AU Walker, Joan Hustace

AT Harmony sought on global hazards communications.

CT Modern Paint and Coatings

DP Jul 1, 1997

DB General Reference Center Gold

   NPCA supports 'sorely needed' effort

   

   Harmonization among hazards communications, labels and Material
Safety

   and Data Sheets (MSDS) "is sorely needed," according to a recent

   four-page letter from the National Paint and Coatings Association

   (NPCA) to the State Department's Office of Environmental Policy.

   NPCA's letter was in response to the State request for comments on
its

   report of government activities involving international harmonization

   of chemical safety and health information.

   

   In its letter the NPCA stressed that, before global consistency could

   be attained, harmonization must begin on the domestic level. The

   letter, submitted June 2, was a "consolidation and harmonization" of

   NPCA members' comments, says Skip Edwards, NPCA manager of Safety and

   Health Affairs. Industry respondents are current members of one of
the

   following NPCA committees: Hazardous Materials Transportation

   Compliance, Industrial Hygiene, Product Safety/Stewardship, and
Hazard

   Communication.

   

   A Great Idea

   

   The State Department notice, published April 3 in the Federal

   Register, was filed by the Bureau of Oceans and International

   Environment and Scientific Affairs (OES) on behalf of an interagency

   work group. The group includes the EPA, OSHA, Consumer Product Safety

   Commission, Department of Transportation (DOT), Food and Drug

   Administration, and the Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and

   Inspection Service.

   

   In general, industry respondents feel that improving international

   communication on the subject is "a great idea and they support it,"

   says Edwards. The respondents describe the current global regulatory

   state as "a difficult, if not impossible, compliance nightmare," he

   adds. The letter states that industry importers frequently have to

   "redo Asian or European labels and MSDS to meet U.S. regulations." It

   states that exporters often find it "difficult to obtain the laws and

   regulations of other countries, especially [those] involving chemical

   labeling and or required warning schemes."

   

   The NPCA's letter cited a recent final international harmonization

   rule, developed by DOT's Research and Special Programs Administration

   (RSPA), as "an example of what can and should be done." Patricia

   Klinger, RSPA spokesperson, says the rule, which became final May 6,

   closely follows the United Nations' recommendations for
transportation

   of hazardous materials.

   

   "We did several things with [the new rule] but the bottom line is
that

   it improves the safety of hazardous materials transportation for

   carriers, shippers and emergency response teams," says Klinger. She

   adds that the rule takes a "common sense approach" to materials

   handling. RSPA says the response to the new rule has been "very

   supportive."

   

   Domestic Issue

   

   The NPCA letter states that for international harmonization to work,

   the U.S. must first harmonize its rules and regulations domestically.

   The letter cites as problematic the lack of harmonization between the

   U.S. Hazard Communication Standard and state requirements, especially

   those of New Jersey, California and Pennsylvania as well as

   California's Proposition 65.

   

   "What hope of harmony do we have internationally with such countries

   as Mexico, the Asian Rim, Canada and Europe, if we can't harmonize

   domestically?" Edwards says. "I personally feel this effort is doomed

   to failure unless we can achieve a consistent interagency approach."

   

   In addition to the issues of domestic harmony, the NPCA letter

   highlighted several other concerns. These include:

   

   * Implementation of an international hazardous materials rule in the

   U.S. is estimated to take as long as seven to 10 years;

   

   * When developing appropriate hazard warnings for raw material

   components, industry needs to be able to maintain confidentiality for

   proprietary ingredients;

   

   * Changes to current systems of hazards communication could cost in

   the millions of dollars for some paint companies, with more

   significant changes such as converting to the 16-part MSDS, being
even

   higher.

   

   RELATED ARTICLE: OSHA Approves California's Hazards Communication

   Standard

   

   Subject to certain conditions, OSHA approved California's hazards

   communication standard last month. The key conditions conform with
the

   National Paint and Coatings Association's (NPCA) comments on the

   issue, and should help clarify much of the current ambiguity in

   Proposition 65, says NPCA.

   

   The organization says one condition for approval is that the hazards

   communication standard may not be enforced against out-of-state

   manufacturers. This is because state plans cannot be used to regulate

   out-of-state conduct.

   

   NPCA General Counsel Tom Graves says the federal ruling will

   "virtually eliminate the threat of bounty-hunter extortion suits

   against our out-of-state manufacturers for workplace warnings under

   OSHA law, and helps those operating plants in California to choose

   viable options for state and federal compliance." Other conditions

   are:

   

   * Employers in California can fulfill their obligations under

   Proposition 65 by complying with the federal or the OSHA hazard

   communication standard.

   

   * Cal/OSHA must assure that the California standard continues to

   provide worker protection "at least as effective" as the federal

   standard and remains consistent with the approval conditions.

   

   - J.H.W.

ZZ 

