Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 4412 News & Views Magazine EDITION 2, 2016 Regulatory PROPOSITION 65 BPA In May 2015, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) listed Bisphenol A (BPA) on the Proposition 65 list as a reproductive toxicant. Consumer products that contain BPA were required to begin providing a warning beginning on May 11, 2016. OEHHA has failed to establish a safe harbor level for BPA, which creates tremendous liability exposure for food and beverage manufacturers. The Administration responded to the concerns of CLFP and other food and beverage manufacturers by issuing an emergency warning regulation, which will allow for warnings signs to be posted at the point of sale or checkout counters. These emergency warning regulations expired on October 18, 2016. OEHHA began a regular rulemaking process in mid-September to extend these regulations until December 30, 2017. The regulations are scheduled for final adoption by January 2017. While CLFP supports the extension of these regulations, OEHHA has added some problematic provisions. Consumer advocacy groups strongly oppose a point of sale warning program, claiming that it does not specifically identify which products intentionally add BPA. In an effort to address these concerns, OEHHA has proposed that manufacturers that choose to participate in the point of sale warning program be required to identify products where BPA is intentionally used in epoxy coating or seals and to post this information on a public OEHHA website. CLFP and the other manufacturer organizations voiced serious concerns about this additional proposed requirement as it will be extremely burdensome on manufacturers and lead to consumer confusion. This requirement will not provide consumers any new information that is not already publicly available and may in fact cause consumer confusion. CLFP argued that the current warning program includes a list of all products for which a warning is being provided. Consumers wishing to know which products are covered can review the list on a publicly available website. However, CLFP would support a voluntary effort in which companies that have transitioned or are currently transition- ing to coatings or seals without BPA intentionally added can identify themselves and their products. OEHHA could provide a link to the list on its website for those public stakeholders looking for this type of information. This list would be far more accurate and helpful to consumers, and much more convenient to persons concerned about BPA. LEAD In late 2015, OEHHA released a pre-regulatory proposal to slash the lead safe harbor by 60% (that is from 0.5 micrograms /day to 0.2 micrograms/day). OEHHA’s proposal marks an extremely significant reduction in the safe harbor that will present substantial challenges for businesses to meet. CLFP is part of a broad-based coalition opposing OEHHA’s proposed reduction. Report What is Prop 65? Proposition 65, the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, was enacted as a ballot initiative in November 1986. The Proposition was intended by its authors to protect California citizens and the State's drinking water sources from chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm, and to inform citizens about exposures to such chemicals. By TRUDI HUGHES AND JOHN LARREA - CLFP Government Affairs Directors