Apr 29, 2016 - Chemist and small business owner Beth Bos- ... behalf of small businesses regarding TSCA reform. ... sear
Daily Environment Report™
Reproduced with permission from Daily Environment Report, 83 DEN B-1, 4/29/16. Copyright 姝 2016 by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. (800-372-1033) http://www.bna.com
CONGRESS
TSCA Small producers have a large stake in the ongoing negotiations between the House and Senate as they consider reforms to the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Beth Bosley of Boron Specialties explores how new safety provisions will impact small chemical makers, their suppliers and customers, and the public. This is the first in a three-part series on negotiations to reform TSCA.
A Toxic Substances Control Act for the 21st Century BETH BOSLEY s the chemical industry awaits the reconciliation of the House and Senate bills that will update the regulation of chemicals in the U.S., I’ve reflected on what it took to get to this point, and why it’s essential for Congress to finish the job quickly. Reform of the
A
Chemist and small business owner Beth Bosley founded Boron Specialties after a 20-year career spanning biotech, fine chemical research, development and manufacturing, regulatory affairs, and custom synthesis. Boron Specialties is an active SOCMA member and Ms. Bosley has testified before House and Senate committees numerous times on behalf of small businesses regarding TSCA reform.
COPYRIGHT 姝 2016 BY THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS, INC.
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), a novel regulation when enacted in 1976, has been debated in Congress for at least 10 years. An assortment of legislative language and draft bills have been proposed, but no previous effort ever made it out of committee. That changed last year when two bills not only emerged from committee, but passed with overwhelming majorities in both chambers. It took a tremendous amount of work and steadfast leadership to accomplish this—a multitude of hearings, consultation with NGOs and industry groups, and serious bipartisan negotiation among congressional members and staff. Reps. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) and Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.) and Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and Tom Udall (D-N.M.) deserve a tremendous amount of credit. But there is little time to pass a reconciled bill before the election and change of administration delay reconciliation and perhaps even jeopardize final passage of the bill.
ISSN 1060-2976
2 Both pieces of legislation—a comprehensive bill from the Senate (S. 697, Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, passed via voice vote in December 2015) and a narrower bill from the House (H.R. 2576, TSCA Modernization Act of 2015, which passed 398 to 1 in June 2015)—enable the Environmental Protection Agency to require testing when necessary without an overly burdensome rulemaking process, and mandate that the EPA evaluate existing chemicals. These two issues (lack of effective testing authority and lack of progress on existing chemicals) are usually cited as the biggest flaws of the EPA’s implementation of TSCA.
Why It’s Important. Industry, the EPA, and the public all have a stake in ensuring sensible regulation of chemicals in commerce. The chemical industry, which is one of the most regulated industries in the U.S., must be able to plan for the resources necessary to comply with a modernized chemical regulatory scheme. As the owner of a small chemical manufacturing business, I must provide advanced solutions to our customer’s problems while confronting global competition, limited resources, and shifting priorities. We value the health and safety of our employees, our neighbors, our customers, and the environment and strive to fully assess and explain the risk our products may present. I’m confident that the large majority of the chemical industry has the same priority. I have never encountered anyone who wants their product to cause harm to human health or the environment. Remember that our industry employs over 800,000 U.S. workers—we are a part of the broader public. The EPA realizes that there are risk assessment activities that are long overdue for many chemicals and chemical classes. Since they could not depend on new legislation after many false starts, the EPA has implemented a work plan to address these deficiencies. The added resources that must accompany their new mandate on existing chemicals will serve to speed this process and expedite regulatory action where warranted. The EPA’s initiative, and eventually the passage of reconciled legislation, will do much to strengthen public confidence in the industry and access to information about the chemicals involved in our lives, economy and environment. While no product is without risk, the EPA’s evaluation of high-priority chemicals should address the perception and reality regarding the safety of the products to which families are exposed. There is no getting around the fact that, for instance, the paints
4-29-16
used in homes all across the country are made up of dozens of molecules, but parents need to have access to information that the yellow paint their child uses to color the sun in that drawing on the fridge is not going to cause harm.
Economic Drivers and Importance of Sensible Regulation. Small- and medium-size chemical manufacturers employ about 260,000 individuals in the U.S. (that’s more than Google, Apple, and Microsoft combined). And, as stated above, total chemical industry employment is about 800,000 direct U.S. workers. Our workforce of scientists and engineers, technicians, plant personnel and administrators are highly skilled and well compensated. And like other manufacturing industries, we support a robust cadre of allied industries in construction, logistics, safety equipment, etc. The chemical industry thrives on innovation and new products, so an effective and efficient new chemicals program is vitally important. And to the public: the EPA’s own data reveal that many new chemical submissions are ‘greener’ alternatives to existing chemicals. I commend the EPA’s current efforts under the new chemicals program—the 90-day review using judicious estimates of hazard and exposure have provided industry a reasonable route to commercialization, while also protecting the public’s health, safety and right to information. Also important to industry, though, is the ability (with robust substantiation and EPA oversight) to protect selected confidential information, even chemical identity, in certain cases. We will not hide the hazards of the materials we produce, but we need reasonable mechanisms like generic or trade names to protect against global competitors unfairly exploiting our valuable research investments.
Let’s Get a Bill to the President. We are tantalizingly close to enacting meaningful TSCA reform. Many, if not most, stakeholders support the bills currently under consideration. Passage could be an important bipartisan win for Congress at a time when such achievements are few. While the chemical industry is, of course, advocating that the enacted legislation be robust and reliable, nimble enough for the EPA to effectively implement, and protective of our trade secrets, we chiefly need a bill to become law.
COPYRIGHT 姝 2016 BY THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS, INC.
DEN
ISSN 1060-2976
