I'm going to go out the proverbial limb here and assume that, by the time this issue has printed, the U.S. Senate will have passed legislation to reform the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). I know I have a reputation of being a glass-half-empty kind of guy—but not this time.

California regulators are at it again. In the name of providing transparency for consumers, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEEHA) may be on the brink of creating more confusion for the public―at the expense of those doing business in the state.

Anyone who has read even a few of my previous columns knows I have a cynical streak. I could blame it on my 30 years spent in Washington, D.C., but I suspect I’ve always been a “glass half empty” sort of guy. However, I have now seen that miracles can happen and I have to believe what took place in the Senate with the Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) reform bill just before year’s end qualifies.

Most readers are familiar with the term “collateral damage.” It is generally described as a situation in which injury is inflicted on something other than an intended target.

By the time you read this column, the battle for Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) reform will be fully engaged. Battle lines will have been drawn, cosponsors for bills will have been recruited, and charges and counter charges will have been swapped back and forth in Senate committee hearings.

The Adhesive and Sealant Council’s (ASC) Regulatory Affairs Committee (RAC) recently held its annual “forecasting” conference call, during which we prioritize what are believed to be the biggest legislative and regulatory issues for the industry in the upcoming year.

Signs, signs, everywhere there’s signs / Blocking up the scenery, breaking up my mind / Do this, don’t do that, can’t you read the sign? —Five Man Electrical Band (1971)

We all knew it was coming. The California’s Safer Consumer Regulation has been on everybody’s radar screen for years.