Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
POLYBROMINATED DIPHENYL ETHERS IN THE GREAT LAKES BASIN
FINAL REPORT October 30, 2015
SUBMITTED TO: INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION - GREAT LAKES WATER QUALITY BOARD LEGACY ISSUES WORKING GROUP
SUBMITTED BY DUNCAN BURY CONSULTING 193 Cowley Avenue, Ottawa, ON, K1Y 0G8 [email protected]; (613) 729-0499
In association with
and
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
This page intentionally left blank.
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The consulting team would like to acknowledge the contributions and information provided by the following government officials, experts and stakeholders who kindly agreed to be interviewed for this report:
Chris Affeldt, Pollution Prevention Program Analyst, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality David Bell, Research Scientist, Environmental Impact Analysis Unit, Minnesota Department of Health David Berryman, Water Quality Analyst, Québec Ministry of Sustainable Development, Environment and the Fight against Climate Change Cindy Coutts, President, Canada, SIMS Recycling Solutions Miriam Diamond, Professor, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario Sean De Vries, Director Recycling Qualification Office, Electronic Products Recycling Association Dave Foulkes, Environmental Specialist, Office of Compliance Assistance and Pollution Prevention (OCAPP), Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Brent Goetz, Inspector, Hazardous Waste, Northwest District Office, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Bradley Grams, Federal Chemical Programs Coordinator, Land and Chemicals Division, Chemicals Management Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5 Peter Hargreave, Director, Policy and Strategy, Ontario Waste Management Association Liz Harriman, Deputy Director, Toxics Use Reduction Institute, University of Massachusetts – Lowell Garth Hickle, Product Stewardship Team Leader, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Al Innes, Safer Product Chemistry Coordinator, Resource Management and Assistance Division, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Kristen Kellock, Toxicologist, Hazardous Waste Section, Office of Waste Management and Radiological Protection, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Avery Lindeman, Deputy Director, Green Science Policy Institute Bob Luedeka, Executive Director, Polyurethane Foam Association Mike Murray, Staff Scientist, National Wildlife Federation Guy Perry, Guy Perry and Associates Peter Pettit, Director of Waste Reduction and Recycling, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Dr. Gordon Price, Innovative Waste Management Program, Faculty of Agriculture, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia Eileen Sheehan, Manager Pollution Prevention and Solid Waste, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 (currently on assignment at CA Department of Toxic Substances Control, Safer Consumer Products Program) Jo-Anne St. Godard, Executive Director, Recycling Council of Ontario Alex Stone, Safer Chemical Alternative Chemist, Hazardous Waste & Toxics Reduction-HQ, State of Washington Department of Ecology Andrew Winters, Program Manager, Regional Municipality of Niagara, Ontario Brad Wolbert, Chief, Recycling and Solid Waste Section, Bureau of Waste and Materials Management, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
This page intentionally left blank.
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
TABLE OF CONTENTS
REPORT CONCLUSIONS ...... 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 3 1.1 Project Background ...... 3 1.2 Project Objectives ...... 3 2.0 PBDES IN THE GREAT LAKES BASIN ...... 5 2.1 Overview ...... 5 2.2 Quantities ...... 6 2.3 Substitutes and Flammability Standards ...... 6 2.4 Pathways and Monitoring ...... 11 2.5 Human Health and Environmental Impacts ...... 14 2.6 Knowledge Gaps ...... 16 3.0 LIFE CYCLE OF PRODUCTS CONTAINING PBDEs: DIVERSION POTENTIAL AND RELEASES ...... 18 3.1 Introduction and Description of Product Categories Containing PBDEs ...... 18 3.2 Typical Life Cycle Management of Products Containing PBDEs and Potential for Diversion ...... 19 3.3 Actual or Potential PBDE Releases – Overview ...... 30 4.0 JURISDICTION REVIEW OF REGULATIONS AND INITIATIVES TARGETING PBDEs IN THE GREAT LAKES BASIN ...... 58 4.1 Overview of International Initiatives ...... 58 4.2 Overview of Federal, State, and Provincial Regulations and Initiatives Targeting PBDEs ...... 63 4.3 Discussion of Federal Initiatives in Canada and the U.S...... 67 4.4 Discussion of State and Provincial Initiatives ...... 70 4.5 Evaluation of the Management of PBDEs in the Great Lakes Basin - Identification of Gaps ...... 76 4.6 Potential Opportunities ...... 84 5.0 OVERVIEW AND ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL PBDE MANAGEMENT INSTRUMENTS ...... 85 5.1 Overview of Regulatory PBDE Instruments ...... 85 5.2 Overview of Non-Regulatory PBDE Instruments ...... 98 5.3 Instrument Summary and Assessment...... 103 6.0 RECOMMENDED FRAMEWORK FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF PBDES IN THE GREAT LAKES BASIN ... 107 6.1 Framework Overview ...... 107 6.2 Conclusions ...... 107 6.3 Actors, Roles, Responsibilities and Recommended Regulatory and Non-Regulatory Elements ...... 109 6.4 Implementation Strategy, Key Considerations and Challenges ...... 113 6.5 Additional Studies and Research ...... 118
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
APPENDIX A INTERVIEWS……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………A-1 APPENDIX B JURISDICTIONAL REVIEW SUMMARIES………………………………………………………………………….B-1 APPENDIX C REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………C-1
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Life Cycle Flow Diagram …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….18 Figure 2: Typical Waste Water Treatment Processes ………………………………………………………………………………32 Figure 3: EPA Generalized Annual Life Cycle of PBDE in the United States……………………………………………….36 Figure 4: State EPR Laws…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..93
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Estimated Quantities of PBDEs in the Great Lakes Basin ...... 6 Table 2: Life Cycles of Products Containing PBDEs ...... 20 Table 3: PBDE Release Analysis – Summary Table ...... 47 Table 4: Comparison of Canadian and U.S. National Initiatives on PBDEs (Substances) ...... 69 Table 5: Comparison of Canadian and U.S. National Initiatives on PBDEs (Products) ...... 70 Table 6: Jurisdiction Review Summary - Government Regulatory Initiatives (PBDE Substances) ...... 72 Table 7: Jurisdiction Review Summary – Government Regulatory Initiatives (PBDE Products) ...... 73 Table 8: Gaps Assessment – State, Provincial, and Federal Authorities, and /or Non-Profit ...... 83 Table 9: Canadian EPR Programs 2014 ...... 91 Table 10: Instrument Summary and Assessment ...... 104 Table 11: Implementation Strategy Challenges and Response ...... 115
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
LIST OF ACRONYMS
ABS – Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene ANSI – American National Standards Institute ASR – Auto shredder residue BAT – Best available techniques BDE – Brominated diphenyl ethers BEP – Best environmental practices BET – Best environmental technology CAA – Clean Air Act (U.S.) CAPEPR – Canada-wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility CBI - confidential business information CCME – Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment CCPSA - Canada Consumer Product Safety Act CEPA – Canadian Environmental Protection Act CMC – Chemicals of mutual concern CMP – Chemicals Management Plan (Environment/Health Canada) COA - Canada-Ontario Agreement CRD – Construction, renovation and demolition (waste) CRT - Cathode ray tube CSR - Chemical safety report DfE – Design for the environment EC – Environment Canada ECHA - European Chemicals Agency EEE – Electronic and electrical equipment EFW – Energy from waste ELV – End-of-life vehicle EPA – Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.) EPEAT – Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool EPP – Environmentally Preferable Purchasing program (Minnesota) EPRA – Electronic Products Recycling Association (Canada) EPR – Extended Producer Responsibility EPS – Expanded polystyrene EPSC – Electronics Product Stewardship Canada EU – European Union FPUF – Flexible polyurethane foam GEN – Global Eco-labelling Network GLBTS – Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy GLWQA – Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement HBCD – Hexabromocyclododecane HDPE – High density polyethylene IADN – Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network ICI – Industrial/commercial/institutional ISO – International Standards Organization IWMC – Island Waste Management Corporation (Prince Edward Island) MARR – Major Appliance Recycling Roundtable (British Columbia) MSW – Municipal solid waste MOU – Memorandum of understanding NGO – Non-governmental organization
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
NIP – National Implementation Plan (EU) NPRI – National Pollutant Release Inventory (Canada) OECD – Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development OEWG – Open-ended Working Group (Basel Convention) OHS – Occupational health and safety PBDE – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ether PC – Personal computer PCB – Printed circuit board; Polychlorinated biphenyl POP – Persistent organic pollutant POPRC – Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee (UNEP) PRO – Producer responsibility organization PSI – Product Stewardship Institute PUF – Polyurethane foam PVC – Polyvinyl chloride REACH – Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (EU) RRFB – Resource Recovery Fund Board (Nova Scotia) ROHS – Restriction on Hazardous Substances (EU) RQP – Recycler Qualification Program (EPRA) SERI – Sustainable Electronics Recycling International SNUR – Significant New Use Rule (U.S.) SOCOPSE –Source Control of Priority Substances in Europe SVHC – Substances of very high concern TBTH – Tetrabromophtalate TPPBA – Tetrabromobisphenol TPP – Tetrabromobenzoate TRI – Toxics Release Inventory (U.S.) TSCA – Toxic Substances Control Act (U.S) UNEP – United Nations Environment Program VCCEP – Voluntary Children’s Chemical Evaluation Program (US EPA) WEEE – Waste electronic and electrical equipment WWTP – Waste water treatment plant XPS – Extruded polystyrene
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
REPORT CONCLUSIONS
The report conclusions are based on the project’s literature review, analysis and on insights gathered from the interviews with government officials, experts and stakeholders. The conclusions are grouped into four primary areas: PBDE pathways and knowledge gaps, current regulatory initiatives, waste diversion and extended producer responsibility (EPR) programs and environmentally sound management and recycling. These conclusions and the recommendations based on them are addressed in more detail in Sections 6.2 and 6.3 of this report.
PBDE Pathways and Knowledge Gaps
PBDEs are associated historically with a wide range of products and materials with varied life expectancies and life cycles. The widespread use of flame retardants means that managing the legacy of older products will be a challenge for some time to come particularly in the case of products with the longest life expectancies. Leachate from landfills, where most PBDE containing products end up, has been shown to contain PBDEs. Leachate is commonly treated at municipal waste water treatment plants in Great Lakes jurisdictions which may not be designed or equipped to capture PBDEs. These can therefore end up in either the sewage sludge which is often applied to agricultural land or plant effluent which is discharged to a receiving body of water. The environmentally sound recycling and processing of products into secondary materials poses less risk of releasing PBDEs to the environment than landfilling such products. While the pathways for PBDEs are generally well described, there is a significant lack of information on where PBDEs are used and on the release risks associated with particular stages of the product life cycle including at the end-of-life. There are alternatives to PBDEs but not enough is known about their environmental or health impacts. Most research on substitutes is focused on the use of alternative substances rather than on the redesign of products to minimize flammability risks or avoid the use of flame retardants. There appears to be very little discussion in the literature or within government agencies on the efficacy of flammability standards or on the environmental and health impacts that may result from actions taken to meet these standards.
Current Regulatory Initiatives
There are currently only a few regulatory initiatives within the Great Lakes Basin or elsewhere which specifically address PBDEs. Most regulatory initiatives that do exist are targeted at the PBDE substances themselves.
1 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Some regulations target product categories (such as electronics products), although these regulations are not focused explicitly on the flame retardants but rather on diversion from disposal for the product category.
Waste Diversion and EPR Programs
Because of the variability in product life cycles and their diversion potential a management framework for PBDEs will need to include a range of instruments targeted at different stages of the product life cycle and at different product categories. Extended producer responsibility (EPR) regulations for waste electronic and electrical equipment (WEEE), are some of the few regulations that address PBDE containing products, although managing PBDE releases is not a primary focus of these programs. EPR programs can be effective in enhancing waste diversion from disposal goals for some designated products and provide sustainable funding for the collection and processing of waste products and for the marketing of recovered materials. EPR programs can be designed to meet environmentally sound management standards.
Environmentally Sound Management and Recycling
Recycling of PBDE containing products can be required to be conducted with due regard to environmentally sound management and follow an environmentally responsible chain of custody for recovered materials that minimizes or prevents the risk of release through disposal. Recycling programs are commonly focused on easily recoverable and marketable materials in products and usually not on the materials where PBDEs are the most problematic such as in plastic housings and components. Plastics containing PBDEs are commonly separated during recycling processes but because of poor or non-existent marketability for some plastics (e.g. moulded plastic resins in vehicles) are most often disposed of in landfill as residuals or shipped to low value overseas markets. In addition there are indications that there are no scaleable technologies are currently available to remove PBDEs from plastics. In private industry, economics, and in particular secondary material commodity prices, not environmental policy, are the primary drivers for recycling of a particular product. The opportunities for enhanced diversion are stronger where products can be easily distinguished and source separated. Mixed wastes are technically more difficult and relatively expensive to separate and are therefore invariably more commonly sent for disposal or to low value materials markets.
2 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Background
The International Joint Commission Water Quality Board through the work of the Legacy Issues Work Group has identified the impact of PBDE flame retardants on the Great Lakes as a priority issue. PBDEs have been used as flame retardants since the 1970s, and have been incorporated into a wide range of commercial and consumer products including appliances, automobiles, carpets, clothing, drapes, mattresses and pillows, plastic film for insulation and shielding, construction materials (adhesives/sealants, foam insulation, paints and coatings, wall covering, and coatings for wires and cables), upholstery, and a variety of electronic devices.
According to numerous environmental assessments PBDEs are entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that have or may have an immediate or long-term harmful effect on the environment or its biological diversity. PBDE’s have been identified as persistent, toxic and bioaccumulative and have been detected in a variety of species worldwide and evidence from many studies indicates that levels of certain PBDEs in biota in North America are increasing steadily and substantially over time.
The scale and challenges associated with the issue are demonstrated by the large size of the Great Lakes basin, by the fact they straddle the Canadian and US border, by the number of jurisdictions which form part of the basin: in Canada, Ontario; in the US, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York and by the significant population and economic activity the basin includes.
1.2 Project Objectives
The PBDEs in the Great Lakes Basin project is designed to undertake a bi-national assessment of the status of responses to the presence of PBDEs in the Great Lakes region and the future implications of the presence of PBDEs in products that are still in use as well as those that are taken out of use and enter the waste stream.
The project required an analysis of:
Product handling during and after use with the following specific objectives:
o Compilation of information about how products containing PBDEs are handled during and after use.
3 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
o Examination of the significance of how products are handled.
o Estimation of potential for PBDE release during all phases of the product life cycle based on a review of relevant literature and other information sources.
o Assessment of the implications for the Great Lakes, including but not limited to a review of existing modeling and relevant monitoring work, and identification of areas where more research may be needed.
Status of government actions with the following specific objective: to examine and assess the regulatory and non-regulatory government framework related to PBDEs, including but not necessarily limited to:
o Phase out actions. o Process for ensuring the safety of substitutes for the substances phased out before their introduction. o Efficacy of rules around reuse, recycling, and disposal. o Utilization of programs for, and potential significance of, extended producer responsibility.
4 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report 2.0 PBDES IN THE GREAT LAKES BASIN
2.1 Overview
Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) are a class of substances used as flame retardants in a wide variety of products that have been used since the 1970’s, intentionally manufactured to retard the combustibility of treated materials. When fire occurs, the PBDE formulations utilize vapor phase chemical reactions that interfere with the combustion process, thus delaying ignition and inhibiting the spread of fire.1
PBDEs include the commercial versions of pentabromodiphenyl ether (c-pentaBDE), octabromodiphenyl ether (c-octaBDE), and decabromodiphenyl ether (c-decaBDE). Each of these commercial products is a mixture composed of several PBDE congeners. PBDEs are used as flame retardants in a number of applications, including textiles, plastics, wire insulation, and automobiles. Releases of PBDEs to the environment can occur during manufacturing and processing operations, throughout the service life of articles containing PBDEs, and when articles that contain PBDEs are recycled or disposed of.2 The level of release depends on many factors such as product category, how it’s used, how it is recycled, and method of disposal. These issues are discussed further in Section 3.
Due to research conclusions that PBDE congeners are persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic to both humans and the environment, both the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and Environment Canada have worked together with industry over the past decade to ensure the phase out of manufacture and import of some PBDEs. In addition, both federal governments have developed Action Plans or Strategies to reduce the levels of PBDEs in the environment (see Section 4.2).3,4
Despite these efforts PBDEs are still imported into Canada and the U.S. when they are contained within finished products such as electrical and electronic equipment, household appliances, upholstered furniture, carpets, curtains and blinds, textiles, mattresses and pillows, automotive/aircraft seating and moulded interiors, and some construction materials such as coated wires and some insulation. In fact, due to strict flammability standards in both countries (which differ for various products), flame retardency is required in many of these consumer
1 U.S. EPA. An Exposure Assessment of Polybromated Diphenyl Ethers. EPA/600/R-08/086F May 2010 2 Environment Canada PBDE website www.ec.gc.ca/toxiques-toxics/Default.asp?lang=En&n=98E80CC6-1&xml=5046470B-2D3C- 48B4-9E46-735B7820A444 3 U.S. EPA PBDEs Action Plan Summary website http://www.epa.gov/oppt/existingchemicals/pubs/actionplans/pbde.html 4 Environment Canada PBDE website www.ec.gc.ca/toxiques-toxics/Default.asp?lang=En&n=98E80CC6-1&xml=5046470B-2D3C- 48B4-9E46-735B7820A444
5 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report products in order to be sold on the market and used in home building. According to Environment Canada’s 2006 ecological assessment report, PBDEs are entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that have or may have an immediate or long-term harmful effect on the environment or its biological diversity.
2.2 Quantities
The Great Lakes Commission has been active in undertaking research to quantify sources of PDBEs in the Great Lakes Region in particular. The Great Lakes PBDE Reduction Project was undertaken between 2011 and 2013 to: quantify sources of PBDEs in the Great Lakes region and identify metrics for tracking reductions in this region. This study estimated the quantities of PBDEs in the Great Lakes region. These estimates are outlined in the following table.5
Table 1: Estimated Quantities of PBDEs in the Great Lakes Basin
PBDE Tonnage Range Where found - % of total PBDE Quantities expected to enter waste use phase or still be in use by 2020 Penta 2000t – 10,000t (2004) Furniture foams 60-65% All to leave the use phase Vehicle foams 30-35% EEE 2-3% Octa 500t - 2,000t (2004) EEE 90% 90% to leave the use phase Auto sector 10% Deca 10,000t – 70,000t (2013) Automotive 25% 50% remain in use (of 2008 peak inventory) Textiles 25% Construction materials 25% EEE 15% Total 15,000t – 80,000t (2004) 40% of the peak value (mainly deca) remain in use PBDEs
2.3 Substitutes and Flammability Standards
2.3.1 Background
Numerous steps have been taken over the years to find alternative chemicals to PBDEs that allow products to meet flammability requirements, but that are of less concern from an ecological and human health perspective.6 Manufacturers have been using alternatives to penta- and octa-BDEs for approximately a decade, and the atmospheric concentrations of some of these alternative compounds are approaching those of PBDEs in the Great Lakes area (for example the concentrations of TBB and TBPH).7 In addition, two derivative substances of TBBPA (another
5 Great Lakes PBDE Reduction Project, Summary Paper No. 1, PBDE Product Inventory. 6 Murray, M.; Soehl, A.,Diamond, M., Abbasi, G. (2014). Great Lakes PBDE Reduction Project Summary Paper No.2. PBDE Alternatives Assessment. 7 Ma. Y.N., Venier, M. & Hites, R.A. (2012). 2-Ethylhexyl Tetrabromobenzoate and Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Tetrabromophtalate Flame Retardants in the Great Lakes Atmosphere. Environmental Science & Technology, 46: 204-208.
6 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report substitute to PBDEs) have been found to bioaccumulate in the herring gull food chain and transfer from gull to egg.8
These studies support growing concerns that we may be replacing one problem with another. Regulatory agencies in various countries, including Canada and the U.S., have concluded that there is still insufficient data to ascertain whether alternative chemicals to PBDEs pose little or no risk, but some of the available alternative chemicals do appear to be safer than PBDEs.9 While some of these products may be “safer”, this does not mean that they have no environmental or health effects and that their use should be promoted. Alternatives to PBDEs should undertake a rigorous scientific risk assessment process before being used in the manufacture of consumer products. Given the very large number of possible alternatives, such an assessment process would require significant resources. In order to avoid replacing one problematic chemical with another, and avoid spending too much effort on long and complex substance assessment, it may be best to establish a novel approach for selecting alternatives, including considering the issue of flame retardants in a broader context that ensures that the desired functionality (fire safety) is maintained while minimizing risks to human and ecological health. The approach should also look beyond the mere replacement of PBDEs by other chemicals.
2.3.2 Chemical substitutes and alternative approaches
To illustrate the spectrum of possibilities, it is worth mentioning that the Index of Flame Retardants, an international guide, contains more than 1000 chemical flame retardant products (preparations and substances) listed by trade name, chemical name, application and manufacturer.10 This index describes around 200 flame retardant substances used in commercial flame retardant products.
In essence, flame retardant chemicals can be divided into four main families: Inorganic flame retardants; Organophosphorus flame retardants; Nitrogen-based flame retardants; Halogenated flame retardants (these include PBDEs, are primarily based on chlorine and bromine and they react with flammable gases to slow or prevent the burning process).
8 Letcher, R.J. & Chu, S. (2010). High-Sensitivity Method for Determination of Tetrabromobisphenol-S and Tetrabromobisphenol-A Derivative Flame Retardants in Great Lakes Herring Gull Eggs by Liquid Chromatography-Atmospheric Pressure Photoionization- Tandem Mass Spectrometry. Environmental Science & Technology, 44(22): 8615-8621. 9 Norwegian Pollution Control Authority (SFT) (2009). Guidance on alternative flame retardants to the use of commercial pentabromodiphenylether (c-PentaBDE). 10 Gower Index Series, (1997). The Index of Flame Retardants: An International Guide to More Than 1000 Products by Trade Name, Chemical, Application, and Manufacturer.
7 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Keeping in mind the need to consider a broader approach, there are also a number of ways to provide a flame retardant effect that do not require chemicals and for which toxicity is not a concern. Examples include re-designing products to be less fire-prone, and the use of inherently fire-resistant fibers or light-weight metals. For example, barrier technologies have a wide immediate commercial applicability and involve layers of materials that provide fire resistance. These include boric acid-treated cotton materials used in mattresses, blends of natural and synthetic fibers used in furniture and mattresses and high performance synthetic materials used in firefighter uniforms and space suits.
In summary, the alternatives to the use of PBDEs as flame retardants may be grouped into three main categories:11
1. Substituting non-brominated chemical additives (chemical substitution) – basically replacement of PBDEs by another flame retardant without changing the base polymer;
2. Substituting product materials that don’t require PBDEs (alternative materials) – i.e. the replacement of the base polymer containing PBDEs and other additives by another material; and
3. Changing design and construction of products so they are inherently less flammable (product redesign eliminating the need for a chemical) – this may include the replacement of a product by a different one or the fulfillment of the product function by the use of a different solution.
In terms of chemical substitution, the choice of a substitute to PBDEs depends on a number of factors such as the fulfillment of the fire safety standards, the level of hazard to human health and the environment, the physical and chemical properties of the product(s), ease of processing, costs, etc. To achieve the fire safety requirements, several substitutes may have to be used together. In general, there is not one specific substitute and case-by-case solutions have to be developed. Given the large number of potential chemicals, there are still major gaps in the understanding of the environmental and health effects of potential alternative chemicals.
Materials substitution includes the use of plastics that are inherently more resistant to ignition.12 For textiles, the development of surface-active fibre systems (e.g. systems with graft copolymers
11 Genty, A. (2009). An Inventory and Assessment of Options for Reducing Emissions: Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs). SOCOPSE Project (Source Control of Priority Substances in Europe). 12 Corden, C. & M. Postle (2002). Risk Reduction Strategy and Analysis of Advantages and Drawbacks for Octobromodiphenyl Ether. Final Report. London: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. 117 pages.
8 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report having low flammability) is also a solution.13 In some cases, it is possible to change plastics for other types of materials which are less flammable, such as wood and metals.14 However, metal casings for laptop computers, for example, are more expensive and might be less acceptable to consumers (increase in size and weight).
Redesigning a product or fulfilling the product function by other means is a growing field of interest. This kind of solution is still considered more challenging from a technical feasibility and costs perspective. However, this may be the most promising avenue. The US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is pursuing this type of solutions through its Design for the Environment (DfE) Alternatives Assessment program.15 For example to omit the use of flame retardants in foams, a simple solution is to increase the foam density, which can be sufficient to satisfy fire safety requirements. With electrical and electronic equipment, a possible design option for keeping fire safety without flame retardants is to move high-voltage and heat-generating parts of the products away from the outer casings or to introduce barriers (e.g. metal shields) between them.16 Other design solutions exist, such as an increase in material thickness, the use of fuses to prevent short circuits, a decrease of operating temperatures and voltages, or the use of materials that conduct heat away from hot-spots.17
2.3.3 Fire Safety Requirements
The use of flame retardants has substantially increased after a push in the US to develop fire safety standards following the release of the America Burning report in 1973.18 At the time, the focus was on preventing harm from fires but possible harm to human and environmental health associated with the use of flame retardants chemicals was not considered.
The numerous state, federal, and voluntary fire safety standards in the United States have driven the industries that use PBDEs to provide a high level of flame retardant performance. Further, even in cases where flame retarding is not mandated, manufacturers often flame-proof their
13 Posner, S. (2004). Survey and technical assessment of alternatives to decabromodiphenyl ether (decaBDE) in textile applications. Report 5/04. Swedish Chemicals Inspectorate. 29 p. 14 OSPAR Commission (2004). Certain Brominated Flame Retardants – Polybrominated Diphenylethers, Polybrominated Biphenyls, Hexabromo Cyclododecane, OSPAR Priority Substances Series 135. London: OSPAR Commission. 24 p. 15 http://www2.epa.gov/saferchoice/design-environment-alternatives-assessments 16 Lassen, C., S. Løkke, L. & I. Andersen (1999). Brominated Flame Retardants: Substance Flow Analysis and Assessment of Alternatives. Report 494. Copenhagen: Danish Environmental Protection Agency. 225 p. 17 Pure Strategies (2005). Decabromodiphenylether: An Investigation of Non-Halogen Substitutes in Electronic Enclosure and Textile Applications. Lowell Center for Sustainable Production. University of Massachusetts Lowell. 69 p. 18 National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control (1973). America Burning. Available at: http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/fa-264.pdf
9 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report products due to market pressure and brand image concerns.19 It is likely that fire safety and flammability standards have driven an increased use of flame retardants in other countries as well. For example, Canada has adopted fire safety requirements similar to those adopted in the United States. Health Canada is responsible for the implementation and enforcement of the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act (CCPSA). Specific flammability requirements for various consumer products are set through a number of regulations under the Act (for example, the Textile Flammability Regulations, the Children’s Sleepwear Regulations and the Toys Regulations).
In Canada and in the U.S., the policy and regulatory context specific to product flammability requirements is complex and highly fragmented, with varying requirements among different jurisdictions. Flammability standards are often product specific. Potentially thousands of flammability rules, codes and standards address different materials and product categories.20 In addition to government regulations requiring flammability standards to be met, model flammability codes are typically developed by the private sector and/or non-profit organizations. These codes are often adopted by various levels of governments and end up being quasi- regulatory (for example, flammability standards have been incorporated into Building Codes and Fire Codes across North America). For more information, the Great Lakes PBDE Reduction Project Summary Paper No.2.21 provides an excellent overview and examples of flammability regulations and flammability standards in Canada and in the Unites States.
In the context of a discussion on PBDEs alternatives, it is worth noting the role flammability requirements play, as a driver of the increased use of flame retardants. Although environmental and human health researchers have raised concerns about negative impacts related to some chemical flame retardants (including alternatives to PBDEs), this subject has received very limited discussion within the fire safety literature; however, the importance of clearly identifying the actual fire safety benefits of flammability requirements has been discussed in a few recent papers.22 This raises the question whether the alternatives to the use of PBDEs as flame retardants should include a fourth category, i.e. the review of products’ flammability requirements. In the United States, the California-based Green Science Policy Institute has been advocating changes to building codes and flammability standards for a number of years. This organization has pointed out that an increased use of chemical flame retardants was a direct consequence of strict flammability standards such as California’s Technical Bulletin 117 (TB 117). Considering the
19 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (2007). Report on Alternatives to the Flame Retardant DecaBDE: Evaluation of Toxicity, Availability, Affordability, and Fire Safety Issues - A Report to the Governor and the General Assembly. 80 p. 20 Hirschler, M. (2010). Regulations, codes, and standards relevant to fire issues in the United States. In Wilkie C., and Morgan, A. (eds). Fire Retardancy of Polymeric Materials, 2nd Edition Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 587-670. 21 Murray, M.; Soehl, A.,Diamond, M., Abbasi, G. (2014). Great Lakes PBDE Reduction Project Summary Paper No.2. PBDE Alternatives Assessment. 22 Babrauskas V., D. Lucas, D. Eisenberg, V. Singla, M. Dedeo & A. Blum (2012). Flame Retardants in Building Insulation: A Case for Re-evaluating Building Codes. Building Research and Information. 40: 738-755.
10 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report environmental and health concerns associated with PBDEs and alternative flame retardants, the Green Science Policy Institute, in 2013, led the charge to eliminate a requirement in TB 117 that had resulted in a widespread use of flame retardants in couches and other furniture. Having similar concerns for flammability standards in construction materials such as insulation foams, the Green Science Policy Institute continues its research on the actual benefits of existing fire safety requirements, hoping to provoke more changes in the codes and standards.23
2.4 Pathways and Monitoring
PBDEs have been detected in a variety of species worldwide and evidence from many studies indicates that levels of certain PBDEs in biota in North America increased over time, although since there are varied sources and pathways so there is a high level of uncertainty surrounding environmental releases and trends. According to U.S. Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) estimates, total environmental releases from manufacturing in the U.S. peaked in 1999, with similar levels through 2002, and then a reduction in releases in 2003, followed by an increase in 2004, and then declines in 2005, 2006, and 2007.24 More recent data was not published on the EPA website at the time of writing of this report. There is no similar data available on releases in Canada, since PBDEs are not included in the list of pollutants that must be reported as being released from a facility under the National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI).
2.4.1 Sources and Pathways
Potential sources of PBDEs in the environment are varied. These include historical sources from manufacturing and use of the chemicals prior to the phase-out, continued use of many imported consumer articles to which these compounds have been added, and subsequent disposal of consumer articles leading to potential emissions during recycling operations or landfill contamination at end of life. Most large landfills in both the U.S. and Canada are required to collect and treat leachate to prevent ground and surface water contamination but this was not always the case historically, nor is it the case for some small landfills still operating (e.g. only newer landfills constructed after a certain date are required to have leachate collection systems in some Canadian Provinces and Territories).25 Furthermore, even for those jurisdictions that do require leachate collection to protect the environment, there is inconclusive information on whether PBDEs are actually removed during leachate treatment, and some studies have shown
23 Westervelt, A. Quest to eliminate chemical flame retardants from Californian homes is far from over, experts say. The Guardian, May 15, 2015. http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/may/15/flame-retardants-insulation-furniture- building-code-foam 24 U.S. EPA. An Exposure Assessment of Polybromated Diphenyl Ethers. EPA/600/R-08/086F May 2010 25 Giroux Environmental Consulting, 2015. Regulatory Profile of Landfill Leachate Control Measures in Canada, Final Report to Environment Canada. Unpublished.
11 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report that they pass through wastewater treatment facilities and are found in the sewage sludge which is most often spread on agricultural fields in many Provinces and States. Further information on this is presented in Chapter 3.
Another possible route is the breakdown of decaBDE in the environment to more toxic and bioaccumulative PBDE congeners. One of the key potential risks for wildlife from PBDEs in the Canadian environment are the secondary poisoning from the consumption of prey containing elevated concentrations of PBDEs and effects on benthic organisms that may result from elevated concentrations of certain PBDEs in sediments.26 All seven PBDE groups assessed are highly persistent and tetra-, penta- and hexaBDE congeners in particular are highly bioaccumulative (the other congeners are bioaccumulative to a lesser degree). PBDEs are not considered to contribute to climate change (e.g. they are not a greenhouse gas) nor do they affect stratospheric ozone depletion or ground-level ozone formation. Rather PBDEs entering the environment (via air, wastewater, or sludge or other sources of contamination) will eventually bind to the organic fraction of particulate matter in sediment and soil. PBDEs in sediment and soil can then contaminate freshwater sources, both surface and groundwater as they are transported through run off or percolation.
PBDEs can enter the environment through the following pathways:27
To surface water: 1) When products and materials containing these substances are sent for final disposal to landfill and the landfill produces leachate which is then discharged to surface water (either onsite following treatment or via municipal wastewater treatment plant); 2) Through industrial wastewater discharges to surface water or to municipal wastewater treatment plant; To sediments: through land application of municipal sewage sludge left over from treated wastewater; To air: When the product undergoes processing such as shredding for recycling; and To air: Day-to-day use of products containing PBDE flame retardants has potential to release PBDEs to the environment via emission to air due to the vaporization of PBDEs from products as they age (e.g. foam particles from furniture, plastic housings of electronic equipment, plastics in vehicle interiors).
Releases from landfills are a function of the concentration of PBDEs remaining in the products at their end-of-life, landfilling practices, use of leachate collection systems to prevent groundwater contamination, and, for those facilities that send leachate for treatment at municipal wastewater
26 Environment Canada 2010. Risk Management Strategy for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) 2010. 27 Environment Canada 2010. Risk Management Strategy for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) 2010.
12 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report treatment facilities, the level of wastewater treatment utilized.28 Note that Environment Canada monitoring activities have found very low concentrations of PBDEs in leachate, and analytical data supports that treatment of leachate decreases the concentration of total PBDEs. Typically, landfill leachate is collected at landfills and then sent to municipal wastewater treatment plants for processing (e.g. in Ontario this is done by most landfills), although in some instances there are on- site treatment systems for leachate which can then be discharged to surface water, depending on individual permit approvals. In all cases the respective facility would have a permit outlining how the leachate is handled once it is collected. Environment Canada monitoring studies have found removal rates of total PBDEs during municipal wastewater treatment as high, with a median value of 93%+. Municipal wastewater treatment facilities that had secondary biological treatment and facultative lagoons had the highest removal rates (87–98%).29
2.4.2 Monitoring
Environment Canada monitoring results to date show that the spatial distribution of PBDEs in air, sediment, fish and wildlife across Canada relates largely to levels of urbanization. Higher concentrations were observed in all media near cities, and, as noted in a review of PBDEs as potential Chemicals of Mutual Concern (CMC) under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, this indicates that “urban and industrial centres are the primary source of PBDEs in the environment.”30 The Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence River had the highest levels of PBDEs in all media measured across Canada in 200831, however it is unknown as to whether this is a result of urbanization (e.g. location of historical manufacturing or processing of PBDE substances, type of current landfill practices in these areas, or current sediment runoff issues from sludge application practices in agricultural areas).
The Great Lakes Fish Monitoring and Surveillance Program tracks the health of the Great Lakes through the testing of top predator fish. PBDE concentrations in these fish increased from 1980 to 2003, however a decrease was observed in trout from 2000 to 2004.32 Results from air and precipitation samples collected every 12 days at five sites near the North American Great Lakes
28 Environment Canada 2010. Risk Management Strategy for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) 2010. 29 Environment Canada 2012. Environmental Monitoring and Surveillance in Support of the Chemicals Management Plan - Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers In The Canadian Environment. 30 Chemicals of Mutual Concern Identification Task Team, Draft Binational Summary Report: Brominated Flame Retardants (PBDEs and HBCD), May 2015, pp.22-23. Available at: http://binational.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/EN-BFRs- BinationalSummaryReport.pdf. 31 Environment Canada 2012. Environmental Monitoring and Surveillance in Support of the Chemicals Management Plan - Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers In The Canadian Environment. 32 Bernard S. Crimmins, James J. Pagano, Xiaoyan Xia, Philip K. Hopke, Michael S. Milligan and Thomas M. Holse. 2012. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs): Turning the Corner in Great Lakes Trout 1980−2009
13 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report from 2005 to 2011 show that the decline in the environment of PBDEs correlated with the phase out of penta- and octa-PBDE.
PBDE monitoring in the Great Lakes is ongoing through the Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network (IADN). The Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network (IADN) has been in operation since 1990 under the guidance of an implementation plan signed that year. The first implementation plan committed the United States and Canada to work cooperatively towards the initiation of the IADN. Currently, the program is comprised of Environment Canada and the U.S. EPA. IADN is delivered federally through the Great Lakes program, and activities delivered at the provincial level are described in the Canada-Ontario Agreement (COA). The mandate for IADN also resides in the U.S. Clean Air Act. The U.S./Canada Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy (GLBTS), signed in 1997, called for monitoring of the atmospheric deposition of toxic chemicals to the Great Lakes basin. Many of the challenges in the GLBTS are directly related to IADN capabilities and goals.
As part of a review of PBDEs under Annex 3 of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, the CMC Identification Task Team recommended: 1) continuing to monitor air, sediment, and top-predator fish species for the purpose of understanding long-term trends, protecting human health through provision of fish consumption advisories, and evaluating atmospheric transport and loadings to the Great Lakes; and 2) further research on the effects of debromination of PBDEs, in particular for the long-term.33 This draft report, issued in May 2015, notes that “more data on temporal trends of BDE and HBCD concentrations in a variety of matrices and locations are needed before the current status of these compounds can be fully assessed, and the impact of regulation and changing usage patterns among different flame retardants determined.”34
2.5 Human Health and Environmental Impacts
PBDEs are lipophilic and hydrophobic compounds and readily bioaccumulate into terrestrial and aquatic food webs. This tendency has resulted in extensive accumulation of PBDEs in a wide variety of birds, fish, insects, and aquatic and terrestrial mammals.35 The atmosphere is the primary transport medium, and soils and sediments are environmental sinks. Transport can occur over relatively long distances, greater than 1,000 km. Evidence for this comes from the presence
33 Chemicals of Mutual Concern Identification Task Team, Draft Binational Summary Report: Brominated Flame Retardants (PBDEs and HBCD), May 2015. Available at: http://binational.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/EN-BFRs- BinationalSummaryReport.pdf. 34 Chemicals of Mutual Concern Identification Task Team, Draft Binational Summary Report: Brominated Flame Retardants (PBDEs and HBCD), May 2015, p.22. Available at: http://binational.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/EN-BFRs- BinationalSummaryReport.pdf 35 U.S. EPA 2010. An Exposure Assessment of Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (Final Report). EPA/600/R-08/086F.
14 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report of PBDEs in polar environments, and in the tissues of deep ocean-dwelling whales and other marine mammals that spend a significant portion of their lives far from anthropogenic sources.36
Routine Canadian and US federal monitoring of PBDEs in whole top predator fish from the Great Lakes (e.g. EC, 2011 and US EPA Great Lakes Fish Monitoring Program reports) revealed that concentrations in top predator fish (e.g. lake trout and walleye), sediment and herring gull eggs exceed relevant guidelines. These studies note that while temporal trends in some fish species have shown recent declines, beginning in mid-2000, concentrations of some homologues in sediment and herring gull eggs have shown a stable or slightly increasing long-term trend. Additionally, fish consumption advisories exist across the Great Lakes due to PBDE concentrations. Therefore PBDEs have been identified as posing an ongoing threat to the environment and human health in the Great Lakes basin as part of the Canada-United States Collaboration for Great Lakes Water Quality – Annex 3 Chemicals of Mutual Concern scientific review.37 The Binational Summary Report released in 2015 recommends continued monitoring of air, sediment and top-predator fish species in the Great Lakes for PBDEs for this reason.
Since PBDEs are persistent and bio-accumulative, humans are exposed to them throughout their lives, from fetal stages through adulthood. Human exposure to PBDEs occurs mostly through two pathways: ingestion and inhalation.38 Ingestion occurs primarily due to PBDE presence in meat, fish and dairy products, likely as a result of bioaccumulation.39 Breast milk is an additional significant ingestion pathway for infants. Inhalation of PBDEs occurs both at home through dust and in the workplace. Volatilization occurs from materials in various consumer products.40 Volatilization moves chemicals into the gas phase and facilitates the sorption of these chemicals to particles in the air. Workers who handle electronic equipment (for example at recycling facilities) are reported in various studies to have higher than average tissue-level PBDE concentrations. Health Canada’s State of the Science Report for a Screening Health Assessment of PBDEs, published in 2006, also identified food and dust as the two main sources of PBDE intake in humans.
36 Chemicals of Mutual Concern Identification Task Team Draft Report 2015 - Binational Summary Report: Brominated Flame Retardants (PBDEs and HBCD) available at http://binational.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/EN-BFRs- BinationalSummaryReport.pdf 37 Chemicals of Mutual Concern Identification Task Team Draft Report 2015 - Binational Summary Report: Brominated Flame Retardants (PBDEs and HBCD) available at http://binational.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/EN-BFRs- BinationalSummaryReport.pdf 38 Domingo, J. L. (2012). Polybrominated diphenyl ethers in food and human dietary exposure: A review of the recent scientific literature. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 50(2), 238-249. And Huwe, J. K., Hakk, H., Smith, D. J., Diliberto, J. J., Richardson, V., Stapleton, H. M., & Birnbaum, L. S. (2008). Environmental Science & Technology, 42(7), 2694-2700. 39 Law, R. J., Covaci, A., Harrad, S., Herzke, D., Abdallah, M. A. E., Fernie, K., Toms, L. L., & Takigami, H. (2014). Levels and trends of PBDEs and HBCDs in the global environment: Status at the end of 2012. Environment International, 65, 147-158. 40 Linares, V., Bellés, M., & Domingo, J. (2015). Human exposure to PBDE and critical evaluation of health hazards. Archives of Toxicology, 89(3), 335-356.
15 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Health effects have been observed in laboratory animals, but only at levels much greater than those to which people are exposed.41 Much of the available scientific data on human health effects is inconclusive. However, epidemiological evidence has found associations between PBDE exposure and altered concentrations of thyroid hormones,42 decreased fertility in adults,43 and lowered IQ in children.44, 45
Despite the lack of evidence of causal effects, there is cause for concern based on animal studies that consistently show thyroid disruption and adverse neurodevelopmental and reproductive effects following in utero exposures of PBDEs.46 In addition, PBDEs show structural and mechanistic similarities with PCBs, for which extensive human data demonstrate effects on neurodevelopment and other end points.
2.6 Knowledge Gaps
There is a number of knowledge gaps associated with the alternatives to PBDEs. Some of these gaps are related to PBDEs substitutes themselves (other chemicals that can be used as flame retardants) while others are linked to new approaches that would reduce the need for PBDEs, such as product redesign. There is also a lack of understanding of the effectiveness and the actual need for product fire safety requirements.
Since the initial phase-out of penta- and octa-BDE, there has been a shift by the fire retardant industry towards alternative chemicals. Some of these alternative chemicals have already begun appearing in the environment but their impacts are unknown since there are no toxicity profiles or inventories of PBDE replacement chemicals. Such information is difficult to ascertain due to the large number of substances that are used in a wide range of products.47 Given the very large number of possible alternatives, rigorous risk assessment of most PBDE substitutes has not been
41 Health Canada (2006). State of the Science Report for a Screening Health Assessment – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs). http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/alt_formats/hecs-sesc/pdf/pubs/contaminants/pbde/pbde-eng.pdf 42 Turyk M.E., Persky V.W., Imm P., Knobeloch L., Chatterton R.J., & Anderson H.A. 2008. Hormone Disruption by PBDEs in Adult Male Sport Fish Consumers. Environmental Health Perspectives, 116:1635-1641. 43 Meeker J.D., Johnson P.I., Camann D., & Hauser R. 2009. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ether (PBDE) Concentrations in House Dust are Related to Hormone Levels in Men. The Science of the Total Environment, 407(10):3425–3429. 44 Eskenazi B., Chevrier J., Rauch S.A., Kogut K., Harley K.G., Johnson C., Trujillo, C., Sjodin, A., Bradman, A. 2013. In Utero and Childhood Polybrominated Diphenyl Ether (PBDE) Exposures and Neurodevelopment in the CHAMACOS Study. Environmental Health Perspectives, 121(2):257-262. 45 Herbstman J.B., Sjödin A., Kurzon M., Lederman S.A., Jones R.S., Rauh V., Neeham, L.L., Tang, D., Niedzwiecki, M., Yang, R.Y., Perera, F. 2010. Prenatal Exposure to PBDEs and Neurodevelopment. Environmental Health Perspectives, 118(5):712–719. 46 Birnbaum, L. S.; Staskal, D. F. Brominated flame retardants: cause for concern. Environ. Health Perspect. 2004, 112, 9–17. McDonald, T. A. A perspective on the potential health risks of PBDEs. Chemosphere 2002, 46, 745–755. 47 Abbasi, G., Diamond, M., Soehl, A., & Murray, M. (2014). Great Lakes PBDE reduction project summary paper No. 1: PBDE product inventory. http://glc.org/files/projects/pbde/PBDE-Inventory-SummaryPaper-20140415.pdf
16 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report completed yet. In 2009, the Norwegian Pollution Control Authority concluded that there is still insufficient data to ascertain whether alternative chemicals to PBDEs pose little or no risk.48 It is worth noting, however, that the US EPA’s Design for the Environment (DfE) program conducts alternatives assessments and is therefore contributing to filling this gap. For example, two final reports on alternatives assessments for flame retardants have been released in September 2015. One of these reports addresses flame retardant chemicals that are used to meet fire safety requirements for upholstered consumer products containing flexible polyurethane foam (PFUF)49 and the other is focused on flame retardant chemicals used to meet fire safety standards in printed circuit boards for electronic products such as cell phones and computers.50
In addition to replacing PBDEs with other chemicals, it is possible to use alternative materials or to change the design and construction of products so they are less flammable. While these alternative approaches are increasingly called for by stakeholders and experts, they require additional work and different types of expertise that may not be readily available within the fire retardant industry. Product redesign is therefore a new area of expertise deserving more attention.
Finally, the actual benefits of fire safety requirements are increasingly being questioned. Some critics of existing fire safety requirements argue that because the circumstances surrounding fire safety regulations have changed over years, some of the existing requirements have no real effects on fire prevention. For example, it was legal in the United States in the 1960s to leave insulation completely unprotected in the home. To address this situation, California introduced changes to its code requirements forcing builders to place insulation behind a thermal barrier where it would be protected from fire.51 These requirements remain in place today, which raises questions about the need for using flame retardants in insulation foams. A better knowledge of the actual benefits of existing fire safety requirements is required in order to assess in which products and under what circumstances flame retardants are really needed.
48 Norwegian Pollution Control Authority (SFT) (2009). Guidance on alternative flame retardants to the use of commercial pentabromodiphenylether (c-PentaBDE). 49 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2015. Flame Retardants Used in Flexible Polyurethane Foam: An Alternatives Assessment Update, August 2015. EPA 744-R-15-002. Available at: http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015- 08/documents/ffr_final.pdf 50 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2015. Flame Retardants in Printed Circuit Boards, August 2015, EPA 744-R-15-001. Available at: http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-08/documents/pcb_final_report.pdf 51 Westervelt, A. Quest to eliminate chemical flame retardants from Californian homes is far from over, experts say. The Guardian, May 15, 2015. http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/may/15/flame-retardants-insulation-furniture- building-code-foam
17 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
3.0 LIFE CYCLE OF PRODUCTS CONTAINING PBDEs: DIVERSION POTENTIAL AND RELEASES
3.1 Introduction and Description of Product Categories Containing PBDEs
As shown in Figure 1, all products have a life cycle from materials extraction to end-of-life disposal or recycling.
Figure 1 Life Cycle Flow Diagram
Extraction Processing Manufacturing Use Disposal e
Recycling
Materials recovered through recycling which have a market value are commonly used as feedstock for new products. Materials can also be recovered as a by-product or residual from a recycling process which targets higher value materials with more established markets. The residual material, while technically recyclable may end up as an unmarketable fraction which would be sent for disposal.
The life expectancy of products varies considerably. Some products such as construction materials have long lives of up to 50 years whereas others such as small household appliances and fabrics can only last 5 years or less. Reuse opportunities also vary considerably by product category with some products such as household furniture having a potentially long second life before becoming an item for disposal. These life expectancies have a bearing on the timing of when the products are disposed of and when such legacy products which contain PBDEs are at risk of releasing PBDEs into the environment at the end-of-life. The life expectancies quoted in Table 2 in the following section are based on average estimates derived from the literature.
18 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
3.2 Typical Life Cycle Management of Products Containing PBDEs and Potential for Diversion
The following table identifies the major product categories and sub-categories where PBDEs have been identified as an actual or potential concern in the literature reviewed for this study. The table identifies estimated life expectancies, typical end-of-life management practices and discusses the potential barriers and opportunities for the diversion of the products from disposal into recycling and material recovery systems. The analysis is a broad overview and under the heading of “typical end-of-life management”, common practices implemented across North America for the largest proportion of the products is identified. It is recognized that depending on the jurisdiction and regional materials markets there may be operational diversion programs for some of the product categories.
19 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report Table 2: Life Cycles of Products Containing PBDEs
Product Average life Typical end-of-life Diversion potential Diversion barriers Diversion opportunities expectancy management Furniture and Textiles Furniture 8 years Furniture can be reused as is, There is a high potential for diversion Economics favor disposal While recycling of foam scrap does take place in Foams and (Life may be extended by or re-upholstered and from disposal as there are existing over recycling. Fluctuation in Canada and the U.S., there is potential for Upholstery reuse and re-upholstery.) reused. While furniture and markets for scrap foam, metal, and prices for recyclable improvement in the types and quantity of upholstery can be reused wood. materials can affect material recycled from furniture. EPR programs and recycled, typical end-of- incentive to recycle. can increase the amount of material diverted life management involves Furniture foams can be shredded and from disposal and provide the opportunity to set disposal. recycled into carpet padding, stuffing standards for the management of PBDE- for pillows, pet bedding, insulation, containing materials recovered. plush toys, sound insulation, gymnastics mats, or school bus seats. In Canada, furniture is on the CCME Canada- Scrap foams can also be ground into Wide Action Plan for Extended Producer ultrafine powders (regrinding) that Responsibility ( EPR) Phase 2 priority list (for can be used in the manufacture of programs to be developed by 2017), but no new foams, however, use of this furniture EPR programs currently exist.52 technology has been limited. Metal and wood components can be An EPR program for furniture currently operates recycled into a variety of products. in France. Carpet padding Residential 8 – 10 years53 While carpet backing can be There is a high potential for diversion The relatively low cost of While carpet recycling does take place in Canada recycled, in Canada and the of this material from disposal. disposal prevents moves to and the U.S. on a voluntary basis, EPR presents Quality commercial carpet – U.S., the majority of this recycling and higher end an opportunity to increase diversion of this up to 20 years material is typically sent for Carpet backing can be recycled into uses for this material. material and set standards for the management disposal. In the U.S., less carpet padding, and this carpet of PBDE-containing materials recovered. than ten percent of carpet padding can again be recycled. and padding is reused or In the U.S., carpet EPR exists in California, and recycled.54 has increased carpet recycling rates.
In Canada, carpet is on the Phase 2 priority list as part of the CCME Canada-Wide Action Plan for EPR (for programs to be developed by 2017), but no carpet EPR programs currently exist. 55 In 2010, the Canadian Carpet Recovery Effort was established by industry to develop voluntary carpet recycling programs, now defunct.
52 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 2014, Progress Report on the Canada-Wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility, PN 1524, available at http://www.ccme.ca/files/Resources/waste/extended/CAP-EPR%20Progress%20Report.pdf. 53 International Association of Certified Home Inspectors, InterNACHI, http://www.nachi.org/life-expectancy.htm 54 CARE 2011 Annual Report, Figure 2. Available at www.carpetrecovery.org/pdf/annual_report/11_CARE-annual-rpt.pdf. 55 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 2014, Progress Report on the Canada-Wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility, PN 1524. http://www.ccme.ca/files/Resources/waste/extended/CAP-EPR%20Progress%20Report.pdf.
20 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Average life Typical end-of-life Diversion potential Diversion barriers Diversion opportunities expectancy management Drapes, Lined 5 years In the absence of reliable There is potential for diversion as Economics favor disposal EPR presents an opportunity to increase curtains, fabric Unlined 4 years data, it is expected that these can be recycled into padding over recycling. diversion of this material and set standards for blinds, roller Sheers 3 years56 majority of such products for chairs, car seats, cleaning cloths, the management of PBDE-containing materials blinds are disposed of with regular and industrial blankets. recovered. municipal waste at end-of- life although they can be In the U.S., there are currently no EPR programs recycled. for these materials.
In Canada, textiles are on the Phase 2 priority list as part of the CCME Canada-Wide Action Plan for EPR (programs to be developed by 2017), but this is a voluntary commitment. 57 Textile coatings 10 years for automobile In the absence of reliable There is potential for diversion as Economics favor disposal EPR presents an opportunity to increase (automobile fabric (vehicle life) data, it is expected that these products can be recycled into over recycling. diversion of this material and set standards for fabric, majority of tarps and tents clothing, and possibly other products. the management of PBDE-containing materials tarpaulins, and 2 years for tarpaulins are disposed of with regular recovered. tents) municipal waste at end-of- 5-7 years for nylon tents life. In the U.S., there are currently no EPR programs for these materials. 10 - 20 years for canvas tents Automobiles are typically dismantled (removal of body In Canada, textiles are on the Phase 2 priority list panels, engine parts, and as part of the CCME Canada-Wide Action Plan tires), and fluids removed. for EPR (for programs to be developed by 2017), Subsequently, shredding but this is a voluntary commitment. 59 occurs which generates Auto Shredder Residue (ASR). ASR consists of non-metallic materials such as plastics, glass, rubber, foam, carpeting, and textiles. This is approximately 15-25 % of the mass of the vehicle, and is typically sent to landfills for disposal.58
56 Dry Cleaning and Laundry Institute (US) 57 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 2014, Progress Report on the Canada-Wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility, PN 1524. Available at http://www.ccme.ca/files/Resources/waste/extended/CAP-EPR%20Progress%20Report.pdf. 58 United Nations Environment Programme, 2012, Guidance on best available techniques and best environmental practices for the recycling and disposal of articles containing polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants; Staudinger, Jeff, and Gregory A. Keoleian, 2001, Management of End-of-Life Vehicles (ELVs) in the US, Report No. CSS01-01; Canadian Environmental Law Association, April 2011, Improving the Management of End-of-life Vehicles in Canada, Available at: http://www.cela.ca/sites/cela.ca/files/784.ELV%20April%202011.pdf. 59 CCME, 2014, Progress Report on the Canada-Wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility, PN 1524.
21 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Average life Typical end-of-life Diversion potential Diversion barriers Diversion opportunities expectancy management Clothing Varies Clothing can be reused, There is high potential for diversion While there are many outlets EPR presents an opportunity to increase (Life can also be extended by recycled, or disposed. In the as these products can be recycled for collection of clothing for diversion of this material and set standards for reuse.) U.S., only 15 percent of used into a variety of products. reuse/recycling, especially in the management of PBDE-containing materials clothing is recycled or urban areas, it is still less recovered. For children – every 6 reused, with the remainder These materials may be recycled into convenient than disposal. months to a year sent for landfill disposal.61 a variety of products including Economics also favor In the U.S., there are currently no EPR programs industrial wiping rags, home disposal over recycling. for these materials. For adults up to 10 – 20 insulation, carpet padding, padding years for chairs, car seats, and industrial In Canada, textiles are on the Phase 2 priority list blankets. as part of the CCME Canada-Wide Action Plan (Note that stores also for EPR (to be developed by 2017), but this is a generate, for end-of-life voluntary commitment. 62 management, new clothes which they were unable to sell, and ultimately landfill, recycle, or sell to outlets/discount stores.60) Child car seats 6-8 years While programs exist for the There is potential for diversion as Economics favor disposal EPR presents an opportunity to increase (limits are established for recycling of car seats, some these products contain components over recycling. diversion of this material and set standards for safety reasons which include of which require prior which have secondary markets. the management of PBDE-containing materials potential for degradation of disassembly into component recovered. the plastic shell or other parts (plastic, metal, fabric, Foam from child car seats can be parts, loss/breakage of parts, and foam), these products shredded and recycled into carpet and that older seats are typically sent for padding, stuffing for pillows, pet sometimes do not meet disposal. bedding, insulation, plush toys, sound current government safety insulation gymnastics mats, or school standards.) bus seats. Scrap foams can also be ground into ultrafine powders (regrinding) that can be used in the manufacture of new foams, however, use of this technology has been limited. Mattresses and 10 years; industry Up to 90 percent of mattress There is a high potential for diversion Economics favor disposal EPR presents an opportunity to increase pillows recommended replacement components—steel, cotton, from disposal with existing markets over recycling. diversion of this material and set standards for after 5-7 years63 and foam—are recyclable. for scrap foam, metal, and wood. the management of PBDE-containing materials However, only a small recovered. Mattress recyclers exist in BC, ON, percentage of mattresses are Scrap foams can be shredded and AB, and QC.
60 Chalupa, Andrea, 2010. What happens to all of those clothes retailers can’t sell? Daily Finance, April 2, 2010. Available at: http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/04/02/what- happens-to-all-of-those-clothes-retailers-cant-sell/ 61 Council for Textile Recycling 62 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 2014, Progress Report on the Canada-Wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility, PN 1524. Available at http://www.ccme.ca/files/Resources/waste/extended/CAP-EPR%20Progress%20Report.pdf. 63 Better Sleep Council; Consumer Reports; www.mattressjournal.com
22 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Average life Typical end-of-life Diversion potential Diversion barriers Diversion opportunities expectancy management recycled annually. Some recycled into carpet padding, stuffing limited reuse and recycling for pillows, pet bedding, insulation, In the U.S., the states of Connecticut, California, of mattresses and pillows plush toys, sound insulation, and Rhode Island have passed EPR mattress does occur, but these gymnastics mats, or school bus seats. laws. Connecticut began implementation of their products are typically sent Scrap foams can also be ground into law in 2015 and CA and RI are expected to begin for disposal. ultrafine powders (regrinding) that their programs in 2016. can be used in the manufacture of new foams, however, use of this There are examples of local mattress recycling technology has been limited. Metal programs operating in both Canada and the US – and wood components can be e.g. Vancouver, Calgary, Duluth recycled into a variety of products. Transportation Products Vehicle seats 10 years (vehicle life) Vehicle seats can be There is a potential for diversion from Economics favor disposal EPR presents an opportunity to increase (Life can be extended by removed and resold64 or disposal, with existing markets for over recycling. diversion of this material and set standards for vehicle reuse.) recycled, but, in the absence scrap foam. the management of PBDE-containing materials of reliable data, it is recovered. expected that they are Foam from vehicle seats can be typically sent for disposal. shredded and recycled into carpet In Canada, recent initiatives (in Ontario, Quebec, padding, stuffing for pillows, pet and British Columbia) have sought better After the vehicle is bedding, insulation, plush toys, sound management of end-of-life vehicles.66 dismantled, shredding insulation gymnastics mats, or school occurs, which generates bus seats. Scrap foams can also be The European Union developed Directive Auto Shredder Residue ground into ultrafine powders 2000/53/EC – the “ELV Directive” for end-of-life (ASR). ASR consists of non- (regrinding) that can be used in the (ELV) vehicles which sets targets for reuse, metallic materials such as manufacture of new foams, however, recycling and recovery of the ELVs and their plastics, glass, rubber, foam, use of this technology has been components. It also pushes producers to carpeting, and textiles. This limited. manufacture new vehicles without hazardous is approximately 15-25% of substances. the mass of the vehicle, and is typically sent to landfills for disposal.65
64 Automotive Recyclers Association (ARA), Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, and Auto Alliance, 2011. Automotive Recycling Industry: Environmentally Friendly, Market Driven, and Sustainable. Available at: http://www.a-r-a.org/files/pdfs/ARA_Recycling_Brochure.pdf. 65 United Nations Environment Programme, 2012, Guidance on best available techniques and best environmental practices for the recycling and disposal of articles containing polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants; Staudinger, Jeff, and Gregory A. Keoleian, 2001, Management of End-of-Life Vehicles (ELVs) in the US, Report No. CSS01-01; Canadian Environmental Law Association, April 2011, Improving the Management of End-of-life Vehicles in Canada, Available at: http://www.cela.ca/sites/cela.ca/files/784.ELV%20April%202011.pdf. 66 Government of Ontario, 2014, Environmental Registry: Environmental Standards for End-of-Life Vehicle Processing Facilities, 2014. Available at: http://www.ebr.gov.on.ca/ERS- WEB-External/displaynoticecontent.do?noticeId=MTIxMjA5&statusId=MTgxNDU4; Canadian Environmental Law Association, 2011, Improving the Management of End-of-Life Vehicles in Canada, 2011. Available at: http://www.cela.ca/sites/cela.ca/files/784.ELV%20April%202011.pdf; Fletcher, Steve (Automotive Recyclers of Canada). 2014. Auto Recycling in Canada. Presentation made to Recycling Council of British Columbia (RCBC) Convention, May 30, 2014. Available at:
23 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Average life Typical end-of-life Diversion potential Diversion barriers Diversion opportunities expectancy management Plastic / 10 years for vehicle After the vehicle is There is potential for diversion of Economics favor disposal EPR presents an opportunity to increase polymer resins dashboards (vehicle life) dismantled, shredding these materials from disposal. over recycling. Market diversion of this material and set standards for / mouldings – occurs, which generates conditions need to be the management of PBDE-containing materials e.g. airplane 30 years for airplane parts Auto Shredder Residue An estimated 12,000 aircraft are improved to allow profitable recovered. In Canada, recent initiatives (in overhead bins, (aircraft life). Note that (ASR). ASR consists of non- expected to be retired in the next 20 recycling of automotive Ontario, Quebec, and BC) have sought better ceiling panels, aircraft life is highly variable metallic materials such as years which offers a large opportunity plastics.69. Price of polymers management of end-of-life vehicles. vehicle often depending on plastics, glass, rubber, foam, for reuse and recycling.68 is likely to increase with dashboards decompression cycles/flights carpeting, and textiles. This decreasing oil resources and The European Union Directive 2000/53/EC for (start and landing). is approximately 15-25 Aircraft parts, including overhead rising energy costs so end-of-life vehicles (ELV) sets targets for reuse, percent of the mass of the bins, can be reused in new planes or recycling may be more recycling and recovery of the ELVs and their vehicle, and is typically sent recycled to produce building cladding, economically attractive in components through an EPR approach. It also to landfills for disposal.67 boats, furniture and houses. future. pushes producers to manufacture new vehicles without hazardous substances. Appliances Large Clothes dryer 13 yrs70 Appliances are commonly There is a high potential for diversion Changes and reduction in Despite the general success of the market to appliances – shredded to facilitate from disposal and generally the end metals commodity prices drive large appliance collection and recycling, foams and Clothes 16 yrs71 recovery of metals. Markets of life disposal of large appliances is affect collection and the EPR presents a significant opportunity to ensure plastics (e.g. Washer for secondary metals drive successfully managed by the private incentive for collection and the diversion of a wide range of large appliances clothes dryers, the collection and recycling marketplace recycling and to establish performance measures. For refrigerators) Refrigerator 9–13 yrs72 of large appliances. Residual example the BC EPR regulation for large non-metals are commonly High rates of recovery and high The low or non-existent appliances is operated by producers (MARR) and Dish washer 9 yrs73 sent for disposal. diversion potential driven largely by value of the non-metals includes a recovery target of 75%78. In the U.S., high metal content and generally fraction – largely plastics (as New York City also has an EPR law for appliances Gas 10– 18 yrs74 Appliances can be managed readily accessible secondary metals much as 15% by weight 77) that contain refrigerant. oven/stove through municipal waste markets where PBDEs will likely be collection and sometimes by contained – means that EPR provides an opportunity to set standards for Electric 13–15 yrs75 return to retail. these materials are the management of PBDE containing materials
http://www.rcbc.ca/files/u7/con2014_fletcher.pdf; Ontario Automotive Recyclers Association (OARA), Undated. Effective and Efficient End-of-life-Vehicle Environmental Management in Ontario. Available at: http://oara.com/wp-content/files/OARA-ELVIS-White-Paper.pdf; Automotive Recyclers of Canada, 2011, A National Approach to the Environmental Management of End-of-life Vehicles in Canada: Submission to the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment by the Automotive Recyclers of Canada, July 2011. Available at: http://autorecyclers.ca/wp-content/files/National_ELV_EMS_approach.pdf. 67 Ibid. 68 Aircraft Fleet Recycling Association, see: http://www.afraassociation.org/ 69 United Nations Environment Programme, 2012, Guidance on best available techniques and best environmental practices for the recycling and disposal of articles containing polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. 70 International Association of Certified Home Inspectors (US) InterNACHI (http://www.nachi.org/life-expectancy 71 Energy Star Market and Industry Scoping Report, Residential Clothes Dryers, November 2011 72 InterNACHI life expectancy chart 73 InterNACHI life expectancy chart 74 InterNACHI life expectancy chart
24 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Average life Typical end-of-life Diversion potential Diversion barriers Diversion opportunities expectancy management oven/stove commonly sent for disposal. recovered as a by-product of the metals recycling. EPR regulations and producer funded Freezer 10–20 yrs76 programs for large appliances exist in BC and are being considered in QC. Small Microwave 9 yrs79 In the absence of reliable Small appliances have the potential Recycling of small appliances EPR regulations and programs can significantly appliances oven data it is expected that the to be recovered for recycling and does produce marketable escalate the quantity of such products which are majority of such products processing technologies do exist to metals but in lower diverted from disposal by mandating producer Electric frying 6–10 yrs80 are disposed of with regular separate and manage component quantities compared to large responsibility for program operations and by the pans municipal waste at their end materials such as ferrous and non- appliances. This is a establishment of a sustainable funding of life. ferrous metals, plastics and foams significant constraint on the mechanism. Blender 5 yrs 81 operation of recycling The ability to repair and the programs and means that The B.C. Electro-Recycle EPR program targets Coffee maker 4–10 yrs82 comparative cost of repair collection programs do not small appliances and is run by the Canadian contrasted with the cost of exist unless there is some Electrical Stewardship Association and operated Toaster ovens 4–10 yrs replacing with a new sustaining alternate source under the provisions of the B.C. Recycling product, means that the of funding such as a Regulation83 Electric iron 4–10 yrs recovery of such products for regulated EPR program. The recycling is limited. There are value of materials recovered Vacuum 4–10 yrs also fewer retail operations from small appliances is cleaner to provide repair and generally smaller than large servicing for common small appliances and insufficient to Electric fan 4–10 yrs appliances than in the past sustain a reliable market to offset the costs of collection, Electric 4–10 yrs transportation and recycling. heater Similarly to large appliances the recovered plastics, where PBDEs are likely to be contained, will generally have little or no market value and would be commonly sent for disposal.
75 InterNACHI life expectancy chart 77 Major Appliance Recycling Roundtable (MARR), British Columbia, 2013 Annual Report to the Director, June 30, 2014 78 British Columbia Recycling Regulation, Regulation 449/2004 as amended by Regulation 88/2014, May 23, 2014 76 InterNACHI life expectancy chart 79 InterNACHI life expectancy chart 80 Energy Star Market and Industry Scoping Report: Coffee Makers, November 2011 81 Energy Star Market and Industry Scoping Report: Toaster Ovens, November 2011 82 Energy Star Market and Industry Scoping Report: Vacuum Cleaners, November 2011 83 Canadian Electrical Stewardship Association, B.C Electro-recycling program; http://www.electrorecycle.ca/
25 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Average life Typical end-of-life Diversion potential Diversion barriers Diversion opportunities expectancy management Electronics Computer 4-6 yrs for a CRT In the U.S., approximately 40 Used electronics have high potential Barriers to collecting e-waste EPR presents an opportunity to increase monitors 5-7 yrs for LCD percent of electronics are to be recovered. Many states require include high costs of diversion of this material and set standards for Laptop and 3 yrs recovered for reuse or recycling of electronics and recyclers processing toxic the management of PBDE-containing materials computer recycling84. In Canada, 500, are making efforts to capture components, such as CRTs. recovered. housings 000 tonnes of end-of-life material in states with no The plastics portion of the TV housings Up to 10 yrs electronics have been requirements. Most components in recovered e-waste stream In the U.S., EPR electronics laws have been put Printer/fax 5 yrs diverted from landfills since electronics are recyclable and have has little value but can be in place in 23 states. Of the GL states, only OH 85 housings 2004. Typically e-waste is value. recycled. Barriers to does not have an electronics EPR law. More EPR Printed circuit 5-7 yrs shredded or manually recycling these plastics laws are likely to recover more e-waste that is boards dismantled for recycling. For reuse, cell phones have a larger include scale of economy, currently landfilled. Specific provisions within e- Phones and cell 5-7 yrs Strong markets exist for potential than most other electronics. the lack of identification and waste EPR laws could address e-waste plastics. phones metals and circuit boards. Cell phones are more likely to be sorting techniques and lack The total volume of recycled refurbished and could be recovered of information of used In Canada, all provinces have EPR programs for e-waste plastics is very low86. and resold/exported for reuse. Cell plastics and flame at least some electronics. Ontario has electronics Most e-waste plastics are phones with screens less than 4” in retardants. 87 EPR for audio-visual and telecom equipment, cell likely landfilled. diagonal, are not typically included in phones, computers, accessories, IT equipment, state EPR programs. and TVs. Plastic films for 40 yrs While the wires and cables Lack of available data makes this Lack of available data makes Lack of available data makes this difficult to insulation and that use plastic films for difficult to assess. this difficult to assess. assess. shielding insulation and shielding are recycled for metals recovery, in the absence of reliable data, it is expected that the films are typically sent for disposal. Construction materials Adhesives and Caulking 5–10 yrs Adhesives and sealants are Low to non-existent when applied to Technical difficulties in Little or none 88 sealants closely bonded and adhered building materials. recovering paints and Construction 20+ yrs to construction materials coatings from construction glue and are not readily source materials and an Inability to separated. They are source separate from Roofing 15+ yrs commonly disposed at construction, renovation and adhesives landfills of as part of regular demolition materials construction, renovation and Sealants89 5–20 yrs demolition (CRD)waste Small quantities relative to
84 Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: Facts and Figures 2013, US EPA, June 2015 85 Electronics Product Stewardship Canada, Available at: http://epsc.ca/ 86 http://www.researchgate.net/publication/270477459_A_Mini-Review_on_Disposal_of_WEEE_Plastics_Containing_PBDEs_with_a_Special_Focus_on_China 87 http://www.researchgate.net/publication/270477459_A_Mini-Review_on_Disposal_of_WEEE_Plastics_Containing_PBDEs_with_a_Special_Focus_on_China 88 InterNACHI, life expectancy chart 89 DowCorning, construction solutions; www.dowcorning.com
26 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Average life Typical end-of-life Diversion potential Diversion barriers Diversion opportunities expectancy management the whole CRD waste stream and anticipated high cost to source separate mitigates against recovery
Low or non -existent material value Foam Foam board 100 + yrs Foam insulation panels and Solid foam panels, such as those CRD recycling is sensitive to Environment Canada’s study of CRD wastes insulation and other foams such as those made with expanded or extruded local disposal costs and identified 9 facilities in Canada in 2014 that insulation sprayed in situ are polystyrene (EPS/XPS) and poly cheap landfill tipping fees for accepted and processed mixed CRD wastes for boards e.g. conventionally disposed to isocyanurate can be relatively easily CRD wastes strongly recycling. However in most cases it appears that structural landfill along with other CRD source separated during renovation mitigates against the source foam insulation was managed as a residual insulated wastes. and demolition and at CRD recycling separation of CRD materials, requiring disposal. 90 panels (SIPs) facilities and are recyclable including foam insulation. If CRD wastes are sent to There are commercial companies, such as CRD recycling facilities the Spray foams which are commonly CRD recycling facilities do Nationwide Foam Recycling in the US which foams and plastics are applied in situ and adhere to ceilings, exist in Canada, primarily in collect and recover foam, usually as part of large generally treated as residues walls, floor joists etc. are difficult if larger urban centres, but building renovations92 The company has which are then disposed of, not impossible to source separate their financial viability can be recovered foam from plants and buildings in conventionally in landfills. a challenge and those that each of the States bordering the Great Lakes. have survived long term are Rastra Inc. uses recovered EPS foam insulation often in areas where access to manufacture insulated concrete forms (ICF – to cheap landfill disposal plastic foam blocks used as forms for concrete especially in the US is walls and foundations)93 constrained by long distance (e.g. Alberta). Two major Little is known about recycling opportunities or CRD recycling facilities closed about the degree to which foam insulation is in the Greater Toronto area recovered either at source or at CRD facilities of Ontario in 201491 and what markets might exist for the materials.
On site source separation of CRD materials is challenged by site constraints (e.g. space for separate bins) and costs are also higher than for conventional management by co-mingling of materials in standard 40 cu yd roll off bins and transportation to a
90 InterNACHI life expectancy chart 91 Environment Canada, Characterization and Management of CRD Wastes in Canada, Guy Perry and Associates/Kelleher Environmental, March 2015 92 Nationwide Foam Recycling; www.nationwidefoam.com 93 Rastra Inc., Orlando FL; www.rastra.com
27 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Average life Typical end-of-life Diversion potential Diversion barriers Diversion opportunities expectancy management landfill site. Even if foam insulation is separated In CRD recycling facilities, markets may not exist and the materials would then be treated as residues which would go to disposal. Paints and Exterior 7– 10 yrs Paints and coatings are Low to non-existent when applied to Technical challenges and Little or no opportunity for recycling of paints coatings – for paints closely bonded and adhered construction materials Inability to source separate and coatings applied to construction materials steel, wood, to construction materials from construction, plaster and Interior 10–15 yrs and are not readily source Unused paints and coatings can be renovation and demolition EPR programs do exist for left over unused 94 concrete paints separated. They are recovered and recycled materials paints and coatings and operate with good therefore commonly recovery rates. The existing programs are Stains 3–8 yrs disposed of at landfills of as Small quantities of unused primarily focused on residentially generated part of regular construction, materials relative to the materials. EPR programs exist in all but one renovation and demolition whole CRD waste stream and Canadian province (CRD) waste anticipated high cost to source separate mitigates Unused paints and coatings against recovery. It is likely can be collected and that modest volumes of left reprocessed for reuse but it over paints and coatings are is expected that even treated as residual waste for moderate volumes of left disposal over paints would mostly be disposed of along with other CRD wastes Textile wall 5–10 yrs Textile and paper wall Low to non-existent when applied to Technical challenges and Little or none coverings (e.g. coverings are closely bonded building materials Inability to source separate wallpaper) and adhered to wallboard from construction, used in building and other construction renovation and demolition materials and are not readily materials source separated. They are therefore commonly Low or non -existent disposed of at landfills as material value part of regular construction, renovation and demolition (CRD) waste
Wires and 20–50 yrs depending on Larger capacity electrical The actual and potential diversion of Metal commodity prices There is a mature and well-established scrap cables – issues such as electrical load cables used by power larger capacity and diameter cables is could have a bearing on the metals industry in both Canada and the US coatings and and exposure to UV95 utilities or in large buildings high and driven by the value of the recovery and recycling of which will likely continue to sustain the insulation and industrial facilities are core metal. cables. collection and recycling of old cables. Copper is
94 InterNACHI, life expectancy chart 95 British Approvals Service for Cables (BASEC); www.basec.org.uk; A Simple Guide to BASEC
28 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Average life Typical end-of-life Diversion potential Diversion barriers Diversion opportunities expectancy management commonly recovered for one of the primary metals sold through recycling and the sheathing The recycling of cables is secondary materials markets. separated from the metals. driven by metals prices and not by the value of the The key issue is the extent to which coatings and The separated insulation and sheathing materials where insulation are captured and recycled or properly sheathing materials which PBDEs are likely to be found. disposed of are made up of materials like The low or non-existent PVC are commonly viewed as value of such materials unmarketable residuals and means that they are would be sent for disposal commonly managed through landfill disposal Electrical cables in residential homes would conventionally be collected as part of the CRD materials during renovation and demolition and would be sent for disposal Pipes and ABS 50 – 80 yrs Pipes and fittings are Low Economics favour disposal ABS plastics can be recycled - materials are fittings PVC 50 - 80 yrs96 conventionally disposed to over recycling - costs of commonly shredded and pelletized and then HDPE 100+ yrs97 landfill along with other CRD source separation, recycling blended with virgin resin. Recycling of ABS is wastes. and material value generally somewhat favoured by its relative value mitigate against recovery compared to other plastics98
Separation of individual Both HDPE and PVC piping can be recycled but plastic resins from mixed recycling facilities will commonly only accept plastics feedstock is clean source separated materials99 technically challenging
PVC is more difficult to recycle and even small quantities can contaminate batches of separated PETE and HDPE
96 InterNACHI, life expectancy chart 97 Plastic Pipe and Fittings Association: http://www.ppfahome.org/faq.aspx 98 Plastics Europe, Association of Plastics Manufacturers; http://www.plasticseurope.org/what-is-plastic/types-of-plastics-11148/engineering-plastics/abs.aspx 99 Blue Planet Recycling , Vancouver B.C.; http://blueplanetrecycling.ca/about/
29 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report 3.3 Actual or Potential PBDE Releases – Overview
Hazardous materials contained in waste products that are recycled or disposed of can be mobilized and released during these processes posing risks to the environment and human health.100 For example, along with mercury and lead, PBDEs are a particular concern during the recycling of waste electronic and electrical equipment. In addition recycling of products like foams can be a safety issue as explosive atmospheres can be created during shredding.
Epidemiological studies conducted for the Stockholm Convention Persistent Organics Pollutant Review Committee have confirmed that in some regions of the world exposures to PBDEs are at levels where serious health effects are being measured.101 The study concluded that the following groups are considered to be at high risk, if exposed to PBDEs as a consequence of being involved in recycling operations:102
Workers in low-technology WEEE operations Those living in areas of developing/transition countries where intensive low-technology WEEE operations are carried out Workers involved in manufacturing/recycling/installing foam materials Workers in smelters and other industries processing WEEE
The following sub-sections review potential PBDE releases identified in the literature during use, disposal in various end-of-life options: landfills, incineration, and finally recycling.
3.3.1 Disposal in Landfill and Leachate Management
Landfills are repositories of a wide variety of wastes including products such as waste electronics and electrical equipment which could contain PBDEs. Leachate is produced in all landfills to varying degrees and its generation is dependent on precipitation, snow melt and the moisture content of the waste itself and leachate quantities are dependent on the waste composition and the landfill age. Water percolates through the deposited waste and in traditional, un-engineered landfills the leachate will ultimately migrate below the site and beyond its bounds into surface waters and ground water. In a modern engineered landfill with a liner, leachate will be captured
100 UNEP, Guidance on best available techniques and environmental practices for the recycling and disposal of waste containing PBDEs listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants; Revised draft January 2015; UNEP/POPS/COP.7/INF/22 101 UNEP, Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee (POPRC); Technical Review of the Implications of Recycling Commercial PentaBDE and Commercial OctaBDE; 2010 UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/2 102 UNEP, Guidance on best available techniques and environmental practices for the recycling and disposal of waste containing PBDEs listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants; Revised draft January 2015; UNEP/POPS/COP.7/INF/22 page 18
30 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report to ensure that it does not migrate into the surface or ground waters. Landfill leachate typically contains metals, halogen anions, organic compounds, dissolved organic matter, endocrine disrupting chemicals and xenobiotic organic compounds.103
Although very little testing appears to have been conducted on landfill leachate to look for PBDEs, testing that has been conducted has concluded that PBDEs are present and, depending on how the leachate is managed, there is a risk of release to the environment. Most of the work in this area has been driven by concerns about PBDEs contained in waste electronics and electrical equipment. The US EPA, in its major exposure assessment of PBDEs reported that studies conducted on landfills in Japan and South Africa found PBDEs in relatively small quantities.104 In two reported cases laboratory tests showed that under simulated landfill conditions that PBDEs can be found in leachate.105 The concentration of PBDEs was highest in tests simulating longer exposure or residence time and higher temperatures and where the material source for the PBDEs was more finely shredded.
A Canadian study106 surveyed 27 landfills across southern Canada and 11 dump sites in the northern territories and found quantities of PBDEs in all cases. The quantities were higher in the southern more urban sites than in the north and the detected levels suggested that older electronics with higher levels of PBDEs had a higher impact on the detected quantities.107 In addition it appeared that the concentrations of PBDEs were higher in landfills serving larger populations. The study confirmed that there are measurable amounts of PBDEs in leachate from landfills and that landfill leachate could therefore provide one source of PBDEs in the environment at large. In conclusion the study analysis also noted that “leachates sampled from landfills across Canada on average show considerably higher PBDE concentrations in leachate than reported in the small number of previous landfill studies published in the open literature, which are from the US, Japan, Sweden and South Africa.”108
Leachate is commonly collected from engineered landfills in Ontario and Great Lakes States, and is typically sent to a waste water treatment plant (WWTP) either by truck or by sanitary sewer depending upon location. As shown in the following diagram, WWTP’s typically use screening and sedimentation, biological treatment and final filtration and sedimentation to remove and concentrate solids. These concentrated solids form sewage sludge and the remaining water is discharged to a surface water receiving body. Sewage sludge is mostly applied to agricultural land
103 Monica N. Danon-Schaffer, PBDEs in Landfills from Electronic Waste, University of British Columbia, PhD Thesis, February 2010 104 US EPA, National Center for Environmental Assessment, An Exposure Assessment of PBDEs, EPA/600/R-086F, May 2010 105 EPA An Exposure Assessment of PBDEs, May 2010 and Danon-Schaffer , PBDEs in Landfills from Electronic Waste, University of British Columbia, PhD Thesis, February 2010 106 Monica N. Danon-Schaffer, PBDEs in Landfills from Electronic Waste, University of British Columbia, PhD Thesis, February 2010 107 Monica N. Danon-Schaffer, PBDEs in Landfills from Electronic Waste, University of British Columbia, PhD Thesis, February 2010 108 Monica N. Danon-Schaffer, PBDEs in Landfills from Electronic Waste, University of British Columbia, PhD Thesis, February 2010
31 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report as a soil amendment in Ontario and in Great Lakes states and can therefore pose a risk of PBDE release through surface runoff. Sewage sludge can also be incinerated although it is unclear whether this is done in any of the Great Lakes states. It is not done in Ontario.
Figure 2 Typical Waste Water Treatment Processes109
A 2010 EPA exposure assessment report indicates that an estimated 93% of the total national sewage flow is processed in approximately 16,500 sewage treatment plants.110 Standard waste water treatment processes are not designed to capture POPs such as PBDEs and as a result PBDEs have been detected in both sewage sludge and in the discharged waste water effluent.111 In one of the few studies focusing on the issue, the presence of PBDEs in WWTP effluent was confirmed in a 2004 study in Palo Alto, CA where effluent and sewage sludge from a WWTP were collected and tested.112 PBDEs were found in both the sludge which was incinerated and in the effluent. The study concluded that the total quantity of PBDEs discharged in the effluent to the San Francisco estuary was 0.9 kg/year.
3.3.2 Incineration
There was very little information identified on the incineration of products containing PBDEs and the EPA reports that there has been no reported testing for PBDEs in emissions from MSW incinerators.113 Despite this it is suggested by the Source Control of Priority Substances in Europe (SOCOPSE) report that controlled incineration – incineration without the production of dioxins and furans – will destroy PBDEs without the production of further PBDEs or other hazardous
109 Karin D. North, 2010. Palo Alto, California, Tracking PBDE Releases in Waste Water Treatment Plant Effluent, Palo Alto CA 110 US EPA, National Center for Environmental Assessment, An Exposure Assessment of PBDEs, EPA/600/R-086F, May 2010 111 US EPA, National Center for Environmental Assessment, An Exposure Assessment of PBDEs, EPA/600/R-086F, May 2010 112 Karin D. North, City of Palo Alto, California, Tracking PBDE Releases in Waste Water Treatment Plant Effluent, Palo Alto, CA, USA, 2010 113 US EPA, National Center for Environmental Assessment, An Exposure Assessment of PBDEs, EPA/600/R-086F, May 2010
32 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report emissions.114 The UNEP Best Environmental Technology (BET) guidance document states that “waste incinerators operating according to Best Environmental Practices (BEP) can co-incinerate POP-PBDE-containing waste material without significant releases of POP-PBDEs or unintentionally formed brominated or chlorinated dioxins.115
Destruction of the PBDEs in a municipal solid waste (MSW) incinerator is dependent on the operating efficiency of the incinerator. The EPA suggests that MSW incinerators actually operate at 98% efficiency and thus suggest that 98% of any PBDE burned in such a facility would be destroyed. “The application of dry scrubbers combined with fabric filters on large MSW incinerators has generally reduced the concentrations of semi-volatile organics present in the combustion gases leaving the furnace by an additional 99% prior to emissions from the stack.”116 The 2% of PBDEs that would not be destroyed would be therefore further reduced by these emissions controls. It is unclear whether or not all currently operating incinerators in either the US or Canada would meet the stated efficiency standards or stack emissions controls.
It should be noted that the EPA Assessment cautions that incineration of MSW contaminated with PBDEs does also form polybrominated dibenzodioxins and dibenzofurans (PBDD and PBDF) in the combustion gases. The overall destruction efficiency of the PBDE contained in the MSW ranges from 90 – 99.9%, which does leave enough PBDE for the emission of PBDE from the stack and for the formation of PBDD and PBDF. The EPA work did not however estimate incinerator stack emissions of these substances and it is unclear how this analysis relates to the earlier EPA claim about 98% destruction efficiency. Similar concerns about PBDD and PBDF were highlighted the UNEP Best Available Techniques (BAT) and Best Environmental Practices (BEP) Guidance Document but it is suggested that using best available technology (sufficient residence time, temperature and turbulence) can cope with PBDEs and that resulting unintentionally formed chlorinated, brominated and brominated-chlorinated dioxins formed in the first combustion stage can be destroyed in the secondary combustion zone.117
Sewage sludge can also be incinerated either on site close to the point of generation or at MSW incinerators. The scope of the study did not permit an investigation of sewage sludge incineration and it is unclear whether it is undertaken in the Great Lakes Basin although sludge was incinerated
114 Source Control of Priority Substances in Europe 2009. Specific Targeted Research Project, Work Package 3 – D.3.1. An Inventory and Assessment of Options for Reducing Emissions: Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) SOCOPSE, 2009 page 36 115 UNEP, Guidance on best available techniques and environmental practices for the recycling and disposal of waste containing PBDEs listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants; Revised draft January 2015; UNEP/POPS/COP.7/INF/22 page 56 116 EPA An Exposure Assessment of PBDEs May 2010 page 2-31 117 UNEP, Guidance on best available techniques and environmental practices for the recycling and disposal of waste containing PBDEs listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants; Revised draft January 2015; UNEP/POPS/COP.7/INF/22 page 56.
33 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report some years ago in a facility in Duluth, Minnesota which is now closed. The EPA Assessment reports that no testing or inventories of PBDEs in stack emissions from sewage sludge incinerators could be found during their study. The Palo Alto study did not test the stack emissions from their sewage sludge incinerator on the assumption that 96% of any incoming PBDEs would be destroyed with resulting emissions being below the level of detection.
3.3.3 Recycling and Processing
There was very little information identified on the actual or potential release of PBDEs during recycling and waste processing. There is a widespread concern that these processes are a potential release pathway and work in the areas of electronics and plastics has focused particular attention on measures to ensure that any such releases are minimized. Concern has also been expressed about the potential for releases during fires at recycling facilities which are unfortunately not that uncommon.118
UNEP’s Technical Review of the Implications of Recycling Commercial PentaBDE and Commercial OctaBDE undertaken by the Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee (POPRC) of the Stockholm Convention raised a number of major questions about recycling and secondary materials processing associated with wastes that contain PBDEs. The report focussed on the challenges of identifying and treating existing waste stockpiles and legacy products which still contained PBDEs but which had not yet entered the waste stream and was undertaken to help fulfil the Stockholm Convention’s requirement for signatories to develop strategies for the identification and management of POPs containing wastes.
Despite the fact that the Stockholm Convention contains a specific exemption, under certain conditions, allowing for recycling of articles that contain penta-BDE and octa-BDE and the use and final disposal of articles manufactured from recycled material that contains these substances, the POPRC report states that “recycling articles containing POPs inevitably increases releases of POPs which can result in environmental and health risks.”119 The report states “the contamination of a wide range of product streams is now a practical and policy challenge that is likely to be exacerbated by recycling.”120 For example, the report notes that penta-BDE was mainly used in North America for the treatment of polyurethane foams (PUF) with recovered material being recycled into re-bonding for carpet padding, a process which has been shown to expose recycling workers and carpet installers.121
118 Waterloo Record, October 6, 2015 “Damage estimate $15m after fire guts Cambridge recycling centre” 119 UNEP, Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee (POPRC); Technical Review of the Implications of Recycling Commercial PentaBDE and Commercial OctaBDE; 2010 UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/2 page 5 120 Ibid 121 Ibid
34 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
It is widely noted that recycling of materials such as electronics and plastics which contain PBDEs and other POPs makes sense from an environmental perspective and in many cases from an economic perspective. Manufacturing using secondary materials and energy recovery are often cited as positives but with the caution that they are acceptable only under conditions of environmentally sound management and best available technology (BAT) and best environmental practices (BEP) designed among other things to minimize releases.
One of the most comprehensive approaches to ESM of wastes is the work of the Basel Convention’s Partnership for Action on Computing Equipment and specifically the 2011 Guideline on Environmentally Sound Material Recovery/Recycling of End-of-Life Computing Equipment. While it focuses on WEEE, the discussion and guidelines have broad relevance to any recycling process which might be managing products and materials that contain PBDEs. The Guideline confirms that “recycling processes (and disposal of un-recycled residues) can release substances and expose workers and their communities to environmental and human health problems.”122 The Guideline outlines the following chain of steps to avoid or mitigate these problems:
Collect Evaluate – to determine re-use opportunity Refurbish or repair Dismantle – with appropriate protection for workers and safety equipment such as engineered control systems for such things as ventilation and dust control Separate – with necessary higher level control systems Recover – with high levels of process technology, monitoring and environmental and health protection
The UNEP Guidance on BAT for PBDEs123 specifically addresses the challenges of recycling of materials containing PBDEs and promotes environmentally sound management practices similar to those recommended by the Basel Convention’s guidance including specific recommendations on labelling to identify the use of PBDEs to facilitate evaluation prior to processing and techniques and technologies to minimize occupational exposure during the processing stage. The guidance report also notes the technical possibilities of separating materials containing bromine flame retardants from materials with non-bromine flame retardants, but states that specifically separating PBDEs is currently not technically feasible.
122 Basel Convention, Guideline on Environmentally Sound Material Recovery/Recycling of End-of-Life Computing Equipment, Feb 2011, page 9 123 UNEP, Guidance on best available techniques and environmental practices for the recycling and disposal of waste containing PBDEs listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants; Revised draft January 2015; UNEP/POPS/COP.7/INF/22 Guidance, January 2015
35 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
3.3.4 Summary: Magnitude of Releases
Figure 3 is based on US EPA assessments of the magnitude and sources of releases of PBDEs to the environment and was produced as part of the May 2010 Exposure Assessment of Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers.124 Although the actual quantities cited in the figure are described by the EPA as “highly uncertain” the figure does indicate the relationship between the various pathways and the relative size of each. The estimates cited in the figure show that BDE 209 is the dominant congener in every aspect of the life cycle with significant quantities estimated in municipal landfills and in recycled waste electronics. The assessment concludes that the annual amount of BDE 209 that may be released from these two primary reservoirs is unknown and a major area of uncertainty.125
Figure 3 EPA Generalized Annual Life Cycle of PBDE in the United States
124 US EPA Exposure Assessment of Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers, May 2010 125 US EPA Exposure Assessment of Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers, May 2010
36 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
The large quantity of PBDEs found in plastics is also clearly shown with these plastics being a significant component of the PBDEs associated with electronics. The analysis also documents the quantities that are released through sewage sludge and as effluent discharges from sewage treatment plants. These quantities are considerably less than the landfill and recycled WEEE numbers but confirm that the management of landfill leachate through conventional sewage treatment processes is a concern.
Comparable analysis of the environmental and health impacts and concerns related to PBDEs have been conducted in Canada by Environment Canada and Health Canada but no equivalent big picture life cycle analysis as represented by the EPA figure was identified.
3.4 Actual or Potential PBDE Releases by Product Category
The following provides an overview of what is known about actual or possible releases of PBDEs during the life cycle of each of the identified product categories which are known to contain or possibly contain PBDEs. More detailed information on environmental risks, releases during recycling or processing wastes and as a result of landfilling and incineration is included for each product category in Table 3 which follows the overviews below. Note: some categories presented separately in Table 2 previously have been grouped together in this section.
The following categories are presented:
Products Containing Foams Carpet padding Textile coatings, drapes, curtains, fabric blinds and roller blinds Textiles - clothing Mattresses and pillows Large and small appliances Waste electronics and electrical equipment (WEEE) Construction, renovation and demolition materials (CRD)
3.4.1 Products containing foams
Foams are used in a variety of consumer products such as in insulation materials, furniture, car seats and baby products. In order to meet fire safety requirements, flame retardants have been used in these products and most of the polyurethane foam products contain PBDEs. Prior to the end of penta-BDE production in 2004, approximately 95% of penta-BDE was used as an additive in flame retardants in flexible polyurethane foams (FPUF). It was estimated, in 2004, that only 7.5%
37 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report of the approximately 953 000 metric tons of FPUF produced annually in the United States was treated with penta-BDE.126
While some studies estimating PBDEs found in dust inside buildings have correlated these measurements with the presence of electronics, some work in this area has indicated that PBDEs in dust may also be linked to products containing foam. In a study where the researchers used a new analytical technique to quantify bromine concentrations in consumer goods, it was concluded that furniture and televisions were the primary sources of the PBDE levels in U.S. house dust.127 In addition, Environment Canada’s risk management strategy for PBDEs128 mentions that particle emissions may result from aging and wear of products (e.g. foam particles from furniture, plastics in vehicle interiors, etc.). However, the EPA reported that the potential for PBDEs to enter the indoor (or car) environment through the flaking and crumbling of treated foam products cannot be characterized quantitatively, or even qualitatively. Procedures to estimate this kind of release from foams are not available.129
The end-of-life controls for PDBE-containing foams are minimal in Canada and the U.S. Generally, these products are landfilled. Even in cases where construction wastes (including insulation foams and/or structural insulated panels) are sent to recycling facilities, the foams and plastics are generally treated as residues which are then disposed to landfills. There is some movement in various jurisdictions for better end-of-life management of vehicles, but the actual impact of these programs on foam recycling has yet to be determined (several programs seem to focus mainly on other hazardous materials such as mercury in ignition switches).
Landfills are considered the main entry for wastes containing PBDEs, including foam-containing products such as insulation foams, furniture foams, vehicle seats and baby products. There is concern with respect to releases of PBDEs leaching from landfills, as noted previously.130
126 ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry). (2004) Toxicological profile for polybrominated biphenyls and polybrominated diphenyl ethers. Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA. Available online at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxpro2.html. 127 Allen J. G.; McClean M. D.; Stapleton H. M.; Webstert T. F. Linking PBDEs in house dust to consumer products using X-ray fluorescence. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42 (11), 4222–4228. 128 Environment Canada, 2010. Risk Management Strategy for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs). 129 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2010) An exposure assessment of polybrominated diphenyl ethers. National Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC; EPA/600/R-08/086F. Available at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=210404 130 Danon-Schaffer, Monica, 2010. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in Landfills From Electronic Waste. A Thesis Submitted In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. University of BC.
38 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
3.4.2 Carpet Padding
C-penta-BDE was the primary PBDE flame retardant used in the manufacture of new carpet pad until 2004, when production of penta-BDE ended. Prior to this date, approximately 95 percent of penta-BDE was used as an additive flame retardant in polyurethane foam, with the remaining 5 percent in the treatment of foam-based packaging and carpet pad.131 For carpet materials, anticipated releases of flame retardants can occur from dust. Carpet dust increases as carpet ages, and is also a function of applied force, and relative humidity.132 PBDEs are not chemically bound to foam and can be released into the environment during use and recycling of older foam that still contains them. PBDEs in indoor dust are a primary source of exposure, and most of this dust tends to concentrate in areas 18 inches and lower, of particular concern for children playing close to the floor. While existing research on PBDE releases from carpet materials appears to be limited, the U.S. EPA reported the potential for PBDEs to enter the indoor environment through the flaking and crumbling of treated foam products cannot be characterized quantitatively, or even qualitatively. Procedures to estimate this release are not available.133
The end-of-life controls for PDBE-containing foams are minimal in Canada and the U.S. Generally, these products are landfilled. In the U.S. in 2012, only 7.5 percent of carpet was recycled.134 In Canada, 99 percent of post-consumer carpet and 95 percent of commercial carpet in Canada are estimated to be going to a landfill, with some product being shipped to the U.S. for recycling.135 Note that foam materials (from various sources including carpet pad and furniture) are recycled into carpet padding, and these used material feedstocks for carpet pad may contain PBDE. Trim polyurethane foam scraps from cutting and shaping during the manufacture of furniture represent approximately 15 percent of the foam produced and almost all of this scrap in North America is recovered for use in North American carpet padding manufacture.136 Prior to 2004, this would mean that much of the pre-consumer foam scraps from furniture manufacture that went into
131 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010. An Exposure Assessment of Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers, EPA/600/R-08/086F, May 2010. Available at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=210404. 132 UNEP. 2010. Supporting Document for the draft technical paper developed in accordance with the work programmes on new persistent organic pollutants as adopted by the Conference of the Parties, UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/INF/6. Available at: http://chm.pops.int/Default.aspx?tabid=783. 133 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2010) An exposure assessment of polybrominated diphenyl ethers. National Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC; EPA/600/R-08/086F. Available at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=210404 134 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2012. Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States Tables and Figures for 2012,” Table 13. Available at www.epa.gov/waste/nonhaz/municipal/pubs/2012_msw_dat_tbls.pdf. 135 Canadian Carpet Recovery Effort. Undated. CARE Update, Available at https://carpetrecovery.org/wp- content/uploads/2014/04/Canadian_Carpet_Reclamation_Effort_Verhoff.pdf. 136 Luedeka, Robert J. 2011. UNIDO Guidance Document Submission: Flexible Polyurethane Foam Waste Management & Recycling. Available at: http://www.pfa.org/Library/UNIDO%20PFA_Submission_11292011.pdf.
39 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report carpet padding may contain PBDEs, in addition to any that was specifically added for carpet pad. While California is the only U.S. state to have EPR legislation for carpet recycling, voluntary industry-run recycling programs have operated in the U.S. since 2002 as a result of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between government agencies, carpet manufacturers, recyclers, waste management representatives, and the environmental industry. This MOU was originally developed through interested Midwestern state agencies but expired in 2011 when the parties could not reach agreement on key areas. A new, temporary nationwide industry-run voluntary carpet recycling program was launched in January 2015 in the U.S.
Landfills are considered the main entry point for wastes containing PBDEs, including foam- containing products such carpet padding. There is concern with respect to releases of PBDEs leaching from landfills, as noted previously in this report.137
3.4.3 Textile Coatings, Drapes, Curtains, Fabric Blinds, and Roller Blinds
C-decaBDE has been the primary PBDE flame retardant used in textile coatings as well as drapes, curtains, fabric blinds, and roller blinds. Between 1970 and 2013, approximately 20 percent of deca-BDE was used in textiles worldwide.138,139 C-penta-BDE was used in limited quantities for the treatment of textiles including back-coating for curtains.140 The total amount of c-penta-BDE used for minor uses (including textiles and other uses is estimated to account for 5 percent or less of the total usage worldwide.141 While a large proportion of c-Penta-BDE was used within the transport sector, back-coating of textiles for car seats was a minor use compared to other uses.142 The manufacture of c-penta-BDE was phased out in 2004 when the sole manufacturer Great Lakes Chemical Corporation, (now Chemtura Corporation) voluntarily phased out its production. In the U.S., coated textiles such as tents and other camping equipment meet a voluntary industrial
137 Danon-Schaffer, Monica, 2010. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in Landfills From Electronic Waste. A Thesis Submitted In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. University of BC. 138 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010. An Exposure Assessment of Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers, EPA/600/R-08/086F, May 2010. Available at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=210404. 139 Abbasi, G., et al., 2014. “Stocks and Flows of PBDEs in Products from Use to Waste in the U.S. and Canada from 1970 to 2020,” Environmental Science & Technology, 49(3), pp. 1521-1528. 140 UNIDO. 2012. Guidelines on best available techniques and best environmental practices for the recycling and waste disposal of articles containing polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention. Available at http://www.unido.org/fileadmin/user_media/Services/Environmental_Management/Stockholm_Convention/Guidance_Docs/ UNEP-POPS-GUID-NIP-2012-BATBEPPBDEs.En.pdf. 141 UNIDO. 2012. Guidelines on best available techniques and best environmental practices for the recycling and waste disposal of articles containing polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention. Available at http://www.unido.org/fileadmin/user_media/Services/Environmental_Management/Stockholm_Convention/Guidance_Docs/ UNEP-POPS-GUID-NIP-2012-BATBEPPBDEs.En.pdf. 142 UNIDO. 2012. Guidance for the inventory of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. https://www.unido.org/fileadmin/user_media/Services/Environmental_Management/Stockholm_Convention/Guidance_Docs/ UNEP-POPS-GUID-NIP-2012-PBDEs-Inventory.En.pdf.
40 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report flammability standard known as CPAI-84 established by Canvas Products Association International, with potential, but unconfirmed, use of PBDEs to meet the standard.143
Most studies estimating and comparing the amounts of PBDEs found in dust indoors have correlated the measurements of PBDEs in dust with the presence of electronics144 however a recent study to determine whether flame retardants applied to coated textiles such as camping tents were likely to cause exposure found decaBDE to be the most common flame retardant detected (of a sample of 11 tents).145 The results were not definitive as to whether direct contact with products containing flame retardants were the source of the exposure. The study also noted that many toy tents and tunnels designed for children for indoor use also meet the same flammability requirements for outdoor tents, but it was uncertain whether these products were treated with the flame retardants identified in this study. The end-of-life controls for PDBE- containing textile coatings for automobile fabric, tarpaulins, and tents, drapes, curtains, fabric blinds, and roller blinds are minimal in Canada and the U.S. These products can be reused and recycled. However, in the absence of reliable data, it is expected that majority of such products are disposed of with regular municipal waste at end-of-life. There is concern with respect to releases of PBDEs leaching from landfills.
3.4.4 Textiles – Clothing
Only some types of clothing contain flame retardants (e.g. specialty work wear such as firefighting uniforms), and historically some children’s sleep wear. Prior to 1990, about 10 percent of global use of c-PentaBDE was used in production of specialized textiles, such as in specialty fire-resistant clothing using polyurethane treatment. During the 1990’s this proportion decreased slightly (7%) and was phased out of most clothing articles with the exception of some specialized work wear by 2003.146 It is difficult to know how much imported clothing might still contain PBDEs as there were no studies identified with data on this sub-sector. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and PBDE manufacturers worked out a voluntary phase-out of PDBE in children’s clothing that began in 2004 and concluded in 2013.147 Recent proposals for addition to this plan include a significant new use rule (SNUR) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 5(a)(2)
143 Keller, A.S. et al., 2014, “Flame Retardant Applications in Camping Tents and Potential Exposure.” Environmental Science and Technology Letters, 1, pp. 152-155. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3958138/pdf/ez400185y.pdf. 144 Cheng. CC. C. F. Chiu and F. H. Chang. 2009. Characteristics of polybrominated diphenyl ethers in the indoor atmosphere of computer classrooms. Scientific Research and Essay Vol.4 (10), pp. 1117-1122, October 2009. 145 Keller, A.S. et al., 2014, “Flame Retardant Applications in Camping Tents and Potential Exposure.” Environmental Science and Technology Letters, 1, pp. 152-155. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3958138/pdf/ez400185y.pdf. 146 BSEF. 2003. An introduction to brominated flame retardants. Bromine Science and Environmental Forum. www.bsef.com 147 Grossman, Elizabeth 2011. Are Flame Retardants Safe? Growing Evidence Says ‘No’. Yale Environment 360. http://e360.yale.edu/feature/pbdes_are_flame_retardants_safe_growing_evidence_says_no/2446/
41 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report which, if passed, would require notice to the EPA prior to import of articles to which c-pentaBDE or c-octaBDE have been added.
For clothing, anticipated releases of flame retardants into laundry water during use are expected to be negligible as only a very small portion of the clothing sector has had PBDEs added to them, although one study estimated that over a products life time small amounts of flame retardants could wash out in laundry water.148 However, it was not possible to determine if this is due to PBDEs within the fabric of a clothing article, or simply from dust accumulated on clothing from other PBDE sources within a home.149 A Danish study found that the amount of PBDEs in protective clothing was less than the amount in curtains, carpet backing, tents, furniture or foam.150. This sector is considered to be a low environmental risk when compared to other sources of PBDEs in products.151,152 A comprehensive European study that reviewed all major sources of PBDE in products, including textile products, specifically stated that only non-clothing textiles was included in their review of major PBDE product categories. 153
No significant risk for PBDE release during product recycling or disposal in landfill was identified in the documentation for the clothing sector since only a very small fraction of specialty-use clothing utilizes PBDEs (i.e. some specialty work wear such as firefighting uniforms for example).
3.4.5 Mattresses and pillows
C-penta-BDE was the primary PBDE flame retardant used in the manufacture of mattresses and pillows in North America, prior to the end of penta-BDE production in 2004. In particular, flame retardants have been added to mattresses in institutional settings such as hospitals, hotels, military facilities, and prisons. Mattresses have been estimated to contain approximately 2 to 3 percent by weight flame retardant.154
148 Source Control of Priority Substances in Europe 2009. Specific Targeted Research Project, Work Package 3 – D.3.1. An Inventory and Assessment of Options for Reducing Emissions: Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) 149 K. Lacasse, Werner Bauman, 2004. Textile Chemicals: Environmental Data and Facts. Published by Spriger. 150 K. Lacasse, Werner Bauman, 2004. Textile Chemicals: Environmental Data and Facts. Published by Spriger. 151 UNIDO 2012. Guidance for the inventory of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants 152 United States Toxic Substances Portal - Polybrominated Biphenyls (PBBs) & Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs), Chapter 7, Production, Import/Export, Use, And Disposal 153 Source Control of Priority Substances in Europe 2009. Specific Targeted Research Project, Work Package 3 – D.3.1. An Inventory and Assessment of Options for Reducing Emissions: Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) 154 UNEP. 2010. Supporting Document for the draft technical paper developed in accordance with the work programmes on new persistent organic pollutants as adopted by the Conference of the Parties, UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/INF/6. Available at: http://chm.pops.int/Default.aspx?tabid=783.
42 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report While existing research on PBDE releases from mattresses and pillows appears to be limited, specific to mattress recycling, a United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) document highlights the significance of dust in worker exposure.155 Also, as mentioned above, the EPA reported that the potential for PBDEs to enter the indoor environment through the flaking and crumbling of treated foam products may be significant, but cannot be characterized quantitatively, or even qualitatively.156
The end-of-life controls for PDBE-containing foams are minimal in Canada and the U.S. Although there are no mattress EPR laws in the Great Lakes’ states or in Canada, the U.S. states of Connecticut, California, and Rhode Island have passed EPR mattress laws to recycle mattresses. Connecticut began implementation of their law in 2015, and California and Rhode Island are expected to begin their programs in 2016. Mattresses can be re-used, remanufactured/refurbished (stripped down to the frame and springs, components washed, refitted, and recovered with new material before sale), or recycled. While no accurate data is available on used mattresses that are renovated and resold, the International Sleep Products Association estimated in 1995 that this market might consist of up to 35 percent of new mattresses sold annually.157 Many used mattresses are also exported for reuse in Mexico from the U.S. Up to 90 percent of mattress components—steel, cotton, and foam—are recyclable. However, only a small percentage of mattresses are recycled annually. While reuse and recycling of mattresses and pillows does occur, these products are typically landfilled.
3.4.6 Large and small appliances
The insulation foams in some large household appliances such as dishwashers and refrigerators are the materials that historically contained quantities of PBDEs. In the small household appliance market the hard plastic casings and components are where such chemicals of concern would be expected to be found. Most large appliances are commonly collected either directly by municipalities, private haulers or recyclers for recycling and primarily for the metals recovery. Recovery of ozone-depleting substances from refrigeration equipment is commonly required in most jurisdictions but there is nothing comparable for the management of the foams or plastics which might contain PBDEs. Similarly to the situation with electronics, the majority of plastics
155 UNEP. 2010. Supporting Document for the draft technical paper developed in accordance with the work programmes on new persistent organic pollutants as adopted by the Conference of the Parties, UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/INF/6. Available at: http://chm.pops.int/Default.aspx?tabid=783. 156 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2010) An exposure assessment of polybrominated diphenyl ethers. National Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC; EPA/600/R-08/086F. Available at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=210404 157 UNEP. 2010. Supporting Document for the draft technical paper developed in accordance with the work programmes on new persistent organic pollutants as adopted by the Conference of the Parties, UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/INF/6. Available at: http://chm.pops.int/Default.aspx?tabid=783.
43 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report recovered during the recycling of small appliances are viewed as an unmarketable and are therefore sent for disposal where they pose a risk of release in landfills.
Recycling codes of practice do however require environmentally sound management of all materials and recycling facilities are mandated to follow occupational health and safety requirements associated with such things as dust management and hazardous materials exposure during manual disassembly and material sorting. Jurisdictions which mandate producer responsibility and the collection and recycling of both large and small appliances will divert materials from landfill disposal where there is an identified risk of release. Such programs often have standards for recycling and processing through such initiatives as the vendor qualifications used by the Electronics Products Recycling Association but such standards appear to be silent on the issue of the management and minimization of PBDE releases.
According to the EPA the volatilization of PBDEs from the plastics used in household appliances over the life of the products has been documented although various different methodologies have been used for quantification and exact rates of release are unclear.158 The analysis of release during use is complicated by the fact that penta-BDE and octa-BDE were taken off the market in 2004. It is not known whether the compounds degrade before they end up in the leachate. Therefore, long-term diffuse emissions and leaching from landfills are possibilities. Little appears to be known about releases from recycling and processing facilities.
3.4.7 Waste Electronics and Electrical Equipment (WEEE)
In this category it is the hard plastic casings of computers, laptops, TVs and fax machines or printers that historically contained higher amounts of PBDEs compared to the other electronic components in this list (monitors, circuit boards, or cell phones). Many large electronics manufacturers have been reducing or eliminating the use of flame retardants such as octa- and deca-BDE in their products since the mid 1990’s, and now adhere to the European Union’s RoHS directive (Restriction of Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment) for global operations.159,160 Newer electronics are being produced without the use of PBDEs. Many manufacturers have committed to phasing out brominated fire retardants in their electronics.161
158 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2010) An exposure assessment of polybrominated diphenyl ethers. National Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC; EPA/600/R-08/086F. Available at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=210404 page 2-17 159 European Union RoHS Directive 2002/95/EC 160 Dell website http://www.dell.com/learn/us/en/uscorp1/corp-comm/earth-greener-products-materials?s=corp 161 Environmental Working Group, Washington DC website http://www.ewg.org/release/pbdefree
44 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report The only documented potential environmental risk from PBDEs in the electronics sector from products still in use is from dust collecting on them.162 Most of the potential routes of exposure from this product category occurs during the end-of-life management phase: either recycling or disposal. For the past five years, many of the jurisdictions surrounding the great lakes have new requirements for mandatory electronics recycling (see Chapter 4). The environmental impact of recycling e-waste is less than that of landfilling it but potential releases can still occur through airborne emission of shredding PDBE containing plastics. European studies indicated that 100% of North American plastic casings are likely to contain PBDEs. At the primary processing stage, manual removal of plastic casings from the equipment represents the lowest release risk, followed by bailing or shredding / grinding (low risk of release) which could result in airborne emissions if not controlled. For secondary processing that includes re-grinding / re-moulding there is potential for re-manufacturing PBDE into new plastics. According to a 2015 UNEP report, grinding or re- moulding polymer from e-waste has the lowest environmental impact and best use of waste management hierarchy compared to other recycling technologies. E-waste recycling processes are normally not optimized for the separation of plastics containing PBDE; it is often shredded together with non-PBDE plastics. Use of recycled plastics containing high residual PBDE levels may re-introduce these chemicals in the manufacture of new units.163 Studies have shown that plastics containing PBDEs have been recycled in the production of articles for which no flame retardancy is required including children’s toys in China.164
There are technologies available to detect bromine-containing plastics in shredded e-waste, these might be viable tools to keep PBDEs out of landfill and ensure proper recycling of PBDE plastics from e-waste in Europe, however even the best technologies provide less than 95% effective rate, and are expensive to implement. In North America 100% of casings are expected to have bromated flame retardants in the plastics.165
Prior to 2005 the majority of electronic waste was landfilled in the Great Lakes region. PBDE compounds from plastic casings leach, particularly when (as for PBDEs) they are added to the polymer at the moulding stage. A comprehensive European study has concluded that recycling products containing PBDEs from all product categories was preferable to landfilling due to the concern of the release of PBDEs through leachate produced at landfills.
162 Schreder, Erika D. and Mark J. La Guardia. 2014. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. Flame Retardant Transfers from U.S. Households (Dust and Laundry Wastewater) to the Aquatic Environment. http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es502227h 163 UNEP 2010. Technical Review of the Implications of Recycling Commercial Pentabromodiphenyl Ether and Commercial Octabromodiphenyl Ether. UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/2 164 UNIDO 2012. Guidance for the inventory of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants 165 UNIDO 2015. DRAFT Guidance for the inventory of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants.
45 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
3.4.8 Construction, Renovation and Demolition (CRD) Materials
The amount of PBDE flame retardants in products based on global production is as follows: electronics and electrical products (56%), building/construction (31%), textiles including carpets, draperies, and specialty clothing (7%) and transportation products and materials (6%).166 As a result of many important uses in construction materials to reduce flammability in buildings, brominated flame retardants have been confirmed as present in Construction, Renovation and Demolition (CRD) wastes in Canada. These substances are found in thermal insulation materials, textiles for usage in residual and commercial wall coverings, latex binders, adhesives, paints, insulation boards in building construction (e.g. walls, ceilings and roofs).
Very few studies investigating the possibility of PBDE release from construction materials appear to have been undertaken and no studies were found that correlated emissions of PBDEs with construction materials during use in service life. For wall paper, this product does produce dust particles during the product use phase which release flame retardants into indoor air, but it is likely not as large of a source of PBDE contaminated dust when compared with the PBDE releases from electronic equipment indoors.167
Generally, CRD is landfilled either in municipal landfills or in special CRD permitted landfills after all marketable recyclables are removed (e.g. concrete, steel, drywall, wood). The vast majority of plastic coatings from CRD waste are landfilled as residue because they are not clean enough, produced in sufficient quantities, or of a single resin, and are therefore not valuable to plastics recyclers168 so there are limited end-of-life controls on PBDE-containing plastic materials from CRD waste. For the wall coverings category it is often included as part of CRD mixed residual waste destined for landfill. Landfills are considered the main entry for wastes containing mixed CRD with plastic coatings, resins, and films.
Table 3 following presents this information in a tabular summary.
166 BSEF. 2003. An introduction to brominated flame retardants. Bromine Science and Environmental Forum. www.bsef.com 167 Cheng. CC. C. F. Chiu and F. H. Chang. 2009. Characteristics of polybrominated diphenyl ethers in the indoor atmosphere of computer classrooms. Scientific Research and Essay Vol.4 (10), pp. 1117-1122, October 2009. 168 Environment Canada, Guy Perry and associates, 2015. Characterization and Management of Construction, Renovation and Demolition (CRD) Waste in Canada.
46 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Table 3: PBDE Release Analysis – Summary Table
Product Overview of Environmental Risk PBDE release (actual/potential) PBDE release (actual/potential) Data during recycling/processing during landfilling / incineration Availability Furniture and Textiles Furniture foams What: Environmental risk of PBDE releases from foams contained in Furniture can be reused as is, or re- No controls identified. Limited data on furniture such as armchairs and couches. upholstered and reused. While furniture and this material Media: PDBE releases could occur from landfill leachate. Also, possible upholstery can be reused and recycled, typical Potential for leachates in landfills. category. vaporization of PBDEs into indoor air resulting from aging and wear of end-of- life management involves disposal. products (e.g. foam particles from furniture). In North America, furniture foams (including Typically, polyurethane foam in furniture was made flame retardant trim scraps) can be shredded and recycled into with pentaBDE up until its discontinued use in 2004. An average of 3% carpet padding, stuffing for pillows, pet (range 2.9−3.2%) PBDE was found in this type of foam while one study bedding, insulation, plush toys, sound 169 reported a pentaBDE content as high as 30% by weight . insulation, gymnastics mats, or school bus seats. Scrap foams can also be ground into Of the many possible applications for flexible polyurethane foam, ultrafine powders (regrinding) that can be scrap generated from upholstered furniture manufacturing presents used in the manufacture of new foams, the greatest challenges for end-of-life management. Trim scraps from however, use of this technology has been cutting and shaping during the manufacture of furniture represents limited. 170 approximately 15% of the foam produced .
Carpet Padding What: Environmental risk of PBDE releases in carpet padding The potential for PBDE releases during No controls identified. Limited data on Media: PDBE releases could occur from landfill leachate and recycling recycling depends on the processing activities this material / processing. Also, possible release of PBDEs into indoor air resulting utilized by a facility, and the environmental Potential for leachates in landfills. category. from aging and wear of products (e.g. foam particles from carpet management protocols required by a backing). jurisdiction.
Carpet padding is mostly made from polyurethane foam and can be There is a notable lack of information about made from recycled foam. PentaBDE was added to carpet backing as a the scale of usage and level of contamination fire retardant up until 2004. PBDEs are not chemically bound to foam as a result of recycling foam into carpet pad.173 and can be released into the environment during use and recycling of older foam that still contains them. The average content of c- Carpet padding can recycled into carpet PentaBDE in polyurethane foam is reported to be around 3 to 5 padding, and this carpet padding can again be percent for upholstery, cushions, mattresses, and carpet padding.171 recycled into carpet padding.
Foam materials (from various sources including carpet pad and In North America, furniture foams (including
169 Hale, RC; La Guardia, MJ; Harvey, E; et al. (2002) Potential role of fire retardant-treated polyurethane foam as a source of brominated diphenyl ethers to the U.S. environment. Chemosphere 46:729−735. 170 Luedeka R. 2011. Flexible Polyurethane Foam Waste Management & Recycling. November 29, 2011, http://www.pfa.org/Library/UNIDO%20PFA_Submission_11292011.pdf. 171 UNIDO. 2012. Guidelines on best available techniques and best environmental practices for the recycling and waste disposal of articles containing polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention. Available at http://www.unido.org/fileadmin/user_media/Services/Environmental_Management/Stockholm_Convention/Guidance_Docs/UNEP-POPS-GUID-NIP-2012-BATBEPPBDEs.En.pdf
47 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Overview of Environmental Risk PBDE release (actual/potential) PBDE release (actual/potential) Data during recycling/processing during landfilling / incineration Availability furniture) are recycled into carpet padding. These used material trim scraps) can be shredded and recycled into feedstocks for carpet pad may contain PBDE. Trim polyurethane foam carpet padding, stuffing for pillows, pet scraps from cutting and shaping during the manufacture of furniture bedding, insulation, plush toys, sound represent approximately 15 percent of the foam produced and almost insulation, gymnastics mats, or school bus all of this scrap in North America is recovered for use in North seats. Scrap foams can also be ground into American carpet padding manufacture.172 Prior to 2004, this would ultrafine powders (regrinding) that can be mean that much of the pre-consumer foam scraps from furniture used in the manufacture of new foams, manufacture that went into carpet padding may contain PBDEs, in however, use of this technology has been addition to any that was specifically added for carpet pad. limited. Textile coatings What: Environmental risk of PBDE releases in textile coatings (for The potential for PBDE releases during No controls identified. Limited data on (for automobile automobile fabric, tarpaulins, and tents), drapes, curtains, fabric recycling depends on the processing activities this material fabric, blinds, and roller blinds utilized by a facility, and the environmental Potential for leachates in landfills. category. tarpaulins, and Media: PDBE releases could occur from landfill leachate and recycling management protocols required by a tents), drapes, / processing. jurisdiction. curtains, fabric blinds, and DecaBDE was added to textile coatings (for automobile fabric, These materials can be recycled into padding roller blinds tarpaulins, and tents), drapes, curtains, fabric blinds, and roller blinds for chairs, car seats, cleaning cloths, clothing, as a fire retardant up until 2013. PentaBDE was also added to and industrial blankets. automobile fabric and curtains until 2004. PBDEs are not chemically bound to materials and can be released into the environment during use and recycling of older products that still contains them. Textiles What: Environmental risk of PBDE releases in from clothing is Most clothing does not contain PBDEs. Most Clothing is not considered to be a significant Limited data on (clothing) negligible compared to other material categories. clothing is reused, and when it is not reusable source of PBDEs entering the landfill in the this material Media: The only documented PDBE releases that might occur in this it is recycled into rags or absorbent material. literature. A 2004 Danish study estimated that category. category would be small amounts discharged into wastewater from approximately half of the Bromated Flame laundry. It is estimated that 25% of post-consumer Retardants in protective clothing would be 178 clothing is recycled In Canada , with the washed out during its life time of use, leaving Prior to ~1990, only about 10% of global use of c-PentaBDE was used remainder landfilled. The EPA estimates that a negligible amount in the product at end of 180 in production of specialized textiles, such as in specialty fire-resistant in the U.S. the textile recycling industry life which is typically landfilled . clothing using polyurethane treatment. Specifically, only a limited recycles approximately 3.8 billion pounds of quantity of c-PentaBDE was used in textiles (such as specifically post-consumer textile waste each year, which The U.S. EPA estimates that approximately workwear), and therefore this sector is considered to be a low is approximately 15% of all post-consumer 85% of used textiles are disposed of in 179 environmental risk when compared to other sources of PBDEs in textile waste . landfills. The average US citizen throws away 174 175 products . Government of Canada sources indicate that PBDEs 70 pounds of clothing and other textiles
173 UNEP. 2010. Supporting Document for the draft technical paper developed in accordance with the work programmes on new persistent organic pollutants as adopted by the Conference of the Parties, UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/INF/6. Available at: http://chm.pops.int/Default.aspx?tabid=783. 172 Luedeka, Robert J. 2011. UNIDO Guidance Document Submission: Flexible Polyurethane Foam Waste Management & Recycling.: http://www.pfa.org/Library/UNIDO%20PFA_Submission_11292011.pdf. 174 UNIDO 2012. Guidance for the inventory of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants 175 United States Toxic Substances Portal - Polybrominated Biphenyls (PBBs) & Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs), Chapter 7, Production, Import/Export, Use, And Disposal
48 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Overview of Environmental Risk PBDE release (actual/potential) PBDE release (actual/potential) Data during recycling/processing during landfilling / incineration Availability 176 181 are only used in non-clothing textiles so this sector should not be annually into landfill . considered a significant source of environmental risk in Canada for No significant risk for PBDE release was PBDEs. identified in the documentation from the No significant risk for PBDE release was clothing sector. identified in the documentation from the A Danish study found that the amount of PBDEs in protective clothing clothing sector entering landfills. was less than the amount in curtains, carpet backing, tents, furniture 177 or foam . Baby Products What: Environmental risk of PBDE releases from foams contained in Baby products containing foam are usually No controls identified. Limited data on baby products (car seats/strollers/high chairs/changing pads/floor disposed to landfills. this material play mats/etc.). Potential for leachates in landfills. category. Media: PDBE releases could occur from landfill leachate. Foam from child car seats can be shredded and recycled into carpet padding, stuffing for Some baby products (e.g. car seats) have an pillows, pet bedding, insulation, plush toys, expiry date after which it is mandatory to sound insulation gymnastics mats, or school dispose of it. In Canada, for example, bus seats. Scrap foams can also be ground into manufacturers’ instructions set an expiry date ultrafine powders (regrinding) that can be of typically 6-7 years for baby car seats (range used in the manufacture of new foams, from 5 to 9 years). Provinces and Territories however, use of this technology has been require by law that manufacturers’ limited. instructions be followed. Such a mandated disposal may contribute to a constant addition of products in use and an increase in the number of them entering the disposal phase. This risk is mitigated in certain jurisdictions (e.g. Ohio and Minnesota) that have voluntary recycling programs for these products.
Mattresses and What: Environmental risk of PBDE releases in mattresses and pillows The potential for PBDE releases during No controls identified. Limited data on Pillows Media: PDBE releases could occur from landfill leachate and recycling recycling depends on the processing activities this material / processing. Also, possible vaporization of PBDEs into indoor air utilized by a facility, and the environmental Potential for leachates in landfills. category. resulting from aging and wear of products (e.g. foam particles from management protocols required by a mattresses and pillows). jurisdiction.
Mattresses and pillows are mostly made from polyurethane foam. There is a notable lack of information about PentaBDE was added to mattresses and pillows as a fire retardant up the scale of usage and level of contamination until 2004. PBDEs are not chemically bound to foam and can be as a result of recycling foam into carpet pad.183
178 Textile Waste Diversion http://textilewastediversion.com/ 179 Council for Textile Recycling http://www.weardonaterecycle.org/about/issue.html 180 K. Lacasse, Werner Bauman, 2004. Textile Chemicals: Environmental Data and Facts. Published by Spriger. 176 Government of Canada http://www.healthycanadians.gc.ca/healthy-living-vie-saine/environment-environnement/home-maison/polluants-eng.php 177 K. Lacasse, Werner Bauman, 2004. Textile Chemicals: Environmental Data and Facts. Published by Spriger. 181 Council for Textile Recycling http://www.weardonaterecycle.org/about/issue.html
49 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Overview of Environmental Risk PBDE release (actual/potential) PBDE release (actual/potential) Data during recycling/processing during landfilling / incineration Availability released into the environment during use and recycling of older foam that still contains them. The average content of c-PentaBDE in There are indications that significant amounts polyurethane foam is reported to be around 3 to 5 percent for of dust, with the potential to contain PBDEs, 182 184 upholstery, cushions, mattresses, and carpet padding. are released during the recycling process.
Up to 90 percent of mattress components— steel, cotton, and foam—are recyclable. Metal can be recycled and is the highest value material that comes out of the mattress. Metal recovered from mattresses can be used to make springs for new mattresses and box springs, among other many other metal products. Wood can be used as mulch, animal bedding, or burned at waste to energy plants. Cotton and foam have been used for insulation, carpet padding, stuffing for pillows, pet bedding, plush toys, sound insulation, gymnastic mats, school bus seats, and as oil filters in diesel engines. Scrap foams can also be ground into ultrafine powders (regrinding) that can be used in the manufacture of new foams, however, use of this technology has been limited.
Transportation Products 186 Vehicle seats What: Environmental risk of PBDE releases from foams contained in Vehicle seats can be removed and resold or No controls identified. Limited data on vehicle seats. recycled, but, in the absence of reliable data, it is this material Media: PDBE releases could occur from landfill leachate. Also, possible expected that they are typically sent for Potential for leachates in landfills. category. vaporization of PBDEs into cars resulting from aging and wear of disposal. products (e.g. foam particles from car seats). It is estimated that 600 000 vehicles are Foam from vehicle seats can be shredded and taken off the road every year in Ontario, After a vehicle is dismantled (removal of body panels, engine parts, recycled into carpet padding, stuffing for pillows, resulting in 150 000 tons of ASR going to 187 and tires), and fluids are removed, shredding occurs, which generates pet bedding, insulation, plush toys, sound landfills . ASR (auto shredder residue) is
183 UNEP. 2010. Supporting Document for the draft technical paper developed in accordance with the work programmes on new persistent organic pollutants as adopted by the Conference of the Parties, UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/INF/6. Available at: http://chm.pops.int/Default.aspx?tabid=783. 182 UNIDO. 2012. Guidelines on best available techniques and best environmental practices for the recycling and waste disposal of articles containing polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention. Available at http://www.unido.org/fileadmin/user_media/Services/Environmental_Management/Stockholm_Convention/Guidance_Docs/UNEP-POPS-GUID-NIP-2012-BATBEPPBDEs.En.pdf 184 UNEP. 2010. Supporting Document for the draft technical paper developed in accordance with the work programmes on new persistent organic pollutants as adopted by the Conference of the Parties, UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/INF/6. Available at: http://chm.pops.int/Default.aspx?tabid=783.
50 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Overview of Environmental Risk PBDE release (actual/potential) PBDE release (actual/potential) Data during recycling/processing during landfilling / incineration Availability metals and Auto Shredder Residue (ASR). ASR consists of non-metallic insulation gymnastics mats, or school bus seats. typically comprised of 15-25% of plastics materials such as plastics, glass, rubber, foam, carpeting, and textiles. Scrap foams can also be ground into ultrafine (including polyurethane foam and several 188 This is approximately 15-25 percent of the mass of the vehicle, and is powders (regrinding) that can be used in the other plastics) . Accordingly, between 22 185 typically sent to landfills for disposal. manufacture of new foams, however, use of this 500 and 37 500 tons of plastic waste from technology has been limited. vehicles end up in landfills every year in Ontario, including an unknown quantity of polyurethane foam. While no statistics on vehicles taken off the road in the Great Lakes Basin U.S. States have been found, it is expected to be at least 6 times higher than in Ontario, based on a simple correlation using population size of these states compared to Ontario.
Recent initiatives in Canada have sought better management of end-of-life vehicles. However, they mainly focus on other hazardous substances (such as mercury in ignition switches) and may not have a significant impact on PBDEs releases into leachates. Appliances Large and small What: The potential for release is higher in older appliances and is of The environmental impact of recycling is less There is a risk of PBDE release if materials Data on this household particular concern with the foam insulation in larger appliances and than that of landfilling. The concerns related to and products including insulation foams and material appliances with the plastic housing and components in small household recycling large and small appliances are the residual plastics are disposed of in landfills. category is appliances management of the foams and insulation in Landfill leachate, sewage sludge and waste mostly Media: PBDE releases could occur from landfill leachate and large appliances such as dishwashers and water treatment plant effluent have been associated with recycling/processing refrigerators and the management of the identified as containing PBDEs information on plastics recovered from small household e-waste. PBDEs are not chemically bound to plastic and some studies have appliances. shown elevated amounts of PBDEs in the indoor environment as dust There is limited collects on the casings in the home. There exists a potential for the The primary focus of recycling of these product information on
186 Automotive Recyclers Association (ARA), Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, and Auto Alliance, 2011. Automotive Recycling Industry: Environmentally Friendly, Market Driven, and Sustainable. Available at: http://www.a-r-a.org/files/pdfs/ARA_Recycling_Brochure.pdf. 187 Canadian Environmental Law Association, April 2011, Improving the Management of End-of-life Vehicles in Canada, Available at: http://www.cela.ca/sites/cela.ca/files/784.ELV%20April%202011.pdf. 185 United Nations Environment Programme, 2012, Guidance on best available techniques and best environmental practices for the recycling and disposal of articles containing polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants; Staudinger, Jeff, and Gregory A. Keoleian, 2001, Management of End-of-Life Vehicles (ELVs) in the US, Report No. CSS01-01. 188 Brett Richards, Co-Steel Recycling, Whitby, Ontario, 1999 (referenced in Canadian Environmental Law Association, April 2011).
51 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Overview of Environmental Risk PBDE release (actual/potential) PBDE release (actual/potential) Data during recycling/processing during landfilling / incineration Availability PBDEs to escape from the casing through volatilization to the air when categories is the metals and not the insulation the end-of-life the equipment is running and the casing becomes warm. materials or plastic casings or components management of which are commonly sent for disposal large appliances During recycling, typical processes of most risk of release include: and possible blending of PBDE polymers into new polymers; formation/release Environmentally sound management practices PBDE release during accidental fires of articles containing PBDE; and release during at recycling facilities can mitigate airborne risks from the the combustion of waste containing PBDE (in facilities and simple emissions associated with manual separation of foam insulation. 189 recycling operations) . However, the environmental impact of product components and shredding and grinding recycling it is considered to be lower than landfilling it. Recycling processes are normally not optimized Risks are highest where there is no market driven recycling of for the separation of plastics containing PBDE - it appliances and products are landfilled. is often shredded together with non-PBDE plastics. Electronics Printed circuit What: Environmental risk of PBDE releases in printed circuit boards is The environmental impact of recycling e-waste is Estimates by the EPA indicate that 857,000 Good. boards low in newer electronics, high in older electronics. less than that of landfilling it. Estimates by the kg/yr of DecaBDE and 890,000 kg/yr of Media: PDBE release risk is high from landfill leachate, and medium EPA indicate that 153,000 kg/yr of DecaBDE and OctaBDE is disposed of in e-waste that is 192 from recycling / processing. 159,000 kg/yr of OctaBDE are re-manufactured landfilled . into new electronics from e-waste that is 190 Printed circuit boards are made mostly of copper, protective coatings recycled . The risk is greatest in all jurisdictions that and adhesives, phenolic resins and epoxy resins or fibreglass. It is the historically landfilled used electronics. resin that typically included a small amount of bromated flame In Canada the Electronics Products Recycling Electronic goods manufactured from 1985- retardants in circuit boards. Bromated flame retardants used in Association EPSC (EPRA) requires all processors 89 have especially high PBDE 193 printed circuit boards include: tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA), to adhere to the Electronics Recycling Standard concentrations and PBDE can leach out of polybrominated biphenyls; and polybrominated diphenyl ethers (ERS) which also includes certification to the R2 this material as they are not chemically (PBDE). As of 2008, TBBPA was used in approximately 90% of printed Standard for downstream processors and zero bound to plastic. As landfill leachate is circuit boards in the U.S. and efforts were already underway to utilize landfilling of residuals. In the U.S. all 8 states collected and sent to municipal wastewater alternatives to halogenated BFRs. Environmental risk of PBDE releases bordering the Great Lakes have R2 Standard plants for treatment, remaining biosolids 191 from printed circuit boards in 2015 is low in newer products. PBDEs certified processors . The R2 Standard usually still contain PBDEs and biosolids are 194 are not chemically bound to plastic and can be released into the requires: Engineering controls such as: often applied to land as final disposal . environment during recycling / processing of older circuit boards that disassembly and segregation of all electrical Most landfills in Ontario send their leachate still contain them. components; isolation, ventilation and capture to municipal wastewater treatment plants. (e.g., fume hood); dust control, capture, and
189 UNEP 2010. Technical Review of the Implications of Recycling Commercial Pentabromodiphenyl Ether and Commercial Octabromodiphenyl Ether. UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/2 190 U.S. EPA 2010. An Exposure Assessment of Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers. EPA/600/R-08/086F 191 U.S. EPA website http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/materials/ecycling/certmap.htm 192 U.S. EPA 2010. An Exposure Assessment of Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers. EPA/600/R-08/086F 193 Danon-Schaffer, Monica, 2010. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in Landfills From Electronic Waste. A Thesis Submitted In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. University of BC. 194 UNIDO 2012. Guidance for the inventory of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants
52 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Overview of Environmental Risk PBDE release (actual/potential) PBDE release (actual/potential) Data during recycling/processing during landfilling / incineration Availability clean up; protocols to reduce emissions of Estimates by the EPA indicate that 46 kg/yr PDBEs and other substances. of DecaBDE and 48 kg/yr of OctaBDE could be released from e-waste that is 195 incinerated . Technologies such as blast furnaces, smelters, cement kilns or incineration facilities have low environmental impacts and are able to 196 destroy the bromine . Best available technology waste incinerators can incinerate PBDE‐containing waste material 197 without significant releases of PBDEs , after 1450°C thermal treatment, the content of PBDEs in fly ash is reduced by 98.9%. Laptop What: Environmental risk of PBDE releases in plastic casings / The environmental impact of recycling e-waste is Estimates by the EPA indicate that 857,000 Good. /computer housings is low in newer electronics manufactured post 2005, high in less than that of landfilling it. Estimates by the kg/yr of DecaBDE and 890,000 kg/yr of casings; older electronics. EPA indicate that 153,000 kg/yr of DecaBDE and OctaBDE is disposed of in e-waste that is 205 Monitor Media: During use phase of this product PBDE release risk is low. 159,000 kg/yr of OctaBDE are re-manufactured landfilled . casings; PDBE release risk is high from landfill leachate, and medium from into new electronics from e-waste that is TVcasings; recycling / processing. recycled. The risk is greatest in all jurisdictions that printer/fax historically landfilled used electronics. casings Octa-BDE was used in high-impact plastic products such as casings for The environmental impact of recycling e-waste is Electronic goods manufactured from 1985- computer/laptop/monitors/TVs. These casings contain higher less than that of landfilling it, but potential 89 have especially high PBDE 206 amounts of PBDEs than all other parts of a computer. In the EU, 95% releases can still occur mainly because its concentrations and PBDE can leach out of of all Octa-BDE was used in electrical equipment casings. Uses include difficult to distinguish PBDE containing plastics this material as they are not chemically in Acrylnitrile-ButadieneStyrene (ABS) and High Impact Polystyrene from non-PBDE containing plastics. In a typical bound to plastic. As landfill leachate is 198 (HIPS) –both used to make casings for electronics housings for e-waste recycling facility there can be up to 15 collected and sent to municipal wastewater televisions, audio and video equipment, mobile phones, remote different plastics. Casings/housings from TVs plants for treatment, remaining biosolids controls, PCs, and PC monitors. Typical concentrations in these and computer monitors provide two good usually still contain PBDEs and biosolids are 207 applications were between 12 wt % and 18 wt % prior to 2004. The sources of plastics if they can be separated from often applied to land as final disposal . computer monitor glass and interior does not contain PBDEs, only the others. The housing is separated for recycling Most landfills in Ontario send their leachate casing for the monitor. manually to give a clean polymer fraction to municipal wastewater treatment plants. consisting mainly of ABS and HIPS which is Older CRT TV casings contain the highest concentration of decaBDE recyclable. To maximize resale value for Estimates by the EPA indicate that 46 kg/yr 199 among the electrical equipment products included in the study . recycling, polymers must be sorted by type
195 U.S. EPA 2010. An Exposure Assessment of Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers. EPA/600/R-08/086F 196 UNIDO 2015. DRAFT Guidance for the inventory of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. 197 Studies undertaken at UBC indicate undetectable amounts of PBDE in bottom fly ash from the Peel Region incinerator in Ontario. Danon-Schaffer, Monica, 2010. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in Landfills From Electronic Waste. A Thesis Submitted In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. University of BC. 198 UNIDO 2012. Guidance for the inventory of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants 199 Golnoush, Abbasi, Andreas M. Buser, Anna Soehl, Michael W. Murray, and Miriam L. Diamond 2014. Environmental Science and Technology. Stocks and Flows of PBDEs in
53 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Overview of Environmental Risk PBDE release (actual/potential) PBDE release (actual/potential) Data during recycling/processing during landfilling / incineration Availability The stock of in-use CRT TVs declined gradually from 2000 to 2010 due (e.g. HIPS, ABS), and by colour. of DecaBDE and 48 kg/yr of OctaBDE could to the replacement of these products with lighter LCD and/or LED TVs. be released from e-waste that is 208 Primary processing: manual removal (no risk) incinerated . Technologies such as blast A study conducted to determine the amount of PBDEs in visual display followed by either bailing (no risk) or shredding / furnaces, smelters, cement kilns or units concluded that 15% of plastic waste from TV casings and 47% of grinding (low risk) which could result in airborne incineration facilities have low plastic waste from PC casings contained PBDEs in an amount greater emissions if not controlled with a hood vent. environmental impacts and are able to 209 than 0.1%. However, note that in Europe about 30% of casings destroy the bromine . Best available contain flame retardants while in Canada and the U.S. virtually 100% Secondary processing: re-grinding / re- technology waste incinerators can 200 of casings contain bromated flame retardants . moulding: potential for re-manufacturing PBDE. incinerate PBDE‐containing waste material 210 without significant releases of PBDEs , PBDEs are not chemically bound to plastic and some studies have According to a UNEP report, grinding or re- after 1450°C thermal treatment, the content shown elevated amounts of PBDEs in the indoor environment as dust moulding polymer from e-waste has the lowest of PBDEs in fly ash is reduced by 98.9%. collects on the casings in the home. There exists a potential for the environmental impact and best use of waste PBDEs to escape from the casing through volatilization to the air when management hierarchy compared to other the equipment is running and the casing becomes warm. It was recycling technologies; however, bromine is not observed that older casings may continue to emit PBDEs into the air destroyed during these processes. E-waste after long periods of time (i.e., 20 years or more). recycling processes are normally not optimized for the separation of plastics containing PBDE, it During recycling, typical processes of most risk of release include: is often shredded together with non-PBDE blending of PBDE polymers into new polymers; formation/release plastics. Use of recycled plastics containing high during accidental fires of articles containing PBDE; and release during residual PBDE levels may re-introduce these 202 the combustion of waste containing PBDE (in facilities and simple chemicals in the manufacture of new units . 201 recycling operations) . However, the environmental impact of Studies have shown that plastics containing recycling it is considered to be lower than landfilling it. PBDEs have been recycled in the production of articles for which no flame retardancy is 203 required including children’s toys in China .
Products from Use to Waste in the U.S. and Canada from 1970 to 2020. 205 U.S. EPA 2010. An Exposure Assessment of Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers. EPA/600/R-08/086F 206 Danon-Schaffer, Monica, 2010. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in Landfills From Electronic Waste. A Thesis Submitted In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. University of BC. 207 UNIDO 2012. Guidance for the inventory of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants 200 UNIDO 2015. DRAFT Guidance for the inventory of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. 201 UNEP 2010. Technical Review of the Implications of Recycling Commercial Pentabromodiphenyl Ether and Commercial Octabromodiphenyl Ether. UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/2 202 UNEP 2010. Technical Review of the Implications of Recycling Commercial Pentabromodiphenyl Ether and Commercial Octabromodiphenyl Ether. UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/2 203 UNIDO 2012. Guidance for the inventory of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants 208 U.S. EPA 2010. An Exposure Assessment of Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers. EPA/600/R-08/086F 209 UNIDO 2015. DRAFT Guidance for the inventory of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. 210 Studies undertaken at UBC indicate undetectable amounts of PBDE in bottom fly ash from the Peel Region incinerator in Ontario. Danon-Schaffer, Monica, 2010. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in Landfills From Electronic Waste. A Thesis Submitted In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. University of BC.
54 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Overview of Environmental Risk PBDE release (actual/potential) PBDE release (actual/potential) Data during recycling/processing during landfilling / incineration Availability
There are technologies available to detect bromine-containing plastics in shredded e- waste, these might be viable tools to keep PBDEs out of landfill and ensure proper recycling of PBDE plastics from e-waste, however even the best technologies provide less than 95% effective rate, and are expensive to implement. In North America 100% of casings are expected to have bromated flame retardants in the 204 plastics . Computer What: Environmental risk of PBDE releases in computer monitor The monitor interior and glass does not contain The monitor interior and glass does not Limited monitors (Non- casings is outlined above. The environmental risk of PBDE releases in PBDEs, only the casing. contain PBDEs, only the casing. Casing) the remainder of the monitor (not including the case) is nil. The computer monitor glass and interior does not contain PBDEs, only the casing for the monitor. Coatings for What: There are no environmental or human health risks from the See circuit boards and casings. See circuit boards and casings. Limited – e- wires and normal use phase of this product, while there is a high environmental waste in cables risk of PBDE releases landfill from disposal of these products and a literature is medium risk from recycling. treated as a Media: Environmental risk could occur from landfill leachate from generic historic practices of landfilling e-waste, compared to recycling in category, programs that utilize ESM protocols. nothing in particular for Plastic coatings for wires and cables in electronics chargers and wire coatings adapters historically contain PBDEs. Examples include polypropylene was identifed. (for electronics), acetate copolymers (ethylene-vinyl acetate [and other copolymers for wire and cable), ethyelene-propylene-diene terpolymer (EPDM) and thermoplastic elastomers (for wire and cable), and polyester resins for electronics.
Typical processes of most risk include: blending of PBDE polymers into new polymers; formation/release during accidental fires of articles containing PBDE; and release during the combustion of waste 211 containing PBDE (in facilities and simple recycling operations) .
Phones and cell What: Brominated flame retardants are identified as substances of See electronic equipment casings above. See circuit boards and casings. Limited data on 212 phones concern during processing of end-of-life mobile phones , but not this material Plastics from mobile phones have not been The risk is greatest in all jurisdictions that category.
204 UNIDO 2015. DRAFT Guidance for the inventory of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. 211 UNEP 2010. Technical Review of the Implications of Recycling Commercial Pentabromodiphenyl Ether and Commercial Octabromodiphenyl Ether. UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/2 212 UNEP, 2008. Mobile Phone Partnership Initiative - Guidance document on the environmentally sound management of used and end-of-life mobile phones.
55 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Overview of Environmental Risk PBDE release (actual/potential) PBDE release (actual/potential) Data during recycling/processing during landfilling / incineration Availability during normal use phase for this product. widely recovered for recycling because its hard landfill used mobile phones and cordless Media: Environmental risk could occur from landfill leachate from to separate them into single stream plastics. In phones. PBDE can leach out of this material practices of landfilling old cell phones, as well as recycling processes. smelters with appropriate flue gas treatment as they are not chemically bound to plastic. plastics may be utilized in the metal recovery As landfill leachate is collected and sent to Mobile phones are comprised of a plastic case printed circuit Board, process, where they serve as a source of heat, a municipal wastewater plants for treatment, Liquid Crystal Display (LCD), keypad, microphone, a battery and a substitute for other hydrocarbon fuels and as a remaining biosolids usually still contain charger. The casing and circuit board would contain PBDEs. Other reducing agent. PBDEs and biosolids are often applied to 214 parts of the phone contain other hazardous materials but PBDEs are land as final disposal . Most landfills in typically only present in the casing, circuit board, and plastic coated When cell phones are recycled through Ontario send their leachate to municipal wire on the charger. Call2Recycle in Canada or the U.S., waste wastewater treatment plants. products are responsibly and safely disposed of Cordless phones (in-home use) include the same type of plastic casing according to the R2 and Basel Action Network on the exterior of the phone and they typically also include flame (BAN) standards. All recycling occurs in North retardants so are at the same risk level as mobile phones, although are America, and nothing is disposed of in a landfill 213 not typically replaced as quickly so their disposal rate would be lower. for collected phones within this program .
The R2 Standard requires: Engineering controls such as: isolation, ventilation and capture (e.g., fume hood); dust control, capture, and clean up; protocols to reduce emissions of PDBEs and other substances.
Construction Materials Construction What: Environmental risk of PBDE releases from insulation materials It is believed that virtually all insulation foams There are over 4 million tonnes of CRD Limited data on materials such Media: PDBE releases could occur from landfill leachate as most are disposed to landfills along with other CRD waste materials generated in Canada this material as insulation insulation foams found in mixed CRD waste is disposed of in landfill. wastes. annually. Of this, 84% is typically disposed, category. foams, with the vast majority of this amount insulation PBDEs have been used for a long time in foams and other thermal If CRD wastes are sent to CRD recycling facilities, disposed of in landfills (3 353 500 tonnes). boards/structur insulation materials. the foams and plastics are generally treated as Foam insulation represents 0.2% of this al insulated residues which are then disposed of, quantity, which means that an estimated 6 panels. conventionally in landfills. 707 tonnes of insulation materials are 215 disposed to Canadian landfills annually .
In the U.S. most mixed CRD wastes that contain foams are also landfilled.
213 Call2Recycle http://www.call2recycle.ca/physical-flowchart/#sthash.XuetNETv.dpuf 214 UNIDO 2012. Guidance for the inventory of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants 215 Guy Perry and associates, 2015. Characterization and Management of Construction, Renovation and Demolition (CRD) Waste in Canada. Report Prepared for Environment Canada.
56 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product Overview of Environmental Risk PBDE release (actual/potential) PBDE release (actual/potential) Data during recycling/processing during landfilling / incineration Availability Plastic films What: Environmental risk of PBDE releases in mixed CRD waste Materials currently recycled from CRD wastes do There are over 4 million tonnes of CRD Limited data on used in Media: PDBE releases could occur from landfill leachate as most not typically contain PBDEs (e.g. wood, concrete, waste materials generated in Canada this material insulation; mixed CRD waste is disposed of in landfill as is virtually all waste shingles, drywall, etc.) so there is minimal risk of annually, with 1,114,373 tonnes in Ontario category. adhesives / plastic materials. PBDE emissions from this sector during recycling alone. Of this, 84% is typically disposed, sealants / operations for those products that can and are with the vast majority of this amount paints; plastic PBDEs have been used for a long time in construction sector materials currently recycled. disposed of in landfills; very small amounts coatings for such as insulation films, cable insulations, foils, other polymer are disposed of at energy-from-waste (EFW) pipes / fittings materials, some paints, adhesives and coatings. Environment Canada Most CRD waste that is recycled is done at facilities. Note that the vast majority of estimates that PBDEs are expected to still be used in pipes, stadium transfer stations where CRD waste is segregated plastics from CRD waste are landfilled as seats, reinforced plastics, switches and connectors, laminates for for marketable material such as wood, steel, residue because they are not clean enough, insulation panels, film for use under the roof and to protect building concrete, drywall, bricks etc. This type of waste produced in sufficient quantities, or of a areas, electrical ducts and fittings, components in analytical generally is at transfer stations for a short term single resin, and are therefore not valuable 217 equipment in industrial and medical laboratories, air ducts for until trucked to recycling or processing facilities. to plastics recyclers . It is the plastic ventilation systems, and pillars for telephone and communication coatings, resins, films and sealants that 216 cables . typically contain PBDEs in CRD waste so this is currently landfilled. As a result of these many uses in construction materials, bromated flame retardants have been confirmed as present in CRD wastes in In the U.S. most mixed CRD wastes that Canada. These substances are found in thermal insulation materials, contain plastics, adhesives, sealants, textiles for usage in residual and commercial wall coverings, latex coatings on pipes, etc. are also landfilled. binders, adhesives, paints, insulation boards in building construction (e.g. walls, ceilings and roofs.
216 Bromine Science and Environmental Forum 2006 Fact Sheet. Applications of DECA-PBDE http://www.bsef.com/uploads/library/Deca-BDE%20Applications%202.06.pdf 217 Guy Perry and associates, 2015. Characterization and Management of Construction, Renovation and Demolition (CRD) Waste in Canada. Report Prepared for Environment Canada.
57 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report 4.0 JURISDICTION REVIEW OF REGULATIONS AND INITIATIVES TARGETING PBDEs IN THE GREAT LAKES BASIN
A review of relevant regulations and initiatives by international, and U.S. and Canadian jurisdictions has been completed and is presented below.
4.1 Overview of International Initiatives
4.1.1 United Nations Environment Program: Stockholm and Basel Conventions
The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) is an international treaty signed under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) designed to “protect human health and the environment from chemicals that remain intact in the environment for long periods, become widely distributed geographically, accumulate in the fatty tissue of humans and wildlife, and have harmful impacts on human health or on the 218 environment.” . The Convention was signed in May 2001 and came into force in May 2004. Canada both signed and ratified the Convention in 2001. The US signed the Convention in 2001 but has not yet ratified it, although it is an observer to Convention deliberations and activities.
The Convention requires parties to prohibit and/or eliminate the production and use, as well as the import and export of intentionally and unintentionally produced POPs. In addition the Convention promotes the use of best available technologies and environmental practices to prevent the releases of POPs and is designed to ensure that stockpiles and wastes containing or contaminated with POPs are managed safely and in an environmentally sound manner. The Convention does not have any specific provisions for the regulation of export of POPs but in the event that a POP is covered under the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal the provisions of the Basel Convention will be applied. POPs may only be imported by parties if they are to be disposed of in an environmentally friendly manner or used for an explicitly permitted purpose under the terms of the Convention (Annex A or B).
In May 2009 the Stockholm Convention was amended to add two PBDE groups containing four congeners to Annex A of the Convention:
Hexabromodiphenyl ether and heptabromodiphenyl ether and, Tetrabromodiphenyl ether and pentabromodiphenyl ether.
218 Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants http://chm.pops.int/TheConvention/Overview/tabid/3351/Default.aspx
58 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
These substances are also listed under the Basel Convention and are therefore subject to the Basel requirements regarding their transport and disposal. The Stockholm Convention works jointly with the Basel Convention and the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade and all three Conventions are engaged in a major synergies initiative and share a common secretariat.
Under the terms of the Basel Convention which was adopted in 1989 parties are required to ensure that the transboundary movement of hazardous and other wastes such as PBDEs are minimized and that any movement is conducted in an environmentally sound manner to protect human health and the environment. The Convention is built on a prior informed consent procedure under which requirements for transboundary movements are set out and parties are required to give notice of movements, issue consent and the necessary documents and confirm environmentally sound disposal. Parties have the right to prohibit the import of hazardous wastes and other wastes.219 Canada both signed and ratified the Convention in 1992 whereas the US signed the Convention in 1990 but has not yet ratified it. The US is however a regular observer and participant on sub-committees and transboundary movements are sometimes addressed through bi-lateral national agreements such as between Canada and the US. Movement of hazardous wastes from the US to Basel parties would be covered under the Basel requirements by the receiving country.
The Stockholm Convention is primarily aimed at restricting the production and the use of chemicals which have been designated as POPs whereas the Basel Convention is directed to the management of these substances when they become wastes. In the case of the Stockholm Convention the policies and regulations are directed at the manufacture and use of PBDEs whereas the Basel Convention is directed towards the transshipment of waste PBDES and at waste products such as electronics which could contain PBDEs. With the exception of electronics, neither the Basel, nor Stockholm Conventions, explicitly targets the large majority of the products identified in this study which either do, or could, contain PBDEs.
As part of its 2014-2015 work program, the Basel Convention’s Open Ended Working Group (OEWG) has been charged with updating the general technical guidelines for the environmentally sound management of wastes consisting of, containing or contaminated with POPs listed by the Stockholm Convention. The work explicitly includes the preparation of guidance for the environmentally sound management of hexa, hepta, tetra, and penta BDEs.220
219 UNEP, International Trade Control Measures under the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions, pamphlet 220 UNEP Guidance on best available techniques and best environmental practices for the recycling and disposal of wastes containing PBDEs listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants; Revised draft January 2015; UNEP/POPS/COP.7/INF/22; page 13
59 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report One of the challenges under the Basel Convention is that materials which are supposedly being shipped for secondary processing or use, such as mixed plastics collected from recycling programs, are often not identified as wastes and therefore escape the Convention’s prior informed consent procedure. In these cases the materials could be identified as market value commodities even though it is likely that the materials are really being shipped for disposal.
4.1.2 European Directive on the Restriction of the Use of Certain Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment (RoHS) (2011/65/EU)
The RoHS Directive aims to minimize the environmental impact of waste electronics and electrical equipment (WEEE), by restricting or eliminating lead (Pb), mercury (Hg), cadmium (Cd), hexavalent chromium, polybrominated biphenyls (PBB) and polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE), in amounts exceeding the established maximum concentration values. The Directive is implemented in European Union (EU) member state countries by national RoHS regulations, which differ considerably from country to country.
The scope of the initial Directive (2002/95/EC (‘RoHS1’)) has been extended to progressively cover medical devices, monitoring and control equipment and other electrical and electronic equipment and in essence covers anything that plugs into an electrical outlet or uses a battery. There are a number of specific exemptions to the regulations (e.g. some military and medical equipment) and the Commission acknowledges that it may not be possible to manufacture some products without the use of banned substances.
For PBB, and PBDE, there must be no more than 0.1% of the material, when calculated by weight, at raw homogeneous materials levels. Producers are required to demonstrate compliance with the Directive by submitting technical documentation or other information to the enforcement authority on request. The information provided should make it possible to evaluate the product’s conformity to RoHS requirements and should include an adequate analysis and assessment of the risks. At a minimum, the technical documentation should, where applicable, contain conceptual design and manufacturing drawings, technical specifications, test reports. Failing to provide the proper documentation exposes a manufacturer to sanctions from these enforcement agencies, including blocked shipments, blocked sales, and negative brand perceptions. RoHS has stimulated important changes in the design of EEE products globally by increasing producers' awareness of product composition and toxicity and mandating product design changes.221
221 Duncan Bury Consulting, 2014. Study of Chemicals in Products (CIP) Management in Scandinavian Countries. Unpublished report prepared for Environment Canada, May 2014
60 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
4.1.3 European Commission: Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) Regulation (1907/2006)
REACH was adopted to enhance the protection of human health and the environment from the risks posed by chemicals and to enhance the competitiveness of the EU chemicals industry. These objectives are achieved through the four processes of REACH, namely the ‘registration’, ‘evaluation’, ‘authorization’ and ‘restriction’ of ‘chemicals’. The Regulation calls for the progressive substitution of the most dangerous chemicals (“substances of very high concern”) when feasible alternatives are available. Certain chemicals are exempt such as those already regulated by other legislations such as medicines, or radioactive substances and requirements for other chemicals are being phased in over 11 years. The regulations apply to all chemical substances, including those used in both industrial processes and by consumers, e.g. cleaning products, paints, clothes, furniture, and electrical appliances.
REACH places an obligation on all chemical producers and importers of more than one metric tonne per year of any chemical to register the product by submitting a technical dossier of information about the properties of that chemical and its applications to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). The dossier must also include information on the risks (if any) associated with use of that chemical, and how those risks should be managed. For quantities greater than 10 tonnes, manufacturers/importers also need to submit a Chemical Safety Report (CSR) to document a safety assessment of the substance. The obligation to register applies from 1 June 2008.
REACH requires producers of “substances of very high concern (SVHC)” to apply for authorization of each particular use, show that the risks can be adequately managed (through labeling, for example), and justify such uses by showing that the socio-economic benefits from their use outweigh the risks. SVHC are: carcinogens, mutagens, or toxic to the reproductive systems, categories 1 and 2; substances which are persistent, bio-accumulative, and toxic; very persistent and very bio-accumulative; or of equivalent concern. In addition, producers are obliged to submit an analysis of possible substitutes if substitutes are available, or a research and development plan if no acceptable substitute exists.
As of 23 October 2013, 22 substances have been identified as SVHCs that are banned from use in the EU unless such use is authorized. In effect, companies who do not receive authorization for a use will be prohibited from manufacturing, importing, or using a chemical after this date. Although it is still too early to judge the effectiveness of the Regulation, some studies suggest that REACH will cause up to 10% of the existing chemicals and chemical-containing products to be removed from the EU market.222 223
222 Centre for Strategy and Evaluation Services, Interim Evaluation: Impact of the REACH Regulation on the Innovativeness of the EU Chemical Industry, 2012
61 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
4.1.4 European Commission: Regulation on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) (756/2010)
The regulation, which applies to all EU members, aims to protect human health and the environment from POPs by prohibiting, phasing out as soon as possible, or restricting the production, placing on the market, and use of substances subject to the Stockholm Convention on POPs, or the 1998 Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution on POPs. POPs, including PBDEs, are defined by the European Commission as “chemical substances that persist in the environment, bio-accumulate through the food web, and pose a risk of causing adverse effects to human health and the environment.”
Each European member state must prepare a National Implementation Plan (NIP) for the implementation of its obligations under the Stockholm Convention and is required to create an emissions inventory for unintentionally produced POPs. There is a ban on the production, placing on the market and use of certain chemicals and some POPs chemicals are banned altogether, some are banned with specific exemptions, while others may be restricted for particular purposes. There are controls on the storage and management of waste that contains POPs - including a requirement to destroy the POP content, if the concentration in the waste exceeds a certain level, and any stockpile of POPs that exceeds 50kg and is held for a legitimate purpose (therefore is not waste) must be notified to the enforcing authority.224
4.1.5 European Union: Directive 2003/11/EC and other related initiatives
Directive 2003/11/EC prohibits the importation and use of PentaBDE and OctaBDE commercial mixtures in all manufactured or imported products at concentrations greater than 0.1% by weight. An Environmental Risk Assessment Report on decaBDE, released by the European Commission in September 2009, confirmed that decaBDE has the potential to degrade into a number of dangerous and polluting chemicals which are listed by the Stockholm Convention.225 With the exception of controls on decaBDE in waste electronics and electrical equipment that are regulated through the RoHS Directive, all other controls on decaBDE are addressed through the REACH regulation.
223 Duncan Bury Consulting, 2014. Study of Chemicals in Products (CIP) Management in Scandinavian Countries. Unpublished report prepared for Environment Canada, May 2014 224 Ibid 225 Environment Canada, PBDE Risk Management Strategy, August 2010, page 15
62 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report 4.2 Overview of Federal, State, and Provincial Regulations and Initiatives Targeting PBDEs
4.2.1 Canada: Environment Canada/Health Canada
In July 2006, under Environment Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan an Ecological Screening Assessment Report, Environment Canada and Health Canada identified PBDEs as entering the environment in quantities and concentrations that may have immediate or long-term effects on the environment. Screening assessments identified seven PBDEs as “toxic” under Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 - tetra-(CAS No. 40088-47-9), penta-(CAS No. 32534-81-9), hexa-(CAS No. 36483-60-0), hepta-(CAS No. 68928-80-3), octa-(CAS No. 32536-52-0), nona-(CAS No. 63936-56-1) and decaBDE-(CAS No. 1163-19-5).226
A December 2006 Risk Management Strategy for PBDEs was published and established the objective of reducing the concentration of PBDEs in the environment to the lowest possible level and presented regulatory and voluntary measures, the development of environmental quality guidelines, international co-operation and ongoing monitoring.227 Based on these assessments, in June 2008, Canada adopted Polybrominated Diphenyl Ether Regulations under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA 1999). The regulations prohibit the manufacture, of tetra, penta, hexa, hepta, octa, nona, and deca-BDEs in Canada, and prohibit the use, sale, offer for sale and import of tetra, penta and hexa-BDEs and otherwise restrict their use.
An additional track of work was conducted on deca-BDEs based on new information respecting its potential to bio-accumulate and to be persistent. A Draft State of Science Report on the Bioaccumulation and Transformation of Decabromodiphenyl Ether was published in March 2009 and finalized in August 2010. The report, subsequent review and consultation confirmed the need for additional regulatory controls on decaBDE. In Canada there are no specific controls for products containing PBDEs other than for mixtures, polymers or resins.228
A Consultation Document on the Proposed Risk Management Instrument for Products Containing Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) was published in February 2013. The document led to a proposal to extend the earlier prohibition of the manufacture, use, sale, offer for sale, import and export of all PBDEs including deca-BDE and any resin or polymer containing these substances. Proposed regulations to amend the Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations, 2012, to
226 Environment Canada PBDE website www.ec.gc.ca/toxiques-toxics/Default.asp?lang=En&n=98E80CC6-1&xml=5046470B-2D3C- 48B4-9E46-735B7820A444 227 Environment Canada: http://www.ec.gc.ca/toxiques-toxics/Default.asp?lang=En&n=98E80CC6-1&xml=5046470B-2D3C-48B4- 9E46-735B7820A444; Risk Management Strategy for PBDEs, 2010; Consultation Document on the Proposed Risk Management Instrument for Products Containing Polyborominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs), September 2013; 228 Environment Canada, Consultation Document on the Proposed Risk Management Instrument for Products Containing PBDEs, September 2013, page 6
63 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report implement these controls were published on April 4, 2015. The proposed amendments would expand the scope of the existing prohibition for PBDEs to cover all PBDE substances, including decaBDE. PBDEs which are used in mixtures and resins are covered by the regulations but PBDEs in manufactured products are not.
A threshold of 0.1% by weight in homogeneous material is proposed for deca-BDE commercial mixtures – a threshold consistent with the Stockholm Convention and the EU’s RoHS Directive for waste electronic and electrical equipment. Because Canada has ratified and implemented thresholds under the Stockholm Convention there is no need to establish thresholds for tetra, penta, hexa and hepta-BDEs in products in this regulation. The 75 day public comment period on these amendments concluded on June 18, 2015. The schedule for final adoption and coming into force of the regulations is not known at this time.
The Government of Canada has been monitoring PBDEs in selected landfills and wastewater treatment plants since 2008. This monitoring information is being used to assess the progress and effectiveness of the risk management actions taken by the Government of Canada and to better understand potential environmental exposure from these sources.
4.2.2 United States: Environmental Protection Agency
To complement the voluntary production phase out of penta-BDE and octa-BDE that took place in 2004, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated a Significant New Use Rule229, or SNUR, (74 FR 34015) on June 13, 2006. This action was taken to: 1) address EPA concern that manufacture or import of these chemicals could possibly recur in the future; and 2) provide the opportunity for EPA review prior to any new manufacture or import of these chemicals. This SNUR requires that anyone who intends to manufacture or import a chemical substance or mixture containing any of the congeners present in c-pentaBDE or c-octaBDE after January 1, 2005 notify EPA at least 90 days in advance to allow EPA to evaluate the intended new use, and possibly limit or prohibit it. The SNUR does not address import of products to which c- pentaBDE or c-octaBDE has been added.
In 2005, the EPA-led Furniture Flame Retardancy Partnership issued a report230 which included a screening level hazard assessment of flame retardant chemicals that may be potentially suitable
229 EPA is authorized under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to determine whether a chemical substance is a “significant new use.” If a positive determination is made, TSCA requires notification to EPA at least 90 days before manufacture (including import) or processing to provide EPA the chance to review and evaluate the intended new use, and possibly regulate it. 230 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2005. Furniture Flame Retardancy Partnership: Environmental Profiles of Chemical Flame-Retardant Alternatives for Low-Density Polyurethane Foam, September 2005. Available at: http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2013-12/documents/ffr_foam_alternatives_vol1.pdf and http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2013-12/documents/ffr_foam_alternatives_vol2.pdf.
64 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report substitutes for pentaBDE. The Partnership began in 2003, and included EPA’s Design for the Environment Program, EPA Region 9, the furniture industry, chemical manufacturers, environmental groups, fire safety advocates, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The information in this report was intended to help furniture manufacturers incorporate health and environmental considerations into their selection of replacements for pentaBDE.
Also in 2006, EPA issued its Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) Project Plan231 which assessed relevant information on PBDEs and outlined EPA’s specific objectives to assess risks and substitutes for pentaBDE and octaBDE, and evaluate decaBDE. An update to this plan, issued in 2008, provided current status and next steps for each of the objectives from the Project Plan.232
In 2009, EPA issued a Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) Action Plan233 which indicated EPA’s intent to: 1) initiate rulemaking to propose a Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) SNUR for the manufacture or import of articles containing c-pentaBDE or c-octaBDE; 2) encourage the voluntary phase out of manufacture and import of c-decaBDE; 3) simultaneously propose a SNUR and test rule for c-decaBDE; 4) initiate rulemaking under TSCA to add the commercial PBDE mixtures, and/or the congeners they contain, to the list of chemicals which present or may present an unreasonable risk to health or the environment; and 5) develop an alternatives analysis for c- decaBDE. More information on these initiatives is provided below.
In 2010, EPA released An Exposure Assessment of Polybrominated Dipheyl Ethers which examined the production, use, and life cycle of these chemicals, as well as environmental fate and human exposure.234 General findings indicated human exposure concerns including that PBDE body burdens in the U.S. were higher than in other countries (primarily compared with Europe), that infant and toddlers had higher exposures than older children and adults, and the importance of the dust pathway of exposure.
In March of 2012, EPA proposed to amend the 2006 SNUR related to PBDEs, and concurrently proposed a TSCA test rule for c-pentaBDE, c-octaBDE, and c-decaBDE. The current status of these
231 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) Project Plan, March 2006. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/existingchemicals/pubs/actionplans/proj-plan32906a.pdf. 232 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2008. Tracking Progress on U.S. EPA’s Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) Project Plan: Status Report on Key Activities, December 2008. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/existingchemicals/pubs/actionplans/pbdestatus1208.pdf. 233 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) Action Plan, December 31, 2009. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/existingchemicals/pubs/actionplans/pbdes_ap_2009_1230_final.pdf. 234 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development. 2010. An Exposure Assessment of Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers, May 2010. EPA/600/R-08/086F. Available at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=210404.
65 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report proposals is not known at this time. However, from a review of recent EPA documents on PBDEs, it appears that these proposals have not yet been passed.235,236 The amendment to the SNUR would: 1) designate processing of any combination of the PBDE congeners contained in c-pentaBDE or c- octaBDE for any use which is not ongoing, as a significant new use; 2) designate manufacture, import, or processing of decaBDE for any use not ongoing after December 31, 2013, as a significant new use; and 3) designate the manufacture (including import) or processing of any article to which PBDEs had been added as a significant new use and be subject to reporting. The proposed test rule requires development of information to determine the health and environmental effects of manufacturing, processing, or other activities involving these c-PBDEs. Promulgation of the test rule by EPA was expected only if manufacture, import, or processing of c- PBDEs, including in articles, had not ceased by December 31, 2013. This date coincides with a deadline to end production, import, and sales of c-decaBDE voluntarily committed to by the two U.S. manufacturers and the major U.S. importer of c-decaBDE. This commitment did not address products made with decaBDE. Note that while all sales were originally scheduled to end by December 31, 2013, they are now expected to end by December 31, 2015.
Due to concerns with decaBDE’s hazards as well as its potential to transform into other PBDE congeners, EPA included decaBDE in its Voluntary Children’s Chemical Evaluation Program (VCCEP). Industry-sponsored screening level risk assessments were conducted for pentaBDE, octaBDE, and decaBDE to evaluate potential risks to children and prospective parents. In August 2005, EPA released documents which noted evidence suggesting development and reproductive effects for PBDEs and requested industry sponsors to provide additional data. When the companies involved did not provide this data, EPA announced an intention to proceed with a test rule under TSCA. Subsequently, the main manufacturers and importers put forth a commitment to phase out manufacture, import, and sales of decaBDE.237
Initiated in 2010, as part of its action plan for PBDE, EPA, through a multi-stakeholder process, conducted a decaBDE alternatives assessment to help decision makers choose safer alternatives to decaBDE. The final report for this effort was released in January 2014.238
235 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2014. EPA’s Technical Fact Sheet - Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) and Polybrominated Biphenyls (PBBs), January 2014. Available at: http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014- 03/documents/ffrrofactsheet_contaminant_perchlorate_january2014_final_0.pdf. 236 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2015. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) Action Plan Summary, Last updated 6/2/2015. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/existingchemicals/pubs/actionplans/pbde.html. 237 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) Action Plan, December 31, 2009. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/existingchemicals/pubs/actionplans/pbdes_ap_2009_1230_final.pdf. 238 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2014. An Alternatives Assessment for the Flame Retardant Decabromodiphenyl Ether (DecaBDE), January 2014. Available at: http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-05/documents/decabde_final.pdf.
66 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report In September 2015, EPA announced the availability of two reports on alternatives assessments for flame retardants. The first report addresses flame retardant chemicals used in upholstered consumer products containing flexible polyurethane foam (FPUF).239 A comparison of the potential human health and environmental effects of 20 chemical alternatives is provided in the report as well as information about other methods to provide increased fire safety. The report finalizes information in a 2014 update and supplement to the 2005 report on pentaBDE alternatives which was developed by EPA’s Design for the Environment (DfE) Furniture Flame Retardancy Partnership.
The second report issued by EPA at this time is related to printed circuit boards for electronic products.240 This report provides: 1) updated human health and environmental information on 10 flame retardants; and 2) a summary of research on combustion by-products from burning printed circuit boards. It finalizes information in a 2014 update to the 2008 draft alternatives assessment report. This report is intended to be useful to manufacturers in choosing safer materials and meeting environmental standards for greener or environmentally preferable electronics.
4.3 Discussion of Federal Initiatives in Canada and the U.S.
From a substance-specific perspective, there has been extensive activity that has taken place by both U.S. and Canadian federal governments throughout the past ten years. At the federal level in the U.S., non-regulatory initiatives in combination with the pressure from the threat of regulatory action were successful in achieving voluntary commitments from the primary manufacturers and an importer of penta-BDE, octa-BDE, and deca-BDE to phase out production and import of these substances approximately 10 years ago. In addition, in both Canada and the U.S., detailed strategies and action plans were developed in consultation with many stakeholders to address concerns related to these substances during the 2006-2009 timeframe. Also in this time period, the Canadian government adopted regulations to restrict manufacture and import of a variety of PBDEs, and the U.S. government passed regulations to restrict manufacture and import of penta- and octa-BDE. Canada has also ratified and implemented thresholds under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants which requires prohibition and/or elimination of the production and use, as well as import and export, of tetra, penta-, hexa- and hepta-BDEs. Canada ratified the Basel Convention which requires that transboundary movement of hazardous and other wastes, such as PBDE substances, are minimized and that any such movement is conducted in a manner protective of human health and the environment.
239 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2015. Flame Retardants Used in Flexible Polyurethane Foam: An Alternatives Assessment Update, August 2015. EPA 744-R-15-002. Available at: http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015- 08/documents/ffr_final.pdf. 240 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2015. Flame Retardants in Printed Circuit Boards, August 2015, EPA 744-R-15-001. Available at: http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-08/documents/pcb_final_report.pdf.
67 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report There has been somewhat less activity at the federal level for initiatives targeting products containing PBDEs. From the Canadian federal government there has been no specific activity relating to products containing PBDEs. From the U.S. federal government, products containing PBDEs were part of proposed regulatory changes but are currently not in force.
While not specifically targeting PBDEs, a body representing all Provincial and Territorial Ministers of Environment, the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME), together developed a 2009 Canada-Wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility (CAPEPR), which targeted some product categories for increased diversion from disposal at end of life including several products and materials that contain PBDEs such as construction and demolition materials, furniture, textiles, carpet, and appliances. This Action Plan, however, is voluntary and under the jurisdiction of each Provincial and Territorial Minister of Environment so each has their own priorities and are progressing at very different rates in terms of regulating EPR programs for these materials.
More recently, both countries, at the national level have pursued additional regulatory action on PBDEs through proposed rules, which, while not yet final, may have placed additional pressure to find suitable alternatives and/or reduce use of PBDEs. In the U.S., non-regulatory activity in the past few years has focused on evaluating alternatives to decaBDE, including in specific product areas (flexible polyurethane foam and printed circuit boards). This effort has engaged industry, state and local governments, other federal agencies, academics, and NGOs. The Government of Canada also has had an active PBDE monitoring program in place for landfills and wastewater treatment plants since 2008 to assess the progress and effectiveness of the risk management actions taken to date by the government.
Table 4 summarizes the Canadian and U.S. national initiatives on PBDEs in substances, and Table 5 summarizes the Canadian and U.S. national initiatives on PBDEs in products.
68 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Table 4: Comparison of Canadian and U.S. National Initiatives on PBDEs (Substances)
Canadian Regulatory Initiatives: PBDE Substances U.S. Regulatory Initiatives: PBDE Substances PBDE National Regulatory National Regulatory Initiative for a National Regulatory Initiative National Regulatory Initiative substances Initiative mixture, polymer or resin for this substance for a mixture, polymer or resin Restrictions on Restrictions on use, sale, import of Yes – restrictions Restrictions on manufacture manufacture and import of c-penta-BDE congeners, mixtures, polymers, on manufacture and import (SNUR 2006). any congeners present in c- resins in this group. penta-BDE (SNUR 2006). Restrictions on Not currently in force. Proposed Yes – restrictions Restrictions on manufacture manufacture and import of c-octa-BDE Regulatory Amendments to include on manufacture and import (SNUR 2006). any congeners present in c- this mixture (2015) octa-BDE (SNUR 2006). Restrictions on use, sale, import of Yes – restrictions tetra-BDE congeners, mixtures, polymers, None identified None identified on manufacture resins in this group. Restrictions on use, sale, import of Yes – restrictions hexa-BDE congeners, mixtures, polymers, None identified None identified on manufacture resins in this group. Not currently in force. Proposed Yes – restrictions hepta-BDE Regulatory Amendments to include None identified None identified on manufacture this mixture (2015) Not currently in force. Proposed Yes – restrictions nona-BDE Regulatory Amendments to include None identified None identified on manufacture this mixture (2015) Not currently in force. Proposed Yes – restrictions deca-BDE Regulatory Amendments to include None identified None identified on manufacture this mixture (2015) Canadian Non-Regulatory Initiatives: PBDE Substances U.S. Non-Regulatory Initiatives: PBDE Substances National Non-Regulatory PBDE National Non- National Non-Regulatory Initiative for National Non-Regulatory Initiative for a mixture, substances Regulatory Initiative a mixture, polymer or resin Initiative polymer or resin Risk Management PBDEs Project Plan (2006) PBDEs Project Plan (2006) c-penta-BDE Risk Management Strategy (2006) Strategy (2006) and Action Plan (2009) and Action Plan (2009) Risk Management PBDEs Project Plan (2006) PBDEs Project Plan (2006) c-octa-BDE Risk Management Strategy (2006) Strategy (2006) and Action Plan (2009) and Action Plan (2009) Risk Management tetra-BDE Risk Management Strategy (2006) None identified None identified Strategy (2006) Risk Management hexa-BDE Risk Management Strategy (2006) None identified None identified Strategy (2006) Risk Management hepta-BDE Risk Management Strategy (2006) None identified None identified Strategy (2006) Risk Management nona-BDE Risk Management Strategy (2006) None identified None identified Strategy (2006) Action Plan (2009) voluntary Action Plan (2009) commitments to end voluntary commitments to Risk Management production, import and end production, import and deca-BDE Risk Management Strategy (2006) Strategy (2006) sales by Dec 31, 2013, but sales by Dec 31, 2013, but are now expected by Dec are now expected by Dec 31, 2015. 31, 2015.
69 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Table 5: Comparison of Canadian and U.S. National Initiatives on PBDEs (Products)
Canadian Regulatory National Initiatives: Products U.S. Regulatory National Initiatives: Products National Regulatory Initiatives for Products Products National Regulatory Initiatives for Products Containing PBDEs? Containing PBDEs? Not currently in force.
2012 Proposed amendments to the 2006 SNUR include manufacture and import ofarticles/products or the processing of any articles/products. Note that although the rule has not been Any PBDE promulgated, the effective date of the rule is the proposed date (2012) None identified Products to prevent any new use during this period before finalization of the rule.
A 2012 proposed test rule was to require development of information to determine health and environmental effects of manufacturing, processing, or other activities involving PBDEs. Canadian Non-Regulatory National Initiatives: U.S. Non-Regulatory National Initiatives: Products Products National Non-Regulatory Initiatives for Products National Non-Regulatory Initiatives for Products Containing PBDEs? Products Containing PBDEs? Action Plan (2009) included voluntary commitments to end manufacture, import, or processing of c-PBDEs, including in articles, by Any PBDE None identified December 31, 2013. While all sales were originally scheduled to end Products by December 31, 2013, they are now expected to end by December 31, 2015.
4.4 Discussion of State and Provincial Initiatives
A detailed review of each State and Provincial initiatives is presented in a series of state and province-specific templates presented in Appendix B to this report. The discussion presented below is based on that information, and the tables which follow this discussion.
Half of the U.S. Great Lakes’ States have prohibitions on manufacturing, processing, and distribution of both products and flame-retardant part of a product containing penta-and octa- BDE above a given threshold. In eight of the nine States and Provinces surrounding the Great Lakes, there are EPR laws for electronics which require recycling at end of life, and most of these laws also include landfill and/or incineration bans for electronics. Four of these jurisdictions include requirements that manufacturers disclose whether electronic products exceed the limits for PBDEs under the Restriction on Hazardous Substances Directive 2002/95/EC of the European Union.
Of the Great Lakes Provincial- and State-level jurisdictions, Minnesota has the most extensive regulatory program related to PBDEs which includes: 1) a prohibition on manufacture, processing, or distribution of a product or flame-retardant part of a product containing more than 0.1 percent of penta-BDE or octa-BDE; 2) state agency procurement requirements; 3) an EPR law for
70 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report electronics; 4) landfill bans for certain electronics; and 5) the only requirements of any U.S. jurisdiction in the Great Lakes region regulating deca-BDE, substitutes for deca-BDE, and specific product categories (children’s products and residential upholstered furniture).
The absence in Ontario of any regulations focused on substances is related to the authority of the Canadian federal government over toxics under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) in contrast to the authority of provincial governments which is more focused on wastes.
The following tables summarize the government initiatives at the Provincial and State levels. The Tables are outlined as follows:
Table 6: Jurisdiction Review Matrix Summary - Government Regulatory Initiatives (Substances) Table 7: Jurisdiction Review Summary – Government Regulatory Initiatives (Products)
Note that in the tables where a clear restriction on a substance use or a product’s end of life management has been identified the cell is not shaded and appears white. All grey shaded cells either have no initiatives identified, or have a “soft” initiative identified such as a study underway or other commitment which does not have evidence of becoming a real program, policy, or regulation in the near future.
71 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Table 6: Jurisdiction Review Summary - Government Regulatory Initiatives (PBDE Substances)
ON NY PA OH MI IL IN WI MN REGULATIONS SPECIFICALLY TARGETED AT PBDES Yes: Yes: Yes: Yes: manufacturing, manufacturing, manufacturing, manufacturing, c-penta-BDE None identified processing or None identified None identified processing or processing or None identified None identified processing or distribution if > distribution > distribution > distribution > 0.1% penta-BDE 0.1% penta-BDE 0.1% penta-BDE 0.1% penta-BDE Yes: Yes: Yes: Yes: manufacturing, manufacturing, manufacturing, manufacturing, c-octa-BDE None identified processing or None identified None identified processing or processing or None identified None identified processing or distribution if > distribution > distribution > distribution > 0.1% octaBDE 0.1% octa-BDE 0.1% octa-BDE 0.1% octa-BDE tetra-BDE None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified hexa-BDE None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified hepta-BDE None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified nona-BDE None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified deca-BDE None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified
72 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Table 7: Jurisdiction Review Summary – Government Regulatory Initiatives (PBDE Products)
Product ON NY PA OH MI IL IN WI MN Generic – Generic Generic Generic Generic regulation: products regulation: all regulation: all regulation: all all products containing products products products containing > 0.1% PBDEs containing > containing > containing > penta / octa PBDE 0.1% penta / 0.1% penta / 0.1% penta / restricted from octa PBDE octa PBDE octa PBDE manufacture, restricted from restricted from restricted processing, or manufacture, manufacture, from distribution. processing, or processing, or manufacture, distribution. distribution. processing, or Carpet pads and distribution. used vehicles are Carpet pads and exempt. used vehicles Recycling is are exempt. excluded. Public procurement to be PBDE-free (mandatory).
Prohibits substitution of chemicals for deca- BDE known to, or suspected of, causing certain health effects. Furniture 2018 restrictions on See above See above See above and manufacture/ sales/ regulations regulations regulations upholstery None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified distribution if targeted at targeted at targeted at >1,000ppm PBDEs PBDEs PBDEs decaBDE Carpet See above See above regulations regulations Identified as See above targeted at See above targeted at PBDEs. potential EPR by regulations PBDEs (carpet regulations None identified None identified None identified None identified ON Gov’t. No targeted at pad is exempt targeted at 2016 status report policy in effect. PBDEs from PBDEs on federal, int’l, regulation). state laws on PBDEs in carpet padding. Drapes, See above See above See above See above blinds, None identified regulations None identified None identified regulations regulations None identified None identified regulations coated targeted at targeted at targeted at targeted at PBDEs.
73 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product ON NY PA OH MI IL IN WI MN textiles PBDEs PBDEs PBDEs Clothing See above See above See above See above regulations regulations regulations regulations None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified targeted at targeted at targeted at targeted at PBDEs. PBDEs PBDEs PBDEs Child car 2018 restrictions on See above See above See above seats and manufacture/ sales/ regulations regulations regulations children’s’ None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified distribution if targeted at targeted at targeted at products >1,000ppm PBDEs PBDEs PBDEs decaBDE Mattresses See above and pillows regulations See above See above See above targeted at PBDEs. regulations regulations regulations None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified 2016 status report targeted at targeted at targeted at on federal, intn’l, PBDEs PBDEs PBDEs state laws on PBDEs in mattresses. Vehicle See above seats regulations See above See above targeted at See above regulations regulations None identified None identified None identified PBDEs (used None identified None identified regulations targeted at targeted at vehicles exempt targeted at PBDEs PBDEs PBDEs from regulation) Polymer See above See above See above See above resins and regulations regulations regulations None identified None identified None identified None identified None identified regulations mouldings targeted at targeted at targeted at targeted at PBDEs PBDEs PBDEs PBDEs Large Identified as See above See above See above See above appliances potential EPR by regulations regulations regulations None identified None identified None identified None identified regulations ON Gov’t. and targeted at targeted at targeted at targeted at PBDEs by CCME PBDEs PBDEs PBDEs Small Identified as See above See above See above See above appliances potential EPR by regulations regulations regulations None identified None identified None identified None identified regulations CCME targeted at targeted at targeted at targeted at PBDEs PBDEs PBDEs PBDEs Electronics / Yes: mandatory Yes: mandatory Yes: mandatory None identified Yes: mandatory Yes: Yes: mandatory Yes: mandatory Yes: mandatory EPR electrical EPR program EPR program. EPR program. EPR program. mandatory EPR program EPR program program. equipment operated Residential Residential and Residential and EPR program. Residential, Residential and collectively. For only. small business. small business. Residential schools, and small schools. See above Residential only. business. regulations only. See above State-level ban See above State level ban targeted at PBDEs.
74 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Product ON NY PA OH MI IL IN WI MN regulations on landfill regulations See above State level ban on on landfill and No province- targeted at targeted at regulations landfill and incineration State level ban on wide landfill PBDEs. PBDEs. targeted at incineration landfill of cathode ban (80% of PBDEs. ray tubes landfills have State-level ban banned on landfill and State level electronics). incineration ban on landfill Province-wide and incineration ban incineration Mobile or Included in See above None identified None identified See above See above None identified None identified See above cordless electronics EPR regulations regulations regulations regulations phones program. targeted at targeted at targeted at targeted at PBDEs PBDEs PBDEs PBDEs Foam None identified See above None identified None identified See above See above None identified None identified See above insulation/ regulations regulations regulations regulations wires/cable targeted at targeted at targeted at targeted at PBDEs PBDEs PBDEs PBDEs
75 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
4.5 Evaluation of the Management of PBDEs in the Great Lakes Basin - Identification of Gaps
Using the information presented in this Chapter, an evaluation, at the strategic level, of the broader picture of the management of PBDEs in the Great Lakes Basin is provided here. The intent of this task was not to evaluate the performance and effectiveness of each separate initiative or regulation identified, but rather, to examine, the overall coverage of initiatives in place to manage PBDEs and PBDE sources, thereby minimizing PBDE releases. The key authority for management responsibilities would be government actors, so the overall coverage of initiatives documented in this Chapter has been reviewed based on the: comprehensiveness of the initiatives identified as being in effect; consistency in approach across governments; and focus of each initiative. Each of these is discussed in more detail below.
4.5.1 Comprehensiveness of Initiatives in Place
In examining comprehensiveness, consideration is primarily given to whether the initiatives address: both PBDE-containing products and PBDE substances; a range of products (e.g., electronics, carpet, furniture, textiles, etc.); a range of sectors (residential and/or institutional/commercial/industrial (ICI); and a range of life cycle aspects from production, distribution, and import to end-of-life. The contribution of non-governmental initiatives is also discussed.
With federal requirements in the U.S. and Canada, and restrictions in four of the Great Lakes’ States regarding penta-BDE and octa-BDE, the production, processing, and distribution of substances are well-covered. In addition, the regulatory requirements address a range of products and sectors. However, four of the nine Great Lakes Provinces and States (ON, PA, OH, and WI) do not regulate PBDEs directly, or at all (some do have electronics EPR laws, which aim to keep electronics out of landfills, but there are no end-of life regulations for all other product categories listed in the above Tables). In Canada, Provinces do not have authority to regulate chemicals or chemicals in products, but they do have ultimate authority for waste management. It only requires that manufacturers report whether video display devices sold exceed the limits for PBDEs under the RoHS Directive 2002/95/EC of the EU.
There are no Canadian and U.S. federal requirements to address finished products containing PBDEs (other than mixtures, polymers, and resins in Canada), both manufacture and import. In the U.S., jurisdictional authority is unclear for EPA with respect to parties other than chemical manufacturers, processors, and formulators. Thus, there is no U.S. federal enforcement for end- users of the chemicals in other manufacturing avenues. At the state level, a weakness of U.S. requirements is in addressing imports of penta-BDE and octa-BDE, or imports of products containing these substances. While regulatory programs have been identified it is unclear to what
76 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report degree enforcement is taking place in any of these jurisdictions. There are some indications from the research that there are laws/regulations that have not been enforced, and/or have no dedicated resources, or basis for, enforcement. Further investigation of this issue is required to determine whether this constitutes a significant regulatory gap, undermining comprehensiveness of the management of PBDEs in the Great Lakes. Ontario has no requirements that restrict manufacture, distribution, and import of PBDEs or PBDE-containing products (the Canadian federal restrictions only pertain to PBDE substances used in manufacture, not finished products).
Deca-BDE is currently unregulated in the U.S. Great Lakes’ jurisdictions. However, implementation of a law passed in Minnesota in May 2015 is set to begin in 2018. This law prohibits manufacture and sale of deca-BDE specifically for use in children’s products and residential upholstered furniture, and also prohibits manufacturer substitution of chemicals for deca-BDE that are known to, or suspected of, causing certain health effects.
While not directly related to minimizing PBDE releases in the Great Lakes basin, the process for reviewing substitutes is a key issue. While there is no standard procedure in Canada or the U.S. for evaluating alternatives, no restriction on use of alternatives until evaluated, and no policies to address new products, frameworks to assess substitutes for PBDEs are becoming more prevalent. Lack of requirements to generate and provide information to regulatory agencies on chemicals and alternatives is an important aspect of addressing the release of PBDEs in the Great Lakes region. Furthermore, the requirements for flame retardants arising from flammability standards affect the ability to minimize PBDE releases in the Great Lakes basin (see Chapter 2.0 of this report for further discussion of this issue).
There are very few requirements related to end-of-life management of PBDE-containing products in the U.S. and Canada. Even in laws that specifically target PBDEs and PBDE-containing products, three U.S. states specifically exempt the processing of at least some recyclables under these laws (IL, MI, and MN). The gap in the U.S. federal regulations of PBDEs in products effectively means that recycling of the wide range of products containing PBDEs is also not regulated at the federal level. It is possible that some proactive recyclers are monitoring for PBDEs, but there are no requirements to do so.
Recycling programs regulated under extended producer responsibility (EPR) laws exist for electronics in most of the Great Lakes jurisdictions. There are also landfill and incineration bans for electronics under these laws, and a few state laws require reporting on exceedances for PBDEs in electronics under the EU Restriction on Hazardous Substances (RoHS) Directive. However, while EPR can increase the amount of material diverted from disposal and provide the opportunity to set standards for the management of PBDE-containing materials recovered, none of these laws have set such standards. Furthermore, electronics is the only product category that is well-covered
77 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report from a regulatory perspective for end-of-life controls for PBDE containing consumer products, but even these regulations exclude most ICI sector electronics.
Although voluntary, non-governmental initiatives can have the potential to complement government activities. The voluntary phase-out of production and import of penta-BDE and octa- BDE in 2004, and the anticipated phase-out in December 2015 of deca-BDE production and import has likely contributed to advancing the minimization of releases of PBDEs in the Great Lakes area in two ways: 1) by accelerating the switch to alternatives; and 2) by facilitating the development and passage of requirements which regulate as well as extend the scope of these actions. For example, while the manufacturers/importers have volunteered to end production and distribution of substances, regulatory agencies worked to regulate products containing PBDEs, procurement, as well as a greater consideration of alternatives, and a process to evaluate them. In addition, regulations have sought to reinforce the phase-out by preventing future recurrence of manufacture or import of PBDEs without notification and evaluation by regulatory agencies.
Voluntary programs for end-of-life management of PBDE-containing products are also available for a wide range of products. There is a market that drives informal charitable organizations in key sectors such as: reusing or recycling clothing, textiles including drapes, blinds, and large appliances. These categories are likely the smallest PBDE releasing product categories and are not considered priorities. Some products such as children’s car seats are not allowed to be reused by federal safety regulations and must be disposed of in landfill as there are no recycling programs for them. Other industry organizations that are active nationally in categories such as vehicle seats and polymer mouldings might not be reducing PBDEs. The codes of conduct to recycle vehicles are primarily focussed on the environmentally sound management of removable toxics such as refrigerants, mercury or other fluids, and the resale of metals for the scrap metal market. Typically, vehicle seats and dashboards are crushed, shredded and landfilled. The existence of these non-governmental programs, to recycle and reuse a wide range of products that contain PBDEs in Canada and the U.S., means the infrastructure is at least partially in place for development and/or future advances in addressing PBDE containing products at end-of-life, including through potential EPR programs. While many voluntary programs are available across Canada and the U.S., future work might examine more closely the extent to which they are accessible in the Great Lakes region. An exhaustive study of these non-governmental initiatives has not been conducted as part of this project.
Although specific chemicals or wastes containing specific chemicals, may be classified as hazardous waste, and treated and disposed of in special hazardous waste management facilities, hazardous waste management requirements in the U.S. do not generally directly address PBDEs. Furthermore, both Canadian and U.S. hazardous waste regulations tend to exempt households where many of the PBDE-containing products are generated. While EPR addresses current use, legacy products that already are in landfills need to be considered. Leachate from landfills may be
78 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report sent to wastewater treatment plants, but effluent and sludge from these facilities is not known to be regulated consistently in the U.S. or Canada in terms of PBDE content, and available literature has not identified requirements for municipal landfills to monitor PBDEs in leachate, or for municipal wastewater treatment plants to monitor sewage sludge for PBDEs.
4.5.2 Consistency in Approach across Governments
Consistency in approach was also considered in our review of how well potential releases of PBDEs were managed by existing initiatives. This includes examining the degree to which governments are working together, or in a consistent manner, to achieve desired outcomes to reduce PBDEs in the environment including collaborative studies and complimentary policies.
In the U.S., at both the State-level and the Federal level there was awareness of key contacts in other jurisdictions, agencies, and departments which indicates a degree of communication occurring across agencies, departments, and levels of government. Work on alternatives to PBDEs, and legislative reports have brought together and required collaboration of different government agencies and departments in the U.S. While no evidence of formal connections on this issue area between the Great Lakes’ states was identified, similarity in legislative language in the four states with requirements addressing PBDEs and products-containing PBDEs (IL, MI, MN, and NY), and common adoption of the RoHS requirement by four states (IL, IN, MN, and NY) shows a consistency of approach. In legislative reports and other studies, government representatives used and referenced each other’s work, including summarizing regulatory and non-regulatory activities in other jurisdictions. The research also indicates that some states are monitoring related activities in other jurisdictions.
Again, while there was no evidence of formal links in PBDE-related programs between the U.S. government and Great Lakes’ states, there appears to be some degree of mutual awareness of activities and initiatives related to PBDEs. In Canada, the collaboration of the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment on EPR programs across Canada, although not focused on PBDEs has the potential to provide a forum for a national dialogue on this issue, including with respect to setting standards for the management of PBDE-containing materials recovered. While research in this area was limited, there was no literature identified that demonstrated significant collaboration across the Canada-U.S. border between provincial and state agencies.
With respect to monitoring activities, however, there is significant federal collaboration on this issue. The Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network (IADN) has been in operation since 1990 which commits the United States and Canada to work cooperatively towards the initiation of the IADN. Currently, the program is comprised of Environment Canada and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). IADN is part of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA). In Canada, these activities are delivered federally through the Great Lakes program, and activities
79 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report delivered at the provincial level are described in the Canada-Ontario Agreement (COA). The mandate for IADN also resides in the U.S. Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA). The U.S./Canada Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy (GLBTS), signed in 1997, called for monitoring of the atmospheric deposition of toxic chemicals to the Great Lakes basin. The goals of IADN are to: 1) determine the atmospheric loadings and trends (both spatial and temporal) of priority toxic chemicals to the Great Lakes and its basin on, at least, a biennial basis; and 2) acquire quality- assured air and precipitation concentration measurements, with attention to continuity and consistency of those measurements, so that trend data are not biased by changes in network operations or personnel. The research side of IADN is continually developing methods for new and emerging compounds of interest. Methods for PBDEs have been successfully implemented and are the newest compounds added to the list of routinely monitored substances.241
4.5.3 Focus of Initiatives
This aspect considers the degree to which the regulations or initiatives identified, which are intended to reduce PBDEs from entering the environment, are targeted towards PBDEs.
In Canada and the U.S., at the federal level, regulations specifically address PBDE substances in manufacture, sale, and import. Some U.S. State laws also target PBDEs and PBDE-containing products. Therefore, there are regulatory initiatives that can be considered to be specifically targeting PBDEs, and these are more prevalent in the U.S. than in Canada. Some State EPR laws for electronics also address PBDEs in their requirements for reporting related to the RoHS standard. However, the Ontario EPR program regulation does not specifically address PBDEs, nor does it refer to the RoHS standard. Similarly, the non-governmental initiatives identified exist primarily as a waste diversion activities and have no focus at all related to toxics management, or PBDEs. The CCME action plan on EPR, which represents Provincial direction and agreements across Provinces in Canada towards common environmental objectives, prioritizes a number of products that contain PBDEs for future EPR program development, but the action plan is not targeted towards PBDEs at all - in fact the focus is on waste diversion as being the primary objective.
4.5.4 International Regulatory and Policy Gaps
Two of the most relevant policy instruments that apply to PBDEs at the global level are the Stockholm Convention and the Basel Convention. The Stockholm Convention is primarily aimed at restricting the production and use of chemicals which have been designated as Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) whereas the Basel Convention is directed to the management of these substances at the end of their life cycle (waste).
241 Environment Canada – Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network https://www.ec.gc.ca/rs- mn/default.asp?lang=En&n=BFE9D3A3-1
80 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
One of the main gaps related to the Basel Convention relates to the fact that materials which are being shipped for secondary processing or use (such as mixed plastics collected from recycling programs) are often not identified as wastes and therefore escape the Convention’s prior informed consent procedure.
On another front, the Work Program of the Basel Convention’s Open Ended Working Group (OEWG) for 2016-2017 lists as a high priority the update of the technical guidelines for the environmentally sound management of wastes consisting of, containing or contaminated with POPs listed by the Stockholm Convention.242 The work program includes the establishment, as appropriate, of the concentration levels of the chemicals in order to define for them low persistent organic pollutant content as referred to in paragraph 1(d)(ii) of Article 6 of the Stockholm Convention as well as the review of all provisional low persistent organic pollutant content values in the technical guidelines that have already been adopted. This will include the preparation of guidance for the environmentally sound management of PBDEs. Representatives from the recycling industry have already expressed concerns over the preliminary proposal for the PBDE concentration levels, which is very low and would make most recycling of plastics and other electronic parts containing PBDEs virtually impossible, thus driving these materials to disposal.
Except for the control of decaBDE in electronic waste and electric equipment that are regulated through the RoHS Directive, all other controls on PBDEs in Europe are currently addressed through the REACH regulation. While REACH requires the registration and evaluation of chemicals, it does not impose any restriction on the use of a substance unless that substance is identified as a Substance of Very High Concern (SVHC). PBDEs are currently not identified as SVHC under REACH. Authorization is required for the prioritized Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC) that are included in Annex XIV of REACH. Companies applying for authorization have to demonstrate that risks associated with uses of these substances are adequately controlled or that the socio- economic benefits from their use outweigh the risks. Applicants also have to investigate the possibility of substituting these substances with safer alternatives or technologies. If the analysis of alternatives reveals that there is a suitable alternative, the applicant must submit a substitution plan, explaining the plan to replace the substance by the alternative.
4.5.5 Canada and US Regulatory and Policy Gaps
In the U.S., PBDE requirements are fairly comprehensive in addressing production and sales of PBDE substances, but there is a significant gap in addressing imports of products. The lack of
242http://www.basel.int/TheConvention/ConferenceoftheParties/Meetings/COP12/tabid/4248/mctl/ViewDetails/EventModID/805 1/EventID/542/xmid/13027/Default.aspx
81 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report requirements to regulate end-of-life management of products containing PBDEs also significantly reduces the degree of comprehensiveness overall in the Great Lakes Region. In the U.S., additional research regarding the degree of enforcement carried out would also help provide a clearer picture of the effectiveness of existing laws across the States in minimizing releases of PBDEs. In addition, governments have under-utilized potential economic controls such as purchasing policies or product registries across all PBDE-containing product categories. Product categories with no significant or comprehensive action include vehicle seats, polymer mouldings and resins, children’s car seats and foam products, mattresses and pillows, carpets, small appliances, construction waste such as foam insulation and wire coatings, and upholstered furniture. The technology exists to recycle mattresses, carpets, and small appliances so these might be considered a priority for action. Other categories are more difficult to recycle and do not have technologies readily available at this time (vehicle seats, polymer mouldings, children’s car seats and foam products, upholstered furniture and construction waste such as foam insulation and wire coatings in this category since they are typically mixed).
Consistency in approach to PBDE regulation in the Great Lakes region was evident, as was collaboration among jurisdictions. There are indications, however, that all jurisdictions could benefit from increased collaborative initiatives, across the border, between states, between states/provinces and their federal governments, within federal governments, and within states and provinces, specifically with regards to addressing product imports, potential product registries, and end of life management of products.
Regulatory focus on PBDEs was determined to exist, in particular for manufacture, distribution, and import of substances and products. However, there is a critical need for specific focus on end- of-life management of PBDE-containing products, including recycling, disposal, and monitoring.
See Table 8 for a summary of the identified gaps.
82 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Table 8: Gaps Assessment – State, Provincial, and Federal Authorities, and /or Non-Profit
ON NY PA OH MI IL IN WI MN Canada U.S. Initiatives specifically targeted at PBDE Substances Substances in Reg Reg Reg Reg Reg Reg manuf./processing Initiatives targeted at products containing PBDEs Generic – all products Economic / Action Plan Reg Reg Economic (some exemptions) Reg & Studies Upholstered furniture Reg Reg Reg Reg (2018) Carpet Informal Reg Informal Informal Informal Reg Informal Informal Reg Drapes, blinds, and Reg / Reg / Reg / Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal coated textiles Informal Informal Informal Clothing Reg / Reg / Reg / Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Child car seats and Reg Reg Reg Reg (2018) childrens’ products Mattresses and Reg Reg Reg Reg pillows Vehicle seats Reg Reg Reg Plastic polymer resins Reg Reg Reg and mouldings Large appliances Reg / Reg / Reg / Reg / Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Informal Small appliances Reg Reg Reg Reg Electronics and Reg Reg Reg Reg Reg Reg Reg Reg electrical equipment Mobile/cordless Reg / Reg / Reg / Reg / Reg Informal Informal Informal Informal phones Informal Informal Informal Informal Foam insulation, Reg Reg Reg Reg wires and cables etc.
Key Shaded grey cell = gap, product is typically landfilled, there were no plans for future action by authorities and no comprehensive initiatives by industry or non-profit Reg Regulatory restriction in effect Economic Economic instrument implemented (government procurement) Informal Categories where either industry or the informal non-profit sector has a nationwide reuse or recycling network in place and some proportion of the products are not typically landfilled. If a cell is completely empty there was no activity identified for that category and jurisdiction but it is not necessarily a gap because its possible a federal authority has covered the category (e.g. substances – regulated at the federal level)
83 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report 4.6 Potential Opportunities
Based on an evaluation of the management of PBDEs in the Great Lakes, and identification of significant gaps in the regulatory framework, recommendations for regulatory and non-regulatory action include:
Additional focus on PBDE-containing products and product imports; Consideration of EPR as an instrument for a number of products, with specific requirements to address PBDEs in recycling; Development of guidance on evaluating substitutes and alternatives to use of flame retardants; Ensure resources are dedicated to enforcement, and laws are designed to include a basis for enforcement; Greater regulation or guidance on landfill leachate collection and treatment, and wastewater treatment sludge for PBDEs in particular; Development of waste regulations addressing PBDEs; Establishment of government procurement policies for sourcing PBDE-free products; and Development of policies which generally establish accountability and responsibility along the entire supply chain (chemical manufacturers, user/product manufacturer, seller/retailer, consumer, and end-of-life management/recyclers/disposers).
These recommendations will be further discussed in Sections 5.0 and 6.0.
84 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
5.0 OVERVIEW AND ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL PBDE MANAGEMENT INSTRUMENTS
5.1 Overview of Regulatory PBDE Instruments
5.1.1 Substance focused regulations and initiatives
In 2008 under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA 1999) regulations were adopted in Canada prohibiting the manufacture, of tetra, penta, hexa, hepta, octa, nona, and decaBDEs , and prohibiting the use, sale, offer for sale and import of tetra, penta and hexaBDEs and otherwise restricting their use. In April 2015 additional regulations were proposed to expand the scope of the existing prohibition for PBDEs to cover all PBDE substances, including decaBDE.
Environment Canada and Health Canada have clear authority to manage environmental and health risks associated with identified substances of concern including PBDEs. While CEPA gives the federal Canadian government authority to address products containing PBDEs and could for example mandate the take back at end-of-life and environmentally sound management of such products, the primary focus of Environment Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan has been on the management of the substances themselves and less so on the products that contain the substances.
In the U.S. a Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) was adopted in 2006 designed to address penta and octa PBDE congeners and a subsequent proposed amendment released in 2012 proposes a test rule for deca-BDE.
Such initiatives, which are targeted primarily at the manufacture, use and sale of the chemicals of concern, are generally best adopted and implemented at a national level. The global marketplace and the distribution of the manufacture of the chemicals and the products that contain them, as well as import and export patterns, means that sub-national jurisdictions are less well placed to address the challenges. Both the PBDEs themselves and the products which contain them are often manufactured beyond the immediate jurisdiction which is attempting to address concerns about the chemicals and as a result the effectiveness of substance focused action tends to reside with the highest level national jurisdictions. National level regulations and initiatives are also well placed to adopt and otherwise mirror international initiatives such as those undertaken by the Stockholm Convention.
One of the significant challenges associated with any regulatory regime targeting PBDEs or in fact any substance of concern is knowing where the substance is used and specifically in which products and in what concentrations. The data that is currently available on PBDEs is based largely on quantity estimates and some sampling and testing and is often dated. There is no established
85 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report process to regularly identify or track the use of PBDEs and there is no comprehensive program to identify PBDE containing products.
The European REACH legislation and comparable product registers in Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland are a way of addressing this challenge. As noted earlier, REACH places an obligation on all chemical producers and importers of more than one metric tonne per year of any chemical to register the product. Producers submit a technical dossier of information about the properties of that chemical and its applications to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). The dossier must also include information on the risks, if any, associated with use of the chemical and how those risks should be managed. For quantities greater than 10 tonnes, manufacturers/importers also need to submit a Chemical Safety Report (CSR) to document a safety assessment of the substance. The intention behind the REACH regulation and the product registers in Scandinavia is to make available to the public as much data as possible on the use of substances in products. The registers do contain protections for confidential business information (CBI).
Because of the controls that national governments have over their borders, the movement of products and substances within their borders and also because of the resources that can be applied by national agencies and bodies, like the U.S. EPA and Environment Canada, it is usually at the national level that such regulations and regulatory oversight and enforcement functions are best conducted.
Despite the predominant role that is commonly played by national regulations, in the case of PBDEs a number of the Great Lakes states have adopted substance focused PBDE regulations. New York, Michigan, Illinois and Minnesota have all adopted legislation that prohibits the manufacture, processing and distribution of products containing more than 0.1% of pentaBDE and octaBDE. These regulations mirror to a significant degree the EU’s RoHS Directive on waste electronics and the national level U.S. initiatives under SNUR. No similar type of regulation has been adopted in Ontario or in fact in any of the other Canadian provinces where the focus is on the end-of-life management of products as wastes rather than on toxics such as those addressed by Environment and Health Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan.
These state regulations can be viewed as a positive support for national and international regulations particularly in the high profile area of electronics where the EU RoHS Directive has effectively set new standards for the use of PBDEs in electronics. State PBDE regulations in MI and NY preceded the U.S. EPA’s PBDE SNUR requirements, so action at the federal level in the U.S. may also be viewed as support for state level initiatives in this issue area. The regulations also serve to reinforce the decisions of companies in the U.S. to cease the manufacture and distribution of penta and octaBDEs in 2004 and in the case of some jurisdictions are linked to other initiatives such as green procurement and producer responsibility initiatives. The impact of the state
86 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report regulations is however to some degree overshadowed by both the national and international initiatives to address PBDEs as substances.
One of the issues associated with any sub-national regulations targeting a substance is the ability of the jurisdiction to enforce the regulations and their capacity to test for or require reporting on PBDE levels in products. There is some suggestion that despite the positive intentions of the state regulations that testing, enforcement and reporting on the legislation’s effectiveness is limited with the exception of some reporting requirements associated with some electronics recycling programs such as those operated by New York and Minnesota where confirmation of PBDEs below the threshold of 0.1 % is required.
5.1.2 Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)
EPR was a term coined in Sweden the late 1980’s and the first formal application of the concept dates to the adoption of the German Packaging Ordinance in 1991. The Packaging Ordinance mandated a fundamental shift in the responsibility for waste packaging collected by German municipalities as part of their garbage collection and disposal services from the municipality and its taxpayers to the producers and brand owners of the waste packaging.
After a 6 year work program the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) published a seminal report on EPR in 2001 which defined EPR as:
“an environmental policy approach in which a producer’s responsibility for a product is extended to the post-consumer stage of a product’s life cycle. There are two related features of EPR policy: (1) the shifting of responsibility (physically and/or economically; fully or partially) upstream toward the producer and away from municipalities, and 2) to provide incentives to producers to incorporate environmental considerations in the design of their products.”243
A similar but somewhat shorter definition of EPR was adopted in Canada by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) in 2009 as follows:
“an environmental policy approach in which a producer’s responsibility for a product is extended to the post-consumer stage of its life cycle”244
The CCME EPR Action Plan represents the commitment of all the Canadian provincial, territorial ministers of the environment and the federal minister to EPR and serves as guidance to its
243 Extended Producer Responsibility: A Guidance Manual for Governments, OECD 2001 page9 244 Canada-wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, October 2009
87 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report implementation as an environmental management tool. The fundamental uniqueness of an EPR program is that it shifts responsibility for the end-of-management of waste products to the producer of that product. Governments set up the legal framework, designate the products to be managed, establish the scope and obligations and set performance goals and reporting obligations and leave producers to run the programs as efficiently as possible.
Under an EPR program the producer– defined as the manufacturer, brand owner or first importer into a jurisdiction – of designated products, is given, through regulation, direct funding and operational responsibility for the establishment of a collection and recycling program designed to divert the designated products from disposal. A typical EPR regulation would identify the designated product, identify the responsible producer, mandate a level of recovery and recycling and establish reporting requirements. Governments are primarily responsible for oversight and other functions such as enforcement action against “free-riders” – companies whose products are being recycled but are not fulfilling their program funding or operational responsibilities.
The designation of products in an EPR regulation does not conventionally address product date of manufacture and therefore regulations are broadly inclusive of all products regardless of whether or not they were put on the market before or after the regulation came into force. Even if a regulation specifically states that it covers products put on the market after a certain date, the reality for most programs is that even if funding by producers is based on current sales, programs will inevitably collect and be responsible for legacy products and orphan products which were manufactured and put on the market before the EPR regulation came into force or by producers which are no longer in business. Consumers are neither aware nor concerned about how old the product they wish to recycle is and programs will have difficulty dating products unless expensive, and largely impractical screening processes, are put into place. Program funding models are therefore commonly designed to receive and process all products that are returned.
In response to an EPR regulation designated producers, commonly called stewards, typically band together into a not-for profit organization to assist in the management and implementation of their obligations. Stewards either register with the overseeing government body or with the established not-for-profit organization often known as a Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO). Producers can fulfil their EPR obligations directly themselves without participation in a PRO but this is only done in unique circumstances and is not often done in programs in either Canada or the US. In some US programs however producers are only made responsible for those products that they put on the market and are not obligated for the waste products in general. In these situations the designated producer commonly establishes a dedicated collection system for their own products such as a mail back return program or a return to retail system.
PROs collect fees or otherwise levy their legally obligated members to fund the collection and recycling of the designated products and enter into contracts with private operators or in some
88 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report cases municipalities for the collection, processing and marketing of the collected materials. Some EPR programs are funded with visible point of purchase “eco-fees” which in some jurisdictions have been controversial because they can be perceived by consumers as a tax. In other cases the costs of the program are built into the price of the product and there is no visible added fee paid by the consumer.
Money for EPR programs can be raised by producers applying a per unit fee on each product unit put on the market. This approach results in a considerable administrative and accounting burden associated with counting and tracking each individual unit put on the market. Alternatively costs between producers in a collective scheme can be assessed based on respective market share which would be independently and confidentially calculated, usually at the fiscal year end. In these types of programs there is no visible point of purchase fee applied. In some programs costs are allocated based on the share of products returned, which is a system which requires the precise identification of individual products returned by consumers and processed in recycling facilities.
There are hybrid producer/government programs where responsibilities and costs are shared. In these so-called shared stewardship models producers may be given responsibility to fund, in whole or in part, the collection and recycling of designated products but governments, most notably municipalities, are responsible for actual program operations including materials marketing. This is most commonly done in majority of the Canadian packaging and printed paper programs, where depending on the province, producers pay between 50% and 100% of the net costs of municipal recycling programs. These types of arrangements have proven difficult in some cases because producers want to exercise more control over municipal costs and municipalities want to maximize revenues from producers. In the case of Ontario’s municipal “blue box” recycling program negotiations between municipalities and producers have been challenging and have had to go to arbitration processes for resolution. British Columbia is the only Canadian jurisdiction where both financial and operational responsibility for packaging and printed paper recycling has been given fully to producers.
There is a wide range of products where EPR has been used as an instrument to support the collection and recycling of designated products and diversion from disposal. The designated products are commonly ones where concerns about landfill disposal have been identified and where particular hazards associated with collection and improper disposal are well known. They are also products where there is commonly a market failure of some kind which has resulted in economics which encourage disposal and not secondary materials use. Successful EPR programs are the ones which not only collect and recycle materials but also play a significant and leading role in the development and long term sustainability of new materials markets. For example before the advent of tire EPR programs in Canada waste tires were commonly dumped indiscriminately or stockpiled posing environmental risks and a significant risk of fire. Since the establishment of the EPR programs new markets for recycled crumb rubber have developed to
89 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report produce landscaping products, mats for truck beds, roofing shingles, arena flooring and mats for dairy cattle barns. These markets are sustainable because they are guaranteed a steady and reliable supply of raw materials where the costs of collection have been borne by the tire producers and not by the recyclers and secondary material processors. The tire EPR programs have demonstrated high rates of return and a considerably improved end-of-life management situation than existed previously.245
In general EPR has been applied to products which are easily identifiable and can relatively easily be source separated for recycling. In addition EPR can be relatively easily applied to products with an identifiable producer or brand owner. Such is the case with products like electronics, large and small household appliances and mattresses. Products which are components of other products such as batteries in electronics can be covered under a distinct EPR regulation but could just as easily be viewed as the responsibility of the producer in whose product the component was found. Challenges occur however with components of products which are not as easily separated either at source or at a recycling facility. In addition the producer associated with a particular component could be difficult or impossible to identify and thus no producer can be assigned producer responsibility. For example plastics used in electronics and vehicles which might contain PBDEs will be mechanically separated and shredded as part of conventional recycling processes. Even at the point of separation producer identification will be an almost insurmountable challenge and definitely impossible once shredded and co-mingled. However even if the manufacturer of the plastic could not be identified as the producer, the brand owner of the product which contained the plastic and made the design and manufacturing decisions which resulted in the use of PBDE containing materials, could be identified and made responsible.
EPR has been used in Canada since 1994 when the province of British Columbia established its used paint program and starting in 1996 when the provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba established EPR programs for used oil and used oil containers.246 The number of EPR programs has grown to over 80 as represented in Table 9 following.247 EPR programs are shaded in blue cells in Table 9.
245 Ontario Tire Stewardship, 2014 Annual Report, March 31, 2015 246 The Growth and Evolution of EPR in Canada, Duncan Bury, Americana conference, Montreal, March 2015 247 CCME 2014 Progress Report on the Canada-Wide EPR Action Plan.
90 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Table 9: Canadian EPR Programs 2014
Material/ BC AB SK MB ON QC PE NB NS NL YT NT NU Product Category Packaging - milk E – V P E – V S S S P E – V S (E – V) consider P Containers Packaging - beverage P P P liquor/ E – L P P E – L P P P P P P containers liquor/wine beer/ pop beer Multi-packaging and E – L consider S S S S consider consider consider consider printed materials Electronics - audio- E – L consider E – L E – L E – L E – L E – L pending E – L E – L consider consider visual and telecom Electronics - cell E – V E – L E – V E – V E – L E – L E – L E – L E – V* E – L E – L E – V phones consider P Electronics - E – L P E – L E – L E – L E – L E – L pending E – L E – L consider consider computers, IT equip. Electronics - tools E – L consider consider consider Electronics - TVs E – L P E – L E – L E – L E – L E – L pending E – L E – L consider consider E – L HHSW - batteries E – L S* E – V E – L E – L E – V E – V E – V E – V* single use HHSW - corrosives & E – L E – L S* consider consider P consider consider irritants corrosives E – L HHSW - aerosols, E – L E – L S* consider solvents & consider P consider consider solvents & flammables solvents flammables HHSW - mercury lamps, other mercury E – L consider consider E – L P E – L E – L consider consider products HHSW - paint E – L P E – L E – L E – L E – L E – L E – L E – L E – L HHSW - pesticides/ E – L E – V E – V* E – L E – L E – V E – V E – V E – V E – V fertilizers & containers pesticides HHSW - E – L E – V E – V E – L E – L E – V E – L E – V E – V* E – V E – V E – V pharmaceuticals HHSW - consider E – L E – L consider E – L E – V* consider E – V sharps/syringes Automotive - batteries E – L E – L consider E – L E – V E – V*
Automotive - tires E – L P P E – L E – L P* P P* P P P
Automotive - used oil, E – L P E – L E – L E – L E – L E – L E – L P* P* oil containers / filters Automotive - other E – L consider E – L E – L E – L E – L E – L E – L consider pending (e.g., glycol) Notes: * = legislated EPR being considered; (P) = Deposit is charged territory-wide, collection depot only in Iqaluit.
91 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report This inventory does not take into account initiatives led by individual manufacturers or retailers to collect end-of-life products. There is a national stewardship program in Canada for mercury switches (end-of-life vehicles, ELVs) as part of the federal notice to prepare and implement pollution prevention plans for mercury releases from ELVs processed by steel mills. Currently, there are no legislated EPR requirements at the federal level.
EPR has become an established environmental management instrument in Canada and has been applied to a wide range of products. The EPR approach has been sanctioned as a favoured instrument by the CCME which has set out deadlines for its adoption across the country for certain categories of products. Waste electronics and electrical equipment including cell phones are the one category on the CCME product list where PBDEs are an issue248 and in this area all provinces but New Brunswick have regulated EEE EPR programs. New Brunswick has however recently tabled draft EPR regulations for electronics which substantially mirror EEE regulations in the other provinces.
In the US, the range of products being addressed by EPR is not as broad as in Canada and there is nothing in the US comparable to the CCME EPR Action Plan. There are significant differences in the take up of EPR between states, with adoption and proposals concentrated in some states with little or no take up in others. Despite these differences the use of EPR is increasingly widespread in the US and EPR legislation continues to be proposed in state legislatures.
The Product Stewardship Institute (PSI) inventory of programs, which is mapped in Figure 4, identifies 81 state-level EPR laws over a range of products that includes electronics, mattresses, carpet, cell phones, among others. In addition, California has a Green Chemistry EPR law which authorizes the state to evaluate and potentially impose regulations on chemicals used in consumer products, including requiring the manufacturer to manage the product at the end of its useful life (recycling or responsible disposal). At the local level, there are nine EPR regulatory programs across the U.S., including one for electronics (Washington, DC) and one for appliances containing refrigerants (New York City). Of the Great Lakes states, Minnesota has the most EPR laws (for batteries, electronics, paint, and mercury thermostats), and every Great Lakes state has at least one EPR law, except for Ohio.
248 Canada-wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, October 2009 pages 11-12
92 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Figure 4 U.S. State EPR Laws249
As demonstrated in the jurisdiction review, Ontario, New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin and Minnesota have EPR programs of various designs aimed at mandating the collection and recycling of a range of electronics, an area where PBDEs are known to be used. There are no other EPR programs targeting products containing PBDEs operating in the Great Lakes Basin.
Aside from the area of electronics, outside the Great Lakes Basin there are only a very limited number of EPR programs targeting other products containing PBDEs. In Canada, construction, renovation and demolition waste is listed as a target area for EPR under the CCME EPR Action Plan but to date the area is only being studied and options reviewed and no actual regulated EPR regulations have been adopted. Similarly under the CCME EPR Action Plan, furniture, textiles, carpet and appliances are listed for EPR but to date there has been some research but little or no direct action. British Columbia does however have a mandated EPR program for large household
249 Product Stewardship Institute, August 2015 http://www.productstewardship.us/?State_EPR_Laws_Map
93 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report appliances operated by the Major Appliance Recycling Roundtable (MARR) an industry PRO representing appliance producers in the province. The program collects a wide range of appliances including refrigerators, clothes dryers, ovens/ranges and dishwashers.250
The Carpet America Recovery Effort (CARE) is the producer responsibility organization which is responsible for the industry’s management of a carpet recycling program in California which operates under the authority of California AB 2398, the California Carpet Stewardship Program legislation. The California program, the only EPR program for carpets in North America, is funded by a modest $0.10 fee per square yard assessed at the point of purchase.251 There is no indication in program reports of efforts to address the possible use of PBDEs in carpet padding. CARE also launched in January 2015 a national US voluntary industry initiative252 which is designed to promote the development of market solutions for carpet recovery and encourage design for recyclability.
There are a number of voluntary initiatives to collect and recycle end-of-life mattresses, but there are no mandated EPR programs for mattresses in Canada. In the U.S., the states of Connecticut, California, and Rhode Island have passed EPR mattress laws. Connecticut began implementation of their law in 2015, and California and Rhode Island are expected to begin their programs in 2016. In both Canada and the US there are private sector operators, such as ReMatt in Calgary,253 which collect and recycle mattresses. In Canada there is at least one large national retailer, Sleep Country, that will accept and recycle used mattresses.254 In general however the mattress recycling industry in both countries does not yet appear to have demonstrated long term sustainability and there have been companies that have entered the business to only later close their doors.
A comprehensive review of the state of EPR across Canada for a variety of product categories including those cited in the CCME EPR Action Plan is available in the CCME’s State of Waste Report.255
250 British Columbia Major Appliance Recycling Roundtable (MARR) http://www.marrbc.ca/consumers/products 251 Northwest Product Stewardship Council, http://productstewardship.net/legislation/california/california-carpet-stewardship-ab- 2398 252 Carpet America Recovery Effort (CARE) https://carpetrecovery.org/ 253 Edmonton Journal, September 6, 2015 254 Sleep Country, http://www.sleepcountry.ca/aboutus/environment.aspx 255 The State of Waste Management in Canada, CCME ,January 2014 Giroux Environmental in association with Duncan Bury Consulting, Rene Drolet Consulting and Eco Works Consulting http://www.ccme.ca/en/resources/waste/waste_mgmt.html
94 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
5.1.3 Disposal Bans
Banning the disposal of certain products and categories of products is a well-established practice which has been adopted by state and provincial governments and by municipalities. The aim of disposal bans is primarily twofold. Firstly, bans are often targeted at products and materials which demonstrate hazardous properties or contain hazardous materials which could be at risk of release to the environment through either landfilling or incineration. Secondly, bans on disposal are used in conjunction with waste diversion policies and are designed to close the door to disposal with a view to diverting the subject products or materials to recycling programs. Disposal bans can also be driven by concerns related to the unique on site landfill management challenges associated with certain products such as mattresses and tires which are difficult to effectively bury due to their tendency to “float” to the top of landfill tipping areas. Bans can take the form of a simple prohibition on disposal or in some cases a higher tipping fee is established which is set at a level to discourage the disposal option. With a high enough fee disposal can be actively discouraged.
All bans pose challenges associated with monitoring products being delivered for disposal and enforcing the policy. With some larger and easily identifiable products, such as mattresses, appliances and tires, enforcement can be relatively easy and the products can be easily diverted at the landfill or incinerator if they are in fact delivered in violation of the ban. For many other smaller products including many electronics bans can be hard to monitor and enforce and the success of the ban often needs to rely on a robust communication program and spot checks at the point of collection and refusals to pick up the subject item.
Another challenge is that bans on disposal can lead to illegal dumping in and around commercial waste dumpsters, on abandoned or vacant urban property, and in remote and rural areas. Costs associated with compliance promotion and actually cleaning up illegally disposed of wastes in the absence of any identifiable party can be significant. In the cases of illegal dumping where there is an identifiable party, prosecution can be time consuming and potentially a significant cost for enforcement agencies. In addition bans on disposal at one municipal landfill or incinerator or a state or province wide ban can result in products being diverted for disposal to other jurisdictions without such bans in place.
Bans are best implemented at the state or provincial level as part of broader waste management and waste diversion strategies. State and provincial authorities need to be provided with enforcement resources and the bans need to be promoted by communication programs and public outreach. They should also only be considered and implemented when there are established and well-functioning recycling programs in place as alternatives to disposal. A disposal ban in the absence of a matching recycling program is bound to lead to significant enforcement
95 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report challenges. Most bans are in fact seen as supporting elements of waste diversion strategies and recycling programs.
Landfill disposal bans on certain electronic products exist at the state level in New York, Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin and Minnesota and in Ontario there is a ban on the incineration of electronic waste although not one on landfilling. However In Ontario it is estimated that 80% of landfills have a ban on electronics disposal in place and most have a companion ban on the placement of electronics at curbside for waste collection. In Canada Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island have in place long-standing province-wide landfill bans on a long list of recyclable materials, including electronics, for both the residential and ICI sectors. The provincial authorities and designated stewardship organizations (Nova Scotia’s Resource Recovery Fund Board (RRFB) and Prince Edward Island’s Island Waste Management Corporation (IWMC)) have worked with the ICI sector over several years to support the bans.256 The CCME’s State of Waste report identified the potential of landfill bans to support EPR programs but noted that in Canada the approach was currently “under-utilized.”257
In the U.S., most states have landfill disposal bans on some products with the most commonly banned items including lead acid batteries, waste oil, tires, CRTs, mercury containing products, computers, and Ni-Cad batteries.258 Some states do have landfill bans on C&D wastes, large appliances, and automobiles. 259
5.1.4 End-of-Life Management Standards
The operation of landfill sites, incinerators, recycling facilities and other industrial facilities are governed by state or provincial environment regulations which control such things as waste storage on site, site access, capacity, and releases to the air or water. Occupational health and safety and labour regulations cover other aspects of such operations.
Standards which address end-of-life management for recycling programs or EPR programs are not common and if they do exist are mostly written as general guidance on program operations, materials handling and disposition. Such standards that do exist related to PBDEs have been
256 The State of Waste Management in Canada, CCME ,January 2014 Giroux Environmental in association with Duncan Bury Consulting, Rene Drolet Consulting and Eco Works Consulting 257 Ibid page111 258 Northeast Recycling Council, 2011. Disposal Bans & Mandatory Recycling in the United States June 24, 2011, Prepared for ReCommunity by The Northeast Recycling Council, Inc.; Available at: https://nerc.org/documents/disposal_bans_mandatory_recycling_united_states.pdf. 259 Northeast Recycling Council, 2011. Disposal Bans & Mandatory Recycling in the United States June 24, 2011, Prepared for ReCommunity by The Northeast Recycling Council, Inc.; Available at: https://nerc.org/documents/disposal_bans_mandatory_recycling_united_states.pdf.
96 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report developed under international agreements such as the Basel and Stockholm Conventions or under the auspices of the European Commission. In January 2015 the Stockholm Convention published guidance on best available practices and best environmental practices for the recycling and disposal of articles containing PBDEs260 and in Europe under the Source Control for Priority Substances in Europe (SOCOPSE)261 initiative a general review of options to reduce PBDE emissions has been published. Both of these documents can primarily be viewed as research studies and assessments and less as actual standards which could be used in a working waste processing or recycling facility.
There are some end-of-life management standards that address products that contain PBDEs such as electronics but none have been identified which specifically target other product categories which could or do contain PBDEs.
In the electronics area where there appears to be the most standards activity the Canadian Electronic Products Recycling Association (EPRA) has adopted a set of guidelines for processors of waste electronics collected by the electronics EPR programs that operate across the country. Under the EPRA’s Recycler Qualification Program (RQP)262 conformity with the Sustainable Electronics Recycling International (SERI), Responsible Recycling Standard (R2 Standard)263 is required in addition to the requirement to meet EPRA’s own Recycler Qualification Program for End-of-Life Electronics Recycling. SERI is a not-for-profit organization which has been accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) as a standards developer. SERI has certified over 500 electronics recyclers worldwide under the R2 standard including a large number of companies and facilities that operate in the Great Lakes Basin states.
Both the EPRA and SERI standards address environmental and occupational health and safety issues in recycling facilities and for example set requirements to meet the OHS obligations mandated by the relevant jurisdiction and set standard practices such as for the use of personal protective equipment by workers. The R2 Standard expressly addresses mercury and PCBs in electronic waste but there is no mention in either of these standards of PBDEs and their management.
260 UNEP, Guidance on best available practices and best environmental practices for the recycling and disposal of articles containing PBDEs listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, UNEP/POPS/COP.7/INF/22 261 Source Control for Priority Substances in Europe (SOCOPSE),An Inventory and Assessment of Options for Reducing Emissions: PBDEs, September 2009 262 Electronic Products Recycling Association, Recycler Qualification Program for End-of-Life Electronics Recycling, October 2010 with updates 263 Sustainable Electronics Recycling International (SERI), Responsible Recycling R2 Standard for Electronics Recyclers, 2013, https://sustainableelectronics.org/about
97 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report The EPRA standard does not prescribe how plastics, where PBDEs are likely to be found, are to be handled. Under the terms of the RQP recovered materials can be further recycled, burned in an EFW facility or landfilled. There are however bans on the sale of recovered plastics for use in the manufacture of food containers and children’s toys. This latter requirement could be effective in helping to minimize recycled electronics plastics being used in new products and continuing the risks of PBDE exposure and release, albeit at likely progressively diminishing percentages as the impact of bans on PBDE use take effect.
In order for the information and guidance contained in the cited studies and reports to be made useable for industries that in any way deal with PBDEs it would be necessary to develop specific guidance on practices and procedures in consultation with the effected stakeholders. For example Environment Canada is currently preparing a technical code of practice for the environmentally sound management of end of life mercury containing lamps.264
The adoption of standards, such as those cited, by recycling and waste management facilities that handle products that contain PBDEs could be made requirements and explicitly tied to the operation of EPR programs. However, making program approvals conditional upon the adoption of certain environmentally sound management standards does not appear to have been done in any currently operating programs. Governments might encourage the adoption of environmentally sound management practices but in general standard environmental and occupational and health requirements hold sway and there is little evidence of government oversight of the issues associated with end-of-life management and the ultimate disposition of products which do or could contain PBDEs.
5.2 Overview of Non-Regulatory PBDE Instruments
5.2.1 Green Procurement
Most jurisdictions including those in the Great Lakes Basin have some level of commitment to sustainable and green procurement. For example Minnesota’s Environmentally Preferable Purchasing program (EPP) includes green procurement assessment tools and specific regulatory purchasing requirements for certain products. Similarly New York State’s preferable purchasing program favours products which have recycled content and are energy efficient. In some jurisdictions the commitment to preferential procurement of products and services demonstrating environmental benefits is less clear and has not been consistent over time. A report by Ontario’s
264 Environment Canada, Request for Proposals, Consultation with Canadian Stakeholders and Development of Best Practices for a Technical Code of Practice for the Environmentally Sound Management of End-of-Life Mercury Containing Lamps, August 2014
98 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report Environmental Commissioner chided the province by stating that Ontario green procurement policies have “waxed, waned and waxed again over the past 20 years.”265
Despite varying levels of commitment, government green procurement strategies can have an influence in the market place because of the relatively large size of government procurement and therefore can be used as supportive tools for other policy objectives. Canada’s CCME Action Plan for EPR for example references green procurement policies as a way to support EPR programs. “With appropriate green procurement policy in place” the Action Plan states, “it is expected producers will be more inclined to consider their products’ design for the environment in order to stay competitive in the market.”266 The EPR Plan also advocates that “governments should at least ensure the producers of any products they purchase that are subject to an EPR regulation are actually participating in the stewardship of those products through the EPR program.”267
Green procurement requires a high level of commitment and follow through by procurement agencies to be truly effective and also requires clear standards to determine product environmental attributes and how they will be assessed in comparison to other procurement issues such as price, availability, warrantees etc. Eco-labels, life cycle assessments and independent third party product reviews are essential tools to make green procurement truly effective. In the area of PBDEs it is critical that information identifying where PBDEs exist and in what concentrations be readily available. In the widespread absence of such information procurement agencies face significant challenges in making proactive purchases of PBDE free products even in the face of a strong policy commitment to do so.
Most green strategies do not address a typical market reality that environmentally preferable products may not be as attractively priced relative to other comparable or competing products. Environmentally friendly products may be new to the market and not have the production scale necessary to reduce costs. Green products may be more expensive because of manufacturing challenges associated with innovative designs and higher cost recycled material feed stocks. In most cases these kinds of price differentials are not directly addressed by green procurement strategies. One notable exception to this general rule is in Minnesota where the EPP allows a 10% price preference for recycled content in products.
There are green procurement strategies which support green procurement of electronics through such means as requiring new electronic equipment to have the Energy Star label. There appear to be very few green procurement policies that specifically address PBDEs in electronics or elsewhere. Minnesota is unique in that it supports its regulatory bans on certain PBDEs by
265 Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, The Greening of the Ontario Government, ECO notes 2009, updated May 2015 266 Canada-wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, October 2009 267 Canada-wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, October 2009
99 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report requiring that the Commissioner of Administration must make available for purchase and use by all state agencies, equipment, supplies, and other products that are PBDE-free, unless otherwise exempted.
Although green procurement strategies have been in place for many years, it is unclear what impact they have because assessments of green procurement programs are not readily available.
5.2.2 Eco-Labels
Environment labels have been used for several decades as an informative tool to encourage preferential environmental purchasing. According to the Global Eco-Labelling Network (GEN) which represents internationally 26 "ecolabel" programs, an eco-label “identifies overall, proven environmental preference of a product or service within a specific product/service category. In contrast to "green" symbols, or claim statements developed by manufacturers and service providers, the most credible labels are based on life cycle considerations; they are awarded by an impartial third-party in relation to certain products or services that are independently determined to meet transparent environmental leadership criteria.”268 GEN follows the Type 1 labelling criteria set by ISO 14024 which defines “a voluntary multiple-criteria based, third party program that awards a license that authorises the use of environmental labels on products indicating overall environmental preferability of a product within a particular product category based on life cycle considerations.”269
In North America two major programs are members of GEN – Ecologo, owned by Underwriters Laboratories, and Green Seal. The UL Ecologo program absorbed the Environment Canada Environmental Choice Program. There are a number of government sanctioned eco-labelling programs operating in the U.S. and Canada most importantly the EPA’s Design for the Environment “Safer Choice” label which has a significant focus on cleaning products, the Energy Star program with its focus on energy efficiency and the Water Sense program.
The program with perhaps the most relevance to the area of flame retardants in North America is the EPEAT program managed by the Green Electronics Council. EPEAT is a widely recognized rating system for electronics which uses environmental criteria to assess product design, production, energy use and recycling. EPEAT criteria appear to be some of the few that expressly reference flame retardants. The criteria for PC’s and displays requires the “elimination of intentionally added short chain chlorinated paraffins (SCCP) flame retardants and plasticizers in certain applications” 270 and the criteria for TVs and imaging equipment encourage the optional
268 Global Eco-Labelling Network (GEN), http://www.globalecolabelling.net/ 269 Ibid 270 EPEAT PCs and Displays, section 4.1.6.1; http://www.epeat.net/resources/criteria/#tabs-1=overview
100 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report elimination and reduction of BFR/CFR/PVC content.271 All of these standards require conformity with the EU’s RoHS Directive which sets limits on the use of PBDEs.
Internationally, electronics also appears to be the area where eco-labelling has been used to target flame retardants. For example, the Nordic Swan eco-label program based in Scandinavia has established criteria for TVs and projectors containing a large section expressly identifying prohibited flame retardants and a list of exceptions.272
Despite these examples, the use of eco-labels to promote the elimination or reduction of the use of PBDEs in most product categories where they are a concern appears uncommon. While a definitive review of available eco-labels was not conducted as part of this project it appears that for most product categories covered by eco-labels where PBDE’s might be an issue that PBDEs were not referenced. For example the Green Seal labelling criteria for paints and coatings, an area where there is potential for PBDEs, contains prohibitions on a number of hazardous materials such as heavy metals and phthalates but no prohibition on any kind of flame retardants.273
If eco-labelling is to be used as a tool to support the reduction or elimination of the use of PBDEs efforts will need to be put into developing the necessary criteria for products and promoting the criteria that already exist. In both cases the use of an eco-label is best linked to a green procurement program that focuses on PBDE-free procurement.
5.2.3 Product Standards
Product standards are often developed by industry sectors but are also set and reinforced by government regulations that proscribe standards for such things as machinery, materials use and equipment operating protocols for a wide variety of products and industry sectors. Regulated standards such as those set under the EU’s Restriction on Hazardous Substances Directive (RoHS) for materials, including PBDEs, in electronics and electrical equipment have had a significant effect internationally on materials use and have effectively driven significant re-design of equipment. Proof of the role of product standards is perhaps somewhat perversely shown in the case of PBDEs by the role that both regulated and non-regulated standards and industry practices have had in the widespread use of flame retardants. For example, the Canadian Consumer Product Safety Act has established standards under such regulations as the Textile Flammability Regulations and the Children’s Sleepwear Regulations. In the US, California’s Technical Bulletin 117 (TB 117) has been instrumental in supporting the use of flame retardants.
271 EPEAT TVs, section 4.1.7.1; Imaging Equipment, section 4.1.7.2; http://www.epeat.net/resources/criteria/#tabs-1=overview 272 Nordic Swan TV and Projectors, Version 5.3, 20 June 2013 – 31 March 2017 273 Green Seal Paints and Coatings GS-11 Edition 3.1, July 2013
101 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report Standards are most effectively set and applied at a national level and are often developed by national standards setting bodies such as the Standards Council of Canada which certifies standards setting bodies in Canada and in the US the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) which is responsible for the U.S. Standards Strategy. International standards such as those developed by the International Standards Organization (ISO) also play a major role and are often adopted into national standards.
Generally speaking product standards are difficult if not impossible to develop and implement at a sub-national, state or provincial level. The regulatory and non-regulatory reach of states and provinces is usually not sufficient to ensure the successful development and implementation of a standard in the face of national and global manufacturing, distribution and marketing of products. Sub-national standards do however exist in some areas where state and provincial authority is paramount such as in the area of construction and building codes. Even in these areas however standards are set often in concert with other jurisdictions including the federal governments and federal standards often set the benchmark for what the standard should contain. In Canada for example there is a national building code which has been developed by the National Research Council, a federal agency, upon which the provincial and territorial building codes are built.274
The development of product standards requires a high level of engagement by federal governments, their departments and agencies, and a sufficient level of cooperation by industry sectors and particularly by leading companies within those sectors. One of the challenges of any kind of standard is the availability of data and in the case of flame retardants the level of information on the use of the substances, which products contain them and in which concentrations is generally not sufficient.
With the exception of flammability standards for products which promote the use of flame retardants, electronics is one of the few areas where product standards have specifically addressed PBDEs and minimized their use. Despite the identified constraints, and only a few examples of standards designed to restrict the use of PBDEs, product standards can be a viable tool for addressing environmental and health concerns about PBDEs if a sufficient level of commitment is made to them.
5.2.4 Proactive Industry Action
Proactive positive industry action has been taken to address concerns with PBDEs. Most notably the major US manufacturer of pentaBDE and octaBDE voluntarily phased out production at the end of 2004, and a voluntary phase-out by major manufacturers and importers of c-decaBDE was
274 National Building Code of Canada 2010, National Research Council, http://www.nrc- cnrc.gc.ca/eng/publications/codes_centre/2010_national_building_code.html
102 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report initiated in the US in 2010, with all sales to end by December 31, 2015. These actions were taken in the context of the growing documentation of the concerns associated with the release and impact of PBDEs and with the development of regulations at both the national and international level to ban, restrict and otherwise phase out the manufacture, use, sale and distribution of the substances.
In the area of electronics, which is one area where considerable attention has been focused on substances of concern, manufacturers have demonstrated that they can meet fire safety standards without using PBDEs. “Many large computer companies have already voluntarily stopped using PBDEs and switched to inherently more fire-resistant materials, or the use of other chemical retardants. Because the bromine industry has voluntarily stopped manufacturing the highly toxic penta and octa forms of PBDEs, the focus of alternatives assessment is on safer, effective alternatives to the use of deca.”275 The Canadian Electronic Products Recycling Association (EPRA) has reported on the efforts of its brand name members to address through voluntary actions “environmentally sensitive materials”. In its 2011 Design for the Environment report EPRA is cited as one way in which that has been done but EPRA does also note the role of regulations in changing the materials that are used in electronic equipment.276 The Association’s 2015 report however makes no reference to environmentally sensitive materials.277
In summary, it is unclear how many of the positive changes away from using PBDEs and other substances of concern are a result of corporate efforts to meet the requirements of the EU’s RoHS Directive and other applicable regulations and how much is a result of proactive industry action to improve the environmental performance of their products. The RoHS Directive, while European in origin and focus has had an impact on the global electronics industry because of the huge size of the European market. All major electronics manufacturers have worked to meet the RoHS standards because they know that their products will need to meet the requirements to gain access to the European market. The RoHS Directive has also had benefits in North America where RoHS standards have been mirrored in state regulations and procurement policies and reinforced through eco-labels.
5.3 Instrument Summary and Assessment
The following Table 10 summaries the instruments which are being used and could be used to manage PBDE containing products and uses the overview discussed in sections 5.1 and 5.2 to identify the pros and cons associated with each instrument’s use and describes for each a number of considerations and comments largely related to instrument implementation.
275 Toxipedia, http://www.toxipedia.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=296 276 Electronic Products Recycling Association, EPRA, Design for Environment Report 2011 277 Electronic Products Recycling Association, EPRA, Design for Environment Report 2015
103 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Table 10: Instrument Summary and Assessment
Instrument Pros Cons Comments/ Considerations Substance International and national in scope with widest impact Do not address legacy products Can set national and support international objectives focused possible on product categories and industry sectors and send clear signals to industry about substances of regulations and Addresses concerns after the fact and are rarely proactive concern initiatives Have proven effective in removing substances of concern from products and setting allowable concentration standards Slow national processes for adoption and implementation and even slower at the international level
Focus commonly on manufacture and distribution of substances of concern and less commonly on the products where such substances are used EPR Mandated recycling and waste diversion of designated Requires a strong legislative and policy support framework Requires programs to be broadly accessible to the public products – both financial and operational responsibility by for effective performance producers Still strong opposition in the US from some industry sectors (less so in Canada) Development, design and program roll-out can be time Shifts cost burden of waste diversion from taxpayers, and consuming and take away from the necessary monitoring potentially from consumer, to producers Oversight and enforcement (e.g. of free riders) needs to be by oversight agencies of actual program performance suitably supported and funded after program launch EPR framework legislation sets the broad parameters and allows designation of products Programs can have limited impact if suitable performance There is only modest and largely anecdotal evidence that measures, targets and reporting requirements are not EPR has resulted in improved environmental product Has the potential to support improved life cycle established and enforced design environmental product performance Harmonization of EPR regulations and policies between Can be implemented with regulated standards and conditions jurisdictions can be problematic and a challenge for applied to processing and end-of-life management of producers who may have to meet slightly different recovered materials jurisdictional requirements for what are essentially similar programs Extensive EPR policy and legislative experience and precedent in Canada and parts of the US Disposal bans A product focused policy which can be used to target Very dependent on the ability to identify products which do Could be applied by using differential higher tip fees products of particular concern and don’t contain PBDEs directed at targeted products rather than outright bans
Supports EPR and recycling by closing off or restricting Difficult to enforce and less effective if implemented in More effective if done on the broadest basis possible and disposal options – landfill and incineration isolation from measures like EPR which provide alternatives ideally consistently across a number of jurisdictions to disposal Can be adopted at a state and province wide basis and by individual municipalities with their own disposal facilities Less effective if not broadly based because disposal will shift to adjacent jurisdictions which do not have a ban in place
Places high burden of enforcement and oversight on states and provinces and especially on municipalities and private landfills
Requires a high level of public communication and outreach primarily by municipalities
104 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Instrument Pros Cons Comments/ Considerations End-of-life EOL management standards can be used to establish In the absence of an industry sector which is willing to Effective EOL management standards are best management environmental management standards for products actively participate, the development of standards can be undertaken alongside and as part of regulatory initiatives standards containing PBDEs in such places as recycling facilities challenging Regulations have been used to prohibit landfilling and They can be used to support other initiatives such as landfill The development of appropriate standards can be a time incineration of certain products but less often to bans by establishing protocols for the separation of subject consuming multi-stakeholder process requiring a significant proscribe more detailed EOL management practices products and materials at the point of disposal degree of active and positive industry input EOL management standards are not commonly EOL management standards can be either explicitly regulated, Enforceable standards are commonly associated with established or implemented as part of EPR regulations. established as conditions associated with other regulated regulations and in the absence of regulations can be difficult initiatives such as EPR or can be voluntary to develop and implement
Standards require regular audits/inspections for adoption and application and regular reporting to ensure they are being applied
Voluntary industry standards can be compromised if they are not enforced by the body establishing the standards and if they are not reported on in a transparent way
Standards related to the ultimate disposition of recycling materials can be hard to enforce in the absence of proper tracking of the marketing and ultimate destination and use of the materials Green Governments have considerable purchasing power and can Very dependent on the ability to identify products which do Green procurement is commonly viewed positively but it procurement use this to lead markets and support environmental and don’t have PBDEs is less clear how effectively it is implemented in practice innovation Highly dependent on a strong policy commitment which Effectiveness could be enhanced if jurisdictions worked Can be a supportive measure in certain areas such as could conflict with traditional procurement practices cooperatively on common green procurement strategies electronics, carpet, furniture and construction materials and programs where governments are potentially large purchasers. Limited by the scope of government purchases and would not apply to the many areas where governments are unlikely to be major purchasers Eco-labels Environmental labeling works well together with green There is a multiplicity of eco-labels, both government , procurement by allowing easy identification of products private sector sponsored and even brand owner initiated and which do not contain PBDEs or otherwise demonstrate this can be challenging for the average consumer positive and enhanced environmental performance The effectiveness of eco-labels in shifting purchasing Can be an effective tool if linked to a strong government decisions is not always clear green procurement policy Development of an eco-label which specifically targeted PBDE containing products would need to be championed, developed and funded Product Regulated product standards addressing environmental Product standards are challenging to develop and or Standards are conventionally focused on health and Standards concerns can be effective (e.g. EU RoHS Directive) and are implement at the sub-national level due to market safety issues and not often on environment releases and effective at a national or international level complexities and difficulties with enforcement impacts
105 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Instrument Pros Cons Comments/ Considerations Would require leadership and engagement by federal level Product standards can only be developed at the national organizations such as the US EPA and Environment Canada and international level due to the nature of the global and cooperation by and coordination with other effected market federal departments in areas such as industry, trade and commerce
Both regulated and voluntary standards are dependent on a high degree of industry support and cooperation
Can be a challenge when an industry association is playing to the lowest common denomination of its membership
Proactive Effective if done at an industry wide level and with broadly Proactive industry action is less likely if an individual producer Proactive action is commonly taken in response to the industry action based industry support perceives that it could be put at a competitive disadvantage possibility of regulatory controls being imposed and with by taking a leadership position the explicit encouragement of government Most effective in markets with a small number of competing companies More effective if undertaken in the context of transparent reporting and with clear program targets
106 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report 6.0 RECOMMENDED FRAMEWORK FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF PBDES IN THE GREAT LAKES BASIN
6.1 Framework Overview
The proposed framework for action on PBDEs in the Great Lakes Basin which is presented in the following sections draws on project conclusions based on observations from the research, jurisdictional reviews and interviews related to the end-of-life management of PBDE containing products.
The proposed framework is intended to provide broadly based but focused guidance for coordinated federal, state and provincial action directed towards eliminating and minimizing the actual and potential releases to the environment of PBDEs. It is also focused on enhancing the diversion of products containing PBDEs from landfill disposal.
The major findings and conclusions of the project are presented first followed by specific recommendations for action by the key actors. Guidelines for implementing the framework are presented and a listing of challenges and suggested responses. The chapter concludes with a discussion of next steps and specific suggestions for policy and program development and additional studies and research that could productively be undertaken to support the framework and its implementation.
6.2 Conclusions
Based on the project’s literature review and analysis and on insights gathered from the interviews with government officials, experts and stakeholders there are a number of conclusions which can be made. The conclusions are grouped into four primary areas: PBDE pathways and knowledge gaps, current regulatory initiatives, waste diversion and extended producer responsibility (EPR) programs and environmentally sound management and recycling. Each of these is discussed below.
6.2.1 PBDE Pathways and Knowledge Gaps
PBDEs are associated historically with a wide range of products and materials with varied life expectancies and life cycles. The widespread use of flame retardants means that managing the legacy of older products will be a challenge for some time to come particularly in the case of products with the longest life expectancies. Leachate from landfills, where most PBDE containing products end up, has been shown to contain PBDEs. Leachate is commonly treated at municipal waste water treatment plants in Great Lakes jurisdictions which may not be designed or equipped to capture PBDEs. These
107 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report can therefore end up in either the sewage sludge which is often applied to agricultural land or plant effluent which is discharged to a receiving body of water. The environmentally sound recycling and processing of products into secondary materials poses less risk of releasing PBDEs to the environment than landfilling such products While the pathways for PBDEs are generally well described, there is a significant lack of information on where PBDEs are used and on the release risks associated with particular stages of the product life cycle including at the end-of-life. There are alternatives to PBDEs but not enough is known about their environmental or health impacts. Most research on substitutes is focused on the use of alternative substances rather than on the redesign of products to minimize flammability risks or avoid the use of flame retardants. There appears to be very little discussion in the literature or within government agencies on the efficacy of flammability standards or on the environmental and health impacts that may result from actions taken to meet these standards.
6.2.2 Current Regulatory Initiatives
There are currently only a few regulatory initiatives within the Great Lakes Basin or elsewhere which specifically address PBDEs. Most regulatory initiatives that do exist are targeted at the PBDE substances themselves. There are regulations in place that target product categories of PBDE containing products (such as electronics), although these regulations are not focused explicitly on the flame retardants but rather on diversion from disposal and enhanced recycling.
6.2.3 Waste Diversion and EPR Programs
Because of the variability in product life cycles and their diversion potential a management framework for PBDEs will need to include a range of instruments targeted at different stages of the product life cycle and at different product categories. Extended producer responsibility (EPR) regulations for waste electronic and electrical equipment (WEEE), are some of the few regulations that address PBDE containing products, although managing PBDE releases is not a primary focus of these programs. EPR programs can be effective in enhancing waste diversion from disposal goals for some designated products and provide sustainable funding for the collection and processing of waste products and for the marketing of recovered materials. EPR programs can be designed to meet environmentally sound management standards.
108 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
6.2.4 Environmentally Sound Management and Recycling
Recycling of PBDE containing products can be required to be conducted with due regard to environmentally sound management and follow an environmentally responsible chain of custody for recovered materials that minimizes or prevents the risk of release through disposal. Recycling programs are commonly focused on easily recoverable and marketable materials in products and usually not on the materials where PBDEs are the most problematic such as in plastic housings and components. Plastics containing PBDEs are commonly separated during recycling processes but because of poor or non-existent marketability for some plastics (e.g. moulded plastic resins in vehicles) are most often disposed of in landfill as residuals or shipped to low value overseas markets. In addition there are indications that there are no scaleable technologies are currently available to remove PBDEs from plastics. In private industry, economics, and in particular secondary material commodity prices, not environmental policy, are the primary drivers for recycling of a particular product. The opportunities for enhanced diversion are stronger where products can be easily distinguished and source separated. Mixed wastes are technically more difficult and relatively expensive to separate and are therefore invariably more commonly sent for disposal or to low value materials markets.
6.3 Actors, Roles, Responsibilities and Recommended Regulatory and Non-Regulatory Elements
The following recommendations form the core of the recommended PBDE framework for the Great Lakes Basin jurisdictions.
The recommendations are divided by the key actors and their jurisdictional level – i.e. federal governments and state/provincial governments - and by a focus on PBDEs as substances and PBDEs in products. The recommended regulatory and non-regulatory actions derive from the study findings and conclusions, and take account of the information gathered in the jurisdictional reviews and in the analysis conducted in Chapter 4.0.
The first series of recommendations are directed to the Canadian and US federal governments and their lead agencies on PBDEs, Environment Canada and Health Canada and the US Environmental Protection Agency. It is recognized that in each federal government there are additional departments and agencies which could be involved. Roles for specific departments and agencies are however not identified.
109 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report The second set of recommendations are directed to the eight State governments which border on the Great Lakes and to the Province of Ontario. As with the federal government it is recognized that in most cases the recommendations would fall within the mandate of the respective environment department or agency but the recommendations could also have implications for other related departments and agencies. Roles for specific departments and agencies are however not identified. In a couple of cases the recommendations apply equally to both the federal and the state and provincial governments and in these cases they are repeated. For example this is the case with a proposed recommendation on the adoption of green procurement programs.
6.3.1 Canadian and US Federal Governments
Recommendations for substance focused instruments Engage in Stockholm and Basel Convention processes especially regarding work on PBDE “non-toxic” thresholds Engage the recycling industry in the discussions of the Basel Convention’s Open Ended Working Group (OEWG) to ensure that the PBDEs concentration levels that will be set are achievable. This would help prevent a situation where non-achievable limits drive a decrease in recycling (especially for electronic waste) and an increase in landfill disposal of waste containing PBDEs. Build on previous Canada-US discussions and formally identify brominated flame retardants, including PBDEs, as “Chemicals of Mutual Concern (CMC)” under Annex 3 of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement After formally identifying PBDEs as chemicals of mutual concern, initiate policy development to support their virtual elimination Ban and continue the phase out of the manufacture, use, sale, and import and distribution of all PBDEs Investigate the environmental and health impacts of PBDE substitutes and develop a standard process for evaluating alternative flame retardants , as well as other means of achieving fire safety objectives without the use of flame retardants, through product redesign Prepare guidance to jurisdictions on the application of these alternative assessment processes Determine the optimal conditions and best available technologies under which municipal solid waste incinerators destroy or sufficiently degrade PBDEs in products Jointly with the state and provincial governments, initiate a review of the efficacy of sector specific flammability standards and their role in the use of PBDEs and PBDE substitutes Initiate broader studies to investigate the actual need for product flammability requirements for a broad range of products (furniture, construction insulation materials, toys, car seats, etc.)
110 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report Recommendations for product focused instruments:
Consider establishing product registers such as those in Scandinavia and the EU to mandate reporting on the use of PBDEs and other toxic substances in products Specifically ban the use of plastics recovered through recycling programs from use in packaging and in children’s toys Establish and implement sampling and testing protocols for measuring PBDE concentrations in products with a particular focus on imports Prepare guidance and identify best practices for recycling/waste processing operations on the end-of-life management of PBDE containing products Develop under the EPA Green Chemistry program or under another appropriate eco-label program a category/label for products that do not contain PBDEs Promote and support a “design for the environment” approach in products with a view to avoiding the need to use flame retardants through product re-design rather than chemical substitution Establish proactive purchasing of products which do not contain PBDEs through green procurement policies and programs Build on prior Canada-US efforts on PBDEs, including PBDEs as CMCs under Annex 3 of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
Recommended other instruments - substance and product focused:
Make a commitment and adopt a framework and plans to eliminate and reduce the use of PBDEs and to manage in an environmentally sound way all products which contain them Enhance the capacity and resources of departments and agencies with regulation and program oversight responsibilities to monitor and enforce regulations and policies related to PBDEs Proactively balance the current regulatory focus on toxic substances themselves with increased efforts to understand where and how PBDEs are used in products Develop cross-departmental initiatives to help overcome obstacles to the advancement of policies to reduce PBDEs that result from fragmentation of work on PBDEs in government agencies (which can include public health departments, green chemistry divisions, pollution prevention/recycling divisions, and regulatory agencies). Engage relevant industry stakeholders throughout the product supply chain in order to evaluate alternatives to PBDEs, policy and program options to eliminate the use of PBDEs, actual product fire safety risks and where fire retardancy is necessary.
111 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
6.3.2 State/Provincial Governments
State and provincial governments generally have more authority in the area of direct program operations and on both sides of the border play a major role in the management of wastes, including disposal and diversion from disposal. Municipalities are to a significant degree governed by state and provincial regulations and policies although they can and do play independent roles such as being to control access to municipally owned and operated disposal facilities.
Recommended substance focused instruments:
Ban and continue the phase out of the manufacture, use, sale, import and distribution of all PBDEs.(In the case of Ontario the national PBDE legislation under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act would have primacy and is already in place) Make the testing and reporting of PBDE concentrations in landfill leachate, waste water treatment plant discharges, and sewage sludge mandatory Jointly with the federal governments, initiate a review of the efficacy of sector specific flammability standards, and assess their actual benefits compared to their role in driving an increased use of PBDEs and PBDE substitutes
Recommended product focused instruments:
Adopt EPR framework legislation that would allow the identification and designation of products containing PBDEs for EPR Focus attention on electronics, appliances, carpets, mattresses and furniture for EPR where diversion opportunities exist due to ease of product source separation, the large number of products within each category, available recycling technology and successful operational programs in some jurisdictions. Support and initiate investigation of construction, renovation and demolition waste to enhance diversion and the source separation of products which contain PBDEs Ban the landfill disposal of PBDE containing products in concert with establishment of EPR and other widely accessible recycling programs Actively promote the 3Rs hierarchy, especially the avoidance of landfilling, and support and otherwise encourage the recycling of products of particular concern Establish proactive purchasing of products which do not contain PBDEs through green procurement policies and programs Establish enforceable standards for recycling/waste processing operations with due regard to the management of PBDEs and with particular attention to recovered plastics Develop and promote guidance on EOL management of PBDEs containing products including best practices
112 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Ban the use of plastics recovered in EPR and other recycling programs from use in packaging and in children’s toys
Recommended other substance and product focused instruments:
Make a strong commitment and adopt a clear framework and plans to eliminate and reduce the use of PBDEs and to manage in an environmentally sound way all products which contain them Enhance the capacity and resources of oversight agencies to monitor and enforce regulations and policies related to PBDEs as substances and in products Develop cross-departmental initiatives to help overcome obstacles to advancement of policies to reduce PBDEs that result from fragmentation of work on PBDEs in government agencies (which can include public health departments, green chemistry divisions, pollution prevention/recycling divisions, and regulatory agencies). Engage relevant industry stakeholders throughout the product supply chain in order to evaluate alternative options and actual fire safety risk
6.4 Implementation Strategy, Key Considerations and Challenges
6.4.1 Framework Implementation Guidelines
Building on the project conclusions and the recommendations for action, the following guidelines are presented to assist in policy and program implementation. The guidelines are designed to clarify roles and responsibilities, ease framework implementation and guide the next steps in policy and program development.
Respect established jurisdictional divisions of powers Build on existing legislative and regulatory authority and approaches Adopt best practices and best environmental technologies of jurisdictions within and outside the Great Lakes Basin Work towards achieving the objectives of the Canada-U.S. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement and take advantage of the policy framework it provides Adopt regulations and implement programs over time in the context of longer term strategic objectives to eliminate and reduce the risks associated with PBDEs Work as cooperatively as possible recognizing that products are manufactured, sold and marketed on both global, national and regional levels Recognize that no one jurisdiction has all the regulatory tools or non-regulatory instruments to address the challenges Adopt a multi-faceted approach recognizing the reality of the issue’s complexity using a blend of regulatory and non-regulatory approaches
113 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Focus priority action on product categories where there are well-known and documented issues with the use of PBDEs Focus priority action where identification and source separation of end-of-life products is easiest and where disposal appears to be currently favoured economically over diversion and recycling Work proactively and cooperatively with industry sectors and leading companies Recognize that regulatory approaches are likely necessary to level the playing field for leading stakeholders who might be otherwise disadvantaged or discouraged from taking action proactively
6.4.2 Considerations and Challenges
The following table lists challenges, considerations and possible responses by governments for a number of areas that are key to helping ensure that the recommended actions are successfully implemented.
114 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Table 11: Implementation Strategy Challenges and Response
Challenge/Issue Concerns/Considerations Response Weak policy framework Weak commitment to addressing PBDEs by Make a formal joint commitment to the elimination of pathways for PBDEs to enter Great Lakes waters and to for action both government and the private sector ensuring that environmentally sound management practices are established and followed to eliminate and mitigate against positive action minimize PBDE releases at the end-of-life of products which contain PBDEs
Isolated individual government responses Develop and release a framework for action on PBDEs in the Great Lakes Basin with targets for implementation and a lack of Great Lakes Basin vision for and specific action action Structure and work on joint cooperative action which will be stronger and more effective than isolated Lack of policy and program leadership individual jurisdiction action
Lack of a suitable Great Lakes framework Create cross jurisdictional programs with common structures, protocols and reporting requirements governance structure
Lack of inter or intra Lack of strategic harmonization and Establish inter department and inter jurisdictional working bodies to develop and implement coordinated and governmental common approaches between jurisdictions harmonized action across the Great Lakes Basin coordination or hampers action harmonization Work to bring all jurisdictions up to common regulatory and program standards – i.e. ensure that all Within governments weak communication jurisdictions implement EPR programs for electronics between departments can restrain the ability to take concerted action
Unique jurisdiction by jurisdiction application of similar instruments damages any capacity to compare program performance Gaps in PBDE science Lack of information on PBDE use in many Expand research on PBDE pathways in product sectors and particularly on the risks of release at key points in and weak information certain product categories restricts ability to the product life cycle develop responses Develop and apply sampling and testing protocols for PBDEs Poor or non-existent reporting and general lack of information and awareness of the Establish reporting protocols for materials at key points of the product life cycle – i.e. mandatory testing of concerns regarding PBDE release pathways landfill leachate for PBDEs particularly at the end of life - landfilling and recycling Consider establishing national product registries to clearly identify and track the use of PBDEs in products
Poor understanding of PBDE substitutes and Actively promote awareness of the science associated with PBDEs and PBDE release pathways of the role of flammability standards in promoting flame retardant use Engage with key industry sectors to raise concerns about uses of PBDEs
Work with leading companies
115 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Challenge/Issue Concerns/Considerations Response Lack of public Low profile of issues related to flame Increase awareness within and between government agencies of the seriousness of issues related to PBDEs awareness and support retardants within government Enhance public support for the diversion of products containing PBDEs and enhanced recycling in general by Lack of public awareness of issues related to increasing the public awareness of issues related to PBDEs PBDEs Specifically identify and promote awareness by the public of the impacts and threats posed by PBDEs on Existing recycling and waste diversion recreational and commercial fisheries promotion is not linked to concerns about PBDEs Work with municipalities to build on existing communication, promotion and outreach programs for recycling Weak or non-existent Possible overlapping authority between Review existing regulatory authority and act to fill gaps regulatory authority federal/state/and provincial bodies creates uncertainty regarding roles and Identify and adopt regulatory best practices responsibilities Build on existing inter-jurisdictional mechanisms and develop new ones to ensure the adoption of best Uncertainty about regulatory authority acts practices as a possible constraint upon action
Lack of knowledge of regulatory best practices and strategies used elsewhere to implement programs targeted at PBDE containing products Lack of industry Strong opposition to EPR by many industry Build on the success of existing EPR programs, most notably the widely adopted use of EPR for electronics support sectors waste
Weak response and lack of leadership Promote the use of regulatory instruments such as EPR and disposal bans in the context of broad public understanding of the negative impacts of PBDEs on other parts of the economy such as recreational fishing Leading companies often find it difficult to initiate proactive responses in the absence of Work with industry leaders a level playing field Lack of performance Inability to measure policy effectiveness or Develop standardized reporting protocols, measures and targets measurement, program performance and absence of accountability and performance measures or targets hampers Ensure robust reporting mechanisms transparency ability to measure success Establish dates for framework implementation and review Weak requirements for program reporting damage public faith in program performance Poorly developed Relatively cheap landfill disposal mitigates Across all jurisdictions discourage landfill disposal and encourage recycling through the use of landfill bans waste diversion against waste diversion and recycling infrastructure Facilitate the development of new recycling infrastructure by working with and supporting municipalities Innovative new recycling programs and processes are hampered by waste collection Consider taxing or levying landfill disposal and incineration and create dedicated funds which can be used to challenges in the face of landfill options support and promote recycling and other waste diversion programs
116 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Challenge/Issue Concerns/Considerations Response
Waste diversion and recycling poorly Through green procurement enhance the market for secondary materials and PBDE free products developed and not broadly available Establish environmentally sound management waste processing and secondary materials aimed at restricting the disposal of secondary materials Lack of sustainable In the absence of sustainable funding waste Develop EPR framework and product regulations to establish sustainable producer funded and operated funding diversion has difficulties competing with recycling programs cheap disposal
Development of secondary materials markets is constrained by the challenges procuring reliable and sustained flows of quality source separated materials
117 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report 6.5 Additional Studies and Research
Investigations conducted as part of this project have sought to give a broad understanding of the handling of products containing PBDEs in the Great Lakes Basin during and after use, as well as the status of government actions that comprise the regulatory and non-regulatory framework related to the management of PBDEs. However, further research can provide a greater depth of comprehension of the gaps identified, and will likely provide valuable additional information to consider in moving forward with the recommendations to improve the management of, and reduce the release of, PBDEs in the Great Lakes Basin.
In addition to the discussion of knowledge gaps related to the life cycle of PBDE containing products and especially related to their end-of-life management, which were discussed in Chapter 3, the following are some additional suggested areas for further study:
Investigate, in greater depth, existing government regulatory policies in all Great Lakes jurisdictions, which address PBDEs in products and substances, to better understand: o how the policies are developed and implemented; and o enforcement, including resources for enforcement, the extent of enforcement, and the mechanisms and basis for enforcement Examine, more comprehensively, voluntary industry and non-profit recycling programs specifically in the Great Lakes region, to better understand: o the existing infrastructure for recycling and how it may help facilitate moves to EPR o the extent to which recyclers understand issues related to PBDEs, and are currently monitoring for PBDEs; and o the extent to which recyclers are taking action to reduce releases, and, through what methods and approaches. Conduct research on PBDE-related activities at the local level, initially focused on major urban areas in each Great Lakes jurisdiction, at wastewater treatment plants, landfills, and incinerators (e.g., monitoring, local requirements, use of best available technologies , key issues in managing products that contain-PBDEs, etc.). Study and evaluate proven, as well as new, innovative technologies and best practices for undertaking the environmentally responsible recycling and disposal of PBDE-containing products. Further examine the barriers to passage of PBDE legislation in Canada and the U.S., and identify potential solutions.
118 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
Appendix A
Interviews
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Interviews were conducted with 24 government officials, stakeholders and experts. Interview candidates were initially approached and provided with an overview of the project and then prior to the scheduled interview were sent a list of questions which served to guide the interview and the discussion. On occasion the interviewee provided an additional name or names for possible secondary interviews. Those who were interviewed are listed under Acknowledgements at the beginning of this Report.
The following summarizes some of the key observations and insights arising from the interviews.
There is a paucity of information on practices and procedures to manage products that might, or do, contain PBDEs. Testing for PBDEs in products and at stages of a product’s life cycle is not regularly undertaken – e.g. in landfill leachate or during shredding of plastics in recycling facilities. In order to manage the issue there needs to be a considerable improvement in monitoring and product tracking There is some awareness of potential or actual environmental or health impacts but most operational standards in recycling and other waste management facilities do not focus on toxicity and in some jurisdictions where there are laws regulating PBDEs, no resources have been dedicated to implementation and compliance enforcement. There are alternatives to PBDES as flame retardants but there is no process for reviewing the safety of PBDE substitutes Chemical substitution appears to be the most common way to introduce alternatives to PBDEs rather than through product redesign which avoids their use – e.g. using denser less flammable foams, using metal rather than plastics in electronics There is an emerging questioning of flammability standards and the need for flame retardants in some products Recycling of most products containing PBDEs is technically feasible but is hampered by the lack of sufficient economic incentives – e.g. high recycling costs; low prices for recovered materials There are no scalable technologies for removing flame retardants from plastics
A-1 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Municipalities perceive the costs of collecting and recycling products such as carpets, mattresses or construction materials to be a significant disincentive to undertaking pilot programs or long term support of recycling programs The primary focus of recycling of products which might or do contain PBDEs is often not the part of the products containing PBDEs – i.e. the plastics – but other materials such as fibres from carpet, not the padding or backing; the metal in cables, not the surrounding insulation or covering; high value metals in electronics, not the plastic housings or components Most plastics residue from recycling processes is disposed of in landfills or incinerators. Many existing incineration facilities are hesitant to receive halogenated materials due to concerns about equipment damage and emissions compliance Recycling of mixed construction, renovation and demolition waste is economically challenging in the face of low landfill disposal costs EPR can be a viable approach but is mainly effective when applied to discrete and easily identifiable and easily source separated products such as electronics, carpet and mattresses EPR programs do provide the opportunity to mandate testing, standards and environmental health and safety protocols and final materials disposition Procurement policies that require PBDE-free materials are a suggested approach Obstacles to advancement of policies to reduce PBDEs include fragmentation of this work in government agencies considering this issue (including public health departments, green chemistry divisions, pollution prevention/recycling divisions, and regulatory agencies).
A-2 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance Great Lakes Water Quality Board – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in the Great Lakes Basin –Final Report
Interview Questions
The following questions were shared with interviewees in advance of the interviews and were used to guide the conversations.
1. With respect to the [insert jurisdiction X] framework related to PBDEs or products containing PBDEs, what is your understanding of the success of the phase out programs implemented to date that aim to minimize releases of PBDEs to the environment? 2. Are there any proposed or planned phase-out programs for new product categories that are not yet operational? 3. Are you aware of any new initiatives in other jurisdictions that specifically target PBDE containing products? 4. Does your department / organization utilize any Great Lakes monitoring data related to PBDEs in the Great Lakes? Does the availability of this data influence your decision making? 5. Can you describe what the process is for reviewing regulatory safety of substitutes for substances phased out before they are used extensively as substitutes? For example, before a substance is banned, what kind of analysis is undertaken on potential substitutes (environment and health and safety reviews) and is industry consulted on what they might substitute with? 6. Do you have knowledge or an opinion about any changes to flammability standards and how these may impact the selection of alternatives to PBDEs. 7. Are you aware with any concerns in the public domain (literature, news, etc.) regarding any PBDE substitutes that are currently in use? If so, please describe. 8. Can you identify any gaps or issues in the current regulations or program rules for reuse, recycling, or disposal of PBDE containing products in your jurisdiction? 9. [Related to #6] Do any of the issues you identified have potential implications for releases of PBDEs during end of life management? Do these implications potentially impact the Great Lakes? 10. Are there any barriers (regulatory, economic, other) you can identify that make it difficult to continue with advancements to reducing PBDE releases to the environment? 11. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is a term that relates to programs where producers are physically and / or financially responsible with the end of life management of their products. 12. Do you have an opinion on the potential for the development of EPR programs related to new product categories that contain PBDEs in your jurisdiction? Do you have any other ideas or potential recommendations about how to more effectively reduce the releases of PBDEs into the Great Lakes region?
A-3 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
Appendix B
Jurisdictional Review Summaries
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
Review of Government Initiatives for PBDEs by State and Provincial Jurisdiction: Illinois CATEGORY DESCRIPTION Regulations specifically targeted at PBDEs Manufacture, Illinois Brominated Fire Retardant Prevention Act (410 ILCS 48/). processing, and distribution From January 1, 2006, manufacture, processing, or distribution of a product or material containing more than 0.1 percent of pentaBDE or octaBDE is prohibited. Exemptions to this requirement are provided for original equipment manufacturer replacement parts manufactured prior to the effective date of the act, and the processing of recyclables.
Note that the law specifically indicates that there is no restriction on a manufacturer, importer, or distributor from transporting products containing PBDEs through the state or storing such products in the state for further distribution. Studies/Reports By January 2, 2006, the Illinois EPA (IEPA) must report to the General Assembly and Governor on the latest available scientific research regarding decaBDE’s potential or actual bioaccumulation, human exposure and health effects, and the availability, health risks, and effectiveness of alternatives to decaBDE. By February 28, 2006, the Illinois Department of Public Health was directed to submit a report to the General Assembly and Governor that reviews the IEPA report on decaBDE and indicate any public health implications.
As a result of the reporting requirements, IEPA issued “A Report to the General Assembly and the Governor In Response to Public Act 94-100, DecaBDE Study: A Review of Available Scientific Research” (January 2006). In response to this report, the Governor requested IEPA to do a follow-up study and determine whether safer, affordable, and effective alternatives to decaBDE were available. IEPA subsequently issued “Report on Alternatives to the Flame Retardant DecaBDE: Evaluation of Toxicity, Availability, Affordability, and Fire Safety Issues, A Report to the Governor and the General Assembly” (March 2007) which concluded that there is reason for concern regarding the continued use of decaBDE, and there are only a few current decaBDE uses for which cost-effectiveness and availability is an issue. The report recommended that: 1) the Governor support a phase-out of several DecaBDE’s uses which could be carried out through voluntary actions, negotiations, rules, and/or legislation; 2) the state explore the creation of a clearinghouse among state environmental agencies as a central repository for information regarding flame retardants that can be made available to interested parties; and 3) state modify its purchasing decisions to favor purchase of DecaBDE-free products. Regulations targeted at products containing PBDEs Electronics / EPR program – Illinois Electronic Products Recycling and Reuse Act (415 ILCS 150/) (2008) (mandatory). electrical equipment Products include: desktop or notebook computer, computer monitor, television, printer, electronic keyboard, facsimile machine, videocassette recorder, portable digital music player that has memory capability and is battery powered, digital video disc player, video game console, electronic mouse, scanner, digital converter box, cable receiver, satellite receiver, digital video disc recorder, or small-scale server. This law applies only to video display screens greater than six inches in size.
The law only covers products sold at retail and taken out of service from a residence in IL.
Exemptions include: 1) electronic devices that are a part of a motor vehicle assembled by or for a vehicle manufacturer or franchised dealer, including replacement parts for use in a motor vehicle; 2) an electronic device that is functionally or physically part of a larger piece of equipment or that is taken out of service from an industrial, commercial, governmental, agricultural, or medical setting; or 3) an electronic device that is contained within appliances (e.g., clothes washer/dryer, refrigerator and freezer, microwave oven, conventional oven/range, dishwasher, room air conditioner, dehumidifier), water pump, sump pump, or air purifier. Also, exempt are printers that are floor-standing or with an optional floor stand, point of sale receipt printers, household calculators with printing capabilities, label makers, or non- stand-alone printers embedded into a product that is not included under the law.
Illinois Electronic Products Recycling and Reuse Act requires manufacturers to disclose whether any products sold in the state exceed the limits for PBDEs under the restriction on hazardous substances (RoHS) Directive 2002/95/EC of the European Parliament and Council, and, if so, an identification of the aforementioned electronic device that exceeds the directive.
Illinois has state-level landfill and incineration bans on electronics that include televisions, monitors, printers, computers ( laptop, notebook, netbook, tablet, desktop ), electronic keyboards, fax machines, VCRs, portable digital music players, digital video disc players, video game consoles, small scale servers, scanners, electronic mice, digital converter boxes, cable receivers, satellite receivers, digital video disc recorders. Government non-regulatory initiatives Education and In 2012, a committee was formed, led by the IL Office of the State Fire Marshal that included representatives from the IL Outreach DPH and IEPA, to provide the Governor with recommendations regarding flame retardant chemicals and their hazards. Resources for supporting research and policy initiatives at this time were not available in Illinois and, such efforts were understood to be potentially duplicative of those already taking place on the federal level and in California. The committee recommendation was to provide information to the public on flame retardant hazards and how to reduce exposure. A fact sheet was developed and made available on-line in January 2013.
B-1 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
Review of Government Initiatives for PBDEs by State and Provincial Jurisdiction: Indiana CATEGORY DESCRIPTION Regulations specifically targeted at PBDEs Manufacture, None identified. Processing, Distribution Studies/Reports None identified. Regulations targeted at products containing PBDEs Electronics / electrical EPR program – Indiana Electronic Waste Law (2009) (mandatory). equipment Products included from households, public schools, and small businesses: TVs, computer monitors, computers (including desktops, laptops, and tablets), e-readers, fax machines, peripherals (keyboards, mice, external hard drives, printers, all-in-one printer/scanner/copiers, projectors, and any other devices sold exclusively for external use with a computer and provide input/output from a computer), DVD players, digital photo frames, digital media players, iPods/MP3 players, camcorders/cameras, DVR/TiVo devices (including cable and satellite boxes, but not satellite dishes), and portable GPS navigation systems.
Indiana’s Electronic Waste Law requires manufacturers to disclose whether any video display devices sold by the manufacturer to households exceed the limits for PBDEs under the restriction on hazardous substances (RoHS) Directive 2002/95/EC of the European Parliament and Council, and whether the manufacturer has received an exemption from the limits established under the RoHS Directive that has been approved and published by the European Commission.
Indiana has requirements that state procurement and state contractors must comply with the Electronic Waste Law.
As of January 1, 2011, the following items are prohibited from being discarded by Indiana households, public (including charter) schools, and small businesses: TVs, computer monitors, computers (including desktops, laptops, and tablets), e-readers, fax machines, peripherals (keyboards, mice, external hard drives, printers, all-in-one printer/scanner/copiers, projectors, and any other devices sold exclusiverly for external use with a computer and provide input/output from a computer), DVD plners, digital photo frames, digital media players, iPods/MP3 plyers, camcorders/cameras, DVR/TiVo devices (including cable and satellite boxes, but not satellite dishes), and portable GPS navigation systems.
Electronic devices under the law are prohibited from disposal in a landfill or by incineration. Government non-regulatory initiatives None identified.
B-2 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
Review of Government Initiatives for PBDEs by State and Provincial Jurisdiction: Michigan CATEGORY DESCRIPTION Regulations specifically targeted at PBDEs Manufacture, Michigan Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, processing, and Act 451 of 1994, Subpart 2, PBDE Compounds, 324.14721-14725 (2005). distribution 32.14722 - From June 1, 2006, manufacture, processing, or distribution of a product or material containing more than 0.1 percent of pentaBDE is prohibited. Exemptions to this requirement are provided for original equipment manufacturer replacement parts and the processing of recyclables.
32.14723 - From June 1, 2006, manufacture, processing, or distribution of a product or material containing more than 0.1 percent of octaBDE is prohibited. Exemptions to this requirement are provided for original equipment manufacturer replacement parts and the processing of recyclables. Studies / Reports 32.14724 – The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality may establish an advisory committee to help determine the risk posed by the release of PBDEs, other than pentaBDE or octaBDE, to human health and the environment. The department may use existing programs to monitor the presence of PBDEs in the state's environment to determine exposure and risk. Regulations targeted at products containing PBDEs Electronics / electrical EPR program – Michigan Electronic Take Back Law (Michigan Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, Act equipment 451 of 1994, Part 173 Electronics, 372.17301-17333) (2005) (mandatory). Products include: desktop or laptop computers, computer monitors, printers, and video display devices with screens four inches or larger.
Exemptions include PDAs, mobile phones, peripherals such as a mouse or a detachable/wireless keyboard, printers that are floor-standing or with an optional floor stand, point of sale receipt printers, household calculators with printing capabilities, label makers, or non-stand-alone printers embedded into a product other than a computer. The law only covers products used primarily for personal or small business purposes; it does not include devices intended for use in industrial, governmental, commercial, R&D, or medical settings.
There are currently no landfill or incineration bans on electronics at the state level in Michigan. Government non-regulatory initiatives Studies/Reports Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) conducted a review of PBDEs, and issued a report in May 2008, Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers: A Scientific Review with Risk Characterization and Recommendations. This document was written in response to a request from the MDEQ management for information about PBDEs, and was needed to make decisions regarding placement of PBDEs on the Critical Materials Register (CMR) as well as the MDEQ’s response to proposed legislation to ban PBDEs (with a particular focus on decaBDEs) in Michigan. The report recommendations included supporting a legislative ban on decaBDE contingent on to the availability of safe alternatives, investigating the efficacy of the legislative bans on penta- and octaBDE, developing criteria when adequate toxicity studies are available, developing educational materials aimed at reducing children’s exposures, examining the safety of PBDE substitutes, and considering the implementation of monitoring programs.
B-3 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
Review of Government Initiatives for PBDEs by State and Provincial Jurisdiction: Minnesota CATEGORY DESCRIPTION Regulations specifically targeted at PBDEs Manufacture, Minnesota Statute 2010 325E.385-325E.388 (2008) regulates product or flame-retardant parts of a product containing Processing, PBDEs. Distribution MN Statute 325E.386 – prohibits manufacture, processing, or distribution of a product or flame-retardant part of a product containing more than 0.1 percent of pentaBDE or octaBDE by mass. Exemptions include, but are not limited to, the following: 1) used transportation vehicles with components containing PBDEs; 2) the manufacture, sale, or distribution of new carpet cushion made from recycled foam containing more than 0.1 percent PBDE; 3) medical devices; and 4) the manufacture, sale, repair, distribution, maintenance, refurbishment, or modification of telecommunications equipment containing PBDEs used by entities which meet special requirements under federal regulations.
Note that the law specifically indicates that there is no restriction on a manufacturer, importer, or distributor from transporting products containing PBDEs through the state or storing such products in the state for later distribution outside the state. Studies/Reports Minnesota Statute 325E.387 – requires that the commissioner of the pollution control agency, in consultation with the commissioners of health and public safety, review uses of decaBDE, availability of technically feasible and safer alternatives, fire safety, and any evidence regarding the potential harm to public health and the environment posed by decaBDE and the alternatives.
To comply with the above requirement, in January 2008, the MN Pollution Control Agency issued “Decabromodiphenyl Ether (Deca-BDE): A Report to the Minnesota Legislature.” The report found that decaBDE is: widespread in the environment; is present in wildlife, sewage sludge, indoor air, house dust, foods, and people; and shows potential to bioaccumulate and concentrate up the food chain. In addition, DecaBDE has been determined to break down into more toxic PBDE congeners (which has important implications for overall evaluation of decaBDE toxicity), and was found to cause developmental neurotoxicity effects in laboratory animals. Effective alternatives for achieving flame retardancy appear to be available for most current Deca-BDE applications andn flammability requirements can be met using a range of strategies (alternative chemical, inherently non-flammable materials, and product re-design). Procurement Minnesota Statute 325E.387 requires that, by January 1, 2008, the commissioner of administration must make available for purchase and use by all state agencies, equipment, supplies, and other products that are PBDE-free, unless exempted.
Exemptions include, but are not limited to, the following: 1) used transportation vehicles with components containing PBDEs; 2) the manufacture, sale, or distribution of new carpet cushion made from recycled foam containing more than 0.1 percent PBDE; 3) medical devices; and 4) the manufacture, sale, repair, distribution, maintenance, refurbishment, or modification of telecommunications equipment containing PBDEs used by entities which meet special requirements under federal regulations. Chemical Identification Minnesota Statute 2010 116.9401 – 116.9407 (Toxic Free Kids Act) (2009) requires the Minnesota Department of and Risk Health (MDH) to create two lists of chemicals: Chemicals of High Concern; and Priority Chemicals. As of July 1, 2013, Communication deca-BDE, octa-BDE, and penta-BDE are on the list of Chemicals of High Concern. Through this program, MDH is working to identify and communicate the potential for hazardous chemical exposures which could be harmful to human health, especially to children and pregnant women. Regulations targeted at products containing PBDEs Electronics / electrical EPR program – Minnesota Electronics Recycling Act (2007) (mandatory). equipment Products include: video display devices with screen size greater than 9 inches diagonally such as TVs, TV-DVD/VCR combinations, monitors for home security/CCTV systems, computer monitors, all-in-one computers, laptop computers, tablet PCs, eBook readers, digital picture frames, portable DVD players, as well as peripherals (keyboard, printer, and other devices that are exclusively for external use with a computer that provides input or output into or from a computer, fax machine, DVD player, VCR). Excluded are refurbished, recertified, open box, or used products as well as cell phones/PDAs, calculators, and stereo/audio equipment. The law only includes products collected from households (products from commercial/industrial/institutional sources are excluded). Minnesota’s Electronics Recycling Act requires manufacturers to disclose whether any products sold to households exceed the limits for PBDEs under the restriction on hazardous substances (RoHS) Directive 2002/95/EC of the European Parliament and Council, and whether the manufacturer has received an exemption from the limits established under the RoHS Directive.
Minnesota has a state-level ban on electronic products containing cathode ray tubes being placed in mixed municipal solid waste. Children’s Products MN Statute 325F.071 (2015) prohibits, from July 1, 2018, manufacturers and wholesalers from manufacture, sales, and distribution in MN, a children's product or upholstered residential furniture containing, in amounts greater than 1,000 parts per million in any product component, decaBDE. From July 1, 2019, no retailer may sell these products. The sale of any previously owned product containing decaBDE is exempt.
Regarding substitutes, a manufacturer may not replace decaBDE with a chemical identified on the basis of credible
B-4 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
scientific evidence by a state, federal, or international agency as being known or suspected with a high degree of probability to: 1) harm the development of a fetus or child; 2) cause cancer, genetic damage, or reproductive harm; 3) disrupt the endocrine or hormone system; or 4) damage the nervous system, immune system, or organs.
This law also requires that by January 15, 2016, the commissioner of health, in consultation with the state fire marshal prepare a report that includes the status of federal, international, and other states’ laws and regulations regarding flame retardants in upholstered furniture, mattresses, and carpet pads, status of fire safety standards. Upholstered MN Statute 325F.071 (2015) prohibits, from July 1, 2018, manufacturers and wholesalers from manufacture, sales, and residential furniture distribution in MN, a children's product or upholstered residential furniture containing, in amounts greater than 1,000 parts per million in any product component, decaBDE. From July 1, 2019, no retailer may sell these products. The sale of any previously owned product containing decaBDE is exempt.
Regarding substitutes, a manufacturer may not replace decaBDE with a chemical identified on the basis of credible scientific evidence by a state, federal, or international agency as being known or suspected with a high degree of probability to: 1) harm the development of a fetus or child; 2) cause cancer, genetic damage, or reproductive harm; 3) disrupt the endocrine or hormone system; or 4) damage the nervous system, immune system, or organs.
This law also requires that by January 15, 2016, the commissioner of health, in consultation with the state fire marshal prepare a report that includes the status of federal, international, and other states’ laws and regulations regarding flame retardants in upholstered furniture, mattresses, and carpet pads, status of fire safety standards. Major appliances MN Statute 115A.9561 (1989) prohibits placement of major appliances in mixed municipal solid waste or disposal in or on the land, in a solid waste processing, or disposal facility. Major appliances must be recycled or reused.
Government non-regulatory initiatives None identified
B-5 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
Review of Controls for PBDE Products by Jurisdiction: New York CATEGORY DESCRIPTION Regulations specifically targeted at PBDEs Manufacture, New York State Law Article 37-0111 (2004) prohibits manufacture, processing, or distribution of a product or flame- Processing, and retardant part of a product containing more than 0.1 percent of pentaBDE or octaBDE by mass. Distribution The Commissioner of the NY Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) may waive the requirements upon a finding that there is no significant threat to the public health.
These requirements do not apply to: 1) carriers or freight forwarders for product or material shipped or delivered for shipment through New York state for commerce in another state or country; 2) the resale of products manufactured prior to January 1, 2006, or replacement parts manufactured prior to January 1, 2006. Studies / Reports None identified Regulations targeted at products containing PBDEs Electronics / electrical EPR program – New York Electronic Equipment Recycling and Reuse (2010) (mandatory). equipment Products include: laptop computers, desktop computers, permanently affixed cables/cords/wiring, monitors, electronic keyboards, electronic mouse or similar pointing device, fax machine, document scanner, printer, small-scale server, TV, portable digital music player that has memory capability and is battery-powered, video cassette recorder, digital video disc player, digital video recorder, digital converter box, cable or satellite receiver, or electronic or video game.
Exemptions include PDAs, portable hand-held calculators, document scanners or printers which weigh one hundred pounds or more, motor vehicles or parts of motor vehicles, cameras or video cameras, radios, household appliances (clothes washers/dryers, refrigerators, freezers, ovens, dishwashers), telephones of any type, GPS devices, equipment that is part of a larger piece of equipment intended for use in an industrial, research and development or commercial setting, security equipment, medical equipment containing a CRT, and medical devices.
New York’s Electronics Equipment Recycling and Reuse law requires manufacturers to disclose whether any electronic device included in the law that are sold in the state exceeds the limits for PBDEs under the restriction on hazardous substances (RoHS) Directive 2002/95/EC of the European Parliament and Council, and whether the manufacturer has received an exemption from the limits established under the RoHS Directive.
New York has state-level landfill and incineration bans on electronics that include desktop computers, laptops, CRT TV, CRT monitor, flat panel TVs, flat panel monitors, printers, keyboards, and mice. Government non-regulatory initiatives Studies/Reports Chapter 387 of the Laws of New York, 2004 established the New York State Task Force on Flame Retardant Safety (Task Force) to review and report on relevant studies, risk assessments, findings or rulings related to decaBDE and to evaluate the availability, reliability, and cost-effectiveness of safer alternatives. The “Report of the New York State Task Force on Flame Retardant Safety” was issued in March 2013 and summarized recent risk assessments and findings by the U.S. EPA and the European Union on decaBDE, and reviewed alternatives. The report concludes that decaBDEs are of concern and that the availability, reliability and cost-effectiveness of safer alternatives to decaBDE in many applications have made the phase out of this chemical practical and met the needs for products to maintain sufficient flame retardant properties.
B-6 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
Review of Controls for PBDE Products by Jurisdiction: Ohio CATEGORY DESCRIPTION Regulations specifically targeted at PBDEs Manufacture, None identified. processing, and distribution Studies / Reports None identified. Regulations targeted at products containing PBDEs None identified. Government non-regulatory initiatives None identified.
Review of Government Initiatives for PBDEs by State and Provincial Jurisdiction: Ontario CATEGORY DESCRIPTION Regulations specifically targeted at PBDEs None identified. Regulations targeted at products containing PBDEs Electronics / electrical EPR program – Ontario Electronics Stewardship (OES) recycling program (mandatory). Products included: audio-visual equipment and telecom equipment, cell phones, computers, accessories, IT equipment, and TVs. In Canada the Electronics Products Recycling Association EPSC (EPRA) requires all e-waste processors to adhere to the Electronics Recycling Standard (ERS) which also includes certification to the R2 Standard for downstream processors and zero landfilling of residuals.
Landfill bans - 80% of Ontario landfills have banned electronics from disposal in landfill278.
Incineration ban - Electronics are not allowed to be incinerated in Ontario. Mobile and cordless Ontario designates both cell phones and cordless phones as part of its OES EPR program. phones Other non-regulatory initiatives Appliances - large Appliances were identified for potential future EPR programing in Ontario as part of the draft Waste Reduction Strategy which did not pass. The Canadian Appliance Manufacturers Association (CAMA) has established a national stewardship agency in response to the province of BC`s regulated EPR program for appliances. Carpets The Ontario Ministry of Environment did identify carpets as a potential EPR product category in their draft Waste Reduction Strategy which did not get passed.
278 Electronic Products Recycling Association website, Map of Landfill Bans. http://epsc.ca/map-of-landfill-bans/
B-7 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
Review of Controls for PBDE Products by Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania CATEGORY DESCRIPTION Regulations specifically targeted at PBDEs Manufacture, processing, None identified and distribution Studies / Reports None identified Regulations targeted at products containing PBDEs Electronics / electrical EPR program – Pennsylvania Covered Device Recycling Act (2010) (mandatory). equipment Products included: desktop and notebook computers, computer monitors, computer peripherals (a keyboard, printer or any other device sold exclusively for external use with a computer that provides input into or output from the computer), and televisions marketed and intended for use by consumers in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. A “consumer” is an occupant of a single or multi-family home that uses the covered devices for personal or small business purposes. For purposes of this definition a small business is an entity that is independently owned or operated, employs 50 or fewer people, has purchased or leased a covered computer device from a computer manufacturer or retailer and, but for the program established under the CDRA, would not otherwise have access to electronic recycling programs.
Products not included: Computer peripherals that are adaptive or assistive technologies; Televisions with viewable screens smaller than four inches; A telephone of any type, including a mobile phone; An automated typewriter, professional workstation, server, portable handheld calculator, portable digital assistant, global positioning system, MP3 player or other similar device; Devices that are functionally or physically part of: o Equipment intended for use in an industrial, governmental, commercial, research and o development, or medical setting; o Equipment used for security, sensing, monitoring, antiterrorism, or emergency o services purposes; Equipment designed and intended primarily for use by professional users; A component or part of a motor vehicle; Devices that are contained in an appliance
Electronic devices included in the law are prohibited from disposal in a landfill. Government non-regulatory initiatives None identified
B-8 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
Review of Controls for PBDE Products by Jurisdiction: Wisconsin CATEGORY DESCRIPTION Regulations specifically targeted at PBDEs Manufacture, None identified. processing, and distribution Studies / Reports None identified. Regulations targeted at products containing PBDEs Electronics / electrical EPR program – Wisconsin Electronics Recycling Law (2009) (mandatory). equipment Products included are those from households and schools as follows: computers (desktop, laptop, netbook and tablet computers, and servers and thin clients if used by households or schools), desktop printers, printer/fax/copier/scanner combinations, and video display devices, including televisions, computer monitors and e-readers with displays of 7" or more in the longest diagonal direction.
Products not included: TV or computer monitor that is part of a motor vehicle, automated typewriters or typesetter, portable hand-held calculator or device, cell phones, digital cameras, and iPods.
Electronic devices prohibited from disposal in a landfill or by incineration include: televisions, computers (desktop, laptop, netbook and tablet computers), desktop printers (including those that scan, fax and/or copy), computer monitors, other computer accessories (including keyboards, mice, speakers, external hard drives and flash drives), e- readers, DVD players, VCRs and other video players (i.e., DVRs), fax machines, and cell phones. Government non-regulatory initiatives Studies The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) conducted a study of PBDEs in Wisconsin fish from 2002 to 2012. The DNR has tracked bioaccumulating pollutants in fish that are consumed since the 1970s. Beginning in 2002, this effort has included monitoring levels of PBDEs in Wisconsin sport fish from the Great Lakes and inland waters. Education and In February 2003, WI DNR published an article in its Wisconsin Natural Resources magazine entitled “A Smoldering Outreach Issue” regarding PBDEs.
B-9 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
Appendix C
References
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
References Cited in this Report
Abbasi, G., Diamond, M., Soehl, A., & Murray, M. (2014). Great Lakes PBDE reduction project summary paper No. 1: PBDE product inventory
Allen J. G.; McClean M. D.; Stapleton H. M.; Webstert T. F. Linking PBDEs in house dust to consumer products using X-ray fluorescence. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42 (11
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,Toxicological profile for polybrominated biphenyls and polybrominated diphenyl ethers 2004
Babrauskas V., D. Lucas, D. Eisenberg, V. Singla, M. Dedeo & A. Blum (2012). Flame Retardants in Building Insulation: A Case for Re-evaluating Building Codes. Building Research and Information
Birnbaum, L. S.; Staskal, D. F. Brominated flame retardants: cause for concern. Environ. Health Perspect. 2004, 112, 9–17. McDonald, T. A. A perspective on the potential health risks of PBDEs. Chemosphere 2002, 46
Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME),Canada-wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility, October 2009
CCME, Progress Report on the Canada-Wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility 2014
CCME, The State of Waste Management in Canada, January 2014, Giroux Environmental in association with Duncan Bury Consulting, Rene Drolet Consulting and Eco Works Consulting
Canadian Environmental Law Association, April 2011, Improving the Management of End-of-life Vehicles in Canada,
Centre for Strategy and Evaluation Services, Interim Evaluation: Impact of the REACH Regulation on the Innovativeness of the EU Chemical Industry, 2012
Crimmins, Bernard S., James J. Pagano, Xiaoyan Xia, Philip K. Hopke, Michael S. Milligan and Thomas M. Holse. 2012. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs): Turning the Corner in Great Lakes Trout 1980−2009
Chemicals of Mutual Concern Identification Task Team, Draft Binational Summary Report: Brominated Flame Retardants (PBDEs and HBCD), May 2015,
Cheng. CC. C. F. Chiu and F. H. Chang. 2009. Characteristics of polybrominated diphenyl ethers in the indoor atmosphere of computer classrooms. Scientific Research and Essay Vol.4 (10),
Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR Convention) 2004, Certain Brominated Flame Retardants – Polybrominated Diphenylethers, Polybrominated Biphenyls, Hexabromo Cyclododecane, OSPAR Priority Substances Series 135. London
C-1 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
Corden, C. & M. Postle (2002). Risk Reduction Strategy and Analysis of Advantages and Drawbacks for Octobromodiphenyl Ether, Final Report, London: UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Danon-Schaffer, Monica N., PBDEs in Landfills from Electronic Waste, University of British Columbia, PhD Thesis, February 2010
Domingo, J. L. (2012). Polybrominated diphenyl ethers in food and human dietary exposure: A review of the recent scientific literature. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 50(2)
Electronic Products Recycling Association (EPRA), Recycler Qualification Program for End-of-Life Electronics Recycling, October 2010 with updates
Electronic Products Recycling Association, EPRA, Design for Environment Report 2011
Environment Canada 2010. Risk Management Strategy for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) 2010
Environment Canada 2012. Environmental Monitoring and Surveillance in Support of the Chemicals Management Plan - Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers In The Canadian Environment.
Environment Canada, Characterization and Management of Construction, Renovation and Demolition (CRD) Waste in Canada, Guy Perry and Associates, 2015.
Environment Canada, Consultation Document on the Proposed Risk Management Instrument for Products Containing PBDEs, September 2013
Environment Canada, Request for Proposals, Consultation with Canadian Stakeholders and Development of Best Practices for a Technical Code of Practice for the Environmentally Sound Management of End-of-Life Mercury Containing Lamps, August 2014
Environment Canada, Study of Chemicals in Products Management in Scandinavian Countries, Duncan Bury Consulting, May 2014 unpublished report
Eskenazi B., Chevrier J., Rauch S.A., Kogut K., Harley K.G., Johnson C., Trujillo, C., Sjodin, A., Bradman, A. 2013. In Utero and Childhood Polybrominated Diphenyl Ether (PBDE) Exposures and Neurodevelopment in the CHAMACOS Study. Environmental Health Perspectives, 121(2):
Genty, A. (2009). An Inventory and Assessment of Options for Reducing Emissions: Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs). SOCOPSE Project (Source Control of Priority Substances in Europe)
Giroux Environmental Consulting, 2015. Regulatory Profile of Landfill Leachate Control Measures in Canada, Final Report to Environment Canada. Unpublished.
Great Lakes PBDE Reduction Project, Summary Paper No. 1, PBDE Product Inventory
C-2 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
Grossman, Elizabeth 2011. Are Flame Retardants Safe? Growing Evidence Says ‘No’. Yale Environment 360
Golnoush, Abbasi, Andreas M. Buser, Anna Soehl, Michael W. Murray, and Miriam L. Diamond 2014. Environmental Science and Technology. Stocks and Flows of PBDEs in Products from Use to Waste in the U.S. and Canada from 1970 to 2020
Government of Ontario, 2014, Environmental Registry: Environmental Standards for End-of-Life Vehicle Processing Facilities, February 28, 2014
Gower Index Series, (1997). The Index of Flame Retardants: An International Guide to More Than 1000 Products by Trade Name, Chemical, Application, and Manufacturer
Hale, RC; La Guardia, MJ; Harvey, E; et al. (2002) Potential role of fire retardant-treated polyurethane foam as a source of brominated diphenyl ethers to the U.S. environment. Chemosphere 46
Health Canada (2006). State of the Science Report for a Screening Health Assessment – Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs
Herbstman J.B., Sjödin A., Kurzon M., Lederman S.A., Jones R.S., Rauh V., Neeham, L.L., Tang, D., Niedzwiecki, M., Yang, R.Y., Perera, F. 2010. Prenatal Exposure to PBDEs and Neurodevelopment. Environmental Health Perspectives, 118(5
Hirschler, M. (2010). Regulations, codes, and standards relevant to fire issues in the United States. In Wilkie C., and Morgan, A. (eds). Fire Retardancy of Polymeric Materials, 2nd Edition Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press
Keller, A.S. et al., 2014, “Flame Retardant Applications in Camping Tents and Potential Exposure.” Environmental Science and Technology Letters, 1,
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (2007). Report on Alternatives to the Flame Retardant DecaBDE: Evaluation of Toxicity, Availability, Affordability, and Fire Safety Issues - A Report to the Governor and the General Assembly
Lassen, C., S. Løkke, L. & I. Andersen (1999). Brominated Flame Retardants: Substance Flow Analysis and Assessment of Alternatives. Report 494. Copenhagen: Danish Environmental Protection Agency
Law, R. J., Covaci, A., Harrad, S., Herzke, D., Abdallah, M. A. E., Fernie, K., Toms, L. L., & Takigami, H. (2014). Levels and trends of PBDEs and HBCDs in the global environment: Status at the end of 2012. Environment International, 65
Letcher, R.J. & Chu, S. (2010). High-Sensitivity Method for Determination of Tetrabromobisphenol-S and Tetrabromobisphenol-A Derivative Flame Retardants in Great Lakes Herring Gull Eggs by Liquid Chromatography-Atmospheric Pressure Photoionization-Tandem Mass Spectrometry. Environmental Science & Technology, 44(22)
C-3 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
Linares, V., Bellés, M., & Domingo, J. (2015). Human exposure to PBDE and critical evaluation of health hazards. Archives of Toxicology, 89(3
Lowell Center for Sustainable Production, University of Massachusetts,Pure Strategies (2005). Decabromodiphenylether: An Investigation of Non-Halogen Substitutes in Electronic Enclosure and Textile Applications
Ma. Y.N., Venier, M. & Hites, R.A. (2012). 2-Ethylhexyl Tetrabromobenzoate and Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Tetrabromophtalate Flame Retardants in the Great Lakes Atmosphere. Environmental Science & Technology
Meeker J.D., Johnson P.I., Camann D., & Hauser R. 2009. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ether (PBDE) Concentrations in House Dust are Related to Hormone Levels in Men. The Science of the Total Environment, 407(10
Murray, M.; Soehl, A.,Diamond, M., Abbasi, G. (2014). Great Lakes PBDE Reduction Project Summary Paper No.2. PBDE Alternatives Assessment.
National Research Council, Building Code of Canada 2010
National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control (1973). America Burning
North, Karin D., City of Palo Alto, California, Tracking PBDE Releases in Waste Water Treatment Plant Effluent, Palo Alto, CA, USA, 2010
Northeast Recycling Council, 2011. Disposal Bans & Mandatory Recycling in the United States June 24, 2011
Norwegian Pollution Control Authority (SFT) (2009). Guidance on alternative flame retardants to the use of commercial pentabromodiphenylether (c-PentaBDE)
Posner, S. (2004). Survey and technical assessment of alternatives to decabromodiphenyl ether (decaBDE) in textile applications. Report 5/04. Swedish Chemicals Inspectorate.
Schreder, Erika D. and Mark J. La Guardia. 2014. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. Flame Retardant Transfers from U.S. Households (Dust and Laundry Wastewater) to the Aquatic Environment
SOCOPSE, Source Control of Priority Substances in Europe 2009. Specific Targeted Research Project, Work Package 3 – D.3.1. An Inventory and Assessment of Options for Reducing Emissions: Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) SOCOPSE
Staudinger, Jeff, and Gregory A. Keoleian, 2001, Management of End-of-Life Vehicles (ELVs) in the US, Report No. CSS01-01
Sustainable Electronics Recycling International (SERI), Responsible Recycling R2 Standard for Electronics Recyclers, 2013,
C-4 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
Turyk M.E., Persky V.W., Imm P., Knobeloch L., Chatterton R.J., & Anderson H.A. 2008. Hormone Disruption by PBDEs in Adult Male Sport Fish Consumers. Environmental Health Perspectives, 116
United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), 2012, Guidance on best available techniques and best environmental practices for the recycling and disposal of articles containing polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants
UNEP, Guidance on best available techniques and environmental practices for the recycling and disposal of waste containing PBDEs listed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants; Revised draft January 2015
UNEP, Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee (POPRC); Technical Review of the Implications of Recycling Commercial PentaBDE and Commercial OctaBDE; 2010 UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/2
UNEP, Basel Convention, Guideline on Environmentally Sound Material Recovery/Recycling of End-of- Life Computing Equipment, Feb 2011
UNEP. 2010. Supporting Document for the draft technical paper developed in accordance with the work programmes on new persistent organic pollutants as adopted by the Conference of the Parties, UNEP/POPS/POPRC.6/INF/6
UNEP, 2008. Mobile Phone Partnership Initiative - Guidance document on the environmentally sound management of used and end-of-life mobile phones
UNEP, International Trade Control Measures under the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions, pamphlet
United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) 2012. Guidelines on best available techniques and best environmental practices for the recycling and waste disposal of articles containing polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) listed under the Stockholm Convention.
U.S. Toxic Substances Portal - Polybrominated Biphenyls (PBBs) & Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs), Chapter 7, Production, Import/Export, Use, And Disposal
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). An Exposure Assessment of Polybromated Diphenyl Ethers. EPA/600/R-08/086F May 2010
US EPA 2015. Flame Retardants Used in Flexible Polyurethane Foam: An Alternatives Assessment Update, August 2015. EPA 744-R-15-002
US EPA 2012. Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States Tables and Figures for 2012
US EPA 2005. Furniture Flame Retardancy Partnership: Environmental Profiles of Chemical Flame- Retardant Alternatives for Low-Density Polyurethane Foam, September 2005
C-5 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting
Attachment 2 WQB Appearance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) Project Plan, March 20
US EPA 2008. Tracking Progress on U.S. EPA’s Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) Project Plan: Status Report on Key Activities, December 2008
US EPA 2009. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) Action Plan, December 31, 2009
US EPA 2014. EPA’s Technical Fact Sheet - Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) and Polybrominated Biphenyls (PBBs), January 2014
US EPA 2014. An Alternatives Assessment for the Flame Retardant Decabromodiphenyl Ether (DecaBDE), January 2014
US EPA 2015. Flame Retardants Used in Flexible Polyurethane Foam: An Alternatives Assessment Update, August 2015. EPA 744-R-15-002
US EPA 2015. Flame Retardants in Printed Circuit Boards, August 2015, EPA 744-R-15-001
Westervelt, A. Quest to eliminate chemical flame retardants from Californian homes is far from over, experts say. The Guardian, May 15, 2015
C-6 Duncan Bury Consulting I Product Stewardship Institute I Giroux Environmental Consulting I René Drolet Consulting