Del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Reddit
Newsvine
co.mments
HR 4936 IH
To amend the Federal Hazardous Substances Act to require engine coolant and antifreeze to contain a bittering agent so as to render it unpalatable.
January 15, 2008
Mr. ACKERMAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce
To amend the Federal Hazardous Substances Act to require engine coolant and antifreeze to contain a bittering agent so as to render it unpalatable.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Antifreeze Bittering Act of 2007'.
SEC. 2. ADDITION OF BITTERING AGENT IN ANTIFREEZE REQUIRED.
The Federal Hazardous Substances Act (
`SEC. 25. ADDITION OF BITTERING AGENT IN ANTIFREEZE REQUIRED.
`(a) In General- Any engine coolant or antifreeze that is manufactured after the date that is 6 months after the date of enactment of this section, and that contains more than 10 percent ethylene glycol, shall include denatonium benzoate at a minimum of 30 parts per million and a maximum of 50 parts per million as a bittering agent within the product so as to render it unpalatable. Any engine coolant or antifreeze that is subject to this subsection and is not in compliance with this subsection shall be deemed a `banned hazardous substance' within the meaning of section 2(q) (
`(b) Record Keeping- A manufacturer of a product subject to this section shall maintain a record of the trade name, scientific name, and active ingredients of any bittering agent used pursuant to this section. Such information shall be available to the public upon request.
`(c) Limitation on Liability- (1) Subject to paragraph (2), a manufacturer, processor, distributor, recycler, or seller of an engine coolant or antifreeze that is required to contain an aversive agent under subsection (a) shall not be liable to any person for any personal injury, death, property damage, damage to the environment (including natural resources), or economic loss that results from the inclusion of denatonium benzoate in any engine coolant or antifreeze, provided that the inclusion of denatonium benzoate is present in concentrations mandated by subsection (a).
`(2) The limitation on liability provided in this subsection does not apply to a particular liability to the extent that the cause of such liability is unrelated to the inclusion of denatonium benzoate in any engine coolant or antifreeze.
`(3) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to exempt any manufacturer or distributor of denatonium benzoate from any liability related to denatonium benzoate.
`(d) Preemption- No State or political subdivision of a State shall have any authority either to establish or continue in effect with respect to retail containers containing less than 55 gallons of engine coolant or antifreeze any prohibition, limitation, standard or other requirement relating to the inclusion of a bittering agent in engine coolant or antifreeze that is in any way different from, or in addition to, the provisions of this chapter.
`(e) Exemption- The requirements of this section shall not be construed to apply to--
`(1) the sale of a motor vehicle that contains engine coolant or antifreeze; or
`(2) wholesale containers of engine coolant or antifreeze containing 55 gallons or more of engine coolant or antifreeze.'.
Rating Filter: 5
(Close help)
Comments
(Close help)
Please pass this bill. Here in Palm Beach County this week someone poisoned 10 cats with aintifreeze. It is a cruel death and the aniimal has no idea it is poison as it is so sweet. Many birds drink it when a radiator leaks. It amazes me that it will take an act of congress to get his enacted. You would think the manufacturers would be happy to add bitters to prevent these senseless deaths.
Thank you.
Thousands of pets die each year from ingesting just a few tablespoons each of antifreeze. This could easily be rectified by covering the naturally sweet taste of the chemical. Five states have already passed bittering laws, but it is being opposed by the industry because of cost. What is the cost of a pet's life?
It's better to eliminate the poison than cloak it...
When I was working as a toxicologist I spent a great deal of time on this. The problem I have with the whole approach is that we could be using propylene glycol instead of ethylene glycol, and that would solve the poisoning problem. Propylene glycol is known to be much less toxic (it's even used as an antidote for ethylene glycol poisoning). And it's on the market- I use it in my car. Sierra or something is one brand. Bittering agents are problematic because (a) we don't know anything about their potential toxicities and (b) they don't really work to prevent baby poisonings (baby gulps, then tastes) and may not help animals either (although I could see a plausible argument about the ways animals lap up the poison slowly). I think a better bill would phase out ethylene glycol altogether.
In Nottingham NH in the last 5 weeks 5 dogs died and one was sickened by antifreeze. My best friend died an ugly and violent death due to this toxic chemical and someones careless and ignorance. Please pass this bill
Add A Comment