [compressed Word 7 and Excel 7 files]
• "Toxic Exposures and Male Infertility," by Steven M. Schrader, Ph.D., of the National Institute for Occupational Safety & Health. A discussion on the identification and assessment of male reproductive toxins.
• "Risk Assessment: What It Is, What It Can (and Can't) Do." A description of the risk assessment process, along with a description of RISK*ASSISTANT software for conducting assessments.
• "Improving the Scientific Basis of Risk Assessment Through Harmonization." An Advisory from former OEHHA Director, Richard Becker, April 1, 1997.
• "Risk Assessment in California and Biological Effects of Low Level Exposures," Joseph P. Brown, Ph.D., David W. Morry, Ph.D., and Robert A. Howd, Ph.D. Pesticide and Environmental Toxicology Section, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment California Environmental Protection Agency
• "The Normative Nature of Risk Assessment: Features and Possibilities," by Carl F. Cranor, Ph.D., M.S.L.
• Air Dispersion Models: Tools to Assess Impacts from Air Pollution Sources [pdf].  By James Westbrook, of Westbrook Environmental Services.

Litigation

From the Attorney General's Office

• Attorney General Litigation Summary on The Prop 65 Page. The AG's office maintained perhaps the most comprehensive listing of early (pre-1995) public and private enforcement actions available. It is dated May 1996, but contains some more recent actions, and is of value to those seeking information on past and ongoing actions. You can either read the file in html on your browser, or download it as a pdf file.
• Attorney General's October 18, 1993, letter to California Manufacturers Assn, explaining the AG's office's policy on Prop 65 cases involving air emissions, originally published in Prop 65 News, April 1994.
• Attorney General opinion regarding duty of manufacturer's duty to give warning for exposures occurring through use of other manufacturer's product.  This article from Prop 65 News, August 1995, summarizes an opinion letter from the AG's office which stated that manufacturers of "dry-clean only" clothing was not responsible for providing warnings to consumers related to perchloroethylene used by dry cleaners, but contained broad language applicable to all manufacturers.
• Attorney General settlement database, current from January 2000 through August 2001.  [html/excel]
• California Attorney General's Proposition 65 Web Site.  Provides forms for reporting complaints and lawsuits, a searchable database of 60-day notices (searchable by by name of plaintiff, defendant, chemical, product, date range, or AG control number), a number of recent AG letters, and will allow for electronic filing (and data retrieval?) in the future.

  Miscellaneous

• "Proposition 65's Application to Workplace Exposures."  "Proposition 65 From A Plaintiff's Perspective." From Roger Beers' Environmental Litigation Page.  The first article is self-explanatory.   The second article discusses proof of knowledge and intent, establishing the fact of exposure, establishing the level of exposure, what is required for the "no significant risk" level defense, statute of limitations, and determination of penalty amounts. 
• Consumer Claims, Environmental Pollution, Environmental Justice and Proposition 65: A Primer for Attorneys and Clients on an Important Tool in Toxics Enforcement. From Jim Wheaton of the Environmental Law Foundation, " this article is adapted from a piece originally authored for conferences before the California Trial Lawyers Association, the Legal Committee of the Los Angeles Chapter of the Sierra Club and seminars sponsored by the San Diego Law Firm of Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps. It therefore assumes some legal experience and passing familiarity with California law, and presents much of the material from a plaintiff lawyer's perspective."
• "Environmental Justice Enforcement: Using Old Tools For New Problems." From the Environmental Law Foundation, originally published in the Environmental Law News, a publication of the State Bar's Environmental Law Section. "Attorneys in the plaintiffs' environmental bar traditionally use citizen enforcement tools derived from the environmental movement's successes. Examples include cases brought under the National Environmental Policy Act, California Environmental Quality Act, or the federal Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act, Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Comprehensive Environmental Response Liability and Cleanup Act, or the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. In addition, several California statutes have become increasingly prominent weapons in environmental groups' arsenals. A principal example is Proposition 65."
• "Bus. & Prof. Code 17200: The Biggest Hammer in the Tool Box?"  Another article by Jim Wheaton, also recently published in Prop 65 News.
• "Proving the 'No Significant Risk' Defense to Proposition 65's Warning Requirement: A Case Study."  Rick Raushenbush of Latham & Watkins explains how the diesel manufacturers won their litigation through the use of risk assessment.   Originally published as an Analysis & Perspective Article, and available in pdf.
• "Proposition 65 in the Workplace: Are Chemical Manufacturers Obligated to Warn Downstream Users of Carcinogenic Hazards?"   By Raphael Metzger.  As Metzger is a toxic tort and Prop 65 plaintiff's lawyer, the answer comes to him easily.

Previous Issues of calprop65.com

• January 14, 2002
• February 25, 2002
• July 8, 2002
• October 5, 2002
• November 26, 2002

This page last updated Saturday, May 3, 2003