BarbriSFCourseDetails
  1. keyboard_arrow_leftBack

Course Details

Course Information
  • smart_display Format

    On-Demand

  • signal_cellular_alt Difficulty Level

  • work Practice Area

    Commercial Law

Date & Time
  • event Date

    Tuesday, December 14, 2021

  • schedule Time

    1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT

  • timer Program Length

    90 minutes

Credit Information

  • This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.

$297.00
CLE
ALL

This CLE course will address the recent amendments to Proposition 65, a/k/a the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 as well as new amendments on the horizon to the short form warning in particular. The ballot initiative relates to warnings for consumer goods and the supply chain. The panel will address the additional requirements instituted by the 2018 amendments and subsequent amendments, what disclosures are needed at the point of sale vs. upon shipment boxes on direct sales, and what new disclosures are needed on alcoholic beverages specifically. The panel will address best practices in reviewing clients' supply chains to meet compliance with the amendments.

Faculty

Michelle Corrigan Erikson
Partner
Stinson LLP

Ms. Erikson has over 20 years of experience in the areas of products liability, consumer products, children's products and business litigation. She has successfully represented manufacturers and distributors of a wide range of products in litigation involving claims of personal injuries and property damages. Ms. Erikson has consulted with manufacturers of consumer products about their warning programs and preventative risk management strategies. She has also assisted companies with various issues involving product recalls, reporting requirements and communications with government agencies. She has a particular interest in issues facing manufacturers of juvenile and children's products and has comprehensive knowledge and understanding of federal and state laws and regulations affecting children's products, as well as standards adopted by ASTM International (ASTM) and American National Standards Institute (ANSI).

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio
Anne Marie Ellis
Shareholder
Buchalter

Ms. Ellis regularly helps clients navigate compliance with California’s Proposition 65. She also consults with clients on warranty issues arising under state and federal statutes. Ms. Ellis’ practice focuses on product liability, commercial litigation, regulatory compliance and client counseling. With extensive experience in complex litigation in both state and federal courts, including judicial council coordinated proceedings, multi-party litigation subject to case management orders, and multi-district litigation, Ms. Ellis has successfully defended cases of all sizes including catastrophic personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits. She also advises clients on a wide-range of discovery issues and procedures including e-discovery and trade secrets.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio

Description

Proposition 65 prohibits businesses from exposing California consumers to certain levels of chemicals identified by the state to cause cancer and/or reproductive harm without warning. The regulations specify "safe harbor" warning language that can be provided with a product to ensure compliance.

Prop. 65 underwent a major overhaul in 2018, and there have been further changes to the regulations. There have been proposed amendments to the short form warning that are in response to the "widespread use of short-form warnings in ways that were not intended and did not further the purposes of Proposition 65" and "numerous inquiries" about when the short-form warning could be used. The proposed amendments will only allow the use of short-form warnings in certain circumstances and most importantly will require identification of the specific chemical. Currently many businesses are using the short form label, regardless of the size of the label or the size or shape of the package.

The panel will discuss recent enforcement trends in certain products and industries, and chemicals of concern that are being highly targeted by noticing parties, including a renewed focus on BPA. This will include a discussion of warnings for alcoholic beverages sold over the internet or through a catalog.

Businesses within the supply chain must consider who must provide the warning and what that warning must be. The party in the best position to ensure that the warning is delivered in compliance with new Proposition 65 amendments are likely on the hook for failure to comply if the party selling or facilitating the sale to the consumer is alcohol delivery. In many instances, the product producer may have no control over the packaging or point of sale documentation for products delivered from a retailer to a consumer (e.g., those suppliers who are generally not permitted to ship their products directly to consumers). This will also include a discussion about how to deal with a business in the supply chain that is potentially exempt from Prop. 65 due to the number of employees.

Listen as our expert panel discusses these regulatory changes that create business issues and best practices for structuring supply agreements to comply with Proposition 65, critical guidance on new terms, risk-shifting measures, and drafting pitfalls.

Outline

  1. Overview of most recent Proposition 65 amendments
    1. Warnings
      1. Safe harbor exceptions
      2. Long-form, short form warnings
      3. Potential changes to the short form warnings
    2. Compliance and enforcement trends for industries, products and chemicals, including alcoholic beverages
    3. Impact of supply chain
    4. Creating Proposition 65 compliance for suppliers

Benefits

The panel will review these and other relevant issues:

  • How can counsel address vagaries in inter-supply chain information requests in achieving compliance?
  • What are the best practices for suppliers when creating a clear Proposition 65 compliance policy?
  • What are the Proposition 65 warnings that should be made at the point of sale with the onus on manufacturers to comply?
  • How should the alcoholic beverage warnings be provided to consumers?