PPDC Discusses Nanotechnology and Pesticides

Posted on May 5, 2010 by Lynn L. Bergeson

On April 29, 2010, during the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee (PPDC) meeting, William Jordan, Senior Policy Advisor, Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), presented slides regarding nanotechnology and pesticides. Jordan briefly described how OPP is defining nanoscale materials and how the technology is being applied to the field of pesticides. His presentation described OPP’s recent consultation with EPA’s Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) concerning nanosilver and other nanometal pesticide products, as well as other ongoing regulatory activity and future actions OPP intends to take.

OPP’s working definition of nanomaterial is:

An ingredient that contains particles that have been intentionally produced to have at least one dimension that measures between approximately 1 and 100 nanometers.

Although nanomaterials occur naturally and can be produced unintentionally, Jordan noted that OPP’s working definition includes the phrase “intentionally produced,” and that those are the ones OPP intends to address.

To obtain more data on hazard and exposure from nanosilver and other nanometal pesticide products, OPP is in the process of preparing a Federal Register notice on nanomaterials and pesticide products. The notice will announce a new interpretation of regulations under Section 6(a)(2) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and propose a new policy in June 2010. The new interpretation will be that the presence of a nanoscale material is reportable under FIFRA Section 6(a)(2). In the same notice, EPA is expected also to memorialize OPP’s view that an active or inert ingredient would be considered “new” if it is a nanoscale material.

Jordan also announced that OPP intends to respond in June 2010 to the International Center for Technology Assessment’s (ICTA) May 2008 petition. In its petition, ICTA urged EPA to regulate nanosilver products as pesticides, and asked EPA to take action on an estimated 600 unregistered nanosilver products marketed in the U.S.

Jordan noted the following activities in other EPA offices:

  • Office of Research and Development (ORD) developing a Draft Case Study on nanosilver (expected in 2010); and
  • Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) developing the following rules under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA):
  • Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) -- Intended to address nanoforms of existing chemicals;
  • Section 8(a) Rule -- Would obtain existing data on current nanomaterials; and
  • Section 4 Test Rule -- Likely at the end of 2010.

 
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

ICTA-Led Coalition Petitions for FIFRA Regulation of Nanoscale Silver Products

Posted on May 7, 2008 by Lynn L. Bergeson
On May 1, 2008, the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA), together with 13 other consumer, health, and environmental groups, filed a petition with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) demanding that EPA regulate as pesticides under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), and that it take additional actions under FIFRA and other environmental statutes concerning, consumer products containing nanoscale silver. ICTA also released an inventory of the nano silver-containing consumer products referenced in the petition.

The petition contends that nano silver is “the most commonly used nanomaterial in consumer products and the fastest growing sector of nanomaterial commercialization,” and that most companies “market their nano-silver products [by] putting emphasis on the nano-silver ingredient, touting its antimicrobial and antibacterial qualities . . . .” The petition states that “research has mounted to indicate that nano-silver materials pose serious risks to human health and the environment.” In support of the petition, the ICTA-led coalition pointed to, inter alia, EPA Region 9’s recent FIFRA enforcement settlement with a California company, IOGEAR, that had been making antimicrobial claims for the nano silver coating on computer accessories it was marketing.

The petition requests that EPA take the following actions:

  • Clarify that nano silver and products containing it are pesticides requiring registration under FIFRA;
  • Classify nanomaterial pesticides such as nano silver as new pesticides [i.e., new active ingredients] that require new registrations, with nano-specific toxicity testing and risk assessment;
  • Assess the potential human health and environmental risks of nano silver under FIFRA, the Food Quality Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act;
  • Take immediate action, including the issuance of Stop Sale, Use, or Removal Orders, to halt the sale of nano silver products with unapproved antimicrobial claims;
  • Fully apply all FIFRA regulations in the event EPA registers any nano silver products; and
  • Utilize its FIFRA authority to further review the potential human health and environmental impacts of nano silver, including undertaking either a classification review or a Special Review, amending the FIFRA regulations to require as part of a registration application the submission of nanomaterial and/or nano silver-specific data, undertaking a registration review of existing bulk silver registrations, regulating nano silver pesticide devices, and establishing a tolerance for nano silver under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

The coalition requests that EPA respond to the petition “within a reasonable time.”
Tags: , , , , , , , ,