Democrats have introduced their latest bill seeking to ban all uses of asbestos, but its prospects appear uncertain at best as it is even stricter than a 2019 version that collapsed without a vote, including a phaseout schedule mirroring EPA’s proposed TSCA rule that industry opposes and a definition of commercial “asbestos” similar to what has divided supporters of past legislation.
Paint and pigment trade groups are saying EPA’s new policy of assuming workers will not use protective gear in TSCA risk evaluations is “illegal” and irrational, charging that the agency has improperly ignored existing workplace practices and OSHA safety standards as well as companies’ general duty to protect their workers from “recognized” dangers.
Industry lawyers are raising broad concerns that strict worker safety standards and other provisions in EPA’s recently proposed TSCA ban on chrysotile asbestos uses signals the agency is take a tougher approach than OSHA and other federal agencies, raising questions about which agency has primacy over workplace safety.
The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has begun formal interagency review of the Biden administration’s draft Risk Management Program (RMP) rule governing chemical facility safety, a measure that officials have said will strengthen a Trump-era version of the rule in part to account for climate and environmental justice (EJ) risks.
The chemical industry is praising what it says are recent moves by EPA to consult OSHA and other work-safety agencies to bolster the TSCA office’s approach to occupational exposure and risk analysis, while pursuing its own efforts to harmonize approaches to that discipline used by the toxics program, industrial hygienists and occupational regulators.
EPA’s draft finding that formaldehyde exposures can lead to leukemia drew a range of reactions from other federal entities that reviewed a pre-release draft with the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) leading praise of the cancer analysis while others warned that they see evidence of that link as more tenuous than the agency is claiming.
EPA’s just-released draft risk assessment of formaldehyde links the chemical to myeloid leukemia based on a controversial study of workplace exposures, but does not use that finding in its cancer risk estimate due to modeling data uncertainty, resulting in a risk value that is an order of magnitude less strict than in 2010 and very close to its last final review in 1991.
EPA is proposing to ban all ongoing uses of chrysotile asbestos in its most aggressive use yet of the reformed TSCA, based on its Trump-era findings that the chemical poses “unreasonable risks” to workers in the chlor-alkali and other sectors as well the public, but industry is already arguing that the rule is based on a flawed understanding of OSHA safeguards.
Major labor unions are warning EPA that while they support its efforts to strengthen consideration of workplace protective gear in chemical risk evaluations, officials “misunderstand” OSHA’s requirements and have failed to fully address harsh interagency criticisms on the subject that were issued in response to a draft Trump-era chemical review.
Worker safety advocates say the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) new report urging the Biden administration to account for climate and environmental justice (EJ) risks in an upcoming update to its risk management program (RMP) facility safety rule bolsters their longstanding calls to restore and strengthen the Obama-era version of the rule, especially as scientists see climate risks growing.