SKIP TO CONTENT
AUSTRALIA
Australia Seeks Comment On Fifth Tranche Of IMAP Assessments: The National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme (NICNAS) has published for public comment the fifth tranche of human health and environmental assessments for chemicals identified as part of the Stage One implementation of the Inventory Multi-Tiered Assessment and Prioritization (IMAP) Framework. NICNAS requests comments where information that has the potential to affect the outcome of an assessment has not been considered. NICNAS states that for certain chemicals it is seeking information from any party, particularly companies introducing products with biocidal ingredients, which identifies industrial uses. Comments provided should be evidence-based and the relevance of submitted information should be highlighted. Comments are due October 25, 2013. More information is available online.
NICNAS Posts Handbook For Notifiers: On September 3, 2013, NICNAS posted an electronic copy of its Handbook for Notifiers, which provides guidance for importers and manufacturers of industrial chemicals in Australia. According to NICNAS, “[f]or ease of reference, industrial chemicals are defined as any chemical that has an industrial use. This includes specialty chemicals, dyes, solvents, adhesives, plastics, laboratory chemicals, chemicals used in mineral and petroleum processing, refrigeration, printing and photocopying, paints and coatings, as well as chemicals used in the home, such as cleaning products, cosmetics and toiletries.” The Handbook is divided into two volumes: the main content (12 chapters) provides details to determine whether and how to make a notification. The appendices provide additional support, guidance, and detailed relevant background information. Appendix H includes guidance and requirements for notification of new chemicals that are industrial nanomaterials. The Handbook is available online.
CHINA
Revised Guidance On SDS Compilation Will Take Effect In 2014: According to a September 6, 2013, notice from the Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China, revised guidance on the compilation of safety data sheets (SDS) for chemical products has been prepared in final and will take effect on January 31, 2014. The details of the revised guidance are not yet available. The September 6, 2013, notice is available online.
China’s Revised Catalog Of Hazardous Chemicals Available For Comment: On September 26, 2013, the State Administration of Work Safety (SAWS) issued for comment a revised Catalog of Hazardous Chemicals. The revised version includes approximately 3,000 substances, less than the almost 4,000 substances included in the current Catalog of Hazardous Chemicals. In general, the substances listed are subject to Decree 591 and its subordinate regulations addressing their safe management throughout the supply chain. Listed substances would need a license to be produced, used, or imported. According to SAWS, a chemical should be classified as hazardous and included in the Catalog if it falls into the hazard classes and categories set out by the national classification and labeling standards. Once the draft catalogue is formally adopted, it will replace the current List of Hazardous Chemicals. Comments are due October 31, 2013. More information is available, in Chinese, online. While the draft Catalog is available only in Chinese, the list can be searched via Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS number). More information is available in The Acta Group’s October 8, 2013, memorandum.
EUROPEAN UNION (EU)
ECHA Publishes Final Report Of The Second REACH Enforcement Project: On September 4, 2013, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) announced the availability of the final report for the ECHA Forum’s second enforcement project. The project focused on checking the compliance of downstream users, particularly formulators of mixtures, with the requirements of the Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) and Classification, Labeling, and Packaging (CLP) regulations. From May 2011 until March 2012, the national enforcement authorities in 29 Member States or European Economic Area countries inspected 1,181 enterprises covering 6,900 substances, 4,500 mixtures, and 4,500 SDSs. The majority of the inspected companies were small- and medium-sized enterprises (SME). More than half of the inspected companies were not only active as downstream users but also in additional roles, e.g. as manufacturers, importers, distributors, and Only Representatives. ECHA states that, in total, 67 percent of the inspected companies were non-compliant with one or more provisions of REACH or CLP. Non-compliance was most commonly related to contraventions of (pre-)registration (REACH, 8 percent), notification (CLP, 15 percent), failure to keep information (20 percent), and having deficient risk management measures (12 percent). While only 3 percent of companies failed to have the SDSs on site, 52 percent of the inspected SDSs showed deficiencies. According to ECHA, despite the high rate of defective SDSs, inspectors noticed an improvement in the formats used and availability of SDSs in comparison to earlier inspections. ECHA recommends that industry undergo a “learning phase” and increase its SDS stewardship to establish compliance in this area of responsibility. ECHA notes that industry “can also find some recommendations in the project report.” More information is available online.
Chromium Trioxide Users Challenge Addition To Authorization List: VECCO and 185 chromium trioxide users have challenged the European Commission (EC) concerning its decision to add chromium trioxide to the REACH authorization list. According to a spokesperson, the companies do not dispute the fact that chromium trioxide is a substance of very high concern (SVHC). The companies are concerned about the process of including chromium trioxide in Annex XIV, and that the listing does not include any exemptions. The spokesperson stated that the companies want exemptions for the use of chromium trioxide in electroplating, etching processes, electropolishing, and other surface treatment processes and technologies, as well as mixing. The users submitted their complaint on July 8, 2013, and it was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on September 7, 2013. The September 7, 2013, notice is available online.
ECHA Grants Registration Numbers To Over 9,000 2013 Registrations: ECHA announced on September 10, 2013, that it has granted registration numbers to 9,030 dossiers that were submitted by the second REACH registration deadline on May 31, 2013. This corresponds to 2,998 more substances being registered under REACH. The dossiers that have not received a registration number are cases where the registrant must resubmit the dossier following a request for further information from ECHA and cases that will be rejected because of non-payment of the related fees. According to ECHA, companies submitted 770 testing proposals in 376 dossiers. Of those, 563 were proposals to test on animals to fulfill the REACH information requirements listed in Annex IX. ECHA will evaluate all dossiers that include testing proposals relevant to Annex IX by June 1, 2016. All tests proposed on vertebrate animals will be subject to public consultation. ECHA notes that it received 301 confidentiality requests in 254 dossiers. The majority of claims concerned SDS information, which includes the name of the company, the registration number, and information on the uses of the substance. ECHA will assess all confidentiality claims before accepting them. ECHA states that it will add the non-confidential information from all of the 2013 registrations to the registered substances online database by the end of 2013. According to ECHA, by the end of August, it received 45 million euros in registration fees, exceeding its estimation of 31 million euros. ECHA reminds registrants to maintain and update their dossiers after receiving the registration number. Companies should also keep checking their REACH-IT account for any communication from ECHA. More information is available online.
Vanadium Consortium Appeals Temporary REACH Registration Decision: On September 12, 2013, ECHA announced that a consortium, Vanadium REACH, has asked the Board of Appeal to annul partially a decision made by ECHA that allowed another company to proceed with a REACH registration without a full data set. On May 8, 2013, ECHA granted permission to the company to register a substance temporarily without a full data set to meet the May 31, 2013, registration deadline. Vanadium REACH claims the decision “lacked a legal basis.” According to Vanadium REACH, ECHA should have proceeded with a final decision on the data-sharing dispute, which was initiated on April 24, 2013. ECHA responded that it does not grant temporary registrations and that the dossier is currently undergoing a completeness check, which takes some months. ECHA stated that it assigns a registration numbers only after it confirms a dossier is complete. Until then, phase-in substances may remain legally on the market, and the registrant may continue to manufacture or import a phase-in substance during the completeness check period. According to ECHA, Vanadium REACH misunderstood this part of the process when it “considered that ECHA had issued a temporary registration decision”. ECHA stated that the data-sharing dispute was resolved on July 12, 2013. More information is available online.
ECHA Publishes Report On Substitution Costs Of Six Hazardous Substances: On September 25, 2013, ECHA published a report on the results of research into the estimation of abatement costs for six substances of concern:
- Nonylphenol and nonylphenolethoxylates used primarily as surfactants in the textile sector;
- Four phthalates used as plasticizers in a wide range of processes and products;
- 1,4-dichlorobenzene used in air fresheners and toilet blocks;
- Lead used for pellets in shotgun cartridges;
- Hexabromocyclododecane, a brominated flame-retardant used in polystyrene insulation material; and
- 4,4′-Diaminodiphenylmethane for various uses, including polyimides and as a hardener in resins and adhesives.
ECHA states that its experience from processing restriction cases has demonstrated that robust substitution cost estimates have the potential to aid decision-making when regulating hazardous chemicals. According to ECHA, the report provides a step forward in understanding the special characteristics of substitution cost assessment in the field of hazardous chemicals. ECHA states that the learning points will be useful for Member States and companies who work on restriction dossiers or authorization applications. More information is available online.
Updated Navigator Tool Will Help Industry Identify Obligations Under REACH: ECHA announced on September 25, 2013, that it published an update of its online Navigator tool. ECHA describes Navigator as an interactive tool that helps manufacturers, importers, downstream users and distributors of chemical substances on their own or in mixtures, and producers and suppliers of articles to clarify their role in the supply chain and to identify their obligations under REACH. ECHA states “Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) that have not yet examined the impact of the REACH and CLP regulations on their business, are strongly advised to use the updated Navigator available in all EU languages.” More information is available online.
Board Of Appeal Annuls ECHA Decision: The Board of Appeal has annulled an ECHA decision because it failed to consider appropriately the appellant’s interests when partially rectifying a contested decision. The Board of Appeal remitted the case to ECHA for re-evaluation. In appeal case A-007-2012, following a compliance check under the dossier evaluation procedure, ECHA issued a final decision requiring the appellant to submit certain information related to the substance identity of the registered substance. During the course of the appeal proceedings, ECHA’s Executive Director partially rectified the contested decision by, among other things, extending the deadline for the appellant to submit the required information from two to three months. The Board of Appeal found that in this particular case, the appellant had only three days to comply with the rectified version of the contested decision once it had been notified to it, and that ECHA omitted to consider appropriately the appellant’s rights and interests. The Board of Appeal concluded that this constituted an infringement of the principle of good administration and consequently remitted the case to ECHA for re-evaluation. More information is available online.
High Level Steering Group Of EIP On Raw Materials Releases SIP: On September 25, 2013, the High Level Steering Group of the European Innovation Partnership (EIP) on Raw Materials adopted a Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) proposing how stakeholders, including the EC, European Union (EU) Member States, industry, research groups, and non-governmental organizations (NGO), can ensure a sustainable supply of raw materials and make Europe a world leader in raw materials exploration, extraction, processing, recycling, and substitution by 2020. The key objectives of the EIP are:
- Reduction of import dependency by improving supply conditions from EU sources, providing resource efficiency and alternatives in supply; and
- Bringing Europe to the forefront in raw materials sectors and mitigating their negative environmental and social impacts.
Examples of suggested initiatives within the 24 action areas proposed by the SIP include:
- New cost-effective exploration concepts and technologies providing high quality data and information, including high resolution 3D geo-data at 150-4,000 meters depth;
- Developing solutions for a better recovery and recycling of construction and demolition waste, particularly in the most promising targets, such deconstruction of non-residential buildings; and
- The substitution of indium in transparent conductive layers, such as those used in touch screen devices, flexible electronics, solar energy, and organic light-emitting diode (OLED) lighting.
According to the EC, a public “Call for Commitments” to be issued at the end of October 2013 will allow all potential stakeholders to express their concrete intention to contribute to the implementation of the SIP. A Communication will follow in 2014, to explain how the EC, Member States, industry, and academia intend to implement the SIP. The SIP is available online.
EU Biocidal Products Regulation And Its Impact On Industry: A Practical Briefing: The EU Biocidal Products Regulation (BPR) has entered into EU law. This legislation changes the way in which biocidal active substances and biocidal products are regulated in the EU. The new EU regulatory system differs from other global regulatory systems for biocidal substances and redefines what are considered biocidal products and treated articles. Companies competing in this space must be aware of and careful to ensure that existing supply chains and biocidal product designs are in compliance with the new regulation and anticipate what will be the new normal. More information is available in The Acta Group’s October 1, 2013, memorandum.
ECHA Posts FAQs On Treated Articles: ECHA announced on October 9, 2013, that the EC has issued final support material, structured as frequently asked questions (FAQ), concerning treated articles under the BPR. The EC notes: “This document is an attempt to provide guidance in the interest of consistency, and has been drafted by the Commission services responsible for biocidal products with the aim of finding an agreement with all or a majority of the Member States’ Competent Authorities for biocidal products. Please note, however, that Member States are not legally obliged to follow the approach set out in this document, since only the Court of Justice of the European Union can give authoritative interpretations on the contents of Union law.” The FAQs are available online.
Board Of Appeal Upholds ECHA Decision On Additional Testing Requirements: ECHA announced on October 11, 2013, that the Board of Appeal upheld an ECHA decision requiring information on sub-chronic toxicity and developmental toxicity in a second species. In appeal case A-004-2012, the appellant requested the Board of Appeal extend the deadline to provide information on sub-chronic toxicity (90-day) in the rat via the oral route. Appellant requested an extension of the deadline to allow it to take into consideration the results of a 13-week (dosed-feed) sub-chronic toxicity study on mice planned under the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP). In its decision, the Board of Appeal stated that the timing of the NTP study was uncertain and outside the control of the appellant. The Board of Appeal found that the performance of a study at some unspecified time in the future cannot justify the revision of the contested decision with respect to the requested information. Appellant also contested ECHA’s decision to require information on developmental toxicity in a second species. Appellant claimed that requiring information on developmental toxicity in a second species as a standard information requirement was an incorrect interpretation of REACH. The Board of Appeal concluded that the REACH provisions, when read as a whole, mean that registrants manufacturing or importing substances at 1,000 or more tonnes per year are required to perform a developmental toxicity study on a second species, unless, as a result of the adaptations set out in the legislation, such a study is not necessary. More information is available online.
ECHA Issues Fact Sheet On Follow-up To Dossier Evaluation Decisions: ECHA announced on October 15, 2013, the availability of a fact sheet explaining the follow-up to dossier evaluation decisions. Dossier evaluation covers compliance checks and testing proposal examinations. Both processes may lead to ECHA decisions requesting further information from registrants. In the follow-up to these decisions, ECHA assesses whether the registrants provided the requested information by the deadline set in the decision and whether this new information should lead to further actions. ECHA states that the fact sheet is intended to clarify this follow-up stage. The fact sheet describes the process steps and the possible outcome documents, and addresses communication issues after the decision has been received. The fact sheet is available online.
ECHA Calls For Information Concerning Substituting DecaBDE: On October 16, 2013, ECHA called for information to identify uses of Decabromodiphenylether (DecaBDE) where substitution may be challenging or where companies may need additional time to carry out the substitution. ECHA will use the information in the assessment of the feasibility of alternatives in preparing an Annex XV restriction dossier. ECHA states that DecaBDE is mainly used in plastics/polymers/composite materials and by the textile industry, as well as in adhesives, sealants, coatings, and inks. According to ECHA, the available information suggests it is technically possible to substitute DecaBDE in all of these applications. It is not clear to ECHA, however, whether companies are facing specific challenges in substitution, or how much time would be needed to overcome possible obstacles. Comments are due December 15, 2013. More information is available online.
ECHA Posts Multi-Annual Work Programme For 2014-2018: ECHA posted the Multi-Annual Work Program (MAWP) for 2014-2018. The MAWP is based around four strategic objectives: maximizing the availability of high quality information to enable the safe manufacture and use of chemicals; mobilizing authorities to use information intelligently to identify and address chemicals of concern; addressing scientific challenges by serving as a hub for building the scientific and regulatory capacity of Member States, European institutions, and other actors; and embracing current and new legislative tasks efficiently and effectively, while adapting to upcoming resource constraints. Annex I of the MAWP highlights the main milestones planned within each objective, year by year. ECHA will annually review the progress in the action areas and milestones during the lifetime of the program, and take corrective action where necessary. The MAWP is available online.
INDIA
India Begins Public Consultation On Draft Chemical Plant Safety And Security Rating System: On September 30, 2013, the Department of Chemicals and Petrochemicals (DCPC) began a public consultation on a draft Chemical Plant Safety and Security Rating System. According to the draft document, the rating system would facilitate safe and secure handling, storage, and processing of hazardous chemicals and in avoiding accidents and occupational diseases. The proposed rating system uses a two-stage methodology for assessment of safe and secure performance of a facility. The first stage would act as a screening mechanism to filter out organizations that do not meet basic requirements of safety and security systems essential for a chemical, petrochemical, and petroleum industry. The second stage would be a rigorous assessment to benchmark the various safety and security systems being practiced by the organization against the framework stipulated in the draft document. Each organization would develop its own specific procedures for using the rating system, which could also be used as a self-assessment tool for continual improvement. For awarding the rating to a chemical facility, a standard assessment procedure would be followed. The proposed rating system would define organization as “company, corporation, firm, enterprise or institution in part or combination thereof whether incorporated or not, public or private, that has its own functions and administration.” Facility would include “Production Unit, Storage (packed, bulk) Location, Loading Terminal, Plant, Warehouse, Laboratory, etc.” Comments are due October 31, 2013. The draft document is available online.
India’s National Chemicals Policy “Won’t Be REACH”: In a recent interview, AJV Prasad, Joint Secretary of the Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers, stated that India “ha[s] to go for REACH-style legislation, but it won’t be REACH. India’s legislation will be different from REACH, but how it will be different is still being debated.” According to Prasad, smaller Indian companies would be unable to handle a compliance workload similar to that required by REACH. On March 29, 2012, India announced the availability of a draft National Chemical Policy. The delay in issuing a final National Chemical Policy was caused by the difficulty in convincing industry of its merits. Prasad stated that the final National Chemical Policy will probably be completed in the next three to six months. At a September 13, 2013, news conference, however, Indrajit Pal, Secretary of the Ministry’s DCPC, stated that the government would release a final draft for public discussion in about one month. The key provisions of the policy would then have to be set out in a bill and passed by Parliament. According to Prasad, work continues on a national chemical inventory. Prasad stated that it contains approximately 5,000 chemicals. Once the inventory is completed, it will be the responsibility of the proposed National Chemical Center to maintain it. The inventory will include “similar data as other countries have done — Canada, Korea, Japan. It won’t be very different.”
INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER (IARC)
IARC Calls For Nominations For Review In Future IARC Monographs: On April 7-9, 2014, an IARC Advisory Group will meet to recommend priorities for IARC Monographs during 2015-2019. IARC states that it encourages the general public, scientific communities, national health agencies, and other organizations to nominate agents for review in future Monographs. Nominations may include “chemicals, mixtures, occupations, physical agents, biological agents, lifestyle factors, and anything else suspected of causing cancer in humans.” According to IARC, it will select agents based on evidence of human exposure and evidence or suspicion of carcinogenicity. The Advisory Group will review all public nominations and recommend those it considers a high priority. Advisory Group members may also propose additional agents at the meeting. IARC states that, in making its recommendations, the Advisory Group will consider “near-term public-health priorities, recent research and research in progress.” IARC states that it will publish the public nominations before the meeting, and, once completed, the Advisory Group’s recommendations and report. Nominations are due January 31, 2014. More information is available online.
JAPAN
METI Adds 40 Chemicals To List Of PACs: The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) published a list of 40 chemicals added to the list of priority assessment chemicals (PAC). Companies must report specific information, including 2013 production, shipment, and import volumes, between April and June 2014. METI’s announcement is available, in Japanese, online. The list of new PACs is available, in Japanese, online. The list does include CAS numbers.
MALAYSIA
Malaysia Publishes CLASS Regulations: Malaysia published in the October 11, 2013, Federal Government Gazette the Occupational Safety and Health (Classification, Labeling and Safety Data Sheet of Hazardous Chemicals) (CLASS) regulations. The regulations state:
“chemical” means —
- a substance which is a chemical element and its compounds in the natural state or obtained by any manufacturing process, including any additive necessary to preserve its stability and any impurity deriving from the process used, but excluding any solvent which may be separated without affecting the stability of the element and its compounds, or changing its composition; and
- a chemical mixture which is a mixture or solution composed of two or more substances which do not react, for use at a place of work, including an alloy.
Under the regulations, hazardous chemicals must be labeled with the product identifier; supplier identification; signal word; hazard statement; hazard pictogram; and precautionary statement. Suppliers must provide an SDS for each hazardous chemical supplied and any chemical mixture containing a hazardous substance at the concentration exceeding the cut-off value of concentration for the relevant hazard class. SDSs must include identification of the hazardous chemical and of the supplier; hazard identification; composition and information of the ingredients of the hazardous chemical; first-aid measures; accidental release measures; handling and storage; exposure controls and personal protection; physical and chemical properties; stability and reactivity; toxicological information; ecological information; disposal information; transportation information; regulatory information; and other information. Under the regulations, importers and manufacturers must prepare an annual inventory of hazard chemicals that includes information on each hazardous chemical imported or supplied in a quantity of one metric tonne and above. The inventory will be due to the Department of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) not later than March 31 of the following year. The regulations allow a supplier to claim the name of a hazardous chemical or the composition and ingredients of a hazardous chemical as confidential business information. Upon request by DOSH, an occupational health doctor, or a person who uses or handles a hazardous chemical, the information must be disclosed. The regulations are available online.
RUSSIA
Russia And Ukraine Sign MOU Concerning Chemical Legislation: Under a memorandum of understanding (MOU) signed by the Russian and Ukrainian Chemist Unions, the countries will develop a list of key differences in their chemical legislations. A spokesperson for the Russian Chemist Union stated that the groups have agreed to harmonize their chemical legislation, as well as “harmonize our legislation with the EU.” According to the spokesperson, the Ukraine has done more than Russia to harmonize its legislation with the EU in anticipation of the EU Association Agreement that it expects to sign in early November 2014.
SOUTH AFRICA
Consultation Begins On Proposed Norms And Standards Relating To Environmental Health: On September 20, 2013, South Africa began a public consultation on the proposed norms and standards relating to environmental health in terms of the National Health Act, 2003. Chapter 5, Hazardous Substances and Chemicals Management, is intended to assist in providing a national approach and guidelines to environmental health practitioners (EHP) in the provision of chemical safety and hazardous substances control, ensure the sound management of chemicals, and ensure protection of human health and the environment. It would apply to importers, manufacturers, wholesale distributors, registered pharmacists, general dealers, farmers, industries and factories, retailers (formal and informal), pest control operators, business premises, schools, laboratories, public and private premises, work, and home places. All Group I hazardous substances premises and dealers would be inspected for compliance and licensing in terms of the Hazardous Substances Act, 1973 and Group I Hazardous Substances Regulations. All consignments of Group I hazardous substances would be inspected prior to release to licensed premises. Comments are due October 20, 2013. The proposed norms and standards are available online.
SOUTH KOREA
MOE Creates Government-Industry Forum To Address Korean REACH: Spokespersons for the Ministry of Environment (MOE) announced on August 28, 2013, that it launched a government-industry roundtable to address concerns regarding Korean REACH, which will take effect January 2015. MOE is preparing an enforcement decree and enforcement rules that will provide regulatory details for enforcement. A MOE spokesperson stated: “A council comprising interested parties and experts from the private sector as well as government officials will act as a framework of official discussions on subordinate rules that go into law. Foreign companies exporting chemical substances to South Korea will be able to share their concerns.” The first round of biweekly discussions was held September 3, 2013, with the goal of completing draft rules and regulations by the end of 2013. The agenda for the roundtable also included new rules for the Toxic Chemicals Control Act, which was amended in May.
MOE Issues Statement Clarifying Korean REACH: MOE issued on September 17, 2013, a statement, in Korean, intended to address industry’s concerns regarding the Korean REACH. MOE noted that forthcoming Presidential and Environment Ministerial Decrees will address how Korean REACH is implemented. According to MOE, while there will not be a low-volume exemption, there will be a simplified registration process available to low-volume manufacturers and importers. MOE stated that exemptions for research and development (R&D) substances would be provided. According to MOE, only 2,000 substances will need to be registered, assuming the criteria for determining priority chemicals are carcinogen and reproductive toxicity. MOE’s statement is available, in Korean, online.
TAIWAN
Taiwan Begins Consultation On Third List Of Proposed Hazard Classifications: On October 4, 2013, the Council for Labor Affairs (CLA) began a public consultation on proposed hazard classifications for 1,022 substances. Compliance with the classifications for the substances and their mixtures will be mandatory once the final version of the list is adopted and takes effect. The previous list, comprising 1,089 substances, took effect January 7, 2011. Although the list of proposed classifications includes the substance name in English and CAS number, the proposed classification is in Chinese. Comments are due October 25, 2013. The list of proposed hazard classifications is available online.
THAILAND
Thailand Consolidates List Of Hazardous Substances: Thailand has combined its eight hazardous substance lists into a single list that identifies chemicals using both their Thai and English names. The six agencies that regulated the separate lists — the Department of Industrial Works, Food and Drug Administration, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Livestock Development, the Department of Fisheries, and the Department of Energy Business — will continue to regulate their separate sections. Hazardous substances are still classified as four types. If a risk assessment report is required, it should be submitted to the Department of Industrial Works for consideration, and a permit will be issued before manufacturing, import, or use. The list is available online.
UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME (UNEP)
UNEP Will Hold Consultation Meeting For Draft Chemicals In Products Program: On December 5-6, 2013, UNEP will hold a consultation meeting in Boston, Massachusetts, concerning the draft Chemicals in Products (CiP) Program, which will be proposed at the fourth session of the International Conference on Chemicals Management (ICCM4). The CiP Program is intended to facilitate the exchange of information on chemicals in products. According to UNEP, the objectives of the meeting are to present the draft CiP Program to stakeholders and obtain feedback concerning implementation; develop recommendations and provide input on issues significant to the further development of and finalization of the CiP Program; and identify and engage with potential “early adopters” of the CiP Program. The Information Note states that the consultation meeting “will give a particular focus on identifying issues with putting the CiP programme into operation in supply chains, recognizing that this information must be available and reliable if actors outside supply chains are to be able to access data on product chemical content.” According to the Information Note, participation is “invited from the business and industry sector, brands, suppliers, service providers, and the waste management and recycling sector, particularly from actors who are leading on this issue, while keeping in mind the limited funding to support the Consultation.” More information regarding the CiP Program is available online.