BANNOCKBURN, IL – IPC is actively refuting statements in an NGO report on brominated flame retardants released this week.

“Electronics without Brominated Flame Retardants and PVC – a Market Overview,” from the Swedish trade group ChemSec, coincides with amendments being introduced in the EU Parliament to restrict the use of brominated flame retardants as part of the RoHS Directive.

According to IPC, however, ChemSec’s report contains misleading statements about the environmental and health concerns associated with BFRs. While some BFRs, such as Polybrominated Biphenyls (PBBs), have been identified as toxic and have been withdrawn from the market, other BFRs, such as Tetrabromobisphenol-A (TBBPA), have been safely used in electronic products for decades, according to IPC.

The World Health Organization and the European Commission Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks conducted separate scientific assessments of TBBPA; both found TBBPA to be safe for human health and the environment, says IPC.

ChemSec’s report “does not provide indication of any environmental benefit” of removing BFRs from products,” says IPC director of environmental policy Fern Abrams. Nor does it identify alternative flame retardants and whether they are better for health and the environment, she says.

Companies have stated the removal of all BFRs and PVC is contingent on viable alternatives that do not compromise the functionality, safety, and reliability of their products, says Abrams.

ChemSec, a non-government body also known as The International Chemical Secretariat, also believes there is a need to “speed up legislative processes,” a position IPC disagrees with.

IPC continues to seek revisions to the RoHS Directive that are “based on science and result in genuine environmental improvements.”

• Prev
• Next