Home > Press > Window for public comment closes January 31
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Nanotechnology White Paper addresses research needs and risk assessment issues concerning nanotechnology. A window of opportunity for public comment closes January 31, 2006. Within its 123 pages there are ample subjects for comment by practicing technologists. Say your piece at http://www.epa.gov/osa/nanotech.htm
If a nanotech enabled product is just the same old chemistry, then the manufacturer’s patents shouldn’t claim otherwise.
U.S. EPA Nanotechnology White Paper window for public comment closes January 31, 2006. How will EPA tell when nanotechnology enabled products are new if the chemistry is not?
San Jose, CA | Posted on January 31, 2006
Nick Massetti: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Nanotechnology White Paper addresses research needs and risk assessment issues concerning nanotechnology. A window of opportunity for public comment closes January 31, 2006. Within its 123 pages there are ample subjects for comment by practicing technologists. Say your piece at http://www.epa.gov/osa/nanotech.htm
I directed my comments to section 3.0. Risk Management and Statutes.
In its subsections it says, "As EPA is chartered to review all new products that are introduced."
And further, "Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA authorizes EPA to determine that a use of a chemical substance is a 'significant new use.'"
The fact that a nanotechnology enabled product may not be contained on the TSCA inventory lends itself to a concern that an applicant manufacturer may claim there is in fact no novelty to the materials involved. Thereby a compound of the same chemistry, but not based on nanotechnology enabled characteristics, which is on the TSCA inventory may be quoted as a basis for allowing introduction of the new nanotechnology enabled product.
I have a simple check that can be accomplished within the existing government structure and services. If a manufacturer states that his nanotechnology enabled product is essentially not new, and in fact fabricated from the same chemicals and materials as one on the TSCA inventory, then any patents associated with the new product could be checked for any contradiction of such a statement. This rationalization could be made the responsibility of the manufacturer as part of the application process for the new product introduction.
Copyright © Nick Massetti
If you have a comment, please Contact
Issuers of news releases, not 7th Wave, Inc. or Nanotechnology Now, are solely responsible for the accuracy of the content.
Preparing for Nano
Durnham University's DEEPEN project comes to a close September 26th, 2012
Technical Seminar at ANFoS 2012 August 22nd, 2012
Nanotechnology shows we can innovate without economic growth April 12th, 2012
Thailand to host NanoThailand 2012 December 18th, 2011
Researchers patent a nanofluid that improves heat conductivity October 22nd, 2014
Materials for the next generation of electronics and photovoltaics: MacArthur Fellow develops new uses for carbon nanotubes October 21st, 2014
Super stable garnet ceramics may be ideal for high-energy lithium batteries October 21st, 2014
Could I squeeze by you? Ames Laboratory scientists model molecular movement within narrow channels of mesoporous nanoparticles October 21st, 2014
Haydale Secures Exclusive Development and Supply Agreement with Tantec A/S: New reactors to be built and commissioned by Tantec A/S represent another step forward towards the commercialisation of graphene October 24th, 2014
QuantumWise guides the semiconductor industry towards the atomic scale October 24th, 2014
Advancing thin film research with nanostructured AZO: Innovnano’s unique and cost-effective AZO sputtering targets for the production of transparent conducting oxides October 23rd, 2014
Strengthening thin-film bonds with ultrafast data collection October 23rd, 2014