Greening the Package: Get the Lead Out

(and other heavy metals)

Toxics in Packaging Clearinghouse

May 2008

2© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

Presentation Outline

Background on Toxics in Packaging Laws Compliance Screening Results Why Are We Detecting Toxics Today? What Can Government & Industry Do?

3© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

Toxics in Packaging Laws

Model Toxics in Packaging Legislation

approved by CONEG in 1990 Adopted by 19 US States, most

recently California in 2003

Basis for EU Packaging Directive

4© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

States with Toxics in Packaging Laws

5© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

State Toxics in Packaging Laws

Prohibits intentional introduction of any amount of 4 regulated metals – lead, mercury, cadmium & hexavalent chromium

Limits incidental presence of these metals to 100 ppm (0.01%) - total concentration of 4 heavy metals

Applies to packaging, packaging components & packaged products sold of distributed in states with legislation

Limited exemptions available, e.g., recycled content

6© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

How Do the Laws Work?

Creates supply chain responsibility Companies self-certify

Based on analytic tests or supplier certification Provide Certificate of Compliance to customers

Must furnish to states upon request Most laws provide state authority to levy substantial

monetary penalties

7© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

Toxics in Packaging Clearinghouse

Supports & Coordinates Implementation of Model

Centralized location for information & processing requests to

minimizing administrative burden for states & industry

Promotes consistency and uniformity among states

Venue for ongoing review of Model Legislation

Enforcement is at the discretion of individual states.

8© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

XRF Compliance Screening

Project 1: October 2005 – February 2006 355 packages (over 570 components) Tested variety of packaging materials, product categories, and

component types June 2007 report

Project 2: January – March 2008 409 packages (628 components) Some targeted sample selection Report expected September 2008

9© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

Product Categories

Shopping bags Mailing/Shipping Home Furnishings Food & Beverage Toys & Games Electrical & Electronic Personal & Healthcare Hardware Apparel

Cleaning Products Pet Supplies Office Supplies Sporting Goods Novelty Fast Food Deli/Produce Bags Entertainment

10© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

Screening Test Protocol

May not be in compliance with state laws if metals are intentionally added or if sum of metals is > 100ppm.

11© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

Compliance Screening Test Results

59

0

50

100

150

200

250

2005/06 2008

<LOD- 25ppm

25-100 ppm

>100 ppm

16%

23%

Number of Packages

packages

12© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

Summary of Samples Failing Screening (>100ppm) – Both Projects

Cadmium & lead

most frequently detected Median concentration

over 250 ppm Up to 14,000 ppm of lead detected

Prevalent packaging materials/types Imported, clear flexible PVC bags/pouches Inks & colorants on shopping, mailing & produce bags

13© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

2005/2006Flexible PVC Bags/Pouches

61% of samples tested of this material exceeded 100 ppm for lead and/or cadmium

> 80% of home furnishing & pet supply packages 55% of cosmetic/personal care packages

Mostly imports Suspect additives - plasticizers & UV stabilizers All blister/clamshell packaging below LOD for all metals

 

Toys Home Furnishings Cosmetic Pet Supply

14© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

Improvements for Flexible PVC?

2005/2006 2008

All Flexible PVC Samples

61% 52%

Home Furnishings

81% 48%

Pet Supplies 80% 63%

15© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

Inks & Colorants

Shopping, mailing, & produce bags, some rigid containers Mostly detected on/in plastics Lead concentrations up to

3,400 ppm

Most likely imports Suspect solvent-based inks

16© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

TPCH Outreach to Supply Chain

Notified manufacturers or distributors that package failed screening test Request certificate of compliance with documentation OR submit plan to bring package into compliance &

discontinue its distribution and sale Outreach to packaging supply chain

Disseminate study results Presentations Develop and disseminate new educational material

17© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

Discrepancy between XRF and Lab Tests

Some laboratory test methods may be inappropriate for measuring total concentration in packaging samples Suspect incomplete digestion of sample

resulting in detection of soluble or leachable metals

Metals need to be liberated from matrix to measure total concentration

18© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

CA DTSC Initiated Comparison of Test Methods

EPA SW-846 Method 3050BAcid Digestion of sediments, sludges, soils

EPA SW-846 Method 3051Microwave alternative to Method 3050B

EPA SW-846 Method 3052Microwave digestion of siliceous and

organically based matrices

19© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

CA DTSC Preliminary Comparison Results

Sample # Elements XRF

Screening 3050B / ICP 3051/ICP

Microwave

3052/ ICP Microwave vendor A

3052/ ICP Microwave vendor B

Cadmium ND ND ND NA ND

Lead 1,300 138 779 NA 1,101 1

Chromium 420 30 198 NA 264 Cadmium ND ND ND NA ND

Lead 650 74 544 NA 561 2

Chromium ND 18 135 NA 142 Cadmium ND ND ND ND ND

Lead 257 154 187 332 305 3

Chromium ND 37 55 143 81

20© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

Why Are We Detecting Toxics in Packaging 15 Years Later?

Fallen off “radar screen” Shift in geographic location of manufacturing Entry of new suppliers & manufacturers that

don’t do their homework Changes in packaging technology

21© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

Example - Changes in Technology

“Innovative” marketing feature….blinking lights powered by electronic circuitry….with lead solder.

22© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

What Can State & Local Government Do?

Make companies aware of toxics in packaging requirements Applies where packaging, packaging components & packaged

products are sold or distributed Responsibility of supply chain from raw materials to packaged

products For states with legislation, join TPCH

Easiest, least expensive way to implement state laws Strength in numbers

If no state requirements, consider legislation

23© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

Actions Companies Can Take

Incorporate toxics in packaging requirements into purchasing specifications & contracts

Contact suppliers directly to remind them of requirements and determine their QA/QC for ensuring the quality of supplies

Require Certificates of Compliance from all suppliers of packaging or packaging components with supporting analytic data

Develop QA/QC Systems to verify compliance & spot check incoming packaging materials and components since………

– Batch to batch variation– Some companies will tell you whatever they think you want to

hear.

24© Copyright Northeast Recycling Council, Inc., 2008

For Additional Information

Visit TPCH website www.toxicsinpackaging.org

Or contactPatty Dillon, TPCH Program Manager(802) 254-8911Info@toxicsinpackaging.org