Posts in 'EPA'
October 9, 2008 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
Carbon Nanotubes, EPA, Environment, Health, Inhalation, Regulation, TSCA, Testing
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
Word hit the street today that EPA intends to make public a "sanitized" version of a Consent Order it has negotiated with a producer of multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs). [A link will be provided once available.] We obtained a copy of the Order, which has redacted all information claimed confidential by the company involved. What can we learn from this well-scrubbed Order? Read more »
September 8, 2008 |
Posted by Cal Baier-Anderson in
Consumer Products, EPA, Regulation, U.S. Government
Cal Baier-Anderson, Ph.D., is a Health Scientist.
I have just finished reading yet another depressing/infuriating publication by the Woodrow Wilson Center's Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies. The new report delineates the many limitations faced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) in addressing nanotechnology health risks. The law governing the CPSC has significant weaknesses that prevent it from meeting critical needs, such as constraints on the ability to collect data, require reporting of known hazards, order recalls and promulgate mandatory safety standards.
Read more »
August 20, 2008 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
EPA, Policy, Regulation, TSCA
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
EDF's recent news release that gave a less-than-glowing review to the performance of EPA's Nanoscale Materials Stewardship Program (NMSP) engendered a critique from Michael Heintz of Porter & Wright, accusing us of being "irresponsible" and potentially "sector damaging." Our release had lamented the mediocre level of participation and lack of transparency surrounding the NMSP. I've posted a reply to Michael's post, but also want to post it here. Read more »
July 28, 2008 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
EPA, Policy, Regulation, TSCA
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
A growing number of observers of nanotechnology policy in the U.S. - at least those outside the U.S. government! - recognize that the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) is poorly suited both to spur the generation of sufficient information about nanomaterials, and to ensure that information indicating potential risks will trigger meaningful action. So why not just tweak TSCA to make it work better for nano? Read more »
July 2, 2008 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
EPA, Policy, Regulation, TSCA
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
[Links to posts in this series: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5]
This final post in this series goes to the ultimate question, where the nanorubber really hits the road: Can EPA regulate an “existing” nanomaterial’s production, use, or disposal under TSCA? Read more »
July 1, 2008 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
EPA, Policy, Regulation, TSCA
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
[Links to posts in this series: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5]
Let's now turn to dissecting just how limited EPA’s authorities are both to collect information that companies already possess on their nanomaterials, and to require companies to generate and submit new information. Read more »
June 27, 2008 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
EPA, Policy, Regulation, TSCA
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
[Links to posts in this series: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5]
This was going to be the last post in my series on the fate of nanomaterials under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), where I turn to what will likely be – at least in the near term – the most common regulatory scenario that will apply: the extent to which EPA has authority to regulate nanomaterials as “existing” chemicals under TSCA. But there’s so much to cover that I’ve decided to split this last topic into three separate posts. Read more »
May 27, 2008 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
EPA, Policy, Regulation, TSCA
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
[Links to posts in this series: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5]
In my last post, I decried EPA’s shortsighted decision to declare nano forms of chemicals listed on the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Inventory to be “existing” rather than “new” chemicals. But I noted that EPA did not rule that all nanomaterials are existing chemicals. EPA says it will consider buckyballs, carbon nanotubes, or anything else that has no counterpart – a substance with the same chemical structure – already on the TSCA Inventory to be “new.” So can we rest assured that, at least for these nanomaterials, EPA has sufficient authority under TSCA to effectively identify and address their potential risks? Would it were so. Read more »
April 29, 2008 |
Posted by Cal Baier-Anderson in
Consumer Products, EPA, Environment, Health, Nanosilver
Cal Baier-Anderson, Ph.D., is a Health Scientist.
A recent article posted on scienceline includes a claim that bacteria cannot develop resistance to silver, which is widely used as an antimicrobial. That assertion is not only false, but also dangerous. Read more »
April 22, 2008 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
EPA, Policy, Regulation, TSCA
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
[Links to posts in this series: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5]
In this and my next two posts, I want to explore the question of whether EPA has sufficient authority under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to effectively oversee nanotechnology. EPA (as well as the White House) maintains that the agency has ample statutory authority to do what’s needed to identify and address any potential risks nanomaterials may pose to consumers, the general public and the environment. I beg to differ. Read more »
Nanotechnology Notes is powered by WordPress.
RSS feeds are available for posts and comments.