EPA is seeking comment on a pair of chemical industry requests asking the agency to assess the risks of two phthalate chemicals, requests that will pose first-time tests for the agency on whether and how it conducts such analysis under the revised toxics law and whether any negative EPA risk finding preempts existing state and federal requirements.
A government watchdog group is petitioning EPA to phase out the use of hydrogen fluoride (HF) at oil refining facilities under its Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and Clean Air Act (CAA) authorities, the latest in a series of actions to curb the use of the highly corrosive substance following several “near miss” incidents.
Cal/OSHA is planning an advisory committee hearing to develop first-time construction worker safety rules pertaining to naturally occurring asbestos (NOA), with staff now conducting research to write a discussion draft for the meeting, officials say.
Fearing a patchwork of strict state rules, a variety of consumer product manufacturers is urging EPA to expand its planned or ongoing risk evaluations under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) in an effort to preempt states from regulating -- or banning -- certain chemicals’ uses.
Cal/OSHA is continuing to advance its proposal to set a much more stringent airborne lead exposure limit for construction and other workers, following a compromise among state lawmakers to set a Sept. 30, 2020, deadline for the agency’s standards board to adopt the new risk level.
Labor and other advocates are strongly criticizing EPA’s risk evaluations for a common solvent and a largely phased-out flame retardant for what they say is a gross understatement of the risks that workers face from exposure to the chemicals, in part because the agency assumes workers will use protective equipment.
House Democrats’ bill to ban uses of asbestos appears to be advancing after state officials opened the door to a longer phase-out period for chlorine producers, but few involved in talks on the bill are discussing prospects that implementing any ban will eventually drive the sector to use an alternate technology that uses perflourinated chemicals.
EPA is facing a possible suit from environmentalists after the agency rejected claims that a modified Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) significant new use rule (SNUR) for use of a specific chemical lacks adequate protections for oilfield workers that are exposed to the substance and any formaldehyde that may be associated with it.
Following criticism that EPA was unnecessarily rushing to complete the first 10 risk evaluations required by the revised toxics law by the end of the year, the agency’s toxics chief says officials will use the additional six months the law allows to complete the studies but they are still aiming to complete all peer reviews by the December 2019 deadline.
A pending suit over EPA’s denial of environmentalists’ petition seeking to require reporting of asbestos uses under the revised Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) is testing plaintiffs’ ability to use remedies in both the toxics law and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to challenge such denials, potentially expanding plaintiffs’ litigation options.