Nanotechnology Lawyer & Attorney : Bergeson & Campbell Law Firm : Nanotechnology Law Blog

On June 17, 2008, the European Commission (EC) issued a press release entitled “Commission starts public dialogue on nanotechnologies -- tapping economic and environmental potential through safe products.” According to the EC, while current European Union (EU) legislation “covers in principle” the environment, health, and safety issues concerning nanomaterials, “there is further need for research and international cooperation.” EC will begin a consultation with stakeholders and member states that it intends “to increase knowledge and awareness about the potential of nanotechnologies and to continue to ensure an adequate protection of nature, environment and health.” Under “Next Steps,” the EC states:

Knowledge about the characterisation of nanomaterials, hazard and exposure needs to be improved. The Commission is therefore backing targeted actions in a number of areas and at different levels, particularly in the field of research and development under the Research Framework Programmes FP6 and FP7 and the Commission’s Joint Research Centre.) Such activities are coordinated and discussed with stakeholders and in the framework of the [Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)] and the International Standardisation Organisation (ISO) and through international cooperation.

The Commission will also engage in an open dialogue with citizens and stakeholders at large to accompany the correct application of existing legislation to the new products arriving on the market.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) recently solicited nominations for substances for review in future IARC Monographs, which identify environmental factors that can increase the risk of human cancer. IARC states that it will select substances for review based on: (a) evidence of human exposure; and (b) evidence or suspicion of carcinogenicity. The 51 substances nominated include carbon nanotubes, which received three nominations:

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On May 19, 2008, the Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) posted its sixth quarterly report on the Voluntary Reporting Scheme (VRS) for engineered nanoscale materials. According to the report, DEFRA received no new submissions this quarter, and to date has received only nine submissions since the VRS’s launch in September 2006:  seven from industry, and two from academia. The report states that DEFRA, in partnership with the United Kingdom Technology Strategy Board, is funding a telephone survey of selected companies and researchers.  DEFRA intends the survey, to be undertaken between May and August 2008, to find out more about the nature of these companies/researchers’ activities in the field of nanotechnologies.  As part of this process, DEFRA will offer assistance to those wishing to submit data to the VRS, in the form of telephone advice or site visits.  All information collected as part of this process will be treated as confidential unless the data owner advises to the contrary.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On March 11, 2008, the German Chemical Industry Association (VCI) released a report entitled Responsible Production and Use of Nanomaterials, which is a series of documents intended to provide guidance on all aspects of a good product stewardship on nanomaterials. The documents include joint papers prepared by VCI and the German Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA) and the German Society for Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology (DECHEMA). The report includes the following documents:

Principles Document:

• Implementing Responsible Care® for a Responsible Production and Use of Nanomaterials

Regulatory Documents:

• Requirements of the REACH Regulation on Substances Which Are Manufactured or Imported also as Nanomaterials
• Guidance for a Tiered Gathering of Hazard Information for the Risk Assessment of Nanomaterials
• Guidance for Handling and Use of Nanomaterials at the Workplace
• Guidance for the Passing on of Information along the Supply Chain in the Handling of Nanomaterials via Safety Data Sheets
• Strategy Paper of the German Chemical Industry on the Standardization of Nanomaterials

Documents on Safety Research:

• Roadmap for Safety Research on Nanomaterials
• Environmental Aspects of Nanoparticles

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On March 12, 2008, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) released a supplementary guidance document for the Voluntary Reporting Scheme (VRS). DEFRA prepared the supplementary guidance document to complement the existing VRS guidance. Chapter 2 describes the rationale and benefits of the VRS. Chapter 3 provides a specific list of the relevant physical, chemical, toxicological, and ecotoxicological data to include when reporting under the VRS, and the relevant hazard, exposure, and risk context for the information requested.  Chapter 4 sets out a context and summary for nanomaterial hazard and risk to human health and the environment. DEFRA intends the VRS to develop a better understanding of the properties and characteristics of different engineered nanoscale materials, so enabling potential hazard, exposure, and risk to be considered.  According to DEFRA, “[b]uilding an evidence-base in this way will allow for a more informed debate about the nature of appropriate controls.”

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A recent report released by Friends of the Earth (FOE) calls for a moratorium “on the further commercial release of food products, food packaging, food contact materials and agrochemicals that contain manufactured nanomaterials until nanotechnology-specific safety laws are established and the public is involved in decision making.” The report, entitled Out of the Laboratory and on to Our Plates:  Nanotechnology in Food & Agriculture, lists 104 commercially available foods, nutritional supplements, food contact materials, and agricultural chemicals identified by FOE that contain manufactured nanomaterials.  According to FOE, due to the “reluctance of food manufacturers to discuss their use of nanotechnology,” this list likely “represents only a small fraction of commercially available products that contain nanomaterials.” FOE states that many more nanofood products are in development, and many of the world’s largest food companies are exploring nanotechnology for food processing and packaging.  Many of the world’s largest agrochemicals and seed companies also have active nanotechnology research and development programs. FOE claims that regulations in the U.S., Europe, and Australia fail to address nanomaterials and calls for nano-specific food regulation to ensure food safety.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On April 17-18, 2008, the European Commission (EC) will hold a workshop on research on the safety of nanomaterials. The main objectives of the workshop are:

• To increase interactions between researchers to enhance networking, sharing of outcomes of the research projects, and boosting synergies between research groups across Europe and abroad;
• To improve communication of the results of research to risk assessment bodies and other interested parties, providing sound science-based data for informing opinions and scientific advice to policy makers; and
• To examine the current knowledge to review, if need be, the priorities in safety of nanomaterials’ research.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The European Commission’s (EC) Scientific Committee on Consumer Products (SCCP) released on March 3, 2008, a document entitled Opinion on Safety of Nanomaterials in Cosmetic Products (Opinion). In its Opinion, the SCCP divides nanoparticles into two groups: 1) soluble and/or biodegradable nanoparticles; and 2) insoluble particles. The SCCP states that, for the soluble and/or biodegradable group, “conventional risk assessment methodologies based on mass metrics may be adequate, whereas for the insoluble particles other metrics, such as the number of particles, and their surface area as well as their distribution are also required.” According to the SCCP, when assessing possible risks associated with nanoparticles, it is crucial to consider their uptake, and that it is primarily for the insoluble particles that health concerns related to possible uptake may arise. The SCCP concludes that, at present, there is inadequate information on: hazard identification; exposure assessment; uptake; the role of physico-chemical parameters of nanoparticles determining absorption and transport across membranes in the gut and lungs; the role of physico-chemical parameters of nanoparticles in systemic circulation determining biokinetics and accumulation in secondary target organs; possible health effects; and translocation of nanoparticles via the placenta to the fetus. The Opinion states that review of the safety of the insoluble nanomaterials presently used in sunscreens is required.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On February 22, 2008, the European Commission (EC) announced the European Nanoelectronics Initiative Advisory Council (ENIAC) Joint Technology Initiative (JTI), which is endorsed by the Council of Ministers and by the European Parliament. Over the next ten years, € 3 billion will be invested in nanoelectronics.  The ENIAC JIT is a public-private partnership that targets nanoelectronics.  Under the ENIAC JIT, the EC and European Union (EU) member states who wish to participate will pool their public funding with universities and industry, including many innovative small- and medium-sized enterprises (SME), by setting up public-private partnerships. According to the EC, while research funding in nanoelectronics so far tends to be fragmented in small projects funded by individual member states and agencies, the ENIAC JIT will allow member states and the EC “to co-operate and co-finance pan-European research initiatives focus[]ed on a strategic agenda set by Industry itself.” The following member states participate in ENIAC: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.  The Governing Boards of the ENIAC JIT held its first meeting on February 22, 2008.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The European Commission (EC) asked its Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) for a scientific opinion on the risk assessment of products of nanotechnologies. The request asks SCENIHR to identify and assess new information and update its opinions on the potential risks of products of nanotechnologies, “in particular, with respect to characterisation, eco-toxicology and toxicology as well as exposure assessments.” The EC’s request for an opinion states that the update “should be done in a step-wise manner taking into account the upcoming risk assessment demands related to specific nanomaterials and the evolving scientific information from various sources, including results from scientific research projects and activities of the European Technology Platforms related to the safety of nanomaterials. The deadline for the opinion is November 2008.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On February 8, 2008, the European Commission (EC) announced the adoption of a code of conduct for responsible nanosciences and nanotechnologies (N&N) research. The EC recommends that member states adopt codes of conduct to govern N&N research.  The EC code of conduct is based on seven general principles that address issues such as sustainability, precaution, inclusiveness, and accountability. The code of conduct also provides guidelines that implement these principles under good governance of research; due respect of precaution; and dissemination and monitoring of the code of conduct. The EC invites member states to take concrete action involving universities, research institutes, and companies for the safe development and use of nanotechnologies.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On January 23, 2008, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) issued a notice entitled “Call for Scientific Data on Applications of Nanotechnology and Nanomaterials used in Food and Feed.” According to the notice, EFSA is seeking data that could be useful as it prepares an initial scientific opinion for the European Commission (EC) regarding the risks arising from nanoscience and nanotechnologies on food and feed safety and the environment. The EC asked EFSA to identify the nature of the possible hazards associated with actual and foreseen applications in the food and feed area, and to provide general guidance on data needed for the risk assessment of such technologies and applications. EFSA intends to release a draft of its opinion in July 2008. Data submissions to EFSA are due March 28, 2008.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In a January 28, 2008, report entitled EU Nanotechnology R&D in the Field of Health and Environmental Impact of Nanoparticles, the European Commission (EC) provides an overview of past and ongoing research projects funded by the Framework Programmes (FP), EU member states, candidate countries, and countries associated to FP6 or FP7 in the area of possible impacts in health, environment, and safety of nanoparticles. The report has information on 106 projects, 14 of which are from the FPs, which provide around 32 million € in grants. The other 92 projects are from the EU members states, which spent around 47 million € in grants. The EC states that the “information may well be incomplete” and asks all interested parties to send additional information on research projects funded through national funding schemes. The EC intends to update the information regularly.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

According to a report recently released by the Danish Ministry of Health and Prevention, nanotechnology research, development, and applications are covered by existing legislation. The report, which includes an English summary, reviews existing national and international legislation in the areas of foods, medicines, the environment, chemicals, and the working environment in relation to current knowledge of nanotechnological products and processes.  The report also includes a chapter on national and international research policy activities, and describes the initiatives, working groups, and network groups the relevant government departments are taking part in, both nationally and internationally. The working group that prepared the report included representatives from the Ministry of the Interior and Health, the Danish Board of Health, the Danish Environmental Protection Agency, the Danish Medicines Agency, the Danish Veterinary and Food Administration, the National Food Institute at the Technical University of Denmark, the Danish Agency for Science, Technology, and Innovation, the Danish Working Environment Authority, and Danish Standards.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

According to the December 22, 2007, fifth quarterly report for the Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs’ (DEFRA) Voluntary Reporting Scheme (VRS) for engineered nanoscale materials, DEFRA received no new submissions since publication of the previous quarterly report in September 2007. DEFRA is in the process of updating the VRS documentation to clarify the purpose and aims of the VRS and provide supplementary guidance for anyone submitting data. DEFRA intends to publish the revised guidance in early February 2008. DEFRA will include a letter to relevant stakeholders in the industry and research communities, restating the strategic importance of the VRS.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On 3 January 2008, Lloyd’s released a report entitled Nanotechnology: Recent Developments, Risks and Opportunities, which examines the potential risks and opportunities in the emerging field of nanotechnology. Lloyd’s states that nanotechnology “promises to improve many industries including medicine, food technology, textiles, materials, cosmetics, defence and more, but the risks are still not fully understood.”

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On December 19, 2007, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) published an update entitled “NIOSH Informs, Leads Nanotechnology Actions by International Partner Organizations.” In the Update, NIOSH summarizes its recent contributions to international research:

• On November 29, 2007, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD) Working Party on Manufactured Nanomaterials agreed to establish a NIOSH-led project to: (1) exchange information on measuring and controlling exposures to nanomaterials; and (2) develop suggestions for further steps by the Working Party.
• At a December 4-7, 2007, meeting, a project group of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Technical Committee 229 voted to approve a draft report of safety and health practices in occupational settings relevant to nanotechnology. The draft report was based on NIOSH’s interim document entitled Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology, and was developed with NIOSH leadership and participation on the project group. 
• On December 2, 2007, NIOSH participated in a meeting of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Global Network of Collaborating Centres in Occupational Health, focusing on nanotechnology. The objective of the meeting was to determine how the WHO collaboration can develop and support research and cooperation in preventing exposure to potentially hazardous engineered nanoparticles. NIOSH is collaborating on five communication and networking projects with various WHO centers.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On December 19, 2007, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) published a report entitled Characterising the Potential Risks Posed by Engineered Nanoparticles: A Second UK Government Research Report, which follows up on DEFRA’s 2005 report and 2006 progress report. The report reviews the status of research pertaining to the environmental, health, and safety (EHS) issues relating to engineered nanoparticles, and places the United Kingdom’s (UK) research program in an international context. DEFRA is collaborating with international partners, particularly the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the International Standards Organization (ISO), to share data and experiences. In this way, according to the report, DEFRA will be able to maximize the effectiveness and speed with which potential risks may be identified and managed.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On December 4, 2007, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) posted a notice entitled “Testing a Representative Set of Nanomaterials -- The Launch of a Sponsorship Programme.” OECD states that its Working Party on Manufactured Nanomaterials has launched a sponsorship program in which countries will share the testing of specific nanomaterials. According to OECD, valuable information on the safety of manufactured nanomaterials can be derived by testing a representative set for human health and environmental safety. In launching the sponsorship program, the Working Party agreed to a priority list of manufactured nanomaterials for testing, based on materials which are in or close to commerce, as well as a list of endpoints for which they should be tested. OECD intends to make regular updates on this program.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In a recent speech at the 9th Annual Food Regulation and Labeling Standards Conference, Steve McCutcheon, CEO of Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ), said that FSANZ has begun analyzing the potential implications of nanotechnology on the food supply chain. FSANZ hopes that, by the time it receives its first application to approve the use of the technology in food, it will already have sufficient scientific and medical information to make an informed decision.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) met the week of November 19, 2007, to begin reviewing the regulation and risk assessment of nanotechnology. The European Commission (EC) issued a mandate for a complete evaluation by March 31, 2008, but EFSA responded that, because of the range of differing properties and safety profiles, it will not be able to complete its review by this deadline. EFSA instead proposed to issue an initial scientific opinion by Summer 2008. EFSA intends to create a working group of 10 to 15 scientific experts. The Scientific Committee held its first discussion on the EFSA working strategy on November 19-20, 2007.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On October 25-26, 2007, the European Commission (EC) held the First Annual Nanotechnology Safety for Success Dialogue. Presentations included:

• Food applications of nanoscience and nanotechnologies -- Ms. Sue O’Hagan, Confederation of the Food and Drink Industries of the European Union (CIAA);
• Consumer products applications of nanoscience and nanotechnologies -- Dr. Michael Holman, Lux Research;
• Health applications of nanoscience and nanotechnologies -- Dr. Carole Moquin-Pattey, European Science Foundation (ESF);
• Nanotechnology risk assessment: Knowns and unknowns -- Mr. Herman B.W.M. Koëter, Deputy Executive Director and Director of Science, European Food Safety Authority (EFSA);
• Nanoparticle toxicology: Scientific state-of-the-art -- Professor Ken Donaldson, University of Edinburgh;
• Nanomaterials. Risk assessment needs -- Professor Jim Bridges, Chair, Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR);
• The EU perspective on policy and regulatory aspects -- Mr. Kees Brekelmans; Enterprise and Industry Directorate General, “Consumer Goods” Directorate;
• Nanotechnology and the Food and Drug Administration:  Science and Policy -- Dr. Richard Canady, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA); and
• The consumer perspective on applications of nanoscience and nanotechnologies -- Dr. Sue Davies, Chief Policy Advisor, Which?.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Swedish Chemicals Agency (KemI) recently released a report entitled Nanotechnology -- Large Risks with Tiny Particles? Although the report is in Swedish, it includes a summary in English. According to the report, the rapid development of new fields of application and a lack of knowledge call for caution. The report states that companies are responsible for ensuring that human health and the environment are not damaged and that legislation needs to be extended to cover nanomaterials.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (Bundesanstalt für Arbeitsschutz und Arbeitsmedizin/BAuA) (FIOSH) and the German Chemical Industry Association (Verband der Chemischen Industrie/VCI) (GCIA) have issued draft document entitled Guidance for Handling and Use of Nanomaterials at the Workplace. The Guidance is intended to provide an overview of occupational health and safety measures in the production and use of nanomaterials. The basis for the Guidance is a survey FIOSH and GCIA conducted in 2006 regarding occupational health and safety measures for handling and using nanomaterials. The Guidance provides recommendations for workers’ protection measures in the handling and use of nanomaterials, based on hazard assessments. The Guidance discusses the state of methods available for measuring nanoparticles and provides a flowchart that recommends specific hazard assessment activities based on the responses to flowchart questions. The Guidance will be developed further by mid-2008 to meet the advancing state of knowledge of nanoparticles.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

According to the fourth quarterly report for the UK’s Voluntary Reporting Scheme (VRS) for Manufactured Nanomaterials, the Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) received no new submissions during the most recent quarter. Since the VRS began in September 2006, DEFRA has received a total of nine submissions, seven from industry and two from academia. In late July 2007, the Advisory Committee on Hazardous Substances (ACHS) reported the findings of its review of the VRS. ACHS concluded that improvements to the VRS guidance documents were needed to increase participation levels and enhance the quality and relevance of data submitted. ACHS recommended changes to the scheme literature to make its purpose clearer and make the specific data requested from industry more explicit. The report states that DEFRA will publish revised guidance shortly. The VRS is scheduled to end in September 2008, at which time DEFRA will evaluate its success and consider alternatives, including compulsory data submissions, if necessary.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Environment Canada (EC) and Health Canada (HC) have released a document entitled Proposed Regulatory Framework for Nanomaterials Under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (Proposed Framework). EC/HC will hold a public workshop for stakeholders regarding the Proposed Framework on September 27, 2007, in Toronto. At the workshop, EC/HC will gather comments from participating stakeholders through discussion groups and plenary sessions. EC/HC will invite all stakeholders to provide additional written comments the weeks following the meeting. Click here to request a copy of Bergeson & Campbell, P.C.’s memorandum on the Proposed Framework.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On August 30, 2007, Greenpeace International (Greenpeace) issued a report entitled Navigating REACH: An Activists’ Guide To Using and Improving the New EU Chemicals Legislation (Guide), which is intended to explain how the European Union’s (EU) Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regulation will work, what main issues are at stake, and how the law will be implemented. The Guide highlights provisions that non-governmental organizations (NGO) and citizens can use to promote safer chemicals and lead ultimately to better protection of human health and the environment from the adverse impact of hazardous chemicals. The Guide includes nanomaterials among the issues for NGOs:

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The European Commission (EC) Directorate General for Health and Consumer Protection retained GreenFacts to summarize the EC’s 2006 report entitled Modified Opinion (After Public Consultation) on the Appropriateness of Existing Methodologies to Assess the Potential Risks Associated with Engineered and Adventitious Products of Nanotechnologies. According to GreenFacts, the EC’s Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) wrote its Opinion for a scientific audience. GreenFacts prepared its summary for a broader audience.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On August 8, 2007, the European Commission (EC) released the scientific opinion of the Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) on the appropriateness of the risk assessment methodology in accordance with the European Union’s (EU) technical guidance documents for new and existing substances for assessing the risks of nanomaterials. SCENIHR concluded that modifications to the existing technical guidance documents are necessary because special characterization of nanomaterial properties, which potentially differ considerably from conventional chemicals, is needed. Furthermore, the toxicological behavior and effects on health and the environment need to be assessed properly.  The opinion states that, due to the lack of common rules for the toxicology of nanomaterials, the risk assessment of nanomaterials should be done on a case-by-case basis. SCENIHR identified issues requiring improvements in the technical guidance and methodologies, and proposed a staged strategy for the risk assessment of nanomaterials. Special consideration is required for the assessment of the potential translocation of nanoparticles in humans and other species, and potential adverse effects, for example, within the cardiovascular system or following passage across the blood-brain barrier.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On July 31, 2007, an international coalition of consumer, public health, environmental, and labor organizations issued the Principles for the Oversight of Nanotechnologies and Nanomaterials and called for strong, comprehensive oversight of the new technology and its products. According to the coalition, the manufacture of products using technology has “exploded in recent years,” while “evidence indicates that current nanomaterials may pose significant health, safety, and environmental hazards.”

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

According to a recent survey presented at the Rural Futures conference in Canberra, Australia, nanotechnology in food and farming is inadequately regulated. Rural sociologist Dr. Kristin Lyons, Griffith University, stated: “Despite significant investment from the agrifood sector in nanotechnologies, the need for nano-specific regulation in this area hasn’t been recognised as a priority by the federal government.” Lyons said that the nano-agrifood industry will be worth more than US $20 billion by 2010.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The proceedings of the June 19-21, 2007, EuroNanoForum 2007 are available. According to the European Commission (EC), they “provide an overview of the state-of-the-art in nanotechnology for industrial applications, presented by selected international top speakers to open up new perspectives in Europe for coming years.”

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On July 23, 2007, the United Kingdom (UK) Royal Society issued a press release entitled “’Responsible NanoCode’ for business to be developed.” The press release states: “An initiative to develop a ‘Responsible NanoCode' for businesses working with nanotechnologies has been launched by the Royal Society, Insight Investment, the Nanotechnology Industries Association and the Nanotechnology Knowledge Transfer Network today.” The Code is intended to establish a set of internationally relevant principles that outline good practice for businesses involved in all aspects of these emerging technologies and their applications including research, development, manufacturing, distribution, and retailing. An open consultation will take place in Autumn 2007 when a draft code will be available for comment.  The working group aims to publish the Code early in 2008.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On July 19, 2007, the European Commission (EC) issued a press release entitled “Commission launches consultation on responsible research in Nanosciences and Nanotechnologies.” The press release states: “The European Commission has today announced a public consultation on responsible nanosciences and nanotechnologies research.  The consultation will provide input for a Recommendation to the Member States on a possible Code of Conduct for this emerging area of science, which the Commission will put forward later this year.  Contributions are expected from a broad cross-section of European society, including the scientific community, industry, civil society, policy-makers, media and the general public.”

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Environment Canada (EC) recently posted a New Substances Program Advisory Note entitled “Requirements for nanomaterials under the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers).” The Advisory Note was signed in June 2007 and states that the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA) and the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers) (Regulations) “apply to new nanomaterials just as any other substance, whether a chemical or a polymer.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Until September 6, 2007, the European Commission (EC) Scientific Committee on Consumer Products (SCCP) is accepting comments on its Preliminary Opinion on the Safety of Nanomaterials in Cosmetic Products. According to the SCCP, traditional risk assessment methods -- hazard identification, hazard characterization, and exposure assessment -- may not be suitable for nanomaterials in cosmetics.  The SCCP suggests that either a new method should be developed, or the existing methodologies for hazard characterization and exposure assessment should be validated.  The SCCP recommends that the risk assessment of nanoparticles in cosmetics should be carried out on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the specific physical, chemical, and surface area characteristics of nanomaterials.  Previous safety evaluations on nanomaterials used in cosmetics would also need to be revised.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The International Council on Nanotechnology (ICON) held a workshop entitled “Towards Predicting Nano-Bio Interactions” on June 5-7, 2007. The plenary presentations and meeting information are now online.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The July 2007 issue of Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology includes an article entitled “Limits and Prospects of the ‘Incremental Approach’ and the European Legislation on the Management of Risks Related to Nanomaterials.” According to the authors, the European Commission (EC) has adopted an incremental approach, focusing on adopting existing laws to regulate nanotechnologies. The authors concluded that the current regulations fail to address the environmental, health, and safety risks posed by nanomaterials and recommended specific revisions to European regulatory policies and the information on which they are based.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The European Commission (EC) will hold its annual Green Week in Brussels, Belgium, from June 12-15, 2007.  On June 14, 2007, an afternoon session will examine the benefits of nanotechnology for the environment and on how nanotechnologies could help to solve major environmental problems, e.g., climate change, energy efficiency, resources use, remediation and pollution prevention, opportunities for developing countries, as well as the potential risks for environment and health.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On May 30, 2007, the Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy (CIELAP) released a document entitled Discussion Paper on a Policy Framework for Nanotechnology, which builds on policy issues discussed at a March 16, 2007, workshop. CIELAP states that it supports a goal statement and context for nanotechnology policy that is centered on an explicit recognition and endorsement of sustainable development.  According to CIELAP, the policy challenges for nanotechnology are enormous, and currently are dominated by a lack of scientific information and basic policy tools, including definitions and metrology; a legal and regulatory framework; and structures and resources for public engagement.  CIELAP notes that, despite these gaps, however, many parallels with other issues and institutional arrangements exist, and could be adapted for nanotechnology.  Due to nanotechnology’s extraordinarily rapid commercialization and development, speed and a strong sense of urgency are needed by government for a responsible Canadian approach to the creation of policy for this area.