{"id":2694,"date":"2013-04-11T08:41:10","date_gmt":"2013-04-11T13:41:10","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/nanotechnology\/?p=2694"},"modified":"2024-02-12T11:01:29","modified_gmt":"2024-02-12T16:01:29","slug":"might-we-soon-be-facing-an-effort-to-roll-back-the-toxic-substances-control-act","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/health\/2013\/04\/11\/might-we-soon-be-facing-an-effort-to-roll-back-the-toxic-substances-control-act\/","title":{"rendered":"Might we soon be facing an effort to roll back the Toxic Substances Control Act?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: left\"><em>Richard Denison, Ph.D.<\/em><em>,<\/em> is a Senior Scientist.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-family: Calibri\"><span style=\"font-size: medium\"><span style=\"color: #000000\">It seems like only yesterday there was broad consensus on the need to <em>strengthen<\/em> the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), a consensus that included the chemical industry.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-family: Calibri\"><span style=\"font-size: medium\"><span style=\"color: #000000\">But that was then.\u00a0 Now there are growing indications that legislation will soon be introduced in the U.S. Senate that would not only <em>not<\/em> fix the fundamental flaws of TSCA, but would actually make the law even weaker.\u00a0 <!--more--><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #000000;font-family: Calibri;font-size: medium\">The first clue came from <\/span><a href=\"http:\/\/thomas.loc.gov\/cgi-bin\/cpquery\/?&amp;dbname=cp112&amp;sid=cp112pqlQi&amp;refer=&amp;r_n=sr264.112&amp;item=&amp;&amp;&amp;sel=TOC_56719&amp;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;font-family: Calibri;font-size: medium\">comments that the Republican minority filed<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-family: Calibri\"><span style=\"font-size: medium\"><span style=\"color: #000000\"> on last year\u2019s Safe Chemicals Act (which was just <a href=\"http:\/\/www.lautenberg.senate.gov\/newsroom\/record.cfm?id=341330&amp;\">re-introduced yesterday<\/a>).\u00a0 Among the many objections, they argued against a standard that has been endorsed by major medical groups as necessary to protect vulnerable subpopulations, especially the developing fetus, infants and young children.\u00a0 That\u2019s a standard that also reflects the recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences to address the multiple chemical exposures that people face in the real world.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-family: Calibri\"><span style=\"font-size: medium\"><span style=\"color: #000000\">Now it appears that Senator David Vitter (LA) is close to introducing a TSCA bill of his own, written in close collaboration with the American Chemistry Council (ACC) and a scant few of its member companies.\u00a0 By all reports, other chemical industry and related interests have had little opportunity for input, and other key stakeholders \u2013 the health and environmental communities, workers, consumer groups, health professionals, etc. \u2013 have been completely cut out of the process.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-family: Calibri\"><span style=\"font-size: medium\"><span style=\"color: #000000\">And while details are sketchy because few people have seen any actual text, the Minority\u2019s comments and other sources suggest that the bill may contain provisions that would actually <strong><em>weaken current TSCA<\/em><\/strong>.\u00a0 Here are just two examples:<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"color: #000000\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri\"><span style=\"font-size: medium\">The bill could further limit EPA\u2019s already highly constrained authority to ask for more information on chemicals.\u00a0 It would reportedly force EPA to rely on existing data, however sparse, for key decisions.\u00a0 EPA would have to document in detail why it needs more information \u2013 exacerbating the <em>Catch-22<\/em> under current TSCA whereby EPA has to be able to show a chemical poses a potential risk in order to require testing to determine if there is a risk.\u00a0 And EPA would be constrained as to <em>when<\/em> in the process it could request new information.\u00a0 <\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium\">If true, <\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium\"><strong><em>these provisions would weaken EPA\u2019s already inadequate information authority under current TSCA.<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"color: #000000\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri\"><span style=\"font-size: medium\">The bill reportedly would wholly quash state authority to address chemical risks.\u00a0 Worse, this pre-emption would start at the moment EPA initiates an assessment of a chemical \u2013 which is typically many years before any decision is made about whether to regulate that chemical.\u00a0 Even putting aside the need for states to be able to address their own priorities and geographic and population factors specific to their states (e.g., native populations highly dependent on wild plants and animals for food), think of the perverse incentive this approach would create for industry to seek to delay assessments and needed regulatory actions \u2013 states would have already been pre-empted from acting to fill the void!\u00a0 <\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium\">Again, if true, <\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium\"><strong><em>this provision would be a severe roll-back of state authority under current TSCA.<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><span style=\"color: #000000;font-family: Calibri;font-size: medium\">Indications are that the bill would leave unchanged the provisions under TSCA that address new chemicals.\u00a0 This would <\/span><a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/nanotechnology\/2009\/04\/16\/epas-new-chemicals-program-tsca-dealt-epa-a-very-poor-hand\/\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;font-family: Calibri;font-size: medium\">perpetuate a flawed system<\/span><\/a><span style=\"color: #000000;font-family: Calibri;font-size: medium\"> in which EPA is compelled to review within 90 days each of more than 1,000 new chemical notifications annually, the vast majority of which include no health or environmental data whatsoever.\u00a0 This lack of any upfront safety data requirement stands in contrast to the policies of virtually every other developed country in the world.\u00a0 Only if EPA can meet its burden to affirmatively find that the chemical is expected to pose an unreasonable risk can it slow its review, require testing, or seek to negotiate conditions with the notifier on production or use of the chemical. \u00a0These are the kinds of problems with the TSCA new chemicals program that led <\/span><a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/nanotechnology\/2010\/02\/20\/epa-ig-report-new-chemicals-program-fails-to-assure-protection\/\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;font-family: Calibri;font-size: medium\">EPA\u2019s own Inspector General<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-size: medium\"><span style=\"color: #000000\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri\"> to reach conclusions such as this:\u00a0 \u201cEPA\u2019s assurance that new chemicals introduced into commerce do not pose unreasonable risks to workers, consumers, or the environment is not supported by data or actual testing.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium\"><span style=\"color: #000000\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri\">It\u2019s exceedingly hard to see how \u201creform\u201d along these lines would do anything to restore consumer confidence in our failed system for assuring chemical safety, let alone resolve the growing debate in the market, in the scientific and medical communities and in the public square over the risks posed by the ever-expanding range of chemicals and chemical-containing products we encounter in our daily lives.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium\"><span style=\"color: #000000\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri\">I urge any Senators thinking about signing on to this approach to reconsider whether they want to be associated with a roll-back of health protections under what is widely acknowledged to be the weakest of all of the major health and environmental laws \u2013 one that will be opposed by every environmental health organization in the country.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist. It seems like only yesterday there was broad consensus on the need to strengthen the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), a consensus that included the chemical industry. But that was then.\u00a0 Now there are growing indications that legislation will soon be introduced in the U.S. Senate that would &#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":100,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[44,114108],"tags":[39150],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-2694","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-policy","category-tsca","tag-american-chemistry-council"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/health\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2694","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/health\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/health\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/health\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/100"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/health\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2694"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/health\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2694\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12682,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/health\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2694\/revisions\/12682"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/health\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2694"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/health\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2694"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/health\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2694"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/health\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=2694"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}