146 



dence standard. In light of this, why should EPA defer to OSHA to set standards 

 for exposure to chemicals in the work place? 



4. At our May hearing, Warren Muir suggested the possibility of having a kind 

 of general duty clause in TSCA that would place upon chemical manufacturers and 

 processors the enforceable duty to use chemicals appropriately. The OSH Act has 

 a general duty clause that requires employers to provide a safe workplace. Based 

 on your experience with OSHA what would you think of such a general duty clause 

 in TSCA? 



5. What is the most signiJBcant limitation on OSHA's ability to use TSCA data? 



(a) What can be done to change that? 



6. From your perspective, what is the most significant chemical threat in the 

 workplace and what is being done about it? 



7. OSHA has a representative on the InteragencyTesting Committee, the ITC. The 

 ITC was intended to provide EPA with priorities for testing. However, GAO and oth- 

 ers have criticized ITC's ability to fill this role, since the process of designating 

 chemicals for EPA to test is cumbersome and does not allow EPA to set its own 

 agenda. Do you think that there is another mechanism that could provide clearer 

 direction for testing priorities? 



(a) Should developing such a list be left to EPA? 



(b) Could there be a way other than through the ITC for federal agencies to 

 advise EPA on the chemicals that should be on a testing list? 



8. Several witnesses at the Subcommittee's first hearing emphasized that a major 

 difficulty in determining the need for testing and issuing testing rules is the lack 

 of exposure data. Do you agree that this is a problem and, if so, what can we do 

 to remedy this? 



(a) Why isn't section 8 sufficient for EPA to get this type of information from 

 manufacturers and processors? 



(b) Should the statute itself require submission of certain exposure data when 

 a chemical is recommended or listed for testing? 



9. Under section 9 as it has been interpreted, if EPA determines that a chemical 

 presents an unreasonable risk and the risk can be prevented or sufficiently reduced 

 under another law, EPA has to refer the chemical to the agency that administers 

 that other law. The idea seems to have been to avoid unnecessary duplication. But 

 at our last hearing, GAO testified that this "gap filling" aspect of TSCA has been 

 a hindrance to action. Clearly, the law should encourage federal coordination. But 

 what direction should the statute provide so that the roles of EPA, OSHA, and other 

 agencies are clear and we don't have either duplicate regulatory actions or hazards 

 that are ignored and fall into a regulatory black hole? 



(a) Should the statute recognize the ONE Committee or establish similar high 

 level interagency coordinating groups? 



[NOTE: Responses to the above questions were not received by the date of publi- 

 cation, October 31, 1994.] 



Statement of Linda Rosenstock, Director, National Institute for 

 Occupational Safety and Health 



Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Dr. Linda Rosenstock, Di- 

 rector of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) I of the 

 Centers for Disease Control and Prevent ion (CDC) I welcome this opportunity to 

 comment on the role NIOSH plays in implementing the Toxic Substances Control 

 Act and offer some suggestions on how data obtained under the Act could more ef- 

 fectively be used to increase worker health and safety. 



NIOSH supports the principle of pollution prevention. Our mandate under the Oc- 

 cupational Safety and Health Act is to conduct research on innovative methods, 

 techniques, and approaches for preventing occupational safety and health problems, 

 including those created by new technology. Based on this research, we develop rec- 

 ommended standards and the criteria needed by the Occupational Safety and 

 Health Administration (OSHA) and the Mine Safety and Health Administration 

 (MSHA) for standards promulgation. We are also required to conduct informational 



