Nafta Talks Offer Chance of 'Risk-Based' Regulation in Mexico, Says ACC

The American Chemistry Council says that an update to the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) gives the opportunity to promote a risk-based "North American model" for chemical regulations throughout the world.

Testifying last week at US Trade Representative (USTR) public hearings on renegotiating the agreement, Greg Skelton said the ACC’s top priority for enhancing regulatory cooperation under Nafta is to strengthen and align the "risk- and science-based approach" adopted in the US and Canada throughout the region, including by extending the approach to Mexico.

And successfully updating Nafta would send an important signal to the rest of the world, particularly in terms of promoting such decision making, said the senior director of global affairs.

The trade deal "could help provide a model for other countries and regions around the world considering developing or updating their own chemical regulations, and push back against the spread of more hazard-based approaches."

Chance to influence policy in Mexico
Mr Skelton said the US TCSA/Canadian Chemicals Management Plan model could be extended to Mexico. The first step, he said, "could be having them adopt either the US or Canada’s chemical inventory instead of trying to compile their own. Secondary options would be to consider mutual recognition for Mexico – for example if a chemical is on either the US or Canadian inventories, it is automatically on theirs".

The ACC is also working with the country, he said, to align its new chemicals programme with those of the US and Canada.

Another ACC proposal is to extend the US-Canada alignment on their implementation of the UN Globally Harmonized System (GHS) for classification and labelling to Mexico, which will have fully implemented mandatory rules on GHS in the workplace by October 2018.

The ACC also remains keen to reduce or eliminate other differences between the US and Canadian adoption of the GHS. Examples include reporting obligations for changes to safety data sheets, labelling requirements and procedures for protecting confidential business information.

With the Canadian government considering changes to its Chemicals Management Plan, any renegotiation of Nafta could prove timely for the chemical industry.

The ACC’s testimony echoes a joint statement by Mexican, Canadian and US chemicals trade groups this winter, and follows past commentary from President and CEO Cal Dooley. He has said that a modernised TSCA could serve as a global 'gold standard', and one that offers a "superior alternative" for managing chemicals of concern.

Their call for regulatory cooperation was echoed by other industry groups.

Industry lobby group the United States Council for International Business said in comments that a modernised Nafta should "preserve and deepen regulatory convergence" across industry sectors. In particular, it said, it should build on existing efforts to promote "risk and science-based approaches" to chemical regulation within the region.

Regulatory coherence good for business
And the Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates (Socma) said that a "more efficient and effective" North American regulatory environment would boost innovation, growth and jobs.

"For the specialty chemicals industry, a growing lack of regulatory coherence – particularly as governments amend or develop new chemical regulations – is increasing the costs of moving goods across borders."

Speaking at a press conference ahead of his testimony, Mr Skelton called for such coherence to promote efficiencies and to ensure the development and implementation of regulations is "done in a way that prevents the creation of inadvertent barriers to trade".

Otherwise, he said, there is a risk of "bureaucratic compliance costs" created by duplicative requirements for data generation, additional animal testing or different formatted dossiers for different markets.

"All of this adds costs for member companies, without necessarily leading to significant improvements and protection for the environment or human health."

Trade constraints on chemicals regulation
However, the Center for International Environmental Law said that convergence can create a "race to the bottom" that results in lower health and environmental standards: "Rather than raising the lowest regulatory standards to be in line with the most stringent, the most stringent often conform to the lower."

And it has called for chemicals to be "entirely excluded" from the purview of Nafta discussions.

Eliminating hazard-based regulation, says the NGO, would "ignore our scientific understanding of carcinogenic and other high-risk substances". And moving towards risk assessments for every substance would bring high cost for governments and would be based on a series of assumptions about risks that are "unsupported by facts or evidence".

Regulatory cooperation under Nafta "has already opened the door to greater corporate influence and less public participation in the area of chemicals policy making and regulation".

And trade constraints on the regulation of chemicals inhibit innovation by protecting "entrenched companies and their higher-risk products".

"The proposals by the chemical industry for a renegotiated Nafta would expose Americans to toxic substances, weaken the government’s ability to ensure food safety, and poison the environment," it added.