Prop 65 Warnings not Required for Most Nail Polish Exposures

On April 17, 2000, Deputy Attorney General Ed Weil wrote to the parties in Toxic Injuries Corp. v. Creative Nail Design, providing the AG's conclusions on a study performed to analyze exposures to toluene and formaldehyde from nail polish.  These products had been subject to extensive litigation by both TIC and As You Sow, with a number of settlements having been reached over the last few years.  The study found:

• consumers are not exposed to either chemical at a level that requires a warning, either in nail salons or using the products at home
• Although only 17% of nail technicians had exposures to toluene at a level that required a warning, the AG considered all nail technicians to be "average" users, and that Prop 65 warnings must be given to workers at nail salons.  However, Fed OSHA's limitation on the application to out-of-state manufacturers applied to the manufacturers of these products, and the duty to provide warnings falls on the employer.
• the concentration of formaldehyde at nail salons was not significantly different than ambient exposures, and no warning is required for nail technicians.

The letter was accompained by a draft declaration from Dr. Jed Waldman, Chief of the Indoor Air Quality Section of the DHS, which summarized the state's analysis of the study.

This page last updated November 2000