In preparation for the 14th meeting of the Stockholm Convention POPs Review Committee (POPRC), which will take place 17 - 21 September in Rome, IPEN has developed a Quick Guide to IPEN Views on POPRC-14. This document highlights IPEN's views on issues that the Committee will tackle at the meeting, including consideration of exemptions and formal recommendations for listing PFOA in the treaty. The Committee will also determine if perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS) – a regrettable substitute for PFOS – warrants global action. Finally, the POPRC will make recommendations about whether loopholes that permit continued use of PFOS are still needed.
Dear President Juncker, We are writing to express concerns surrounding EU actions on setting hazardous waste limits for short-chain chlorinated paraffins (SCCPs) under the Basel and Stockholm Conventions. This is an issue which has horizontal implications for issues such as circular economy, health, environment and internal market, each of which is affected by what hazardous waste limits are set for SCCPs. The Basel Convention Open-Ended Working (OEWG11) will discuss this issue for SCCPs and other substances at their meeting next week, 3-6 September 20181. Governments will finalize these limits at the Conferences of Parties for the treaties in April/May 20192. The EU has an important role to play as the nominator of SCCPs for listing in the Stockholm Convention, but its current proposal raises questions about its commitment to the Convention’s objectives.
(Göteborg, Sweden) The EU is advocating for hazardous waste limits under two UN treaties that could allow significant releases of a globally-banned chemical contaminate new products made of recycled plastic, and result in waste dumping in developing countries. Basel OEWG11 will tackle the issue 3 – 7 September in Geneva.
In 2015, the EU nominated PFOA for listing in the Stockholm Convention and agreed to lead the evaluation drafting process. However, instead of carrying out the work in-house, the EU hired an industry consultancy (BiPRO). This resulted in proposals for a sweeping set of loopholes that undermine a global ban. BiPRO’s client list includes companies that make and/or use fluorinated chemicals, including PFOA.