Testimony of
Assistant Administrator Stephen L. Johnson
Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Before the
Environment and Public Works Committee
United States Senate
May 9, 2002
I.
Introduction
Mr. Chairman and Members of the
Committee, thank you for the invitation to appear before you today. It is my privilege to represent the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and to discuss the Administration’s legislative
proposal to effectively implement three very important international
environmental agreements: The Stockholm
Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), the Rotterdam Convention on
the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and
Pesticides in International Trade (PIC) and the Protocol on Persistent Organic
Pollutants negotiated under the UN Economic Commission for Europe’s Convention
on Long Range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP POPs Protocol). This afternoon,
I respectfully ask for your help to expeditiously approve the Administration’s
legislative proposal so that the United States may be able to quickly and
effectively ratify and implement these important environmental agreements.
The Bush Administration is committed
to working closely with all members of this Committee and the U.S. Senate to
ensure quick enactment of the implementing legislation and subsequent
ratification of the agreements. We want
to work with you to craft legislation that tracks the provisions of these
agreements and ensures that the United States retains its current position as
the international leader in chemical environmental safety.
I am pleased to have the opportunity
to update the Committee on EPA’s domestic and international activities to
effectively manage these pesticides and chemicals, our intentions with respect
to the listing of additional chemicals
on the POPs agreements and to explain specific provisions of the Administration’s
draft legislative proposal.
The Bush Administration is firmly
committed to ratification of both the global POPs Convention, the PIC
Convention and the regional LRTAP POPs Protocol.
Here in the United States, we have
already taken extensive steps to address risks posed by the substances covered
by the global POPs Convention and the LRTAP POPs Protocol. Stand-alone action by any one country is not
enough. These chemicals continue to
pose real health risks to U.S. citizens and to people around the world because
they are used and released in other countries and travel long distances from
their source. In the United States,
these agreements are of particular importance for the people and environment of
Alaska, which are impacted by POPs transported by air and water from outside
the State. This is particularly true
for Alaskan Natives, who rely heavily on traditional diets comprised of fish
and wildlife. By joining with the rest
of the world to phase out or reduce these toxic pollutants, we protect the
health and the environment, not only of our fellow Americans, but of all those
who share our planet.
II. U.S.’ Role as an International Leader
At EPA, we take the threats posed by
these pesticides and chemicals to our environment and public health very
seriously. The U.S. was the first
country to begin a thorough scientific reassessment/re-registration
program for pesticides and, I believe,
is still the only nation that is looking at the cumulative risks posed
by pesticides. Other countries look to
the United States to provide strong leadership in the area of chemical safety. EPA is internationally recognized for
its sound scientific risk assessments
and regulatory decision making. Our
actions are respected and often replicated in other countries across the globe.
EPA continues to take measures that
promote the objectives of the POPs Convention.
As you know, the Convention contains obligations related to providing
technical and financial assistance to developing countries and countries with
economies in transition to help them comply with POPs Convention
obligations. The U.S is committed to
providing financial and technical assistance to assist developing countries in
ratifying the Convention and meeting their
obligations.
III.
The Bush
Administration’s Legislative Proposal to Implement POPs, PIC and LRTAP
The Administration’s legislative
proposal is a culmination of an interagency process that provides targeted
changes to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) in order to track the provisions of
these three agreements. Because these
agreements are largely consistent with existing U.S. law, only narrowly
targeted adjustments to FIFRA and TSCA are necessary for the U.S. to fully
implement our obligations under them.
For the currently listed
intentionally produced global and LRTAP POPs chemicals, the legislation contains language to prohibit
any production, use, processing, distribution in commerce and disposal
operations that may be inconsistent with treaty obligations. It also contains provisions for specific exemptions
from the prohibitions such as those needed for research purposes, consistent
with the agreements.
The Administration’s legislative
language directly tracks obligations in the PIC Convention relating to notice
of control action, export notification, export controls and labeling. With these provisions, the U.S. will be able
to effectively and expeditiously implement this important Convention.
The Bush Administration is fully
committed to the listing of additional chemicals to the global POPS and
regional LRTAP POPs agreements. In
fact, that’s why the Administration’s legislative draft contains information
collection provisions that will ensure that the U.S. is as informed as possible
of the risks, benefits, production, uses and other pertinent factors concerning
candidate chemicals when it is negotiating amendments to add future
chemicals.
The Administration believes the
processes set forth in Article 8 of the POPs Convention and the LRTAP Executive
Body Decision 1998/2 for identifying candidates for listing chemicals are
sufficiently rigorous and science based and are fully supported by this
Administration. We are confident that
they will identify strong candidates for listing based on a scientific risk
assessment. However, the parties must
still work through the details of a decision process for evaluating cost and
other information for listing additional substances under POPs. The Administration is firmly committed to
maintaining the high degree of analytical and scientific rigor that has led to
the international recognition for its sound scientific risk assessments and
regulatory decision making. At this
time, we do not have enough experience with how, after a decision that a
chemical meets certain scientific criteria
for listing, the Conference of the Parties (COP) of the global POPs
Convention or the Executive Body of the LRTAP POPs Protocol will weigh and
balance risk assessment, socioeconomic and other factors (listed in Annex F of
the global POPs Convention and in Executive Decision 1998/2 for the LRTAP POPs
Protocol) when making final listing decisions and deciding on appropriate
control measures for the chemical. Both
Agreements explicitly contemplate bans and restrictions, and possible
exemptions, as types of risk management outcomes, with chemical specific
socioeconomic factors being relevant considerations. Since no chemical has been through the listing process, however,
it is unclear how the COP/Executive Body will weigh these factors and arrive at
appropriate control measures.
Recognizing that a provision to
address the listing of additional chemicals is not required to bring the U.S.
into compliance upon entry into force of these agreements, the Administration
determined that it would be best to consider these risk management issues in
the context of the detailed POPs listing process. We believe the experience gained at the negotiating table when
considering additional chemicals will be of great value in conducting the
necessary analyses for EPA action. Such
valuable information, combined with our experience in implementing established
domestic regulatory standards under FIFRA and TSCA will help ensure that EPA’s
decisions regarding newly listed POPs result in the most appropriate and
balanced risk management decisions.
The Administration would also like
to recognize Chairman Jeffords and Senator Smith for their significant efforts
to support the global POPs Convention and LRTAP POPs Protocol. We are in the process of reviewing the
Chairman’s implementing legislation, but have not completed our analysis of all
of the changes proposed by the bill.
Thus, at this time, we have not developed a formal position on S. 2118. However, Administrator Whitman and I are
committed to working with Senator Jeffords, Senator Smith, Members of the
Committee and all Members of Congress to ensure expeditious enactment of the
best legislation possible to implement the POPs, PIC and LRTAP agreements.
IV.
A Call
for Swift Ratification
The Administration is seeking swift
ratification of these Agreements and, with your support, we will retain our
current position as a very active
player in their implementation. We
believe that it is especially important to be at the table as a party when
crucial early implementation decisions are being made and when parties,
including the U.S. submit proposals to add new chemicals to the global POPs and
LRTAP POPs Protocol’s control annexes.
As you may know, the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) intends
to hold a forum at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg
in August to encourage countries to deposit their instruments of ratification
for the POPs Convention with UNEP at the Summit. As a result, the Stockholm Convention may come into force soon
and it is important that the U.S. be a party at that time so that the U.S. can
play a strong role from the outset of the Convention. Furthermore, the United States would like to demonstrate
its ongoing commitment to the goals of this important treaty and by our example
encourage other countries to ratify the Convention.
V.
Ratification
is a U.S. Interest
The Administration is very proud of
the U.S.’s leadership role on these very important environmental treaties. I am especially proud of the POPs treaty
because it provides a perfect example of how industry, business and
environmental interests have worked together to resolve serious environmental
issues. These three agreements illustrate how much can be accomplished in support
of common environmental goals. Upon
ratification, EPA will continue to work with various industry and environmental
organizations on implementation of the Convention. Together with our domestic stakeholders and international organizations, we will support
the growth of the capacity of developing countries to meet the imperative of
the sound management of chemicals.
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss these international environmental agreements this afternoon. Again, I want to thank you for your support and leadership and assure you that President Bush, Administrator Whitman and I are looking forward to working with the Committee to ratify these important agreements and finalize the implementing legislation. I will be pleased to answer any questions.