Global Policy Forum

If the U.S. is to participate at the first meeting for an historic international treaty to ban or severely restrict a dozen of the world's most hazardous chemicals, Congress must pass legislation enabling it to do so within the next several weeks. But intervention from the Bush Administration has so far turned one of two laws that must be amended into an unnecessarily "cumbersome" piece of legislation, while keeping draft legislation for a second law so closely guarded that environmental groups don't even know what's in it.[1]

The Senate is unlikely to vote on its "advise and consent" for ratification of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) -- which goes into effect May 17 -- until Congress amends these two laws, said Clifton Curtis, director of the World Wildlife Fund's (WWF) Global Toxics Program. Curtis told BushGreenwatch.org that Congress must amend the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) as well as the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), to pave the way for participation in the treaty.

According to a WWF backgrounder on the POPs treaty, both environmental groups and chemical industry representatives were invited to help draft legislation amending TSCA. But intervention by the White House Office of Management and Budget resulted in changes that would "risk shackling the EPA with unnecessary and cumbersome" requirements that "would make it extremely difficult for the U.S. to take effective action after a new POP is added to the treaty," according to WWF.[2] The POPs treaty calls for elimination or severe restriction of a dozen of the world's most persistent organic pollutants -- that is, chemicals that do not easily break down in the environment, are extremely toxic, and accumulate in the body fat of people and animals. POPs can also travel great distances through the air and water and are passed from mother to fetus. They are highly dangerous even at low levels of exposure, causing nervous system damage, immune system diseases, reproductive and developmental disorders and cancer.[3]

At issue is language in the TSCA legislation that would make it more difficult to regulate chemicals added to the POPs treaty in future years. Curtis said the additional language is overkill, especially since the treaty already includes a provision that allows parties to be bound only if they "opt in" to restrictions on new chemicals as they are added to the list, rather than opting out, as is the standard for most international agreements. The second piece of legislation, amending FIRFA, is being drafted in the House Agriculture Committee. "Although chemical companies are intimately involved in this process, no drafts have been shared with the NGO community," according to the WWF backgrounder. "We're concerned that what the Administration may be proposing will make it more difficult for the legislation to be enacted," Curtis said.

If there is too much opposition to the proposed amendments and they fail to pass, it could jeopardize the Senate's ability to ratify the treaty in time for the U.S. to be on board at the first conference of parties early next year. "We'd very much like to see the U.S. have a seat at the table, but demanding controversial, unnecessary measures puts that objective in serious jeopardy," said Curtis.

SOURCES:
[1] WWF backgrounder, "Stockholm POPs Convention: Overview and Status of U.S. Ratification and Implementing Legislation."
[2] Ibid.
[3] WWF Press Release, Feb. 18, 2004.