Regulatory Limits and Applications

For applications in the rain trap system, the results of the EPA s toxicity characterization leaching procedure (TCLP) indicate that none of the tire products tested exceeds proposed TCLP regulatory levels. Most compounds detected are found at trace levels, (near method detection limits), from 10 to 100 times less than TCLP regulatory limits and U.S. EPA drinking water standard maximum contaminant level (MCL) values. The Florida Department of Environmental Regulation released its final report on tire teachability in potential usage environments. The study, which evaluates the leachability of shredded tires in different aquatic environments, finds that scrap tires pose no harmful effects when used in applications that are above the water table [14]. 

ADDITIONALLY, THE USE OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY INVOLVE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, OPERATIONS OR EQUIPMENT. THE DOCUMENT CANNOT ANTICIPATE ALL POSSIBLE APPLICATIONS OR ADDRESS ALL POSSIBLE SAFETY ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH USE IN HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS. THE USER OF THIS DOCUMENT MUST EXERCISE SOUND PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT CONCERNING ITS USE AND APPLICABILITY UNDER THE USER S PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES. THE USER MUST ALSO CONSIDER THE APPLICABILITY OF ANY GOVERNMENTAL REGULATORY LIMITATIONS AND ESTABLISHED SAFETY AND HEALTH PRACTICES BEFORE IMPLEMENTING THIS DOCUMENT. 

Because of the special regulatory position occupied by foods and beverages, a great deal of attention has been given to development and application of analytical procedures for them. Improved procedures have resulted in quantitation and confirmation levels in the range of 1 to 10 ppb with sample amounts of 10 to 250 g. Detection limits for foods are in the 0.1 to 1 ppb range. Detection limits of 0.1 to 1 ppm appear adequate for pesticide formulations (1, > while sensitivity of 0.01,... 

The definitions of method detection and quantification limits should be reliable and applicable to a variety of extraction procedures and analytical methods. The issue is of particular importance to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and also pesticide regulatory and health agencies around the world in risk assessment. The critical question central to risk assessment is assessing the risk posed to a human being from the consumption of foods treated with pesticides, when the amount of the residue present in the food product is reported nondetect (ND) or no detectable residues . 

While all nations of the world possess the sovereign right to establish their own acceptable levels for pesticide residues in foods, many lack the resources to develop their own regulatory programs and instead rely upon a set of international standards developed by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, frequently referred to as Codex. The Codex international standards are termed maximum residue limits (MRLs) and, like U.S. tolerances, are established primarily as enforcement tools for determining whether pesticide applications are made according to established directions. While many countries have adopted Codex MRLs, others, such as the U.S. and several Asian countries, rely on their own standards. Thus, there is no uniformity among the world with respect to allowable levels of pesticides on foods. A pesticide-commodity... 

A major consequence of using regulatory limits based on degradant formation, rather than absolute change of the API level in the drug product, is that it necessitates the application and routine use of very sensitive analytical techniques [ 10]. In addition, the need to resolve both structurally similar, as well as structurally diverse degradants of the API, mandates the use of analytical separation techniques, for example, HPLC, CE, often coupled with highly sensitive detection modes, for example, ultraviolet (UV) spectroscopy, fluorescence (F) spectroscopy, electrochemical detection (EC), mass spectroscopy (MS), tandem mass spectroscopy (MS-MS) and so forth. 

This manual may involve hazardous materials, operations, and equipment, and does not purport to address all of the safety problems associated with their use. It is the responsibility of the user of this manual to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. 

The revised and adopted module ISO 9001 2000 makes the quality system management requirements extremely clear. The review of Tables 1 and 2, under the heading Correspondence between ISO 9001 (1994) and ISO 9001 2000, reveals that the same processes are specified in both standards, even though they have different names and subheadings. The quality system requirements in ISO 9001 2000 are comprehensively grouped under clause 7 with additional emphasis on customer satisfaction and internal communication. Where exclusions are made, claims of conformity to this international standard are not acceptable unless these exclusions are limited to the requirements within clause 7. Such exclusions do not affect the organization s ability or responsibility to provide products that fulfill customer and applicable regulatory requirements. 

Claims of conformity to this international standard where exclusions are made are not acceptable unless these exclusions are limited to requirements within clause 7, and such exclusions do not affect the organization s ability or responsibility to provide products that fulfill our customers and applicable regulatory requirements. 

The validation of the QSAR was scientifically sound, and the model should be considered suitable for regulatory use within specified limits. This should either reiterate the predefined purpose and applicability of the QSAR, or could potentially redefine them, on the basis of the scientific evidence. 

---