Posts in 'EPA'
October 1, 2009 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
ChAMP, EPA, Industry, Policy, Regulation, TSCA, Testing
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
A new entry showed up sometime in the last day on EPA’s webpage for its ChAMP initiative. It reads: “The Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP) has been superseded by the comprehensive approach to enhancing the Agency’s current chemicals management program announced by Administrator Lisa Jackson on September 29, 2009.”
Don’t miss this bit at the top of the page:
Yes, that image is a cobweb, which EPA uses to designate archived web content. What’s happening here? Read more »

September 29, 2009 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
EPA, Policy, Regulation, Risk Assessment, Risk Management, TSCA
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
Today, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson unveiled the Obama Administration’s “Essential Principles for Reform of Chemicals Management Legislation.” The principles’ significance lies not so much in the words they contain, but rather in what they symbolize: A clear confirmation that this Administration understands that the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) needs fundamental reform and that it is ready and willing to engage in making it happen. Read more »

August 21, 2009 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
Carbon Nanotubes, EPA, Industry, Regulation, TSCA
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
In June, EPA published a Federal Register notice that included Significant New Use Rules (SNURs) for two carbon nanotubes (as well as 21 other chemicals). That notice certainly got the attention of lawyers in town (see here, here and here). The nanotube SNURs would require anyone planning to produce or process either of the two substances to notify EPA if the person intended not to comply with the (rather limited) risk management conditions specified by EPA. Well, as reported yesterday by Sara Goodman of E&E News, EPA is now withdrawing the SNURs, at least temporarily.
[Note: Since first posting this Friday, I have made a few changes. In first writing this post, I let show too much my frustration over the fact that even the smallest of steps taken by EPA to ensure some review of nanomaterials prior to their commercialization appears to have engendered an industry challenge. In a few places, I got too personal and took some gratuitous swipes I shouldn't have. I apologize for that, and have taken those out.] Read more »

August 4, 2009 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
EPA, Policy, Regulation, Risk Assessment, TSCA, Testing
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
Today, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) unveiled its “10 Principles for Modernizing TSCA.” Also today, the Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families coalition – of which EDF is a member – issued a news release and unveiled its 9-point “Platform for Reform of TSCA.” How do they line up? Read more »

July 24, 2009 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
Canada, EPA, Policy, Risk Assessment, TSCA
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
Some time back, I promised a look at whether Canada’s Chemical Management Plan provides a model for TSCA reform. This post will provide that look. Bottom line: While our neighbor to the north has undertaken and accomplished a great deal over the past decade, it has done so with one hand tied behind its back. Read more »

July 14, 2009 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
Carbon Nanotubes, EPA, Industry, Policy, Regulation, TSCA
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
In earlier posts (here and here), I discussed a notice EPA had received in July of 2008 from BASF reporting toxic effects at very low doses of a carbon nanotube (CNT) observed in a 90-day rat inhalation study. In that notice, BASF had declared the specific identity of its CNT to be confidential business information, hence denying that information to the public. Now, in a setting more to its liking, it appears the company has decided to reveal the identity after all. Read more »

June 19, 2009 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
ChAMP, EPA
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
It probably goes without saying that EDF welcomes EPA’s decision to suspend the development and posting of risk-based prioritizations under its Chemical Assessment and Mangement Program (ChAMP). EDF has been arguing (see our earlier posts) that ChAMP’s “rush to risk” has taken EPA badly off-track. But we have also identified many useful things that EPA’s existing chemicals program can and should be doing with the data it obtained through the HPV Challenge (whether called ChAMP or not) .
We look forward to working with EPA to craft a new approach, grounded in a return to developing scientifically defensible hazard, not risk, characterizations and transparently identifying and addressing data gaps and data quality problems.

June 16, 2009 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
ChAMP, EPA, In Vitro, NAS, Testing
Cal Baier-Anderson, Ph.D., is a Health Scientist and Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
Many of the screening-level hazard data being collected and analyzed under ChAMP that pertain to human health are derived from traditional laboratory animal studies. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) recently offered a “new paradigm for toxicity testing” in its 2008 report Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: a Vision and a Strategy. Can ChAMP hazard data be used to facilitate the development of new testing strategies? Read more »

June 1, 2009 |
Posted by Richard Denison in
ChAMP, EPA, Policy, Regulation, Risk Assessment, Risk Management, Testing
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
This new post serves as a response to Charlie Auer’s most recent comment responding to our critique of ChAMP. (To see the whole exchange, start here, then go here, here and here.) So far, this exchange has focused mainly on our disagreement over whether or not EPA is somehow required to do risk assessments under ChAMP. At some point, I hope Charlie and others will engage on the substance of our critique – the serious concerns we’ve raised about the quality and validity of the ChAMP assessments.
Read more »

May 27, 2009 |
Posted by Cal Baier-Anderson in
ChAMP, Consumer Products, EPA, Policy
Cal Baier-Anderson, Ph.D., is a Health Scientist.
In our critique of EPA’s Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP), we have pointed out that, despite its limitations, there is value in the hazard data that EPA is collecting and analyzing. How so? Read more »

Chemicals & Nanomaterials is powered by WordPress.
RSS feeds are available for posts and comments.