CalEPA needs to use its regulatory authority to protect people from SHS outdoors to make Prop 65 suits unnecessary

California governor Jerry Brown has proposed amending Proposition 65, California's law requiring public warnings about exposures to carcinogens and reproductive toxicants to reduce "frivolous lawsuits.

I was surprised to read that Matt Rodriquez, secretary of CalEPA, supported the governor by citing a recent Proposition 65 case in which a Southern California group claimed that banks had violated Prop. 65 by not posting warnings about secondhand smoke that came from smokers near entrances or ATMs as "frivolous" because CalEPA identified secondhand smoke outdoors as a carcinogenic toxic air contaminant in 2007. Rather than ridiculing the fact that outdoor secondhand smoke can be a serious problem he should use his rregulator authority to protect people from secondhand smoke near bank entrances, ATM lines, bus stops and other outdoor environments, which would make the Prop 65 lawsuits unnecessary.

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.