European Commission Exposure Scenario Workshop

1. European Commission Exposure Scenario Workshop Stresa: 9 June 2006

2. CEPE project group Issue manager Tony Newbould, BCF Anne Lill Gade, Jotun Leo Appelman, Akzo Nobel Martin Kanert, VdD Per Langholz, Dyrup Werner Lenhard, DuPont Helle Simon Elbro, FDLF + M Buescher, BG Druck and Papierverabeitung Making presentation today.

3. Reminder – the “CEPE” sector • CEPE represents manufacturers of • decorative coatings • printing inks • industrial coatings • artists colours • CEPE is: • 1400 companies: ~80% of industry • 70% SME/M; ~12 global companies • ~3,000 non-members: most SME/M

4. Preparing the CEPE proposal (1) • Our aims: • overall, to support and co-ordinate specific national or European industry activities • to test information flows up and down at least three supply chain steps e.g. • provision of DU (CEPE) descriptions of use and RMMs upstream • assessing upstream Exposure Scenarios • to cover the wide range of use situations found in: • manufacture of coatings and inks • application (use) of coatings and inks • to test CEPE tools and procedures for risk identification and management • identifying critical components for control • identifying appropriate RMMs • preparing eSDSs for preparations

5. Preparing the CEPE proposal (2) • selected a representative set of cases: Deco consumer/professional - diffuse Screen printing professional/industrial - non-spray Structural steel professional - outdoors Coil coating industrial - engineering controls Vehicle refinish professional – spray Powder coating industrial - particulates • CEPE exploring further sectors • aim to evaluate all in RIP3.2-2 timeframe

6. Selected case study: screen printing (1) • Contact person and organisation:CEPE, Avenue Edmond Van Nieuwenhuyse – bte 4, B-1160 Brussels: Contact: Tony Newbould; email : tony.newbould@bcf.co.uk Tel: + 44 1372 360 660 (O) + 44 7773 324 989 (M) • Types of chemical product:organic solvent borne and UV curable printing inks and organic solvent screen cleaner • Exposure scenario for the preparation to be developed:yes • Type of raw material used in the example by functionality :solvents, binders, additives • Candidate raw materials to be used for exemplification of preparation related ES: solvent naphtha, cyclohexanone, 4-hydroxy-4-methyl-2-pentanone, 2-butoxy-ethylacetate, aliphatic urethane acrylate, HDDA, photoinitiators, MPA

7. Selected case study: screen printing (2) • Life cycle stages the example will refer to: - manufacture of solvent borne and UV curable screen inks and of screen cleaners - application of solvent borne screen printing inks - human and environmental effects of printed articles - environmental effects of disposing of printed article as waste

8. Type(s) of users the example will refer to: manufacture: industrial Broad function (technical fate) of substance: manufacture: raw materials (substances and preparations mixed and blended into inks (preparations) Process type: manufacture: multi-stage dispensing, blending, mixing of raw materials in open or closed equipment. Contained in an installation Targets (compartments) the example will refer to: manufacture: human: employees, public (neighbours); environment: air, water, soil Exposure routes the example will refer to [more important in red]: manufacture: inhalation, skin, eye, ingestion, air, soil, waste(water) application: industrial or professional application: inks applied to (incorporated into) an article cleaner: processing aid in screen printing application: manual and semi-automated screen printing (graphic application and membrane switches). Contained in an installation. application: human: employees, public (neighbours); environment: air, water, soil use: human: consumer; environment: air, water, soil application: inhalation, skin, eye, ingestion, air, soil, (waste)water Selected case study: screen printing (3)

9. Selected case study: screen printing (4) • Measured data or modelling tools available to calculate exposure: - occupational exposure and environmental emissions data as required by member state regulations. - company-specific measurements - industry “critical component” approach to RMM identification • Sector leading the exemplification: Screen ink manufacturers • Industry person to lead an exemplification group: Martin Kanert, VdD, Germany • Involved levels of supply chain: - screen printers (SMEs, national printers’ association BVDM) - screen ink manufacturers (mostly SMEs, national ink manufacturers’ association VdD + CEPE) - raw material suppliers (international companies) - employers liability insurance (BG Druck u Papierverarbeitung) - authorities(BMWi, BAuA, UBA,BfR) • National working group or EU group: National + EU (CEPE interface)

10. Type(s) of users the example will refer to: manufacture: industrial Broad function (technical fate) of substance: manufacture: raw materials (substances and preparations mixed and blended into protective coatings (preparations) Process type: manufacture: multi-stage dispensing, blending, mixing of raw materials in open or closed equipment. Contained in an installation Targets (compartments) the example will refer to: manufacture: human: employees, public(neighbours); environment: air, water, soil Exposure routes the example will refer to [more important in red]: manufacture: inhalation, skin, eye, ingestion, air, soil, waste(water) application: industrial or professional application: protective paints applied to an article cleaner: processing aid in maitenance work application: manual, paint brush and spray application. Maintenance: On the oil rig New building: Contained in an installation application: human: employees, oil-rig personnel, environment: air, coastal water, spreading with coastal streams, sedimentation use: environment: air, water, soil application:inhalation, skin, eye, ingestion, air, soil, (waste)water Selected case study: structural steel (1)

11. Selected case study: structural steel (2) • Measured data or modelling tools available to calculate exposure: - Occupational exposure and environmental emissions data as required by member state regulations. - Company based risk assessment method - COSHH essentials (UK) - Danish REACH project methodology (Dk) - Model for exposure in coastal water (DREAM-Dose Related Effect Asessment Model) - Company-specific measurements - CEPE “critical components” approach to RMM identification • Sector leading the exemplification: Paint manufacturers • Industry persons to lead an exemplification group: Anne Lill Gade, NML,Norway, Helle Simon Elbro,FDLF,Denmark • Involved levels of supply chain: - Raw material suppliers (International companies) - Paint manufacturers (SMEs, National paint manufacturers’ association NML, FDLF, European Paint Industry Association CEPE) - Corrosion protection companies (SMEs, National corrosion protection association (KEF) - Oil companies (International companies, National Oil producers association (OLF) - Authorities (State Pollution Control Authority) • National working group or EU group: National + EU (CEPE interface)

12. Methodologies – Two approaches • Semi-quantitative • Quantitative

13. Semi-quantitative method • Inspiration: • Stoffenmanager • COSHH essentials • Starting point: Manufacture (but use will also be tested) • One use: Coatings or inks manufacture • For each exposure route select critical component

14. Semi-quantitative methodBasic idea Increasing Exposure RMM Increasing Hazard Neglible Low risk Medium risk High risk

15. Semi-quantitative methodHealth Hazard Rating – first version Increasing Hazard

16. Semi-quantitative methodExposure Rating – first version Increasing Exposure

17. Semi-quantitative methodDeciding on RMM Increasing Exposure Exposure route: Ingestion Liquid: No RMM Powder: No RMM Increasing Hazard

18. Semi-quantitative methodDeciding on RMM Increasing Exposure Increasing Hazard Exposure route: Eyes Liquid: Eye protection designed to protect against liquid splashes should be worn Powder: No RMM

19. Semi-quantitative methodProcess RMM • Develop industry standard RMM-matrix. • Subsequent process: • CEPE member sends matrix to supplier + information about exposure categories. • RMM is reviewed by supplier • A reduced matrix is incorporated into the ES send from supplier in SDS • CEPE member makes ’practical risk assesment’

20. Quantitative method • Inspiration: • Existing TGD’s • Starting point: USE by consumers/professional(but manufacture will also be tested) • Each industry sector establishes a table of Standard Exposure Values • To be used together with information on RMM efficiency factors.

21. Quantitative methodBasic idea (1) 176 144 Measured or Modelled data

22. Quantitative methodBasic idea (2) Substance data from supplier Exposure value >< DNEL Standard Exposure Values (industry sector) > DNEL < DNEL Use can be considered safe RMM to be used Exposure value reduced with RMM effciency factor > DNEL < DNEL Additional RMM to be used. Use with RMM can be considered safe

23. Quantitative methodStandard Exposure Values 176 144 • To be reviewed by • Industry sector • commission/authorities Measured or Modelled data

24. Quantitative methodOptions if use can not be demonstrated to be safe Additional testing to be done (substance supplier level) Exposure value >< DNEL > DNEL New exposure values to be measured (across industry sector) RMM to be used Exposure value reduced with RMM effciency factor More testing on RMM efficiency (RMM supplier level) > DNEL Additional RMM to be used.

25. Semi-quantitative methodProcess • Develop industry standard of exposure values. • Collect table of RMM efficiency factors • Subsequent process: • CEPE member receives DNEL (incl. in SDS) from supplier for critical component for the specific exposure route • Exposure value is compared to DNEL • If unable to document safe use, various options are considered – either on supplier, industry sector level – or company level.

26. In conclusion • details still being finalised • recognise a number of questions/uncertainties/unknowns • see RIP 3.2-2 a valuable opportunity to test acceptability and practicality of approaches

27. THE END