Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
When the chemical industry talks about prioritization – a central question in the debate over TSCA reform – more often than not it quickly reduces the question down to the argument that we should focus only on those chemicals, however hazardous or untested they may be, to which we know people are exposed. In a perfect world, that might suffice. But, as this post will explore, the world of exposure assessment is anything but perfect. Read More
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
A new entry showed up sometime in the last day on EPA’s webpage for its ChAMP initiative. It reads: “The Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP) has been superseded by the comprehensive approach to enhancing the Agency’s current chemicals management program announced by Administrator Lisa Jackson on September 29, 2009.”
Don’t miss this bit at the top of the page:
Yes, that image is a cobweb, which EPA uses to designate archived web content. What’s happening here? Read More
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
Today, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) unveiled its “10 Principles for Modernizing TSCA.” Also today, the Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families coalition – of which EDF is a member – issued a news release and unveiled its 9-point “Platform for Reform of TSCA.” How do they line up? Read More
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
For the past several years, EDF has been in the thick of discussions about whether the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (TSCA) needs reform and, if so, what form it should take. Happily, the former question has largely been answered: With only a few remaining holdouts, even the chemical industry acknowledges the time has come. So now we can move on to what such reform should look like – and what it should not. Read More
Cal Baier-Anderson, Ph.D., is a Health Scientist.
I have just finished reading yet another depressing/infuriating publication by the Woodrow Wilson Center’s Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies. The new report delineates the many limitations faced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) in addressing nanotechnology health risks. The law governing the CPSC has significant weaknesses that prevent it from meeting critical needs, such as constraints on the ability to collect data, require reporting of known hazards, order recalls and promulgate mandatory safety standards.
