"Protecting Urban
Environments" 

Copyright © 2000-2009 by
Connecticut Coalition for Environmental Justice.
All rights reserved.

CCEJ Gives Good Marks To Toxic Chemicals Bill

The recently released House reform bill, HR 5820, the Toxic Chemicals Safety Act of 2010, “is generally very good on its environmental justice provisions,” says Mark Mitchell, MD, MPH, president of the Connecticut Coalition for Environmental Justice. “Although we were not able to prevent the use of risk assessment, the bill requires EPA to take into account aggregate exposure (exposure from all sources), as well as consider lifecycle of the chemical and cumulative exposure (exposure from chemicals that have similar health effects) when determining the required limits of chemical use and exposure.”

“The ‘hot spots’ provisions that we fought for in the new bill are strong and require identification of communities with high [chemical] exposures leading to disproportionate health or environmental risks,” Mitchell continued.

The bill requires identification of at least 20 communities as hot spots after one year of setting the criteria and six months of making the determination, which includes taking nominations from the public, according to Mitchell. It also requires the development of an action plan to require EPA, state, tribal and local governments to reduce exposures from specific chemicals from all sources in the community by specified percentages within a specified timeline. The bill also mandates annual progress reports to Congress and updating of the list at least every five years.

“Chemicals of Environmental Justice concern are handled in two groups,” Mitchell explained. “Use of persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic chemicals (PBTs), such as lead and mercury, are required to be reduced to the ‘greatest extent practical,’ and then assessed for remaining risks to determine if further steps should be taken to reduce exposure. Other non-PBT chemicals of EJ concern, such as TCE, formaldehyde, and chromium 6, are among the 17 named chemicals on the priority list for EPA to determine their safety and required restrictions. Other priority chemicals are BPA, vinyl chloride, phthalates, and perchlorate.”

“Chemical standards must protect the public and vulnerable populations to a ‘reasonable certainty of no harm,’ which is a highly protective standard.” Mitchell says. He notes that the definition of vulnerable population includes disproportionately exposed or potential for disproportionate adverse effects from exposure, and includes infants, children, adolescents, pregnant women and their fetuses; elderly, those with preexisting medical conditions; and others identified by the administrator based on socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity, culturally influenced dietary or other practices. Biomonitoring studies of the public must be done by CDC or of workers, by NIOSH rather than by the chemical company.

The bill and summaries are listed on the Congressional website at: http://energycommer ce.house. gov/index. php?option= com_content&view=article&id=2087:chairmen- rush-waxman- release-hr- 5820-the- toxic-chemicals- safety-act-&catid=122:media- advisories&Itemid=55>