Update on Global Copper Antifouling Regulatory Issues

Global Marine Coatings ForumSingapore 2012

Neal Blossom – American Chemet

Topics Science

Copper Antifouling – Non-Target Organism Toxicity?Copper Antifouling – Tolerance and Invasive Species?Copper and Salmonid Olfactory Effects

RegulationsSweden, Netherlands, New Zealand, China, USA, Washington State, California

Copper and Toxicity Study Sampling Locations in Shelter Island Yacht Basin Capolupo (University of San Diego) et. al., 2011

Copper Concentrations Found

Wet Season Concentration

Dry Season ConcentrationOrange – Total Cu Blue – Dissolved Cu Black – Dissolved Organic Carbon

Toxicity Measured for Blue Mussel Larvae – The most sensitive species at its most sensitive life stage.

Application of the Biotic Ligand Model (BLM) in This Study

This model predicts when copper toxicity can occur based on water chemistry and the actual bioavailability of the copper to the organisms.

The BLM accurately predicted that toxicity would only occur at the upper most concentrations found in this study.

Conclusions•There was not significant toxicity to non-target organisms away from the vessels hulls.• The Biotic Ligand Model (BLM) estimated chronic limit for Cu

(8.5 ug/L in this water body) is protective.• The current EPA Water Quality Criteria (3.1 ug/L) is overly

conservative based on EPA’s intended level of protection. • Lack of ambient toxicity and verified protection by BLM

suggest that Shelter Island Yacht Basin is not impaired due to copper.

Copper Tolerance

Is the use of copper in antifouling promoting invasive species which

are or are becoming copper tolerant?

Copper Tolerance Is Not New

NOEC values reported in μg/lICMCF, Seattle, 2012

-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Log10(NOEC)

Distribution of copper “No Observed Effect Concentrations” for numerous marine

species

Biofouling SurvivalWatersipora subtorquata (bryozone – moss

type animal) is a robust species Panels with 3 AF paints (1 Cu2O based) + control Watersipora most abundant on AF panels by week 16

Floerl et al (2004)

Watersipora covered up to 64% of non-Cu AF panels

Paint 1 – Cu2O Paint 2,3 – Non-Cu biocidal Control – No biocide

● , ■ Watersipora ○ , □ Other sessile organisms Data reported from two test sites

The Cost of Survival

Watersipora larvae exposed to 100 µg Cu/L, simulating exposed Cu levels on hull surface

Transplanted to low Cu environments

Exposed larvae survived and settled, but subsequently grew slowly or died sooner than non-exposed larvae

Ng, Keogh (2003) Delayed effects of larval exposure to Cu in the bryozoan Watersipora subtorquata. Mar Ecol Prog Ser, 257, 77-85

Exposure to very high levels of copper, as could be expected on a treated hull, leads to reduced long-term fitness

Tolerance ConclusionsCost to organisms survival of copper levels outside the

normal rangeReduced growthReduced reproductive function

Non-Indigenous Species delivered to new environmentsRecent BLM assessments indicate the new environment is

not copper impacted which could give copper tolerant species an advantage.

Organisms attached to Cu treated surfaces forfeit general health to ensure survival.

Conclusion: Higher metal tolerance, while a strength of the organism, does not guarantee survival and isn’t a viable reason to stop using copper based antifouling.

Salmonid Olfactory Sense and Copper Environmental Concern

Copper has been shown to impact olfactory responses and behaviors in salmonid fish:Feeding, spawning, predator avoidance behavior

Perhaps the soon to be established BLM based copper water quality criteria, while protective of life of organisms, isn’t protective of behaviors that affect survival?

13

Salmonid Olfactory Findings and Conclusions

Numerous studies were reviewed to investigate this phenomenon.

Olfactory and behavioral effects thresholds are usually higher than BLM derived freshwater or saltwater copper criteria

Therefore: copper criteria do not yet need to be lowered to protect against olfactory and behavioral impairment. More studies are underway.

14

Copper Antifouling RegulationsWorldwide - Every country in the world accepts the

use of copper antifouling coatings! There is not a ban in place at this time anywhere in the world!

Sweden The NetherlandsNew ZealandChinaUnited StatesWashington StateCalifornia

Sweden’s “New” Policies There is no ban on copper antifouling. The coating

must just pass a risk assessment. At least 28 copper based coatings have been approved.

They are encouraging coatings manufacturers to bring low leach rate copper antifouling to their market for the Baltic.

They only allow “do-it-yourself” coatings if personal protective equipment isn’t necessary to pass an applicator risk assessment. 20 coatings meet this standard. All contain copper.

They are banning all zinc oxide only products.

The Netherlands Removed Their Ban On Copper Antifouling for Leisure Boats.

Why?The EU’s scientific committee on health and environmental

risks (SCHER) determined that the Dutch government failed to provide sufficient evidence to justify a proposed ban on copper-based antifouling paint for leisure boats.

In its opinion the SCHER committee concluded that the assessment was not "scientifically sound" and failed to show that copper antifouling posed significant environmental risks.

New Zealand Reassessment of All Antifouling Active Ingredients

All formulated products reviewed contain copper. Why? Because it has previously been found to be safe and effective.

In the reassessment preliminary result copper was found to be low to moderate in risk and high in benefit.

New Zealand EPA requested and we are providing additional information including monitoring studies to demonstrate that some of the risks identified in the reassessment were higher than the reality.

ChinaChina’s Ministry of Environmental Protection is seeking to

create a “Green Label” for antifouling coatings which are safe enough to the environment to warrant a special designation as being “Green”.Copper containing antifouling coatings are on the proposed

green list with a leach rate limit.

United StatesRegistration Review of copper antifouling is on going. The

US EPA’s preliminary decision was favorable and we foresee no significant issues.

Vessel General Permits – There is no ban or limitation for copper antifouling in the permits as drafted. The American Coatings Association has provided suggested wording revisions which would emphasize using effective antifouling coatings to prevent invasive species is more important than emphasizing any negative copper issues.

United States - ContinuedThe marine Biotic Ligand Model (BLM) review is on

going at the US EPA. They have been very favorable in all discussions of

acceptance - it is just a matter of when.We are hopeful for acceptance before fall 2013.

Washington StateA lawsuit by an environmental group prompted a ban on

copper antifouling for recreational vessels only. It was not because of any measured environmental effect.

The new law would phase in the ban between 1/1/2018 and 1/1/2020.

However, beginning 1/1/2016, the Department of Ecology must study how antifouling paints affect marine organisms and water quality. The department must report its findings to the legislature by 12/31/2017. We will seek to stop this ban at that time.

California Regulation and Legislation

The Dept. of Pesticide Regulation goal in the reevaluation of copper antifouling is to reduce copper input. Strategies Include

lower leach rate coatingscontrolling in-water hull cleaning.

Proposed legislation that could have banned the use of copper antifouling on recreational vessels has been removed.

Take Away Concepts Copper in antifouling use is being shown to

be even safer than previous recognized with each well reviewed study and risk assessment.

Every country in the world allows the use of Copper Based Antifouling because it is safe and effective.

Questions and Comments

Neal Blossomnblossom@chemet.com