Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
Goto- All About Color, Real Color Wheel in a new window
  HomeHelpSearchLoginRegisterBroadcast Message to Admin(s)    
Jun 21st, 2009 at 4:01am

Admin   Offline
YaBB Administrator
Color is Everything!
Makawao,  Maui, USA, HI

Posts: 1196


Environmental Protection Agency
OPPT Document Control Office (DCO)
East Tower Room G-099
Waterside Mall
401 M Street S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460

Attn: Docket Number OPPTS-42213A

Re:      Color Pigments Manufacturers Association, Inc. Comments on the Testing of Certain High Production Volume Chemicals; Data Collection and Development on High Production Volume ("HPV") Chemicals Proposed Rule and Notice 65 Fed. Reg. 81658, December 26, 2000, Docket Control No. OPPTS-42213A

The CPMA is an industry trade association representing color pigment companies in Canada, Mexico, and the United States. CPMA represents small, medium- and large color pigments manufacturers throughout Canada, Mexico and United States, accounting for 95 & of the production of color pigments in North America.

"In issuing the Final Rule as EPA has done, EPA has attempted to foreclose any comment on the actual tests and procedures included in the tests that are required under a TSCA test rule. When the test rule is published, the impacted entity only has one option, to comment, argue or contest the test rule itself. The Final Rule prevents the impacted entity from making any meaningful comment on whether the standard test procedures in the Final Rule are appropriate."

" It is extremely difficult and time-consuming to locate and collect all such data for products that in some cases have been manufactured for between fifty and one hundred years. The schedules for response in the voluntary program should also be extended several years to allow for a reasonable and thorough search of existing data and to plan efficient testing procedures."

"These remarks appear to fall into a pattern of always wanting more data on existing study reports, after which EPA informs the submitter that only sixty days will be allowed for the correction of all deficiencies in the "voluntary" program."

Don Jusko: After reading this artical I agree with CPMA, and feel the EPA is stepping over of bounds and hasn't done enough on it's own to understand what it is doing in the name of their own 'rightiousness". Did I say they were inapt? If I didn't say it I sure thought it.

Read it for yourself.


We strongly believe that both the Proposed Rule for HPV testing and the Voluntary Program should be revised to allow for more time and flexibility in assessing chemicals and determining what tests, if any, should be undertaken. This should involve detailed discussions with industry to understand the properties, risks and exposures chemicals pose before new studies are undertaken. The analysis should be sufficiently flexible to incorporate experience with the subject chemical in a meaningful context.

We hope these comments help EPA in revising the HPV program to be more responsive and flexible.

Please call if we can be of further assistance or if you have any questions or comments.


J. Lawrence Robinson
IP Logged