Off The Books: Industry’s Secret Chemicals

From Environmental Working Group:

The 33-year old law that was supposed to ensure that Americans know what chemicals are in use around them, and what health and safety hazards they might pose, has produced a regulatory black hole, a place where information goes in – but much never comes out. The reason is that under the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the chemical industry has been allowed to stamp a “trade secret” claim on the identity of two-thirds of all chemicals introduced to the market in the last 27 years, according to an Environmental Working Group (EWG) analysis of data obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These include substances used in numerous consumer and children’s products.

EWG’s analysis also showed that:
• The public has no access to any information about approximately 17,000 of
the more than 83,000 chemicals on the master inventory compiled by the
EPA.
• Industry has placed “confidential business information” (CBI) claims on the
identity of 13,596 new chemicals produced since 1976 – nearly two-thirds of
the 20,403 chemicals added to the list in the past 33 years.

MSDS Gone Wild!

From EHS Today:

Oh no! We have a serious problem. The plant office manager ran into my office with a frantic look of panic on her face. The company safety inspectors are here and they want to see an MSDS on the Wite-Out. What will we do?

This scenario, while fictitious, is played out a thousand times every year in facilities all across our nation. We all have learned the OSHA rules of hazard communication, 29CFR1910.1200. The purpose and design of the program is excellent: that any chemicals produced or imported are evaluated for hazards and those hazards are then communicated to the employees and employers who might come in contact with them.

OSHA Settles Hazcom Dispute

From Occupational Hazards:

Days after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia dismissed a petition made by the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and other industry groups claiming that OSHA amended its Hazard Communication (hazcom) standard without notice or comment, OSHA and the petitioners reached a settlement.
As per the settlement, OSHA will issue a letter of interpretation addressing specific questions NAM and the Specialty Steel Industry of North America (SSINA) presented to OSHA regarding the agency’s new hexavalent chromium (Cr[VI]) standard for general industry. The letter will be issued by OSHA’s Directorate of Enforcement Programs.

In addition, NAM and SSINA have agreed to file a motion with the court to withdraw their petition for review of the Cr(VI) standard on or before May 24.

OSHA and the two other industry groups involved in the settlement – Public Citizen Health Group (HRG) and the United Steelworkers – have agreed not to oppose any motion NAM and/or SSINA may file to intervene in support of the Cr(VI) standard in the remaining cases.

More Delays on OSHA’s Latest Agenda

From Occupational Hazards:

OSHA’s latest semiannual regulatory agenda, published in the April 30 Federal Register, includes predictable delays for long-awaited standards such as crystalline silica and occupational exposure to beryllium, to name a few.

Crystalline silica – a compound that workers in construction, maritime and general industry are routinely exposed to – has been cited as the cause of silicosis, which is a disabling, if not fatal, disease. The standard has been on OSHA’s regulatory agenda for years, but it has not moved past the pre-rule stage. Previously slated for April, OSHA’s latest agenda indicates that a complete peer review of health effects and risk assessment will be done by September.

Occupational exposure to beryllium also has been on OSHA’s plate for some time now. Since 2001, OSHA has been in the process of gathering data through an official request for information in order to determine an appropriate course of action for addressing work-related hazards to beryllium. The agency, in its previous regulatory agenda, had indicated that the a SBREFA (Small Business Regulatory Enforcement and Fairness Act) panel would complete its report by March. The standard has been postponed to September.

ASSE Poll: Safety Community Ready for GHS

From Occupational Hazards -

Implementing a globally harmonized system of classification and labeling of chemicals (GHS) would be the next best step in improving hazard communications systems, according to a web poll sponsored by the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE).
A March 22 technical audio conference revealed that 98 percent of web poll participants – comprised mostly of safety and health professionals – voted “yes”when asked whether they see hazardous communication systems improving as a result of GHS implementation. In addition, 72 percent of poll voters said that their companies are in the process of preparing for GHS and 88 percent said they thought that GHS would help their companies streamline their hazard communication (HAZCOM) issues.

Among other poll results:

72 percent said that their companies have a HAZCOM program with international issues.

52 percent said that their companies dedicate significant resources to international issues.

61 percent said that they have international safety, health and environmental responsibilities.
According to ASSE, the poll results are indicative of the impact GHS is going to have in the safety and health community.

“Hundreds of safety, health and environmental professionals participated in the GHS call,” said Christopher Gates, assistant administrator of the ASSE Management Practice Specialty. “This clearly illustrates that GHS will be a critical issue for the profession in the near future and has the potential to make a significant impact on workplace safety and health when the system is fully implemented.”

Jennifer Silk, OSHA’s former deputy director of the Directorate of Standards and Guidance, and Mary Frances Lowe of EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs were on the call and discussed how GHS would impact hazard communication for manufacturers, importers, distributors and end users in all industries.

They also discussed how GHS would change material safety data sheets (MSDSs) and company HAZCOM programs and the impact GHS will have on EHS professionals.

Impact of REACH on US exporters of manufactured goods to the EU

Impact of REACH on US exporters of manufactured goods to the EU –

EU regulations are more stringent and more numerous than US regulations, and US manufacturers who don’t consider themselves chemical companies will find themselves widely affected by REACH. Dr. Louis Wyness of TSG Europe, a UK-based regulatory services consultancy, explains.

With trepidation from industry a new chemical regulation in the European Union (EU) called REACH (Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006) was published late in 2006. The Regulation which comes into force on 01 June 2007 will have a major impact on chemical and associated industries worldwide which manufacture and/or import chemicals, preparations and articles to the EU.

Before REACH the EU legislative framework for chemicals was fragmented with different rules for new and existing chemical substances and the requirements were generally considered by government to be inadequate for protecting human and environmental health. REACH brings together all existing EU legislation and is arguably the most comprehensive and far-reaching system of chemical regulation worldwide.

Basic elements of REACH

In brief, the basic elements of REACH are Registration (by industry), Evaluation (by a new Chemical Agency), Authorisation (and possible restriction) of Chemicals. The extent of the obligations placed on industry varies depending on the chemical tonnage manufactured in, or exported to, Europe and on the hazard properties of the chemical substance. Substances alone, in preparations or in articles are affected.

There are many exemptions from many or all of the provisions of REACH. Some substances being structurally simple and benign are exempted (and listed in the Annexes to the Regulation). Other chemicals or preparations already regulated are exempt from certain provisions such as those in medicinal products or in foods.

OSHA Forecast for 2007

Good Article in Occupational Hazards about the coming year ahead in OSHA Compliance:
OSHAs Forecast for 2007

OSHA’s HazCom Standard Does Not Require Chemical-Specific Training

The Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission strikes down OSHA’s interpretation of the training component of the HazCom standard.
by Arthur G. Sapper

You are the new safety manager of a chemical plant, which has about 700 hazardous chemicals. You examine the plant training records, and see that employees spent an inordinate amount of time being trained under OSHA’s hazard communication standard. In fact, every employee is told the name of every hazardous chemical in his work area and given other chemical-specific information.

This puzzles you because you know that Paragraph (h)(1) of OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard, 29 C.F.R. § 1910.1200, specifically states: “Information and training may be designed to cover categories of hazards (e.g., flammability, carcinogenicity) or specific chemicals.”

You also recall reading my article in the August 2000 issue of Occupational Hazards magazine – titled “Chemical-Specific or Hazard-Category Training?” – which argued that for this very reason, chemical-specific training is not required.

In your previous job, you used hazard-category training instead of chemical-specific training. You told employees that chemicals in their work area posed certain hazards, such as flammability or carcinogenicity, but you did not name every such chemical. You told them to get chemical-specific information from material safety data sheets and labels.