scholarly journals Comparative Requirements for Premarketing Premanufacture Notifications in the EC Countries and the USA, with Special Reference to Risk Assessment in the Framework of the US Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)

1983 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph C. Arcos

The legal-scientific control system for toxic substances is embodied in the 79/831 EC Directive in the European Community countries and in the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) in the United States. The 6th Amendment of the EC Directive and Section 5 of TSCA cover notification of new chemicals and require a Premarketing Notification and a Premanufacture Notification, respectively (both known as PMN). Beyond a commonality of some general information required in the submission on a new chemical (such as chemical identity and molecular structure, proposed categories of use, production or importation level) there are two important differences between the two systems. First, the EC Directive requires as a mandatory part of a PMN submission a specified “base set” of health, environmental, and physicochemical test data; TSCA Section S does not specify a set of mandatory test data but requires, as a part of the PMN submission, data on all health and environmental effects in the possession or control of the notifier, as well as on byproducts, resulting from the manufacture, processing, use, or disposal of the new chemical. Second, the EC Directive is not concerned with either controlling the potential adverse health and environmental effects of a new chemical or with the assessment of risk that these effects represent; these issues are left up to the EC member states to legislate and handle. Forty-five days after submission of an EC PMN, if all notification requirements have been met and if the packaging and labeling requirements comply with the Directive, the chemical may be placed on the market. In TSCA, companies must notify the US EPA 90 days before they intend to begin the manufacturing or importation of a new chemical for commercial use. The 90 days (which may be extended under TSCA to 180) is used by EPA to carry out an initial assessment of the health and environmental risk that the chemical may represent. Should a “reasoned evaluation” of the data submitted and/or otherwise available indicate that the chemical could or does present an “unreasonable risk to health and the environment,” the Agency can, under Sections 5(e) and 5(f), respectively, limit or prohibit the production, use or disposal of the chemical. Both the EC Directive and TSCA mandate the establishment and publication of Inventories of chemicals. The EC Directive Inventory is a closed system, listing only those chemicals which were on the EC market during specified reporting periods; chemicals submitted subsequently will remain “new” so that each subsequent manufacturer or importer must submit a PMN. In contrast, the TSCA Inventory keeps on continuously increasing by those PMN chemicals, the manufacture or importation of which has actually begun. The TSCA assessment framework for chemicals makes a clear distinction between hazard and risk. The hazard of a chemical represents its suspected or established inherent toxicological capabilities to inflict damage on the health of humans, animals, plants, and the environment at-large, through some type of exposure. There is risk, when there is actual exposure to a hazardous chemical; in other words, risk of chemicals represents the overlap of hazard and exposure. The overall process of PMN assessment in the US EPA includes a first phase of risk assessment and a second phase of regulatory disposition. In accordance with the distinction made between hazard, exposure and risk, the stage-setting initial evaluation of PMNs is carried out along two converging procedural channels (representing hazard assessment and exposure assessment) in the risk assessment stage. Following the convergence of the outcomes of the hazard and exposure assessments, the level of risk that a new chemical may represent determines the regulatory disposition (if any) taken subsequently. A key component of the hazard assessment of PMN chemicals at EPA resides in the Structure-Activity Team (SAT). SAT assesses PMNs against a hazard evaluation grid, representing data or estimate categories on chemical and physiocochemical properties, environmental fate, bioaccumulation, irritant properties toward and absorption into living organisms, acute and chronic toxicological and pharmacological effects, generation of xenobiotic metabolic split products, impurities present,, etc. The hazard rating of PMN chemicals (into those of low-, medium-, and high-level concern) is based on a combination of three approaches or data source categories: (a) evaluation of the test data and related information submitted; (b) evaluation of the xenobiotic and/or pharmacological potentialities of the compound regarded singly, as distinct from its possible analogy to other compounds; (c) structure-activity relationship analysis, based on structural analogy to compounds or classes of compounds established to have xenobiotic effects. Only chemicals of substantial concern are led through all steps of the assessment process. Submissions on certain categories of PMN chemicals (e.g., certain water-insoluble high polymers, low/medium hazard level photographic chemicals incorporated into films) receive special procedural treatment and undergo limited assessment.

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Rade Milošević ◽  
Sanja Mrazovac-Kurilić

In industrial zones such as the municipality of Kikinda (presented in this manuscript) it is necessary to monitor environmental pollution and take measures to protect the environment from the effects of harmful polluting and toxic substances (especially from heavy metals). The risk assessment model developed by the US EPA was used to assess the health risks posed by emissions of heavy metals in the air in Kikinda industry zone. It can be concluded that no increased level of risk was identified from heavy metals content in the air from industry systems in the area of the industrial zone in Kikinda, however, it is necessary to apply preventive measures in order to reduce the accumulation of heavy metals in the environment due to activities that are constant in that area.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zahid Imran Bhatti ◽  
Muhammad Ishtiaq ◽  
Said Akbbar Khan ◽  
javed nawab ◽  
Sardar Khan ◽  
...  

Abstract Accelerated mining activities have increased water contamination with potentially toxic elements (PTEs) and their associated human health risk in developing countries. The current study investigated the distribution of PTEs, their potential sources and health risk assessment in both ground and surface water sources in mining and non–mining areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Water samples (n=150) were taken from selected sites and were analyzed for six PTEs (Ni, Cr, Zn, Cu, Pb and Mn). Among PTEs, Cr showed high mean concentration (497) μg L–1, followed by Zn (414) μg L–1 in mining area, while Zn showed lowest mean value (4.44) μg L–1 in non-mining areas. Elevated concentrations of Ni, Cr and moderate level of Pb in ground and surface water of Mohmand District exceeded the permissible limits set by WHO (2017). Multivariate statistical analyses showed that pollution sources of PTEs were mainly from mafic-ultramafic rocks, acid mine drainage, open dumping of mine-wastes and mine tailings. The hazard quotient (HQ) was highest for children relatively to adults, but not higher than the US-EPA limits. The hazard index (HI) for ingestions of all selected PTEs were lower than the threshold value (HIing <1), except Mohmand District which showed (HI >1) in mining areas through ingestion. Moreover, the carcinogenic risk (CR) values exceeded the threshold limits for Ni and Cr set by the US-EPA (1.0E−04 to 1.0E−06). In order to protect the drinking water sources of the study areas from more contamination, the management techniques and policy for mining operations need to be implemented.


2006 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
P F Ricci ◽  
L A Cox ◽  
T R MacDonald

How can empirical evidence of adverse effects from exposure to noxious agents, which is often incomplete and uncertain, be used most appropriately to protect human health? We examine several important questions on the best uses of empirical evidence in regulatory risk management decision–making raised by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s science–policy concerning uncertainty and variability in human health risk assessment. In our view, the US EPA (and other agencies that have adopted similar views of risk management) can often improve decision–making by decreasing reliance on default values and assumptions, particularly when causation is uncertain. This can be achieved by more fully exploiting decision–theoretic methods and criteria that explicitly account for uncertain, possibly conflicting scientific beliefs and that can be fully studied by advocates and adversaries of a policy choice, in administrative decision–making involving risk assessment. The substitution of decision–theoretic frameworks for default assumption–driven policies also allows stakeholder attitudes toward risk to be incorporated into policy debates, so that the public and risk managers can more explicitly identify the roles of risk–aversion or other attitudes toward risk and uncertainty in policy recommendations. Decision theory provides a sound scientific way explicitly to account for new knowledge and its effects on eventual policy choices. Although these improvements can complicate regulatory analyses, simplifying default assumptions can create substantial costs to society and can prematurely cut off consideration of new scientific insights (e.g., possible beneficial health effects from exposure to sufficiently low ‘hormetic’ doses of some agents). In many cases, the administrative burden of applying decision–analytic methods is likely to be more than offset by improved effectiveness of regulations in achieving desired goals. Because many foreign jurisdictions adopt US EPA reasoning and methods of risk analysis, it may be especially valuable to incorporate decision–theoretic principles that transcend local differences among jurisdictions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document