Prop 65 - A (former) litigation attorney's (now in-house counsel at a MD manufacturer) perspective.

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Staff member
Super Moderator
#11
Forgive me, but I can't tell if you're being serious, or just cynical/sarcastic (I presume the latter?).
Nope...serious. Sorry that I am, actually....and I appreciate you checking.

I have a number of clients in CA...every one of them has a warning posted in the front window and on every entrance door.
I asked two of them "Why? I know what you make here."
The answer was pretty much what I wrote...they didn't make the sheetrock in the walls, or the paint, or the carpet...and surely there's something in there made in China under questionable controls...and the warning signs only cost ~$50USD to cover everything.
One of them outsources janitorial, and it would cost more than $50 to check their chemicals every time they come in to clean...

It is a very easy cost/benefit equation which makes Prop65 essentially useless in a litigious society. Especially given supadrai's description of (my paraphrase) "guilty until proven innocent".

Warning labels cost 1.6 cents at Uline...with the marketing "Apply to items that may contain Prop 65 chemicals "...note the "may".
 
Last edited:
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Mark Meer

Trusted Information Resource
#13
But... China isn't the only source of materials made under questionable controls...
The Californian government should just put out a public bulletin: "WARNING: All products and all places may contain chemicals which are known to the State of California to cause cancer and/or birth-defects.", and save everyone the trouble... :p
 

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration with a Mask on...
Staff member
Admin
#14
I can't say I know much about Prop65 but it sounds like you're right.
 

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Staff member
Super Moderator
#15
China isn't the only source of materials made under questionable controls...
Too true, and I apologize if this is found offensive to anyone...
That's just what my customer said...
I don't even have to leave my town to find questionable controls...
 
#17
Interesting decision, given the convincing case you make otherwise.
For us, our products are very cost competitive and one customer will use several contract manufacturers for products the consumer will view as identical, so if we put a warning on their packaging that other contract manufacturers don't, we would almost assuredly lose the business.

Additionally, the tests all came back really good. Almost everything was below detection limits and the one or two that weren't were well below the exposure limit. I can't remember the exact calculation, methodology or name of the test - but there were no significant concerns.

From legal and regulatory the testing drove the decision, from the business - the don't do what others aren't doing drove the decision. Rare and fortunate alignment.


Unrelated: putting your lawyer hat on, as far as law documents go, do you find the California regulations particularly byzantine? Like, it seems, that nearly every clause references some other section - some reference 3 or 4 separate sections! Maybe it's just my limited exposure to these types of regulations, but in anycase I certainly don't envy the lawyers that have to navigate these documents! :frust:
It's annoying but a fact of life we're used to. What often helps is to begin with an article by a reputable law firm or law journal that does the untangling for you. We can't fully rely on it but it puts the puzzle pieces together in a coherent picture - which is really difficult to do on a read through. But the IRS, EPA and some other federal regs take it to another level.

What upsets me is when I get contracts from another lawyer that contain an unnecessary amount of cross-references. To muck up something over which we have control is inexcusable.

Edited for mobile mistakes
 

MDRexpert

Involved In Discussions
#18
Hello,

Can someone tell what level of notification should a company make to its product/labeling to address the presence of this amount DEHP to be compliant with prop 65. Please advise! Thanks.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S Prop 65 and RoHS statement REACH and RoHS Conversations 6
T Determining What to Test - Prop 65 Testing RoHS, REACH, ELV, IMDS and Restricted Substances 2
J Compliance with CA Prop 65 Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 1
R ROHS and Prop 65 regulated materials: Alternative to the mdsystems database? RoHS, REACH, ELV, IMDS and Restricted Substances 13
dinaroxentool Former Class I device that is upscaled to IIa if the MDR is delayed EU Medical Device Regulations 2
BLoganB UDI for former manufacturer - My company is a distributor Other US Medical Device Regulations 0
J Looking for feedback from current/former Intelex users Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 4
P Regulations to Register Medical Devices in Republics of former Yugoslavia Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 2
J Taking over for former QA... Where to start? How to proceed? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
A "Do's" and "Don'ts" of auditing a former employer General Auditing Discussions 12
T Finding Suppliers for automotive industry in the former Yugoslavia countries Manufacturing and Related Processes 1
P Farewell Former President Cory Aquino World News 0
GStough What would you do? Former boss needs help General Auditing Discussions 39
R Analysis of Data - The former "Statistical Techniques" procedure ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
R Anyone know of ISO 14971 litigation for negligence? ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 3

Similar threads

Top Bottom