Oral arguments were made by the US National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) recently in its court-case against the nation's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The case was brought to court by the NRDC in January 2012 over the EPA's registration of a nanosilver product.
One line of argument pursued by the plaintiff was the use of 'three-year-olds rather than nine-month-olds as the most vulnerable subpopulation on which to base risk values'. The Council believes that the younger group would be 'more likely to chew on textiles and [therefore] could have higher exposures'. The EPA contested that its use of toddlers was supported by studies; furthermore the Agency had 'a long-standing practice of using three-year-olds in risk assessments with similar exposure patterns'.
The NGO also proposed that the government authority had 'failed to consider the risk of aggregate exposure from other nanosilver products on the market'. The EPA stated that it had factored such data-gaps into its assessment, and that it had stated that the product needed to submit more information before it could receive 'full registration' from the Agency.