Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP. logo.

Proposition 65 (California)

For more than three decades, GRSM has counseled 100+ companies on matters involving California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, known as Proposition 65, which can require companies to provide “clear and reasonable” warnings for possible consumer exposure to certain carcinogens and reproductive toxicants through foreseeable use of consumer products. The warning requirements can pertain to food products, beverages and dietary supplements as well. We have advised manufacturers, distributors and retailers throughout the stream of commerce regarding regulatory compliance measures for possible consumer product exposures and we have defended a multitude of companies against enforcement actions brought under Proposition 65.

Proposition 65 prohibits any company with ten or more employees from knowingly and intentionally exposing the public to any chemical identified by the state as known to cause cancer, birth defects or reproductive harm without first providing a clear and reasonable warning. The statute is primarily enforced by private parties seeking injunctive relief, penalties and attorneys’ fees against companies that they claim to be out of compliance.

Our attorneys bring academic backgrounds and years of scientific and technical experience and knowledge to guide our clients with respect to Safe Harbor exposure/warning compliance and in the efficient use of consultants and potential expert witnesses. We have counseled and defended companies of all sizes, from Fortune 500 companies to small businesses, that manufacture, distribute and/or sell products in California either directly or through a third-party retailer or distributor.

  • Dietary Supplements
  • Seafood products
  • Chips, crackers and wafers
  • Food preparation packages from overseas
  • Dried food products
  • Dietary supplements
  • Coffee
  • Antacids
  • Spices
  • Food additives
  • Candy

  • Cosmetics and Personal Care Consumer Products
  • Plumbing and home maintenance care products and accessories
  • PVC or plastic components and/or packaging
  • Decorative ceramic dining products
  • Cleaning supplies
  • Automotive parts, diving equipment and water vessel components and accessories
  • Clothing, textiles and footwear products
  • Cookware and glassware
  • Backpacks and carrying cases
  • Furniture
  • Cleaning products
  • Pool supplies
  • Children’s products
  • Consumer electronics
  • Garden equipment
  • Jewelry
  • Sports equipment
  • Leather gloves and footwear
  • Consumer product packaging

  • Pesticides
  • Paints, inks, and removal products
  • Fire retardants
  • Solvents
  • Varnishes, stains and adhesives
  • Hardware and construction products
  • Tools and tool accessories
  • Plumbing fixtures
  • Abrasive materials
  • Cement aggregate
  • Wood dust

  • Diesel exhaust
  • Coal and petroleum coke dust
  • Tobacco smoke
  • Carbon monoxide
  • Cleaning agents
  • Parking garages and engine exhaust

We regularly assist our clients in developing compliance strategies for risk management against potential Proposition 65 enforcement actions. We prepare clear and reasonable warnings and regularly conduct scientific analyses, using qualified laboratories, to ensure that listed chemicals in products are within the safe harbor thresholds.

We work with our clients to develop the most efficient and cost-effective resolution for private party, bounty hunter actions, ranging from pre-litigation nuisance settlements, all the way to defense at trial. We have defended Proposition 65 enforcement actions against the California Attorney General and all the main private plaintiffs’ firms in the state.