In a recent proposed statement of decision, LA Superior Court Judge Elihu Berle dealt a blow to Starbucks and a number of other defendants in a case regarding Proposition 65 warnings for acrylamide in coffee, finding that the defense failed to support any of the three criteria necessary to support an alternative significant risk level … Continue Reading
As part of its Green Chemistry Initiative and the Safer Consumer Products (SCP) implementing regulations, California’s Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has released its Draft Three Year Priority Product Work Plan (2018-2020). The Plan indicates that it will “address exposures from harmful chemicals that migrate from consumer products into food.” DTSC identifies as “Candidate Chemicals” … Continue Reading
A California court has granted an injunction enjoining various growers associations from providing Proposition 65 cancer warnings for crops grown with glyphosate. In a motion for preliminary injunction, National Association of Wheat Growers et al. v. Zeise, the court held that a Proposition 65 warning conveying that glyphosate causes cancer would not be “factually accurate” … Continue Reading
New Proposition 65 warning requirements are becoming effective in just six months, on August 30, 2018. As previously reported on this blog, new regulations regarding “clear and reasonable warnings” were issued on September 2, 2016 In guidance, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), which administers Proposition 65, has advised that consumer products “manufactured … Continue Reading
California residents may see more Proposition 65 warnings at coffee shops in the near future. A state court is expected to issue a decision in the coming months regarding a 2010 60-day notice and 2012 court filing in which the Council for Education and Research on Toxics alleged 90 companies had failed to warn consumers … Continue Reading
Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley announced that 12 states have joined Missouri in a lawsuit challenging a California law requiring any eggs sold in the state to come from hens that have space to stretch out in their cages. The lawsuit was filed on December 4 to the U.S. Supreme Court. In 2008, Californians approved, … Continue Reading
For years, FDA, USDA, and various industry stakeholders have sought to tackle public health concerns associated with the use of medically important antibiotics to promote growth or feed efficiency in food-producing animals. In the U.S., FDA is working with industry to gradually phase out the use of medically important antimicrobials in food animals for production … Continue Reading
Foie gras is a culinary delicacy made from the fattened liver of a duck or goose. It can be produced through a process called gavage in which the birds are force-fed through tubes inserted into their esophagus. Foie gras sales derived from this method were prohibited in California following the passage of a bill in … Continue Reading
As previously covered on this blog, the City of San Francisco passed legislation in June 2015 that required health warnings to be placed on advertising for sugar-sweetened beverages (i.e., nonalcoholic beverages with caloric sweeteners that contain more than 25 calories per 12 oz.). Specifically, the warning would have read: “WARNING: Drinking beverages with added sugar(s) contributes … Continue Reading
The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) just posted a new question and answer document on how the new Proposition 65 Clear and Reasonable Warning regulations apply to businesses. As we previously reported on this blog, California’s OEHHA announced on September 2, 2016, a final rule concerning “clear and reasonable warnings” required under … Continue Reading
“Slack fill” cases are on the rise across the U.S. Slack fill is the empty space between products and their packaging. Companies can be challenged for including “nonfunctional slack fill” in product packaging under both the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”) and state unfair business practice statutes (particularly in California). At the federal … Continue Reading
California State Senator Bill Monning (D-Carmel) introduced a bill that would require health warning labels on sugary beverages sold in California. More specifically, SB 300, referred to as the Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Health Warning Act, would require the following warning on certain sealed beverage containers: STATE OF CALIFORNIA SAFETY WARNING: Drinking beverages with added sugar(s) contributes … Continue Reading
As previously covered on this blog, BPA was added to the Prop 65 list as a reproductive toxicant in May 2015, with an effective date in May 2016. On April 18, 2016, California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) implemented an emergency rulemaking that allowed the use of point-of-sale (POS) signage to indicate exposures … Continue Reading
As previously covered on this blog, FDA has been in the process of implementing menu labeling provisions added to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act by the Affordable Care Act. Under the new requirements, restaurants or similar retail food establishments (in chains of 20 or more locations doing business under the same name and selling substantially … Continue Reading
Furfuryl alcohol was recently added to California’s Proposition 65 list of carcinogens, effective September 30, 2016. Proposition 65, also known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, prohibits knowingly exposing any individual to a listed chemical without first providing a “clear and reasonable warning” to such individual. Effective September 30, 2016, … Continue Reading
The food and beverage industry generally supports extending the use of point-of-sale (POS) signage to indicate exposures from bisphenol A (BPA) present in cans, lids, and caps of packaged food and beverages at retail stores; however, the industry strongly opposes the requirement that companies submit information on whether BPA was intentionally used in the manufacture … Continue Reading
Amendments to California’s Proposition 65 settlement terms, penalty amounts, and attorney’s fees in civil actions filed by private persons become effective October 1, 2016. By way of background, Proposition 65—also known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986—prohibits knowingly exposing any individual to a listed chemical without first providing a “clear … Continue Reading
California issues final rule adopting new “clear and reasonable warnings” required under Proposition 65. By way of background, on November 27, 2015, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) proposed to revise warnings required under Proposition 65 (Prop 65) and accepted public comments through January 25, 2016. Subsequently, on March 25, 2016, OEHHA … Continue Reading
An upcoming Appeals Court decision may embolden consumer advocacy groups to bypass administrative remedies in favor of the courts. (subscription to Food Chemical News required) Consumer groups sued FDA in November 2014 for approving ractopamine-based feed additives used to promote faster growth and leaner meat in food producing animals such as cattle, pigs, and turkeys, … Continue Reading
Washington Legal Foundation files brief in support of First Amendment challenge to San Francisco soda warning. As previously covered on this blog, the City of San Francisco passed legislation that requires health warnings to be placed on advertising for sugar-sweetened beverages. Industry and advertising trade associations filed a lawsuit challenging the legislation on First Amendment grounds. … Continue Reading
California proposes to amend Prop 65 warning requirements for BPA in canned and bottled foods and beverages. In May 2015, California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) added bisphenol A (BPA) to the Prop 65 list as a reproductive toxicant. On April 18, 2016, OEHHA implemented an emergency regulation for BPA, providing a safe harbor warning strategy to … Continue Reading
San Francisco sugar-sweetened beverage warning set to take effect in July. As previously covered on this blog, the City of San Francisco passed legislation in June 2015 that requires health warnings to be placed on advertising for sugar-sweetened beverages (i.e., nonalcoholic beverages with caloric sweeteners that contain more than 25 calories per 12 oz.). Specifically, … Continue Reading
Styrene added to Proposition 65 list. Proposition 65 is a “right to know” California statute that requires companies to provide warning statements where their products cause an “exposure” to carcinogens and/or reproductive toxicants. California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) maintains an up-to-date list of the chemicals (>900) that trigger warnings. The warning requirements do not … Continue Reading
California launches Prop 65 Warning Website. As previously covered on this blog, California has been in the process of revisiting its Prop 65 regulations, which may eventually include changes to the safe harbor warnings. As part of this process, a final regulation took effect on April 1, 2016, establishing a framework for a new website … Continue Reading
