'Essential' and 'non-essential' uses for PFASs; Brexit; New reporting rule planned by the US EPA

In this latest episode of the Chemical Watch Podcast, Kate Lowe is joined by science editor Andrew Turley, editorial director Geraint Roberts and North America managing editor Terry Hyland.

First we hear about an international group of scientists who are making the argument for managing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) as a class, and who say a more precise set of criteria is needed to categorise ‘essential’ and ‘non-essential’ uses – a distinction vital to draft European Commission proposals to phase out all but 'essential' uses of PFASs across a wide range of legislation.

Secondly, we catch up with the post-Brexit concerns of the chemicals industry in the UK where representatives continue to warn that the UK REACH regime’s attempts to create a parallel database will both weaken UK manufacturing and potentially cut the number of chemicals on the market.

And finally, we take a look at the implications of the US EPA’s plans to propose a rule in November that would allow it to obtain information about potential hazards and exposure pathways related to certain chemicals on the TSCA work plan – a list of 90 chemicals the agency put together in 2014 based on their potential for high hazard and exposure.