Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

RESTRUCTURING CHEMICALS POLICY:The European Challenge Ken Geiser, Ph.D. and Joel Tickner, Sc.D. Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Department of.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "RESTRUCTURING CHEMICALS POLICY:The European Challenge Ken Geiser, Ph.D. and Joel Tickner, Sc.D. Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Department of."— Presentation transcript:

1 RESTRUCTURING CHEMICALS POLICY:The European Challenge Ken Geiser, Ph.D. and Joel Tickner, Sc.D. Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Department of Work Environment University of Massachusetts Lowell www.chemicalspolicy.org Lowell Center for Sustainable Production

2 SUMMARY  The European Union is proposing a bold restructuring of its entire chemicals policy called REACH  The US is several years behind Europe in addressing chemicals in products and management in general.  There are some positive aspects of the US system that could inform REACH  REACH will provide an important driver to chemicals testing and management in the US.

3 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Defining Chemicals Policy  Regulatory and voluntary policies designed to achieve long-term, integrated and prevention-oriented sustainable use of chemicals in production systems and products  Focus is on industrial chemicals but could also include pesticides, cosmetics, etc.

4 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Basics of chemicals policy  New Chemicals – those coming on the market after regulatory programs came into force in 1979-1980 (about 1% by volume of what is on the market today)  Pre-market vs. pre-manufacture  Subjected to assessment/review  Existing chemicals – everything on the market when regulatory programs came into force (about 99% by volume of what is on the market today)

5 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production The Problem  Lack of regulatory programs to address chemical lifecycle risks  Lack of integrated and comprehensive approach to chemicals management  Lack of information on existing chemicals  Concern about chemicals in products  Slow risk assessment process, burden on government

6 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production The Problem  Increasing public concerns about types of chemicals (persistent and bioaccumulative and endocrine disruptors) and impacts on health and ecosystems (marine)  Continued use of dangerous chemicals  Policy failures and lack of public confidence  Market pressures for safer chemicals

7 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production The Need  The time has come for a broad-based discussion in the United States of a more integrated, preventive and precautious policy on chemicals throughout their lifecycle in synthesis, manufacturing, products, and wastes

8 Chemicals Policy in the United States Lowell Center for Sustainable Production

9 SUMMARY  There is no one “US” system of chemicals management  The federal government took an early lead internationally in precautious chemicals policy  National policy basically stalled after 1980  Since 1980, new, more limited, policy initiatives have appeared at the state and local levels.

10 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production History of US Chemicals Policy  Delaney Clause - FFDCA  Great Lakes – International Joint Commission and Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement  Occupational Health  Right-to-Know  Waste Management/ Pollution Prevention/Chemical accident prevention  Green Chemistry/Design for Environment  PBTs and endocrine disruption

11 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Federal Chemicals Legislation in the US  1960 Hazardous Substances Act  1970 Occupational Safety and Health Act  1970 Clean Air Act  1972 Clean Water Act  1972 Consumer Product Safety Act  1976 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act  1976 Toxic Substances Control Act  1990 Pollution Prevention Act

12 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Toxics Substances Control Act of 1976  Regulatory power to require testing  Responsibility on industry to provide data on risks  Regulatory power to restrict chemicals in commerce  Requirement for pre-manufacture notification for New Chemicals  National Inventory update  Deference to other legislation – RCRA, OSHA, CAA, CWA

13 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production What about the Toxics Substances Control Act?  “Existing chemicals” – limited results – high burdens on the agency  Industry not proactively providing information/testing  Overuse of Confidential Business Information (CBI)  Use of voluntary initiatives to obtain data or manage chemicals – hard to regulate  “New chemicals” a bright, and understated light

14 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production New Chemicals Under TSCA  Pre-Manufacture, not Pre-Market Focus  Low threshold for action – “may present an unreasonable risk or substantial exposure”  Deterrence from potentially harmful chemicals  Guidance towards safer chemicals and syntheses  A precautionary, lifecycle review

15 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Deterrence under the TSCA New Chemicals Program  Informal negotiation with manufacturers  Informal regulatory signals  Establishment of list of “chemicals of concern”/”chemical categories”  Use of conservative assumptions to encourage testing/restricting chemicals

16 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production TSCA Guidance Towards Safer Chemicals  Attempt to get safer chemicals to market to replace existing ones  Pre-manufacture pollution prevention review of substances and syntheses  Green chemistry initiatives  Informal discussion with manufacturers  From gatekeeper to encouraging safer chemicals and processes

17 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Precautionary Review of New Chemicals  Multi-disciplinary, multi-step hazard and risk review.  Rapid chemical assessment using available data (SAR, surrogates, etc.)  Conservative assumptions in face of data gaps  Build on database/experience of 30,000 new chemicals analyzed  However: No Testing Requirements

18 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Existing Chemicals under TSCA  Inventory Update Rule generates national inventory of non-polymeric chemicals every four years  Years of delay in seeking health and environmental effects data  1998 Chemicals Right to Know Challenge generates High Production Volume (HPV) program

19 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production High Production Volume Chemicals Program  Initiated from NGO pressure  EPA’s analysis demonstrates basic screening data incomplete for 97% of all existing HPV chemicals  EPA initiates HPV voluntary challenge to chemical industry to provide the basic testing data  Chemical industry agrees to provide screening data for 64% of HPV chemicals  Data in the form of “robust summaries” due by 2005

20 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Right to Know - An Important Driver for Prevention  Toxics Release Inventory and chemical storage and accident scenario data.  Demonstrated inefficiencies in chemicals management  Useful information for workers and communities to promote prevention  Links to hazard/risk data – ie www.scorecard.org

21 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Other Federal Chemicals Policies  Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (EPA region 5)  PBT initiatives (RCRA focused)  BFR initiative (EPA region 9)  FACA Committee on TSCA

22 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Promoting Chemicals Policy through Pollution Prevention  An important, but indirect route  Sector-based initiatives  Chemical class/use clusters based initiatives (solvents, cleaning agents)  Voluntary reduction programs  Outreach and education  Design for Environment

23 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Pollution Prevention at the State Level  Most state programs are voluntary and poorly funded  A few states (Massachusetts, New Jersey, Maine) have mandatory planning programs, with materials accounting and planning requirements  Goals for waste reduction  Education  Technical assistance and research for prevention  Tax credits and other incentives

24 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Example: Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Program  Goal: 50% reduction in toxic waste  Focus on ways to reduce waste and chemical use rather than on “acceptable exposures”  Chemical List based on evidence but not proof of toxicity of chemicals  Quantify materials used (why and how)  Understand costs of chemical use

25 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Example: Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Program  Examine alternatives  Innovation and technical support  Measure progress and re-evaluate  Results: 1990-2000  60% reduction in waste  40% reduction in use  80% reduction in emissions  Benefits to industry $15 million (not considering health/environmental benefits)

26 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Other State Initiatives  Labeling – Prop 65 in California  PBDE ban - California  PBTs – Washington, Oregon  Local procurement programs  Mercury bans at local, state, regional level  High Hazard Chemicals program in Massachusetts/Act for a Healthy MA

27 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Conclusions  New Chemicals policy has been moderately successful—precautious and preventive  Existing Chemicals policy has been inadequate – based on voluntary initiatives and data collection, with little focus on chemical management or restrictions  Focus on pollution prevention and getting safer chemicals to market.  Important drivers: children’s health/corporate responsibility/ accident prevention  Movement at the state/regional level is likely to influence federal policy

28 New Directions in European Chemicals Policies Lowell Center for Sustainable Production

29 Summary  European Union moving forward with a major restructuring of chemicals policy the result of several years of public debate  Centerpiece is the REACH proposal  Over the past 10 years, Member States have initiated a variety of programs/tools for integrated chemicals management  These European initiatives provide an opportunity for broad-scale US discussions on the effectiveness of current chemical management policies and potential for changes

30 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production The European Union  15 Member States (inc. 13 more in June 2004)  Environmental legislation is developed through Directives or Regulations  Technical expertise/implementation in Member States  European Parliament and Council of Ministers enacts laws while the European Commission acts as an administrative body

31 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production European Member State Approaches  Constraints of the Common Market  Ability of Member States to go beyond EU policy is constrained, particularly for chemicals  Impetus for new policy has come from Germany, UK, the Netherlands and the Nordic states

32 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Differing National Approaches  Member States tend to use an array of tools ranging from regulations, economics, taxes to education  Nordic States: Regulatory  Netherlands: Cooperative  United Kingdom: Voluntary  Other nations are less innovative

33 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Nordic Approaches - Regulatory  Multiple regulatory and voluntary tools – action plan/long-term goal-oriented  Lists of “chemicals of concern” and criteria for problem substances  Focus on products and product lifecycles – product registers  Demonstration projects and research support for safer technologies and substances  Public education  Taxes, eco-labeling, procurement  Integrate chemicals management throughout regulatory and business structures

34 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production The Dutch Approach – Cooperative  Rapid screening to prioritize high concern/low concern chemicals – Quick Scan  Tripartite process (SOMS) with inclusion of occupational health authorities  Agreements with industry sectors – covenants  Sector demonstration projects  Project chain responsibility of industry – communication

35 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production The UK Approach - Voluntary  1999 Chemicals Strategy  Stakeholder forum  Department of Trade and Industry Downstream Users group and Chemicals Innovation Growth Team  Health and Safety Executive  UK Royal Commission 2003 Report  Market-based approaches – retail, users

36 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production International efforts on chemicals influencing EU process  Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants  North Sea Conventions  Oslo and Paris Conventions  Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety  Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)

37 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Existing European policies  Dangerous Substances Directive (1967)  Limitations Directive (1976)  Dangerous Preparations Directive (1988)  Existing Substances Regulation (1993)  Cosmetic Products Directive (1976, 2003)  Occupational Health regulations (1990,1998)  Biocides Directive (1998)  Water Framework Directive (2000)  Waste from Electronic Products/ Restrictions on Hazardous Substances (2003)

38 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production The REACH Proposal  In February of 2001, the European Commission issued a White Paper on the Future of Chemicals that proposed a major new policy called REACH  REACH:  Registration  Evaluation  Authorization of  CHemicals

39 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production A long and transparent process leading to REACH  1998 Council of Ministers concern/request for report on status of chemicals policy  1999 stakeholder conferences and additional consultations  2001 Comments by Council and Parliament  Stakeholder working groups  Other stakeholder conferences, Member State meetings and informal discussions– business impact, workability, etc.

40 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production The REACH Proposal  A duty of care on chemical producers, users, and importers for studying risks and safety  A European-wide approach to chemicals policy – protect internal market  Substitution of chemicals of very high concern - innovation in safer chemicals  Bridge knowledge gap between new and existing chemicals – develop information on all chemicals.  Reduction in animal testing  Promotion of a non-toxic environment – the “generational goal”

41 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Components of REACH  Registration – testing, data collection, and assessment of all chemicals and supply chain information  Evaluation of risks of chemicals used in greatest quantity and of highest concern  Accelerated risk management for chemicals of concern  Authorization for substances of highest concern.  Establishment of a new central administrative agency

42 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Chemical safety assessment  Part of duty of care for all manufacturers, importers and downstream users and producers of articles  Applied to all chemicals manufactured and used  To be based on available data only  Identification of hazards and potential exposures, and risk management measures  Responsibility to pass information along supply chain

43 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Registration  Essentially a notification process  All producers and importers of substances produced over 1m ton/year (about 30,000 substances)  Phased in over 3 yrs, 6 yrs, and 11 yrs  Pre-registration, consortia establishment  Exemptions for R&D, intermediates, polymers, others  Current New Chemicals are considered registered  Requirement to submit new data

44 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Registration requirements  Base information – identity, information on manufacture and uses, proposed classification/labeling, guidance on safe use, safety assessment  Additional tiered testing/information – requirements – flexibility  Requirement to consult database/authorities before testing  Required data sharing/compensation – Substance Information Exchange Forum

45 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Evaluation  Essentially a risk screening process  Two types: standard and priority  Standard: minimize duplicative testing for high production volume substances  Priority: review of registration to identify additional information needs (focus on high volume/high concern plus intermediates and randomly selected substances)  Requirement to consult other Member States before requiring additional testing  Can lead to risk management recommendations.

46 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Authorization  Essentially a use restrictions process  Applies to chemicals of very high concern – CMRs 1&2, PBTs, VPVBs, and other high concern substances  Requirement to request authorization for high concern chemicals – timelines (includes use and incorporation into articles)  Consideration of socio-economic benefits, alternatives, controls in place  Can be subject to conditions/time limited  Community/Member State authorizations

47 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Restrictions process  A “safety net” – for Community wide protection  Member State proposal for restriction  Preparation of risk assessment and socio-economic assessment  Commission decision  Can specify types of restrictions  Time limited process

48 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Requirements for downstream users/substances in products  Incentive for downstream users to place responsibility on producers  Requirement to complete downstream user chemical safety assessment  Limited registration/authorization requirements  Similar limited requirements for substances (contained over 1m ton/yr) in articles unless not registered

49 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Role of new chemicals agency  Database on chemicals under registration/ authorization  Completeness check of registration dossiers  Risk assessment/socio-economic analysis for Community authorizations  Risk and socio-economic analysis for restrictions  Forum for exchange of information on enforcement  Maintenance of much expertise in Member States

50 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Key issues  Workability  Flexibility in requirements  Prioritization/overloading  Enforcement  Access to information/protection of CBI  Centralization of system  Maximizing benefits/minimizing costs

51 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production EU Legislative Process  White Paper  Draft legislation  Comment Period  Final Commission proposal  First Reading Parliament/Council  Second Reading Council/Parliament (time limited) with Commission debate  Conciliation (time limited)  Comitology

52 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Responses to REACH proposal  Many countries and downstream users are supportive, offering important input  Serious concerns raised by the chemical industry  Serious concerns raised by the United States

53 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Strengthening REACH  Greater linkage to technical support and R&D  Greater focus on safer processes and green chemistry  Greater linkage with innovative Member State tools  Greater focus on public information and right to know  Improved rapid assessment  Better metrics for evaluation

54 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Lessons learned  Major European restructuring of chemicals policy is happening  REACH responds to problems of current system  Policies at the Member State level are more integrated and diversified  Will have significant impacts on global chemicals markets

55 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Conclusions for the US  Need policies to make it easier to act – use variety of tools and markets  Need to move focus from study to solutions – have studied many chemicals enough.  An opportunity to stimulate dialogue on chemicals management in the US.  An opportunity to innovate in the US to meet REACH goals.  Need for greater Trans-Atlantic dialogue amongst advocates and others (more involvement of users/retailers)  Need to promote global chemicals policies.

56 Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Chemicals Policy Initiative Website  www.chemicalspolicy.org


Download ppt "RESTRUCTURING CHEMICALS POLICY:The European Challenge Ken Geiser, Ph.D. and Joel Tickner, Sc.D. Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Department of."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google