155 



has stemmed from sources that are small and diffuse and difficult to control under 

 existing regulations. 



A different approach is to set goals for reducing the use of toxic chemicals overall. 

 Under this approach, legislation could establish national goals for reductions in the 

 use of toxic chemicals and provide EPA with various tools, such as pollution taxes 

 and other economic incentives, to achieve these goals. In our February 1993 report, 

 we concluded that, because of their inherently greater flexibility, market-based in- 

 centives can be both a less costly and more effective means of controlling pollution. 



Establishing longer-term goals for overall reductions in the use of toxic chemicals 

 could be a useful supplement to TSCA's efforts to review individual chemicals to 

 identify and control the more serious health and environmental risks. These goals 

 could be established in TSCA if the act were revised to provide EPA with the types 

 of tools it would need to achieve these goals. 



In conclusion, TSCA has not played a major role in EPA's efforts to protect human 

 health and the environment from the harmful effects of toxic chemicals. Although 

 the act contains some unique chemical information-gathering and control authori- 

 ties, these authorities have proven to be difficult to use. On the basis of our ongoing 

 work, we have discussed our preliminary observations on a niunber of options for 

 changes in the authorities that could strengthen the act and its role in reducing the 

 risks associated with toxic chemicals. Details on such options will be provided to the 

 Subcommittee in our report, which we plan to issue in September 1994. However, 

 other approaches, such as national goals for reducing the use of toxic chemicals, 

 may be needed to supplement TSCA, if the Congress anticipates a substantial re- 

 duction in the amount of toxics that enter the environment. Mr. Chairman, we 

 would be happy to respond to any questions that you or other Members of the Sub- 

 committee may have. 



Statement of Robert L. Hagerman, Dow Chemical Company 



Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Subcommittee, I am Robert 

 Hagerman of the Dow Chemical Company, Midland, MI ("Dow"). I have been en- 

 gaged in addressing issues related to the Toxic Substances Control Act since its in- 

 ception in 1976 and have been responsible for planning and supporting Dow's efforts 

 to comply with the Act for the same time period. I appreciate the opportunity to 

 talk to you today about Dow's perspectives on TSCA. As a memufacturer of diverse 

 chemicals and chemical intermediates, Dow has had substantial experience in meet- 

 ing the many requirements of TSCA. 



As a foundation for commenting on the issues in which the Subcommittee has ex- 

 pressed an interest, I would like briefly to share our perspective of TSCA. We see 

 TSCA as a statute fundamentally designed to supplement and support the other en- 

 vironmental or health-related statutes which are generally focused on a specific me- 

 dium, and generally lack the comprehensive authority found in TSCA to acquire in- 

 formation almost always needed for making sound regulatory decisions. In support 

 of other statutes lacking comparable authority, TSCA may be used, for example, to 

 gather information or to generate test data needed to establish priorities for action 

 under the other statute or to provide the scientific or economic bases for such action. 

 Likewise, TSCA can supplement other statutes by using its information gathering 

 or generation authority to identify possible concerns and refer them to the agency 

 or office with primary authority to mitigate risk if needed or by identifying and reg- 

 ulating unreasonable risks which sister agencies or offices may lack authority to ad- 

 dress, for example, review of new chemicals before manufacture regardless of the 

 "medium" of possible concern. 



Dow believes, and we think that most of the U.S. chemical industry would agree, 

 that while there are areas of TSCA that might benefit from legislative clarification, 

 its problems are largely amenable to administrative "fixes." The Subcommittee 

 heard testimony at its May hearing that TSCA contained many features that were, 

 in 1976, new and unique approaches to evaluation and control of risks from chemi- 

 cals. As a consequence, both the regulators and the regulated community had to em- 

 bark on a substantial learning program. The result was a paucity of regulatory ac- 

 tions under the existing chemical authorities of the Act for several years. Beginning 



