New Changes to the U.S. Toy Safety Standard, ASTM F And Other Federal and State Product Safety Updates presented October 5, 2016 by:

Transcription

1 New Changes to the U.S. Toy Safety Standard, ASTM F And Other Federal and State Product Safety Updates presented October 5, 2016 by: Quin Dodd, Esq. Product Safety Attorney Bridget Wallace Regional Sales Manager, XOS

2 ASTM F963 Formerly voluntary standard Made mandatory by Congress as part of CPSIA Current version (F963-11) became mandatory CPSC rule June rd party (lab) testing and importer/u.s. manufacturer must certify to all provisions relevant to that toy F currently going through final editing and likely to be published (made final) any day 180 days before becomes mandatory

3 Key Changes of F Technical changes to requirements for magnets in toys (ingestion hazard) to align with EN-71 and ISO 8124 (European and international toy standards) Similar alignment for projectile toys New provision for expanding (in water) toys New performance standards for ride-on toys New labeling for button/coin batteries in toys and new performance standards for LI batteries

4 Key Changes of F New design guidelines for projection bath toys Clarification of ban of certain toys with spherical ends Clarification that plastic film requirement applies to all film Soft-fill exemption for rattle/teether/squeeze toy provisions Changes to test methods for jaw entrapment, yoyo balls and sound-producing toys Addition of heavy metals substrate requirements and composite testing procedure

5 Key Changes of F : Allowance for HDXRF for All 8 Heavy Metals Current limits on 8 heavy metals in both substrate and surface coatings (paints) for toys (Pb, As, Ba, Cd, Cr, Pb, Hg and Se) General test method for soluble release of metals (to simulate ingestion) using wet chemistry Current allowance for use of HDXRF as alternative for Pb to be expanded to all 8 metals (for homogenous plastic substrates)

6 Allowance for HDXRF Screening All advantages of XRF generally (nondestructive/less sample prep; speed; cost; onsite testing) Limited in F to homogenous plastic substrates only (for other 7 metals) Action supported by extensive CPSC and private test data Seen by CPSC as reduction of third party test burden/cost

7 Other Recent/Pending CPSC Test Burden Actions Exclusion from lead testing of natural/untreated wood Expansion of phthalates Determinations list Likely to allow FTIR to screen for phthalates May exclude manufactured wood from lead testing mandate

8 CPSC Violations at Ports Lead 225 (paint 14; content 211) (41%) Phthalates 114 (20%) Tracking labels 62 (11%) Art materials 49 (8%) Small parts 39 (7%) Certification 21 (3%) Durable nursery products 21 (3%) Mislabeled (mostly small parts) toys 15 (2%) Mislabeled balloons (no warning label) 8 (1%) Battery-operated toys (F-963) 5 (1%)

9 3 Ways States Regulate Substances 1. Bans of restricted substances in certain (typically children s) products 2. Reporting requirements for priority chemicals in certain products 3. Warning label requirements (especially CA Prop 65)

10 Key Regulated Substances Lead and lead compounds Flame Retardants (esp. brominated, chlorinated and organohalogen e.g., TRIS) Cadmium Phthalates (CPSC six plus one under Prop 65) CPSC could change Chromium (hexavalent compounds) Nickel and nickel compounds Formaldehyde Arsenic Mercury BPA

11 Key State Laws California: - Proposition ( Prop ) 65 (warning labels) - Various lead and cadmium limits for jewelry and cosmetics - New: CA Green Chemistry (Safer Consumer Products) Regulations (effectively a ban on priority products ) - Pending: flame retardant labeling for upholstered furniture Washington State: Children s Safe Products Act - Requires reporting to State if measurable amount of any of 66 chemicals in most children s products (including apparel) Maine, Vermont and Oregon: - Reporting laws very similar to Washington State w/authority to ban chemicals - Similar reporting/ban authority laws being actively considered in more than 20 states and additional laws are almost certain to be enacted. (And existing and several new not likely to be preempted)

12 CA Green Chemistry Law 3 Priority Products proposed: - Children s foam-padded sleep products containing TDCPP (flame retardant); - Spray polyurethane foam insulation containing unreacted diisocyanates; and - Paint/varnish strippers containing methylene chloride 7 additional product categories being reviewed: - Clothing (looking at alkyl phenol & ethoxylates, aromatic amines & azo dyes, bisphenols, phthalates, and volatile organic compounds like hexane, toluene and xylene) - Beauty/personal care/hygiene; - Building products (e.g., paints, adhesives, sealants and flooring) - Household/office furniture containing FRs - Cleaning products - Fishing/angling equipment; and - Consumable office machinery products (e.g., inks/toners) Alternatives analysis process extremely burdensome and time consuming/costly (likely not an option for most companies)

13 Tips to Maximize Compliance/Minimize Costs Push compliance up the supply chain where possible/practical Establish clear contractual and procedural obligations for suppliers Partner with a good lab Properly categorize (and label and market) products Prioritize risk (can t test for all Prop 65 substances); establish practical and updated RSL Establish multidisciplinary and consistent product safety team w/clear lines of responsibility and communication Find/develop good IT system for document production/retention and issue response Learn, monitor and adapt Have fun!-)

14 Technology Overview presented October 5, 2016 by Bridget Wallace Regional Sales Manager, XOS

15 Counts Conventional XRF From Sample 100 From Tube S Ca K Ti Cr Mn Fe Ni Cu Zn Zn Pb+As 10 Se Br Pb Br Sr Energy (kev) X-Rays Generated Secondary X-Rays Detected Sample Secondary X-Rays Emitted from Sample

16 Conventional XRF An inexpensive screening option which can be a valuable tool to screen at a high level for material failures Difficult to quantify low concentrations of heavy metals, even in substrates or bulk materials due to high background from X-ray source Measurement result is an uncontrolled average of the coating and the substrate material Results for surface coating in μg/cm 2 or mass per unit area, not the regulated parts per million (ppm) Average across multiple features and materials due to large illuminated area

17 HDXRF principle of operation Secondary X-Rays Emitted from sample

18 HDXRF A screening and quantifying tool which can identify failures as well as verify compliance. An instrument can only verify compliance if it is capable of quantification below the regulatory limit. Coating and substrate material can be measured separately with a single measurement Results for surface coating reported in ppm AND in μg/cm 2 or mass per unit area Reduction of scattering background from x-ray tube source allows for lower limits of detection Small but intense 1-mm spot size

19 Advantages of XRF over digestion/icp for total element screening XRF is non-destructive for homogenous materials Little to no sample preparation reduces analysis time and cost. Less than 5 minutes per measurement versus several hours to cut, weigh, digest, and analyze Faster analysis times obtained with XRF would be expected to result in lower test costs XRF does not involve hazardous acids, no cost for disposal of hazardous wet chemicals October 2016

20 How do I know HDXRF is capable of F963 total screening?

21 CPSC Technical Report Equipment HD Prime (HDXRF) 2 min quantification, plastic material selection Thermo NITON XL3t 700 (Traditional HHXRF) 5 min measurement time, main filter = 60 sec light filter = 40 sec, Consumer Goods/Test All Inductively-Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-OES) A CPSC Chemist operated the equipment and interpreted the data presented in this study. Samples Plastic reference materials Plastic parts from consumer goods Polyvinyl chloride material formulated by CPSC staff

22 Conclusions After comparing the results from measuring samples with each of the three techniques, the following conclusions were reported: HDXRF is a suitable alternative test method for measuring total content of heavy metals in homogenous polymeric materials It is recommended that this test method (ASTM e1) be accepted as an approved alternative total screening test method in the ASTM F standard. Traditional HHXRF technology has the potential to be a suitable alternative test method for measuring total content of heavy metals in homogenous polymeric materials. However, there were a number of discrepancies in the results obtained by the traditional HHXRF technology and the ICP or referenced amounts. CPSC staff encourages traditional HHXRF manufacturers to develop a standard test method that could be used for F963 total element screening when validated with appropriate certified reference materials.

23 To read the full CPSC report: Statistics/Chemicals/Lead/Lead-Technical-Report-/ Customized HDXRF Demonstrations Available For additional information or to request a free customized demonstration either in person or via the web visit: info@xos.com

24 Thank You! Bridget Wallace Quin Dodd Law Offices of Quin D. Dodd, LLC Web: