USEPA Finalizes First Nationwide Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Requirements

This post was written by Rose Standifer and Jennifer Smokelin.

Mandatory reporting of greenhouse gases (GHG) is now required nationwide. On Tuesday, September 22, 2009, the U.S. Environmental Project Agency (EPA) issued its Final Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Rule. The final rule requires mandatory reporting of GHG from most large GHG emissions sources in the United States. The stated purpose of the rule is to collect accurate and timely emissions data to inform future policy decisions. Reporting requirements begin on January 1, 2010. Initial reports, covering emissions during 2010, are due on March 31, 2011.

Continue Reading...

USEPA Again Targets Antimicrobial Products Under FIFRA

This post was written by David Wagner.

On September 21, 2009, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency filed a complaint against VF Corporation for the alleged sale and distribution of unregistered pesticides through its outdoor gear company, The North Face. VF Corporation faces up to $1 million in fines for selling shoes containing an unregistered pesticide and making unverified health-related claims for about 70 shoe products using AgION silver ion technology. Although the products do not claim to use nanomaterials, the alleged claims in the complaint are similar to claims for antimicrobial products containing nanomaterials. In fact, this lawsuit is similar to the February 2008 suit filed by USEPA against a technology company for allegedly making unsubstantiated claims about the antimicrobial capabilities of its computers keyboards and mouse accessories.

In its complaint, USEPA stated the company made unsubstantiated claims about its footwear, including claims that “AgION antimicrobial silver agent inhibits the growth of disease-causing bacteria” and that its product “prevents bacterial and fungal growth”. Products discovered online and evidence found at The North Face retail store in San Francisco led USEPA to file the complaint under the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), which prohibits unsubstantiated public health claims regarding unregistered products.

Researchers and Regulators Are Debating the Costs of REACH

This post was written by David Wagner.

In the last several weeks, there’s been some back and forth between researchers and regulators on how REACH legislation will affect costs and loss of animal lives.  In a study published on August 26 in the journal Nature, the researchers reported that toxicity testing required by REACH will cost $13.6 billion, or six times more than estimated, and require 54 million research animals, or 20 times higher than the previous estimate.  The study reports that the European Union’s cost estimate was based on preregistration of 29,000 substances which was well below the actual preregistration total of 140,000 substances.  Accounting for redundancies and mistakes in preregistration, the study estimated that a conservative estimate puts preregistration at about 68,000 substances.  Using this number as the basis for its analysis, the study determined that REACH’s costs are likely to be substantially higher, largely because of a requirement to test chemicals’ effects on reproductive systems in two generations of animals -- a test that requires a large number of test subjects. But the study’s results have been challenged by the regulators.

Continue Reading...

Recent Study is First to Suggest Death from Exposure to Nanoparticles

This post was written by Tony Klapper and Jesse Ash.

A study published this summer claims an association exists between exposure to nanoparticles and the deaths of two workers and the illnesses of five others in a horribly ventilated, cramped Chinese factory.  While the authors conclude that long-term exposure to nanoparticles without protective measures may be related to serious damage to human lungs, the study has several significant flaws.  This Reed Smith client bulletin provides some details on the study's findings and its weaknesses while framing the results in the larger context of the need to employ appropriate risk management practices when making or using nanomaterials.