CHEMISTRY YEAR
IN
REVIEW
HEADLINES
LEGISLATION
Overhaul Of U.S. Chemical Law Moved
BIOTECHNOLOGY
Genetically Modified Foods In The Spotlight
AQUABOUNTY TECHNOLOGIES
Calls for labeling, enhanced regulatory oversight grew U.S. regulators gave the green light this year to a few new genetically modified foods, including apples engineered to resist browning and an Atlantic salmon that is engineered to grow faster than nonmodified salmon. Neither product will be required to carry a label indicating that it contains genetically modified ingredients. The approvals angered consumer activists, environmental groups, apple producers, and others who say bioengineered varieties should be labeled as genetically modified. Lawmakers in the House of Representatives stepped into the food labeling debate this year, passing a bill (H.R. 1599) in July that would prohibit U.S. states from requiring the labeling of genetically modified foods. In the absence of federal action, several states have been considering laws that would require such labeling. The food industry supports H.R. 1599, claiming that state laws with varying labeling requirements pose a threat to interstate commerce and lead to inconsistent and confusing information. Environmental activists and organic farmers oppose the bill, saying it would deny consumers
the right to know what is in their food. It was also a notable year for genetically modified crops in the European Union, where historically, cultivation of such crops has been met with resistance. A law was proposed in March that would have given EU countries the option of banning the cultivation of particular genetically modified crops even if the crops are approved in the EU. Numerous activist groups and the U.S. government spoke out against the EU proposal, saying it was inconsistent with free-trade agreements and would weaken the EU economy. In October, the European Parliament rejected the draft law, potentially putting an end to the idea. The European Commission is now talking with the individual EU countries about potential next steps. The U.S. is also considering changes to its regulatory system for genetically modified products. In July, the White House directed federal agencies with jurisdiction over biotechnology to overhaul the current system, which hasn’t been updated since 1992. Officials stressed the importance of ensuring that the federal government efficiently assesses any risks associated with future products of biotechnology.—BRITT ERICKSON
FDA cleared the way this year for a genetically engineered salmon, which grows faster than nonmodified salmon, to enter the U.S. market.
CEN.ACS.ORG
40
DECEMBER 21, 2015
Partisan gridlock again hindered reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act Chemical manufacturers kept a close eye on Congress this year as efforts to overhaul the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)—a nearly 40-year-old U.S. chemical safety law—got off to a promising start. In March, Sens. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and David Vitter (R-La.) introduced S. 697, which garnered widespread attention and support. The bill cleared a key Senate committee in April and was passed by the full Senate on Dec. 17. Initially, many Democrats and environmental groups opposed S. 697 because of provisions that would override state chemical safety laws. But Sens. Jeff A. Merkley (D-Ore.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Cory A. Booker (D-N.J.) negotiated a compromise with Republicans that addressed a number of the concerns related to state laws on chemicals. The bill currently has the support of at least 60 senators. The chemical industry and some environmental, public health, animal welfare, wildlife, and labor organizations also support S. 697, which represents more than two years of negotiations. But a political tussle between two Republican senators brought S. 697 to a standstill in October. Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) placed a hold on the bill until the Senate votes on reauthorizing the Land & Water Conservation Fund, an unrelated bill that expired at the end of September. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) objected to that vote. As the disagreement between the senators continued, prospects of S. 697 passing this year grew dim. The House of Representatives passed its own slimmed-down version of a TSCA reform bill (H.R. 2576) in June. The Senate cleared S. 697 in December. Now, the two chambers must hash out the differences between the two bills.—BRITT ERICKSON
