Legislature(2011 - 2012)BUTROVICH 205
02/21/2011 01:30 PM Senate HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB27 | |
| Presentation by Akeela Inc. | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 27 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
SB 27-FLAME RETARDANTS AND TOXIC CHEMICALS
1:31:49 PM
CHAIR DAVIS announced the first order of business would be SB
27.
SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI, sponsor of SB 27, said the most
important role of government is to protect our children and
families. He said that SB 27 was an opportunity to do that. It
would phase out the use of flame retardants (PBDEs) which are
known to cause numerous health problems. These chemicals are
found in higher concentrations here in Alaska because they
concentrate in the soluble fats of subsistence animals. Also,
the problem is particularly bad in Alaska because people spend
the winter indoors in unventilated spaces. Most people don't
realize that contact with mattresses, children's pajamas, and
household dust is exposing them to PBDEs. This is an opportunity
to take action to protect the people of the state. Other states
have done this.
CHAIR DAVIS noted there is a committee substitute (CS) for the
committee to consider.
1:38:04 PM
SENATOR EGAN moved to adopt CSSB 27( ), labeled 27-LS0300\M, as
the working document of the committee. Chair Davis objected for
discussion purposes.
KARLA HART, staff to Senator Wielechowski, said she would
introduce SB 27 by reading a speech delivered to the
Commonwealth Club of San Francisco by Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa Jackson in September 2009:
A child born in America today will grow up exposed to
more chemicals than a child from any other generation
in history. A 2005 study found 287 different chemicals
in the cord blood of ten newborn babies. They were
found in children in their most vulnerable stage. Our
kids are getting steady infusions of industrial
chemicals before we even give them solid food. As more
and more chemicals are found in our bodies and the
environment, the public is understandably anxious and
confused. Many are turning to government for assurance
that chemicals have been assessed using the best
available science and that unacceptable risks haven't
been ignored. Right now we are failing to get this job
done.
Our oversight of the 21st century chemical industry is
based on the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act. It was
an important step forward at the time, but over the
years it has been proven an inadequate tool for
providing a protection against chemical risks that the
public rightly expects. Manufacturers of existing
chemicals aren't required to develop the data on
toxicity and exposure needed to assess potential risks
and demonstrate to EPA that chemicals meet risk-based
safety standards. On new chemicals, companies have no
legal obligation to develop new information, only to
supply data that may already exist. As with existing
chemicals, the burden of proof falls on EPA.
Manufacturers aren't required to show that sufficient
data exists to fully assess a chemical's risks.
If EPA has adequate data and wants to protect the
public against known risks, the law creates obstacles
to quick and effective action. Since 1976, EPA has
issued regulations to control only five existing
chemicals determined to present an unreasonable risk;
five from a total universe of almost 80,000 existing
chemicals. In 1989, after years of study, EPA issued
rules phasing out most uses of asbestos, an
exhaustively studied substance that has taken an
enormous toll on the health of Americans. Yet, a court
overturned EPA's rules because it had failed to clear
the many hurdles for action under the 1976 Toxic
Substances Control Act. Today, advances in toxicology
and analytical chemistry are revealing new pathways of
exposure. There are subtle and troubling effects of
chemicals on hormone systems, human reproduction,
intellectual development and cognition. Every few
weeks we read about new potential threats. Many states
have stepped in to address these threats because they
see inaction at the national level.
MS. HART then addressed the changes in the proposed CS. On page
2, line 6, the original version created a loophole by
specifically mentioning brominated PBDEs. This change allows the
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) to look at any
fire retardant, not just specific ones. On page 4, line 2, a
section was deleted under the high volume challenge program.
This was done to allow DEC to use whatever data EPA has. The
change on page 5, lines 13 - 15, made the definition of
bioaccumulative more scientifically accurate.
CHAIR DAVIS asked for clarification.
MS. HART answered that on page 5, lines 13-15, the original
definition for bioaccumulative was not scientifically correct.
This new language explains that bioaccumulative means an animal
has a toxicity greater than the environment in which it lives.
The change on page 5 lines 16 - 17 addresses the definition of
persistence to acknowledge that all toxins transform or break
down in the environment over time, and that some chemicals
degrade into even more toxic forms.
CHAIR DAVIS asked if she would go through the sectional
analysis.
MS. HART stated that she would highlight the main points of the
sectional analysis provided by legislative legal services.
Section 1 bans three types of PBDEs, and provides DEC with the
ability to ban other fire retardants if they are deemed
dangerous and acceptable alternatives exist. It also provides
exemptions to address specific concerns relating to
transportation and industrial concerns. This section also
provides enforcement by requiring manufacturers and importers of
goods to provide information showing that their products are
safe. It directs the state to review risks and possible
alternatives to brominated fire retardants, and to develop a
list of persistent bioaccumulative toxins that are used in
products used by the public.
1:43:04 PM
MS. HART explained this section also allows the state to
participate in an interstate clearinghouse on toxins to pool
information and resources. Sections 2 and 5 allow the DEC to
begin adopting regulations immediately. Section 3 directs that
the first list of toxins be established by February 1, 2014.
Section 4 is revisor notes, and section 6 adds an overall
effective date of January 1, 2013.
She noted that SB 27 follows model legislation that has been
enacted in other states. There is information from the National
Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) in the material
distributed to committee members. The science exists to
demonstrate the danger of these toxins. Alternatives to these
dangerous chemicals do exist. The Washington state fire marshal
has approved these alternatives as providing acceptable fire
protection. Firefighters' organizations across the country
support this legislation because toxic flame retardants present
additional risks to them.
1:45:58 PM
SENATOR DYSON said he believes EPA is phasing out these toxins.
MS. HART said they are taking some action within their ability
to take action. The EPA has a draft plan to address PBDEs, but
in the best case scenario there might be action in nine months
and it is based on voluntary compliance by the manufacturers.
Also, it does not address importation of products. Because there
is no ability to address imports, the EPA feels it can't protect
the public.
JEFFERSON WOOD, Seward, testifying on his own behalf, testified
against SB 27. He said that every day we are exposed to
chemicals. The beneficial effects of these chemicals are greater
than the potential side effects. PBDEs may be damaging, but we
don't really have conclusive evidence, so this bill might take
action with no basis in fact. Fire has an effect. The bill
contains no specifics regarding alternatives. In conclusion, he
feels that SB 27 does not look out for the health and welfare of
Alaskans.
SENATOR DYSON noted that all testifiers should disclose if they
have any financial interest in SB 27.
MR. WOOD responded that he was not financially invested at all.
DR. TED SCHETTLER, Science Director, Science & Environmental
Health Network, Anchorage, testified in support of SB 27. He
said he is a physician with a degree in public health and
training in toxicology, and has no financial interest in the
bill. Dr. Schettler explained that PBDEs are present in food,
wildlife, human blood, human milk, placentas, and fat tissue.
Deca BDE has ten bromine atoms on the molecule; other flame
retardants from the same family have fewer. A number of states
have banned these chemicals from commerce because of health
concerns. People are exposed to these chemicals through
contaminated food, house dust inhalation, and possibly skin
absorption. These chemicals have adverse effects on the liver,
kidneys, and reproductive systems in animal studies. Deca is
classified by the EPA as a possible carcinogen.
Most human concerns focus on the effects of PBDEs on the
developing brain, since these effects occur at far lower levels
of exposure. Octa, penta and deca BDEs cause persistent
hyperactivity after administration of a single, relatively low
dose. Normal thyroid hormone levels and function are disrupted.
In 2010 the first large study of the impacts of PBDEs on human
brain development was published in the scientific literature.
The scientists measured PBDE levels in maternal blood and
umbilical cord blood of several hundred participants at the time
of birth, and followed the neurological development of the
children for six years. For every measure of psychomotor skills,
attention, learning, and memory, the children who were most
highly exposed to PBDEs performed worse than the children who
were least exposed. Many of these differences were large enough
to achieve strong statistical significance.
1:56:15 PM
DR. SCHETTLER emphasized it is important that deca PBDEs be
removed from commerce as well as penta and octa. He concluded by
saying that human exposure to PBDEs has been rapidly increasing.
As long as we continue to use them in products, we will add to
the environmental burden and insure ongoing exposure in people
and wildlife. We now know that these chemicals interfere with
normal human brain development. Safer alternatives are
available.
CHRIS HALL, Arc of Anchorage, testified in support of SB 27. He
said the Arc serves people with developmental disabilities and
mental health issues. Learning and developmental disabilities
influence the quality of life for affected children and their
families, and impose a heavy financial burden on the state
through required special education, increased health care costs,
and loss of time at work for parents. Scientific evidence has
demonstrated that some chemicals, including deca BDE, can cause
learning and developmental disorders. He said we must not expose
our children to toxins that we know or suspect can harm their
developing brains and bodies. We know safe alternatives exist.
Developing children are more susceptible to toxic exposure than
adults. He also noted that PBDE residues have been found
consistently in tissue samples of mothers and infants, as well
as breast milk. This trend has been found to occur around the
globe, and the highest levels are in Yupik women from the Yukon-
Kuskokwim Delta.
1:59:38 PM
GREG PATTERSON, retired volunteer firefighter, Petersburg,
testified on his own behalf in opposition to SB 27. He said that
after reading the Center for Disease Control report, he believes
that these studies are inconclusive. There is still no
definitive answer on these chemicals. He asked the committee to
make sure that what they are doing will not increase the number
of burned children. If we ban these chemicals, let's do it
correctly and make certain that we have something to replace
them with.
2:02:10 PM
PETER THARING, Anchorage, testifying on his own behalf,
testified in opposition to SB 27. From his reading and prepared
statements, he feels that studies are inconclusive, but he knows
from personal experience that fire retardants work. He urged the
committee to be judicious, and to make sure we have solid
alternatives.
PETER BRIGHAM, a member of the burn injury community, testified
on his own behalf in support of SB 27. He said he has been
active for 35 years in the burn injury community, including as a
member of various boards. This is a difficult issue because
anyone who treats severely burned patients would be inclined to
support the use of fire retardant chemicals. He first became
aware four or five years ago of the increasing public health and
environmental threat posed by PBDEs. We can't conclude the value
of the fire retardant chemicals other than by occasional
anecdotes, and we have found many ways to reduce fire death and
injury without negative side effects. The major decline in
smoking as well as the transition in home cooking from the stove
to the microwave has both contributed to lower rates of fire
injuries and death; the growing threat of these chemicals is new
knowledge. The ability to enact legislation at the federal level
is lacking. Hopefully, the state will take action.
2:08:10 PM
DR. DAVID HEIMBACH, testifying on his own behalf and as a member
of the burn injury community, said for 35 years he was the
director of the burn injury center at Harborview Hospital in
Seattle. As a burn doctor, he said, these chemicals do work. We
all want our environment to be clean, but we also want it to be
safe. It is appropriate to look for safer retardants, but not to
throw away the ones we have. He hopes that especially in
children's clothing and mattresses, we would be circumspect.
2:12:34 PM
SENATOR DYSON asked if Dr. Heimbach was familiar with an
organization called Citizens for Fire Safety, and does he know
if they are credible.
DR. HEIMBACH said he thinks they are.
CAITLIN HIGGINS, Executive Director, Alaska Conservation
Alliance, Anchorage, testified in support of SB 27. She said
this is one of their three priorities for the session. The
Alaska Conservation Alliance believes this is a smart first step
in making our homes safer and our families healthier. It is time
for Alaska to phase out the sale of outdated toxic chemicals.
PAMELA MILLER, Executive Director, Alaska Community Action on
Toxins, testified in support of SB 27. She said that SB 27 is an
important measure to protect public health, especially the
health of children and firefighters. PBDEs are similar in
structure to PCBs which were banned more than 30 years ago, and
have similar harmful effects on the body. PBDEs accumulate, are
long-lasting, and interfere with proper thyroid function. They
cause problems with brain development and disrupt learning,
memory, and behavior. These chemicals leach out of products and
we are exposed through indoor air and dust. Levels in wildlife
and people are increasing. Levels in human breast milk are
doubling every 2-5 years. These chemicals are persistent and can
travel long distances. Alaskans are more vulnerable due to our
higher levels of consumption of fish and marine mammals, and
homes that are closed in for a greater part of year. New
scientific evidence compels urgent action.
2:19:21 PM
GERAN TARR, Alaska Community Action on Toxins, Anchorage,
testified in support of SB 27. She said a growing body of
research links PBDEs to many adverse health effects. The adverse
effects include more than just health problems, as health
problems affect families. The committee should not forget the
cost of care associated with these illnesses. SB 27 would be
good for our families and our pocketbooks. It strikes the right
balance between protecting public health, protecting local
businesses, and the interests of Alaskans. We used to think that
lead was safe, and then we found ways to make products without
lead. We can be innovative when we need to.
2:22:22 PM
DR. KRISTIN COX, naturopathic doctor, Juneau, testified in
support of SB 27. She said that PBDEs are persistent in the
environment and in human tissues. These chemicals are currently
not regulated with regard to human health. PBDEs are found in
household products, furniture, and baby products; the chemicals
settle in house dust, which results in exposure to our children.
She sees a lot of thyroid problems, as well as infertility
problems. PBDEs leach out of landfills into coastal areas and
ocean sediments, causing high levels in bivalves. Atmospheric
and ocean currents concentrate toxic chemicals in the Polar
Regions. Alaska Native women's breast milk is toxic. A nursing
pillow and rocking chair can contain up to 10 percent dry weight
of these chemicals. We shouldn't have to worry that our
household dust is toxic.
2:25:56 PM
LAUREN Heine, PhD., Science Director, Clean Production Action,
testified in support of SB 27. She said that a lot of her work
is with businesses who work to produce products that are safe
for human health and the environment. A good alternative to
PBDEs is one that provides fire safety but does not have the
negative human health and environmental effects. The U.S.
manufacturers of PBDEs have volunteered to stop manufacturing
them in the U.S, and are in the process of fazing them out. They
are already making chemical alternatives. The ban will affect
imports as well. She emphasized that we need to support the
manufacturers of alternative chemicals here in the U.S. EPA has
hosted a series of flame retardancy partnerships. This is a
multi-stakeholder partnership based on the best available
science. Walmart has recently prohibited PBDEs in its products,
and will not be buying any products from its suppliers that
contain PBDEs. This shows that companies do want to move to
safer alternatives, and they need the states to support them.
Mattress manufacturers now use a barrier technology, a flame
retardant fabric to cover the mattress. We can use good science
to identify safer alternatives.
2:30:29 PM
SENATOR DYSON asked if other states have done something to ban
importation or stop the use of imported materials containing
these chemicals.
MS. HEIN said if you ban the sale of products containing flame
retardants, it would not matter where the products came from.
This is driving a movement for people to know what is in the
products they sell.
SENATOR DYSON asked if we would then be putting a burden on
retailers or wholesalers.
MS. HEIN said yes, retailers would be responsible. Walmart has
already decided to do this. This movement is driven in part by
Europe. Any global company has to do this. It is responsible to
know what is in the products you are selling.
CHAIR DAVIS closed public testimony on SB 27. She announced that
SB 27 would be held in committee.
^Presentation by Akeela Inc.
Presentation by Akeela Inc.
2:33:17 PM
CHAIR DAVIS announced the next order of business would be a
presentation by Rosalie Nadeau, Executive Director of Akeela
House [Akeela Inc.].
ROSALIE NADEAU said that Akeela House is now one program of
Akeela Inc. Each year what happens with behavioral health is
that grants stay about the same, but the cost of living has
increased by 65 percent since 1992. Akeela Inc. has grown over
the past 20 years. It is now a full service behavioral health
organization with both substance abuse and mental health
programs. Its budget has grown from $3.1 million in 2006 to $7.2
million in 2010. This year they are projecting a budget of $12.5
million. Akeela Inc. has grown by combining administration of
programs in order to make them more efficient and cost
effective. They have merged with the Alaska Council on
Prevention Programs and have taken over the programs of the
Alaska Women's Resource Center. In 2006 they bought a small,
for-profit private company and pulled that into their mix. In
2010 the city of Ketchikan asked Akeela Inc. to look at taking
on the programs in Ketchikan.
2:39:09 PM
MS. NADEAU said those programs constitute a complete behavioral
health treatment system. It was a big change for Akeela, as the
location is small and hard to reach. But the result is they
brought the Ketchikan program under their wing. She further
noted that if the legislature makes funding cuts, community
programs will be destroyed. She wants to encourage the Division
of Behavioral Health and the legislature to look at ways of
combining the administration of small programs. There are there
some ways that larger organizations can have administrative
coordination with these small programs. Akeela Inc knows how
funding sources operate, and she believes they can work together
with the state to save programs in small communities and still
do quality service.
2:42:49 PM
MS. NADEAU further noted that by 2013, all providers in the
state must be using electronic medical record systems. Akeela is
in the process of making this change. It is a painful process.
Akeela is in 18 communities in this state, and they have to be
able to access records. Also, the state has built into new
regulations a required national certification or accreditation.
Akeela was already accredited. The state has mandated this
change, and becoming accredited is extremely expensive. She
asked how providers can cover the additional costs of this
mandate, when the state is not covering the cost. The division
also says it wants to measure outcomes. The state of Washington
says that treatment in the community is cost effective far
beyond prison. Alaska needs to find better ways of dealing with
people. Eighty percent of domestic violence cases have substance
use involved. It is a major driver of social ills in the state.
2:49:02 PM
She explained that outcome measurement is especially difficult
with substance abuse cases. We need better studies, and that
means spending money. It is important to see if people are
really getting better. This can't be done cheaply. Half of
Akeela house beds are empty because of lack of funding to fill
them. Akeela Inc. also runs prison programs in nine institutions
in the state. She feels we need to be looking at getting people
out of prison into community programs with monitoring devices.
This would be cheaper than prison beds and the people would be
receiving needed treatment. Programs are operating with
inadequate resources.
CHAIR DAVIS said Akeela Inc. was impressive, and she noted that
DSHS would like to do some of the things that Akeela is already
achieving.
MS. NADEAU said in social services we get caught up with our
clients, and those are the people we serve. But really, our
clients are our funders. We should work to achieve what they
want to see. There are many unfunded mandates. Programs need
better staff, but there is no money to hire them. Substance
abuse treatment came out of 12 step programs. As we learn more
about behavioral health, we need staff with more training.
2:59:59 PM
SENATOR DYSON asked if there was enough money in the governor's
budget this year.
MS. NADEAU said there was misunderstanding on the substance
abuse side. The DSHS commissioner during the Murkowski
administration thought that Medicaid would take care of
everything, but most of their clients are not Medicaid eligible.
She emphasized that she was not blaming this governor, there is
a long history. Everyone involved is looking at ways to do this
better and more cheaply.
SENATOR DYSON asked what she wanted from the committee.
MS. NADEAU answered take a look at helping DSHS and the division
of behavioral health come up with a better way of looking at
this. Don't give providers unfunded mandates, because they are
already struggling.
SENATOR DYSON asked if she would recommend a task force or study
group on the issue.
MS. NADEAU responded that would be a great idea. Especially with
moving into behavioral health, we need a new method of operating
these programs.
SENATOR DYSON asked if there are other jurisdictions that have
done this well.
MS. NADEAU said she would get back to the committee with that
information.
3:03:27 PM
CHAIR DAVIS adjourned the meeting at 3:03 p.m.