EPA Suspends Risk-Based Decisions as It Eyes Chemical Management Plan

By Pat Rizzuto

The Environmental Protection Agency has suspended the development and publication of decisions it is making under the risk-based portion of its Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP), the agency said in a statement issued June 18.

EPA said it will decide before October on how it will assess, prioritize, and take risk management actions on chemicals of concern, EPA spokesman Dale Kemery said.

“While EPA has not made a final determination on how the agency's efforts to enhance the chemicals management program will affect the current ChAMP program, [the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics] has suspended development and posting of ChAMP Risk-Based Prioritizations during this evaluation,” he said.

“EPA plans to announce the specifics of this effort this summer and will seek public input into the discussion,” Kemery said.

Under ChAMP, EPA planned to evaluate 6,750 existing high-production-volume (HPV) and moderate-production-volume (MPV) chemicals for their toxic, environmental, and physicochemical properties by 2012. HPV chemicals are made in or imported into the United States in volumes of 1 million or more pounds; MPV chemicals are made in volumes of from 25,000 pounds to less than 1 million pounds.

EPA planned to issue two types of documents under ChAMP: risk-based prioritization decisions, which evaluated hazard and exposure information on HPV chemicals and determined whether they were high, low, or medium priority for further scrutiny; and hazard-based prioritization decisions, which evaluated MPV chemicals to determine whether they were a high, medium, or low priority for additional review.

The agency's review of ChAMP is part of Administrator Lisa Jackson's goal of strengthening the chemical management program, Kemery said. Chemical industry officials have pointed to ChAMP as an illustration of key principles they would like to see if the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) is revised.

EPA did not reply to a question as to whether it would continue to issue hazard-based prioritization decisions for HPV and MPV chemicals.

Advocates Pleased by EPA Decision

Richard Denison, a senior scientist with the Environmental Defense Fund, which has criticized ChAMP, told BNA he is pleased that EPA has suspended making risk-based prioritizations.

Denison helped craft the HPV program that was launched in 1998. Through the HPV program, chemical manufacturers volunteered to provide the agency with basic health and toxicity data in what is called a Screening Information Data Set (SIDS).

In numerous public speeches and through a blog he posts, Denison has argued that the use and exposure information EPA has been using to make its risk-based decisions is inadequate.

Denison said the agency's focus should be to evaluate hazard information received under the HPV Challenge Program, identify missing data, and seek to obtain it.

Denison has noted some chemical manufacturers have failed to provide EPA with the full SIDS data they promised, which EPA acknowledged in an announcement it made in April about a possible rulemaking.

According to Denison, EPA has determined that hundreds of chemicals present a low-hazard or are a low-priority for obtaining information even though data to make such decisions were missing or inadequate.

Richard Wiles, senior vice president for policy at the Environmental Working Group, called the decision to suspend risk-based prioritizations a “good step forward.” The decision sends the right signal that EPA recognizes the ChAMP program is ill-equipped to enable the agency to make decisions about chemicals, Wiles said.

Wiles said EPA's prioritization decisions “may do more harm than good because they are based on such faulty or missing data. It's better to not do them than to issue them and be stuck with highly inaccurate prioritizations.”

Effect on TSCA Reform Predicted

Wiles and Denison said the suspension of risk-based prioritizations probably will affect an anticipated debate on updating the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.) has said he will soon introduce the Kid Safe Chemical Act, which would amend TSCA.

The problems with ChAMP are traceable to the limited authority EPA has under TSCA to obtain information from manufacturers about chemicals and to take actions to manage chemical risks when risks are identified, Denison said.

Many chemical industry officials and their attorneys have said they strongly support ChAMP, and would want a reformed TSCA to incorporate key elements of that program, Denison said.

EPA's decision to partly suspend ChAMP is a strong signal that the agency does not think the program is sufficient to obtain information about and to manage chemicals, he said.

Industry Support for Program

Chris Cathcart, president of the Consumer Specialty Products Association (CSPA), said the group was concerned over the “lack of consumer confidence in the federal chemicals management program. He said, “The goals of ChAMP (i.e., prioritization of chemicals under prescriptive deadlines) are aspects of a program that may help repair this lack of consumer confidence.”

The Soap and Detergent Association issued a statement saying it continues to support risk-based approaches to chemical management to minimize unjustified or excessive constraints on product innovation and formulation.

The American Chemistry Council affirmed its support of ChAMP in a June 18 statement, and noted, “ChAMP arose out of a regional commitment made by the governments of Mexico, Canada and the United States, and we are confident that any changes to ChAMP do not signal a reversal of the U.S. government's commitment, but rather to further strengthen the program.”

Denison's concerns about ChAMP can be read at http://blogs.edf.org/nanotechnology/2009/06/01/champs-double-standard/.

Envirowire news features are brought to you by the Air & Waste Management Association through a licensing agreement with the Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., Daily Environment Report. Features may not be copied, e-mailed, sold, rewritten for broadcast, or redistributed in any form.

Member ID	Password