On December 6, 2024, California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) finalized several amendments to Proposition 65 (Prop 65) warning statements. This law, officially known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, requires businesses to provide a “clear and reasonable” warning on products that contain chemicals exceeding an established safe harbor level and have been deemed to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity by the state. There are approximately 900 chemicals currently listed under this program.
Some of the changes to Prop 65 include:
- Chemical Identification: Short-form warnings will now have to provide the identity of at least one chemical on the list, if present above the safe harbor level. The long form warning has always required the identity of at least one chemical. If there are multiple chemicals that pose a carcinogenic and reproductive harm, the name for at least one of them has to appear on the warning.
- Labeling Requirements: The long and short-form warnings can now state “CA WARNING” or “CALIFORNIA WARNING” instead of just “WARNING.”
- Online Warnings: For online sales, warnings can be provided on the website rather than on the packaging.
Although revised warnings aren’t required until 2028, the recent rule changes will significantly impact the printing industry. Suppliers using the short-form warning must now identify one of the 900 listed Prop 65 chemicals and update their product labels, potentially requiring extensive testing. Label printers and web-to-print businesses selling directly into California will also need to revise their labels. Additionally, print customers may face the need to include warning statements on their products.
OEHHA’s reasoning for changing the short-form warning was to “make it more informative to consumers.” The agency says that the short-form warning, initially intended for small packaging, has been overused on packaging of all sizes. They claim businesses often use it to avoid litigation, even when products may not contain listed chemicals, which diminishes the warning's relevance. By requiring chemical identification, OEHHA aims to reduce "over-warning" and ensure warnings are more meaningful and accurate. More information about Proposition 65 can be found at this link.
PRINTING United Alliance was opposed to the changes on the short-form warning and joined two separate coalition comment letters. The letters pointed out that OEHHA failed to justify the revisions as beneficial to consumers and overlooked the underlying issue of bounty hunter lawsuits targeting companies over warnings. They also emphasized that current analytical methods cannot guarantee the absence of regulated chemicals in products.
In this article, Sara Osorio, Coordinator, EHS Affairs, PRINTING United Alliance, reviews changes to California’s Prop 65. More information about this and other sustainability issues can be found at Business Excellence-EHS Affairs, or reach out to Sara directly if you have questions about how these issues may affect your business: sosorio@printing.org.
To become a member of the Alliance and learn more about how our subject matter experts can assist your company with services and resources such as those mentioned in this article, please contact the Alliance membership team: 888-385-3588 / membership@printing.org.
This content was created with the assistance of AI and reviewed by a human for accuracy and relevance.