Chemical Safety Board History


Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Chemical Safety Board History

  1. 1. Future of Chemical Safety Manuel R. Gomez, DrPH, MS, CIH Director of Recommendations U.S. Chemical Safety Board ACS Annual Conference, Washington, DC August 30, 2005 1
  2. 2. Disclaimer This presentation by Manuel R. Gomez of the United States Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) on August 30, 2005 to the American Chemical Society’s Annual Conference has not been approved by the Board and is given for general informational purposes only. Any material in the presentation that did not originate in Board-approved reports is solely the responsibility of the author and does not represent the official views of the Chemical Safety Board. Copies of all CSB reports can be found at 2
  3. 3. Session Outline • CSB History, Description and Mission • Chemical Safety – Brief look at recent past – Likely future drivers – Wild Cards 3
  4. 4. CSB Overview • Created By 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments: – After catastrophic industrial accidents in mid-late 1980s (Bhopal) • Also created: – OSHA Process Safety Management (1992) – EPA Risk Management Program (1996) • Independent agency • Modeled after NTSB • Presidentially-appointed Board (5) • Funded 1998, $9M budget, 45 staff 4
  5. 5. CSB Overview Mission • To promote prevention of industrial chemical accidents that harm employees, damage the environment and endanger the public Focus of Activity • Conduct Investigations • Determine Root/Contributing Cause(s) • Issue Prevention Recommendations to many parties Impact • Not a regulatory or enforcement agency • Influence broad adoption of recommendations to prevent recurrences More information: 5
  6. 6. Chemical Safety Recent Past • 1970s & mid-80s – Environmental/occupational laws & regs – Vigorous chemical safety activity – EPA, OSHA, NIOSH in world lead • Mid-80s to today – Anti-regulatory climate – Judicial challenges – US now lagging 6
  7. 7. Example TSCA: Losing Steam? • Adequate data ….developed …..[re] effect of chemical substances and mixtures on health and the environment and ….and development ….should be the responsibility of those who manufacture and those who process such chemical substances and mixtures; • Adequate authority should exist to regulate chemical substances and mixtures which present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment, and to take action with respect to chemical substances and mixtures which are imminent hazards; • Authority….exercised….as not to impede unduly or create unnecessary economic barriers to technological innovation while fulfilling the primary purpose of this chapter to assure that …substances and mixtures do not present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. 7
  8. 8. Example TSCA: Losing Steam • Toxic Substances Control Act (1976) – Very little impact on existing chemicals (99% of total chemical use by volume) – Very few test rules for chemicals – Precedent from legal challenges: EPA has to “prove guilty” to act – Bottom line: Little progress in knowledge re toxicity or exposures to most chemicals in 30 years. 8
  9. 9. Future Chemical Safety What Are the Likely Drivers? • Reach Legislation in EU • Management system standards • Corporate social responsibility standards • Globally Harmonized System • High Production Volume Challenge • Others: – Precautionary Principle – Workplace risk assessment protocols (EU) – Control Banding (UK and EU?) 9
  10. 10. REACH • R egistration – Applies to all chemicals > 1Mton – Test & risk data according to volume – Use & exposure information required • E valuation – Recipient develops risk assessment & risk management • A uthorization – New EU-wide agency reviews data – May impose risk management requirements, even ban • Of CHEMICALS 10
  11. 11. REACH Implications • Shifts burden to producers/importers • Comprehensive: Applies to all chemicals, “old” and new • Affects entire product chain: addresses uses and exposures • Can result in bans • Will affect chemical industry worldwide • It’s very likely to really happen. 11
  12. 12. MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS • Origin: ISO quality standards • Followed by environmental & occupational health and safety standards (some ISO) • Based on Plan-Do-Check-Act Model & • Heavy emphasis on continual improvement, not “compliance” 12
  13. 13. MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS • Impact: 3rd party audit systems for registration/certification • Huge market demand in Europe & Asia • US lags but may be forced to catch up – Responsible Care & US auto industry using model ! • Growing evidence of improved performance, but jury still out 13
  14. 14. CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY STANDARDS • Thousands of reports on web • ISO developing a guideline • Information disclosure, performance metrics are central tenets • Chemical performance will be prominent • Passing fad, PR, or real impact? 14
  15. 15. Globally Harmonized System • Basically a harmonized MSDS approach • Main impetus European • European parliament law this year? – US when? • Real Goal: To help market for chemicals (one MSDS, accepted/understood by all) • Prelude/example of other European-led harmonization? • Example of growing strategic use of standardization by Europeans? 15
  16. 16. High Production Volume Challenge--Summary • Triggered by 1998 NGO report (ED) • Joint industry-EPA effort • Develop basic hazard data for high volume chemicals (>1M lbs/yr) – SIDS data (OECD’s Screening Information Data Set) • Not enough for full risk assessment • No exposure or use data required 16
  17. 17. High Production Volume Challenge--Current Status • Much info available, but highly technical • Online user-friendly HPVIS in late 2005? • Many new “orphan” HPV chemicals since 1990 • EPA prioritizing chemicals for more data and risk assessments (when?) • Any “sleeper” asbestos among them? • What will be reaction of stakeholders (communities, workers, consumers)? 17
  18. 18. OTHER TRENDS • Precautionary principle – Europe: Weight of evidence & prevention – US: Need to prove “guilty” precedents Legalistic Piecemeal analysis • Risk Assessment protocols for workplace (EU Commission) • Control Banding in workplace (UK, EU trend?) 18
  19. 19. WILD CARDS • Catastrophes (Bhopal, Cuyahoga River & EPA, Gualey Bridge disaster and silicosis compensation, Farmington mine explosion & MSHA, etc.) • Terrorism Threat – Creating focus on chemical safety – Some legislative debate already – Can “security” trigger process safety & prevention goals? • Liability • Ripple effect of European trends? 19
  20. 20. SOME SOURCES OF INFO • Text of Reach & other: micals/reach.htm • EPA information: Chemical Right-to-Know Initiative • Review & Commentary: • American Chemistry Council: www.american • European chemical industry: • OECD: • Environmental Defense (see Chemical Tracker): 20
  21. 21. Thank You For more information about CSB: 21