Trade groups and individual companies are starting to raise concerns on EPA’s draft supplement to the Trump-era TSCA evaluation of 1,4-dioxide, in particular an occupational exposure limit the agency quietly floated in early August, arguing in early comments that it may not be feasible along with several other broad concerns for the new review.
Labor and environmental groups are pressing EPA to tighten its proposed rule limiting industrial use of perchloroethylene (PCE) in part by banning more uses of the solvent or even phasing it out entirely, saying the agency is relying too much on personal protective equipment (PPE) to protect workers while also neglecting risks to fenceline communities.
Charging their members are currently shut out of data that could be crucial to their safety, labor unions are urging EPA to require employers turn over a wide range of information on their TSCA new-chemical applications and compliance orders and are proposing a framework based on OSHA policies they say would protect confidential materials.
Industry groups are calling on EPA to rework its proposed TSCA rule for the solvent perchloroethylene (PCE) but are split on what approach it should adopt, with some seeking a more flexible policy under the chemicals law while at least one is pushing the agency to drop its worker-safety proposals and advance them through a joint rulemaking with OSHA.
A National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) peer-review panel has broadly endorsed EPA’s draft risk assessment of formaldehyde that adopted controversial research linking workplace exposures to the chemical with leukemia, potentially opening a door for rules based on those findings, but industry is challenging the review process in court.
An industry attorney is floating a wide range of legal critiques of EPA’s proposed TSCA rule for the solvent perchloroethylene (PCE or perc), including an argument that it is unlawfully regulating in an area that OSHA has already addressed -- even though the workplace safety agency says its chemical-exposure rules are outdated.
EPA’s proposed TSCA rule on carbon tetrachloride (CTC) is drawing heavy criticism from environmentalists, with one key advocate saying the plan is fatally flawed because it proposes only worker protections rather than banning uses of the solvent, meaning it fails to protect fenceline communities whose exposures may increase under some safety measures.
OSHA recently posted a slew of new regulatory interpretation letters offering responses to employers’ and industry professionals’ questions on matters such as the categories of chemicals considered “associated with” formaldehyde gas, occupational noise exposure standards, shipment of hazardous materials and silica dust exposure control methods.
Major unions are criticizing EPA for excluding organized labor from stakeholder discussions on its pending TSCA methylene chloride rule, warning that the failure to consult them led to significant omissions in the proposal’s workplace protections compared with OSHA standards -- even as they praise the agency’s strict occupational exposure limits for the solvent.
EPA has unveiled a proposed TSCA risk management rule for carbon tetrachloride (CTC or CCl4) that would allow uses that it says represent “essentially all” annual production of the solvent to continue indefinitely if facilities meet strict new worker protection mandates -- as well as a bar against increasing air emissions to surrounding communities.