The first phase of the report looks at the full lifecycle of 6ppd (and the tire itself), from raw materials to the energy and resources required to make the chemical; the dizzying amount of regulations, by continent and country, to which any potential alternative must adhere, including ASTM testing thresholds; and further studies that seem to confirm 6ppd-q's toxicity on salmonids.
"Tire composition cannot responsibly be modified without great care, including extensive and rigorous testing," the report states. "Any material identified as a possible alternative must continue to ensure comparable performance in a tire and continued compliance with federal safety regulations."
Completion of this initial stage of the alternatives study establishes a basis for further evaluation in Stage 2, which will result in a final alternatives analysis report, according to Norberg.
During Stage 2, as required by the DTSC process, USTMA and the consortium will confirm a "short list" of possible alternatives (in light of any new data that emerges in this phase), assess the potential impacts of these options and initiate a more detailed review of the chemicals' potential hazards and exposure-related chemical properties.
USTMA and Gradient officials say they are optimistic that the consortium "will have identified one or more possible alternatives (following the second stage) that hold promise to replace or materially reduce 6ppd in motor vehicle tires, subject to future performance testing to ensure comparable tire safety and performance."
Other options, such as the non-pneumatic tire, infrastructure TRWP collection options and tire-particle catchers on vehicles themselves were mentioned but purposefully not considered as options as part of this initial alternatives analysis phase.
Non-pneumatic tires still will require an antidegradant, and tire manufacturers cannot dictate policy for something like a tire-particle catcher, according to the report.