EPA will continue to regulate carbon nanotubes on a case-by-case basis - SafeNano, UK
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will continue to regulate carbon nanotubes on a case-by-case basis as the distinct characteristics of each type of carbon nanotube could mean that each has different implications for human health and the environment.
At the end of June, the EPA's Chemical Control Division issued a series of significant new use rules (SNURs), or conditions for manufacture, for nanomaterials. These SNURs are among the first regulations designed to protect workers dealing with carbon nanotubes, and require manufacturers of specific carbon nanotubes to ensure that their workers are wearing protective clothing and masks that comply with National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) requirements. Similar SNURs are expected to be issued for other types of carbon nanotubes.
The agency may revise the worker protection they require as they gain more information about carbon nanotubes or if they are manufactured in new ways. Manufacturers will be expected to detail plans on how they will prevent environmental releases.

Nanotechnology: safety rules skewed the wrong way - The Syndney Morning Herald, Australia
Australia's regulation of risky technologies and substances in the products we consume is inadequate. Materials such as nano-zinc are not just miniature versions of the chemical. Their size makes them fundamentally different and they can be toxic. Research is showing nano-materials may seriously affect our health and the environment. Nanotechnology has no place in our food or personal products until it is proved to be safe.

Hiding a toxic nanomaterial's identity: TSCA's disappearing act - Environmental Defense Fund, USA
In earlier posts (here and here), I discussed a notice EPA had received in July of 2008 from BASF reporting toxic effects at very low doses of a carbon nanotube (CNT) observed in a 90-day rat inhalation study.  In that notice, BASF had declared the specific identity of its CNT to be confidential business information, hence denying that information to the public.  Now, in a setting more to its liking, it appears the company has decided to reveal the identity after all.