Showing posts with label California Proposition 65. Show all posts
Showing posts with label California Proposition 65. Show all posts

December 30, 2023

Proposed changes to California Proposition 65 short form warnings (Jan 3 2024)

On October 27, 2023 the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), the state agency that implements Proposition 65, introduced its third attempt to amend the “short form” warning provisions. This has been going on for a few years now but every time they get ready to amend the regulations they stop short and put it off for various "reasons". The fourth attempt may be the charm. Comments are due on the new regulations by January 3 2024. The proposed regulations (and rationale for changes) are here and the comment form is here. However I am gathering commitments from companies for our office to write a collective letter on all their behalves (so that they remain anonymous to the agency).  Please email me if you wish to join in out letter. The main problem with the proposed amendments is that OEHHA does not like the fact that manufacturers and distributors are defaulting to the use of the short form warning in order to escape the dragnet of plaintiff's lawsuits that are impossible to cost effectively defeat. OEHHA wants to force companies to have to run very costly tests on hundreds of potential chemicals (many not testable) so that they can list the chemical(s) in the warning text before they can use the safe harbor short form warning. Think of it as sort of a "penalty" for using the short form. All the arguments they make for this change are fallacious arguments. They don't like all the short form warnings being used as they feel its diluting the overall effect of Prop 65. That is not the industry's problem that's the regulators problem. Their rationales are comical if it were not so sad and costly for companies to deal with. They are also proposing some additional "catch all" warnings for motorsports parts that are just not workable/feasible or cost effective and are NOT going to make consumers safer at all. This is what we would expect from bureaucrats who have never worked in the recreational sports business or any product manufacturing business for that matter.


Law Offices of Steven W. Hansen | www.swhlaw.com | 562 866 6228 © Copyright 1996-2024 Conditions of Use

August 17, 2017

California Proposition 65 regulations amended to require more specificity on warnings

On August 30, 2016, (yes a year ago) the California Office of Administrative Law approved the adoption of amendments to Article 6, "Clear and Reasonable Warnings", of the California Code of Regulations.  This was a regulatory "repeal and replace" and not a legislative one so as a result it was further off the news "radar". The new regulations provide, among other things, methods of transmission and content of warnings deemed to be compliant with the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Prop. 65). Prop 65 regulations are promulgated by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) which also maintains the Prop 65 chemical list and is one of 6 agencies under the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA).

Most companies already know that any consumer product sold in California must comply with Proposition 65, meaning that their products sold in California cannot contain harmful amounts of the chemicals on its notorious 800 chemical list (and growing). Its important to keep in mind that this list continues to grow and is much more extensive than the EU REACH law/regulation (which currently lists only about 200 chemicals). Its also much more extensive that the US Consumer Product Safety Commission's (CPSC) regulations which are mostly confined to lead and Phthalates. There has been quite a bit of publicity surrounding Monsanto's futile legal efforts to keep RoundUp weed killer off the Prop 65 list.

The difficulty with the new warning requirement (which does not go into effect until August 30, 2018) is that if you test and if you find something on the list in your product you must now have specific "safe harbor" warnings that include any of the 800 chemicals on the list that might be in your product in harmful amounts. Under the old abolished regulations you could utilize a "safe harbor" (provision of a statute or a regulation that specifies that certain conduct will be deemed not to violate a given rule) warning that did not need to specify which of the 800 chemicals on the list might exist in the product. Now of course one can debate the merits of warnings generally, especially the efficacy of one that lists the offending complex chemical name over one that does not, but we don't have enough space on this post to have that debate. The point is this is now the current state of the law and my advice is to try to steer clear of Prop. 65 suits (just like ADA suits and host of others). Also these warnings cannot exist solely in user's manuals unless you are a vehicle manufacturer who got special dispensation under the new regulations (but even they still must have stand alone warnings)

The other interesting issue is that if your company was part of a settlement of a Prop 65 suit. Under the new law a company that is a party to a court-ordered settlement or final judgment establishing a warning method or content, is deemed to be providing a “clear and reasonable” warning for that exposure for purposes of the new law, if the warning fully complies with the order or judgment. This covers a few companies in the bicycle arena. It's not known how many total companies are exempted by this as that would depend a lot on the terms of the settlement and (I assume) the chemicals ("the exposure") involved in that particular suit.

Clearly there is going to be lots of work ahead in the next year for all consumer product manufacturers, brands, distributors, resellers, and retailers (on line and off). You can be sure Amazon, Walmart and all the big retailers are well aware of these issues and they will surely come up in contract negotiations with sellers to most large retailers.

Law Offices of Steven W. Hansen | www.swhlaw.com | 562 866 6228 © Copyright 1996-2013 Conditions of Use

April 22, 2013

Bisphenol A (BPA) Delisted on Proposition 65 banned chemical list in California

The info below is taken from a press release from the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) which is the California government agency which governs the so called "Proposition 65" list of banned chemicals. Again this delisting of bisphenol A (BPA) is only based on a preliminary injunction (read the Judge's order here or download) in the case now pending below which may or may not be finally resolved in favor of the plastics or chemical industries whose trade group (American Chemistry Council) brought the lawsuit. The Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental advocacy group in San Francisco, said the decision was a "temporary setback". The NRDC encouraged California to place restrictions on BPA originally.

press release from the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment:

Proposition 65
Chemical Delisted Effective April 19, 2013 As Known To The State Of California To Cause Reproductive Toxicity: Bisphenol A (BPA)[04/19/13]

Effective April 19, 2013, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) is removing bisphenol A (BPA) (CAS No. 80-05-7) from the list of chemicals known to the State to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity for purposes of Proposition 65 fn1. The chemical was added to the list on April 11, 2013 based on reproductive endpoints (developmental toxicity).

On April 19, 2013, the Honorable Raymond M. Cadei issued a preliminary injunction requiring OEHHA to delist the chemical in American Chemistry Council v Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, et al., Sacramento County case number 34-2013-00140720, pending final resolution of the case. A copy of the court’s order is included with this Notice.

A complete, updated chemical list will be published in an upcoming issue of the California Regulatory Notice Register and is available on the OEHHA website at www.oehha.ca.gov.

Please contact Carol Monahan Cummings, OEHHA Chief Counsel at (916) 322-0493 or carol.monahan-cummings@oehha.ca.gov if you have questions regarding this notice.

fn1 The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, Health and Safety Code section 25249.5 et seq.

Law Offices of Steven W. Hansen | www.swhlaw.com | 562 866 6228 © Copyright 1996-2008 Conditions of Use

February 7, 2009

California Enforcement of CPSIA

For those of you within the jurisdiction of the California Attorney General Jerry Brown (who may be running for Governor of this state) it is important to point out that the AG did not agree with the CPSC's decision (based upon its reading and interpretation of Congress' intent) that only consumer products manufactured after February 10, 2009 were subject to the phthalates ban. In a letter to the CPSC dated December 3, 2008 in citing A.B. 1108 the AG's office stated:

"As of January 1, 2009, it will be illegal to sell, distribute, or manufacture toys and child care articles in California with greater than 0.1 percent of six specified phthalates, regardless of when or where the products were manufactured. The effective date of the federal CPSIA does not affect implementation of California’s phthalate restrictions. Because A.B. 1108 will have been on the books for over 14 months before its phthalate limits take effect, we believe that industry has had sufficient time to prepare to comply with the requirements that take effect on January 1, 2009. The Attorney General, and other public enforcers, can and will enforce California's phthalate ban after that date."

As it turns out a federal court made that point somewhat moot in agreeing that the phthalates ban can be retroactive.

What is more disconcerting however is that the CPSIA also gives state attorney generals some enforcement power under the new law. The extent of that authority and the discretion that will be used by the AG's in accordance with the CPSC's own eventual discretion will be very interesting indeed. One can only assume that with Proposition 65 in California and a host of other safety and consumer oriented statutes we can only assume that California will be more aggressive on this front than most other states. Of course then there is the 2009 budget crisis which at this point may furlough the entire AG's office. At least for the time being.


Law Offices of Steven W. Hansen | www.swhlaw.com | 562 866 6228
© Copyright 1996-2008 Conditions of Use

December 24, 2008

California Proposition 65 - Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986

This text contains new statutory language added by Assembly Bill 1756 (Committee on Budget, Chapter 228, Statutes of 2003) which was signed into law by Governor Gray Davis on August 9, 2003. The new language took effect on August 11, 2003.

To see a current list of all the chemicals banned under Proposition 65 see this link.



25249.5. Prohibition On Contaminating Drinking Water With Chemicals Known to Cause Cancer or Reproductive Toxicity. No person in the course of doing business shall knowingly discharge or release a chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity into water or onto or into land where such chemical passes or probably will pass into any source of drinking water, notwithstanding any other provision or authorization of law except as provided in Section 25249.9.>

25249.6. Required Warning Before Exposure To Chemicals Known to Cause Cancer Or Reproductive Toxicity. No person in the course of doing business shall knowingly and intentionally expose any individual to a chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity without first giving clear and reasonable warning to such individual, except as provided in Section 25249.10.

25249.7. Enforcement.
(a) Any person that violates or threatens to violate Section 25249.5 or 25249.6 may be enjoined in any court of competent jurisdiction.
(b) (1) Any person who has violated Section 25249.5 or 25249.6 shall be liable for a civil penalty not to exceed two thousand five hundred dollars ($2500) per day for each violation in addition to any other penalty established by law. That civil penalty may be assessed and recovered in a civil action brought in any court of competent jurisdiction.
(2) In assessing the amount of a civil penalty for a violation of this chapter, the court shall consider all of the following:

(A) The nature and extent of the violation.
(B) The number of, and severity of, the violations.
(C) The economic effect of the penalty on the violator.
(D) Whether the violator took good faith measures to comply with this chapter and the time these measures were taken.
(E) The willfulness of the violator's misconduct.
(F) The deterrent effect that the imposition of the penalty would have on both the violator and the regulated community as a whole.
(G) Any other factor that justice may require.

(c) Actions pursuant to this section may be brought by the Attorney General in the name of the people of the State of California, by any district attorney, by any city attorney of a city having a population in excess of 750,000, or, with the consent of the district attorney, by a city prosecutor in any city or city and county having a full-time city prosecutor, or as provided in subdivision (d).
(d) Actions pursuant to this section may be brought by any person in the public interest if both of the following requirements are met:
(1) The private action is commenced more than 60 days from the date that the person has given notice of an alleged violation of Section 25249.5 or 25249.6 that is the subject of the private action to the Attorney General and the district attorney, city attorney, or prosecutor in whose jurisdiction the violation is alleged to have occurred, and to the alleged violator. If the notice alleges a violation of Section 25249.6, the notice of the alleged violation shall include a certificate of merit executed by the attorney for the noticing party, or by the noticing party, if the noticing party is not represented by an attorney. The certificate of merit shall state that the person executing the certificate has consulted with one or more persons with relevant and appropriate experience or expertise who has reviewed facts, studies, or other data regarding the exposure to the listed chemical that is the subject of the action, and that, based on that information, the person executing the certificate believes there is a reasonable and meritorious case for the private action. Factual information sufficient to establish the basis of the certificate of merit, including the information identified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (h), shall be attached to the certificate of merit that is served on the Attorney General.
(2) Neither the Attorney General, any district attorney, any city attorney nor any prosecutor has commenced and is diligently prosecuting an action against the violation.
(e) Any person bringing an action in the public interest pursuant to subdivision (d) and any person filing any action in which a violation of this chapter is alleged shall notify the Attorney General that the action has been filed. Neither this subdivision nor the procedures provided in subdivisions (f) to (j), inclusive, shall affect the requirements imposed by the statute or a court decision in existence on January 1, 2002 concerning whether any person filing any action in which a violation of this chapter is alleged is required to comply with the requirements of subdivision (d).
(f) (1) Any person bringing an action in the public interest pursuant to subdivision (d), any person filing any action in which a violation of this chapter is alleged, or any private person settling any violation of this chapter alleged in a notice given pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d), shall, after the action or violation is either subject to a settlement or to a judgment, submit to the Attorney General a reporting form that includes the results of that settlement or judgment and the final disposition of the case, even if dismissed. At the time of the filing of any judgment pursuant to an action brought in the public interest pursuant to subdivision (d), or any action brought by a private person in which a violation of this chapter is alleged, the plaintiff shall file an affidavit verifying that the report required by this subdivision has been accurately completed and submitted to the Attorney General.
(2) Any person bringing an action in the public interest pursuant to subdivision (d) or any private person bringing an action in which a violation of this chapter is alleged, shall, after the action is either subject to a settlement, with or without court approval, or to a judgment, submit to the Attorney General a report that includes information on any corrective action being taken as a part of the settlement or resolution of the action.
(3) The Attorney General shall develop a reporting form that specifies the information that shall be reported, including, but not limited to, for purposes of subdivision (e), the date the action was filed, the nature of the relief sought, and for purposes of this subdivision, the amount of the settlement or civil penalty assessed, other financial terms of the settlement, and any other information the Attorney General deems appropriate.
(4) If there is a settlement of an action brought by a person in the public interest under subdivision (d), the plaintiff shall submit the settlement, other than a voluntary dismissal in which no consideration is received from the defendant, to the court for approval upon noticed motion, and the court may approve the settlement only if the court makes all of the following findings:

(A) Any warning that is required by the settlement complies with this chapter.
(B) Any award of attorney's fees is reasonable under California law.
(C) Any penalty amount is reasonable based on the criteria set forth in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).

(5) The plaintiff subject to paragraph (4) has the burden of producing evidence sufficient to sustain each required finding. The plaintiff shall serve the motion and all supporting papers on the Attorney General, who may appear and participate in any proceeding without intervening in the case.
(6) Neither this subdivision nor the procedures provided in subdivision (e) and subdivisions (g) to (j), inclusive, shall affect the requirements imposed by statute or a court decision in existence on the January 1, 2002 concerning whether claims raised by any person or public prosecutor not a party to the action are precluded by a settlement approved by the court.
(g) The Attorney General shall maintain a record of the information submitted pursuant to subdivisions (e) and (f) and shall make this information available to the public.
(h) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the basis for the certificate of merit required by subdivision (d) is not discoverable. However, nothing in this subdivision shall preclude the discovery of information related to the certificate of merit if that information is relevant to the subject matter of the action and is otherwise discoverable, solely on the ground that it was used in support of the certificate of merit.
(2) Upon the conclusion of an action brought pursuant to subdivision (d) with respect to any defendant, if the trial court determines that there was no actual or threatened exposure to a listed chemical, the court may, upon the motion of that alleged violator or upon the court's own motion, review the basis for the belief of the person executing the certificate of merit, expressed in the certificate of merit, that an exposure to a listed chemical had occurred or was threatened. The information in the certificate of merit, including the identity of the persons consulted with and relied on by the certifier, and the facts, studies, or other data reviewed by those persons, shall be disclosed to the court in an in-camera proceeding at which the moving party shall not be present. If the court finds that there was no credible factual basis for the certifier's belief that an exposure to a listed chemical has occurred or was threatened, then the action shall be deemed frivolous within the meaning of Section 128.6 or 128.7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, whichever provision is applicable to the action. The court shall not find a factual basis credible on the basis of a legal theory of liability that is frivolous within the meaning of Section 128.6 or 128.7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, whichever provision is applicable to the action.
(i) The Attorney General may provide the factual information submitted to establish the basis of the certificate of merit on request to any district attorney, city attorney, or prosecutor within whose jurisdiction the violation is alleged to have occurred, or to any other state or federal government agency, but in all other respects the Attorney General shall maintain, and ensure that all recipients maintain, the submitted information as confidential official information to the full extent authorized in Section 1040 of the Evidence Code.
(j) In any action brought by the Attorney General, a district attorney, a city attorney, or a prosecutor pursuant to this chapter, the Attorney General, district attorney, city attorney, or prosecutor may seek and recover costs and attorney's fees on behalf of any party who provides a notice pursuant to subdivision (d) and who renders assistance in that action.

25249.8. List of Chemicals Known to Cause Cancer or Reproductive Toxicity. (a) On or before March 1, 1987, the Governor shall cause to be published a list of those chemicals known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity within the meaning of this chapter, and he shall cause such list to be revised and republished in light of additional knowledge at least once per year thereafter. Such list shall include at a minimum those substances identified by reference in Labor Code Section 6382(b)(1) and those substances identified additionally by reference in Labor Code Section 6382(d).
(b) A chemical is known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity within the meaning of this chapter if in the opinion of the state's qualified experts it has been clearly shown through scientifically valid testing according to generally accepted principles to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity, or if a body considered to be authoritative by such experts has formally identified it as causing cancer or reproductive toxicity, or if an agency of the state or federal government has formally required it to be labeled or identified as causing cancer or reproductive toxicity.
(c) On or before January 1, 1989, and at least once per year thereafter, the Governor shall cause to be published a separate list of those chemicals that at the time of publication are required by state or federal law to have been tested for potential to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity but that the state's qualified experts have not found to have been adequately tested as required.
(d) The Governor shall identify and consult with the state's qualified experts as necessary to carry out his duties under this section.
(e) In carrying out the duties of the Governor under this section, the Governor and his designates shall not be considered to be adopting or amending a regulation within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act as defined in Government Code Section 11370.

25249.9. Exemptions from Discharge Prohibition.
(a) Section 25249.5 shall not apply to any discharge or release that takes places less than twenty months subsequent to the listing of the chemical in question on the list required to be published under subdivision (a) of Section 25249.8.
(b) Section 25249.5 shall not apply to any discharge or release that meets both of the following criteria:
(1) The discharge or release will not cause any significant amount of the discharged or released chemical to enter any source of drinking water.
(2) The discharge or release is in conformity with all other laws and with every applicable regulation, permit, requirement, and order. In any action brought to enforce Section 25249.5, the burden of showing that a discharge or release meets the criteria of this subdivision shall be on the defendant.

25249.10. Exemptions from Warning Requirement.
Section 25249.6 shall not apply to any of the following:
(a) An exposure for which federal law governs warning in a manner that preempts state authority.
(b) An exposure that takes place less than twelve months subsequent to the listing of the chemical in question on the list required to be published under subdivision (a) of Section 25249.8.
(c) An exposure for which the person responsible can show that the exposure poses no significant risk assuming lifetime exposure at the level in question for substances known to the state to cause cancer, and that the exposure will have no observable effect assuming exposure at one thousand (1000) times the level in question for substances known to the state to cause reproductive toxicity, based on evidence and standards of comparable scientific validity to the evidence and standards which form the scientific basis for the listing of such chemical pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 25249.8. In any action brought to enforce Section 25249.6, the burden of showing that an exposure meets the criteria of this subdivision shall be on the defendant.

25249.11. Definitions. For purposes of this chapter:
(a) "Person" means an individual, trust, firm, joint stock company, corporation, company, partnership, limited liability company, and association.
(b) "Person in the course of doing business" does not include any person employing fewer than 10 employees in his or her business; any city, county, or district or any department or agency thereof or the state or any department or agency thereof or the federal government or any department or agency thereof; or any entity in its operation of a public water system as defined in Section 4010.1.
(c) "Significant amount" means any detectable amount except an amount which would meet the exemption test in subdivision (c) of Section 25249.10 if an individual were exposed to such an amount in drinking water.
(d) "Source of drinking water" means either a present source of drinking water or water which is identified or designated in a water quality control plan adopted by a regional board as being suitable for domestic or municipal uses.
(e) "Threaten to violate" means to create a condition in which there is a substantial probability that a violation will occur.
(f) "Warning" within the meaning of Section 25249.6 need not be provided separately to each exposed individual and may be provided by general methods such as labels on consumer products, inclusion of notices in mailings to water customers, posting of notices, placing notices in public news media, and the like, provided that the warning accomplished is clear and reasonable. In order to minimize the burden on retail sellers of consumer products including foods, regulations implementing Section 25249.6 shall to the extent practicable place the obligation to provide any warning materials such as labels on the producer or packager rather than on the retail seller, except where the retail seller itself is responsible for introducing a chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity into the consumer product in question.

25249.12. (a) The Governor shall designate a lead agency and other agencies that may be required to implement this chapter, including this section. Each agency so designated may adopt and modify regulations, standards, and permits as necessary to conform with and implement this chapter and to further its purposes.
(b) The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Fund is hereby established in the State Treasury. The director of the lead agency designated by the Governor to implement this chapter may expend the funds in the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Fund, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to implement and administer this chapter.
(c) In addition to any other money that may be deposited in the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Fund, all of the following amounts shall be deposited in the fund:
(1) Seventy-five percent of all civil and criminal penalties collected pursuant to this chapter.
(2) Any interest earned upon the money deposited into the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Fund.
(d) Twenty-five percent of all civil and criminal penalties collected pursuant to this chapter shall be paid to the office of the city attorney, city prosecutor, district attorney, or Attorney General, whichever office brought the action, or in the case of an action brought by a person under subdivision (d) of Section 25249.7, to that person.

25249.13. Preservation Of Existing Rights, Obligations, and Penalties. Nothing in this chapter shall alter or diminish any legal obligation otherwise required in common law or by statute or regulation, and nothing in this chapter shall create or enlarge any defense in any action to enforce such legal obligation. Penalties and sanctions imposed under this chapter shall be in addition to any penalties or sanctions otherwise prescribed by law.

25180.7. (a) Within the meaning of this section, a "designated government employee" is any person defined as a "designated employee" by Government Code Section 82019, as amended. (b) Any designated government employee who obtains information in the course of his official duties revealing the illegal discharge or threatened illegal discharge of a hazardous waste within the geographical area of his jurisdiction and who knows that such discharge or threatened discharge is likely to cause substantial injury to the public health or safety must, within seventy-two hours, disclose such information to the local Board of Supervisors and to the local health officer. No disclosure of information is required under this subdivision when otherwise prohibited by law, or when law enforcement personnel have determined that such disclosure would adversely affect an ongoing criminal investigation, or when the information is already general public knowledge within the locality affected by the discharge or threatened discharge. (c) Any designated government employee who knowingly and intentionally fails to disclose information required to be disclosed under subdivision (b) shall, upon conviction, be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year or by imprisonment in state prison for not more than three years. The court may also impose upon the person a fine of not less than five thousand dollars ($5000) or more than twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000). The felony conviction for violation of this section shall require forfeiture of government employment within thirty days of conviction.
(d) Any local health officer who receives information pursuant to subdivision (b) shall take appropriate action to notify local news media and shall make such information available to the public without delay.

25192. (a) All civil and criminal penalties collected pursuant to this chapter shall be apportioned in the following manner:
(1) Fifty percent shall be deposited in the Hazardous Substance Account in the General Fund.
(2) Twenty-five percent shall be paid to the office of the city attorney, city prosecutor, district attorney, or Attorney General, whichever office brought the action.
(3) Twenty-five percent shall be paid to the department and used to fund the activity of the CUPA, the local health officer, or other local public officer or agency authorized to enforce the provisions of this chapter pursuant to Section 25180, whichever entity investigated the matter that led to the bringing of the action. If investigation by the local police department or sheriff's office or California Highway Patrol led to the bringing of the action, the CUPA, the local health officer, or the authorized officer or agency, shall pay a total of 40 percent of its portion under this subdivision to that investigating agency or agencies to be used for the same purpose. If more than one agency is eligible for payment under this paragraph, division of payment among the eligible agencies shall be in the discretion of the CUPA, the local health officer, or the authorized officer or agency.
(b) If a reward is paid to a person pursuant to Section 25191.7, the amount of the reward shall be deducted from the amount of the civil penalty before the amount is apportioned pursuant to subdivision (a).


Law Offices of Steven W. Hansen | www.swhlaw.com | 562 866 6228
© Copyright 1996-2008 Conditions of Use