1 / 15

Flame Retardant Product Risk Assessments

Flame Retardant Product Risk Assessments. Veronique Steukers, 1 April 2003. Chemicals – building trust . Flame Retardants (FRs) are necessary to guarantee current level of safety for consumers and are indispensible for current daily life!

adamma
Download Presentation

Flame Retardant Product Risk Assessments

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Flame Retardant Product Risk Assessments Veronique Steukers, 1 April 2003

  2. Chemicals – building trust • Flame Retardants (FRs) are necessary to guarantee current level of safety for consumers and are indispensible for current daily life! • Public trust in chemicals has been undermined based on legitimate as well as unfounded concerns • Regulators and industry need to: • Limit effects on environment and human health • Take action to address legitimate concerns • Challenge unfounded concerns • Rebuild trust

  3. EU Chemicals Policy – The future • Legislative proposals to be launched by EU Commission in April 2003: „REACH“ = Registration, Evaluation & Authorisation of Chemicals • Shorter and more effective process evaluating existing chemicals • Industry will be conducting scientific research, not EU Member States • However, scientific research will be assessed by EU authorities • ALL manufacturers and users of existing chemicals will require increased data behind their products: mandatory co-operation in REACH

  4. EU Future Chemicals Policy • Three Possible Outcomes from Scientific Assessments Interpretation Ban Risk Reduction Measures or Approved as Safe or

  5. Impact on textiles • Chemicals used by textiles industry will fall in each of the three baskets • Opportunity in Orange Basket: • If you can demonstrate risks can be managed, you will avoid restrictions

  6. Industry Managing Risks • Examples: • Voluntary Emissions Reduction Measures means • Less environmental concerns • Voluntary safety measures means: • Less exposure to workers & human health concerns • Less FR products banned or less imposed risk reduction measures on user industries • More choice/products available on the FR marketmaintaining competitivity and innovation

  7. EU Risk Assessments – What is it? • European Regulation 793/93/EEC • Assesses the risks the substance poses to human health & the environment • = hazard (tox properties) x exposure e.g. • Pb in gasoline: high exposure through emission so RISK • Pb in crystal: no exposure so NO RISK • Several brominated and halogenated phosphorous flame retardants are undergoing risk assessment

  8. Current Risk Assessments - update • Brominated FRs • Decabromodiphenyl ether (DecaBDE) • Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) • Antimony trioxide (ATO) • Phosphorous FRs • Tris (2-chloro-1-methylethyl)phophate (TCPP) • Tris [2-chloro-1-(chloromethyl)ethyl]phophate (TDCP)

  9. EU Risk Assessment of BFRs • Deca-BDE – final conclusions in June / September 2003 • Deca is critical as it will set standard for all evaluations of chemicals • Interim report • Human health – no concern • Environmental impact show no significant risks, but need further data • No classification as dangerous substance • HBCD - final discussion in September 2003? • Interim report: • Concerns identified in certain areas but also need for further data

  10. EU Risk Assessment of ATO • First report • No classification as acutely or chronically toxic for the aquatic environment (no dead fish & tree) • Several studies still ongoing • First draft report in May 2003 • First discussion at EU level in June 2003

  11. EU Risk Assessments of PFRs • TCPP: • First report: • Draft environmental report indicate need for further testing – testing program ongoing • Human health first report possibly in August 2003 • First discussion second half 2003 • TDCP • First report • Draft environmental report indicate need for further testing – testing program ongoing • Human health first report possibly in August • First discussion second half 2003

  12. DecaBDE Risk Reduction • Despite lack of risk, risk reduction based on concerns on findings of decaBDE in the environment – February 2003 • Discussion group incorporating Authorities, green NGOs and industry • EBFRIP, APME, EuPC, TFA agreed to participate • Several individual companies requested to be consulted during the process • Important precedent setting for other chemicals undergoing risk evaluation!

  13. ConclusionEmissions reduction is key to sustainable use of FRs • Even if products not toxic, it is a concern that some are found increasingly in the environment • This trend is not acceptable for the industry • Nor is it accepted by regulators, non governmental organisations or the public Norwegian EPA: „Conclusions [from the report on BFRs] are not alarming due to the brominated flame retardants‘ levels recorded. Concern was due to the substances being detected at all.“

  14. Industry Managing Emissions Regulators will impose restrictions on the use of chemicals which are deemed to be of concern and which are NOT being managed Let‘s work together to manage emissions and waste going into the environment

  15. More info… • www.cefic-efra.com • www.ebfrip.org • www.bsef.com • www.iaoia.org • www.firesafetyinfo.org

More Related