deca-BDE: Banned or Not?
On July 10th, a news item went out claiming that deca-BDE was now banned. I passed along the news and added my opinions about its impact on compliance activities. The article was based on a letter from the Directorate-General Environment suggesting that nona-BDE concentrations in commercial grade deca-BDE would exceed the 0.1% RoHS concentration limit on PBDE.
The Bromine Science and Environmental Forum (BSEF) says this is not news. The BSEF position is that the legal status of the deca-BDE exemption has not changed. Furthermore, the deca-BDE exemption included the nona-BDE at an average concentration of 2.5% since this contamination is a normal component of the commercial grade deca-BDE. The BSEF focus is on the legal status, which is not changed by the non-binding letter issued by the Directorate-General Environment.
On the opposite side, the Greens and others maintain that nona-BDE is not covered by the deca-BDE exemption. They present the obvious math and reach the conclusion that commercial grade deca-BDE is not compliant with RoHS because the concentrations of nona-BDE will range from 0.3% to 0.6% of the polymer.
The arguments continue on both sides in greater detail. A lawsuit is in progress to repeal the deca-BDE exemption. An internal discussion is ongoing within the EC over the exemption and objections to it. The letter from the DG Environment is just one statement in that discussion.
My question is, what does all this mean from a compliance perspective? In the short term, it appears that the deca-BDE exemption is intact. The ultimate fate of the exemption hinges on the outcome of the lawsuit and the internal EC discussion. In my experience, this sort of dispute increases risk for affected businesses.
A business could choose to do nothing, betting that the exemption will hold and deca-BDE will remain as an approved flame-retardant. The risk: the bet loses, and it becomes necessary to very quickly remove deca-BDE from product lines sold in Europe. An alternative is to remove deca-BDE now. The risk: the exemption holds and the removal effort will have been unnecessary. Yet another option is to identify all components containing deca-BDE and reduce or eliminate usage gradually.
One form of guidance is to look at what other businesses have done. A number of large, high-profile companies have eliminated PBDEs from their products and gone beyond. The list includes Apple, Dell, HP, Sony and Volvo. Outside the electronics industry, Ikea and other furniture makers have eliminated the penta and octa-BDEs used in foam cushions. Most of these companies now enjoy a market advantage from the change.
The flame retardant industry is also looking for alternatives. Great Lakes Chemicals now sells Firemaster 550, a phosphorus and bromine based material that does not include PBDE. A new Russian flame retardant sold by Isle Firestop is made from an ammonium salt and ammonium chloride.
I find the case for elimination to be much more persuasive than to continue using deca-BDE. By working toward a PBDE-free product now, future risk is pre-empted, and a new market advantage is created. The cost to switch early is much lower than the cost to do so later, in a crisis, if the exemption is reversed.
Additional Resources
RoHSwell, 1 July 2006, "Bacteria Convert deca-BDE into Toxic Forms" - report on discovery of bacteria that convert deca-BDE into more toxic forms containing fewer bromine atoms. This is one of many reasons that PBDEs are under attack. Science News articles listed at the end document the problems.
Hewlett-Packard, 1 November 2005, "HP eliminated PBDE and PBB" in 95% of case parts over 10 years ago. Now they have a goal to eliminate tetrabromobisphenol (BFR) from products by the end of 2006.
BSEF - Bromine Science and Environmental Forum.
Database Of Chinese Manufacturers
Over 400,000 Entries
Full Contact Info
