www.intertek.com1 © Intertek 2012, All Rights Reserved
Phthalates Screening and Testing Methods
Bob Altkorn, Ph.D.CPSC National Product Testing and Evaluation CenterMarch 1, 2012
www.intertek.com2 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Intertek
100More than
countries
1,000More than
laboratoriesand offices
30,000people
© Intertek 2012, All Rights Reserved
© Intertek 2012, All Rights Reserved
www.intertek.com3 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Our Industries
Our organisation
Consumer Goods
Commercial & Electrical
Commodities
Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals
Industry & Assurance
Industries we operate in
Aerospace & AutomotiveBuilding Products
ChemicalConsumer Goods &
RetailersElectrical & Electronic
EnergyFood & Agriculture
Government & InstitutionsIT & Telecom
IndustrialMedical & Pharmaceutical
MineralsPetroleum
Toys, Games & HardlinesTextile, Apparel
& Footwear
What we do
Testing
Inspection
Certification
Auditing
Outsourcing
Advisory
Training
Quality Assurance
www.intertek.com4 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Intertek & Phthalates
• 19 laboratories worldwide accredited to Phthalates test method CPSC-CH-C1001-09.3
• Test to other phthal ates methods (Canada, EU, etc.)
• Participate in interlaboratory studies organized by LGC Standards Proficiency Testing and Institute for Interlaboratory Studies
• Advocated for exemption of inaccessible parts recently adopted in CPSIA reform bill
www.intertek.com5 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Overview
1. Review Intertek material submission and failure rate data by material and phthalate (large sample size)
2. Review failure margins by phthalate (smaller sample size, more recent data)
3. Comments on screening in general
4. Comments /questions on potential screening methods
www.intertek.com6 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Self-Declared Materials
Soft Plastic, 28%
Coating, 23%
Hard Plastic, 22%
Fabric, 6%
PVC, 3%
TPR, 3%
Liquid, 2%
Paint, 1%
Rubber, 0.4%
Other, 11%
www.intertek.com7 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Failure Rate across All Materials
Fail, 4.2%
Pass, 95.8%
www.intertek.com8 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Failure Rate by Self-Declared Material
33%28%
13% 8% 7% 7% 6% 6% 6% 6% 2%
39%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
POM Glue PU Blendedmaterial
ABS Plastic TPR Rubber PVC SoftPlastic
HardPlastic
Other
Pass
Fail
www.intertek.com9 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Failure Rate by Phthalate
3.1%
0.6%0.2%
1.3%
0.5%0.2%0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
DEHP DBP BBP DINP DIDP DNOP
www.intertek.com10 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Failure Margin: DEHP
54%
30%
16%
0%
0.1 - 1% 1 - 10% 10 - 50% 50%+
Perc
ent o
f Fai
lure
s
www.intertek.com11 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Failure Margin: DBP
50% 50%
0% 0%
0.1 - 1% 1 - 10% 10 - 50% 50%+
Perc
ent o
f Fai
lure
s
www.intertek.com12 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Failure Margin: BBP
100%
0 0 0
0.1 - 1% 1 - 10% 10 - 50% 50%+
Perc
ent o
f Fai
lure
s
www.intertek.com13 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Failure Margin: DINP
44% 44%
12%
0%
0.1 - 1% 1 - 10% 10 - 50% 50%+
Perc
ent o
f Fai
lure
s
www.intertek.com14 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Failure Margin: DIDP
92%
8% 0% 0%
0.1 - 1% 1 - 10% 10 - 50% 50%+
Perc
ent o
f Fai
lure
s
www.intertek.com15 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Summary
1. Polymer/fiber type general ly not specified by customer; some materials may be incorrectly identified
2. Non-compliance rate 4.2%
3. Most non-conformities marginal (0.1 – 1%).
4. Many non conformities in non PVC materi als (glues, paints and other surface coatings, etc.)
www.intertek.com16 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Challenges of Screening - General
1. Lack of certified reference materials & uniform instrument calibration methods
2. Absence of screening methods (and definition of “screening method”)
3. Substrate complexity – polymers may contain plasticizers, fillers, colorants, flame retardants, stabilizers, lubricants which may cause interference.
4. Limited work on matrices other than PVC
5. Potential problems with small-area coatings (interference from surrounding regions?)
6. Possibility of Compositing
7. Pass/inconclusive/non-compliance boundaries as function of sample & instrument
8. Qualification of different instruments within a given category (e.g. sensitivity will vary with different FTIRs, sampling techniques, software packages, algorithms)
9. Operator experience, maintenance, interactivity, etc.
www.intertek.com17 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Potential Screening - FTIR
Advantages :
• Widely available
• Relatively inexpensive
• Possible easy sample preparation (ATR)
• Fast (depending on sample preparation)
• Possible internal calibration using matrix absorption bands (depending on matrix/spectral complexity)
• Potentially portable
www.intertek.com18 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Potential Screening - FTIR
Challenges
• Interference from addi tives
• Relatively high detection limit
• Most sensitive sampling techniques also more time consuming (e.g. film transmission vs. ATR)
• Potential increased difficulty with complex mixtures –especially mixtures of phthalates (most phthalates are mixtures)
• Works best if library built on single machine (particularly when using difference spectra etc.)
• Qualification of different instruments / accessories / software in the field (how do algorithms differ – how well do they work with different substrates?)
www.intertek.com19 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Potential Screening - DART MS Questions
• DART (Direct Analysis in Real Time) invented by JEOL, sold as ion source and complete system. Few publ ished studies on phthalates
• 2009 study1 using single quadrupole indicates potentially high detection limits.
• What are MS recommendati ons for phthalates screening?
• Calibration? Source adjustments for different matrices? Interferences?
1. T. Rothenbacher and W Schwack, Rapid Comm. Mass Spectrom. 2009; 23: 2829-2835
www.intertek.com20 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Alternate GC-MS Techniques
• Thermal desorption, Pyrolysis, other?
• Calibration? Interferences?
• Potential complications related to substrates, additives?
• Mass spec recommendati ons?
• Interlaboratory studies?
www.intertek.com21 © Intertek 2011, All Rights Reserved
Recommendat ions
• Define “screening”
• Reference materials, ideally using representative substrates and additives
• Interlaboratory studies
• Intertek would like to participate