Pink Sheet is part of the Business Intelligence Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction
UsernamePublicRestriction

Prop. 65

This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet

Executive Summary

NDMA and other trade associations representing FDA-regulated industries submitted written comments at June 24 hearing on the repeal of a reg exempting FDA-regulated products from Prop. 65 warning requirements. The industry comments assert that the California EPA "cannot lawfully agree, outside the rulemaking process, to promulgate or repeal a regulation." While an agency "can agree to initiate rulemaking, it cannot lawfully commit itself in advance to any specific result." The California EPA agreed to repeal the exemption in a December 1992 out-of-court settlement of AFL-CIO, et al. v. George Deukmejian, et. al. ("The Tan Sheet" May 17, p. 7)...
Advertisement

Topics

Advertisement
UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

PS081615

Ask The Analyst

Please Note: You can also Click below Link for Ask the Analyst
Ask The Analyst

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel