Distr. GENERAL
UNEP/POPS/INC/CEG/1/2 17 September 1998
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
CRITERIA EXPERT GROUP FOR PERSISTENT
ORGANIC POLLUTANTS
First session
Bangkok, 26-30 October 1998
THE DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENCE-BASED CRITERIA AND A PROCEDURE FOR IDENTIFYING ADDITIONAL PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANTS AS CANDIDATES FOR FUTURE INTERNATIONAL ACTION
Note by the secretariat
Introduction
1. This document has been developed to promote a free-ranging initial discussion in the Criteria Expert Group for Persistent Organic Pollutants on the development of criteria and a possible procedure for adding substances to the existing twelve persistent organic pollutants (POPs). It is not intended to be prescriptive or preemptive. Based on discussions, the Expert Group may decide whether or not to develop it further. In the attachment to this document two options for describing the criteria and the process in convention text are presented.
2. The Criteria Expert Group was established, in accordance with the mandate given by the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in paragraph 9 of its decision 19/13 C, at the first session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for an International Legally Binding Instrument for Implementing International Action on Certain Persistent Organic Pollutants, which was held in Montreal from 29 June to 3 July 1998. The Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee also decided on terms of reference for the Criteria Expert Group (UNEP/POPS/INC.1/7, paragraphs 64-73 and annex II). The mandate of the Group is to develop science-based criteria and a procedure for identifying additional POPs as candidates for future international action. The relevant documents mentioned above were circulated together with the invitations to this meeting.
I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES
3. Criteria should be based on sound science. Such criteria should be able to stand the test of time and not be influenced by changing social and political conditions. The stress on the need to establish science-based criteria reflects the growing awareness that science is rapidly advancing with regard to the factors that determine the behaviour of chemicals in the environment and in organisms, including human beings.
4. Criteria should be open and transparent. They should be understandable to the educated public and to policy makers. The procedure whereby a chemical is evaluated and accepted or rejected as a candidate POP should be easily understood. The process should include steps for interested parties to contribute new, relevant data to modify, clarify, reject or confirm decisions to move a chemical along towards its designation as a POP.
II. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
5. Chemicals may move between static environmental compartments, e.g. soil and sediment, and dynamic compartments, e.g. air and water. Migratory species constitute another, as yet unquantified, route of dispersal of persistent chemicals. A process to select candidate POPs should initially consider all routes of environmental dispersal.
6. POPs are made up of complex molecules, often with aromatic or alicyclic rings. All twelve under discussion in the present negotiations contain carbon-halogen bonds that, to a varying degree, are resistant to degradation by physical, chemical or biological means. They are semi-solids with low, but distinct, vapour pressure, and their lipid solubility is several orders of magnitude higher than their water solubility. A typical POP would be released to air, directly from emissions, or indirectly through evaporation from water, soil or vegetation. Once in air it would travel significant distances. When deposited on water, soil or vegetation, it would remain in that medium for a long time. It would redistribute itself between lipid and aqeuous phases with the net result being a high concentration in lipids and a low one in water.
7. In water, soil and sediment, lipids are mostly found in organisms. In cold regions, animals protect themselves against heat loss by thick fatty layers, which may become significant storage sites for POPs. Predatory animals in cold regions, including man, look for fat as an energy source because of its high specific energy content, thus promoting the tendency of POPs to accumulate in the food chain. In warmer climates exposures may occur closer to the source, e.g., occupational exposure during use, or local exposure caused by run-off from use or leaking from stockpiles. Food, such as fish may be a major route of intake also in warmer climates and POPs may accumulate in the food chain and reach high levels in predatory species in these conditions.
8. The scientific knowledge on the behaviour of POPs in the environment is increasing. Empirical measurements and models predicting the distribution of chemicals in environmental media are coming in closer agreement to one another. Criteria for persistence based on scientific models may be developed for all environmental media. The environmental distribution and potential for long-range transport of chemicals, including POPs, may be scientifically evaluated.
III. THE NEED FOR POLICY GUIDANCE
9. Criteria ultimately refer back to political goals, such as the protection of public health or the environment from the harmful effects of POPs. Protection goals are usually formulated by policy makers, for example, Governments. To be useful for the selection of criteria such goals could be formulated as:
(a) No substance should be allowed to travel more than x hundred kilometres from its place of origin before being permanently degraded, or
(b) Industrial chemicals or pesticides should not influence remote regions, i.e. one that is separated from the source by distance x; or
(c) Chemicals that may be released to the environment should have global residence times less than x years.
10. Such goals may be translated by widely acknowledged scientific methods into residence times and transport distances in the global environment, corresponding to half-lives in specific environmental compartments.
IV. EXISTING MODELS
11. Most existing systems for selecting and evaluating POPs (for example, the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution, concluded under the auspices of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, and the Commission for Environmental Cooperation established under the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation) consider properties such as persistence, bioaccumulation and potential for long-range transport at an early stage in the selection process. These properties are considered separately in a step-wise process, which usually starts with properties that facilitate transport, e.g., volatility and persistence in air. Then persistence in other media is considered, as well as evidence of long-range transport from, from example, monitoring data. Bioaccumulation data and evidence of adverse effects on health and environment are addressed at a later stage, and used together with available exposure data to characterize and, as appropriate, assess risks.
V. QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER IN DEVELOPING CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES
12. In developing criteria for identifying additional POPs, the Expert Group might want to consider a number of questions, e.g.:
(a) Environmental modelling has shown that POPs behave as multimedia substances, i.e., they move between environmental media and are typically not restricted to any single medium, in contrast to, for example, gases or water soluble compounds. How should the initial criteria for POPs be designed to take into account all media?
(b) If the basic properties are persistence and the potential for long-range transport, how could these be usefully considered together as initial criteria for identifying additional POPs? What parameters should be used for an initial screening of chemicals e.g. half-lives in air, water, soil and sediments and partition coefficients between the various media?
(c) For many chemicals the evaluation of overall environmental persistence and potential for transport would be based on estimated properties, for example, from molecular structure and basic physical properties, rather than actual measurements. How could data from monitoring in remote regions be used at the initial stage to correct or confirm the estimated potential for long-range transport? How should data from monitoring studies be evaluated, as appropriate, with respect to levels of concern?
(d) What would be the benefit of proceeding in stages, for example, starting with a screening stage and continuing at a later stage with a more in-depth evaluation of persistence and long-range transport? How should the outcome of such an evaluation be linked to an evaluation of the potential of the chemical to cause injury to man and the environment, based on criteria for bioaccumulation and toxicity?
(e) Would a kind of decision-tree be helpful to describe the decision-making process for identifying additional POPs? What type of guidance or values would be needed at various decision-points in the process?
(f) What other generic issues should be considered, e.g., what sort of decision-making process would best facilitate the process for identifying additional POPs? How would candidate chemicals be introduced into the process, e.g., by Governments or through an independent scientific panel? How would socio-economic considerations be factored into the process, at what stage?
(g) The process of adding chemicals to the Convention could be described in terms of the steps a proposer would need to go through before coming up with a proposal. It could also be described in terms of what the final product - the risk profile - would need to contain, in order to be considered by the Conference of the Parties or any entity the Conference of the Parties might set up for that purpose, or any combination of these two approaches. What are the benefits of either approach and are there other approaches that should be considered?
VI. EXPECTED OUTPUTS FROM THE CRITERIA EXPERT GROUP
13. The future Convention on POPs will contain one or more articles referring to the process for adding chemicals to the Convention. There may also be one or more annexes, to be referenced in the body of the text. The Criteria Expert Group is expected to provide draft text for the article(s) and the annex(es).
14. In the attachment (proposed text for articles and annexes) two options for the process of adding chemicals to the convention are described. The Criteria Expert Group may decide to continue developing those options or that there are other options not considered in the attachment that should be developed. The Expert Group may also wish to consider the process for developing such options into draft text for the Convention and its annexes for submission to the Group's next meeting.
Annex
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR DEVELOPING MATERIALS ON CRITERIA AND
PROCESS FOR ADDING POPS TO THE FUTURE INTERNATIONAL LEGALLY
BINDING INSTRUMENT FOR IMPLEMENTING INTERNATIONAL ACTION
ON CERTAIN PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANTS
1. The Criteria Expert Group has been requested by the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee to develop criteria and a process for adding persistent organic pollutants to the future international legally binding instruments. As part of the process of developing criteria and a process, the Expert Group may also wish to consider the manner of integrating into a future draft of the legally binding instrument the criteria and process agreed to by the it.
2. There are a number of different possible structures, formats and approaches the Expert Group could consider for integrating its recommended criteria and process into a future draft legally binding instrument. The following approaches are provided as examples of how such drafting can be organized, and are offered to the Expert Group without prejudice to any other approach that it may wish to consider. The exact modality of integrating the Group's output into the future draft instrument will be better understood as further progress is made by the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee in organizing and drafting the overall instrument.
3. As a general consideration, it is possible that the exact criteria and full process proposed by the Criteria Expert Group will be sufficiently detailed and lengthy as to warrant consideration as an annex or annexes to the instrument. In addition, there is a possibility that Parties may wish procedures for amending this Annex (or Annexes) to be different from the procedure for amending the Convention. Therefore, for the purposes of this paper, the secretariat has placed the criteria and process as an annex or annexes to the instrument, rather than as part of the instrument itself.
4. In order to implement the requirements of an annex, it is necessary that the instrument itself have one or more provisions making the annex applicable. It is also normally necessary for the instrument to contain a provision for amendments of annexes, however such a provision is not included in this paper.
5. For the purposes of this paper, two approaches were considered as possibilities for mechanisms to add chemicals to the future POPs instrument. The first approach is somewhat similar to the approach used in the prior informed consent convention. Parties would nominate chemicals for inclusion in the instrument, providing certain mandatory and/or optional information. Each nominated chemical would be reviewed by a subsidiary body of the Conference of the Parties against certain criteria to determine whether the chemical should be recommended for inclusion in the Convention. The second approach would not require that a Party nominate a chemical. Instead, the Convention could establish a subsidiary body whose process would include evaluating all possible candidates for inclusion in the Convention against established criteria, and making recommendations on the basis of those evaluations directly to the Conference of the Parties. Like the first approach, the subsidiary body would forward a recommendation to the Conference of the Parties, along with a description of recommended elimination and/or reduction measures for a final decision by the Conference of the Parties.
6. Example No. 1. The following example outlines the possible content of articles, paragraphs and annexes for integrating the recommended criteria and a process for adding additional persistent organic pollutants into a future draft legally binding instrument. The example follows the process whereby Parties nominate chemicals for possible inclusion, nominations are reviewed by a subsidiary body, which makes recommendations to the Conference of the Parties, and the Conference of the Parties makes the determination whether to add the chemical to the Convention.
7. The following could be an example of an article for adding chemicals to the Convention:
Article X
The Article would explain how proposals are submitted by Parties. It would explain the activities of the Secretariat after receiving a proposal, checking whether it contains required information, whom to send the proposal to, response times, etc. It would also describe the role of the subsidiary body which would review the proposal against preset criteria (or on an ad hoc basis) and the procedure for the subsidiary body to make recommendations to the Conference of the Parties. Such recommendations might include measures to be taken, e.g., listing of chemicals in annexes to the Convention as well as appropriate control measures.
8. The following could be an example of how to establish the subsidiary body by a paragraph in the article on Conference of the Parties:
Paragraph Y
The paragraph would explain how, when and by whom the subsidiary body is established. It would describe how members are appointed, including their preferred expertise, geographical distribution, etc. It would also describe how terms of reference, work plans, etc., are decided upon, and the decision procedures of the subsidiary body.
9. The following could be an annex on information requirements for proposals to add chemicals to the Convention:
Annex Z
The Annex would list all kinds of information that would be required for a proposal to be considered, e.g., information on the identity and properties of the chemical, including its toxicity to man and the environment, evidence that it is persistent and has a potential for long-range transport, bioaccumulation, production/uses/emissions, relevant socio-economic factors, alternatives, etc.
10. The following could an annex describing the process and criteria used by the subsidiary body for determining whether to recommend or not the chemical for inclusion in the Convention:
Annex ü
The annex would describe the criteria to be used by the subsidiary body in reviewing the information and reaching a decision to recommend or not the chemical for inclusion. This might be done by giving values or ranges for individual factors, e.g., persistence in various media, long-range transport potential, bioaccumulation, etc., and also include other factors to take into consideration, e.g., high toxicity, production/uses/emissions. It would also contain advice on the form and content of the recommendation to the Conference of the Parties, as well as how to proceed if the information is insufficient for a recommendation to be made.
11. Example No. 2. This example describes possible articles, paragraphs and annexes for a process where a (permanent) subsidiary body reviews chemicals for possible inclusion in the Convention and makes recommendations to the Conference of the Parties, which then determines whether to add the recommended chemical to the Convention.
12. The following could be an article for adding chemicals to the Convention:
Article X
The article would describe the process whereby the subsidiary body reviews chemicals. The details, e.g., information requirements, criteria, decision procedures, etc., could be given in annexes. It would describe the structure and content of the recommendation to the Conference of the Parties and the process of the Conference of the Parties in reacting to the recommendation.
13. The following could be included as a paragraph in the article on the Conference of the Parties:
Paragraph Y
The paragraph would describe the establishment of the subsidiary body, including its name, how members are appointed, how terms of reference, etc., are decided and how the subsidiary body reaches decisions.
14. The following could be included as an annex on the process and criteria to the used by the subsidiary body in determining whether a chemical should be recommended for inclusion in the Convention:
Annex Z
The annex would describe how the subsidiary body evaluates the available evidence for, for example, persistence, potential for long-range transport, bioaccumulation, toxicity etc, and also what other kind of data to be considered in the evaluation, e.g. data on production/uses/emissions, socio-economic factors, etc. It would also describe the criteria and the values or ranges used by the subsidiary body in determining whether the chemical is sufficiently persistent, has potential for long-range transport, is bioccumulative and toxic to be recommended for inclusion. It would describe the information to be transmitted to the Conference of the Parties in the recommendation for inclusion and the measures proposed, e.g., listing the chemical in annexes to the Convention, etc.
15. The Expert Group might wish to invite the secretariat, in cooperation with the Bureau, to provide text for one or both options for the next session of the Group.