Brimer v. Rotary Corporation

The parties involved in the case Brimer v. Rotary Corporation executed a Consent Judgment on July 31, 2015.  In this matter, citizen enforcer Russell Brimer alleged that Rotary Corporation (“Rotary”) sold vinyl/PVC tubing containing the phthalate chemical di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (“DEHP”) in the State of California without providing the requisite health hazard warnings.  

As part of the agreement, Rotary agreed not to sell any vinyl/PVC tubing or other pliable PVC-containing replacement parts, accessories, and protection devices in California after the Santa Clara County Superior Court approves the Judgment, unless the products contain no more than 1,000 parts per million of DEHP, butyl benzyl phthalate (“BBP”), di-n-butyl phthalate (“DBP”), di-isodecyl phthalate (“DIDP”), and diisononyl phthalate (“DINP”) when analyzed using state or federally approved testing methodologies.  Products that are not “Phthalate Free” shall be sold with Proposition 65 warnings provided.  Should Rotary provide written certification that 80 percent of the products sold in California qualify as reformulated by July 31, 2016, Brimer agreed to waive a portion of the civil fine that would otherwise be applied.

The Consent Judgment required settlement payments of $78,600, divided therein between civil penalties, 75% of which are paid to California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, and compensation to whistleblower Brimer and his counsel for their successful enforcement of this matter in the public interest.