How is Proposition 65 meeting its goal of reducing exposure to hazardous chemicals in California?

Since it was passed in 1986, Proposition 65 has provided Californians with information they can use to reduce their exposures to listed chemicals that may not have been adequately controlled under other State or federal laws. This law has also increased public awareness about the adverse effects of exposures to listed chemicals. For example, Proposition 65 has resulted in greater awareness of the dangers of alcoholic beverage consumption during pregnancy. Alcohol consumption warnings are perhaps the most visible health warnings issued as a result of Proposition 65.

Proposition 65’s warning requirement has provided an incentive for manufacturers to remove listed chemicals from their products. For example, trichloroethylene, which causes cancer, is no longer used in most correction fluids; reformulated paint strippers do not contain the carcinogen methylene chloride; and toluene, which causes birth defects or other reproductive harm, has been removed from many nail care products. In addition, a Proposition 65 enforcement action prompted manufacturers to decrease the lead content in ceramic tableware and wineries to eliminate the use of lead-containing foil caps on wine bottles.

Proposition 65 has also succeeded in spurring significant reductions in California of air emissions of listed chemicals, such as ethylene oxide, hexavalent chromium, and chloroform.

Although Proposition 65 has benefited Californians, it has come at a cost for companies doing business in the state. They have incurred expenses to test products, develop alternatives to listed chemicals, reduce discharges, provide warnings, and otherwise comply with this law. Recognizing that compliance with Proposition 65 comes at a price, OEHHA is working to make the law’s regulatory requirements as clear as possible and ensure that chemicals are listed in accordance with rigorous science in an open public process.