Workshop presentations Introduction

1. Framing a Future Chemicals Policy 27-29th April 2005 Colonnade hotel, Boston, MA, USA Workshop presentations Introduction Dr. A. Michael WarhurstLowell Center for Sustainable Production

2. Aim of workshops • To discuss key aspects of sustainable chemicals management • To focus on solutions, through identification of options for possible future discussion and investigation 0. Introduction

3. Structure of workshops • Each workshop had a background paper, which was presented briefly by the author • The background papers are views of the author, they are not comprehensive reviews of the issue • The papers were intended to start the discussion in the workshops, and pose some key questions • The author was normally the rapporteur • A facilitator ensured that: • All participants were able to contribute to the discussion • The discussion stayed focussed on solutions, and generated options 0. Introduction

4. Outcome of workshops • Workshops were not expected to reach consensus, but it was hoped that they would discuss a number of options • Some options may be mutually exclusive, others might be best done together • Not everyone would support every option • Reporting of the workshops: • Comments will not be attributed to individuals - “Chatham House Rules” • Facilitator, rapporteur and note takers will collaborate to ensure the workshop is reported fairly and accurately • A short summary of the discussion was presented by the rapporteur on Friday afternoon (see following slides) • A workshop summary will be written up after the meeting, and published on the LCSP web site 0. Introduction

5. List of workshops • Promotion of innovation, green chemistry and alternative materials • Defining and obtaining good quality information for decision making • Improving Information Flows – in Supply Chains and Beyond • Integration of US and Global chemical initiatives. • Promotion and development of substitution and alternatives assessment • Integrating improved chemicals management into business processes, including product design • Improving our understanding of substance flows through the economy 0. Introduction

6. Note re slides • The following slides were produced under great time pressure during the conference • They are not a definitive record of the workshops, nor do they necessarily fully represent the views of those in the workshops 0. Introduction

7. Workshop #1: Promotion of Innovation, Green Chemistry and Alternative Materials Rapporteur - Andrea Larson 1. Innovation

8. Option Categories • Primary research • Education • Transparency • Market campaigns 1. Innovation

9. Primary Researchin Green Chemistry • Green Chemistry funding by federal agencies (NSF, NIH, DOE, DOD…) • State level partnerships (like TURI) 1. Innovation

10. Education • Educate the educators • Curriculum development • K-12 • Higher ed • Industry funding 1. Innovation

11. Transparency • Credible 3rd party certification • Labeling for consumers • Alternatives assessment requirements • Better information for manufacturers • Content information for large buyers 1. Innovation

12. Market Campaigns • Retailer focus • Identify leaders and laggards 1. Innovation

13. Information needs for decision-making that protects health and spurs innovation Credible information is critical for companies, workers, government and the public to understand and make better decision and to stimulate innovation in safer chemicals and processes. Rapporteur - Mike Wilson 2. Information needs

14. What kind of information is needed for decision-making, depending on user (firm, government, worker, consumer) • Toxicity, ecotoxicity, fate, physical properties, cumulative and interactive effect, mixtures. • Use, volume, qualitative exposure (occupational, env dispersion etc) • Alternative, green chemistry • Materials flows, life cycle issues 2. Information needs

15. Information produced by whom? • Producer responsible for generating data, distributing through commerce and understanding uses, including exposure. • Key questions: Verifying data produced by manufacturers; introducing opportunities for participatory process; transparency of process; CBI issues; liability concerns. 2. Information needs

16. Information needs and format depends on who the information is intended for. • Producers; • Supply chain: industrial users, formulators; • Retailers; • Government agencies, policymakers; • Workers and their representatives; • Non-governmental organizations; • Individual consumers 2. Information needs

17. What is the minimum amount of information needed for decision-making? • Screening tools necessary and appropriate; • QRA not prerequisite to action; • Screening tools needed for toxicity; • P, B and toxicity issue. 2. Information needs

18. Options • Increase body of information and make it accessible; • Develop more tools for rapid screening; Swedish strategy; • Policy for assuring duty of care; • Policy for assuring distribution of chemical information to wide body of stakeholders. 2. Information needs

19. Options • Combination of regulation, incentives to achieve chemical safety and innovation. • Clearinghouses of public information on alternatives, tech assistance. • Revise TSCA to introduce health and environment into design of chemicals. 2. Information needs

20. Workshop 3. Improving Information Flows – In Supply Chains and Beyond Report-back on workshop outcomes Rapporteur: Richard Denison Facilitator: Liz Harriman 3. Information flow

21. Summary of Discussion • Broad agreement that richer and freer flow of information is needed • Power of info is in its use • Less agreement on what info and for what purpose; whose responsibility • Value chain barriers are real and impede all actors/stakeholders • CBI, liability, competition/secrecy • MSDS insufficient • Inconsistent, poor quality, little/no constituent information • Needed but also other needs: articles, lifecycle, reflect transformations 3. Information flow

22. Key issues discussed • Need to dissect current scope of CBI claims • How much info should be provided by whom? • Responsibility needs to flow down supply chain • Hazards only vs. composition • Public ability to understand not excuse to withhold • Interpretation or appropriate decision framework should not be left to provider only • More than hazard (i.e., risk) info needed for workplace 3. Information flow

23. Options for CBI • Distinguish between CBI, proprietary info in US law • Criteria for when chemical identity can be CBI • Provide data ownership protection while allowing disclosure • Ensure data compensation/sharing • Patents, exclusivity rights • Purchasers reward disclosure in marketplace • Address liability? 3. Information flow

24. Options: How much info should be provided? • Crux of debate: All info available, then distilled for specific vs. Provide info tailored to need/user • Options: • Mfr: Process to identify info needs by sector/product type/user; • could use vol or reg to decide what gets provided • NGO: Require release of full info; range of users decide how to use 3. Information flow

25. Options: How much info should be provided? • Downstream user: • Require GHS data for all substances; govt database • Materials declaration model – other sectors • Labor: Require employer to assess chemical risk to workers 3. Information flow

26. Workshop 4. Integration of US & Global Chemical Initiatives Report-back on workshop outcomes Rapporteur: Mark Rossi 4. Integration

27. Key options discussed • Implement GHS (in the U.S.) • Data Sharing • Confidential Business Information (CBI) • POPs Ratification • High Production Volume (HPV) Chemical Data • Stakeholder Working Group on Information Sharing 4. Integration

28. Implement GHS (in the U.S.) • Harmonize across sectors & agencies • De-link from legislation • Make the business case: • Business to business dialogue • Business – government dialogue • Joint campaign in support of implementation • GHS data are very important to downstream users 4. Integration

29. Data Sharing • Clearinghouse • Where to locate it? Trade associations? • Government role? Facilitate? Require? • Compensation? • E-bay for chemical data – “chem bay” • Share data for (free) w/downsteam users in exchange for upstream sharing of findings • Inter-government data exchange – mechanism is being created (EU & US data portal) – create global data • SAICM? • Government incentives/sanctions for providing data 4. Integration

30. Confidential Business Information (CBI) • Agree on what information should be CBI, what information should never be CBI, & when CBI should be invoked • Need to separate CBI from proprietary data • Need proposal from businesses on how to handle CBI 4. Integration

31. POPs Ratification (in the U.S.) • NGO-Business collaboration on ratifying POPs • Need to address implementation question? How new chemicals are added to the treaty (disagreement • Ratify treaty at state level? 4. Integration

32. High Production Volume (HPV) Data • Mesh HPV data with other data being collected • Need long-term testing data on HPV chemicals • Options / priorities for lower volume chemicals • See Canada / Europe as model on how to do this 4. Integration

33. Stakeholder Working Group • Information Sharing, including POPs, HPV, GHS • NAFTA, North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation to host dialogue 4. Integration

34. Alternatives Assessment and Substitution Report-back on workshop outcomes Beverley Thorpe (Rapp) Sally Edwards, Pam Civie, Cathy Crumbley 5. Substitution

35. Key Themes discussed • Theme 1 • Substitution Planning • Theme 2 • Education • Theme 3 • Government Role • Theme 4 • Institutional Customers and Role of Procurement 5. Substitution

36. Theme 1: Substitution Planning • Elements: • 1 Mandatory/Voluntary • 2 Who? Involve workers, community • 3 Methodology: LCA? Indicators? RA? Inherent hazard as basis? • Advantages: • 1Mandatory: Level Playing field • 2 Prioritise common indicators/criteria used • Problems: • 1Lack of uniform consistent method • 2 different value judgments/who pays 5. Substitution

37. Theme 2: Education • Elements: • 1Labeling • 2 Broader consumer awareness • 3 Training within industry/academia • Advantages: • 1stimulates market (NGO advocate) • 2 Rewards responsible companies • Problems: • 1False Advertising/self promotion/Liability • 2 not individual consumer responsibility 5. Substitution

38. Theme 3: Government role • Elements: • 1 Chemical Plant Security • 2 substitution planning/chemical info/Bans/phase outs • 3 R&D, tax incentives/subsidy elimination • Advantages: • 1 Level playing field for companies • 2 Fills current data gaps • Problems: • 1 No clear transition planning • 2 lack of government commitment 5. Substitution

39. Theme 4: Institutional customers/Procurement • Elements: • 1 Review specifications • 2 Can be ‘biggest’ driver • 3 Where is government responsibility? • Advantages: • 1 Quickly move market • 2 takes onus off individual consumer • Problems: • 1Specs can hinder (eg carpets) • 2 Company Staffing? Time? 5. Substitution

40. Recommendations for follow up • Duplicate this type of conference in Europe and Asia … • Common ground statement from conference (landmark conference!) • Workshops needed for: • Practical Tools - eg, Alternative Assessment • Retailers • Best Practices for: Specific Industry sectors (eg toys) • Advocacy groups, labor, gov’t … 5. Substitution

41. Workshop 6. Integrating Chemicals Management into Business Decisions Report-back on workshop outcomes Rapporteur: Tom Swarr 6. Chemicals Management

42. Who is Responsible? Consumer Education OEM Regulator Government Supplier Formulator Chemical workers community 6. Chemicals Management

43. Summary of Discussion • Information / Education • Regulations / Incentives • Accountability • Lessons from the 90’s P2 Efforts • Roles & Responsibilities across supply chain 6. Chemicals Management

44. Key options discussed • Goals from OEMs • Set the direction w/ measurable targets • Better chemical information • Dual track MSDSs • Incentives / Regulation • Information, rewards, & regulated minimum 6. Chemicals Management

45. Option 1: OEM Goals • Elements: • Identify requirements • Assess impacts • Measurable targets tracked • Advantages: • Prioritization • Market focus • Problems: • Complex supply chain • Public participation 6. Chemicals Management

46. Option 2: Chemical Information • Elements: • Technical data for design/ develop • Food pyramid for general audience • Targeted & harmonized information • Advantages: • Better information = better informed decision- makers • Problems: • Cost, flow through supply chain • Access 6. Chemicals Management

47. Option 3: Incentives • Elements: • 3rd party certified information (labels, required use information, etc.) • Green procurement / funding • Regulated floor • Advantages / Problems: • Finding the balance • Public participation • UL label doesn’t guarantee no fire 6. Chemicals Management

48. Workshop 7. Substance Flow Analysis • Report-back on workshop outcomes Rapporteur: Cheri Peele 7. Substance flows

49. Summary of Discussion • Value of analysis depends on many variables • Which materials? • Who would use information? For what purpose(s)? • Scope of information? • At what cost? To whom? • Need for systematic methodology 7. Substance flows

50. Variable 1: Materials • PBTs • High-value recyclable materials • High-exposure chemicals (body burden) • High-volume and hazardous • Substances of regional concern 7. Substance flows