The new environmental guidelines we mentioned earlier in the week have been released. A press release from the competition bureau states:

Environmental Claims: A Guide for Industry and Advertisers addresses a number of commonly used green claims and provides examples of best practices on how such claims can be used by businesses to comply with the false or misleading provisions of the laws enforced by the Competition Bureau. Among other practices, the Guide states that:

• The use of vague claims implying general environmental improvement are insufficient and should be avoided.
• Environmental claims should be clear, specific, accurate and not misleading.
• Environmental claims should be verified and substantiated, prior to being made.

…The Bureau recognizes companies may wish to reassess their advertising and labelling in light of the Guide. A one-year transition phase will allow legitimate businesses to change their marketing practices, if necessary, and will also allow the Bureau and CSA to raise awareness and understanding on the new environmental guidelines.

During this one-year transition period, the Bureau will not hesitate to pursue egregious cases of deceptive environmental claims.

Although the Guide is not law, following the best practices outlined will help businesses to avoid making misleading claims that contravene the laws enforced by the Bureau. The Guide will be used by the Bureau to assess environmental advertising that raise concerns under its legislative mandate.

Click on the above link for the full press release.

We highly encourage our colleagues and clients to ensure that their labels comply with the guidelines. A PDF copy of the guidlines is available here (PDF).

From the Stoneham Sun:

On June 10, U.S. Rep. Edward Markey, who represents the 7th District of Massachusetts that includes Stoneham, filed a bill, HR 6228, that would ban the use of BPA in all food and drink packaging…

The bill that Markey filed is now in a congressional subcommittee. It then goes to a House committee, followed by discussion on the House floor, and then to the Senate. If it’s passed, it will go into effect 180 days after it becomes law.

Click on the above link for the full story. We will be watching this one as it progresses through the House.

First of all, we would like to welcome you to our newly re-designed news site. We hope that you find it easier to navigate than the previous version of Regulatory News by Nexreg Compliance. The site has not been tested against every possible browser and resolution combination. If you find any display errors, we would appreciate it if you let us know by e-mail at info@nexreg.com

In other news, Nexreg Compliance is introducing three free regulatory compliance newsletters. The two-page newsletters summarize major chemical compliance news and will be released bi-monthly. The three newsletters are as follows:

• Canadian Regulatory Compliance News
• U.S. Regulatory Compliance News
• Global Regulatory Compliance News (covering GHS, REACH, etc.)

The first issue of the Canadian newsletter has just been released. If you wish to receive copies of one or all over the newsletters sent by mail or by e-mail (as a PDF file), please send your contact information to info@nexreg.com.

There has been a fair amount of interest in yesterday’s post on environmental claims in Canada – see Canada Competition Bureau Sees Red Over False Green Claims. As soon as the new guidelines are released, we will let you know.

Since it appears the bureau is starting to crack down on labels, it may be worth seeing if your product labels meet the current guidelines which are available at: Guidelines for Environmental Claims.

Environmental claims on products in Canada are to follow four guiding principles:

1) Those making environmental claims are responsible for ensuring that any claims and/or representations are accurate, and in compliance with the relevant legislation.

2) Consumers are responsible, to the extent possible, for appropriately using the information made available to them in labelling and advertising, thereby enhancing their role in the marketplace.

3) Environmental claims and/or representations that are ambiguous, vague, incomplete, misleading, or irrelevant, and that cannot be substantiated through credible information and/or test methods should not be used.

4) Claims and/or representations should indicate whether they are related to the product or the packaging materials.

For more information, click on the above links.

From The Guardian:

European Union agriculture ministers struck a compromise deal on Monday to revise pesticide authorisation laws that should cut the number of crop chemicals that can be sold in EU markets, officials and diplomats said.

The proposed changes, which will now be debated by the European Parliament in the autumn, would replace a law dating from 1991 and let groups of countries with similar geography and climate to decide whether farmers may use specific products.

Britain, Hungary, Ireland and Romania abstained in Monday’s vote, saying the final text was too restrictive and focused too much on danger analysis of pesticides rather than risk analysis.

But the EU’s remaining 23 countries voted in favour, after changes were agreed by EU ambassadors last week for countries to apply exceptions, under certain strict conditions, for particular substances to gain bloc-wide authorisation.

Click on the above link for the full story.

Could nanomaterial labeling regulations be coming to the EU? EurActiv.com discusses:

The EU executive’s regulatory review of existing European legislation concludes that current laws may need to be modified as the depth of scientific knowledge on nanomaterials increases. Specific labelling schemes for products containing nanomaterials could notably be developed.

The current EU legislative framework “covers in principle the potential health, safety and environmental risks in relation to nanomaterials,” concludes a Commission Communication on regulatory aspects of nanomaterial, published on 17 June 2008…

As for labelling of products, the Commission does not exclude the possibility “that a need would be identified for specific labelling requirements” for nanomaterials. Until then, it says, nanomaterials must comply with the existing EU law on the labelling of products, warnings and other information for consumers on the properties of products.

Click on the above link for more information.

Canada may be getting new labeling standards for environmental claims on labels. Canada.com explains:

Consumers weary of environmental claims about products can soon expect more straight talk from manufacturers when the Competition Bureau releases tougher standards for green marketing pitches.

As early as next week, the agency is expected to release updated guidelines for self-declared environmental claims to make clear the federal government wants companies to stop making false or misleading claims.

Customers are bombarded with eco-friendly pitches for products, ranging from household cleaners to electronics as companies try to cash in on a desire by Canadians to help the environment. But the bureau says the truth has been a casualty in some cases, and wants to see an end to vague claims, such as pitching a product as “ozone-friendly.”

Click on the above link for more information.

A recent release from the EPA:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today fined Fresno-based property owner, Ralph Hovannisian, $16,000 for violating federal lead-based paint disclosure requirements at eight rental properties in Fresno, Calif.

“The EPA has a responsibility to ensure renters and buyers receive adequate information to protect children from potential lead-based paint hazards,” said Enrique Manzanilla, director of the EPA’s Communities and Ecosystems Division for the Pacific Southwest Region. “This enforcement action is an example of the EPA’s commitment to regulating and enforcing toxic substances to protect public health — especially children, from potential lead-based paint hazards.”

Residential property owner and manager Ralph Hovannisian did not provide federally-required lead warning statements to his tenants. He also failed to disclose information or reports on lead-based paint or lead hazards at these locations prior to tenants signing lease agreements. The tenants didn’t receive an EPA-approved lead information pamphlet, a statement of knowledge about lead-based paint in the units, or an identification of any records available regarding lead-based paint in the units. These failures resulted in multiple violations of the federally regulated Toxic Substances Control Act.

Click on the above link for more information.

The NHPPA an organization which opposes both Bill C-51 and Bill C-52 has a detailed analysis of Bill C-52. The analysis is from the perspective of a group that opposes the bill (so that should be kept in mind), but it is by far the most detailed analysis of the details of the bill we have seen.

The analysis is available here.

A google translate into English of the draft of NOM-232-SSA1-200 is available here:

Draft Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-232-SSA1-2006, Pesticides: laying down the requirements of packaging and labelling of products for use in agriculture, forestry, livestock, gardening, urban, industrial and domestic.

This project is published so that interested parties, within 60 calendar days from the date of its publication, submit their comments in Spanish language and with sufficient technical support to the National Advisory Committee for Standardization Regulation and Health Promotion.

Click on the above link for the full draft of the regulations in Google-translated English. To read the draft in the original Spanish click here.