7. CHEMICALS: Toxics law revision should address emerging science, uncertainty, admin officials say(12/03/2009)
Sara Goodman , E&E reporter
Any overhaul of federal toxics regulations must give U.S. EPA the authority and flexibility to stay on stop of emerging science and act in the face of scientific uncertainty, a leading federal scientist and the U.S. EPA administrator said yesterday.
Since the Toxic Substances Control Act was approved in 1976, scientists have learned more about chemical toxicity and how that affects people at various stages of their lives, said Linda Birnbaum, director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
"Environmental health science has made tremendous strides since the original passage of the Toxic Substances Control Act," Birnbaum told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
Some of the challenges EPA must be able to address when regulating chemicals in the future: multiple exposures, different routes of exposure, multiple risks and vulnerability of different populations. Research needs to study endpoints beyond cancer and birth defects, such as obesity, as well as how a chemical affects specific genes or chronic diseases, Birnbaum said.
Lawmakers are beginning to discuss overhauling TSCA, which is tasked with regulating the more than 80,000 chemicals currently on its inventory. The only environmental statute that has not been amended since it was created, TSCA has a high burden of proof, requiring that the government prove a chemical poses a health threat before it can act. However, regulators also need proof before they can require companies to provide more information about a chemical.
Since 1976, EPA has used it to evaluate the safety of 200 chemicals and banned or restricted five.
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson told the panel that policy must take into account the science in order for regulatory reform to be successful.
"Restoring confidence in our chemical management system is a top priority for me and a top environmental priority for the Obama administration," Jackson said.
Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) said yesterday he intends to introduce a TSCA reform bill either this month or next. He said it will put the burden of proving a chemical is safe on the manufacturer, which he intends to model after the law governing pesticides.
"We need to get it right," Lautenberg said. "We'd like to pick up the pace -- there's plenty of evidence that this needs attention."
Added EPW Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.): "This issue is at the top of my agenda."
Persistent bioaccumulative toxins (PBTs) and dioxins are two groups of chemicals that EPA should have the authority to move forward with quick action because of the knowledge base that already exists, Birnbaum said.
Many countries have already banned PBTs using the precautionary principle because it is highly likely that a chemical that persists and bioaccumulates is going to become toxic. Meanwhile, EPA has been assessing dioxin for 18 years and has not yet completed a final risk assessment profile of the chemical, Birnbaum said.
Birnbaum said these examples highlight the need for EPA to move forward in the face of uncertainty to take action when the scientific consensus suggests that action is warranted.
"Science never provides 100 percent certainty," Birnbaum said. "Important decisions need to be made in the presence of evidence, not certainty. The more you know, the more questions you have."
Jackson echoed this, saying Congress needs to write regulations that promote efficiency so EPA can ensure risk assessments do not get bogged down in regulatory processes while potentially hazardous chemicals remain on the market.
"In the space between that doubt and delay stands the American consumer," Jackson said. "We as government, and EPA in particular, has a role to play that needs some help from Congress.
"Prioritization will be the key for efficiency in the rulemaking process, and EPA's success will be tied initially to a strong piece of legislation that gives us clear standards, a clear direction and also flexibility," Jackson added.
Andy Igrejas, campaign director of the Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families coalition, said the comments from Jackson and Birnbaum, spurred in part by questions from Lautenberg, suggested that lawmakers are responding to one of the key issues the coalition is pushing: that EPA should have the authority to take immediate action on those chemicals that are known to cause harm.
"The questions that Senator Lautenberg was asking about dioxins, PBTs, show that reform can't just mean reassessing a lot of the chemicals in the way we've done before," Igrejas said. "He was putting his finger on that, the need to act on some of these chemicals, not just assess them."
Thirteen states yesterday released a list of principles they would like to see emerge as Congress debates overhauling federal toxics regulations.
The recommendations include requiring that manufacturers demonstrate chemicals and products are safe for people and the environment; encouraging the use of safer products and chemicals; and making chemical safety information available to regulators, businesses and the public. The states also want new regulations to consider emerging contaminants, prioritize chemicals of concern and allow states to take action where needed.
"Without adequate protection at the federal level, it has fallen to the states to protect people and the environment from the toxic chemicals that are causing harm," Ted Sturdevant, director of Washington state's Department of Ecology, said in a statement. "We need a federal law that prevents contamination from happening in the first place, and phases out the harmful chemicals that are already in widespread use.
That's common sense, but it's not the system we have today."
The states that signed the document include California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Vermont and Washington. Many of those states have moved forward in the absence of strong federal regulations, but they say the federal government must take the lead in ensuring the public and environment are protected.