05.11.2014 Views

Chemical & Engineering News Digital Edition ... - IMM@BUCT

Chemical & Engineering News Digital Edition ... - IMM@BUCT

Chemical & Engineering News Digital Edition ... - IMM@BUCT

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

GOVERNMENT & POLICY CONCENTRATES<br />

FDA’S FOREIGN<br />

INSPECTION PROGRAM<br />

NEEDS OVERHAUL<br />

Better data management and more inspections<br />

are needed to strengthen FDA’s<br />

foreign drug facility inspection program,<br />

according to congressional investigators.<br />

The Government Accountability Office<br />

says the agency isn’t sure how many foreign<br />

establishments produce drugs for<br />

the U.S. market (GAO-08-970). Using a<br />

list of 3,249 plants FDA developed in 2007<br />

to prioritize foreign inspections, GAO<br />

estimates that FDA inspects only about<br />

8% of facilities outside the U.S. each year.<br />

“At this rate, it would take FDA more than<br />

13 years to inspect these establishments<br />

once,” GAO notes. Pharmaceutical plants<br />

in the U.S. are inspected on average every<br />

2.7 years. “This report confirms that we<br />

have reason to be concerned about the<br />

safety of imported drugs,” says House<br />

Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman<br />

John D. Dingell (D-Mich.). “Foreign<br />

inspections are alarmingly low.” The<br />

report also indicates that FDA is failing to<br />

promptly conduct follow-up inspections<br />

after serious violations—such as product<br />

impurities or record-keeping problems—<br />

are found in foreign facilities. From 2002<br />

through 2007, FDA issued 15 warning<br />

letters to foreign drug producers but reinspected<br />

only four of the facilities, the<br />

report notes.—GH<br />

SENATORS ASK EPA<br />

NOT TO ISSUE AIR RULE<br />

EU LISTS CHEMICALS OF CONCERN<br />

Following submissions from various European Union member countries,<br />

the European <strong>Chemical</strong>s Agency (ECHA) has put 15 chemicals on its candidate<br />

list of “substances of very high concern.” The list is part of the EU’s<br />

new regulatory program under the Registration, Evaluation & Authorization<br />

of <strong>Chemical</strong>s (REACH). “The inclusion of the substances in the list<br />

generates immediate new legal obligations” for companies producing,<br />

marketing, and using them, ECHA Executive Director Geert Dancet says.<br />

As of Dec. 1, 2011, a producer has to notify ECHA when a product contains<br />

more than 0.1% by weight of a substance on the candidate list, or when<br />

use totals more than 1 metric ton per year. Companies must also provide<br />

sufficient information on the safe use of the chemical or product to customers<br />

and consumers who request it. Inclusion on this list, some project,<br />

will encourage producers to develop more benign replacement chemicals.<br />

Publication of the list is “a welcome start, but a drop in the ocean,” given<br />

“the hundreds of well-known dangerous substances present in products<br />

used every day across Europe,” according to a statement released by a coalition<br />

of environmental and consumer public interest groups.—PLLS<br />

Because a federal court recently overturned<br />

a key Clean Air Act regulation, two powerful<br />

Senate Democrats are asking EPA not<br />

to issue a pending related rule that would<br />

relax some emissions controls on power<br />

plants. The pending rule, which the Bush<br />

Administration says it will finalize in coming<br />

weeks, is expected to boost air pollution<br />

from coal-fired power plants. This in turn<br />

is likely to pressure state environmental<br />

regulators to impose more stringent emissions<br />

controls on other industries, possibly<br />

including chemical plants, to maintain air<br />

quality. Proposed in 2005, the pending rule<br />

would allow utilities to renovate and expand<br />

the operating capacity of older power plants<br />

without having to install modern air pollution<br />

controls. EPA said any increase in annual<br />

pollution from power plants due to these<br />

proposed changes would be offset by another<br />

regulation called the Clean Air Interstate<br />

Rule (CAIR). But in July, a federal appeals<br />

court threw out CAIR (C&EN, July 21, page<br />

12). EPA needs to withdraw the pending rule<br />

because CAIR no longer exists, say Sens.<br />

Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who chairs the<br />

Senate Environment & Public Works Committee,<br />

and Thomas R. Carper (D-Del.), who<br />

chairs the panel’s Subcommittee on Clean<br />

Air & Nuclear Safety.—CH<br />

DOE UPGRADES USER<br />

FACILITIES’ CONTRACTS<br />

On Oct. 27, the Department of Energy announced<br />

that it has streamlined access<br />

to user facilities, which offer researchers<br />

access to unique and expensive equipment<br />

and expertise, by making changes to<br />

technology transfer contracts. The new<br />

contracts clarify wording and provide a<br />

universal document that all DOE user facilities<br />

can employ. The two standardized<br />

contracts are designed to make it easier<br />

for university and industry scientists to<br />

use DOE’s research facilities. Under the<br />

proprietary agreement, users pay full cost<br />

for lab equipment use, and with limited<br />

exceptions, the researchers will retain<br />

all rights to the data and new inventions.<br />

For noncommercial and precompetitive<br />

research, researchers can use DOE’s equipment<br />

and collaborate with lab scientists<br />

under the nonproprietary agreement, but<br />

all data would be publicly available. The department<br />

hopes these contracts will speed<br />

up processing time, get researchers on-site,<br />

and increase collaborations. Researchers<br />

who already have contracts to use DOE<br />

facilities can expect the agreements to be<br />

executed as originally written.—RFHB<br />

GROUP PROMOTES USE<br />

OF GREENER CHEMICALS<br />

Executives from the electronics, health<br />

care, retail, and building sectors are<br />

joining with health and environmental<br />

advocates to promote the development<br />

and use of safer chemicals. On Oct. 29,<br />

the Business-NGO Working Group for<br />

Safer <strong>Chemical</strong>s & Sustainable Materials<br />

unveiled principles designed to encourage<br />

chemical producers to supply compounds<br />

with low to no toxicity and which degrade<br />

into innocuous substances. The principles<br />

call for manufacturers to identify the<br />

chemicals that are used to make or are<br />

contained in a product and for buyers to<br />

request chemical data from their suppliers.<br />

In addition, they call for manufacturers<br />

to determine the hazards of substances<br />

in their products; use chemicals with<br />

inherently low hazard potential; and target<br />

persistent, bioaccumulative, or toxic<br />

compounds for elimination. Roger McFadden,<br />

vice president of product science and<br />

technology for Corporate Express, an arm<br />

of office products retailer Staples, explains<br />

that the principles “mark a significant step<br />

toward incorporating green chemistry into<br />

consumer goods.” —CH<br />

WWW.CEN-ONLINE.ORG 17 NOVEMBER 3, 2008

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!