Industry Association Sues Gov. Brown's Administration to Keep BPA Off of Prop. 65 List
That statewide level of regulation is what has chemical companies worried. Rather than print the required Prop. 65 warning label on products, many businesses simply replace the chemical with something else, leaving those chemical manufacturers to try and scramble for business. Last year, when California added a substance called 4-Methylimidazole (4-MEI) to the list, both Coca-Cola and Pepsi changed their formulas to exclude the chemical. The ACC would like to prevent that from happening again.
The OEHHA's proposal is not the first step taken against BPA in California. In 2011, Gov. Brown signed a bill banning the substance in baby bottles and sippy cups, which was followed by a similar nationwide FDA ban in 2012. Several other countries, including Canada and France, have implemented bans on BPA in certain products. The ACC notes that independent agencies in the U.S., Japan and Europe all "[support] the safety of BPA in food contact materials and other consumer products."
OEHHA has extended the comment period on the proposal until March 27, 2013. Interested parties may send an email to P65Public.Comments@oehha.ca.gov with "NOIL-Bisphenol A" in the subject line or visit www.oehha.org for more information.