Washington State Adopts Children's Safe Product Rule to Control Chemicals of Concern to Children

Washington State has adopted a new rule implementing the state's 3-year old Children's Safe Product Act law.  Amongst other things, the rule requires companies to report all children's products manufactured or imported for sale in Washington that contain any of 66 "Chemicals of High Concern to Children" (CHCC) that exceed the "Practical Quantification Limit" (PQL).  The PQL is defined as "the lowest concentration that can be reliably measured within specified limits of precision, accuracy, representativeness, completeness, and comparability during routine laboratory operating conditions."

The rule provides for a phase-in period for reporting different categories of products and the size of the manufacturer and size of the products.  Within 12 months, the largest companies who are making products that are likely to come in contact with the skin of children or be placed in a child's mouth, must make their first report.  First reporting extends out to as long as 84 months (7 years) for "tiny" companies making products with limited potential for contact with children's skin. After the first notice date, reporting must occur annually on the anniversary of the first notice date.

The list of 66 Chemicals of High Concern to Children includes many of the same chemicals usually seen on such lists, including formaldehyde, benzene, Bisphenol A, many phthalates, brominated flame retardants, PFOS, and heavy metals such as mercury, cadmium and molybdenum.

Information on the new rule can be found on the Washington State Department of Ecology web site.

A PDF of the full rule can be downloaded and read here, including the list of 66 CHCCs.

Environmental and Health Organizations Say "Fully Fund the National Children's Study"

A group of national and state environmental and health organizations have written a letter to the Senate and House Committees on Appropriations calling for full funding of the National Children’s Study.  The study was "authorized by the Children’s Health Act of 2000," and is "one of the most comprehensive national efforts to study environmental, social and genetic influences on children’s health, including air, water, diet, noise, family dynamics and community and cultural influences."  Unfortunately, it has never been properly funded.

According to a press release by the Environmental Working Group, one of the 24 organizations that signed the letter, it includes:

“There are great and growing concerns about the increased rate of chronic and acute disease in the United States, and the National Children’s Study is designed to help all Americans have a better understanding of the links between those diseases and our environment. However, to ensure the study’s success, it is critical that it continue to receive the necessary funding throughout each and every stage. No study has ever followed children from before birth to age 21, but to do so the National Children’s Study must receive sufficient and consistent funding.”

Further, the letter says that "the study will examine how the events and exposures of early life can lead to specific outcomes including birth defects, asthma, obesity, diabetes, and mental health disorders among other possible outcomes." It suggests that "science continues to emerge and show that early exposures, especially those during vulnerable times of development, are linked to future adverse health effects."

With No Federal Action, Wal-Mart Takes the Lead in Banning Chemicals - Is Retail Regulation the Future?

Is retail regulation the wave of the future?  At this site I have talked a lot about the attempts to reform the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).  So far TSCA reform efforts have failed to produce any federal action to modernize the now 35-year old law.  But now, into this gap in federal-level regulation have come the "retail regulators."  Retail regulation is when influential retail stores like Wal-Mart, Toys-R-Us and Sears make unilateral buying decisions that could effectively ban chemicals of concern.  Call it The Wal-Mart Factor.

A recent article by Lyndsey Layton in the Washington Post discusses how Wal-Mart is "stepping ahead of federal regulators and using its muscle as the world's largest retailer to move away from a class of chemicals researchers say endanger human health and the environment."  Those chemicals, polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), have been used as flame retardants in a wide range of consumer products, including computers, furniture, and toys.  With a worldwide buying power rivaling many national economies, when Wal-Mart speaks, manufacturers listen.  And since manufacturers and formulators aren't likely to make one product for Wal-Mart and another version of the same product for other distributors, chemical bans by Wal-Mart have the ripple effect of eliminating chemicals from products sold elsewhere.

As the article points out, this is not the first foray into retail regulation by big box stores.  Toys R Us, Sears, Kmart, Whole Foods, and others have started telling suppliers that products containing chemicals such as BPA, PVC, PBDEs and others will no longer be accepted.  This is caused many suppliers to reformulate their products to replace components of toxicological concern with those that are less hazardous.  The result, in effect, is a market-based ban on certain chemicals.  Though it should be clear that the reason Wal-Mart and the other retailers have made the decision to ban is because state legislatures have been taking action to limit chemicals in which health and safety studies have raised concerns. 

Since unilateral decisions by retailers and varied state-level action could create a patchwork of "regulation" across the country, this would seem to be more impetus for moving forward with federal-level action.  Such federal action should include a modernized and rational TSCA reform legislation that encourages both innovation by retailers and manufacturers and protection of human health and the environment.

EPA Administrator Jackson Makes Trip to Africa (Kenya and Ethiopia)

The following is the text of an EPA press release dated February 18, 2011.

********************************************

On Friday, February 18, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa P. Jackson will travel to Kenya and Ethiopia to engage in bilateral and multilateral meetings aimed at building relationships with key African counterparts and other environmental leaders. The trip will include attending the 26th United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) Governing Council Meeting and Ministerial Environment Forum, where Jackson and other U.S. representatives will outline the global scope of shared environmental, health and economic challenges and opportunities.
  
Jackson’s meetings in Kenya and Ethiopia will highlight important issues in children’s environmental health, good environmental governance and emerging green technology and innovations.
  
Jackson’s stops in Ethiopia and Kenya will include meetings and events focused on electronic waste, enforcement and compliance, indoor air quality, and clean fuels. While in Kenya, she will be hosted by U.S. Ambassador Michael E. Ranneberger and will lead the U.S. delegation to the UNEP meetings, where the group will continue the precedent set by the U.S. during UNEP’s 2009 meeting by actively engaging international partners in bringing awareness to shared environmental, health and economic challenges. In 2009, the U.S. signaled its commitment to take on a leadership role in working with 140 other countries on a binding international agreement on mercury. At the UNEP meeting, Jackson and UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner will sign the first ever Memorandum of Understanding between the two organizations, furthering the U.S. commitment to more effective collaboration to promote global environmental sustainability. She also will join with the director general of the country’s National Environmental Management Authority to speak on environmental initiatives and will participate in a roundtable with the East Africa Enforcement Network.
 
In Ethiopia, Jackson will be hosted by U.S. Ambassador Donald Booth and will meet with U.S. Ambassador to the African Union Michael Battle. She will represent U.S. interests in bilateral meetings with Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi and leaders from Ethiopia’s Environmental Protection Agency. Jackson will also speak with students from Addis Ababa University about opportunities for women to take leadership roles in addressing environmental issues facing Ethiopia. In addition, she will receive a site-briefing and tour an e-waste de-manufacturing facility to highlight improved e-waste management and affirm EPA’s commitment to supporting innovation in the management of electronic waste.
 
These meetings will focus on EPA’s recently launched international priorities and aims to strengthen U.S. relationships with environmental counterparts in the Kenya, Ethiopia and other African nations.

More information on EPA’s international priorities and efforts:
http://www.epa.gov/international/

EPA Takes Next Step in Test Rule for BPA

Almost a year ago the EPA issued a Chemical Action Plan (CAP) for bisphenol-A, commonly called simply BPA, a chemical used in many plastics.  And just before the holiday break EPA took the next step in managing what it sees as potential risks of BPA by sending a proposed test rule to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).  The proposed rule looks to require toxicity testing related to environmental effects, including the potential for endocrine disruption.

No human health-related testing is being proposed at this time since most human exposure seems to be through packaging and that comes under the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration.  FDA and the Centers for Disease Control are undertaking new studies.  But EPA is looking at evaluating the potential for environmental exposures from BPA in surface, ground, and drinking waters, and also may request monitoring near landfills, soil and sediment, as well as other sources of BPA leakage.

It's unclear how long OMB will take in its review.

The CAP for BPA can be downloaded here.

Other action plans and information can be found on EPA's Existing Chemicals web site.

Washington State Moves Forward on Children's Safe Chemical Rules in Lieu of TSCA Action

I have mentioned previously here that with TSCA chemical reform trudging through Congress on the federal level, the States have continued to move forward with attempts to protect human health and the environment on a more local scale.  One of these efforts is the Children's Safe Product Act (CSPA) passed by Washington State in 2008.  While Governor Gregoire has suspended rulemaking in general because of the state of the economy, she has exempted this particular rule to continue through the development process.  The goal of the proposed law is to focus on protecting children from toxic chemicals.

According to the Department of Ecology, which manages health and safety issues in Washington, the CSPA consists of two parts:

The first part "limited the amount of lead, cadmium and phthalates allowed in children's products sold in Washington after July 1, 2009. These standards were substantially preempted when the U.S. Congress passed the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) in July, 2008. The federal Consumer Product Safety Commission will enforce this act."  So this part is essentially dormant.

"The second part of the CSPA requires Ecology, in consultation with the Department of Health, to develop a list of chemicals that manufacturers must report on. As required by the law, chemicals on the list are toxic and have either been found in children’s products or have been documented to be present in human tissue (blood, breast milk, etc.). However, the mere presence of these chemicals in children’s products does not necessarily indicate that there is a risk of exposure." 

Rules to implement this second part of the CSPA are currently open for public comment until December 31st.  These draft rule list 59 chemicals considered to be of high concern to children.  Most are familiar to people in the chemical control business as they have been targeted by other states as well as federal and international laws.  The law stipulates that the chemicals selected must be known to be toxic, commonly found in products used by children, are used in home environments, and found in biomonitoring of human blood and tissue samples. 

Once the final rules are issued, "manufacturers of children's products must report to Ecology if their products contain these chemicals."  These notifications will be required by law on a particular schedule, but the CSPA does not stipulate what happens once they are notified.  Presumably the state is interested in collecting data on what chemicals, and in what volumes, are used in the state so they can take any needed action.

Inspector General Inquires into EPA's Voluntary Children's Chemical Evaluation Program

The Voluntary Children’s Chemical Evaluation Program (VCCEP), which advocacy groups had criticized for years as ineffective and a "stall" by industry, was halted by the Obama administration.  Now it seems EPA’s Inspector General (IG) has launched an inquiry into the program because EPA has indicated it intends to model other programs on VCCEP.  The IG says it will determine “whether there are alternative mechanisms for achieving children’s health protection goals from chemical exposure.”

VCCEP was a product of the 1998 Chemical Right to Know Initiative, "the goal of which was to give citizens information on the effects of chemicals to enable them to make wise choices in the home and marketplace."  VCCEP itself was launched in December of 2000, and for many years was a focal point for EPA to work with industry to assess the potential effects of 23 chemicals on children's health.  Of the 23, only 20 were actually sponsored, with the chemicals selected being some for which children had a high likelihood of exposure. The intent was to have companies that manufactured or imported these chemicals to volunteer to provide information on health effects, exposure, risk, and data needs. Thirty-five companies in 10 consortia responded.

Unfortunately, 10 years after it was initiated the program seems to have not gotten past its initial pilot program.  Like the voluntary High Production Volume Chemical Challenge, the voluntary nature of the program resulted in actual participation dropping off as soon as the program fell out of the public's field of view.

The goal of the IG review is to learn from this experience before EPA initiates a new effort to assess the effects of chemicals on children's health.  Given the slow movement of TSCA reform in Congress, and the change in power structure for the next two years leading into a presidential election, EPA and others are looking for ways to carry on their mandate to protect public health, especially that of children.

More information can be found on the VCCEP program web site.

Director of Columbia Center for Children's Environmental Health Testifies at Toxic Chemicals Hearing

Last, but not least, of the witnesses in Tuesday's Senate subcommittee hearing on "Toxic Chemicals and Children's Environmental Health" in New Jersey, was Dr. Frederica Perera.  Dr. Perera is Director, Columbia Center for Children's Environmental Health (CCCEH), Professor of Public Health, Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health Columbia University.  In her testimony, she focused on "endocrine disrupting chemicals and neurodevelopmental disorders, noting that an estimated 5-17% of United States children have been diagnosed with a learning or attention disorder."


She reported largely based on the work done at CCCEH, which since 1998 has "conducted international studies of cohorts of mothers and children followed from pregnancy."  Even back then, she noted, "we knew that there were ever-increasing human exposures to environmental toxicants and that rates of neurodevelopmental disorders and chronic illnesses such as childhood asthma and cancer were on the rise."  She made it clear "that these diseases had multiple causes, environmental exposures such as lead, mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls were known to contribute," but also said that it had "become evident over the previous decades that the placenta does not adequately protect the fetus from toxicants and that, due to their rapid development and immature defense systems, the developing fetus, infant and child are especially susceptible to environmental toxicants."

After sharing some of the Center's research in this area, she noted that the research demonstrates "the link between fetal and child exposures to phthalates, BPA, and PBDEs, and adverse developmental and neurodevelopment effects."  She suggested that "a preventive approach is clearly needed," and offered the example of the case of lead removal from gasoline as an illustration of the effectiveness of such an approach. She acknowledged that there were still many uncertainties in cause and effect, but suggested that:

"given the widespread exposure to chemicals such as those I have discussed, these uncertainties do not outweigh the need for a preventative approach to children’s health. The public health and economic benefits of prevention are clearly great. Our data and those of many others support a preventative chemical policy to protect our youngest and most susceptible population."

More on the hearing can be found on the subcommittee web site.

Head of Poison Information and Education System Testifies at Toxic Chemicals and Children's Environmental Health Hearing

As noted in my other posts this week, on Tuesday there was a Senate subcommittee hearing on "Toxic Chemicals and Children's Environmental Health" in New Jersey.  In addition to testimony by EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and CNN's Medical Correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta, there was testimony by Dr. Steven Marcus, Executive and Medical Director, New Jersey Poison Information and Education System, Professor, Department of Preventive Medicine and Community Health, Associate Professor of Pediatrics
New Jersey Medical School of The University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey.

Dr. Marcus emphasized the importance of poison control centers around the country.  He noted that "poison centers respond to the needs of the US citizens in every state and territory of the country 24 hrs a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year."  He noted that, nationally, "there are over 4 million exposures reported to poison centers with over 50% of the victims of these exposures occurring in children under 5 years of age."

"To put that into perspective, once every 15 seconds a child in this country is reported to be exposed to some potential toxin."

His take home message at the end of his testimony was that there "are actions which can and should be taken now" that "will help respond to the risk of exposure to chemical substances of all nature, medications, spoiled food, etc."  He listed:

1. Find a way to “shore up” the funding of existing poison centers

2. Supply funds to allow enhanced surveillance activities of poison centers

3. Supply funds to train medical toxicologists outside of the Medicare cap and encourage
pediatricians to seek such training.

More information at the subcommittee web site.

CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta Testifies at "Toxic Chemicals and Children's Environmental Health" Hearing

Continuing with the news of the last two days, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, the highly visible physician and medical correspondent for CNN testified at the Senate subcommittee hearing on "Toxic Chemicals and Children's Environmental Health" in New Jersey on Tuesday. 

Gupta had looked at the potential for reproductive and developmental effects related to chemical exposure in a CNN special program called "Toxic America" first aired several months ago.  In his testimony, Gupta noted that "children are especially vulnerable to toxic chemicals. Children are not simply small adults. For one thing, children have a faster metabolism. They take in – pound for pound --- more air, water and food than adults."  Further, "infants and toddlers also spend a lot of time close to the ground, where dust accumulates. And we know from research this dust can contain toxic chemicals like flame retardants, shed from our televisions and other appliances. Young children can breathe in this dust. As a father, I also know first-hand how little kids like to put their hands in their mouths. That’s another potential route of exposure."

While in the CNN article Gupta acknowledges that "there is no science that demonstrates a conclusive cause-and-effect relationship between chemicals children are born with and particular health problems," he argues that "studies are finding associations between elevated levels of chemicals in a baby's body and their development."  In his testimony he notes that "children are also more susceptible because their immune systems are still developing. Kids are simply not as good at getting rid of toxic chemicals. That means toxic chemicals stay in their bodies longer. Also, their growing bodies are not as good at repairing damage from exposures to toxic chemicals."

And that is the take home message on which Gupta ended his testimony:

Finally, we know our exposure to many chemicals accumulates over time – what’s known as body burden. So what children are exposed to now can build as they age, and their risks of harm from these chemicals could rise with their body burden. So we need to take into account the long-term risks of chemical. After all, children – and the rest of us – are still being exposed to PCBs, which the government calls “probable carcinogens,” and PCBs have been banned for more than 30 years.

More testimony and an archived web cast can be found on the subcommittee web page.

Senate Hearing on Toxic Chemicals and Children's Environmental Health - Tuesday (Oct. 26th)

In a subcommittee event to be held away from Washington DC, the Senate Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics, and Environmental Health will hold a hearing in Newark, New Jersey called "Toxic Chemicals and Children’s Environmental Health."  Headlining the event will be EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, who is returning to her old turf (she was previously head of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection).  

The meeting will be held tomorrow, October 26th, in the Oral Health Pavilion Multi-purpose room at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey in Newark. The hearing starts at 10:30 am EDT.

While Jackson will provide the sole remarks in the first panel, many will recognize the name of Sanjay Gupta, CNN Chief Medical Correspondent and once floated as a possible Surgeon General, who will lead off the second panel.  Also testifying in the second panel will be Lisa Huguenin (a New Jersey mother of child with autism and an immune system disorder), Steven Marcus (Executive and Medical Director of the New Jersey Poison Information and Education System and Professor at the New Jersey Medical School of The University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey), and Frederica Perera (Director of the Columbia Center for Children's Environmental Health and Professor at the Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health).  

The subcommittee chair is New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg, who introduced the Kid Safe Chemical Acts of 2005 and 2008 (neither of which made it out of committee) and the Safe Chemicals Act of 2010 (which is likely also to sit largely untouched for the rest of this legislative term).  


More information and copies of testimony will be available at the subcommittee web site.

GAO Report on Protecting Children from Environmental Threats - Senate Hearing

As reported yesterday, the Senate held a hearing entitled "Hearing on the Government Accountability Office’s Investigation of EPA’s Efforts to Protect Children’s Health." EPW Committee Chair Senator Boxer never quite made it to the meeting, but it was ably chaired by Senator Amy Klobuchar who chairs the new subcommittee on children's health. The focus of the hearing was on a new GAO report requested by Congress, and testimony was heard from representatives from EPA and GAO as well as NIOSH, the Children's Environmental Health Network, and the Science and Environmental Health Network. Full testimony can be found at the hearing site link above.

The full GAO report was also released yesterday and can be found at the hearing site. A PDF can also be found here.

The GAO report concludes that "EPA has developed policies and guidance to consider children, but it has not maintained attention to children through agency strategies and priorities." It notes that while "[i]n 1996, EPA created a national agenda on children’s health, and its 1997 and 2000 strategic plans highlighted children’s health as a key cross-agency program," that early momentum was lost during the previous decade. GAO notes that "EPA has not updated the agenda since 1996, and the focus on children is absent from the 2003, 2006, and September 2009 draft strategic plans."

Furthermore, GAO concludes that "EPA has not fully used the Office of Children’s Health Protection and other child-focused resources. The active involvement of managers from the office and experts from the Children’s Health Protection Advisory Committee has been lacking, as has the involvement of key staff throughout EPA." GAO noted that there seems to be a renewed emphasis under the new administration, but that "[a]lthough EPA now has a new Director of Children’s Health, the office had not had consistent leadership since 2002, hampering its ability to support and facilitate agencywide efforts and elevate matters of importance with senior officials. For example, a previous director established workgroups to bring together officials from the program offices and the children’s health office, but a subsequent acting director eliminated these groups, effectively halting work on a key set of children’s health recommendations. In addition, the regional children’s health coordinators—who provide outreach and coordination for EPA—have no national strategy or dedicated resources. Finally, the advisory committee has provided hundreds of recommendations, but EPA has requested advice on draft regulations only three times in the last decade."

GAO further concludes that despite the critical need for EPA leadership in "protecting children from environmental threats, EPA’s efforts have been hampered by the expiration in 2005 of certain provisions in the executive order. For example, the Task Force on Children’s Environmental Health provided EPA with a forum for interagency leadership on important federal efforts, such as the National Children’s Study. It also provided biennial reports that helped establish federal research priorities."

In short, emphasis on children's health was severely lacking during the last 10 years and while the current administration has taken many steps to reemphasize this issue, more needs to be done.

Based on the questioning yesterday, and Senator Klobuchar's personal interest in children's health (similar comments were also made by Senators Lautenberg and Bill Nelson), it seems clear that the new TSCA reform bill will emphasize the "Kid Safe" component of chemical regulation.