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

Safety and Health Topics: Hazard Communication

Safety and Health Topics: Hazard Communication
OSHA’s page of HAZCOM topics-Good overview of resources.

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.

When OSHA Comes Calling

(Reprinted from Occupational Hazards Magazine – March 2006)

OSHA’s list of the 10 most-violated workplace safety and health standards offers employers the opportunity to improve safety.
The Occupational Health and Safety Administration recently revealed the 10 most-violated OSHA standards for the 2005 fiscal year. Those standards include Scaffolding (1926.451), Hazard Communication (1910.1200), Fall Protection (1926.501), Respiratory Protection (1910.134), Lockout/Tagout (1910.147), Powered Industrial Trucks (1910.178), Electrical (Wiring) (1910.305), Machine Guarding (1910.212), Electrical (General Requirements) (1910.303) and Ladders (1926.1053).

The publication of the OSHA top 10 list serves a greater purpose to employers than merely relaying yearly statistics. The top 10 list sheds light on the enforcement policies and procedures of OSHA. By more-closely focusing compliance efforts on the top 10 standard violations, employers could eliminate employees’ exposure to some serious workplace hazards and reduce their own exposure to 50 percent of the citations given each year.

OSHA has repeatedly stated that inspectors are not asked to look at any possible violation more than another. Unfortunately, logic dictates otherwise. Year after year, the same violations grace the OSHA top 10 list.

It is axiomatic that inspectors will look at hazards that are a common problem. Consequently, if compliance efforts must be limited, any increased efforts should be focused on these common violations.

The MSDS – Steer Clear of Potential Hazcom Roadblocks

                When the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) enacted the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) in 1983, the chemical manufacturing and distribution industries were the most affected by the broad sword of complying with the regulations.  At the heart of this standard, is the idea that all employees have a right to know what the chemicals and associated hazards are in their workplace. To that end,  chemical manufacturers and importers must convey both physical hazards (such as flash point, flammability, explosivity), and the health hazards (carcinogenicity, birth effects, etc) of their end products.  This is achieved using Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs).  One problem with MSDSs stems from the fact that the HCS is a performance based standard, meaning that the employer is allowed flexibility in adapting rules to the needs of the workplace versus rigid compliance requirements.  In fact,  the standards are so flexible that OSHA has no specified format for the MSDS other than what information should be included.  With over 3 million MSDSs written since the Standard was enacted,  the variability in quality and formatting is staggering.    

Welcome!!

Wecome to MSDSCenter, a forum to discuss everything MSDS related. Come back and visit often!!!