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.
Proposition 65 requires the Governor to publish, at least annually, a list of chemicals known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity.
download this fact sheet as a pdf file here
Q: I recently bought a product that came with a Proposition 65 warning. How do I find out more about the warning and the chemicals in the product?
A: Businesses are not required to provide OEHHA with any information regarding their Proposition 65 warnings. To receive more information about the chemicals of concern and the levels of exposure related to a particular product's use, one should contact the manufacturer of the product. The decision to provide a Proposition 65 warning is made by the respective business based upon its knowledge of the types of chemical exposures it is responsible for causing to individuals. A business is not required to notify our office or any other regulatory agency when it decides to provide a warning.
Because we do not know why a business has chosen to provide a warning, we generally cannot respond to specific questions regarding product safety, why a warning is being given, for which listed chemical the warning is being given, how long the chemical exposures have been occurring, and at what level a chemical exposure is occurring. The responses to these exposure questions should be obtained from the business.
The list of chemicals subject to Proposition 65 is available at http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/Newlist.html.
Q: Is a product safe if it carries a Proposition 65 warning?
A: The fact that a product bears a Proposition 65 warning does not mean by itself that the product is unsafe.
You could think of Proposition 65 more as a “right to know” law than a pure product safety law. Voters who approved Proposition 65 in 1986 intended that Californians should have a right to know when they may be exposed to chemicals that cause cancer or reproductive harm. That way, consumers and their families can decide on their own if they want to purchase and/or use the product. For additional information about the product, contact the product manufacturer.
State public health officials and the federal government generally regulate product safety. The California Department of Public Health issues recalls of food products found to be unsafe. Its federal government counterpart, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, regulates food, drug, cosmetic, and medical device products. Other types of consumer products, including toys, jewelry, personal care products, and other non-food items, come under the purview of the Consumer Products Safety Commission, which also may issue recalls for products found to be unsafe. Finally, the California Air Resources Board may ban products that harm the air we breathe.
Q: My landlord just posted Proposition 65 warning signs at my apartment complex. Why is my landlord posting these warnings?
A: Tenants should ask their landlords for specific information regarding Proposition 65 warnings at their apartment building. Property owners and managers are not required to notify OEHHA when or explain to us why they provide tenants with a Proposition 65 warning. You can find general information on what tenants should know about Proposition 65 by reading our fact sheet for tenants at: http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/background/P65ten.html.
Q. Is toxic mold subject to the requirements of Proposition 65?
A. No. Toxic mold is not subject to Proposition 65. The Department of Public Health (DPH), formerly the Department of Health Services, is the lead state agency concerning the regulation of mold. DPH has published a fact sheet on toxic mold in homes and it is available at http://www.cal-iaq.org/MIMH_2006-06.html
Other information resources on toxic mold can be found at:
http://www.cal-iaq.org/MOLD/
http://www.epa.gov/iaq/molds/
http://www.insurance.ca.gov/ type in search word "mold"
http://www.cdph.ca.gov/Pages/default.aspx type in search work "mold"
http://www.cdc.gov/health/mold.html
http://www.osha.gov/dts/shib/shib101003.html
Q. Are any businesses exempt from Proposition 65?
A. Yes. Small businesses with less than 10 employees, governmental agencies, and public water systems are exempt from the warning requirement and discharge prohibition of Proposition 65. This is addressed in the definition for "person in the course of doing business" in section 25249.11(b) of the Health and Safety Code, which states, “‘Person in the course of doing business’ does not include any person employing fewer than 10 employees in his or her business; any city, county, or district or any department or agency thereof or the state or any department or agency thereof or the federal government or any department or agency thereof; or any entity in its operation of a public water system as defined in Section 116275."
Q: Are governmental agencies exempt from the disclosure requirement under Proposition 65?
A: No. Designated Employees of the government, as the term is used in Government Code Section 82019, are required to disclose illegal and threatened illegal discharges of hazardous waste to the local Board of Supervisors and the local health officer. Additional information about the disclosure requirement is available in a fact sheet at http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/background/P65Facts.html.
Q: As a business, how do I know if I need to provide a Proposition 65 warning?
A: The statute states that “no person in the course of doing business shall knowingly and intentionally expose any individual to a chemical known to the state (California) to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity without first giving a clear and reasonable warning…” Based upon your knowledge of your business operations and chemicals used, you should review the Proposition 65 list at http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/Newlist.html to determine which chemicals would likely be involved in exposures to individuals.
OEHHA has established safe harbor levels (levels of exposure that trigger the warning requirement) for some, but not all, listed chemicals. Businesses that cause exposures greater than the safe harbor level must provide Proposition 65 warnings. These safe harbor levels are available in the September 2011 Status Report available at http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/pdf/2011SeptemberStatus.pdf. Over time, we expect to adopt additional safe harbor numbers as explained in the report.
If there is no safe harbor level for a chemical, businesses that knowingly expose individuals to that chemical would generally be required to provide a Proposition 65 warning, unless the business could show that risks of cancer or reproductive harm resulting from the exposure would be below levels specified in Proposition 65 and its accompanying regulations. Determining health risks is very complex, and we recommend that businesses consult a qualified professional if they believe an exposure to a listed chemical may not require a Proposition 65 warning.
Q: Can you send me the Proposition 65 signs that businesses are required to post or provide me with the information that needs to be included?
A: We do not have Proposition 65 warning signs. Businesses are responsible for providing clear and reasonable warnings. The form, content and suggested language for some Proposition 65 warnings can be found in regulation in Title 27, Cal. Code of Regulations, Sections 25601 -25605.2 (http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/law/pdf_zip/RegsArt6.pdf).
Q. What is the acceptable concentration in my product for chemicals listed under Proposition 65?
A. Under Proposition 65, there are no acceptable concentrations established for any listed chemical in any given product. An exposure that causes a significant risk of harm from a listed chemical through the use of a product would trigger the warning requirement, not merely the fact that a listed chemical is present in a product. The concentration of a listed chemical would certainly factor into the level of exposure that would result from an individual using a given product. But concentration alone is not sufficient to determine if warnings are required. (However, please see the final question below regarding a specific court settlement involving allowable concentrations of lead in tableware.)
Q: What are the Proposition 65 requirements for lead in jewelry?
A: Lead is a chemical known to the state of California to cause cancer and reproductive harm. Jewelry is just one of many types of products that can have lead as a constituent. Manufacturers and importers of lead-containing jewelry must warn consumers if they will be exposed to lead in jewelry.
A 2006 settlement of a Proposition 65 lawsuit filed by the California Attorney General’s Office set standards for lead in jewelry and other products. Proposition 65 settlements often result in products that contain fewer chemicals and other substances known to cause cancer or reproductive harm. In this case, the settlement resulted in less lead content in jewelry and other products you may buy every day.
This consent judgment resulted in a state law that limits the amount of lead in jewelry and establishes specific testing procedures for that jewelry. (Health and Safety Code Sections 25214.1-25214.4.2). The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) enforces this law (known as the Lead Containing Jewelry Law) in California. See: http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/LeadInJewelry.cfm for more information about lead-containing jewelry, and to learn more about the complex requirements placed on jewelry that contains lead.
Nationwide, the federal Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) implemented by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) addresses lead in children’s products (including children’s jewelry). (15 U.S.C. 2051 et seq. at http://www.cpsc.gov/cpsia.pdf) Click here to read more about these requirements: http://www.cpsc.gov/ABOUT/Cpsia/sect101.html
Recently, cadmium, another chemical on the Proposition 65 list, has been used as a substitute for lead in jewelry-making. Exposures to cadmium are subject to the same Proposition 65 warning requirement as lead. Beginning January 1, 2012, California state law also regulates children’s jewelry that contains any component or is made of any material that is more than 0.03% cadmium by weight.
Q: What are the standards concerning phthalates in products?
A: Phthalates are a group of chemicals that are used in plastics to make them soft and flexible. Phthalates are used in a variety of common household products including cosmetics and personal care products, automotive and building products, food and beverage packaging and soft, plastic children’s toys.
The following phthalates are listed under Proposition 65 because they are known to cause reproductive harm:
Under Proposition 65, significant exposure to any of these named phthalates would require a warning prior to the exposure. ”Safe harbor levels” for DEHP, DBP, and DnHP have been established which indicate when a Proposition 65 warning is required.
More information about safe harbor levels, including a list of all available safe harbor levels may be found here: http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/getNSRLs.html
Phthalates in products are also subject to other federal and state laws. The California phthalates in children’s toys law (AB 1108, 2007) bans the use of certain phthalates in excess of 0.1 percent in certain child care articles. The federal Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) (2008) also conditionally or fully bans the use of the same named phthalates in children’s products.
These phthalates are:
For information about the implementation of the California phthalate law, visit the State Attorney General’s Office web site at http://ag.ca.gov/prop65/pdfs/CA_phthalate_letter.pdf.
For information about the federal phthalate law, visit the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s web site at http://www.cpsc.gov/about/cpsia/faq/108faq.html#products.
'Last updated September, 2011
