Canada announced on January 9, 2015, that the New Substances Program has published six new risk assessment summaries for chemicals and polymers, including a summary for multi-wall carbon nanotubes. See http://www.ec.gc.ca/subsnouvelles-newsubs/default.asp?lang=En&n=4BCC7425-1 Environment Canada and Health Canada conduct risk assessments on new substances. These assessments include consideration of information on physical and chemical properties, hazards, uses, and exposure to determine whether a substance is or may become harmful to human health or environment as set out in Section 64 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA 1999), and, if harm is suspected, to introduce any appropriate or required control measures.

“On November 24, 2014, the European Parliament (EP) Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI) considered draft legislation concerning novel foods. See http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/content/20141125IPR80424/html/Novel-foods-MEPs-call-for-moratorium-on-nano-foods-and-labelling-of-cloned-meat. The Committee amended the draft legislation, proposing a moratorium on the use of nanomaterials in food based on the precautionary principle. The Committee approved the amended draft legislation by a vote of 57-4, with two abstentions. EP Member James Nicholson (ECR, UK), who is steering the legislation through the EP, stated that he was not completely satisfied with the vote. ”

The European Parliament (EP) Committee on Environment, Public Health, and Food Safety (ENVI) has posted a study entitled ENVI Relevant Legislative Areas of the EU-US Trade and Investment Partnership Negotiations (TTIP). See http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=IPOL_STU(2014)536293. The study analyzes the main differences between European Union (EU) and U.S. legislation in eight areas: human medicines and medical devices; cosmetics; food and nutrition; sanitary and phyto-sanitary; nanomaterials; cloning; raw materials and energy; and motor vehicles. 

Chemicals play a central role in our personal and professional lives. As consumers, we focus keenly on the chemicals in the products we use and with which we come into contact. Globalization and the emergence worldwide of sophisticated chemical management programs invite complex legal, commercial, and scientific challenges. These challenges extend far beyond compliance questions that, by comparison, seem now nostalgically straightforward. Understanding these programs and their evolution can only help inform our judgment as lawyers, consultants, and educated consumers.

On August 9, 2014, Canada published a proposal for adopting the Globally Harmonized System for Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS). GHS compliance is a big issue for just about all manufacturers, and understanding the approach of our neighbor to the north is important. This column summarizes the highlights.

The Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) will host a nanotechnology regulation symposium on October 28, 2014. See http://apvma.gov.au/node/11191 APVMA states that it "has worked over many years to progressively develop a regulatory framework for nanoscale agvet chemicals and chemical products." APVMA intends the symposium to provide industry and regulators with an opportunity for dialogue on the future regulation of nanopesticides and veterinary nanomedicines.

Nano product registries in Europe are the newest twist to satiating the public’s relentless “right to know.” Nominally intended to prevent hazards, facilitate monitoring, and promote consumer choice, nano product registries also risk stigmatizing nano products, diverting limited government and private resources, and potentially creating commercial barriers to a promising technology. This article in the American Bar Association’s Natural Resources & Environment magazine focuses on efforts of multiple European countries that are presently at varying stages of establishing product registries to keep track of nanomaterials and the products that contain them. After outlining the stated purposes of these registries and explaining how they operate, the article explores whether they are achieving their stated goals or inadvertently inviting unintended consequences.

The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) Biocidal Products Committee (BPC) adopted an opinion on April 10, 2014, concerning HeiQ AGS-20 (AGS-20). See http://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/21680461/bpc_opinion_heiq_ags-20_en.pdf.