compromise nears on toxic substances

2
Afterward, if Congress feels wrong de- cisions were made, then it is appropri- ate for Congress to call NSF to ac- count." GAO in its review of MACOS finds many of the same deficiencies noted in the Moudy report and has come up with similar solutions. Its recommen- dations include making the awarding of curriculum development grants more competitive, perhaps through the use of formal requests for proposals, main- tenance of files by NSF to show the reasons for support or nonsupport of a grant request, and ensuring that reasons for publisher selection are valid and documented. GAO also says that NSF should make sure that disclaimer statements are included on all materials to avoid any implication that NSF endorses a project just because it supported its preparation or implementation. GAO still is in the process of investigating other NSF curricula programs, but NSF already has begun implementing many of GAO's recommendations. Both reports are certain to be dis- cussed at NSF's fiscal 1977 authoriza- tion hearings early next year, if not be- fore. And although it is unlikely that Congress will require NSF to get out of the curriculum development business, NSF's implementation activities may be sharply curtailed or even aban- doned. Congress already has deleted all money earmarked for such activities from NSF's fiscal 1976 budget. And the report by the Senate Appropriations Committee on NSF's fiscal 1976 appro- priations bill discourages future NSF implementation activities. The com- mittee says in its report that "the fed- eral government should not be in the business of marketing curricula devel- oped with tax dollars nor in the habit of funding efforts by developers to do the same." Janice R. Long, C&EN Washington Compromise nears on toxic substances Toxic substances control legislation ap- pears to be gaining momentum in Con- gress. Later this week, the Senate Sub- committee on Environment is sched- uled to resume its markup session. And late last week the House Subcommit- tee on Consumer Protection & Finance held markup sessions on its bills, in- cluding H.R. 10318, a compromise bill sponsored principally by Rep. Bob Eck- hardt (D.-Tex.), and apparently cal- culated to parallel more closely the tough Senate version. However, wheth- er all this action will result in Con- gressionally passed legislation by the end of the year is far from clear. In- deed, some key committee staffers ex- pect the issue to spill over into the sec- ond session. In any event, the Eckhardt bill, which is cosponsored by Rep. William DISULFIDES *tert-Butyl Disulfide tert-Dodecyl Disulfide CIRCLE 27 ON READER SERVICE CARD Nov. 17, 1975 C&EN 25 The Performance 'Company / PHILLIPS 66 Petrochemical and Supply Division PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY Bartlesville, Oklahoma 74004 Phone: 806 274-5236 Typical Purity MERCAPTANS (THIOLS) wt. % *Ethyl Mercaptan 99 + *iso-Propyl Mercaptan 98 *n-Propyl Mercaptan 99 + iso-Butyl Mercaptan 98 *n-Butyl Mercaptan 98 sec-Butyl Mercaptan 97 *tert-Butyl Mercaptan 98 *n-Hexyl Mercaptan 96 *n-0ctyl Mercaptan 98 *tert-Octyl Mercaptans 96 tert-Nonyl Mercaptans 97 n-Decyl Mercaptan 95 *n-Dodecyl Mercaptan 92 *tert-Dodecyl Mercaptans 97 *tert-Tetradecyl Mercaptans 94 *tert-Hexadecyl Mercaptans 82 *Mixed Tertiary Mercaptans 94-98 Cyclohexyl Mercaptan 99 + SULFIDES Methyl Sulfide 99 *Ethyl Sulfide 96-99 η-Propyl Sulfide 96 tert-Butyl Sulfide 97 *n-Butyl Sulfide 97 •These Petro-Sulfur Compounds are available in commercial quantities. OTHER PETRO-SULFUR COMPOUNDS: If you don't see what you need above, let us know. We'll be happy to discuss your specific requirements. MISCELLANEOUS Ethylenetrithiocarbonate *Ethylthioethanol *2-Mercaptoethanol POLYSULFIDES tert-Butyl Polysulfide CYCLIC SULFONES 3-Methylsulfolane 3-Methylsulfolene *Sulfolane *Sulfolene PHILLIPS PFTRO-SULFUR COMPOUNDS As a leading supplier of petro-sulfur compounds, Phillips consistently provides the highest quality products while continuing research to meet special needs.

Upload: lammien

Post on 04-Feb-2017

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Compromise nears on toxic substances

Afterward, if Congress feels wrong de­cisions were made, then it is appropri­ate for Congress to call NSF to ac­count."

GAO in its review of MACOS finds many of the same deficiencies noted in the Moudy report and has come up with similar solutions. Its recommen­dations include making the awarding of curriculum development grants more competitive, perhaps through the use of formal requests for proposals, main­tenance of files by NSF to show the reasons for support or nonsupport of a grant request, and ensuring that reasons for publisher selection are valid and documented.

GAO also says that NSF should make sure that disclaimer statements are included on all materials to avoid any implication that NSF endorses a project just because it supported its preparation or implementation. GAO still is in the process of investigating other NSF curricula programs, but NSF already has begun implementing many of GAO's recommendations.

Both reports are certain to be dis­cussed at NSF's fiscal 1977 authoriza­tion hearings early next year, if not be­fore. And although it is unlikely that Congress will require NSF to get out of the curriculum development business, NSF's implementation activities may be sharply curtailed or even aban­doned. Congress already has deleted all money earmarked for such activities from NSF's fiscal 1976 budget. And the report by the Senate Appropriations Committee on NSF's fiscal 1976 appro­priations bill discourages future NSF implementation activities. The com­mittee says in its report that "the fed­eral government should not be in the business of marketing curricula devel­oped with tax dollars nor in the habit of funding efforts by developers to do the same."

Janice R. Long, C&EN Washington

Compromise nears on toxic substances Toxic substances control legislation ap­pears to be gaining momentum in Con­gress. Later this week, the Senate Sub­committee on Environment is sched­uled to resume its markup session. And late last week the House Subcommit­tee on Consumer Protection & Finance held markup sessions on its bills, in­cluding H.R. 10318, a compromise bill sponsored principally by Rep. Bob Eck-hardt (D.-Tex.), and apparently cal­culated to parallel more closely the tough Senate version. However, wheth­er all this action will result in Con-gressionally passed legislation by the end of the year is far from clear. In­deed, some key committee staffers ex­pect the issue to spill over into the sec­ond session.

In any event, the Eckhardt bill, which is cosponsored by Rep. William

DISULFIDES *tert-Butyl Disulfide tert-Dodecyl Disulfide

CIRCLE 27 ON READER SERVICE CARD

Nov. 17, 1975 C&EN 25

The Performance

'Company /

PHILLIPS

66

Petrochemical and Supply Division PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY Bartlesville, Oklahoma 74004 Phone: 806 274-5236

Typical Purity

MERCAPTANS (THIOLS) wt. % *Ethyl Mercaptan 99 + *iso-Propyl Mercaptan 98 *n-Propyl Mercaptan 99 +

iso-Butyl Mercaptan 98 *n-Butyl Mercaptan 98 sec-Butyl Mercaptan 97

*tert-Butyl Mercaptan 98 *n-Hexyl Mercaptan 96 *n-0ctyl Mercaptan 98 *tert-Octyl Mercaptans 96

tert-Nonyl Mercaptans 97 n-Decyl Mercaptan 95

*n-Dodecyl Mercaptan 92 *tert-Dodecyl Mercaptans 97 *tert-Tetradecyl Mercaptans 94 *tert-Hexadecyl Mercaptans 82 *Mixed Tertiary Mercaptans 94-98

Cyclohexyl Mercaptan 99 +

S U L F I D E S Methyl Sulfide 99

*Ethyl Sulfide 96-99 η-Propyl Sulfide 96 tert-Butyl Sulfide 97

*n-Butyl Sulfide 97 •These Petro-Sulfur Compounds are available in commercial quantities.

OTHER P E T R O - S U L F U R C O M P O U N D S : If you don't see what you need above, let us know. We'll be happy to discuss your specific requirements.

M I S C E L L A N E O U S Ethylenetrithiocarbonate

*Ethylthioethanol *2-Mercaptoethanol

POLYSULFIDES tert-Butyl Polysulfide

CYCLIC S U L F O N E S 3-Methylsulfolane 3-Methylsulfolene

*Sulfolane *Sulfolene

PHILLIPS PFTRO-SULFUR

COMPOUNDS As a leading supplier of petro-sulfur compounds, Phillips consistently provides the highest quality products while continuing research to meet special needs.

Page 2: Compromise nears on toxic substances

Vectaire NEW GENERATION OF

LABORATORY FUME HOODS FROM HAMILTON

Hamilton proudly introduces a new and contemporary fume removal system for your laboratory.

• Minimum Energy Consumption.

• Meets more stringent codes and standards.

• Super safe baffle system—cannot cut off exhaust.

• Minimum noise pollution.

rftasrz^iOTL, //v/?{/sr/?/£s TWO RIVERS, WISCONSIN 54241 TELEPHONE 414/793-1121 DIVISION OF AMERICAN HOSPITAL SUPPLY CORPORATION

See Us At The Chem Show - Booth 2 7 2 4

CIRCLE 45 ON READER SERVICE CARD

at the Chem Show... see how to

avoid filtrate fumes

The new FLUID DYNAMICS Backflush-able Filter*. This closed system elimi­nates disposal problems common to plate and frame filter presses.

^Patents Pending

See us at Booth 4208, adjoining our sister company, Filterite, Technetics Division, Brunswick Corporation.

U-OJ DYNAMO

P.O. Box 10, Cedar Knolls, New Jersey 07927 PHONE (201) 539-8100 TELEX 136350

M. Brodhead (D.-Mich.) and Rep. Lionel Van Deerlin (D.-Calif.), repre­sents a significant move on the House side. In the past, the House has veered toward a less stringent version than the Senate's and has made for difficult compromise.

Earlier this year, Eckhardt, Brod­head, and Rep. John Y. McCollister (R.-Neb.) each introduced bills sep­arately on toxic substances control. Brodhead's was the most stringent and McCollister's the least and more to in­dustry's liking. But with H.R. 10318, McCollister was left with practically no manuevering room in markup ses­sions last week.

In many ways, H.R. 10318 is more stringent than the Senate working draft of S. 776. For instance, both ver­sions authorize the Environmental Pro­tection Agency to require the testing of any new or existing chemical if there is reason to believe that the chemical may present an unreasonable risk to health or the environment and that test data are needed to determine whether such risks do or do not exist. But, under H.R. 10318, EPA may re­quire testing solely on the basis that the chemical is or will be produced in substantial quantities, or if it enters or will enter the environment in substan­tial quantities, or if there is or will be substantial human exposure, or if it is closely related to any chemical known to present an unreasonable risk.

Further, the Eckhardt bill does not provide for EPA to make a risk/benefit analysis before deciding that a chemi­cal does present an unreasonable risk, as is provided for in the Senate work­ing draft. And H.R. 10318 establishes a seven-man government advisory com­mittee (consisting of representatives from EPA, Occupational Safety & Health Administration, Council on En­vironmental Quality, National Insti­tute for Occupational Safety & Health, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Cancer In­stitute, and National Science Founda­tion) to prepare a list of chemicals and mixtures that should be given priority consideration for testing. (In contrast, the Senate working draft requires EPA to come up with a list of 300 chemicals for priority testing.)

H.R. 10318 also has adopted the Senate provision that gives EPA the power to make immediately effective orders that would keep a new chemical from reaching the market without any prior rule making or hearing. And it goes beyond the Senate working draft in that it authorizes EPA to regulate manner and method of disposal of a chemical.

Provision for criminal penalties also is more stringent in the House bill. It considers criminal any failure to notify EPA of adverse information concerning a chemical, whereas in the Senate ver­sion, only the willful or intentional suppression is considered to be crimi­nal. D

CIRCLE 40 ON READER SERVICE CARD

26 C&EN Nov. 17, 1975