Prop. 65 Violations Cited as Vons Pulls Tobacco Off Shelves

Vons, the state’s largest supermarket chain, on Tuesday began pulling cigars, pipe tobacco and most chewing tobacco products from its shelves because, a spokeswoman said, manufacturers have largely ignored a 2-year-old state law that requires warning labels on goods that contain cancer-causing compounds.

Vons Companies Inc., which operates 336 stores in Central and Southern California, took the action to comply with Proposition 65, spokeswoman Vickie Sanders said. The so-called toxics initiative was overwhelmingly approved by voters in November, 1986.

“It’s the first time we are aware of that a supermarket has taken product off the shelves in response to Proposition 65,” said Deputy Atty. Gen. Craig C. Thompson, who coordinates enforcement of the initiative for the state Department of Justice.

Atty. Gen. John K. Van de Kamp on Friday filed a civil lawsuit against 25 tobacco manufacturers and eight food store chains, including Vons, alleging that they had failed to warn consumers of the risk of cancer from many tobacco products. Cigarettes already carry a federally mandated warning label.

Sanders said Vons’ decision to pull non-cigarette tobacco products from its shelves was unrelated to the lawsuit and had been under consideration for months. “We did not do it without warning or notice (to manufacturers). This is not a sudden move on Vons’ part,” Sanders said.

Vons told tobacco manufacturers and distributors in August that it would require warning labels on their products by Sept. 17, Sanders said. At the request of the manufacturers, the deadline was extended until last Monday.

The action involves 17 tobacco products manufactured by five companies, she said. Some brands of chewing tobacco that bear the appropriate warning labels will remain on sale, Sanders added.

“You will see bare shelves. There will be a sign up there telling customers we apologize for the inconvenience, but it is a necessary inconvenience,” Sanders said.

“I’m not sure to what extent they did it to avoid an injunction or limit their damages, or to be a good corporate citizen,” said Thompson of the state Department of Justice. “It certainly shows some intent to take Proposition 65 seriously, I guess.”

The initiative requires businesses to provide “clear and reasonable” warnings to anyone who may be exposed to chemicals that are known to cause cancer or birth defects.

‘Warning Has to Be Given’

The Department of Justice, Thompson said, does not take a position “one way or the other on whether people should take products off their shelves. We are saying a warning has to be given as the law requires.”

If a manufacturer does not imprint a warning on its product, a retailer can comply with the law by posting its own warning notice, Thompson said.

Safeway Stores Inc., which operates 221 stores in California, has posted such warning signs near displays of cigars, pipe and chewing tobacco, spokesman John Shepherd said. Shepherd said the chain has told tobacco manufacturers that after Oct. 17 it will no longer accept shipments of products that do not bear warning labels.

Van de Kamp filed the lawsuit two months after a coalition of four environmental groups announced that it intended to seek $1.3 billion in fines from stores and manufacturers for violating the Proposition 65 warning requirement.

Many stores have attempted to comply with the requirement by participating in a toll-free “hot line” that is intended to alert consumers to cancer-causing chemicals contained in specific brand-name products. Environmentalists view the hot line as seriously inadequate.