Committee on Energy and Commerce, Democrats Home Page
Who We Are Schedule What's New
View Printable Version
Outline of the top of the U.S. Capitol Dome

 

Statement of Congressman John D. Dingell, Ranking Member
Committee on Energy and Commerce

 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
HEARING ON H.R. 2567, THE “ANTIFREEZE BITTERING ACT OF 2005”

May 23, 2006

Mr. Chairman, today the Subcommittee is holding a hearing on H.R. 2567, the Antifreeze Bittering Act of 2005, a bill that amends the Federal Hazardous Substances Act to require that a bittering agent, denatonium benzoate, be added to antifreeze sold commercially. The hearing today provides the opportunity to begin the process of answering some very necessary questions about this legislation. Let me highlight a few of them:

  • Why have the manufacturers of denatonium benzoate declined to provide scientific data on the environmental fate and environmental toxicology of denatonium benzoate?

  • Do we have full toxicological, exposure, and risk evaluations on the bitterant denatonium benzoate or other bittering agents before us and available for Congress and the public to review?

  • Should the Congress be mandating a market for a product, denatonium benzoate, that is manufactured almost exclusively in other countries?

  • What scientific evidence shows that the inclusion of bitterants in automotive products has resulted in a reduction in incidents of accidental poisoning?

  • Has the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reviewed the numerous scientific studies about denatonium benzoate? Has the EPA rendered a conclusion as to whether it is safe if released in the environment?

  • Should Congress provide broad legal immunity for the use of denatonium benzoate, including a liability exemption from the Superfund statute?

  • Should we consider other options, such as the use of propylene glycol, as an alternative to ethylene glycol?

  • Should we reverse 30 years of precedent in our pollution statutes by preempting State laws that may adopt more effective aversive agents or allow the use of aversive agents that are less harmful to the environment, or by preempting laws that maintain liability for environmentally harmful releases?

Mr. Chairman, while the goal of this legislation is worthy, we need answers to these questions before we proceed, and I look forward to the testimony of our witnesses.

- 30 -

(Contact: Jodi Seth, 202-225-3641)

Prepared by the Committee on Energy and Commerce
2125 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515