Court rules whether workers' exposure to product requires claim for widespread adverse impacts
A recent California case alleged that there was no evidence showing that the exposure of workers or individual citizens using spray foam systems exceeded any level necessary to support a claim of a potential for public exposure or for significant widespread negative impacts.
In the case of American Chemistry Council et al. v. Department of Toxic Substances Control et al., the Department of Toxic Substances Control issued a regulation listing spray polyurethane foam systems with unreacted methylene diphenyl diisocyanates as a priority product under California’s Green Chemistry law.
The trial court found that the department’s decision to list spray foam systems as a priority product was within its legal authority, that the department complied with the California Administrative Procedure Act (APA), and that the department violated the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The American Chemistry Council and the General Coatings Manufacturing Corp. appealed. They argued that listing spray foam systems as a priority product exceeded the department’s authority under the Green Chemistry law and under the Safer Consumer Products regulations. They also claimed that the department breached the APA in multiple ways. The department cross-appealed and challenged the trial court’s decision that it violated the CEQA.
The California Court of Appeal for the Fifth District agreed with the...
You don't have permission to access "http://www.chosun.com/english/kpop-culture-en/2026/09/27/AXCF6DQHNNA75HTAIBNGBSMHJU/" on this server. Reference #18.f0a6dc17.1790489781.a8ee3f3 https://errors....