Federal safety agency would limit worker’s right to know about chemical hazards

A recent proposal by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) would endanger workers by reducing the amount of information on chemical hazards provided to them, according to several public interest groups. OSHA’s proposal is part of its effort to make its Hazard Communication Standard conform to a United Nations system for classifying chemicals. The effort has been criticized by several public interest groups who view portions of it as an unnecessary contraction of workers’ right to know and as contrary to the rhetoric of transparency and movement toward greater disclosure seen elsewhere in the Obama administration.

Considered to be a powerful tool for informing workers about chemical risks and safety measures, the Hazard Communication Standard (HazCom) is referred to as the “Workers’ Right to Know.” OSHA’s HazCom standard requires chemical manufacturers and importers to evaluate chemicals they produce or import and determine if they are hazardous. Manufacturers must provide information on the hazards and safety measures to “downstream” users – employers, employees, and other chemical users – through Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS).

According to the nonprofit government watchdog, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), “OSHA’s plan would be a reversal in the right-to-know approach to chemical handling that would also mislead workers about actual hazards.”

As part of the agency’s effort to conform to the United Nations standard, OSHA has proposed to eliminate a longstanding requirement that chemical manufacturers include certain information on chemical hazards in the MSDS. Specifically, OSHA wants to remove the requirement to include chemicals’ Threshold Limit Values (TLVs), which are quantitative judgments of chemical exposure levels that are hazardous to humans and are developed by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists(ACGIH), an independent, nonprofit scientific research group focusing on workplace safety issues. OSHA has also proposed removing a requirement that chemical manufacturers include in the MSDS cancer hazard evaluations by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Critics likewise view the proposed elimination of the IARC information as detrimental to workers’ right to know.

In place of the TLV requirement, OSHA would require a different set of exposure limits developed by the agency. These OSHA hazard figures, called Permissible Exposure Limits (PELs), have been criticized as being decades out of date, biased by economic rather than scientific analyses, developed with little transparency, and less protective of worker safety. Moreover, there are no PELs developed by OSHA for thousands of chemicals handled by workers.

The proposal to reduce the required information on MSDS was originally proposed by the Bush administration in 2006 with strong industry support.

According to the Center for Progressive Reform, a nonprofit think tank, the proposed HazCom changes are not necessary to conform to the U.N. standard, called the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS). The GHS was designed to be flexible enough to allow authorities to adapt to their own nations’ needs. Moreover, the changes would not meet the requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Act and could be challenged in court as being “arbitrary and capricious.”

In testimony submitted at a public hearing on the issue, the Center for Progressive Reform determined that “the [MSDS] serve as a critical vehicle for conveying hazard information to workers. Accordingly, the protection of workers is best served by including more – not less – information in the [MSDS].”

The proposed changes to the HazCom standard would eliminate certain requirements to provide information to workers and others through the MSDS. However, the MSDS have long been regarded by many as ineffective for informing the public about the hazards of chemicals. MSDS have been criticized for containing incomplete, inaccurate, or contradictory information.

In 2004, the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB), an independent federal agency that investigates major industrial chemical accidents, foundthat deficient MSDS were a cause or contributing factor in 10 of 19 major accidents the board had investigated. The then-head of the CSB, Carolyn Merritt, testified before the Senate that, “Deficiencies in hazard communication and Material Safety Data Sheets are among the common causes of major chemical accidents that result in loss of life, serious injures, and damage to property and the environment.”

OSHA originally planned three public hearings across the country to gather comments on its HazCom proposal. A hearing in California has been cancelled, and a hearing in Pittsburgh, PA, is scheduled for March 31.

Copyright 2010 OMB Watch