On 3/2/2015 10:41 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 3/2/2015 8:14 AM, Frank wrote:


I saw it too and question in my mind was that, while it fails California
standard, what about US standards?

I know on CA prop 65 that their no significant risk limits are far
tighter than those used by OSHA.


Everything causes cancer in CA. Given it was many times the limit and
they had complaints from consumers, it is probably over the limits you'd
want anywhere.

I was also very surprised that the factory people were so quick to admit
it was over, but they put the labels on anyway. There are many
potential problems with LL, the factory, the third party testing company.


CA prop 65 has a no significant risk level for formaldehyde at 40
micrograms/day whereas OSHA permits workers to be exposed up to 2 ppm in
continuous work environment.

Maybe somebody has the energy to figure out under the OSHA standard how
many micrograms a worker might breathe in during an 8 hour shift.

Environmentalists had petitioned EPA to accept CA standard but I don't
have the time to spend looking at their response:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2008...l/E8-14618.htm

CA is in a world unto itself on chemical toxicity. I write safety data
sheets and if there is the possibility of a trace of a Prop 65 chemical
in the product, I list it. If not, the likes of the Sierra Club will
analyze your product and if they find an ingredient they tell the state
and hope they fine you so the Sierra Club can get a cut.