European Commission Will Not Seek New Legislation for Nanomaterials

At a meeting of the European Commission this week commissioners confirmed that the EU plans to deal with  nanoscale materials primarily through its REACH chemical regulation rather than develop entirely new legislation specific to nanomaterials.  Commissioners noted that creating something new was simply not feasible at this time.

The Commission will, however, work with ECHA and other regulatory bodies to develop additional guidance documents to assist stakeholders in adequately characterizing and evaluating any specific risks posed by nanoscale materials.  While most nanomaterials are nano-sized versions of existing chemicals, the small size often results in differences in key physical-chemical, fate and transport, and potentially toxicity properties.  The goal is to find a balance between the need for additional information for the risk assessment and creating a massive new regulatory burden for companies, many of whom may be small or medium sized entities.

At this point there is quite a bit of uncertainty for industry, which must deal with a regulatory system that isn't yet predictable or consistent.  Even the definition of what the regulatory bodies believe constitutes a nanomaterial is not clear. Still, industry is generally in agreement that nanomaterials should be dealt with through REACH rather than have to deal with entirely new legislation.

EPA to Initiate Chemical Safety for Sustainability Plan

The USEPA is set to launch a Chemical Safety for Sustainability initiative.  The plan is to use innovative approaches to assess chemical hazard and exposure so this can be accurately communicated to the public.  According to their web site:

EPA scientists and their partners are embracing the principles of green chemistry to produce safer chemicals. They are also integrating a diversity of scientific disciplines to develop new prediction techniques, pioneering the use of innovative technologies for chemical toxicity testing, and designing tools to advance the management of chemical risks. Chemical safety for sustainability includes research in computational toxicology, nanotechnology, endocrine disrupting chemicals, human health, and pesticides.

As part of this ongoing process EPA recently made available two new chemical databases - ToxCastDB and ExpoCastDB.  These supplement the ToxCast robotic screening testing program started earlier by EPA.  The most recent announcement of the Chemical Safety for Sustainability initiative was made during the first meeting of the National Research Council's Committee on Science for EPA's Future, part of the National Academies of Sciences.


The three main areas of focus for the program are:

• Providing scientific knowledge, tools and models for integrated evaluation strategies
• Improving assessment and informing management for chemical safety
• Targeting high priority research needs for immediate and focused attention

GAO Calls for Improved National Priorities for Climate Change

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has issued a report calling on the federal government to improve and clarify national priorities related to climate change.  Acknowledging that "climate change poses risks to many environmental and economic systems, including agriculture, infrastructure, and ecosystems," GAO noted that national priorities need to be set and "better align them with federal funding decisions."  While "funding for climate change activities reported by OMB increased from $4.6 billion in 2003 to $8.8 billion in 2010," GAO noted that it "is organized in a complex, crosscutting system."

Two key factors were identified that "complicate efforts to align funding with priorities."

First, notwithstanding existing coordinating mechanisms...federal officials do not have a shared understanding of strategic priorities. This is in part due to inconsistent messages articulated in strategic plans and other policy documents....Second, respondents indicated that since mechanisms for aligning funding with priorities are nonbinding, they are limited when in conflict with agencies' own priorities.

GAO came up with two recommendations:

1) To improve the coordination and effectiveness of federal climate change programs and activities, the appropriate entities within the Executive Office of the President, including the Council on Environmental Quality, Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy, Office and Management and Budget, and Office of Science and Technology Policy, in consultation with Congress, should work together with relevant federal agencies and interagency coordinating bodies to clearly establish federal strategic climate change priorities, including the roles and responsibilities of the key federal entities, taking into consideration the full range of activities within the federal climate change enterprise.

2) To improve the coordination and effectiveness of federal climate change programs and activities, we recommend that the appropriate entities within the Executive Office of the President, including the Council on Environmental Quality, Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy, Office and Management and Budget, and Office of Science and Technology Policy, in consultation with Congress, should work together with relevant federal agencies and interagency coordinating bodies to assess the effectiveness of current practices for defining and reporting federal climate change funding and aligning funding with priorities, and make improvements to such practices as needed for Congress and the public to fully understand how climate change funds are spent.

For more information and to download a highlights page and the full report, go to the GAO page here.

Four chemicals to be added to the Rotterdam Convention PIC list?

The fifth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP5) to the Rotterdam Convention starts today and will continue through Friday, June 24, 2011 in Geneva Switzerland.  On the agenda are decisions regarding the inclusion of four substances to the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) list. The four substances are chrysotile asbestos, endosulfan, alachlor and aldicarb.  If the decision is inclusion, the chemicals will be added to Annex III to the Convention.

The participants of COP5 also hope to adopt a strategic plan related to management of industrial chemicals worldwide, with emphasis on "synergies between the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, the Rotterdam Convention and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants." 

Alachlor and aldicarb are expected to be approved for PIC listing, while chrysotile asbestos and endosulfan may garner significant additional discussion as several participating countries have expressed their concerns based on economic reasons, i.e., that PIC listing is equivalent to blacklisting the chemicals from the market.

More information on the Rotterdam Convention and Prior Informed Consent can be found here and here.