SlideShare une entreprise Scribd logo
1  sur  36
Télécharger pour lire hors ligne
Nanotechnology EHS Legal Briefing: How
companies are reducing their liability exposure
while achieving regulatory compliance and
market acceptance

_______ Insurance Company
Boston, MA
July 15, 2008
                                      Philip A. Moffat
                                     (202) 789-6027
                                 pmoffat@bdlaw.com
Overview of Presentation

• Adequacy of existing legal authorities to
  regulate EH&S risks
• Tort liability considerations specific to
  nanotechnology
• Current voluntary initiatives and practices
  to achieve compliance and reduce
  potential liability


                                              2
Existing Legal Authorities
Observation
• Majority of governments consider existing legal
  authorities adequate, although future
  amendments are possible
• Few proposals for laws/regs specific to nano
• Near-term focus on improving implementation
  through:
    - gaining experience with nano;
    - developing science for better risk assessment
      and management; and
    - developing guidance, methodologies,
      classifications, implementing regs, etc.

                                                    4
Available Opinions on Adequacy
▪ European Commission Communication to
  Parliament and Council – June 2008
    - Recent proposed amendment to REACH annexes to
      require registration of carbon and graphite
▪ Environment Canada and Health Canada Proposed
  Regulatory Framework under CEPA – Sept. 2007
• Council of Canadian Academies – July 2008
• U.S. Council on Envt’l Quality – Nov. 2007
▪ FDA Nanotechnology Task Force – July 2007
▪ American Bar Association SEER – June 2006
▪ Australian Office of Nanotechnology (DIISR) –
  Sept. 2007
                                                      5
Important Minority Trend - Local Laws
Specific to Nanotechnology
• Berkeley, CA ordinance effective June
  2007:
    • Applies to “manufactured nanoparticles” – one
      axis < 100 nm
    • File written disclosure plans, regardless of
      amount used/produced, identifying:
        - nanoparticle production or use;
        - current toxicity data; and
        - plans for safe handling, monitoring, disposal, and
          release prevention & mitigation
• Cambridge, MA considering similar
  ordinance: advisory panel assembled and
  recommendation expected in 2008.
                                                               6
Important Minority Trend - State Laws
Specific to Nanotechnology
• California Assemblyman Mike Feuer (D) held a public
  meeting in April to discuss alternative regulatory
  approaches that could be incorporated in future
  legislation.
   - Proposal expected in 2009
• Wisconsin State Representative Terese Berceau (D)
  proposing creation of a registry & reporting system
  either through legislation or regulation for submission of
  information re:
   •   type of nanomaterials,
   •   test methods,
   •   properties,
   •   use,
   •   handling, and
   •   disposal activities.
                                                          7
Improving Implementation
• Variety of international and domestic govt’l and quasi-
  govt’l initiatives to improve implementation of existing
  legal authorities.
    - OECD
    - ISO
    - UK Defra VRS
    - EPA NMSP
    - Others
▪ Intended to advance science and methodologies
  supporting risk assessment and management, as well
  the knowledge and experience of regulators.
    ▪ Presentation will not emphasize scientific efforts

                                                           8
International Initiatives - OECD

▪ Organization for Economic Cooperation and
  Development (OECD)
     - 30 member countries
     - Important forum for intergovernmental cooperation

▪ Established Working Party on Manufactured
  Nanomaterials (WPMN) in September 2006.
• Eight different projects have potential to help establish
  a globally-harmonized risk assessment & management
  system for nano.
• Work product likely to influence national regulatory
  programs and industry practices.


                                                           9
International Initiatives – ISO TC 229

• Voluntary, consensus-based standards
• Strong liaison with OECD WPMN
• Four Working Groups:
   - Terminology & Nomenclature (WG1)
   - Metrology & Characterization (WG2)
   - EH&S (WG3)
   - Material Specifications (WG4)
• Technical report on occupational practices and technical
  specification on nanoparticle terminology available soon.
• ISO standards may influence future regs, industry
  practices, and eventually standards of care.

                                                        10
Foreign Government Initiatives - UK
Many foreign gov’ts active – UK is a good example
• UK Dept of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
  (Defra) Voluntary Reporting Scheme (VRS)
  - existing environmental and human health risk data from
    industry and research organizations on free, engineered
    nanoscale materials in the UK
  - unbound at any phase of life cycle, and deliberately
    engineered to have ≥ 2 dimensions within 0 – 200 nm
• Environment Agency May 19, 2008 Interim Advice re
  CNT wastes
  - classify and handle unbound CNT wastes as “inorganic
    wastes containing dangerous substances”
  - high-temperature incineration recommended
  - concern about physiological properties similar to asbestos
• British Standards Institution terminologies & guidance
                                                                 11
Domestic Initiatives
Numerous federal agencies involved:
• NNI
   - Funding framework for EH&S and other R&D research of 25
     federal agencies
• EPA
   - White Paper
   - Nanoscale Materials Stewardship Program
   - TSCA guidance (new v. existing)
   - FIFRA enforcement and petition (nanoscale silver)
• FDA
   - Nanotechnology Task Force
• NIOSH
   - Information Exchange
   - Draft Medical Screening Guidance
                                                         12
EPA Nanoscale Materials Stewardship

• Voluntary program under TSCA for “engineered
  nanoscale materials”
   - Basic program for:
       - submission of “known or reasonably ascertainable” data on
         “existing” substances (PMN +), and
       - Risk management program that “considers” nano.
   - In-depth requires:
       - data generation; and
       - evaluation of effectiveness of risk management measures.
• Proposal criticized for, inter alia, a lack of:
   - deadlines, and
   - rules mandating data submission by non-participants.
• 16 Participants in “basic” program to date
                                                                    13
EPA TSCA Guidance
• Guidance released in July 2007 Federal Register.
• Confirms that physical form (e.g., particle size) or
  properties (e.g., reactivity) will not determine
  whether a substance is “new” or “existing.”
• Analysis of “molecular identity” will continue to
  focus on structural and compositional features:
   - types and numbers of atoms in a molecule,
   - the types and number of chemical bonds, and
   - the connectivity and spatial arrangement of atoms in a
     molecule.
• Current Inventory listings include nano- and bulk-
  scale versions of chemical substance.
                                                              14
FDA Initiatives

• Nanotechnology Task Force Report
  Released in July 2007
• Three-part report:
  - Reviews state of science re nanomaterial
    biological interactions
  - Identifies science issues of importance to mission
    (i.e., biological interactions & current testing
    methods) and recommends keeping abreast
    through collaboration
  - Examines regulatory authority and offers
    recommendations

                                                    15
NIOSH Initiatives
National Institute of Occ. Safety & Health:
• Lead gov’t agency focusing on nanoparticle
  occupational exposure research
   - Non-regulatory; part of the CDC
• Information Exchange - guidance document on
  current best practices
   - Field Research Team site visits
   - Seeks collaboration with industry, et al.
• Interim guidance on medical screening of
  workers potentially exposed to nanoparticles
   - No specific tests recommended at this time
                                                  16
OSHA Initiatives

• No new rulemaking expected in near
  future.
• No OSHA nano-specific PELs or other
  stds.
• Current general regulations remain
  applicable:
  – General Duty Clause
  – Hazard Communication

                                       17
Tort Liability Considerations
Observations
• Common law and statutory tort liability theories
  are available and appear adequate for current
  and near-term developments.
   - Revolutionary new products in mid- to long-term may
     require evolution of the law to include new causes of
     action, damages, etc.
• Nanotechnology currently has a unique risk
  profile that will present litigation challenges for
  claims that arise across various aspects of the
  product life cycle.
   - Worker exposure claims
   - Product claims
   - Environmental release claims

                                                             19
Unique Litigation Risk Profile
Nanotechnology has a unique litigation risk profile:
• Evolving scientific knowledge re EH&S risks
   - Complex general/specific causation analyses possible
   - Latent effects could pose challenges for identifying when
     cause of action accrued
   - Invitation for “junk science” by hired experts
   - Invitation for “creative” causes of action (e.g., med
     monitoring)
• Evolving industry practices and standards
   - Invitation to second-guess past risk assessment and
     management practices (e.g., testing, exposure controls,
     warnings, instructions)
• Evolving regulatory standards
   - Invitation to second-guess past practices and to allege
     failure to disclose risk information to regulators or others
                                                                    20
Liability for Worker Exposures
• Workers’ Compensation may not always be a complete
  defense:
    • California: Johns-Manville Corp. v. Rudkin, 27 Cal. 3d 465
      (Cal. 1980) (finding actionable at law the aggravation of
      disease caused by concealment of its connection with
      asbestos hazards) .
    • West Virginia: Roney v. Gencorp, 431 F. Supp. 2d 622
      (S.D. W.Va. 2006) (finding actionable at law fraud re
      hazards of vinyl chloride monomer).
• Tort theories potentially available given company’s superior
  knowledge in comparison to workers:
    • Intentional Misrepresentation
    • Fraudulent Concealment
    • Conspiracy
• Traditional product liability theories for injuries to downstream
  workers.
                                                                      21
Liability for Consumer Products

• Negligence, Strict liability, and
  warranty theories available:
   - Design defect
      • risk/utility
      • consumer expectations
   - Manufacturing defect
   - Inadequate warning/instruction
      • reasonably foreseeable risks
• Misrepresentation/Fraud
• Deceptive Trade Practices

                                       22
Liability for Environmental Releases

• Potential tort claims for harm to natural
  resources, human health, & property:
  - Product liability theories
  - Trespass, nuisance, diminution in value
• Environmental statutes may impose liability
  via citizens’ suit or gov’t action:
  - State & federal NRD claims, if designated a haz
    substance
  - Cleanup orders under various statutes (e.g.,
    SDWA, RCRA)
                                                   23
Potential Damages

• Personal injury, including “creative” versions
   - “subclinical” injuries
   - medical monitoring
• Increased risk of future disease
• Fear-based claims
• Property Damages
   - alternative water supplies
   - natural resources
• Punitive damages
                                              24
Minimizing Liability and
Achieving Compliance
Observation

• Nanotechnology “sector” is proactive
  in addressing EH&S concerns to
  achieve present/future compliance
  and minimize liability risks:
  - Many voluntary initiatives underway
    outside of government in addition to
    Nano Risk Framework
  - Indicators of good practice are readily
    available

                                              26
Nanotechnology Occupational Safety &
Health (NOSH) Consortium
• Established in October 2005
• Industry, academia & gov’t members
• Deliverables:
  - develop a nanoparticle generator and
    characterize the aerosol as a function of time
  - measure filtration & barrier efficiency of
    various filter media (e.g., respirator, clothing,
    gloves) to specific engineered nanoparticles
  - develop a prototype device for daily exposure
    monitoring of nanoparticles in air

                                                        27
Int’l Council on Nanotechnology

International multi-stakeholder
organization:
  • Develop & communicate information re
    human health & environmental risks
     – EH&S database
     – Host events re EHS & nano
     – Provide technical info for decision makers
     – Communications development for
       stakeholders
  • Completed studies re best practices in
    occupational settings
                                                    28
Responsible Nano Code
• Royal Society, Insight Investment, NIA, and
  Knowledge Transfer Network, assembled multi-
  stakeholder working group.
• Voluntary, principles-based code of conduct for large
  & small organizations along value chain (incl. retail).
• Goal of establishing international consensus on
  “good practice” in as many sectors as possible.
• Seven principles & indicators of compliance.
• Framework of Good Practice and Benchmarking
  Process under development.
   - Independent assessment of adherents & non-adherents
     beginning in 2009
• September/October 2008 release date.
                                                           29
Responsible Nano Code
Principles include:
  - Board (or delegate) assumes responsibility for
    nano-developments & compliance with Code
  - Involve stakeholders proactively
  - I.D & minimize occupational risk (including
    downstream)
  - Perform thorough risk assessment & management
    across product life cycle
  - I.D. & respond to social - ethical implications
  - Engage suppliers & partners to adopt Code
  - Transparent re activities & Code implementation
                                                      30
Good Practice #1
• Keep updated on science supporting risk
  assessment and management.
   “Experts are overwhelmingly of the opinion that
    the adverse effects of nanoparticles cannot be
    reliably predicted or derived from the known
    toxicity of the bulk material.” Source: Allianz & OECD, Small Sizes that Matter
    (2005)



  “Until more is known about their environmental
    impact we are keen that the release of
    nanoparticles and nanotubes in the environment
    be avoided as far as possible.” Source: Royal Society and the Royal
    Academy of Engineering, Nanoscience and nanotechologies: Opportunities and uncertainties (2004) (emphasis added).




• ICON, NIOSH, SAFENANO databases

                                                                                                                31
Good Practice #2
An established process for regular
evaluation, mgmt & communication of
potential risks as data develop is important
for minimizing liability and achieving
compliance.
    - Include risks across product life cycle
    - Independent testing when appropriate
    - Employee training integrated into process
    - Designated responsible person(s)
    - Auditing when appropriate
    - Assists with “good” documentation practices
                                                    32
Good Practice #2 – cont’d.
Why is Practice #2 Important?
   • Helps satisfy duties to test, warn and may
     facilitate I.D. of avoidable risks in product design
       - liability avoidance?
       - reduces potential for harm/injury and risk of paying
         compensatory damages
       - may avoid punitive damages
   • Helps achieve current and possibly future
     regulatory obligations (e.g., OSHA)
   • Current opportunities: Nano Risk Framework,
     existing product stewardship practices/policies,
     Responsible Nano Code, to name but a few
                                                                33
Good Practice #3
• Keep updated on industry standards and practices.
  - Benchmarking: N.A. industry worker protection efforts:
     - “North American organizations more frequently reported
       administering nano-specific EHS programs including
       training, and monitoring the work environment than
       organizations in other parts of the world. Similarly, North
       American organizations more often reported using high
       capital cost engineering controls such as clean rooms,
       closed piping systems, and separate HVAC systems,
       compared to organizations from Asia that indicated more
       widespread use of glove boxes, glove bags and respirators.”
       Source: ICON, A Survey of Current Practices (2006).


  - Life Cycle Assessment ISO 14040: 2006
  - Occup. Inhalation Exposure & Assmt ISO TR 27628: 2007
• Many sources of info - ISO, ASTM, NIOSH, NOSH, ICON
                                                             34
Good Practice #4

• Engage regulatory agencies as appropriate.
  - May reduce later allegations of withholding information
    from regulators.
  - May help I.D. current & future compliance obligations.
  - May help educate regulators.
  - May reassure public and other stakeholders.
• Many opportunities available:
  - EPA NMSP
  - NIOSH Info Exchange & Field Team Visits
  - UK Defra VRS

                                                         35
Conclusion
• Most governments consider current legal
  authorities adequate to regulate
  nanotechnology, but they are working to
  improve implementation with the assistance of
  independent scientists and industry.
• Nanotechnology currently has a unique profile
  that may increase risk of tort litigation and pose
  challenges for defendants.
• Nanotechnology “sector” is proactively
  addressing potential liability, regulatory, and
  public perception risks.

                                                    36

Contenu connexe

Similaire à Nanotechnology EHS Legal Briefing

Nano Regulatory
Nano RegulatoryNano Regulatory
Nano RegulatoryDIv CHAS
 
Identification, prioritization and conduct of applied research and analyses i...
Identification, prioritization and conduct of applied research and analyses i...Identification, prioritization and conduct of applied research and analyses i...
Identification, prioritization and conduct of applied research and analyses i...EFSA EU
 
TSCA Reporting & Recordkeeping for Nanomaterials
TSCA Reporting & Recordkeeping for NanomaterialsTSCA Reporting & Recordkeeping for Nanomaterials
TSCA Reporting & Recordkeeping for NanomaterialsTriumvirate Environmental
 
Nanotechnology in Consumer Products: An Update on Regulatory Responses and Li...
Nanotechnology in Consumer Products: An Update on Regulatory Responses and Li...Nanotechnology in Consumer Products: An Update on Regulatory Responses and Li...
Nanotechnology in Consumer Products: An Update on Regulatory Responses and Li...kurfirst
 
A better understanding of the OECD Test Guidelines Programme and the validati...
A better understanding of the OECD Test Guidelines Programme and the validati...A better understanding of the OECD Test Guidelines Programme and the validati...
A better understanding of the OECD Test Guidelines Programme and the validati...OECD Environment
 
2014 11-19 rb progressive fieldevaluationmerck
2014 11-19 rb progressive fieldevaluationmerck2014 11-19 rb progressive fieldevaluationmerck
2014 11-19 rb progressive fieldevaluationmerckReiner Banken
 
MN Chemical Regulation and Policy, Work Group Meeting 10/26/11
MN Chemical Regulation and Policy, Work Group Meeting 10/26/11MN Chemical Regulation and Policy, Work Group Meeting 10/26/11
MN Chemical Regulation and Policy, Work Group Meeting 10/26/11Environmental Initiative
 
Chemical Safety Board History
Chemical Safety Board HistoryChemical Safety Board History
Chemical Safety Board HistoryDIv CHAS
 
OSMA: Orthopedic Industry's Top Regulatory Challenges and Opportunities
OSMA: Orthopedic Industry's Top Regulatory Challenges and OpportunitiesOSMA: Orthopedic Industry's Top Regulatory Challenges and Opportunities
OSMA: Orthopedic Industry's Top Regulatory Challenges and OpportunitiesApril Bright
 
TSCA - Risk Evaluation Rule
TSCA - Risk Evaluation RuleTSCA - Risk Evaluation Rule
TSCA - Risk Evaluation RuleLorenzo Zullo
 
Lorie Sheremeta_ A life cycle approach to understanding and managing risks an...
Lorie Sheremeta_ A life cycle approach to understanding and managing risks an...Lorie Sheremeta_ A life cycle approach to understanding and managing risks an...
Lorie Sheremeta_ A life cycle approach to understanding and managing risks an...Ne3LS_Network
 
Towards a new international instrument on the conservation and sustainable us...
Towards a new international instrument on the conservation and sustainable us...Towards a new international instrument on the conservation and sustainable us...
Towards a new international instrument on the conservation and sustainable us...Glen Wright
 
Pistoia Alliance USA Conference 2016
Pistoia Alliance USA Conference 2016Pistoia Alliance USA Conference 2016
Pistoia Alliance USA Conference 2016Pistoia Alliance
 
The TCE Revolution and Its Permanent Impact on Environmental Due Diligence
The TCE Revolution and Its Permanent Impact on Environmental Due DiligenceThe TCE Revolution and Its Permanent Impact on Environmental Due Diligence
The TCE Revolution and Its Permanent Impact on Environmental Due DiligenceEDR
 
Reach And Green Chemistry
Reach And Green ChemistryReach And Green Chemistry
Reach And Green ChemistryKevin Haroff
 
TGA Presentation: Biologicals framework updates
TGA Presentation: Biologicals framework updatesTGA Presentation: Biologicals framework updates
TGA Presentation: Biologicals framework updatesTGA Australia
 
Emerging Training Needs and Issues in Radiological Protection
Emerging Training Needs and Issues in Radiological ProtectionEmerging Training Needs and Issues in Radiological Protection
Emerging Training Needs and Issues in Radiological ProtectionGregory P Nichols, MPH, CPH
 

Similaire à Nanotechnology EHS Legal Briefing (20)

Nano Regulatory
Nano RegulatoryNano Regulatory
Nano Regulatory
 
Identification, prioritization and conduct of applied research and analyses i...
Identification, prioritization and conduct of applied research and analyses i...Identification, prioritization and conduct of applied research and analyses i...
Identification, prioritization and conduct of applied research and analyses i...
 
TSCA Reporting & Recordkeeping for Nanomaterials
TSCA Reporting & Recordkeeping for NanomaterialsTSCA Reporting & Recordkeeping for Nanomaterials
TSCA Reporting & Recordkeeping for Nanomaterials
 
Nanotechnology in Consumer Products: An Update on Regulatory Responses and Li...
Nanotechnology in Consumer Products: An Update on Regulatory Responses and Li...Nanotechnology in Consumer Products: An Update on Regulatory Responses and Li...
Nanotechnology in Consumer Products: An Update on Regulatory Responses and Li...
 
A better understanding of the OECD Test Guidelines Programme and the validati...
A better understanding of the OECD Test Guidelines Programme and the validati...A better understanding of the OECD Test Guidelines Programme and the validati...
A better understanding of the OECD Test Guidelines Programme and the validati...
 
2014 11-19 rb progressive fieldevaluationmerck
2014 11-19 rb progressive fieldevaluationmerck2014 11-19 rb progressive fieldevaluationmerck
2014 11-19 rb progressive fieldevaluationmerck
 
MN Chemical Regulation and Policy, Work Group Meeting 10/26/11
MN Chemical Regulation and Policy, Work Group Meeting 10/26/11MN Chemical Regulation and Policy, Work Group Meeting 10/26/11
MN Chemical Regulation and Policy, Work Group Meeting 10/26/11
 
Chemical Safety Board History
Chemical Safety Board HistoryChemical Safety Board History
Chemical Safety Board History
 
OSMA: Orthopedic Industry's Top Regulatory Challenges and Opportunities
OSMA: Orthopedic Industry's Top Regulatory Challenges and OpportunitiesOSMA: Orthopedic Industry's Top Regulatory Challenges and Opportunities
OSMA: Orthopedic Industry's Top Regulatory Challenges and Opportunities
 
S15 all
S15 allS15 all
S15 all
 
TSCA - Risk Evaluation Rule
TSCA - Risk Evaluation RuleTSCA - Risk Evaluation Rule
TSCA - Risk Evaluation Rule
 
Lorie Sheremeta_ A life cycle approach to understanding and managing risks an...
Lorie Sheremeta_ A life cycle approach to understanding and managing risks an...Lorie Sheremeta_ A life cycle approach to understanding and managing risks an...
Lorie Sheremeta_ A life cycle approach to understanding and managing risks an...
 
Towards a new international instrument on the conservation and sustainable us...
Towards a new international instrument on the conservation and sustainable us...Towards a new international instrument on the conservation and sustainable us...
Towards a new international instrument on the conservation and sustainable us...
 
Pistoia Alliance USA Conference 2016
Pistoia Alliance USA Conference 2016Pistoia Alliance USA Conference 2016
Pistoia Alliance USA Conference 2016
 
The TCE Revolution and Its Permanent Impact on Environmental Due Diligence
The TCE Revolution and Its Permanent Impact on Environmental Due DiligenceThe TCE Revolution and Its Permanent Impact on Environmental Due Diligence
The TCE Revolution and Its Permanent Impact on Environmental Due Diligence
 
Reach And Green Chemistry
Reach And Green ChemistryReach And Green Chemistry
Reach And Green Chemistry
 
TGA Presentation: Biologicals framework updates
TGA Presentation: Biologicals framework updatesTGA Presentation: Biologicals framework updates
TGA Presentation: Biologicals framework updates
 
Presentation Brian Rappert
Presentation Brian RappertPresentation Brian Rappert
Presentation Brian Rappert
 
HCF 2016: Brian Richards
HCF 2016: Brian RichardsHCF 2016: Brian Richards
HCF 2016: Brian Richards
 
Emerging Training Needs and Issues in Radiological Protection
Emerging Training Needs and Issues in Radiological ProtectionEmerging Training Needs and Issues in Radiological Protection
Emerging Training Needs and Issues in Radiological Protection
 

Nanotechnology EHS Legal Briefing

  • 1. Nanotechnology EHS Legal Briefing: How companies are reducing their liability exposure while achieving regulatory compliance and market acceptance _______ Insurance Company Boston, MA July 15, 2008 Philip A. Moffat (202) 789-6027 pmoffat@bdlaw.com
  • 2. Overview of Presentation • Adequacy of existing legal authorities to regulate EH&S risks • Tort liability considerations specific to nanotechnology • Current voluntary initiatives and practices to achieve compliance and reduce potential liability 2
  • 4. Observation • Majority of governments consider existing legal authorities adequate, although future amendments are possible • Few proposals for laws/regs specific to nano • Near-term focus on improving implementation through: - gaining experience with nano; - developing science for better risk assessment and management; and - developing guidance, methodologies, classifications, implementing regs, etc. 4
  • 5. Available Opinions on Adequacy ▪ European Commission Communication to Parliament and Council – June 2008 - Recent proposed amendment to REACH annexes to require registration of carbon and graphite ▪ Environment Canada and Health Canada Proposed Regulatory Framework under CEPA – Sept. 2007 • Council of Canadian Academies – July 2008 • U.S. Council on Envt’l Quality – Nov. 2007 ▪ FDA Nanotechnology Task Force – July 2007 ▪ American Bar Association SEER – June 2006 ▪ Australian Office of Nanotechnology (DIISR) – Sept. 2007 5
  • 6. Important Minority Trend - Local Laws Specific to Nanotechnology • Berkeley, CA ordinance effective June 2007: • Applies to “manufactured nanoparticles” – one axis < 100 nm • File written disclosure plans, regardless of amount used/produced, identifying: - nanoparticle production or use; - current toxicity data; and - plans for safe handling, monitoring, disposal, and release prevention & mitigation • Cambridge, MA considering similar ordinance: advisory panel assembled and recommendation expected in 2008. 6
  • 7. Important Minority Trend - State Laws Specific to Nanotechnology • California Assemblyman Mike Feuer (D) held a public meeting in April to discuss alternative regulatory approaches that could be incorporated in future legislation. - Proposal expected in 2009 • Wisconsin State Representative Terese Berceau (D) proposing creation of a registry & reporting system either through legislation or regulation for submission of information re: • type of nanomaterials, • test methods, • properties, • use, • handling, and • disposal activities. 7
  • 8. Improving Implementation • Variety of international and domestic govt’l and quasi- govt’l initiatives to improve implementation of existing legal authorities. - OECD - ISO - UK Defra VRS - EPA NMSP - Others ▪ Intended to advance science and methodologies supporting risk assessment and management, as well the knowledge and experience of regulators. ▪ Presentation will not emphasize scientific efforts 8
  • 9. International Initiatives - OECD ▪ Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) - 30 member countries - Important forum for intergovernmental cooperation ▪ Established Working Party on Manufactured Nanomaterials (WPMN) in September 2006. • Eight different projects have potential to help establish a globally-harmonized risk assessment & management system for nano. • Work product likely to influence national regulatory programs and industry practices. 9
  • 10. International Initiatives – ISO TC 229 • Voluntary, consensus-based standards • Strong liaison with OECD WPMN • Four Working Groups: - Terminology & Nomenclature (WG1) - Metrology & Characterization (WG2) - EH&S (WG3) - Material Specifications (WG4) • Technical report on occupational practices and technical specification on nanoparticle terminology available soon. • ISO standards may influence future regs, industry practices, and eventually standards of care. 10
  • 11. Foreign Government Initiatives - UK Many foreign gov’ts active – UK is a good example • UK Dept of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) Voluntary Reporting Scheme (VRS) - existing environmental and human health risk data from industry and research organizations on free, engineered nanoscale materials in the UK - unbound at any phase of life cycle, and deliberately engineered to have ≥ 2 dimensions within 0 – 200 nm • Environment Agency May 19, 2008 Interim Advice re CNT wastes - classify and handle unbound CNT wastes as “inorganic wastes containing dangerous substances” - high-temperature incineration recommended - concern about physiological properties similar to asbestos • British Standards Institution terminologies & guidance 11
  • 12. Domestic Initiatives Numerous federal agencies involved: • NNI - Funding framework for EH&S and other R&D research of 25 federal agencies • EPA - White Paper - Nanoscale Materials Stewardship Program - TSCA guidance (new v. existing) - FIFRA enforcement and petition (nanoscale silver) • FDA - Nanotechnology Task Force • NIOSH - Information Exchange - Draft Medical Screening Guidance 12
  • 13. EPA Nanoscale Materials Stewardship • Voluntary program under TSCA for “engineered nanoscale materials” - Basic program for: - submission of “known or reasonably ascertainable” data on “existing” substances (PMN +), and - Risk management program that “considers” nano. - In-depth requires: - data generation; and - evaluation of effectiveness of risk management measures. • Proposal criticized for, inter alia, a lack of: - deadlines, and - rules mandating data submission by non-participants. • 16 Participants in “basic” program to date 13
  • 14. EPA TSCA Guidance • Guidance released in July 2007 Federal Register. • Confirms that physical form (e.g., particle size) or properties (e.g., reactivity) will not determine whether a substance is “new” or “existing.” • Analysis of “molecular identity” will continue to focus on structural and compositional features: - types and numbers of atoms in a molecule, - the types and number of chemical bonds, and - the connectivity and spatial arrangement of atoms in a molecule. • Current Inventory listings include nano- and bulk- scale versions of chemical substance. 14
  • 15. FDA Initiatives • Nanotechnology Task Force Report Released in July 2007 • Three-part report: - Reviews state of science re nanomaterial biological interactions - Identifies science issues of importance to mission (i.e., biological interactions & current testing methods) and recommends keeping abreast through collaboration - Examines regulatory authority and offers recommendations 15
  • 16. NIOSH Initiatives National Institute of Occ. Safety & Health: • Lead gov’t agency focusing on nanoparticle occupational exposure research - Non-regulatory; part of the CDC • Information Exchange - guidance document on current best practices - Field Research Team site visits - Seeks collaboration with industry, et al. • Interim guidance on medical screening of workers potentially exposed to nanoparticles - No specific tests recommended at this time 16
  • 17. OSHA Initiatives • No new rulemaking expected in near future. • No OSHA nano-specific PELs or other stds. • Current general regulations remain applicable: – General Duty Clause – Hazard Communication 17
  • 19. Observations • Common law and statutory tort liability theories are available and appear adequate for current and near-term developments. - Revolutionary new products in mid- to long-term may require evolution of the law to include new causes of action, damages, etc. • Nanotechnology currently has a unique risk profile that will present litigation challenges for claims that arise across various aspects of the product life cycle. - Worker exposure claims - Product claims - Environmental release claims 19
  • 20. Unique Litigation Risk Profile Nanotechnology has a unique litigation risk profile: • Evolving scientific knowledge re EH&S risks - Complex general/specific causation analyses possible - Latent effects could pose challenges for identifying when cause of action accrued - Invitation for “junk science” by hired experts - Invitation for “creative” causes of action (e.g., med monitoring) • Evolving industry practices and standards - Invitation to second-guess past risk assessment and management practices (e.g., testing, exposure controls, warnings, instructions) • Evolving regulatory standards - Invitation to second-guess past practices and to allege failure to disclose risk information to regulators or others 20
  • 21. Liability for Worker Exposures • Workers’ Compensation may not always be a complete defense: • California: Johns-Manville Corp. v. Rudkin, 27 Cal. 3d 465 (Cal. 1980) (finding actionable at law the aggravation of disease caused by concealment of its connection with asbestos hazards) . • West Virginia: Roney v. Gencorp, 431 F. Supp. 2d 622 (S.D. W.Va. 2006) (finding actionable at law fraud re hazards of vinyl chloride monomer). • Tort theories potentially available given company’s superior knowledge in comparison to workers: • Intentional Misrepresentation • Fraudulent Concealment • Conspiracy • Traditional product liability theories for injuries to downstream workers. 21
  • 22. Liability for Consumer Products • Negligence, Strict liability, and warranty theories available: - Design defect • risk/utility • consumer expectations - Manufacturing defect - Inadequate warning/instruction • reasonably foreseeable risks • Misrepresentation/Fraud • Deceptive Trade Practices 22
  • 23. Liability for Environmental Releases • Potential tort claims for harm to natural resources, human health, & property: - Product liability theories - Trespass, nuisance, diminution in value • Environmental statutes may impose liability via citizens’ suit or gov’t action: - State & federal NRD claims, if designated a haz substance - Cleanup orders under various statutes (e.g., SDWA, RCRA) 23
  • 24. Potential Damages • Personal injury, including “creative” versions - “subclinical” injuries - medical monitoring • Increased risk of future disease • Fear-based claims • Property Damages - alternative water supplies - natural resources • Punitive damages 24
  • 26. Observation • Nanotechnology “sector” is proactive in addressing EH&S concerns to achieve present/future compliance and minimize liability risks: - Many voluntary initiatives underway outside of government in addition to Nano Risk Framework - Indicators of good practice are readily available 26
  • 27. Nanotechnology Occupational Safety & Health (NOSH) Consortium • Established in October 2005 • Industry, academia & gov’t members • Deliverables: - develop a nanoparticle generator and characterize the aerosol as a function of time - measure filtration & barrier efficiency of various filter media (e.g., respirator, clothing, gloves) to specific engineered nanoparticles - develop a prototype device for daily exposure monitoring of nanoparticles in air 27
  • 28. Int’l Council on Nanotechnology International multi-stakeholder organization: • Develop & communicate information re human health & environmental risks – EH&S database – Host events re EHS & nano – Provide technical info for decision makers – Communications development for stakeholders • Completed studies re best practices in occupational settings 28
  • 29. Responsible Nano Code • Royal Society, Insight Investment, NIA, and Knowledge Transfer Network, assembled multi- stakeholder working group. • Voluntary, principles-based code of conduct for large & small organizations along value chain (incl. retail). • Goal of establishing international consensus on “good practice” in as many sectors as possible. • Seven principles & indicators of compliance. • Framework of Good Practice and Benchmarking Process under development. - Independent assessment of adherents & non-adherents beginning in 2009 • September/October 2008 release date. 29
  • 30. Responsible Nano Code Principles include: - Board (or delegate) assumes responsibility for nano-developments & compliance with Code - Involve stakeholders proactively - I.D & minimize occupational risk (including downstream) - Perform thorough risk assessment & management across product life cycle - I.D. & respond to social - ethical implications - Engage suppliers & partners to adopt Code - Transparent re activities & Code implementation 30
  • 31. Good Practice #1 • Keep updated on science supporting risk assessment and management. “Experts are overwhelmingly of the opinion that the adverse effects of nanoparticles cannot be reliably predicted or derived from the known toxicity of the bulk material.” Source: Allianz & OECD, Small Sizes that Matter (2005) “Until more is known about their environmental impact we are keen that the release of nanoparticles and nanotubes in the environment be avoided as far as possible.” Source: Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering, Nanoscience and nanotechologies: Opportunities and uncertainties (2004) (emphasis added). • ICON, NIOSH, SAFENANO databases 31
  • 32. Good Practice #2 An established process for regular evaluation, mgmt & communication of potential risks as data develop is important for minimizing liability and achieving compliance. - Include risks across product life cycle - Independent testing when appropriate - Employee training integrated into process - Designated responsible person(s) - Auditing when appropriate - Assists with “good” documentation practices 32
  • 33. Good Practice #2 – cont’d. Why is Practice #2 Important? • Helps satisfy duties to test, warn and may facilitate I.D. of avoidable risks in product design - liability avoidance? - reduces potential for harm/injury and risk of paying compensatory damages - may avoid punitive damages • Helps achieve current and possibly future regulatory obligations (e.g., OSHA) • Current opportunities: Nano Risk Framework, existing product stewardship practices/policies, Responsible Nano Code, to name but a few 33
  • 34. Good Practice #3 • Keep updated on industry standards and practices. - Benchmarking: N.A. industry worker protection efforts: - “North American organizations more frequently reported administering nano-specific EHS programs including training, and monitoring the work environment than organizations in other parts of the world. Similarly, North American organizations more often reported using high capital cost engineering controls such as clean rooms, closed piping systems, and separate HVAC systems, compared to organizations from Asia that indicated more widespread use of glove boxes, glove bags and respirators.” Source: ICON, A Survey of Current Practices (2006). - Life Cycle Assessment ISO 14040: 2006 - Occup. Inhalation Exposure & Assmt ISO TR 27628: 2007 • Many sources of info - ISO, ASTM, NIOSH, NOSH, ICON 34
  • 35. Good Practice #4 • Engage regulatory agencies as appropriate. - May reduce later allegations of withholding information from regulators. - May help I.D. current & future compliance obligations. - May help educate regulators. - May reassure public and other stakeholders. • Many opportunities available: - EPA NMSP - NIOSH Info Exchange & Field Team Visits - UK Defra VRS 35
  • 36. Conclusion • Most governments consider current legal authorities adequate to regulate nanotechnology, but they are working to improve implementation with the assistance of independent scientists and industry. • Nanotechnology currently has a unique profile that may increase risk of tort litigation and pose challenges for defendants. • Nanotechnology “sector” is proactively addressing potential liability, regulatory, and public perception risks. 36