The Landscape of State The Landscape of State Chemicals RegulationChemicals Regulation

Joel A. Tickner, ScDJoel A. Tickner, ScDLowell Center for Sustainable ProductionLowell Center for Sustainable Production

University of Massachusetts LowellUniversity of Massachusetts LowellJoel_tickner@uml.eduJoel_tickner@uml.edu

OverviewOverview

• Long history of state level chemicals policy Long history of state level chemicals policy efforts – states traditionally drivers of efforts – states traditionally drivers of innovation at the federal levelinnovation at the federal level

• New drivers for state level policyNew drivers for state level policy• Various approaches to state level policyVarious approaches to state level policy• Lessons learnedLessons learned

– Change is happening – prepare!Change is happening – prepare!– Thinking thoughtfully about policies that Thinking thoughtfully about policies that

address problems while stimulating innovationaddress problems while stimulating innovation– Ultimate goal should be reform of federal Ultimate goal should be reform of federal

policypolicy

History of state level chemicals History of state level chemicals policypolicy

• Hazard Communication/right to knowHazard Communication/right to know

• Pollution PreventionPollution Prevention

• State level restrictionsState level restrictions

• Packaging/labelingPackaging/labeling

• Overarching strategiesOverarching strategies

• Local, State and regionalLocal, State and regional– Great LakesGreat Lakes– New England GovernorsNew England Governors

Drivers for chemicals policy Drivers for chemicals policy reform in the statesreform in the states

• Speed of federal policy to address issues of Speed of federal policy to address issues of state/local concern (local impacts)state/local concern (local impacts)

• Market demands driven by governments– Market demands driven by governments– Europe/Japan – and other stakeholdersEurope/Japan – and other stakeholders

• Need to build market niches for new Need to build market niches for new productsproducts

• Frustration of state level officials at lack of Frustration of state level officials at lack of data/other limitations in federal policydata/other limitations in federal policy

• Concerns over toxics in productsConcerns over toxics in products• Solutions often local in natureSolutions often local in nature

Safer Alternatives

Chemical Restrictions

Procurement

Right-to-Know

policieschemical

Toxics Use Reduction /Pollution

Prevention

state

Right to Know - An Important Right to Know - An Important Driver for PreventionDriver for Prevention• Toxics Release Inventory and chemical Toxics Release Inventory and chemical

storage and accident scenario data.storage and accident scenario data.

• Chemical use/throughput dataChemical use/throughput data

• Demonstrated inefficiencies in Demonstrated inefficiencies in chemicals management, allows “public” chemicals management, allows “public” to understand potential risksto understand potential risks

• Useful information for workers and Useful information for workers and communities to promote preventioncommunities to promote prevention

More right to know More right to know initiativesinitiatives• Links to hazard/risk data – ie Links to hazard/risk data – ie

www.scorecard.orgwww.scorecard.org

• Now biomonitoring data linked to research Now biomonitoring data linked to research and outreachand outreach

• Labeling efforts:Labeling efforts:

• CA Prop 65 (1986) CA Prop 65 (1986) – List ofList of carcinogens & reproductive toxicants carcinogens & reproductive toxicants– Product LabelsProduct Labels: requires firms to provide “clear : requires firms to provide “clear

and reasonable warning” to exposed individualsand reasonable warning” to exposed individuals

State level chemical State level chemical restrictionsrestrictions• Started with PCBs, CFCs and some pesticides (DDT)Started with PCBs, CFCs and some pesticides (DDT)• Mercury (numerous states and different approaches)Mercury (numerous states and different approaches)• PackagingPackaging• UFFIUFFI• LeadLead• PBDEsPBDEs• PERC/SolventsPERC/Solvents• PBTsPBTs• Local/state procurement policiesLocal/state procurement policies• Often linked to particular products (ie paint, Often linked to particular products (ie paint,

insulation) or media (waste/air)insulation) or media (waste/air)

New England Governors, Eastern Canadian Premiers endorse Regional Mercury Action Plan (1998)

Limit Use of Limit Use of Elemental MercuryElemental Mercury: : MN legislationMN legislation

modellegislation

Interstate Interstate Clearinghouse Clearinghouse

Restrict Sale of Certain Restrict Sale of Certain ProductsProducts: MN legislation: MN legislation

Label ProductsLabel Products: VT legislation: VT legislation

Disposal Ban - Disposal Ban - MN legislationMN legislation

Collect Banned ProductsCollect Banned Products – proposed in MA – proposed in MA

mercury

State Appropriation for fiscal year State Appropriation for fiscal year 2005 2005

– funding for chemical action funding for chemical action plans for PBTs, including PBDEs plans for PBTs, including PBDEs and mercuryand mercury

Establishes:

criteria for selecting which PBTs to prepare chemical action plans

the scope and content of chemical action

plans

procedures to review and update the list

list of PBTs

criteria to identify PBTsDefines:

Toxics in Packaging LegislationToxics in Packaging Legislation

• Introduced in 1989Introduced in 1989

• 19 states19 states

• Restrict: Restrict: Lead, Mercury, Cadmium, Lead, Mercury, Cadmium,

Hexavalent ChromiumHexavalent Chromium

• Exemptions w/expiration dates: Exemptions w/expiration dates: recycled materials, reusable recycled materials, reusable packaging, no alternativespackaging, no alternatives

Pollution Prevention at the Pollution Prevention at the State LevelState Level• Massachusetts, New Jersey, Maine mandatory Massachusetts, New Jersey, Maine mandatory

planning programs, with materials planning programs, with materials accounting/planning requirementsaccounting/planning requirements

• Goals for waste reductionGoals for waste reduction

• EducationEducation

• Technical assistance and research for Technical assistance and research for preventionprevention

• Tax credits and other incentivesTax credits and other incentives

• Product take back now being discussedProduct take back now being discussed

Example: Toxics Use Example: Toxics Use ReductionReduction

• Goal: 50% reduction in toxic wasteGoal: 50% reduction in toxic waste• Focus on Ways to reduce waste and Focus on Ways to reduce waste and

chemical use rather than “acceptable chemical use rather than “acceptable exposures”exposures”

• Evidence but not proof of toxicity of Evidence but not proof of toxicity of chemicals on TUR listchemicals on TUR list

• Quantify materials used (why and how) Quantify materials used (why and how) • Understand costs of chemical useUnderstand costs of chemical use

Example: Toxics Use Example: Toxics Use ReductionReduction

• Examine alternativesExamine alternatives• Innovation and technical supportInnovation and technical support• Measure progress and re-evaluateMeasure progress and re-evaluate• Results: 1990-2000 Results: 1990-2000

– 60% reduction in waste60% reduction in waste– 40% reduction in use40% reduction in use– 80% reduction in emissions 80% reduction in emissions

• Benefits to industry $15 million (not Benefits to industry $15 million (not considering health/environmental considering health/environmental benefits)benefits)

MA TCE Cleaning Use DataMA TCE Cleaning Use Data

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

1990 1996 2001 2002

millions of pounds

An Act for a Healthy Massachusetts: An Act for a Healthy Massachusetts: Safer Alternatives to Toxic Safer Alternatives to Toxic Chemicals Chemicals

Aid businesses

Steps to Safer Alternatives

10 priority toxic chemicals (lead, TCE, PCE, PBDEs, DEHP, et al)

Alternatives assessment to identify feasible safer alternatives

Exempt uses without feasible safer alternatives

Priorities -- greatest exposures, easiest to replace

Raise funds through fees Set deadlines

Proposed LegislationProposed Legislation

Lessons Learned – Critical Role of Lessons Learned – Critical Role of InformationInformation• Need good information on chemical hazards and Need good information on chemical hazards and

exposuresexposures

• Need for good materials and supply chain Need for good materials and supply chain accounting information (both manufacturing and accounting information (both manufacturing and product flows)product flows)– Materials not efficiently managed (what you Materials not efficiently managed (what you

can’t measure you can’t manage)can’t measure you can’t manage)– Identifies opportunities for greater efficiency and Identifies opportunities for greater efficiency and

supply chain uses and places for substitutionsupply chain uses and places for substitution

• Need good metrics to measure progressNeed good metrics to measure progress

• Need good information on alternatives to problem Need good information on alternatives to problem substancessubstances– Market pressures from good information on Market pressures from good information on

alternativesalternatives

Lessons Learned - Lessons Learned - InnovationInnovation• Innovation requires both willingness AND capacityInnovation requires both willingness AND capacity

• Technical and research support is critical for Technical and research support is critical for industry innovation industry innovation – Demonstration projects/sitesDemonstration projects/sites– Networking of firmsNetworking of firms– Research and Development of safer chemicalsResearch and Development of safer chemicals– Efficacy testing of chemicalsEfficacy testing of chemicals– Direct Technical assistance to firmsDirect Technical assistance to firms

• Recognition of leadersRecognition of leaders

• Need guidance for substitution/use reduction Need guidance for substitution/use reduction planning to ensure risk minimizationplanning to ensure risk minimization

Lessons Learned – rapid Lessons Learned – rapid screening and assessment screening and assessment toolstools• Need for tools to rapidly characterize chemical Need for tools to rapidly characterize chemical

hazards, exposures and riskshazards, exposures and risks

• Need effective prioritization schemesNeed effective prioritization schemes

• Tools that identify positive criteria in chemicals.Tools that identify positive criteria in chemicals.

• Need for tools to compare alternative Need for tools to compare alternative chemicals/processeschemicals/processes

ConclusionConclusion

• Limited and uncoordinated set of chemicals Limited and uncoordinated set of chemicals policies at the state level but some important policies at the state level but some important lessonslessons

• States important laboratories for innovation but States important laboratories for innovation but resources limited for data collection (particularly resources limited for data collection (particularly chemical testing which should be a federal chemical testing which should be a federal activity)activity)

• Need both tools for collecting information and Need both tools for collecting information and informing public but also for supporting innovationinforming public but also for supporting innovation

• States should work together to share States should work together to share resources/capacity and build momentum for resources/capacity and build momentum for national changenational change