Prop 65 California

Titanium Metals Corp. to Pay $13.75M Penalty and Clean up PCBs Contamination

May 21, 2014
Image: 

Titanium Metals Corporation (TIMET), one of the world’s largest producers of titanium parts for jet engines, has agreed to pay a record $13.75 million civil penalty and perform an extensive investigation and cleanup of potential contamination stemming primarily from the unauthorized manufacture and disposal of PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) at its manufacturing facility in Henderson, Nevada, the Department of Justice and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced last week. TIMET will pay an additional $250,000 for violations related to illegal disposal of hazardous process wastewater, in violation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).

PCBs are human-made organic chemicals that were widely used in paints, construction materials, plastics, and electrical equipment prior to 1978.  PCBs, which are probable carcinogens, have been banned in the United States for the last 30 years, except for specific uses authorized by regulations.  When released into the environment, PCBs can persist for decades because they do not break down through natural processes.  Exposure to PCBs has been demonstrated to cause cancer, as well as a variety of other adverse health effects on the immune system, reproductive system, nervous system, and endocrine system.  PCBs have also been designated by the State of California as a chemical known to cause cancer and reproductive harm, and products that may expose consumers to PCBs must be accompanied by a health hazard warning.

TIMET processes titanium from rutile ore at its 108-acre manufacturing facility at the Black Mountain Industrial (BMI) Complex in Henderson.  This process generates hazardous waste and PCBs.  In the complaint, the government alleged that EPA inspections revealed that TIMET had been unlawfully manufacturing PCBs as a by-product of its titanium manufacturing process, without an exclusion from the Toxic Substances Control Act’s ban.  An EPA inspection also revealed that the company had disposed of PCB-contaminated waste in a solid waste landfill and a trench at the plant.  The complaint further alleges that, on several occasions, the company had unlawfully disposed of acidic, corrosive hazardous process wastewater into an unpermitted surface impoundment at the facility, in violation of RCRA.

The Chanler Group represents citizen enforcers who, acting in the public interest, commence actions against businesses offering products for sale in California that contain chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive harm without first providing the health hazard warning required by Proposition 65. Citizen enforcers bringing Proposition 65 actions in the public interest may obtain a Court Judgment imposing civil penalties, an injunction requiring reformulation of products, and/or provision of health hazard warnings. The Chanler Group has represented citizen enforcers of Proposition 65 for more than twenty years.

Cross-Post On: 
Both

Discount School Supply Recalls Sorting Boards Due to Ingestion Risk and Excessive Lead Levels

May 16, 2014
Image: 

Discount School Supply has issued a recall of its Excellerations™ magnetic color sorting boards.  The magnet in the wand can detach and the plywood backing can crack to release small metal balls.  Swallowing a magnet and/or a metal ball poses a serious choking and internal injury risk.  The surface paint on the metal balls also contains levels of lead in excess of the federal lead paint standard.  The boards were sold through discountschoolsupply.com from January 2013 through March 2014.

The sorting boards are 16 inches wide and 12 inches high, with six cupcake cut-outs and one jar-shaped cut-out.  A clear plastic cover is attached to the board with rivets, and beneath the cover are about 60 multi-colored metal balls, each one about 1 cm in diameter.  A 4-inch long wand with a magnet on one end is attached to the board by a 13.5 inch plastic cord.  Discount School Supply has received six reports of the plywood back cracking and making the metal balls accessible to children, and two reports of the magnet detaching from the wand.  No injuries have been reported.

Consumers are advised to immediately stop children from using the board and put it out of their reach and sight before contacting the company for a full refund.  Contact Discount School Supply at (800) 338-4430 from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. CT Monday through Friday, or online at www.discountschoolsupply.com.

The Chanler Group, on behalf of citizen enforcers and other whistleblower clients, seeks to uncover toxic chemical exposures and government fraud in our everyday lives, to hold the offenders responsible for such violations of state and federal law, such as the CPSIA, accountable to the public, and to effectuate change for a cleaner environment.

Cross-Post On: 
Both

Prop 65 Reform Proposed to Allow Businesses With Fewer than 25 Employees 14-Day Cure

May 15, 2014
Image: 

California Assemblyman Brian Jones (R-Santee) has introduced AB-2361, which proposes a 14-day cure period for small businesses that have been served with a 60-Day Notice of Violation of Proposition 65.  If the business has fewer than 25 employees, they can avoid a lawsuit so long as they cure the alleged violation (such as putting up a warning sign, or removing the offending product from shelves) and pay a $500 fine within 14 days.

This is similar to last year’s AB-227, which proposed a 14-day cure period for businesses alleged to be in violation of Prop. 65; however, AB-227 was later narrowed to certain specific types of exposure (alcoholic beverages, chemicals formed during cooking, tobacco smoke, engine exhaust in a parking facility).  Prop. 65 has recently been the target of reform by lawmakers and even Gov. Jerry Brown himself.

AB-2361 is at a very initial stage in the legislative process as it has to receive a hearing in a committee.

The Chanler Group represents citizen enforcers who, acting in the public interest, commence actions against businesses offering products for sale in California that contain chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive harm without first providing the health hazard warning required by Proposition 65. Citizen enforcers bringing Proposition 65 actions in the public interest may obtain a Court Judgment imposing civil penalties, an injunction requiring reformulation of products, and/or provision of health hazard warnings. The Chanler Group has represented citizen enforcers of Proposition 65 for more than twenty years.

Cross-Post On: 
Both

Z Gallerie Joins Dozens of Other Companies in Eliminating Flame Retardants from Furniture

May 7, 2014
Image: 

Peter Englander and Dr. Anthony Held, two clients of The Chanler Group, negotiated an agreement with Z Gallerie last month to ensure that Z Gallerie’s chairs are free of the carcinogenic flame retardant tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCPP) and reproductive toxicant di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (“DEHP”).  The chairs were sold throughout California.

The plaintiffs alleged that Z Gallerie violated Proposition 65 by selling chairs that contain TDCPP and/or DEHP in California without providing a health hazard warning.  Under Proposition 65, companies offering products for sale in California that contain chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive harm must provide a health hazard warning.

As part of the agreement, Z Gallerie agreed to reformulate all of its chairs to virtually eliminate TDCPP and DEHP, and will notify its vendors to sell only the reformulated products.  Z Gallerie will also pay civil penalties of $45,000, 75 percent of which are earmarked for California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.   As an incentive for comprehensive reformulation, Englander and Held will waive a portion of the civil fine should Z Gallerie certify that the chairs are free of another toxic flame retardant, tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate (“TDBPP”). 

For more information about the agreement, please see the case summary on the website. Z Gallerie has more than fifty locations across the United States.

The Chanler Group represents citizen enforcers who, acting in the public interest, commence actions against businesses offering products for sale in California that contain chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive harm without first providing the health hazard warning required by Proposition 65.  Citizen enforcers bringing Proposition 65 actions in the public interest may obtain a Court Judgment imposing civil penalties, an injunction requiring reformulation of products, and/or provision of health hazard warnings.  The Chanler Group has represented citizen enforcers of Proposition 65 for more than twenty years.

Cross-Post On: 
None

TCG Clients Serve 23 New 60-Day Notices of Violation of Prop 65

May 1, 2014

TCG clients Russell Brimer, Dr. Whitney Leeman, Dr. Anthony Held, and Laurence Vinocur served 23 new 60-Day Notices of Proposition 65 Violation yesterday, to companies offering products such as hand tools, bags, and photo frames for sale in California that contain chemicals known to cause cancer and reproductive harm, without the required health hazard warning. These citizen enforcers allege that the companies' products contain the phthalate DEHP, the heavy metals lead and arsenic, and the flame retardant TDCPP.  DEHP and lead are known to cause birth defects and reproductive harm, while arsenic and TDCPP are known to cause cancer. Some of the noticed companies include American Crafts and Callway Golf Company.

See below for a partial list of notices.

Product Chemical Alleged Violator Citizen Enforcer
Portable Stove Bags Lead Akerue Industries, LLC Held
Vinyl/PVC Craft Embellishments DEHP American Crafts, L.C. Held
Tape Measures with Vinyl/PVC Straps and Grips DEHP Building Materials Holdings Corporation Held
Vinyl/PVC Golf Club Covers DEHP Callaway Golf Company Held
Drinking Cups with Vinyl/PVC Sleeves DEHP ICUP, Inc.; Target Corporation Held
Foam Pillow Forms TDCPP June Tailor, Inc. Vinocur
Vinyl/PVC Golf Ball Retriever Grips DEHP King Par, LLC Held
Dried Seaweed Arsenic Marukai Corporation; Yamachu Ltd. Held
Fitness Vests with Vinyl/PVC Components DEHP Nathan Sports Inc. Held
Photo Frames with Vinyl/PVC Components DEHP New View Gifts & Accessories, Ltd.; Stein Mart, Inc. Held
Audio Cables Lead Rockford Corporation Brimer
Vinyl/PVC Tote Bags DEHP Team Beans, L.L.C. Held
Vinyl/PVC Planner Covers DEHP Trends International, LLC Held

 

Cross-Post On: 
Both

Held Files Complaint Against JFC International Re: Arsenic in Seaweed

April 30, 2014
Image: 

Anthony Held, Ph.D, P.E., a client of The Chanler Group, has filed a lawsuit against JFC International, Inc. (JFC) for violations of Proposition 65: namely, failing to inform California consumers that their dried seaweed contains arsenic, a chemical known to the State of California to cause cancer.

JFC is a major wholesaler and distributor of Asian food products and is a subsidiary of Kikkoman.

Held seeks injunctive relief against JFC in the form of civil penalties, appropriate warnings, and reimbursement of attorneys’ fees.

The Chanler Group represents citizen enforcers who, acting in the public interest, commence actions against businesses offering products for sale in California that contain chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive harm without first providing the health hazard warning required by Proposition 65. Citizen enforcers bringing Proposition 65 actions in the public interest may obtain a Court Judgment imposing civil penalties, an injunction requiring reformulation of products, and/or provision of health hazard warnings. The Chanler Group has represented citizen enforcers of Proposition 65 for more than twenty years.

 

Cross-Post On: 
Both

Interview with Kirby Walker, Producer of Toxic Hot Seat Documentary

April 29, 2014
Image: 

The Chanler Group was fortunate enough to be able to interview Kirby Walker, a director/producer of the documentary film Toxic Hot Seat.  This documentary reveals the truth about toxic flame retardants in our furniture, how they arrived there, and why they remain despite advocacy and legislative efforts.  Kirby Walker is an environmentalist, activist, and award-winning independent film and video producer.

Before we even started, Kirby jumped in with a little background on the funding for the film:

When we were making the film, we weren’t allowed to take any funding from anybody on either side of the issue!  In fact, HBO wouldn’t have purchased it.  If we had, we wouldn’t have been able to sell it.  Just a factoid.

So it was entirely privately funded?

My partner James Redford and myself, we were just putting our own money into it for the proof of concept.  We took the 12 minute proof of concept to HBO, and they gave us more money and wanted first right of refusal.  If they chose not to buy it, we could keep the money.  We went to them with our rough cut and they bought it outright, so we didn’t have to do any other fundraising.  We were very fortunate.

What inspired you to make this movie?

I was a trustee for a long time at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and now I’m an honorary trustee.  They invite people periodically to brown bag lunches, and I am very fond of the public health work that’s going on at the San Francisco office.  So I went to this brown bag lunch, and a colleague who I know very well—Sarah Janssen, who is also a medical doctor at UCSF—started talking about this whole flame retardant issue and how they’ve been trying to get them removed for five years, that they’re not effective and dangerous and were linked to all these health defects.  And I was sitting at this brown bag lunch and I was getting more and more outraged: How can these things that don’t work and are harmful be in our baby products and our couches? 

I went home and called Dr. Sarah Janssen, and she said, well, if you really want to know more about this, you have to reach out to Dr. Arlene Blum, the chemist at UC Berkeley who discovered that these chemicals were mutagenic in the 70s.  (She’s in our film, you remember?)  So I called Dr. Blum and she said, I’m sorry, I don’t take meetings with people, but do you want to hike with me?  Of course I was delighted, and a couple of hikes later she said, you really must come to the Flame Retardant Dilemma, it’s an all-day symposium I’m having at UC Berkeley with people from across the country who’re working on this issue in all different fields, from different hospitals and organizations.  Come, I’ll put you on the list.  That was on February 9, 2012, that I went to the Flame Retardant Dilemma.  I almost didn’t go; I woke up that morning and thought, oh my God, yes I’m interested, but all day at a flame retardant symposium?  My husband was like, why don’t you just go, if it’s boring you can leave. 

Long story short, I got there and most of the characters that you see in our film, like Andy McGuire the burn survivor and MacArthur Fellowship winner who worked all his life for fire-safe cigarettes, and Tony Stefani the firefighter were there presenting.  As I was sitting there I wasn’t thinking of a film, because even though I’m a filmmaker, the whole concept of a film about flame retardants had seemed ludicrous, because how boring would that be?  So I had my environmental hat on and my activist hat on, not my filmmaker hat.  But as I was sitting there, these people were absolutely compelling.  You can’t create that.  They had so much to say, and nobody’s listening.  And I just had to make a film.  A month later, we were rolling, and didn’t stop as the story just kept growing.

And what goes around comes around, because this year at the symposium, I was a presenter!  We showed the trailer and talked about what had happened since the film came out in November.  I went from being a skeptical participant to, two years later, being a presenter.

So when you were making the film, what did you learn?  What was the most shocking?

Oh boy.  Let me back up for a second. 

We heard from all of our characters about Citizens for Fire Safety being a front group, we heard that actually, big tobacco had a hand in why we have furniture flame retardants instead of fire-safe cigarettes.  We heard about all these conspiracies, lying burn doctors—which we didn’t put in, but was in the Tribune—and we had all this on tape, but when we did the 12-minute proof of concept, we decided that since we didn’t have proof of all of this, it was just so conspiracy theory and outlandish, that we would just tell the story that these chemicals are known carcinogens, they were outlawed from pajamas in the 70s, and now they’re in all our furniture and many baby products, and by the way they don’t work.  We had enough to back that up, and we couldn’t put all this other stuff that we’d heard in our proof of concept: It sounded too far-fetched.  Well, May 9th, the Chicago Tribune, which had been pursuing this story at the same time as we were or earlier, though we didn’t know it—

Oh, so you were making this film before the Tribune ran their series!

We got a lot of our interviews before that we could never have gotten after, a lot of which were proven to be lies.  Like the guy who works for the chemical industry who was saying all of the stuff, the talking points for the industry?  He said all that in our film, but he would never have agreed to our interview after.  We were lucky that we’d started shooting in March but the article didn’t come out until May, so we already had a lot of that stuff in the can.  When that article came out, when we found out that everything we’d been hearing was actually true and was worse than what we’d been hearing?  We’d left it out of the proof of concept because we thought it was so outrageous!  So that was a shock to us.

For me, the worst was going to these hearings, watching the lobbyists representing the Citizens for Fire Safety, hearing them before our lawmakers who’re trying to make appropriate decisions, sitting there and spouting off about how they were a consumer group of firefighters and mothers and doctors—and it ends up that the only members of that whole organization were the three chemical companies.  That was the worst.

What do you want people to get out of this film?  Do you have any goal in mind?

Yes, our goal is really for meaningful TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) reform at the federal level so that states don’t have to go state by state trying to regulate the safety of their citizens and coming up against what we saw in this film: false advertising, false citizens groups, all of those bad apples that are out there trying to prevent meaningful TSCA reform.  So we wanted to create awareness, and urgency, and anger around the fact that we are not being protected and we need to reform TSCA.

And then we wanted people, on the more direct level, to demand that their furniture not have these chemicals in it and speak with their wallets, not buy stuff that has flame retardants.  We’re hoping to change some of the big retailers, to say they won’t sell any that have these in it. 

We’re going for all these changes, on the one hand national, as well as down to people’s homes.  We especially want parents to ask, before they buy changing pads and nap pads and those things.  It was awareness and also hoping for national change.

Do you think there has been a shift in public awareness around these issues?

I know the American Chemistry Council has been paying attention.  Google “toxic hot seat” or our advocacy arm, which is “give toxics the boot,” which is an action campaign that we’ve been doing with the International Association of Fire Fighters and the Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families coalition.  We’ve been working with them on “Give Toxics the Boot,” using the film to promote awareness and the next step is pushing for advocacy.  If you Google either of those, you’ll see the American Chemistry Council saying, do you want to know the truth about flame retardants?  And it’s a paid ad above us.  It’s been like this for five months now.  We called them out on our website and said we consider it a badge of honor that they’re paying attention.

So what was the overall experience of making this film like?  Was it rewarding?  Fun?

It was so much fun!  We only shot a day and a half in Chicago with the Tribune reporters, and at the end of the first long day, we’d had these amazing interviews with Patricia Callahan, who you saw—we just knew that the interviews were just gold, and it was so fun getting to tell the whole story that we’d been uncovering.  At the end of that day, my partner and I high-fived, like, is there anything else in the world you’d rather be doing than this?  We knew how incredibly lucky we were, it was just so compelling, we knew we had a really good story, we knew we were going to be able to rattle some cages, and it was so much fun in the process.  Rewarding, of course it’s that, but it’s amazingly fun.

It’s so gratifying to be able to do work that’s rewarding and fun.

It’s not always that way, but we were blessed.  We could have gotten into it and any number of things could have happened, but what happened was the Tribune reported, the governor changed the regulation in California, the firefighter we were calling got called back to Washington, all these things were just luck.  You’re already in the story, you can’t create Boxer calling the two people we were already following, or have the Tribune reporters’ story be so good and so eloquent.  The stars were aligned for us to tell this story.

Do you think this signals a shift in awareness that all these things are happening at once?

I do!  You know, I’m an optimist.  I don’t give up easily, or I probably wouldn’t be a documentary filmmaker!  I believe that once the public knows—and the public doesn’t like being taken advantage of, we as citizens—and the story that we tell in our film is that these are not good people that are trying to tell us that we’re safe and everything’s fine, when they’re doing things that are clearly wrong, lying, and deceitful.  It’s going to catch up with them, and people are going to get mad and demand change.  I think things are changing on these issues.  A good TSCA bill was in the works, before Lautenberg died, but now look where we are a year later, with this Chemicals in Commerce Act.  In some ways it feels like we’ve gone backwards in the six months since the film came out. 

I guess I just contradicted myself, but I am an optimist.  The signs are looking like the forces against us are really picking up their pace on not allowing change.

What advice do you have for consumers who’re wondering about their furniture or other household items?

I would say, do your research!  I for one don’t believe in—not that I could afford it—getting rid of all the furniture that I have.  We don’t have a safe way to dispose of it anyway.  I’m not a proponent of starting over.  It’s not practical, it’s not really environmental.  But we can demand change going forward so that we don’t have this legacy for the next 30 years.  The average piece of home furnishing is in people’s homes for a really long time.  This is an environmental justice issue too: as the foam breaks down, there’s more of that dust in the home.  Lower income people end up with furniture that’s been used longer. 

And I think people should demand from their retailers that they carry safe products, because that’s going to change things.  The government might be legislating and that helps, but if consumers start demanding it from their retailers, that’s when you’re going to see change happen.  They’re going to walk in and ask if this couch has flame retardant chemicals, and if the salespeople start telling the people at headquarters, they’re going to pay attention.  People aren’t apathetic, they just don’t have the knowledge.  I didn’t know until that brown bag lunch.  But I don’t know how many people watch documentaries on HBO either.

It’s up for wider distribution now, right?

It is.  We’re being distributed by ro*co films, which is the largest educational institutional film distributor.  They have a 25,000 film library for colleges and universities, so you can get it that way.  In six months it’ll be available for streaming through Amazon, iTunes, and things like that.

So what are your future plans beyond the film?  What’s next?

We’ve been really on the road with this Give Toxics the Boot, I haven’t even had time to start development for another project.  I’m not sure what it is yet, so I’m not talking about it!  There will be more, but I don’t think we’ll stay with toxics.  We want to do a film where we don’t have so much liability for us and everyone else.  Boy, we had to spend a lot of time with lawyers!  We’ll keep Give Toxics the Boot alive, and we might do another ThunderClap.

Is there anything else you’d like us to know?

No, I think you’ve hit all the important things!  You’ll be hearing more from us if anything starts happening with this Chemicals in Commerce Act.  We’ll reach out.  For now, our main goal is to not let that pass.  It feels weird to be on the end of “just say no” instead of offering a solution, but that’s where we are.

Kirby Walker’s documentary “Give Toxics the Boot” aired in late 2013 and will be available for widespread viewing within the next six months.  It is currently available to colleges and universities through educational film distributor ro*co films and HBOGo.

The Chanler Group represents citizen enforcers who, acting in the public interest, commence actions against businesses offering products for sale in California that contain chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive harm without first providing the health hazard warning required by Proposition 65. Citizen enforcers bringing Proposition 65 actions in the public interest may obtain a Court Judgment imposing civil penalties, an injunction requiring reformulation of products, and/or provision of health hazard warnings. The Chanler Group has represented citizen enforcers of Proposition 65 for more than twenty years.

Cross-Post On: 
Both

Over 70 Mfrs. Certify to TCG That Their Furniture is Free From Toxic Flame Retardants

April 23, 2014
Image: 

More than 70 furniture manufacturers have certified to The Chanler Group that their products sold in California have been reformulated to remove detectable amounts of the carcinogenic flame retardants tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCPP) and tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate (TCEP).  These certifications encompass a wide range of home and office furniture, including car seats, high chairs, ottomans, and office chairs.

Under Proposition 65, California’s right-to-know toxics law, companies selling products containing toxic chemicals must notify consumers that the product contains a chemical that may increase their risk of cancer or reproductive harm.  Last year, The Chanler Group’s clients brought enforcement actions against dozens of furniture manufacturers for violations of Proposition 65, many of which resulted in the manufacturers promising to remove the toxic flame retardants from their products. 

See the full press release for more details.

Cross-Post On: 
Both

Over 70 Companies Certify to Chanler Group That Products Are Free of Toxic Flame Retardants

April 23, 2014
Image: 

BERKELEY, Calif.  -- More than 70 furniture manufacturers have certified to The Chanler Group, an environmental law firm based in Berkeley, Calif., that their products sold in California have been reformulated to remove detectable amounts of the carcinogenic flame retardants tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCPP) and tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate (TCEP).  These certifications encompass a wide range of home and office furniture, including office chairs, ottomans, high chairs, and car seats.

“Our clients don’t want the manufacturers to just pay a monetary penalty and go back to doing what they were doing,” said Josh Voorhees, managing attorney of The Chanler Group.  “We want to instigate concrete change to the environment.  We want these chemicals out of consumer products.”

Under Proposition 65, California’s right-to-know toxics law, companies selling products containing toxic chemicals must notify consumers that the product contains a chemical that may increase their risk of cancer or reproductive harm.  Last year, The Chanler Group’s clients brought enforcement actions against dozens of furniture manufacturers for violations of Proposition 65, many of which resulted in the manufacturers promising to remove the toxic flame retardants from their products. 

The settlements benefit the environment and public health of California by incentivizing the companies to take any of the following steps in exchange for a waiver of a substantial civil penalty amount:

  • accelerated reformulation of the products
  • the removal of another flame retardant, tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate (TDBPP)
  • withdrawal of unreformulated products from the California market
  • termination of distribution of unreformulated products into California 

So far, The Chanler Group has received certifications of compliance with these additional actions from almost 80 companies, meaning that thousands of furniture products sold in California are now reformulated.  See below for a partial list of certifying companies, with more furniture manufacturers expected to provide certifications soon.

Companies that Have Provided Certifications

A.R.T. Furniture, Inc.

Ace Bayou Corp.

American Leather, Inc.

Artsana USA, Inc.

Ashley Furniture Industries

Bassett Furniture Industries

Benetti’s Italia, Inc.

Blumenthal Distributing, Inc.

Brentwood Originals, Inc.

Butler Specialty Company

Cherry Man Industries, Inc.

Cheyenne Industries, LLC

CMC Worldwide

Cohesion Products, Inc.

Corinthian, Inc.

Craftmaster Furniture, Inc.

Diono, L.L.C.

Emerald Home Furnishings, LLC

Ergonom Corporation

Essential Medical Supply, Inc.

Euromarket Designs, Inc.

Evenflo Company, Inc.

First Act Inc.

Foremost Groups, Inc.

Four Hands, LLC

Fourstar Group USA, Inc.

GF Health Products, Inc.

Global Industries, Inc.

Graco Children’s Products, Inc.

Hancock & Moore, Inc.

Helen of Troy, L.P.

Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.

Homelegance, Inc.

Hooker Furniture Corporation

Human Touch, LLC

Idea Nuova, Inc.

IKEA Holding US, Inc. and IKEA North America Services, LLC

Intercon, Inc.

J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc.

Jakks Pacific, Inc.

Jofran Sales, Inc.

Jonathan Louis International, Ltd.

Keystone Foam Corporation

Kinwai USA Inc.

Legacy Classic Furniture, Inc.

Lexington Furniture Industries, Inc.

Lifestyle Solutions, Inc.

Linon Home Décor Products, Inc.

Magnussen Holdings, Inc.

Marco Group, Inc.

Medline Industries, Inc.

Minson Corporation

Norstar Office Products, Inc.

Otto International (USA), Inc.

Pier 1 Imports, Inc.

Recaro Child Safety, LLC

Restoration Hardware, Inc.

Riverside Furniture Corporation

Room & Board, Inc.

Ross Stores, Inc.

Sauder Woodworking Co.

Shafer Commercial Seating, Inc.

Skyline Imports, LLC

Stakmore Company

Staples, Inc.

StyleCraft Home Collection, Inc.

Style-Line Furn., Inc.

Summer Infant (USA), Inc.

Taymor Industries U.S.A., Inc.

The Uttermost Company

Theodore Alexander USA, Inc.

TJX Companies, Inc.

Tomy Corporation

United Stationers Supply Co.

Universal Furniture International, Inc.

Virco Manufacturing Corp.

Whitewood Industries, Inc.

Z-Line Designs, Inc.

 

The Chanler Group has negotiated hundreds of settlements on behalf of its clients over the years, many of which resulted in industry-wide reformulation, from lead in ceramics to asbestiform fibers in crayons.  Details of each case settlement are available at www.chanler.com.  Mr. Voorhees is available to discuss these cases, as well as the broader issues of hazardous materials in consumer products sold in the U.S.  He can be reached at (510) 848-8880 or at josh@chanler.com

Cross-Post On: 
Both

Lowe's Settles Lead Dust Violations for $500K, Implements Compliance Program

April 16, 2014
Image: 

Lowe’s Home Centers, one of the nation’s largest home improvement retailers, has agreed to implement a corporate-wide compliance program at more than 1,700 stores nationwide to ensure its contractors minimize lead dust from home renovation activities, as required by the federal Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule, the Department of Justice and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today.  The company will also pay a $500,000 civil penalty, which is the largest ever for violations of the RRP Rule.

The government complaint alleged that Lowe’s failed to provide documentation showing that its contractors had been certified by EPA, had been properly trained, had used lead-safe work practices, or had correctly used EPA-approved lead test kits at renovation sites.   Additionally, EPA’s investigation found that Lowe’s contractors had failed to ensure that work areas had been properly contained and cleaned during renovations.  EPA’s investigation was prompted by tips and complaints submitted by the public.

In addition to the civil penalty, Lowe’s must implement a comprehensive compliance program to ensure that the contractors it hires to perform work for its customers comply with the RRP Rule during renovations of any child-occupied facilities, such as day-care centers and schools, and any housing that was built before 1978.  For these projects, Lowe’s must contract with only EPA-certified renovators, ensure they maintain certification, and ensure they use lead safe work practices checklists during renovations.  In addition, Lowe’s must suspend anyone that is not operating in compliance with the rule, investigate all reports of potential noncompliance, and ensure that any violations are corrected.

The RRP Rule, which implements the federal Toxic Substances Control Act, is intended to ensure that owners and occupants of housing built before 1978, as well as any child-occupied facilities, receive information on lead-based paint hazards before renovations begin, and that individuals performing such renovations are properly trained and certified by EPA and follow specific work practices to reduce the potential for lead-based paint exposure.  Home improvement companies such as Lowe’s that contract with renovators to perform renovation work must ensure that those contractors comply with all of the requirements of the RRP Rule.  Renovators that are certified under EPA’s RRP Rule are encouraged to display EPA’s “Lead-Safe” logo on worker’s uniforms, signs, websites and other material, as appropriate.   Consumers can protect themselves by looking for the logo before hiring a home renovator.

Lead-based paint was banned in 1978 but still remains in many homes and apartments across the country.  Lead dust hazards can occur when lead paint deteriorates or is disrupted during home renovation and remodeling activities.   Lead exposure can cause a range of health problems, from behavioral disorders and learning disabilities to seizures and death, putting young children at the greatest risk because their nervous systems are still developing.  Lead is a chemical known to the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects, and reproductive harm.

The Chanler Group represents citizen enforcers who, acting in the public interest, commence actions against businesses offering products for sale in California that contain chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive harm without first providing the health hazard warning required by Proposition 65. Citizen enforcers bringing Proposition 65 actions in the public interest may obtain a Court Judgment imposing civil penalties, an injunction requiring reformulation of products, and/or provision of health hazard warnings. The Chanler Group has represented citizen enforcers of Proposition 65 for more than twenty years.

Cross-Post On: 
Both
Syndicate content