Journal of Environmental Health Sciences (한국환경보건학회지)

Korean Society of Environmental Health (한국환경보건학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Formaldehyde Risk Assessment in Other Household Textile Products

가정용 섬유제품 중 기타 제품류의 폼알데하이드 위해성평가 연구

  • Tae Hyun Park (Risk Assessment Team, Korean Institute of Product Safety) ;
  • Ji Hwan Song (Safety Foundation Team, Korean Institute of Product Safety) ;
  • Sa Ho Chun (Chemical Product Team, FITI Testing and Research Institute) ;
  • Hee Rae Joe (Risk Assessment Team, Korean Institute of Product Safety) ;
  • Pil Jun Yoon (Risk Assessment Team, Korean Institute of Product Safety) ;
  • Ho Yeon Kang (Risk Assessment Team, Korean Institute of Product Safety) ;
  • Myeong Seon Ku (Risk Assessment Team, Korean Institute of Product Safety) ;
  • Jin Hyeok Son (Risk Assessment Team, Korean Institute of Product Safety) ;
  • Cheol Min Lee (Department of Environment & Chemical Engineering, SeoKyeong University)
  • 박태현 (한국제품안전관리원 위해도평가팀) ;
  • 송지환 (한국제품안전관리원 안전기반팀) ;
  • 천사호 (FITI시험연구원 화학제품팀) ;
  • 조희래 (한국제품안전관리원 위해도평가팀) ;
  • 윤필준 (한국제품안전관리원 위해도평가팀) ;
  • 강호연 (한국제품안전관리원 위해도평가팀) ;
  • 구명선 (한국제품안전관리원 위해도평가팀) ;
  • 손진혁 (한국제품안전관리원 위해도평가팀) ;
  • 이철민 (서경대학교 일반대학원 환경화학공학과)
  • Received : 2024.03.18
  • Accepted : 2024.04.09
  • Published : 2024.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: Appropriateness issues have emerged regarding the non-application of hazardous substance safety standards for items classified as 'other textile products'. Objectives: Testing for formaldehyde (HCHO) and risk assessment were conducted on 'other textiles products' to provide reference data for promoting product safety policies. Methods: Testing was conducted on five items (102 products) classified as 'other textile products' according to relevant standards (textile products safety standards), and the risk of each product was assessed using the evaluation methodologies of the European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC) and European Chemical Agency (ECHA). Results: Out of the 102 products tested, HCHO was detected above the quantification limit in five. Based on these results, the screening risk assessment indicated that three products exceeded the criteria. Upon reassessing the emission and transfer rates of products exceeding the criteria, it was confirmed that there were no instances of exceeding the criteria. Conclusions: Risk assessment results can be used as supporting data for non-application of hazardous substance standards. However, it is deemed necessary to transition towards a management approach based on risks in order to addressing emerging trends such as convergence/new products.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

본 연구는 산업통상자원부의 융복합신기술 제품안전기술지원사업에서 지원받았으며(과제번호: 20024035) 이에 감사드립니다.

References

  1. Kim BY, Kwon HY. The status and improvement of product safety management law and institution. J Law Econ Regul. 2017; 10(1): 61-79. 
  2. Ju MJ, Yoon JG, Jo EK, Lee SA, Oh JH, Park JH, et al. A study on the regional distribution of enrollment cases who reported humidifier disinfectant-related health effects. J Environ Health Sci. 2021; 47(4): 303-309. 
  3. Park TH. Health risk assessment on radon exposure in Korea residential environments: based on the risk assessment model provided by US EPA [dissertation]. [Seoul]: Seokyeong University; 2019. 
  4. Korean Agency for Technology and Standards (KATS). Starbucks, initiates voluntary recall of travel bags. Eumseong: Korean Agency for Technology and Standards; 2022. 
  5. Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). Safety guidance on concentrations of particular chemicals in certain consumer goods. Canberra: ACCC Publication; 2014. 
  6. Japan Environment Association (JEA). "Household textile products version 3.5" certification criteria. Eco Mark Product Category No. 104. Tokyo: Japan Environment Association; 2022. 
  7. Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS). Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS) version 7.0. Stuttgart: Global Standard Gemeinnutzige GmbH; 2023. 
  8. Global Standard No. 1 (GS1). GPC browser. Available: https://gpcbrowser.gs1.org/ [accessed 6 April 2024]. 
  9. Park TH, Kim JS, Song JH, Yun PJ, Hong SK, Moon ES, et al. A pilot study on the standard classification system for effective operation of the product safety management: for children's products. J Stand Certif Saf. 2023; 13(1): 35-50. 
  10. Adamovic D, Cepic Z, Adamovic S, Stosic M, Obrovski B, Moraca S, et al. Occupational exposure to formaldehyde and cancer risk assessment in an anatomy laboratory. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021; 18(21): 11198. 
  11. Naya M, Nakanishi J. Risk assessment of formaldehyde for the general population in Japan. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2005; 43(3): 232-248.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2005.08.002
  12. Trantallidi M, Dimitroulopoulou C, Wolkoff P, Kephalopoulos S, Carrer P. EPHECT III: health risk assessment of exposure to household consumer products. Sci Total Environ. 2015; 536: 903-913.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.05.123
  13. European Commission (EC). Commission Regulation (EU) .../... of XXX amending Annex XVII to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards formaldehyde and formaldehyde releasers. Available: https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/comitology-register/screen/documents/084710/3/ consult?lang=en [accessed 31 March 2024]. 
  14. European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC). Targeted risk assessment. ECETOC technical report No. 93. Brussels: ECETOC; 2004. 
  15. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment. Chapter R.15: consumer exposure assessment. ECHA-16-G-07-EN. Helsinki: ECHA; 2016. 
  16. Delmaar JE, Park MVDZ, van Engelen JGM. ConsExpo 4.0: consumer exposure and uptake models program manual. RIVM report 320104004/2005. Bilthoven: RIVM; 2005. 
  17. National Institute of Environmental Research (NIER). Korean exposure factors handbook. Incheon: NIER; 2019. 
  18. Korean Institute of Product Safety (KIPS). Establishment of risk management and risk assessment methods to assist in developing and revising safety standards for new convergence products. Seoul: Korea Planning & Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology; 2022. 
  19. Korea Transport Institute (KOTI). 2013 National transportation survey and DB construction project: automobile usage survey. Sejong: Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport; 2013. 
  20. National Institute of Environmental Research (NIER). Regulations regarding the subject and methods of safety assessment for household chemical products. Incheon: NIER; 2021. 
  21. United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). Vehicle size classes used in the fuel economy guide. Available: https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/info.shtml#sizeclasses [accessed 14 March 2024]. 
  22. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). NIOSH skin notation profiles: formaldehyde/formalin. DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2011-145. Cincinnati: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; 2011. 
  23. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Guidance notes on dermal absorption. Paris: OECD Environment, Health and Safety Publication; 2011. 
  24. Jung JY, Lee HW, Park SH, Lee JI, Yoon DK, Lee CM. Health risk assessment by exposure to heavy metals in PM2.5 in Ulsan industrial complex area. J Environ Health Sci. 2023; 49(2): 108-117.  https://doi.org/10.5668/JEHS.2023.49.2.108
  25. United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) - generic tables. Available: https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-screening-levels-rsls-generic-tables [accessed 14 March 2024]. 
  26. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). Registration dossier - formaldehyde. Available: https://echa.europa.eu/registration-dossier/-/registered-dossier/15858 [accessed 5 April 2024]. 
  27. United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). Guidelines for human exposure assessment. Washington, D.C.: Risk Assessment Forum, U.S. EPA; 2020. 
  28. Aldag N, Gunschera J, Salthammer T. Release and absorption of formaldehyde by textiles. Cellulose. 2017; 24: 4509-4518.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-017-1393-8
  29. de Groot AC, Le Coz CJ, Lensen GJ, Flyvholm MA, Maibach HI, Coenraads PJ. Formaldehyde-releasers: relationship to formaldehyde contact allergy. Formaldehyde-releasers in clothes: durable press chemical finishes. Part 1. Contact Dermatitis. 2010; 62(5): 259-271.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2009.01675.x
  30. Piccinini P, Senaldi C, Summa C. European survey on the release of formaldehyde from textiles. Luxembourg: European Communities; 2007. 
  31. Guo H, Murray F, Lee SC, Wilkinson S. Evaluation of emissions of total volatile organic compounds from carpets in an environmental chamber. Build Environ. 2004; 39(2): 179-187.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2003.08.015
  32. Delmaar JE, Bokkers BG, ter Burg W, van Engelen JG. First tier modeling of consumer dermal exposure to substances in consumer articles under REACH: a quantitative evaluation of the ECETOC TRA for consumers tool. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2013; 65(1): 79-86.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2012.10.015
  33. Zaleski RT, Dudzina T, Keller D, Money C, Qian H, Rodriguez C, et al. An assessment of the ECETOC TRA consumer tool performance as a screening level tool. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2023; 33(6): 980-993.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-022-00510-0
  34. Kang SH, Lim MY, Lee KY. Comparison of exposure estimates using consumer exposure assessment models and the Korean exposure algorithm. J Environ Health Sci. 2024; 50(1): 43-53.  https://doi.org/10.5668/JEHS.2024.50.1.43
  35. Huh KO. Directions and suggestions for consumer safety policy in living. Korean J Hum Ecol. 2010; 19(2): 311-323. https://doi.org/10.5934/KJHE.2010.19.2.311