EPA’s New Chemical List: Who, How, Possible Challenges & Responses, Listing Criteria Richard Becker, Ph.D., DABT American Chemistry Council December 13,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Perspectives from EPA’s Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program
Advertisements

Richard A. Becker, Ph.D., D.A.B.T American Chemistry Council Arlington, Virginia Comments on “Dose Setting” EDMVS Meeting July 23-24, 2002.
1 High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge Program Diane Sheridan Chief, Existing Chemicals Branch, Chemical Control Division, Office of Pollution Prevention.
Session III: Assessing Cumulative Effects of Endocrine Active Substances 9:15 - 9:30 Introduction” Rick Becker (Session Chair and Panel Moderator) 9:30.
Carcinogen Classification Criteria Patricia Richter Ph.D., DABT Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee June 8, 2010.
 Enacted August 3, 1996  No amendments since  United States Federal Law  Amended:  Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)  Federal.
Priority-setting for the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program: Pesticide Active Ingredients Penelope A. Fenner-Crisp Office of Pesticide Programs U.S.
National Pesticide Program A New Toxicology Testing Paradigm: Meeting Common Needs Steven Bradbury, Director Environmental Fate and Effects Division Office.
Endocrine Screening – Phase 1 TSCA 8(e) and FIFRA 6(a)(2) Requirements A. Michael Kaplan, Ph.D. December 13, 2010 A. Michael Kaplan & Associates, LLC
It’s not my Fracking Problem! Regulations, Liability, and the Process of Hydraulic Fracturing Katie Heath November 30, 2010.
Chemical Screening Programs Ted Smith Dale Phenicie.
Key issues in biopesticide regulation Pesticides Safety Directorate 19 June 2007.
What Do Toxicologists Do?
FDA’s Policy for Evaluating Bioengineered Foods Jeanette Glover Glew Food and Drug Administration Center For Food Safety and Applied Nutrition September,
SDWA1 The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
Animal Feed GRAS Notifications Geoffrey K. Wong, M.S. Division of Animal Feeds Center for Veterinary Medicine Pet Food Institute Pet Food Institute October.
Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) Regulatory Determinations Water Quality Training Roundtable 2000 February 7, 2000.
Mrs. Brandi Robinson Office of New Animal Drug Evaluation Center for Veterinary Medicine Regulating Animal Drugs.
EPA/Office of Water’s Strategy for Contaminants of Emerging Concern Octavia Conerly Health and Ecological Criteria Division Office of Water U.S. Environmental.
Food Advisory Committee Meeting December 16 and 17, 2014 Questions to the Committee Suzanne C. Fitzpatrick, PhD, DABT Senior Advisory for Toxicology Center.
Quill Law Group LLC1 EDSP Implementation Business and Legal Considerations Terry F. Quill Quill Law Group LLC 1667 K St, NW Washington, DC
Quill Law Group LLC1 EDSP Compliance EDSP Phase 2 Policies and Procedures Terry F. Quill Quill Law Group LLC 1667 K St, NW Washington, DC
1 Discussion of the 2006 Inventory Update Reporting Data December 12, 2006 Nhan Nguyen U.S. EPA.
Status of the U.S. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) Status of the U.S. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) September
Regulatory Controls PBT Strategy Team Great Lakes Regional Collaboration February 22, 2005.
Nanomaterials Issue Paper Standard 61 Joint Committee Meeting December, 2013.
Environmental Review of the Use of Pesticides in USAID Projects: Rationale & Approaches.
Office of Pesticide Programs 21st Century Screening Assessment of Pesticides – A Regulatory View Vicki Dellarco, Ph.D. Senior Science Advisor Office of.
Pesticide Regulatory Process
SCHC, 9/27/2005 US Implementation of the Globally Harmonized System The GHS Journey Continues…
Alex Stone Chemist, WA Dept. of Ecology EPA Prioritization Workshop April 6-7,
ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT.  History of the Act ◦ The primary purpose of TSCA is to regulate chemical substances and mixtures  It does so by regulating.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration Notice: Archived Document The content in this document is provided on the FDA’s website for reference purposes only.
Quill Law Group LLC1 Endocrine Disruption and Personal Care Products --- Legislative Developments Terry F. Quill Quill Law Group LLC 1667 K St, NW Washington,
Quill Law Group LLC1 EDSP Compliance Timing, Procedural and Legal Issues Terry F. Quill Quill Law Group LLC 1667 K St, NW Washington, DC
Slide 1 of 24 EPA’s Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) Use of Exposure Data in Priority Setting Bill Wooge Office of Science Coordination and.
Environmental Hazards & Human Health
The Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (TSCA) Yunmi Lee (period 6 )
1 EPA Regulatory Authority and PPCPs Octavia Conerly Health and Ecological Criteria Division Office of Water Office of Water October 26, 2005 October 26,
Washington State Children’s Safe Product Act
MODULE 1 Water Framework Directive, Relation of WFD with Daughter Directives, River Basin Management Planning, Water Bodies, Typology, Classification Environmental.
Module 3 Risk Analysis and its Components. Risk Analysis ● WTO SPS agreement puts emphasis on sound science ● Risk analysis = integrated mechanism to.
Environmental Hazards and Human Health, Part 1. CHEMICAL HAZARDS A hazardous chemical can harm humans or other animals because it may: –Be flammable –Be.
CALIFORNIA proposed SAFER CONSUMER PRODUCT REGULATIONS Marjorie MartzEmerson October 24, 2012.
Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 by: Bjorn Bookser period 2.
Regulatory Processes for Pesticides Mark Hartman Antimicrobials Division (AD) Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances United States Environmental.
International Society of Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 2009 Endocrine Workshop The Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program: What Can Screening Results.
Communications and the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program ISRTP Workshop December 13, 2010.
Quill Law Group LLC1 EDSP Implementation Business and Legal Considerations Terry F. Quill Quill Law Group LLC 1667 K St, NW Washington, DC
1 Exceptional Events Rulemaking Proposal General Overview March 1, 2006 US EPA.
Introduction to Session II: Incorporating Existing Data into the EDSP Erik R. Janus Director, Human Health Policy CropLife America.
REMEDIATION OF CONTAMINATED LAND IN SOUTH AFRICA Part 8 of the Waste Act Ms Mishelle Govender Chemicals and Waste Management.
Examination Practice in Applications Presenting “Reach-Through Claims” George Elliott Practice Specialist Technology Center 1600
1 TCEQ Drinking Water Sample Collector Training October 2006 Alicia Diehl TCEQ Public Drinking Water Section UCMR Sampling TCEQ Drinking Water Sample Collector.
Industry Perspective on TSCA Modernization ABA Conference June 11, 2010.
EDSP Implementation: Concerns for the Pesticide Industry ISRTP 2009 Endocrine Workshop: The Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program: What Can Screening Results.
The Safe Drinking Water Act By: Jonathan Besquin.
Key Concepts on Health Risk Assessment of Chemical Mixtures.
Abstract A step-wise or ‘tiered’ approach has been used as a rational procedure to conduct environmental risk assessments in many disciplines. The Technical.
Event – Points ! Environmental Laws US.
Proposition 65 Safe Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 Purpose: prevent exposure to toxics through water & other means Two approaches to managing.
Endocrine Disruptor Screening and Testing: An Industry Update
Safe Drinking Water Act , CCL and Perchlorate
Food Quality Protection Act of 1996
Richard Becker, Ph.D., DABT American Chemistry Council
The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, 1984, and 1996 (SDWA)
Endocrine disruptors and animal-free toxicology
Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA)
Exceptional Events Rulemaking Proposal
Presentation transcript:

EPA’s New Chemical List: Who, How, Possible Challenges & Responses, Listing Criteria Richard Becker, Ph.D., DABT American Chemistry Council December 13, 2010

EPA’s EDSP Legislative Mandates (August 1996) EDSP Phase 1 (Test Orders issued commenced 10/09) Food Quality Protection Act 1996 (FQPA) – Must screen pesticides (including inerts) for estrogenic effects that may affect human health – Must use appropriate validated test systems or other scientifically relevant information – Can include other endocrine effects EDSP Phase 2 (Expansion to chemicals in water (3 FR Notices Nov 17 th 2010) Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments 1996 (SDWA) – Can screen drinking water contaminants to which substantial numbers of persons are exposed

1996 SDWA Amendment SEC ESTROGENIC SUBSTANCES SCREENING PROGRAM. Part E (42 U.S.C. 300j et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``Sec <> In addition to the substances referred to in section 408(p)(3)(B) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 346a(p)(3)(B)) the Administrator may provide for testing under the screening program authorized by section 408(p) of such Act, in accordance with the provisions of section 408(p) of such Act, of any other substance that may be found in sources of drinking water if the Administrator determines that a substantial population may be exposed to such substance.''

EPA’s EDSP Legislative Mandates (2) 2010 House Appropriations Language Direction to EPA on EDSP (Oct 2009) – “Publish within one year of enactment a second list of no less than 100 chemicals for screening that includes drinking water contaminants, such as halogenated organic chemicals, dioxins, flame retardants (PBDEs, PCBs, PFCs), plastics (BPA), pharmaceuticals and personal care products, and issue 25 orders per year for the testing of these chemicals. This process also should allow for public input.” 2010 Markey/Moran Bill that Passed in the House (Assistance, Quality, and Affordability Act 2010)

EPA’s EDSP Expansion: Candidate List 2 Chemicals in Drinking Water FR Notice 17 Nov 2010 (30 days to comment – due 17 Dec. 2010) Applies to manufacturers and importers & reflects EPA drinking water priorities and EDSP List 2 was compiled by Agency from: – 85 regulated drinking water contaminants and 116 unregulated contaminants on CCL3 and Pesticide AIs: from OPP 2007 & 2008 registration review schedule Candidate EDSP List 2 then whittled down by EPA to 134 – EPA excluded biological agents & nat. occurring, chemicals w/o clear manufacturer, chemicals already on EDSP List 1, hormones, chemicals not likely biologically active, phys-chem properties incompatible with testing and pesticides scheduled for registration review after FY 2008 “Agency is not soliciting comments on any of the individual lists used to create the second list of chemicals being considered for Tier 1 Screening” Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program: Second List of Chemicals for Tier 1 Screening” [75 FR 70248; 11/17/2010; EPA-HQ-OPPT ; FRL

EPA’s description of the list: NOT A LIST OF EDCs “The public should not presume the listing of a chemical or substance indicates it interferes with the endocrine systems of humans or other species simply because it has been listed for screening under the EDSP. EPA believes that these chemicals or substances should be candidates, at least for screening purposes, under EDSP testing based only on their pesticide registration status and/or because such substances may occur in sources of drinking water to which a substantial population may be exposed.” EDSP Candidate List 2 Chemicals in Drinking Water

EPA Contends being onCCL3 Satisfies SDWA EDSP Requirements “SDWA section 1412(b)(1) requires the Agency to develop a list of unregulated contaminants that are known or anticipated to occur in public water systems (PWSs) and may require regulation under SDWA. “ “The Agency is required to develop the CCL list every 5 years. In determining whether a substance may occur in drinking water, EPA considers not only public water system monitoring data, but also data on ambient concentrations in surface water and ground water, and releases to the environment (e.g., reporting data from the Toxics Release Inventory). “ “The Agency believes that such data are sufficient to anticipate contaminants that may occur in public water systems and furthermore, also represent those substances that may be found in sources of drinking water and to which a substantial population may be exposed. “

EPA’s “Streamlining” Process Exclude chemicals based on one or more of the following: 1. Biological agent and naturally-occurring chemicals (e.g., microbials, microbial toxins, inorganics, radionuclides). 2.Chemicals for which the manufacturer, importer or registrant cannot be clearly identified (e.g., disinfection byproducts or DBPs, microbes, microbial toxins, degradate compounds with more than one possible source etc.). 3.Chemicals already included on the first EDSP list. 4.Chemicals that are hormones with confirmed endocrine effects. 5.Chemicals that are not likely to be biologically active or which are incompatible with testing assays for various reasons due to one or more of their physiochemical properties (e.g., gases, strongly acidic or basic, solubility, vapor pressure molecular weight). 6.Pesticides that are scheduled for registration review after FY 2008.

ACC’s Concerns with Draft EDSP List 2 I. EPA Should Continue to Ensure Accurate, Complete and Consistent Communications Concerning the EDSP to the Public and Across the Agency – EPA needs to stress, in addition to list qualifying language, that apical tox test results used in risk assessment include endocrine-mediated adverse effects – Other parts of EPA seem to be misinterpreting and inappropriately applying EDSP ORD DfE

EPA ORD: Inappropriate Definitions “Endocrine disruptors are basically chemicals with the potential to interfere with the function of endocrine systems.” “Endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) have been defined as exogenous agents that interfere with the production, release, transport, metabolism, binding, action, or elimination of the natural hormones in the body responsible for the maintenance of homeostasis and the regulation of developmental processes.”

EPA DfE: Proposing Inappropriate Action Based on Tier 1 Screening “4.5.5 Potential endocrine effects. Chemicals that are candidates for endocrine screening will be part of the review. Chemicals found to interact with or perturb the endocrine system—potentially leading to reproductive, developmental, carcinogenic, systemic, hormonal or other effects— will not be allowed based on the toxicological hazards they pose.” (emphasis added) cts.htmlhttp:// cts.html Proposed Enhancements to the Design for the Environment (DfE) Standard for Safer Products. Comments due December 31, 2010.

EPA’s OSCPP Description of EDSP (1) “EPA developed a two-tiered approach to implement the statutory testing requirements.” “The purpose of Tier 1 screening (referred to as ‘‘screening’’) is to identify substances that have the potential to interact with the estrogen, androgen, or thyroid hormone systems using a battery of assays.” “The fact that a substance may interact with a hormone system, however, does not mean that when the substance is used, it will cause adverse effects in humans or ecological systems.” “The purpose of Tier 2 testing (referred to as ‘‘testing’’), is to identify and establish a dose-response relationship for any adverse effects that might result from the interactions identified through the Tier 1 assays.”

EPA’s OSCPP Description of EDSP (2) “EPA believes that the results from the entire battery of tests required in the Tier 1 screening and Tier 2 testing stages (or their equivalents) are necessary to make the statutory determination of whether a particular substance ‘‘may have an effect in humans that is similar to an effect produced by a naturally occurring [hormone]’’(21 U.S.C. 346a(p)).” “In other words, a positive result in the Tier 1 screening assays would not be adequate to make the determination ‘‘whether a substance may have an effect in humans that is similar to an effect produced by a naturally occurring [hormone]. Id.” “ Conversely, a negative result in all Tier 1 screening tests will be adequate to determine that a particular substance is not likely to have an effect on the estrogen, androgen, and thyroid hormone systems (EAT) and, therefore, is not a priority for testing in Tier 2. The confirmatory tests in the Tier 2 testing stage are necessary to determine whether a substance may have an effect similar to that of a naturally occurring hormone.” Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 248 / Monday, December 28, 1998

Exposure – Effect Discontinuum: Illustrated in Graphic from NRC “Toxicity Testing in the 21 st Century” 2007 “Biological responses viewed as the result of an intersection of exposures with biological functions. The intersection leads to perturbations of biological pathways. When perturbations are sufficiently large or when host is unable to adapt because of underlying nutritional, genetic, disease or life-stage status, biological function is compromised (emphasis added).”

ACC’s Concerns with Draft EDSP List 2 II. EPA Should Respond To Comments Submitted on the Draft EDSP List 2 – EPA stated in the Listing Notice that “The Agency does not plan to respond formally to information or comments that may be submitted…” (75 Fed. Reg 70248, 70251) – This is contrary to the open process envisioned by APA and is inconsistent with open and transparent regulatory practices.

III. EPA Has Not Been Fully Transparent in “Streamlining” from 201 to 134 Substances – EPA qualitatively describes criteria but hasn’t published the actual physiochemical criteria and data it relied on to make the exclusion decisions – EPA has not released the analysis that a chemical is not likely to be biologically active or is incompatible with testing assays due to one or more physiochemical properties (e.g., gases, strongly acidic or basic, solubility, vapor pressure, molecular weight) – Some chemicals on 134 would seem to meet the exclusion criteria: e.g., OEHHA describes a substance as “XXXX is a highly reactive base and reducing agent” ACC’s Concerns with Draft EDSP List 2

IV. EPA’s Use of Certain Exposure Databases an TRI Information – EPA makes per se assertion that being on CCL3 satisfies SDWA endocrine provisions – But this assertion is insufficient. The Agency must show that a substance (1) is likely to be present in sources of drinking water and (2) there is an empirical basis - actual monitoring of finished drinking water or ambient water (that is an actual source of water that is delivered to consumers as finished water). – Number of substances draft EDSP List 2 for which TRI info on releases into surface water = only basis for being on CCL3 and tis on Draft EDSP List 2. Of these, 6 have reported TRI surface water releases at levels ranging from only 0.2 to 5 lbs. per year total in all U.S. ACC’s Concerns with Draft EDSP List 2

EDSP Test Order Authority Applies to Current Manufacturers and Importers – A NUMBER OF SUBSTANCES ON Draft EDP List 2 are no longer manufactured in US or imported or present by virtue of manufacture/use Discontinued pesticides Industrial chemicals no longer made Not manufactured except for research lab use, but present as component of mixtures (PAH components) Components of mixture reach water via leaking underground tanks not from manufacture or import of neat / tech grade of the chemical entity ACC’s Concerns with Draft EDSP List 2

Commenting on Specific Chemicals: Some Points for Companies/Consortia to Consider Insufficient evidence to meet the SDWA requirements that it “may be found in sources of drinking water” and “that a substantial population may be exposed to such substance.'' It should be excluded for reasons of: not likely to be biologically active or incompatible with testing assays for various reasons due to one or more of phys.chem. prop. (e.g., gas, strong acid/base, solubility, vapor pressure, etc.) Adequate information is available on endocrine effects of agent Also consider including analysis/description of why there is confidence in the safety of the chemical, even for possible endocrine –mediated effects. Apical studies include endocrine MOA.

Thank You Richard Becker, Ph.D., DABT American Chemistry Council