From Marketing News:

The European Parliament has called for warnings on foods containing certain food colours to say: “May have an adverse effect on activity and attention in children”.

The Parliament has voted in favour of labelling foods containing the six food colours E110, E104, E122, E129, E102 and E124.

The move comes after research commissioned by the UK Food Standards Agency last year.

The research, known as the Southampton Study, was published last September and revealed that a combination of six food colours and one preservative increased hyperactivity in a cross section of children – not just those who had been previously diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, more commonly known as ADHD.

Foods containing these six dyes will have to carry the warning label within 18 months of the official publication of the law, expected within the next few weeks.

For more information, click on the above link.

From the Sacramento Bee:

At the national level, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is working on a definition of “natural products” to be used in future standards, said USDA National Organic Program spokesman Billy Cox. It does not certify natural products.

The department’s National Organic Program certifies organically produced cosmetics and body care products but on a voluntary basis.

The Food and Drug Administration can take action against cosmetic companies that make false or misleading claims on product labels, but it does not define or regulate “organic” or “natural” cosmetics, nor does it test any cosmetics before they go to market.

In the private sector, the nonprofit Natural Products Association launched a certification program May 1. The voluntary program will certify products as natural if they contain at least 95 percent ingredients from renewable resources found in nature, with no petroleum compounds.

For more information, click on the above link.

This article provides a good reminder of the important of ensuring your company’s consumer chemicals are legally compliant:

For the second time in two months the European Union has ordered the withdrawal of bicycle repair kits from the EU market. The solution in the kits do not comply with the Chemical Restrictions Directive 76/769/EEC. This time the China produced rubber solutions contained too high toxic toluene levels.

The product poses a chemical risk because the rubber solution contains 30% of toluene. Toluene is classified as reprotoxic. According to the Chemical Restrictions Directive, toluene is prohibited in consumer products at levels above 0.1%.

Click on the above link for the full article.

But not for consumer products, according to a recent article:

The classification and communication of chemical hazard labelling will be implemented in the industrial and agriculture sectors apart from consumer products by 2010, said Deputy Human Resource Minister Datuk Noraini Ahmad…

“Unlike in the European countries, Malaysia was a bit slow in implementing the GHS because it had to be carried out in stages and with the agreement of the other nine Asean countries,” she told reporters after opening the two-day Chemical Management at the Work Place Seminar here Wednesday…

Noraini said after the implementation of the GHS, all imported products would be uniformly labelled and classified to facilitate their usage in the chemical industry. “For example, the chemical elements in imported hair shampoos sold in Malaysia were not uniformly labelled and unclear because of the differences in labelling definitions, thus they needed to be harmonised,” she said.

Click on the top link for the full article.

Nexreg has more information on GHS at the following link:

• GHS Strategic Planning (English)

To speak to a Nexreg representative about how GHS or REACH will impact your company, please call or e-mail Nexreg at:

Nexreg Toll Free: 1-866-361-3032
E-mail:info@nexreg.com

Relevant Nexreg Compliance Links: Nexreg, GHS Consulting.

From Evertiq:

The plastics and electronics industry should be alerted to signals from the Swedish Government as restrictions of some flame retardant substances could force them into risking the fire safety of their products or into the use of less tested alternative substances. The flame retardant Deca-BDE could be banned in Sweden as early as June.

Flame retardants are substances required to be applied to a wide range of materials in order to meet Sweden’s fire safety standards (e.g. for cinemas, hospitals or other public buildings). Deca-BDE is used in applications such as plugs, cables, TV sets, carpets and furniture in public buildings or for insulation for the chemicals industry or other industry producing explosive goods.

DecaBDE has gone through a lengthy evaluation process at EU level lasting 12 years in which Sweden was involved. As a result of this evaluation, the EU authorities agreed that no restrictions on the use of this flame retardant would be necessary. Sweden obviously ignores and goes against this decision by proposing a ban. Both the European Commission and several other EU Member States have opposed the Swedish Government’s actions regarding their violation of the fundamental principles of the free movement of goods within the EU internal market. Such a ban will serve as a dangerous precedent for other substances, such as TBBPA, the flame retardant used in FR4-boards, for which restrictions have been announced for the Autumn.

Click on the above link for more information.

From the ECHA:

In the framework of the authorisation process, Member States Competent Authorities or the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), on a request by the Commission, may prepare Annex XV dossiers for the identification of substances of very high concern (SVHC).

Substances of very high concern are defined in Article 57 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (“the REACH Regulation”) and include substances which are:

• Carcinogenic, Mutagenic or toxic to Reproduction (CMR), meeting the criteria for classification in category 1 or 2 in accordance with Directive 67/548/EEC,
• Persistent, Bioaccumulative and Toxic (PBT) or very Persistent and very Bioaccumulative (vPvB) according to the criteria in Annex XIII of the REACH Regulation, and/or
• Identified, on a case-by-case basis, from scientific evidence as causing probable serious effects to human health or the environment of an equivalent level of concern as those above (e.g. endocrine disrupters)

The Annex XV report prepared by a Member State or the Agency is available in the table below in order to inform interested parties. The interested parties have 45 days from this publication to give scientific comments on the identification of the substance as SVHC as well as further information related to exposures, alternatives substances and risks and send their comments to the Agency. It would facilitate the evaluation process of comments to receive them in English.

The 16 substances are as follows:

1. Anthracene ( CAS No. 120-12-7 )
2. 4,4′- Diaminodiphenylmethane ( CAS No. 101-77-9 )
3. Dibutyl phthalate (CAS No. 84-74-2 )
4. Cyclododecane ( CAS No. 294-62-2 )
5. Cobalt dichloride ( CAS No. 7546-79-9 )
6. Diarsenic pentaoxide ( CAS No. 1303-28-2 )
7. Diarsenic trioxide ( CAS No. 1327-53-3 )
8. Sodium dichromate, dihydrate ( CAS No. 7789-12-0 )
9. 5-tert-butyl-2,4,6-trinitro-m-xylene (musk xylene) ( CAS No. 81-15-2 )
10. Bis (2-ethyl(hexyl)phthalate) (DEHP) ( CAS No. 117-81-7 )
11. Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCDD) ( CAS No. 25637-99-4 )
12. Alkanes, C10-13, chloro (Short Chain Chlorinated Paraffins) ( CAS No. 85535-84-8 )
13. Bis(tributyltin)oxide ( CAS No. 56-35-9 )
14. Lead hydrogen arsenate ( CAS No. 7784-40-9 )
15. Triethyl arsenate ( CAS No. 15606-95-8 )
16. Benzyl butyl phthalate ( CAS No. 85-68-7 )

Click on the above link for the full release.

From EurActiv.com:

European labour unions have called on the European Commission to amend the REACH regulation on chemicals to better protect workers against nanomaterials throughout their lifecycle. Their call comes shortly after the EU executive argued that nanotech is already covered by existing EU regulation…

The confederation calls on the Commission to amend the bloc’s chemicals legislation (REACH) to cover nanomaterials manufactured or imported below the threshold of one tonne per year. According to ETUC, nanomaterials could escape the current chemicals registration procedure as they would probably weigh less.

Unions say another argument in favour of amending REACH is the fact that the legislation’s current requirement for a chemicals producer to provide a chemical safety report only for production volumes above 10 tonnes per year “will allow many manufacturers or importers to avoid doing a risk assessment before putting nanomaterials on the market”. ETUC therefore wants a mandatory chemical safety report “for all substances registered under the REACH regulation for which nanometer-scale use has been identified”.

Click on the above link for the full story. We will be watching closely to see if REACH is amended in any way.