PaintSquare.com


The First Word in Protective & Marine Coatings

A Product of Technology Publishing / PaintSquare
JPCL | PaintSquare News | Durability + Design | Paint BidTracker

Free Download of

Paint and Coatings Industry News

Main News Page


‘Safe Chemicals’ Bill Riles Industry

Monday, April 25, 2011

More items for Coating Materials

Comment | More

Coatings and chemical makers have come out swinging against a new Senate proposal that would overhaul the Toxic Substances Control Act to shift the 35-year-old burden of chemical safety proof to manufacturers.

The Safe Chemicals Act of 2011, introduced April 14 by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), is “a long-overdue modernization” of TSCA, which has not been amended since it was adopted in 1976, said Lautenberg, who chairs the Senate Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics, and Environmental Health.

Currently, chemical companies need not—and typically do not—perform toxicity testing on the approximately 700 new chemicals introduced into commerce annually. EPA currently has more than 80,000 chemicals on its inventory.

Proof of ‘Unreasonable Risk’

Instead, TSCA requires EPA to demonstrate “unreasonable risk” before regulating a chemical—a burden the agency has met only five times since TSCA was enacted.

In 1991, a federal appeals court even threw out EPA’s 1989 attempt to regulate most uses of asbestos—banned by the European Union and other countries—saying the proposal was not based on “substantial evidence.” 
 
 ACA

 ACA

The bill would restrict the ability of manufacturers to keep some chemical safety data confidential.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office has recommended several times that Congress amend TSCA to reduce the evidentiary burden EPA must meet to control toxic substances. In January 2009, GAO added TSCA to its “high risk” areas of the law.

EPA challenges to chemical safety can take years, due to the procedures required in obtaining test data from companies, GAO notes. About 95% of the notices companies provide to EPA on new chemicals contain some information claimed as confidential. Evaluating these claims is time- and resource-intensive, and EPA does not challenge most of them, GAO says.

‘Core Failings’

Lautenberg’s bill would address what the senator calls “each of the core failings of TSCA,” beginning with shifting the burden of proof on safety. The measure would: 
  • Require chemical companies to develop and submit a minimum data set for each chemical they produce and authorize EPA to require any data beyond that to determine a chemical’s safety.   
Chemical companies would have to demonstrate the safety of industrial chemicals, and the EPA would evaluate safety based on the best available science. 
  • Require EPA to prioritize chemicals based on risk. The agency would conduct an evaluation to place chemicals into one of three classes:  immediate risk management, safety standard determination, and no immediate action. (Some chemicals will not meet the criteria to be placed in a class.)
Persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic chemicals with the potential for widespread exposure will be considered the highest risk, and EPA would then impose conditions to immediately reduce exposure.   

Chemicals in the second category would require EPA to perform more testing and risk assessment.  If the chemical cannot meet the safety standard, it could not remain on the market.  
  • Establish a public database with chemical information submitted to EPA and decisions made by EPA.  
  • Restrict the conditions under manufacturers can claim data as confidential business information (CBI), “while still ensuring appropriate protections for legitimate CBI.”
  • Require EPA to establish an incentive program for safer alternatives and a grant program to develop alternatives for priority hazardous chemicals.
Industry Responds

No companion bill has yet been introduced in the House, but coatings and chemicals manufacturers are already making their opposition clear. The American Coatings Association, which represents manufacturers, and the American Chemistry Council, a lobbying group, have both come out against the measure.

ACA calls the bill “even more exacting” than a similar bill that failed last year. “The burden is placed squarely on industry to prove safety,” ACA notes on its web site. 

In a statement, ACA said it was “particularly concerned about how [the bill] may impact America’s manufacturing base….”
 
 Cal Dooley
Cal Dooley, of the American Chemistry Council, says the measure will “hamper innovation.”

Cal Dooley, president and CEO of the American Chemistry Council, said the bill's proposed decision-making standard “may be legally and technically impossible to meet."

The changes “could hamper innovation in new products, processes and technologies,” Dooley said. “In addition, the bill undermines business certainty by allowing states to adopt their own regulations and create a lack of regulatory uniformity for chemicals and the products that use them."

Both ACA and ACC say they are committed to modernizing TSCA, but that Lautenberg’s bill overreaches. Said Dooley: “Unfortunately, it appears many of our concerns have not been addressed in this new version, and the bill introduced today could put American innovation and jobs at risk.”

   

Tagged categories: American Coatings Association (ACA); EPA; Health and safety; Regulations

Comment from john schultz, (4/26/2011, 9:19 AM)

“The burden is placed squarely on industry to prove safety,” Like Big Tobacco? If a product is safe enough for a couple hundred thousand exposures is it safe? Then next comes another industry-wide class lawsuit $billion settlement with a black eye for the industry.


Comment from James Johnson, (4/26/2011, 10:23 AM)

Just what the American industrial base needs - more red tape and interference by government leading to less innovation and less employment, putting the chinese even further ahead. No wonder the government cannot balance their own checkbook or live within their means. Yesterday it was anounced by the IMF that in 2016 the chinese will surpass the US as the world economic leader. With proposed legislation such as this one can see why.


Comment from Gary Hall, (4/26/2011, 4:07 PM)

EPA, OSH and DOT have all announced programs to "Cooperate" with the EU on REACH registered compounds and substances. Under REACH, the manufacturers must provide the toxicological and environmental data that ECHA evaluates. A lot of that data is already on line and easily searched. Once EPA et al decide on the execution date for partnering with ECHA, there will be even less burden for US companies. As it stands now, if a compound has undergone testing and classification under ECHA's REACH program, the manufacturer can re-submit that same data to EPA. As a politically Conservative scientist, I endorse most of Lautenberg's proposals.


Comment Join the Conversation:

Sign in to our community to add your comments.

Mitsubishi Gas Chemical America
Performance Amine 1,3-BAC

A highly reactive cycloaliphatic diamine offering superior performance. Reasonable cost and curing efficacy makes it suitable for all types of epoxy resin applications.


International Paint LLC
A Long Track Record of Success

  • Polyurethanes
  • Linings
  • Epoxies
  • Zincs
The Power to Protect™
1-800-589-1267


Sherwin-Williams

Sherwin-Williams
Our 3,500 locations give you a level of service that is simply unmatched.


BASF
New resins from BASF will have metals loving water:

Excellent corrosion resistance, low VOC, high gloss, thin films basf.us/industrialcoatings
polyorders@basf.com
800-231-7868


Blastox/The TDJ Group, Inc.
Blastox - One Step
Lead Abatement

Don't waste $$ on added labor steps with other methods. Don't mix, meter or apply at the job-site. Avoid strict hazardous waste rules.
Let your painters paint!


Safety Lamp of Houston, Inc.
Wet & hazardous area lighting solutions from SAFETY LAMP of Houston

New WOLF LED and fluorescent lights are now available, including low voltage tank lighting kits.
Call: (281) 964-1019.


Novatek Corporation
Dustless Coatings Removal

Strip it, clean it, and profile it,
all dust free! High production
rates and Blast like finishes.
Comply with new lead
standards.

 
 
 
Technology Publishing

The Technology Publishing Network

The Journal of Protective Coatings & Linings (JPCL) PaintSquare
Durability + Design Paint BidTracker JPCL Europe

 
EXPLORE:      JPCL   |   PaintSquare News   |   Interact   |   Buying Guides   |   Webinars   |   Resources   |   Classifieds
REGISTER AND SUBSCRIBE:      Free PaintSquare Registration   |   Subscribe to JPCL   |   Subscribe to PaintSquare News
MORE:      About PaintSquare.com   |   Privacy policy   |   Terms & conditions   |   Site Map   |   Search   |   Contact Us
 

© Copyright 2000-2014, Technology Publishing / PaintSquare, All rights reserved
2100 Wharton Street, Suite 310, Pittsburgh PA 15203-1951; Tel 1-412-431-8300; Fax 1-412-431-5428; E-mail webmaster@paintsquare.com