Sanderson newmoa pres

Information about Sanderson newmoa pres

Published on January 15, 2008

Author: Sever

Source: authorstream.com

Content

Hazard and Exposure Screening Methods for HPV Categories: Amine Oxides a Case Study:  Hazard and Exposure Screening Methods for HPV Categories: Amine Oxides a Case Study Hans Sanderson, PhD. Senior Adviser, Danish National Environmental Research Institute On behalf of the Soap and Detergent Association (SDA) Acknowledegments:  Acknowledegments SDA HPV task force SDA Amine Oxides Consortia Presented at Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Spring 2006 – sponsored by the USEPA Sister organizations: International Council of Chemical Associations (ICCA) The Cosmetic, Toiletry, and Fragrance Association (CTFA) The European Cosmetic, Toiletry and Perfumery Association (COLIPA) Consumer Specialty Products Association (CSPA) Japanese Soap and Detergent Association (JSDA) European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC) European Oleochemicals and Allied Products Group (APAG) Comite Europeen des agents de Surface et de leeurs Intermediaires Organiques (CESIO) Japan Cosmetic Industry Association (JCIA) SDA Background:  SDA Background Founded 1926 >100 member companies Produce >90% of residential, industrial, institutional cleaning products sold in US Cleaning Product Formulators Chemical Suppliers Finished Packaging Suppliers > 40 years of human and environmental safety research and assessment http://www.sdahq.org SDA HPVC Program:  Ten SDA-managed Consortia (3 US and 7 OECD) addressing >240 chemicals >40 companies HPV commitment: Fill hazard data needs Extended commitment: Assessment reports to include global use/exposure information SDA HPVC Program Slide5:  600 160 SDA-managed Consortia Commitments Related to International Council Chemical Associations (ICCA) total commitment SDA HPV Vision :  SDA HPV Vision Support key ingredients made and used by members in the US/ICCA HPV Programs Go beyond hazard — compile information sufficient to characterize uses, exposures and risks associated with committed HPV’s Develop screening level assessments with: Hazard data Use / exposure information Exposure / risk characterization SDA HPV Commitments:  SDA HPV Commitments 1998 commitment to providing additional information, including use/exposure, to support risk communication in HPVC assessment efforts Initiation of Use/Exposure Information and Risk Methodologies Data Collection Project Global input from interested producers and downstream users – CTFA, CSPA, JSDA, CEFIC, APAG, CESIO, JCIA Emphasis on expanding scientific understanding of risk characterization process through dialogue with variety of stakeholders Input sought from academia, governments, NGOs SDA Exposure and Risk Screening Methodologies:  SDA Exposure and Risk Screening Methodologies Initiated December 2000 >40 companies participated CTFA, COLIPA, CSPA, JSDA Create database of product related information and summarize exposure assessment methodologies for human and environmental safety Models, calculations, assumptions, habits International Peer-Review http://www.cleaning101.com/files/Exposure_and_Risk_Screening_Methods_for_Consumer_Product_Ingredients.pdf SDA Exposure and Risk Screening Methodology Project:  SDA Exposure and Risk Screening Methodology Project Scope Consumer products (i.e., cleaning, beauty care, baby care, personal care) North America and Europe Goal To develop and make publicly available the exposure scenarios, exposure equations, and appropriate parameters (habits & practices data). Process Gather current publicly available scenarios, equation, and recommended parameter values Supplement with company specific data Exposure and Risk Assessment Methodology :  Exposure and Risk Assessment Methodology Compilation of methods Models, first principle equations, exposure factors (habits and practices), default assumptions Tiered approaches — use of conservative defaults, refine as necessary with more realistic data Approach to address chemical categories Product Exposure Data Sources:  Product Exposure Data Sources Extracted from a large variety of sources Priority was given to: Government documents (i.e., US EPA’s exposure factor handbook, European Union Technical Guidance Document (TGD)) Documents submitted to regulatory authorities SDA member company data Survey data from associations (CTFA, COLIPA) Open literature Consideration for recent data Results – Scenarios:  Results – Scenarios 46 different products/exposure route combinations: 37 Dermal 4 Oral 5 Inhalation Results – Product Use Categories::  Results – Product Use Categories: Laundry detergents Fabric conditioners Dishwashing detergents Hard surface cleaners Shampoos and conditioners Hair rinses, gels, sprays Toothpaste, mouthwash Hand, face and body soaps/cleansers Antiperspirants/Deodorants Lotions, creams, moisturizers Cosmetics, face/eye/lip makeup Fine fragrances, after shave Results - Product Category Exposure Factors (‘Habits and Practices’ Info):  Results - Product Category Exposure Factors (‘Habits and Practices’ Info) Use frequency Task duration Amount used Concentration in use Transfer amount/residual Contact area Fraction ingested, inhaled/dermal penetration Other – body weight and surface area, breathing rates, use category specific factors (e.g. room volume) SDA Peer Review Panel:  SDA Peer Review Panel Advise SDA on document concerning methodologies to assess exposure and risk for HPVs Panel membership: Recognized experts in human and environmental exposure and risk assessment; non-profit groups, academia Individuals with experience that enables SDA to obtain broader understanding of stakeholders perspective (NGOs, government, etc.) Represent broad cross section of interests (Europe, Japan, North America) SDA Peer Review - Panel Charge:  SDA Peer Review - Panel Charge Is approach adequately described? Is the method adequate to assess exposure at a screening level? Are there omissions that would significantly impact assessment results? Are there refinements that would improve the efficiency of the methodology? Suggestions for refinements. Are there omissions that would significantly impact assessment results? Work product of Panel: Report addressing above questions. Input was used to revise the document. SDA Risk Screening Methodology document content:  SDA Risk Screening Methodology document content Assessment methods Environmental Overall approach Assessment methods and regional models Human -Consumer Overall approach Key scenarios/exposure factors ; by product category; route; and geography Case Studies Linear alkylbenzene sulfonate (LAS) Hydrotropes Triclocarban Summary:  Summary One of the largest, broadest, most recent compilation of consumer exposure information with references Model iterative; employs conservative default assumptions at early stages Enables efficient use of resources by focusing on greatest exposures Considers aggregate exposures from multiple products Model/approach received independent peer review Can be applied to other categories when habits and practices information available Potential Uses of SDA Document:  Potential Uses of SDA Document HPV and other public assessments Incorporation in regulatory programs Priority setting Providing screening level consumer exposure assessment Internal company safety assessment Case Study Amine Oxides (AO) Category*:  Case Study Amine Oxides (AO) Category* R3N=O (alkyl chain length 8-20 (12-14 predominant)) 16 CAS numbers US Tonnage: 26,000 Tonnes Amphoteric surfactants used in personal care and cleaning products (conditioning and foam stabilizers, etc) Here only focus on: Screening level human health – conservative default assumptions  likely overestimate exposure and risk *(www.sdahq.org/amineoxides) Sanderson et al. 2007, Risk Analysis in press Product Ingredient AO Concentration*:  Product Ingredient AO Concentration* Dishwashing detergents (liquid) 0.1 – 10 % Hard surface cleaners (liquid spray) 0.05 – 5 % Hard surface cleaners (liquid) 0.5 – 5 % Laundry detergents (liquid) 1 – 5 % Hand/face soaps (bar) 0.1 – 5 % Shampoos 0.09 – 5 % Hair conditioners 0.6 – 0.7 % Hair styling tonic/gel 0.1 – 2 % Cleansing products 0.04 – 9 % Skin creams/moisturizers 0.2 – 0.6 % Aftershaves 0.5 – 1 % Home dry cleaning products 0.1 – 0.5 % Douches 1 – 2 % Face/eye foundations (liquid) < 0.1 % Hair coloring preparations < 0.1 % Permanent waves preparations 1 – 2 % * Source: Company and Association surveys Estimated Highest Product Category Dermal* Exposures (mg AO/kg BW/day) Minimum to Maximum :  Estimated Highest Product Category Dermal* Exposures (mg AO/kg BW/day) Minimum to Maximum Body Moisturizer 1.1 to 3.2 Hair Care 1.1E-2 to 2.4E-1 Aftershave 7.0E-2 to 1.4E-1 Laundry Detergent – liquid 3.0E-3 to 1.5E-2 Bar Soap 4.1E-4 to 2.0E-2 Cleansing Products 2.3E-4 to 5.1E-2 Dish Detergent – liquid 1.2E-5 to 1.2E-3 Hard Surface Cleaner – liquid 1.1E-4 to 5.5E-3 *These are leave on products, with minimal inhalation and oral exposures (highest other for spray cleaner exposure is inhalation: 1.6 E-6 to 8.2 E-5) Conservative calculation:  Conservative calculation Lowest No Observed Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) = 80 mg AO/kg BW/day (non cancer endpoint need to indicate type of study e.g. 90-day?) Maximum product exposure (PE): Dermal, body moisturizers = 3.2 mg AO/kg BW/day Maximum product ingredient concentration (IC) = 0.6% MOE = NOAEL/PE x IC  MOE = 80/3.2 x 0.6 = 41 AO margin of Exposures relative to different product types:  AO margin of Exposures relative to different product types Product Type Minimum Maximum Body Moisturizer 41.6 363 Aftershave 570 1,109 Hair Care 332 7,268 Laundry Detergent – liquid 5,329 26,650 Bar Soap 3,997 195,005 Cleansing Products 1,567 347,617 Hard Surface Cleaner – liquid 14,537 726,836 Dish Detergent – liquid 66,626 6,662,666 For moisturizers and aftershave exposure defaults should be refined with measured or modelled data of e.g. absorption. SDA science portal:  SDA science portal New portal; transparency about how SDA ensure sustainability through sound science Search functionality Ingredient Product type Categories Increase availability of data to all stake-holders Thank You for Your Attention:  Thank You for Your Attention [email protected] EXTRA SLIDES Concerning the webportal:  EXTRA SLIDES Concerning the webportal Links to other similar pages:  Links to other similar pages Slide39:  [email protected]

Related presentations


Other presentations created by Sever

imf
21. 01. 2008
0 views

imf

03 Bastien Affeltranger
09. 01. 2008
0 views

03 Bastien Affeltranger

file13141
09. 01. 2008
0 views

file13141

Freshman Engineering 2007
14. 01. 2008
0 views

Freshman Engineering 2007

20070125
15. 01. 2008
0 views

20070125

Methampethamines
18. 01. 2008
0 views

Methampethamines

Introduction to Grid Portals
21. 01. 2008
0 views

Introduction to Grid Portals

extinguisher truck
22. 01. 2008
0 views

extinguisher truck

ast110 19
23. 01. 2008
0 views

ast110 19

L1 Vaz Serra
28. 01. 2008
0 views

L1 Vaz Serra

SAP BP Upgrade
09. 01. 2008
0 views

SAP BP Upgrade

EVADE6 7 web
17. 01. 2008
0 views

EVADE6 7 web

NWS July05
13. 02. 2008
0 views

NWS July05

ozone
20. 02. 2008
0 views

ozone

driftphyto
25. 02. 2008
0 views

driftphyto

slides 0708
28. 02. 2008
0 views

slides 0708

ErgoAwareness 062007
05. 03. 2008
0 views

ErgoAwareness 062007

5ROME
11. 03. 2008
0 views

5ROME

F
19. 03. 2008
0 views

F

bullockafrica concessions talk
03. 04. 2008
0 views

bullockafrica concessions talk

4 Vertinsky Sh
08. 05. 2008
0 views

4 Vertinsky Sh

Cesagen biopolitics Plows
14. 02. 2008
0 views

Cesagen biopolitics Plows

Info Systems
08. 01. 2008
0 views

Info Systems

DPC03 Chelateposter3
11. 01. 2008
0 views

DPC03 Chelateposter3

2007 05 09 Ramakrishnan
07. 02. 2008
0 views

2007 05 09 Ramakrishnan