States Chemicals Policy Reform: Moving Forward

Ken Zarker, Co-ChairNPPR P2 Policy and Integration Workgroup

Washington State Department of Ecology kzar461@ecy.wa.gov

2007 National Environmental Partnership SummitNew Orleans, Louisiana

May 2007

2

What does chemicals policy reform look like?

3

First Step: A History of the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990

Under Section 6602(b) of the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990, Congress established a national policy that:

Pollution should be prevented or reduced at the source whenever feasible;

Pollution that cannot be prevented should be recycled in an environmentally safe manner whenever feasible;

Pollution that cannot be prevented or recycled should be treated in an environmentally safe manner whenever feasible; and

Disposal or other releases into the environment should be employed only as a last resort and should be conducted in an environmentally safe manner.

Pollution is waste, and waste leads to shortages tomorrow…

Dr. Joseph Ling

4

Why use P2 planning?

• Identifies materials flows and supply chain linkages.

• Reviews production processes and product design – why and how chemicals are being used.

• Creates options for reducing problem chemicals

used either in production process or product design – maintaining desired function.

Source: Lowell Center for Sustainable Production, University of Massachusetts

5

Why use P2 planning?

• Better understand the performance, health safety and environmental trade-offs involved.

• Establishes priorities, performance targets and measuring progress towards more sustainable process and product design.

• Produce environmental results.

Source: Lowell Center for Sustainable Production, University of Massachusetts

6

So, how have things changed?

• Body Burden

• Children’s Health

• Toxics in Products

• Safer Alternatives

• Green Chemistry

• Green Engineering

• Chemicals Policy

7

Why is our concern for kids increasing?

• High rates of developmentally related diseases– Children 6–17 years of age: learning disabilities (11.5%),

ADHD (8.8%), behavioral problems (6.3%) – Preschoolers: speech problems (5.8%), developmental

delay (3.2%)– One in 200 children with autism– 41% of parents had concerns about learning difficulties and

36% about depression or anxiety

• Costs in US estimated at $81.5 - 167 billion/yr• Estimate attributed to environment - $4.6 to 18.4 billion/yr

Ref: Blanchard et al. Pediatrics 2006;117;1202-1212 (National Survey of Children’s Health)Ref: Muir and Zegarac. EHP December 2001.Ref: Landrigan et al. EHP July 2002.

8

The Chemical Big Picture

• 80,000 chemicals on Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) inventory– 60,000 prior to TSCA

• 1,500 new chemicals every year

• EPA established categories to streamline review of new chemicals– Persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT)

is one of 45 categories

9

Today: Emerging Chemicals Policy Issues

• States banning toxic flame retardants

• Chemical by chemical approach

• European Union’s Registration, Authorisation and Evaluation of Chemicals (REACH)

• States Chemicals Policy Framework Development

• Green Chemistry Innovation & Economic Opportunity

10

consi

dere

d c

hem

istr

yNIKE GREEN CHEMISTRY

FILTER CHEMICALS

EVALUATE HAZARDS

PRIORITIZETHE LIST

INNOVATEPRODUCT &

PROCESS

EVALUATE EXPOSURE

Source: Nike, Inc., Used by Permission

consi

dere

d c

hem

istr

y

TRADITIONAL RUBBER ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED RUBBER

Numberof “Red” Chemical

s:

5“Red”

Chemicals by

weight

12%

Numberof “Red” Chemical

s:1

“Red” Chemical

s by weight

1%REDUCED TOXICS96% BY WEIGHT

TO

XIC

S R

ED

UC

TIO

N –

EP

R

Source: Nike, Inc., Used by Permission

consi

dere

d c

hem

istr

y

A relatively small volume for the rubber industryBU

TA BIG (GREEN) STEP IN THE FOOTWEAR

INDUSTRY

By using EP Rubber

Nike eliminate

toxics3,000 metric tons

Source: Nike, Inc., Used by Permission

13

What State efforts are underway?

• MA Toxics Use Reduction Institute / Lowell Center

• Maine Governor’s Executive Order and Task Force on Consumer Products

• UC Berkeley – Green Chemistry Report to CA Legislature

• Michigan Green Chemistry Executive Directive

14

More State & Local Efforts

• New York Pollution Prevention & Green Chemistry Executive Order

• States Chemicals Policy (West Coast, NE States, Great Lakes)

• City of San Francisco

• Multnomah County, Oregon

• California Green Chemistry Initiative

15

Case Study: Washington State’s PBT List

MetalsMetalsMethyl-mercuryMethyl-mercury

Combustion By-Combustion By-ProductsProducts

Polyaromatic Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)Hydrocarbons (PAHs)Chlorinated Dioxins & Chlorinated Dioxins & FuransFuransBrominated Dioxins & Brominated Dioxins & FuransFurans

Metals of ConcernMetals of ConcernCadmiumCadmiumLeadLead

Flame RetardantsFlame RetardantsPolybrominated Di-phenol Polybrominated Di-phenol ethers (PBDEs)ethers (PBDEs)Tetrabromobisphenol ATetrabromobisphenol AHexabromocyclododecanHexabromocyclododecaneePentachlorobenzenePentachlorobenzene

Organic ChemicalsOrganic Chemicals1,2,4,5-1,2,4,5-TetrachlorobenzeneTetrachlorobenzenePerfluorooctane Perfluorooctane Sulfonates (PFOS)Sulfonates (PFOS)HexachlorobenzeneHexachlorobenzeneHexachlorobutadieneHexachlorobutadieneShort-chain Chlorinated Short-chain Chlorinated ParraffinsParraffinsPolychlorinated Polychlorinated NaphthalenesNaphthalenes

Banned PesticidesBanned PesticidesAldrin/DieldrinAldrin/Dieldrin

ChlordaneChlordane

DDT/DDD/DDEDDT/DDD/DDE

Heptachlor EpoxideHeptachlor Epoxide

ToxapheneToxaphene

ChlordeconeChlordecone

EndrinEndrin

MirexMirex

Banned Flame RetardantsBanned Flame RetardantsHexabromobiphenylHexabromobiphenyl

Banned Organic ChemicalsBanned Organic ChemicalsPolychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBsPolychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)

16

Case Study: Washington’s PBT List

• PBT characteristics – Toxicity for humans is defined as: – (i) The chemical (or chemical group) is a carcinogen, a

developmental or reproductive toxicant or a neurotoxicant;

– (ii) The chemical (or chemical group) has a reference dose or equivalent toxicity measure that is less than 0.003 mg/kg/day

• Uses of the chemical in Washington• Releases of the chemical in Washington• Levels of the chemical present in the Washington

environment • Levels of the chemical present in Washington

residents

Relative ranking criteria

17

Case Study: Washington State’s Chemical Action Plans

• Completed: – Mercury (2003)– Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) (2006)

• Proposed:– Lead - 2007– Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) - 2008– Perfluorooctane Sulfonates (PFOS) - 2009

18

Case Study: What is in a Chemical Action Plan?

• Collaboratively developed with Dept. of Health

• Identifies, characterizes and evaluates uses and releases of a specific PBT

• Recommends actions to protect human health or the environment

19

What information is in a CAP?

• Production and Washington-specific uses/releases• Human health and environmental impacts• Evaluation of current management approaches • Identification of policy options

– Reducing use, phase out, managing wastes, minimizing exposures, safer substitutes

– Consistent with existing state and federal law– Consider economic and social impacts

• Implementation actions• Performance measures/milestones

20

What are the Measurable Results?

Source: WA Mercury Chemical Action Plan

Between 2001 and 2006 there is approximately 2,300 pounds per year of mercury no longer being released into the environment

Use of Products Containing

Mercury

Disposal of Products

Containing Mercury

Mining & Manufacturing

Fossil Fuel Combustion

Reduced Hg from Products

Reduced Hg from Fossil Fuel Combustion

Reduced Disposal of Products

Containing Hg

Reduced Hg from Mining &

Manufacturing

2006

Estimated 3,700 lbs/yr released into the environment in WA

2001

Estimated 6,000 lbs/yr released into the environment in WA

Mercury CAPMercury CAP

21

Where can we improve?

• Avoid working backwards – Detection exposure health concern

regulation alternative

• Green chemistry up front• Understanding sources and pathways

• Consumer education

22

What about the Lowell Center

Alternatives Assessment Framework?

• Creating an open source framework for the relatively quick assessment of safer and more socially just alternatives.

• “Open source” means the collaborative development, sharing, and growth of methods, tools, and databases that facilitate decision making.

• “Relatively quick assessment” means that the process results in robust decisions informed by the best available science, while avoiding paralysis by analysis.

23

Lowell Center

Alternatives

Assessment

Framework

Source: Lowell Center for Sustainable Production, University of Massachusetts

24

Chemicals Policy: A Three-Pronged Approach

•Close Data Gaps: Require companies to review & conduct alternatives assessment with the chemicals they use;

•Close Safety Gap: Substitute safer chemicals in products and manufacturing; and,

•Close Technology Gap: Invest in research and assistance for businesses to switch to the safest chemicals.

25

Classify Chemicals for Action

• Classify chemicals in tiers based on hazard of chemical/breakdown products.

• Move beyond PBTs—Carcinogens, Mutagens, Reproductive Toxics, Developmental, ED, vPvB, other toxics of equivalent concern.

• Propel shifts to use of safest chemicals via combination of regulation, incentives, technical assistance.

26

Preferredfully tested / very low or no hazards

Chemical Action Pyramid

Actions

Phase Out

Reduce Use / Substitute

Give Preference

HighlyHazardous

PBT, others

Moderately Hazardous

Use /Continue Improvement

Source: Washington Toxics Coalition, March 2007

27

Substitution Requirements/Assistance

• Requirements for substitution planning— products and industrial processes

• Provide Technical Assistance (TURI model)

• Toxic Chemical Fees as Incentives• Companies will be more competitive

in world market

28

Data

• Further prioritize chemicals through data collection on use, exposure

• Require manufactures to disclose the chemicals used in products and practices (e.g. cosmetics, consumer products, etc..)

• Establish a multi-state clearinghouse to gather data on chemical use in products (e.g. mercury).

29

Green Chemistry• Green chemistry is critical to solution.• Establish and fund green chemistry

programs in institutions and in agencies.• Provide technical assistance to businesses

wanting to improve their practices and products

• Provide preference for cleanest, safest chemicals

• Tax incentives for using safest chemicals, innovative design changes

30

Congress: Green Chemistry Research and Development Act of 2005

H.R. 1215 / S. 1270

• Among other things, provides grants to institutions to revise undergraduate curriculum in chemistry and chemical engineering

• Includes Green Supplier Network Grants

• Partnerships

Pollution Prevention at the molecular level

31

Companies Moving Forward

• Kaiser Permanente: reducing reliance on carcinogens and reproductive toxicants

• Herman Miller: new product design process; zero hazardous waste/emissions by 2020

• Dell: phased out PBDEs, created Chemical Use Policy

32

Moving ahead in the States

• Legislation & Policy– MA Toxic Use Reduction Act (Revised)– WA PBDE Ban– CA Green Chemistry Initiative

• Executive Orders– Maine Governor’s Task Force on Consumer

Products– MI Green Chemistry– NY Pollution Prevention and Green Chemistry

33

Moving ahead in the States

• State Agency Green Procurement • NE States, Great Lakes & West Coast States

Chemicals Policy Development

• Business Technical Assistance– Facility and Chemicals Planning– REACH Workshops– Safer Chemical Alternatives Assessment– NPPR States Collaborative

34

Western States Chemicals Policy Meeting

The objective of the first meeting West Coast States Chemicals Policy Meeting

was to share information and discuss opportunities to collaborate on chemicals policy, legislative initiatives, green chemistry, and PBT reduction

efforts.

California, Oregon and Washington State

35

“Thanks for making Chemicals Policy happen”

Alexander and Ethan

36

Contact Information

Ken Zarker, P2 Section ManagerHazardous Waste and Toxics ReductionWashington State Department of EcologyP.O. Box 47600Olympia, Washington 98501-7600

Ph: 360-407-6724 Em: kzar461@ecy.wa.gov