MN Chemical Regulation and Policy, Work Group Meeting 10/26/11

Uploaded on


  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide
  • Minnesota is well positioned to benefit from more widespread adoption of advanced risk assessment methodologies that will enable improved risk management decision-making. to facilitate this transition, there is a need to identify and evaluate emerging methodologies to better inform risk assessors of potential applications and resulting benefits.
  • Methods would be applied to both human health and environmental endpoints.
  • Methods would be applied to both human health and environmental endpoints.
  • Lots of discussion at the last meeting.Work in progress, not yet in unanimous agreement about how this panel would function and the membership structure.
  • Agencies get requests. Legislators have been historically active.
  • Budget includes one more Work Group meeting we could schedule for January, if needed.


  • 1. Minnesota Chemical Regulation and Policy Project Work Group Meeting October 26, 2011
  • 2. Green Chemistry• Green chemistry is the design of chemical products and processes that reduce or eliminate the use or generation of hazardous substances.• Applies across the value chain – product design, formulation, manufacture, use, disposal.• Positive momentum for Green Chemistry as an economic development opportunity: – Emerging and established companies – Segetis, BioAmber, Cargill NatureWorks, Ecolab, 3M, etc. – Minnesota Green Chemistry Forum – business/NGO networking group – BioBusiness Alliance Bioindustrial Partnership
  • 3. Green ChemistryDraft Recommendation Proposal Minnesota Green Chemistry Innovation Council • Recommendation: Create a Minnesota Green Chemistry Innovation Council by Governor’s Executive Order • Need: – Increase economic development through the promotion of new Green Chemistry businesses in Minnesota; – Improve the sustainability and access to markets of existing Minnesota businesses through Green Chemistry process improvements and product development.
  • 4. Green ChemistryDraft Recommendation Proposal • Function: Develop and recommend strategies to: – Promote collaboration and synergies between entities; – Identify ways to align existing initiatives and interests; – Raise public awareness of Minnesota Green Chemistry businesses and products; – Identify sources of funding and incentives. • Structure: Cross-sector membership to demonstrate public and private sector leadership and engagement. – Potential mechanisms to support green chemistry development include: business support, education, research, public outreach.
  • 5. Science and Risk Assessment• Risk assessment is the process of determining the probability that exposure to chemical contaminants or other environmental stressors will harm human or ecosystem health. Risk = toxicity (hazard) + exposure• New approaches to risk assessment have the potential to increase the accuracy and efficiency of risk assessment by: – pushing problem formulation to the forefront; – accounting for cumulative risk and multiple exposures; – using chemical mode of action information in determining risk.• Work Group recognizes the need to identify and evaluate emerging methodologies in order to facilitate the transition to advanced approaches to risk assessment.
  • 6. Science and Risk AssessmentDraft Recommendation ProposalProject to Evaluate Emerging Risk Assessment Methodologies• Recommendation: Implement a project to test alternative risk assessment methodologies to improve risk assessment in Minnesota• Need: Identify and analyze new or underutilized risk assessment approaches to enable better risk management decision-making. Guiding principles and priorities for adopting new approaches include: • increased precision and accuracy; • decreased uncertainty; • utilizing chemical mode of action information; • accounting for cumulative risk; • cost effectiveness and efficiency; and • high level of confidence in the data and risk assessment conclusions by all stakeholders.
  • 7. Science and Risk AssessmentDraft Recommendation Proposal • Function: Two Phases – Phase 1 – inventory existing methods, data requirements, and relevant policy implications – Phase 2 – test and analyze alternative methods (vs. standard approaches) against the guiding principles • Structure: Assessment and analysis performed by a designated researcher with oversight and advisement from a cross-sector Project Advisory Committee
  • 8. Policy and RiskManagement • Federal reform of TSCA is needed and recommended improvements to state policy in Minnesota should complement and integrate with the current and anticipated future framework for chemical regulation at the national scale. • Status quo for state chemicals policy is not working. • Decision-making in the face of scientific uncertainty will continue to be a challenge. • Improved chemicals policy must be based on sound science and should enable increased understanding of chemical risk, benefits and management by decision-makers and the public.
  • 9. Policy and Risk ManagementDraft Recommendation Proposal Chemical Science Advisory Panel (CSAP) • Recommendation: Create a Chemical Science Advisory Panel (CSAP) for the state of Minnesota • Need: Provide a forum for scientific discussion and debate outside the policy realm • Function: The CSAP will serve as an independent advisory body and will respond to specific requests (“charge”) from either the legislative or executive branch • Structure: 6 highly qualified members from the scientific community appointed to serve on the panel with the ability to call in other experts as needed on an ad hoc basis
  • 10. Pathway for inputs and outputs of the Chemical Science Advisory Panel (CSAP)Executive MPCA/MDHBranch Commissioner CSAP Proposal Full Report • Work plan • 2/3 majority • Budget • TimeframeLegislative LAC via • Committee Chair Ad hocBranch Legislative Auditor members or Legislator • Screen for relevance/imp ortance Criteria Relevant to MN environment or population Disputed issue of science where independent review is helpful
  • 11. Project Roadmap November 16 – Work Group Meeting St. Paul Student Center – MN Commons Room 1) Review draft report outline 2) Tweak and refine recommendations 3) Prepare for second public input meeting November 30 (Tentative) – Public Input Meeting #2 December 7 – Work Group Meeting UROC – Room 105 1) Review public input 2) Finalize and approve recommendations January 2012 – Online public comment period Final Report complete
  • 12. Final Report Outline • Executive Summary • Introduction – Background – Project Structure – Phase I Outcomes – Phase II Goals • Recommendations – Policy and Risk Management – Science and Risk Assessment – Green Chemistry – Include background info/context, responsibilities, timeframes • Appendices – Work Group Roster – Charge to the Work Group – Resources and Additional Supporting Material/Examples – Public Comments received