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 clone

This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet

Executive Summary

Connecticut measure resembling California's Proposition 65 would require warning labels on products that contain toxic substances; SB 1030 was subject to a Public Health Committee hearing March 15. Although bill exempts OTC drugs and dietary supplements, in a March 13 letter to co-sponsors Sen. Tony Nathaniel Harp and Rep. Mary Eberle, CHPA maintains "we are concerned that...once this precedent is set in Connecticut, it would be very easy to eliminate that protection in the future." CHPA and CTFA contend the bill would unduly worry consumers, place unnecessary relabeling costs on industry and needlessly mirror federal safeguards
Advertisement

Topics

Advertisement
UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

PS092352

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