Overview of Policy Initiatives Relating to Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (EDCs) 5 May 1997
A. Introduction
Summary of National Level Actions
Denmark:
- Legislation: Ban on certain pesticides, limit value for nonyl phenol ethoxylates (NPEO) in sludge
Approval/Registration: use of evidence when making risk assessment of pesticides and used when deciding on granting approvals
- Voluntary Agreement: DEHP, NPEO phasing out.
- Recommendation: Ingredients in cosmetics, guidance from DK-EPA to countries on discharge permits
Finland: Measures concerning pesticides
Norway:
- specific chemicals: APEO, endosulfan, vinclozolin
- Legislation: TBT, PCB
- Approval/registration: Phasing out APEO
- Discharge Permit: Teratogenic products not approved (off-shore chemicals)
- Voluntary agreement: OPEO/NPEO in detergents according to OSPAR Conventions
- Phase-out plan: all APEO by the year 2000
Sweden:
- Legislation: PCB, DDT, TBT, pesticides like atrazine, dicofol, vinclozolin, benomyl; maximal limits for pesticides and PCB in food stuffs
- Recommendations: consumption advice for fish regarding PCB
- Phase-out plan: NPEO in pesticides
Switzerland: OPEO/NPEO in detergents, DDT, Kepone, HCH, TBT, PCB, etc.
UK:
- Discharge permits: Environmental Quality Standards for the substances listed to have been set on general environmental toxicity rather that on
endocrine disrupting activity
- Voluntary agreement:
- 1) APEO in wool scouring industry,
- 2) Industry to investigate sources and leakage of phthalates in infant formula
- Recommendations:
- 1) Substitute APEO with alternatives,
- 2) Manufacturers of soy-based infant formulae to investigate means of reducing phytoestrogen content,
- 3) Recommendations for parents using soya-based formulae
This is not meant to be a comprehensive list. For the purposes of this overview document, we review regulatory action on specific substances (based upon the
preliminary results of a recent OECD survey) and as well as the implementation of toxics use reduction programmes, including Pollutant Release and Transfer
Registers (PRTRs) and pesticide reduction programmes.
B. Action on Particular Substances Considered to Have, or Suspected of Having, EDC effects
1. Regulatory Action Taken, or Planned, on EDCs in OECD Member Countries
According to the results of a recent OECD survey on EDCs, the results of which have only been initially compiled, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden and
Switzerland have taken specific regulatory action against EDCs for the reason that they have endocrine disrupting ability.
Italy has prepared regulatory action not yet implemented.
Australia has developed recommendations on developmental and reproductive toxicity test requirements.
The UK has not taken any specific regulatory actions for EDCs generically although some actions have been taken on individual chemicals.
Many of the countries surveyed considered the following chemicals/chemical use-categories as potential EDCs: phytoestrogen, PCBs and metabolites, phthalates,
TBT, dioxins/furans, alkyl phenols, DDT and metabolites, alkyl phenol ethoxylates (APEO), organometals, pesticides, pharmaceuticals, and food additives.
2. Policy Documents Addressing EDCs Available or Under Preparation
- Available: Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Norway
- Under preparation: Denmark, UK
3. Information to the General Public by Authorities:
- Yes: Australia, Austria, UK, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland
Information on EDCs for the Public from Governmental Authorities
Australia: community consultation forum
Austria: press release, proceedings of workshop
Belgium: information campaigns, press release
Denmark: press release, leaflets, warning on cosmetic, report
from D-EPA (easy to understand version)
France: press release, proceedings of congress
Germany: press release on NPEO and phthalates
Italy: press release
Norway: press release on phthalates in mother's
milk substitution and other sorts of food, leaflets,
recommendations/warnings, lectures
Sweden: recommendation on fish consumption
Switzerland: press release
UK: press release, research reports, scientific papers
4. Hazard/Risk Assessment
4.1 Classification and labelling
Finland: vinclozolin, iprodione, simazine
Italy: triazole fungicides
Norway: vinclozolin
4.2 Drug Registration
UK: (registration of veterinary drugs): vinclozolin, fenarimol
4.3 Pesticide Registration
Australia: vinclozolin, iprodione, TBT, atrazine
Finland: vinclozolin, iprodione, dithiocarbamates, simazine
Greece: vinclozolin, endosulfan, lindane, TBTs,
Norway: vinclozolin
Sweden: vinclozolin
4.4 Other registration
Norway: TBT as antifouling agent
Sweden: Dietary Advisory: effects of PCB and dioxins
C. Other Relevant Policy Initiatives
1. Community Right-to-Know (Pollutant Release and Transfer Registers or PRTRs)
The OECD/IOMC (Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals) PRTR Guidance Manual for Governments was published in March 1996. It draws on
the experience that a number of countries have gained through existing reporting systems, for example, the US Toxic Release Inventory (TRI), Canada's National
Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI), the U.K. Chemical Release Inventory (CRI), as well as the Netherlands' Collective and Individual Emission Inventories (CEI & IEI). Furthermore, Australia
has begun a widespread exploration of the possibilities of developing reporting systems and other countries are also considering implementing PRTRs, for example
South Africa, Hungary, Egypt, Czech Republic and Mexico. There are currently underway three UNITAR (United Nations Institute For Training and Research) pilot
projects in Czech Republic, Egypt and Mexico. UNITAR has also prepared documents to assist countries in implementing PRTRs.
In Europe, PRTR-type inventories exist only in the United Kingdom and in the Netherlands.
1.1 European Commission - Polluting Emissions Register (PER)
The PER will be integrated into the EEC-wide permitting scheme for major polluters -- the proposed "Integrated Pollution and Prevention Control" (IPPC)
Directive. The Directive came into force at the end of 1996.
The IPPC Directive provides that the Commission should publish every three years an inventory of the "principal emissions and sources responsible" on the basis
of the data supplied by the Member States. The Commission has delegated this task to the European Environmental Agency (EEA). However, the draft Directive does
not fix details and unfortunately no active public dissemination is foreseen. A committee will have to negotiate these details after implementation.
It seems clear that the PER will be not be published before the next millennium since the Member States have three years to align their legislation with the
IPPC Directive and in addition they have to report to the Commission for the first time within eig hteen months after the Directive comes into effect.
1.2 Other European PRTR Initiatives
Denmark and Finland are both considering a PRTR. Ireland is working on the requirements for the PER. Sweden working on the details for implementation of the PER.
2. Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)
International consensus of the need for a legally binding instrument to phase out Persistent Organic Pollutants ("POPs": the 12 initial POPs identified are:
PCBs, dioxins and furans, aldrin, dieldrin, DDT, endrin, chlordane, hexachlorobenzene, mirex, toxaphene and heptachlor), promoted the UNEP Governing Council at
its 19th session in Jan/Feb'97, to call for the beginning of negotiations on such a convention in early 1998 (to be concluded by the year 2000). Many of the
substitutes for POPs, either are known to be, or may turn out to be EDCs.
In addition, the initiatives to phase out POPs through the Mediterranean regional sea and the UN ECE Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution Conventions will
face similar problems in design and implementation unless preventative action is taken.
3. Regional Seas (North Sea and NE Atlantic)
Regional Seas Agreements have been in the forefront of international commitment to the reduction of toxics. At the 3rd North Sea Conference, the ministers
agreed to "phase out those pesticides which are the most persistent, toxic and liable to bioaccumulate". At the 4th North Sea Conference in 1995, the definition
of toxicity was expanded to include chronic effects such as carcinogenicity, mutagenicity and teratogenicity and adverse effects on the function of the
endocrine system (emphasis added).
The Ministers also invited the Oslo and Paris Commissions and the Commission for the European Communities as a matter of urgency to launch investigations and/or
risk assessments to improve knowledge of the consequence of substances, such as pesticides, suspected to have endocrine or hormone-like effects, and to adopt
and implement necessary measures at least by 2000.
The Paris Commission has incorporated "Endocrine Disruptors" into the work plan on programmes and measurements and these chemicals will be a topic for the next
North-East Atlantic Ministerial Meeting in Sept`97.
EDCs identified to date for phase out include nonyl phenol ethoxylates.
4. Pesticide Reduction (OECD Pesticide Forum/National Pesticide Reduction Programmes)
In 1993, the OECD's Environmental Health and Safety Division created the pesticides Forum to oversee work carried out by this division. Part of this Forum's
mandate is to "reduce risks to human health and the environment from the use of pesticides".In 1994, the Pesticide Forum launched the OECD Pesticide Risk
Reduction Project, in cooperation with the FAO. A survey Activities to Reduce Pesticide Risks in OECD and Selected FAO Countries was conducted in 1994-1995 as
part of this project and is currently b eing updated.
In 1995, the Forum held a workshop on pesticide risk reduction in Uppsala, Sweden. The workshop recommendations urged that both national and international
activities be initiated to decrease and minimize the risks associated with pesticide application and handling, and to reduce reliance on chemical pesticides by
increasing the use of biologically-based farming methods.
Recently another workshop was held in Copenhagen, Denmark to look at how to measure pesticide risk reduction using "Pesticide Use Risk Indicators". A second
workshop on indicators will be held in 1998 in Switzerland specifically on the use of IPM as a measure of progress on pesticide risk reduction.
Countries such as Sweden, the Netherlands and Denmark have demonstrated that is it possible to reduce pesticide use by over 50%. This progress from these
Northern European countries, as well as the OECD/FAO Pesticide Risk Reduction Project, has been useful in bringing the various stakeholders/interested parties
together to focus pesticide use in the context of farming and farming systems. This model moves beyond the pesticide registration system to deal with all of the
risks from pesticide use/exposure, bringing the pesticide regulators in contact with their government counterparts in agriculture, health, etc. and with farmers
organizations, pesticide industry, NGOs and other interested stakeholders.
5. Wetlands Protection (Ramsar convention)
The 1996 Conference of the Parties to the Ramsar Convention also considered toxic chemicals and agreed a Recommendation (6.14) which recognizes the endocrine
disruption threat to wetland ecosystems and species and that the adverse impact of toxic substances compromises the ecological character of wetlands. It is also
recommended that the Parties to the Ramsar Convention "... recognize the importance of the communities' right to know with respect to hazardous and
bioaccumulative chemicals, including pollutant release and transfer registers (PRTRs)".
6. Research Coordination & Information-Sharing Initiatives (Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety (IFCS), OECD, US EPA & EC)
The IFCS, the post-UNCED body set up in 1994 to develop new international partnerships for dealing with chemical risks, decided in February 1997 that there is
a need to investigate, in depth, the human, environmental and ecotoxicological aspects of endocrine disrupting substances, and recommended that the IOMC
(Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals), and participating organizations (OECD, UNEP, ILO, UNIDO, WHO, FAO) do the following:
- Compile and harmonize the definitions and terms appropriate to endocrine disruption;
- Promote coordinated research strategies and processes, identify research priorities and gaps for all relevant research disciplines;
- Delineate testing methods, harmonize guidelines, identify research priorities and gaps;
- Adopt and maintain an inventory of research activities and other relevant and related information; and
- Facilitate information exchange on:
- a. existing and new evaluations of the scientific issues related to endocrine disruption
- b. research and testing results
- c. surveys and survey results
- d. hazard and risk management actions and options
- Report to the Standing Committee of the Forum and the next Forum meeting on these efforts
In addition, the IFCS Standing Committee will consider how to address urgent issues and new
developments related to endocrine disruption and report to the next Forum meeting on this effort.
The OECD is reviewing testing methods for chemicals to identify gaps concerning endocrine disruption potential and to recommend action. As noted above, the
OECD is also conducting a survey on how countries currently test and assess, if at all, for endocrine disrupting chemicals.
The US EPA & EC have also agreed to cooperate on research on EDCs.
|