Submission of information on
TEMPLATE
for third party submission of information on alternatives for
Applications for Authorisation
NON-CONFIDENTIAL
Legal name of submitter(s):
Masterbatch Producer – Un-named
[0012-07] [azo yellow pigments] [09-04-2014]
SUBMISSION OF INFORMATION ON ALTERNATIVES (NON-CONFIDENTIAL)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. ALTERNATIVE ID AND PROPERTIES ......................................................................... 3
2. TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY ........................................................................................ 3
3. ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY ......................................................................................... 3
4. HAZARDS AND RISKS OF THE ALTERNATIVE............................................................. 3
5. AVAILABILITY ....................................................................................................... 4
6. CONCLUSION ON SUITABILITY AND AVAILABILITY OF THE ALTERNATIVE .................... 4
7. OTHER COMMENTS ................................................................................................ 4
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 4
APPENDIXES ............................................................................................................. 4
[0012-07] [azo yellow pigments] [09-04-2014]
2
SUBMISSION OF INFORMATION ON ALTERNATIVES (NON-CONFIDENTIAL)
1. ALTERNATIVE ID AND PROPERTIES
No single direct alternative – would require a mixture of azo yellow pigments, in combination,
to try to approximate the desired hue.
e.g.
CI Name
CI Number
CAS
EC
Pigment Yellow 155
200310
68516-73-4
271-176-6
Pigment Yellow 62
13940
12286-66-7
235-558-6
Pigment Yellow 168
13960
71832-85-4
276-057-2
Pigment Yellow 180
21290
77804-81-0
278-770-4
Pigment Yellow 128
20037
79953-85-8
279-356-6
2. TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
Feasible but undesirable.
Not possible to obtain same vibrancy of colour and durability– some compromises are
necessary in respect of colouristic and/or performance properties.
More difficult to handle in respect of airborne particle control and staining/cleaning of mixing
and containment equipment.
3. ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY
Cost of formulation with relatively poor durability and weathering will be approximately
doubled.
To obtain good weathering performance, cost of formulation would be in the region of 3 to 8
times more expensive in respect of raw materials.
Business tends to be low-margin, so anticipate customers likely to lose existing business to
non-European competitors.
4. HAZARDS AND RISKS OF THE ALTERNATIVE
No significant known hazards associated with alternatives, but all are very much lower relative
density, and therefore represent increased volumes in handling, which gives rise to problems
with airborne dust levels, product cross-contamination, filter-clogging, increased filter waste
generation, and contamination of protective clothing.
Airborne contamination can quickly obscure eyeshields resulting in increased safety hazards as
a consequence of reduced visibility.
All alternatives are based on organic technology, and thus perhaps have some potential for
known and as yet unrecognised hazards associated with by-products of thermal breakdown.
[0012-07] [azo yellow pigments] [09-04-2014]
3
SUBMISSION OF INFORMATION ON ALTERNATIVES (NON-CONFIDENTIAL)
5. AVAILABILITY
All commercially available products - unaware of any current issues relating to availability.
6. CONCLUSION ON SUITABILITY AND AVAILABILITY OF THE ALTERNATIVE
Alternatives are available, but none are suitable as direct replacements and compromises must
be made in terms of hue and/or technical performance, and all options represent an increase
in cost of materials and in handling.
7. OTHER COMMENTS
None
REFERENCES
Based on our own experience and producer/supplier grade-specific data.
APPENDIXES
n/a
[0012-07] [azo yellow pigments] [09-04-2014]
4