Documents REACH Regulation 213 results

"In this timely and insightful book, Laura Maxim evaluates the use of socio-economic analysis (SEA) in the regulation of potentially carcinogenic, mutagenic, and toxic chemicals. Retracing the history of the use of cost-benefit analysis in chemical risk policies, this book presents contemporary discourse on the political success of SEA.

Informed by empirical research, theoretical analysis, and professional experience in implementing EU Regulation on the Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), Maxim proposes a new form of risk regulation called ‘regulatory co-management', of which SEA has become a convenient tool. Chapters outline the controversy surrounding cost-benefit analysis in the US, the history of chemical regulation in Europe since 1967, and the construction and institutionalization of the European Chemicals Agency's (ECHA) socio-economic guidelines. The book concludes by analyzing legal, political, and ethical criticisms of the role of SEA in the authorization of chemicals such as lead chromate, chromium trioxide, and sodium dichromate."

"For hazard assessment of NPs quantitative nanoecotoxicological data are required. The objective of this review was to evaluate the currently existing literature data on toxicity (L(E)C50 values) of synthetic NPs in environmentally relevant species in order to: (i) identify tentatively most harmful NPs and most sensitive organism groups, and (ii) to provide relevant ecotoxicological information for further risk assessment. The focus was set on selected synthetic NPs (nano TiO(2), nano ZnO, nano CuO, nano Ag, SWCNTs, MWCNs and C60-fullerenes) and organism groups representing main food-chain levels (bacteria, algae, crustaceans, ciliates, fish, yeasts and nematodes). Altogether 77 effect values were found, mostly for nano TiO(2) (31%), C60 (18%), nano ZnO (17%), nano Ag (13%), SWCNTs and nano CuO (both 9%). Only 3% of the available quantitative ecotoxicological information concerned MWCNTs. Organism-wise, 33% of the data concerned crustaceans, 27% bacteria, 14% algae and 13% fish. For all organism groups studied, solubility of CuO- and ZnO-NPs was a key factor in their aquatic toxicity. On the basis of the 34 median L(E)C50 values derived from 77 individual values, NPs were ranked according to their lowest median L(E)C50 value for the above described organism groups: the most harmful were nano Ag and nano ZnO that were classified "extremely toxic", (L(E)C50<0.1mg/l), followed by C60 fullerenes and nano CuO that were classified "very toxic", (L(E)C50 0.1-1mg/l). SWCNTs and MWCNTs were classified "toxic" (L(E)C50 1-10mg/l). Nano TiO(2) was classified as "harmful", (L(E)C50 10-100mg/l). Throughout, algae and crustaceans (daphnids) were most sensitive and thus probably most vulnerable organism groups in aquatic exposure to NPs. Very low L(E)C50 values should deserve thorough attention of environmental risk assessors for evaluation of the potential adverse effects of synthetic NPs on ecosystems. As the quantitative nanoecotoxicological data are still rare, further studies are needed."

"The European Commission has proposed a radical new policy for the regulation of chemicals in the EU in the form of aWhite Paper. The current system has separate regulatory provisions for “new” chemicals (introduced to the market since September 18, 1981) and “existing” chemicals (on the market before September 18, 1981). The proposed future policy will have a single unified regulatory system for all chemicals, which should result in better regulation of chemicals in the EU single market. It will be better because risk assessments will be targeted at the chemicals of greatest concern. Furthermore, the system will be streamlined, making regulatory decisions faster, and thus reducing the so-called burden of the past (the large number of chemicals that have never been assessed for their risks to human health or the environment). The new system incorporates the precautionary principle, which will be applied where there is an early indication of unacceptable risk or where there is undue delay in the regulatory process. Moreover, the new strategy is intended to promote greater transparency for all stakeholders."

"La prévention des risques chimiques, en particulier les risques pour la santé en milieu de travail, passe par une connaissance suffisante des propriétés et des utilisations des substances et par une approche cohérente et systématique d'évaluation des risques de ces substances. C'est principalement pour répondre à cet objectif que la Commission européenne a proposé en octobre 2003 un nouveau dispositif réglementaire, baptisé REACH, qui introduit un système global de contrôle des substances chimiques. Ce règlement mettra en oeuvre trois procédures : l'enregistrement, l'évaluation et, dans certains cas, l'autorisation ou la restriction d'usage des substances chimiques. Une agence européenne des produits chimiques sera créée qui devrait jouer un rôle clef dans le processus. Après de longs débats qui ont mis en évidence la complexité et les enjeux socio-économiques du projet, le Conseil a arrêté en juin 2006 une position commune qui reflète au moins 200 des amendements proposés par le Parlement européen. Cet article présente les étapes essentielles du nouveau dispositif tel que prévu dans la position commune. Toutefois, les discussions se poursuivent au Conseil et au Parlement et certains éléments spécifiques pourraient encore évoluer. D'après les estimations de la Commission, la procédure de co-décision pourrait se conclure en 2007 et REACH entrer en vigueur au plus tard en 2008."

"We recently completed a review of scientific evidence, particularly epidemiologic evidence, regarding the contribution of environmental and occupational exposures to the overall cancer burden in the US. We evaluated the efforts to estimate the proportion of cancer due to these involuntary exposures, including the ambitious effort by Doll and Peto and an update by a group of authors at the Harvard Center for Cancer Prevention. In this paper, we critique these efforts, and their resulting estimates of the proportion of cancer due to various factors. We also provide an alternative interpretation of the evidence and a caution against the very idea of attributing specific fractions or proportions of cancer to particular factors. We conclude by recommending that environmental and occupational links to cancer be given serious consideration by individuals and institutions concerned with cancer prevention, particularly those involved in research and public education. We support the new initiative in the European Union to evaluate chemicals more fully before they reach the market."

"It lays out a foundation for future studies using a set of indicators, in order to monitor the success of REACH. Three main indicators most closely related to the main objectives of REACH were noted: administrative indicators, risk & quality indicator system and supplementary indicators.
The study will monitor changes to risk and the current information base on chemicals, including the quality of such information. The study noted the difficulty in tracking risk reduction and used a subset of chemicals taken out of the approximately 30,000 chemicals regulated under REACH."