Senate Committee Holds Hearing on 6PPD
The Senate Subcommittee on Chemical Safety, Waste Management, Environmental Justice, and Regulatory Oversight held a hearing on July 31 to examine the environmental impacts of the chemical 6PPD, which is found in automobile tires.
Chair Jeff Merkley (D–OR)’s opening statement summarized what was currently known about 6PPD. The chemical is used as an additive in tires to increase durability and reduce the risk of dry rot, improving the tire’s lifespan. When tire material is worn into dust on roadways, 6PPD in the dust may react with ozone and form 6PPD-quinone (6PPD-Q), a chemical that is highly toxic to marine life. 6PPD-Q dust is easily washed into rivers and streams, posing a unique threat to aquatic species, particularly Coho salmon, which die hours after exposure. Merkely called this pollution “a disaster for our environment, our economy, and our tribes,” and stated that it was important to learn more about this issue and develop an alternative chemical for tire manufacturing.
Ranking Member Markwayne Mullin (R-OK)’s opening statement acknowledged the environmental risks but also highlighted benefits of 6PPD: Since 6PPD protects tires from cracking and blowouts, it has kept cars safer and reduced automotive crashes. Senator Mullin admitted that there were no current alternatives for 6PPD and criticized the EPA for its consistent failure to meet the deadlines set by the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). For a viable alternative to be approved in a timely manner, Senator Mullin said, the EPA must streamline the chemical testing and approval process. He also argued that it was important to understand both “the science, and the cost to consumers.”
There was a panel of three witnesses: Katrina Lassiter, Program Manager at the Hazardous Waste and Toxics Reduction Program of the Washington State department of Ecology, Tracy Norberg, Executive Vice President and General Counsel of the U.S. Tire Manufacturers Association, and David Fischer, Counsel at Keller and Heckman LLP, who frequently works with clients on issues relating to TSCA.
Ms. Lassiter began by explaining that researchers first discovered 6PPD-Q in 2020 after years of searching for the cause of Coho salmon die-offs in the Pacific Northwest. 6PPD-Q, Ms. Lassiter said, was “one of the most toxic chemicals to aquatic life that has ever been identified.” When asked by Senator Merkley to explain the specifics of how 6PPD-Q kills fish, Lassiter said that researchers were not yet certain of the specific mechanism but that it tends to kill Coho salmon returning from the ocean before they spawn. Based on her department’s research, the chemical can cause near-instant mortality to Coho salmon but also impacts other species including rainbow trout. Ms. Lassiter had two main suggestions for Congress: Requiring nationwide transport projects to include stormwater control infrastructure to reduce 6PPD-Q in the environment, and an aggressive effort to search for new, safer chemical alternatives.
Ms. Norberg emphasized the ubiquity of 6PPD in the United States, pointing out that the chemical is found in every tire in the U.S. and, without it, tires would last about one-third as long as they do today. She said, “our industry has embraced the challenge of finding potential alternatives,” and explained the current progress of USTMA-led research to identify replacements: out of over 60 candidates, seven chemicals have passed the first level of review. Ms. Norberg recommended that Congress consider bioretention strategies for stormwater, rubberized pavements to reduce tire wear, street sweeping in urban areas, and increased enforcement of tire pressure requirements.
Mr. Fischer elaborated on the EPA’s timespan for evaluating new chemicals under the TSCA, saying that the average time for review and determination was 1 ½ years, as opposed to 90-180 days as dictated by the statute. When asked by Senator Mullin how he would improve the EPA’s timeline, Mr. Fischer suggested that the EPA take a “more reasonable approach” regarding insufficient data. “If they don’t have data, the defaults should be reasonable…right now, it is the worst-case scenario, which is unrealistic,” he said. He also recommended a more collaborative exchange between the submitter and EPA staff, as opposed to the current system which he called a “black box” that frustrates the submitter and prolongs the review process.
Reported by NEMWI Intern Evan Kaye, Dartmouth College
|