Impacts of the European Commission’s REACH Proposal on Risk Assessment Joel A. Tickner, ScD and Ken Geiser, PhD Lowell Center for Sustainable Production.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Toxics Use Reduction Institute Alternatives Assessment: An Overview Pam Eliason Toxics Use Reduction Institute
Advertisements

Jim Jones Acting Assistant Administrator Office of Chemical Safety & Pollution Prevention 1.
Interactions between IED and REACH Exploring the opportunities for cooperation Valletta, Malta October 2013 Geert Dancet Executive Director Conference.
1 INTRODUCTION What is Happening with REACH Hong Kong
Challenges and opportunities for effective implementation of TSCA Joel A. Tickner, ScD School of Health and Environment, UMASS Lowell US EPA National Pollution.
Health and Safety Executive Regulator’s expectation in implementation of comparative assessment Jayne Wilder Chemicals Regulation Directorate, Health and.
Toxics Use Reduction Institute Chemicals Policy in Europe: New Directions Rachel Massey Policy Analyst April 2006.
Controlling Toxic Chemicals: Production, Use, and Disposal Chapter 19 © 2004 Thomson Learning/South-Western.
Chemicals Policy Update Regulatory options for pollution prevention and toxics use reduction. Ken Zarker, P2 Section Manager Washington State Department.
Chemicals Policy – A View from the United States Joel Tickner, ScD, Ken Geiser, PhD Lowell Center for Sustainable Production University of Massachusetts.
RESTRUCTURING CHEMICALS POLICY:The European Challenge Ken Geiser, Ph.D. and Joel Tickner, Sc.D. Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Department of.
The Substitution Approach in the “White Paper on the Future EU Chemicals Policy” European Conference on Substitution of Hazardous Chemicals Hamburg, 13.
1 REACh Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals and Restriction! Ohio Valley SOT Wednesday, August 26, 2009 REACh: The New Toxicology Frontier.
More on REACH Andrew Fasey 15 November 2005 Univ of Virginia, USA.
The Knowledge Resources Guide The SUVOT Project Sustainable and Vocational Tourism Rimini, 20 October 2005.
The role of NGOs in promoting sustainable consumption and production Dr. Nadia Haiama-Neurohr Senior policy officer “2nd international expert meeting on.
European Commission, DG Environment Unit C.3: Chemicals REACH Key issues for the paper industry CEPI Open Seminar – European Paper Week 1 December 2005.
Green Chemistry in Commerce Council Drivers for Innovation & Marketing Safer Products Yve Torrie, MA Lowell Center for Sustainable Production
From Reaction to Prevention: Ensuring that TSCA Reform and Other Chemicals Policies Stimulate the Transition Towards Safer and More Sustainable Chemicals.
Guidance for AONB Partnership Members Welsh Member Training January 26/
International Initiatives and the U.S. HPV Challenge Program Ken Geiser, PhD Lowell Center for Sustainable Production University of Massachusetts Lowell.
Preparing for REACH implementation: The RIP process Dimosthenis A. Sarigiannis, PhD Institute for Health and Consumer Protection DG Joint Research Centre.
REACH New requirements for introduction of chemicals on EU market Jana Kovačičová Centre for Chemical Substances and Preparations Bratislava, Slovakia.
The Toxics Use Reduction Act in Massachusetts: A Successful Model in Toxics Substitution and Reduction Joel A. Tickner, ScD Lowell Center for Sustainable.
The Landscape of State Chemicals Regulation Joel A. Tickner, ScD Lowell Center for Sustainable Production University of Massachusetts Lowell
European Commission REACH European Chemicals Policy Experts Tour USA, October 2003 Robert Donkers, Delegation of the European Commission to the U.S.
Identifying Tools to Rapidly Characterize & Prioritize Chemicals in Commerce for Prevention Joel A. Tickner, ScD Lowell Center for Sustainable Production.
HERA STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP-11 JULY FUTURE CHEMICALS POLICY and HERA Anne-Marie Rodeyns, A.I.S.E. Deputy Director 11 July 2002.
Framing a Future Chemicals Policy Joel A. Tickner, ScD Lowell Center for Sustainable Production April 28, 2005.
1 REACH, the Future EU policy for Chemicals European Conference in Eretria April 27, 2004 Tony Musu – European Trade Union Technical Bureau/ETUC.
Communication Paper on Smart Regulation COM(2010) 543, 8 October 2010 Presentation by Savia Orphanidou 3 rd November 2010.
Chemical & Environment Considerations in Product Safety: Current research, legislation, and the public and industry response Chemical Safety Regulations.
Some Developments in EU Environmental Legislation, and Potential Military Implications Simon Taylor, ERM.
Challenges of developing national capacity for PRTR systems in Central and Eastern Europe Magda Tóth Nagy Public Participation Program June 2004.
Employment and Chemical risks Tony Musu, ETUI-REHS Developing trade union activities on sustainable development and employment Torino, 27 October 2006.
EPA essential principles for reform of chemicals management legislation – lessons from REACH Dr Veerle Heyvaert London School of Economics Chemical Regulation:
Precautionary Principle– Use in EU Chemicals Legislation Bjorn Hansen Head of Unit: Chemicals European Commission, DG Environment Precaution and Innovation,
Malaysia Update on “draft” proposal for the Environmentally Hazardous Substance (“EHS”) Notification and Registration Scheme.
H. Wriedt / G. Kittel REACH in 30 minutes - EWHN Conference 2006, Jurmala/Latvia Arbeit Gesundheit & Beratungs- Informationsstelle & REACH in 30 minutes:
September 22, 2011 Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics1.
REACH Activities in progress in ITALY UNICHIM - Milano
REACH A modern chemicals policy Anya Oram Head of the Economic and Commercial Affairs Section Delegation of the European Commission in Canada.
Overview & Implications for Affinia Registration, Evaluation, and Authorisation of Chemicals.
Can REACH become the New Global Model? Helsinki Chemicals Forum 20 May 2010 Jukka Malm, Director ECHA – Directorate of Assessment.
REACH: state of art and base definitions WERCS 2007 US User group Albany 27/06/2007 Dr. Erwin Annys Sr. Advisor Product & Innovation Policy.
ROPES & GRAY LLP Chemical Policy Reform: State/Federal Approaches Mark Greenwood.
REACH: state of art and base definitions Dr. Erwin Annys Sr. Advisor Product & Innovation Policy WERCS 2007 EU User group Napoli 31/05/07.
Industry Perspective on TSCA Modernization ABA Conference June 11, 2010.
New Framework for EPA’s Chemical Management Program Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Wendy Cleland-Hamnett, Director.
An overview of OECD Strategies for Improving Regulatory Performance Regulatory Reform and Building Governance Capacities – New Delhi 3 December 2009 Mr.
Sustainability in the Supply Chain 5 © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. SUPPLEMENT.
European network for Health Technology Assessment | JA | EUnetHTA European network for Health Technology Assessment THL Info.
Helsinki Chemicals Forum 2015 Concluding Remarks Second Day Jukka Malm European Chemicals Agency.
Introduction to REACH Flavie Guérin U.S. Mission to the EU 15 November 2011.
NICNAS Reforms Community Stakeholder Workshop. Input from non-industry stakeholders on NICNAS Reforms Working within parameters of Government decision.
We personally care 31 May 2016 – Working Group on Cosmetic Products EU Cosmetics Regulation – Article 15.2 Criteria for exempting CMR1A and 1B from being.
2echa.europa.eu/reach-2018 Purpose of this presentation This presentation, with notes, was prepared by ECHA, the European Chemicals Agency, to assist.
Lowell Randel Global Cold Chain Alliance/ International Institute of Ammonia Refrigeration.
Position of the Japanese Government and Possible impact of the REACH on Japanese trade relations with the EU.
Potential Impact on the Cotton Industry
REACH Regulation (EC) No.1907/2006
Climate Change and River Basin Planning
22/02/2019 REACH REACH update.
The proposed legislation
International Initiatives and the U.S. HPV Challenge Program
Presentation to IPC RoHS Meeting
Water scarcity and droughts
Conclusions from the Review of REACH
STRATEGY ON MANAGEMENT OF SUBSTANCES (SOMS)
Lowell Center for Sustainable Production
Presentation transcript:

Impacts of the European Commission’s REACH Proposal on Risk Assessment Joel A. Tickner, ScD and Ken Geiser, PhD Lowell Center for Sustainable Production University of Massachusetts Lowell Joel A. Tickner, ScD and Ken Geiser, PhD Lowell Center for Sustainable Production University of Massachusetts Lowell

Europe and the US – Similar Problems Lack of toxicity/exposure information on chemicals in commerce Unequal treatment of new/existing chemicals Slow chemical by chemical risk assessment process, burden on government Lack of incentives to stimulate development and implementation of safer substitutes Increasing evidence of health effects Lack of integrated and comprehensive approach to chemicals management Lack of toxicity/exposure information on chemicals in commerce Unequal treatment of new/existing chemicals Slow chemical by chemical risk assessment process, burden on government Lack of incentives to stimulate development and implementation of safer substitutes Increasing evidence of health effects Lack of integrated and comprehensive approach to chemicals management

The REACH Proposal In February of 2001, the European Commission issued a White Paper on the Future of Chemicals that proposed a major new policy called REACH REACH: Registration Evaluation Authorization of CHemicals In February of 2001, the European Commission issued a White Paper on the Future of Chemicals that proposed a major new policy called REACH REACH: Registration Evaluation Authorization of CHemicals

The REACH Proposal A duty of care on chemical producers, users, and importers for studying risks and safety A European-wide approach to chemicals policy – protect internal market Substitution of chemicals of very high concern - innovation in safer chemicals Bridge knowledge gap between new and existing chemicals – develop information on all chemicals. Reduction in animal testing Promotion of a non-toxic environment – the “generational goal” A duty of care on chemical producers, users, and importers for studying risks and safety A European-wide approach to chemicals policy – protect internal market Substitution of chemicals of very high concern - innovation in safer chemicals Bridge knowledge gap between new and existing chemicals – develop information on all chemicals. Reduction in animal testing Promotion of a non-toxic environment – the “generational goal”

Components of REACH Registration – testing, data collection, and assessment of all chemicals and supply chain information Evaluation of risks of chemicals used in greatest quantity and of highest concern Accelerated risk management for chemicals of concern Authorization for substances of highest concern. Establishment of a new central administrative agency Registration – testing, data collection, and assessment of all chemicals and supply chain information Evaluation of risks of chemicals used in greatest quantity and of highest concern Accelerated risk management for chemicals of concern Authorization for substances of highest concern. Establishment of a new central administrative agency

Registration Essentially a notification process All producers and importers of substances produced over 1m ton/year (about 30,000 substances) Phased in over 3 yrs, 6 yrs, and 11 yrs Pre-registration, consortia establishment Exemptions for R&D, intermediates, polymers, others Current New Chemicals are considered registered Requirement to submit new data Essentially a notification process All producers and importers of substances produced over 1m ton/year (about 30,000 substances) Phased in over 3 yrs, 6 yrs, and 11 yrs Pre-registration, consortia establishment Exemptions for R&D, intermediates, polymers, others Current New Chemicals are considered registered Requirement to submit new data

Registration requirements Base information – identity, information on manufacture and uses, proposed classification/labeling, Chemical safety assessment/guidance on safe use (over 10 tons) – risk assessment for all identified uses Additional tiered testing/information – requirements – flexibility Requirement to consult database/authorities before testing Required data sharing/compensation – Substance Information Exchange Forum Base information – identity, information on manufacture and uses, proposed classification/labeling, Chemical safety assessment/guidance on safe use (over 10 tons) – risk assessment for all identified uses Additional tiered testing/information – requirements – flexibility Requirement to consult database/authorities before testing Required data sharing/compensation – Substance Information Exchange Forum

Evaluation Essentially a risk screening process Two types: standard and priority Standard: minimize duplicative testing for high production volume substances Priority: review of registration to identify additional information needs (focus on high volume/high concern plus intermediates and randomly selected substances) Requirement to consult other Member States before requiring additional testing Can lead to risk management recommendations. Essentially a risk screening process Two types: standard and priority Standard: minimize duplicative testing for high production volume substances Priority: review of registration to identify additional information needs (focus on high volume/high concern plus intermediates and randomly selected substances) Requirement to consult other Member States before requiring additional testing Can lead to risk management recommendations.

Authorization Essentially a use restrictions process Applies to chemicals of very high concern – CMRs 1&2, PBTs, VPVBs, and other high concern substances Requirement to request authorization for high concern chemicals – timelines (includes use and incorporation into articles) Consideration of socio-economic benefits, alternatives, controls in place (safe use) Can be subject to conditions/time limited Community/Member State authorizations Essentially a use restrictions process Applies to chemicals of very high concern – CMRs 1&2, PBTs, VPVBs, and other high concern substances Requirement to request authorization for high concern chemicals – timelines (includes use and incorporation into articles) Consideration of socio-economic benefits, alternatives, controls in place (safe use) Can be subject to conditions/time limited Community/Member State authorizations

Restrictions process A “safety net” – for Community wide protection Member State proposal for restriction Preparation of risk assessment and socio- economic assessment Commission decision Can specify types of restrictions Time limited process A “safety net” – for Community wide protection Member State proposal for restriction Preparation of risk assessment and socio- economic assessment Commission decision Can specify types of restrictions Time limited process

Role of new chemicals agency Database on chemicals under registration/ authorization Completeness check of registration dossiers Risk assessment/socio-economic analysis for Community authorizations Risk and socio-economic analysis for restrictions Forum for exchange of information on enforcement Maintenance of much expertise in Member States Database on chemicals under registration/ authorization Completeness check of registration dossiers Risk assessment/socio-economic analysis for Community authorizations Risk and socio-economic analysis for restrictions Forum for exchange of information on enforcement Maintenance of much expertise in Member States

EU Legislative Process White Paper Draft legislation Comment Period Final Commission proposal First Reading Parliament/Council Second Reading Council/Parliament (time limited) with Commission debate Conciliation (time limited) White Paper Draft legislation Comment Period Final Commission proposal First Reading Parliament/Council Second Reading Council/Parliament (time limited) with Commission debate Conciliation (time limited)

Impacts of REACH on Risk Assessment – new data and initial burden on industry Burden on industry to come up with test data or equivalent information Availability of test data for most existing substances Ability to use surrogates (QSAR, category approach, alternatives) if satisfactory Burden on industry to provide risk assessment and risk management recommendations for all identified uses according to guidance New supply chain use and exposure data Burden on industry to come up with test data or equivalent information Availability of test data for most existing substances Ability to use surrogates (QSAR, category approach, alternatives) if satisfactory Burden on industry to provide risk assessment and risk management recommendations for all identified uses according to guidance New supply chain use and exposure data

New government risk assessment responsibilities Development of good IT system for collecting, analyzing, and public access to data Data on some 11,000 chemicals over 11 years Protecting CBI Spot checks of dossiers for completeness Member States perform evaluation of risk assessments for certain higher concern substances (high volume, toxicity concerns) For additional data/risk assessment needs For risk management recommendations Determination of new chemicals of concern for which registration is warranted – intermediates Development of good IT system for collecting, analyzing, and public access to data Data on some 11,000 chemicals over 11 years Protecting CBI Spot checks of dossiers for completeness Member States perform evaluation of risk assessments for certain higher concern substances (high volume, toxicity concerns) For additional data/risk assessment needs For risk management recommendations Determination of new chemicals of concern for which registration is warranted – intermediates

Need for rapid screening and assessment tools Need for tools to rapidly characterize chemical hazards, exposures and risks Traditional risk assessment methods won’t be quick enough Need effective prioritization schemes Need indicators of which chemicals seem to be of higher concern One option is establishment of list of “chemical categories” Opportunities to reduce registrations by encouraging non-registration of chemicals of concern. Need tools that can be given to industry to help then internalize good assessment practices Need for tools to rapidly characterize chemical hazards, exposures and risks Traditional risk assessment methods won’t be quick enough Need effective prioritization schemes Need indicators of which chemicals seem to be of higher concern One option is establishment of list of “chemical categories” Opportunities to reduce registrations by encouraging non-registration of chemicals of concern. Need tools that can be given to industry to help then internalize good assessment practices

Rapid chemicals review under TSCA Section 5 Multi-disciplinary, multi-step hazard and risk review throughout lifecycle Rapid chemical assessment using available data (SAR, surrogates, etc.) Conservative assumptions in face of data gaps Build on database/experience of 30,000 new chemicals analyzed Multi-disciplinary, multi-step hazard and risk review throughout lifecycle Rapid chemical assessment using available data (SAR, surrogates, etc.) Conservative assumptions in face of data gaps Build on database/experience of 30,000 new chemicals analyzed

Information Needs in REACH Need for good process/facility/supply chain level materials accounting information Materials not efficiently managed (what you can’t measure you can’t manage) Identifies opportunities for greater efficiency and supply chain uses and places for exposure reduction and substitution Need good metrics to measure progress Need good information on alternatives to problem substances Market pressures from good information on alternatives Need for good process/facility/supply chain level materials accounting information Materials not efficiently managed (what you can’t measure you can’t manage) Identifies opportunities for greater efficiency and supply chain uses and places for exposure reduction and substitution Need good metrics to measure progress Need good information on alternatives to problem substances Market pressures from good information on alternatives

The big risk assessment challenge in REACH – alternatives assessment Chemical changes mean process changes Potential for risk trade-offs (community, occupational) Defeats goals of REACH if companies switch to other problem substances No clear cut tools for comparative assessments P2OASys – UMASS Lowell German, Swedish, OSPAR, Nordic Substitution methodologies University of TN Risk Ranking tool/CTSA method PBT Profiler A challenge to develop procedures for substitution assessment Chemical changes mean process changes Potential for risk trade-offs (community, occupational) Defeats goals of REACH if companies switch to other problem substances No clear cut tools for comparative assessments P2OASys – UMASS Lowell German, Swedish, OSPAR, Nordic Substitution methodologies University of TN Risk Ranking tool/CTSA method PBT Profiler A challenge to develop procedures for substitution assessment

Goals of a substitution assessment method Compare toxicity, physical hazards and other trade-offs at process and lifecycle levels Identify key criteria for avoidance (ie PBT) Allow flexibility to adapt to particular chemical, use Allow use of expert judgment Number scores are easy but hide information Be simple and clear enough so that firms and regulators can use Outline a clear process/guidelines for “substitution thinking” Compare toxicity, physical hazards and other trade-offs at process and lifecycle levels Identify key criteria for avoidance (ie PBT) Allow flexibility to adapt to particular chemical, use Allow use of expert judgment Number scores are easy but hide information Be simple and clear enough so that firms and regulators can use Outline a clear process/guidelines for “substitution thinking”

A possible process for substitution assessment Problem Identification Identification and development of a range of alternatives (chemical, non-chemical) Identification of the consequences of the alternatives Comparison of the alternatives Decision Implementation Evaluation of the results/reevaluation Problem Identification Identification and development of a range of alternatives (chemical, non-chemical) Identification of the consequences of the alternatives Comparison of the alternatives Decision Implementation Evaluation of the results/reevaluation

TSCA Section 5: Guidance Towards Safer Chemicals Attempt to get safer chemicals to market to replace existing problem ones Pre-manufacture pollution prevention review of substances and syntheses Green chemistry initiatives Informal discussion with manufacturers Agency going from gatekeeper to encouraging safer chemicals and processes Attempt to get safer chemicals to market to replace existing problem ones Pre-manufacture pollution prevention review of substances and syntheses Green chemistry initiatives Informal discussion with manufacturers Agency going from gatekeeper to encouraging safer chemicals and processes

Conclusions REACH will require development of new risk assessment tools For rapid assessment For alternatives assessment Without these will have collection of data REACH will require development of clear guidance on how to assess chemicals, substitutes, and trade-offs REACH will require tools to understand risk reduction activities/progress towards goals To be more effective, REACH needs to include more data on process level use and exposure REACH will require development of new risk assessment tools For rapid assessment For alternatives assessment Without these will have collection of data REACH will require development of clear guidance on how to assess chemicals, substitutes, and trade-offs REACH will require tools to understand risk reduction activities/progress towards goals To be more effective, REACH needs to include more data on process level use and exposure

Final thoughts… If REACH internalizes holistic consideration of chemical lifecycle risks and alternatives then it has achieved some measure of success Too little attention has been paid to substitution and analysis of alternatives Equally applicable with what to do about HPV/VCCEP in the US An opportunity to guide manufacturers towards safer chemicals and syntheses. If REACH internalizes holistic consideration of chemical lifecycle risks and alternatives then it has achieved some measure of success Too little attention has been paid to substitution and analysis of alternatives Equally applicable with what to do about HPV/VCCEP in the US An opportunity to guide manufacturers towards safer chemicals and syntheses.

Lowell Center for Sustainable Production Chemicals Policy Initiative Website