The world’s jury has returned a majority verdict on CCA (chromated copper arsenate) timber treatment – with most countries imposing a ban or severe restrictions on its use.

A handful are still deliberating, but Europe has been quite definite in its decision.

The thrust of EC legislation, due to come into force on June 30 next year, is to remove arsenic from preserved wood in residential environments.

The European Commission published a directive in January spelling out exactly where CCA-treated timber can and cannot be used and DEFRA, which is drafting UK regulations, has said its position will closely mirror that.

A DEFRA spokesperson said the department’s lawyers are currently drafting the final regulations which are likely to be laid before parliament this month and could mean the regulations being passed before the start of 2004.

The regulations will clarify the placement of treated wood on the market, and detail issues such as labelling. For instance, from June 30 CCA-treated timber must be individually labelled – and responsibility for labelling, the EC says, should “cascade down the supply chain”. A pack of timber can be regarded as an individual item and must be labelled “For professional and industrial installation and use only, contains arsenic” and “Wear gloves when handling this wood. Wear a dust mask and eye protection when cutting or otherwise crafting this wood. Waste from this wood shall be treated as hazardous by an authorised undertaking”.

If a pack of timber is broken down into smaller sizes, each pack must be labelled in the same way.

The onus falls on the CCA-treated timber supplier to advise customers of the need to label and timber treatment companies in the UK have gone to great lengths to keep clients informed – not just about CCA but about the alternatives available.

Confusion

According to TTJ contributor Keith Fryer of merchant/importer T Brewer and Co Ltd the issue is still causing confusion in the trade. He said: “The merchant’s customer base generally lacks knowledge on timber preservation – treated is treated.

“Trying to explain the difference between treatments for finished goods and constructional products is hard enough, but the added complexity of CCA or ‘arsenic free’ is usually just too great a hurdle to jump!

“There is a great deal of confusion out in the market place, at every level, particularly as new methods of treatment take more market share – water borne, double vacuum systems being just one example – and the huge number of old, sometimes outdated specifications just add to this.

“As an industry, it would be great to see surplus old specifications removed from any literature, replaced by information based on current legislation. What any responsible merchant also needs to check is that what they’re buying is actually the correct specification and the first step is to always ask your treatment supplier to produce written certification of their products. There are many proven instances of ‘treatment’ on timber that falls well short of specification, which is only building up a problem for the future, for the whole timber industry.”

Against this background, the treatment companies have been working both on developing alternative timber treatments and keeping the market informed.

Task force

In a key move in the UK, three of the main preservative suppliers have actually formed a joint task force to ensure copper can be used in timber treatment alternatives to CCA.

Arch Timber Protection, Osmose and Rockwood (formerly Laporte) have pledged to pursue copper’s continued authorisation, backed by major suppliers of copper-based raw materials. They are currently working on information dossiers to meet an EC March 28, 2004 deadline to ensure that authorisation is in place.

And they maintain that for all the non-permitted uses of CCA there are potential alternatives in which users can have complete confidence. These can be broadly categorised according to either the defined end use of the treated wood or by product type.

Water-based organic biocide preservatives are designed mainly for internal construction timbers. They can also be used for joinery or in external, out-of-ground situations when a coating is applied. They are not suitable for unprotected out-of-ground or in-ground applications.

Copper-chromium based preservatives are designed for external in-ground and unprotected out-of-ground applications and those available include CCB (chromated-copper-boron), CC (chromated-

copper), and CCP (chromated-copper-phosphate).

Thirdly, there is copper in conjunction with an organic biocide preservative. The most popular group of alternative products, they are less generic than the traditional chromated preservatives.

Customer advice

Arch, Osmose and Rockwood have also channelled a great deal of effort into giving customers advice and, importantly, confidence in alternative products.

Arch Timber Protection has developed TANALITH E, based on a unique blend of copper and triazole fungicides. Successful on the European market since 1993, it is now sold in more than 20 countries worldwide. Wood treated with TANALITH E can be used in internal and external constructions and in-ground contact situations.

Both Osmose and Rockwood have followed the ACQ (alkaline copper quaternary) route. Osmose products are made up of a copper base with quaternary compounds and boron and the company has aimed to provide as much choice and range of uses as possible.

Its timber treatment products include Osmose Lifewood, Osmose Naturewood and Protim Clearchoice.

Environmental credentials

All the major wood preservative manufacturing companies have had to formulate and develop their products. As part of this process they have had to provide environmental impact credentials and toxicity data to gain registration from the Health and Safety Executive. Field tests and laboratory testing of preservative systems to determine efficacy are carried out by third party testing authorities in line with the European standards.

Mike Connell, director of new technology and products at Arch Timber Protection, said: “There is no doubt that the range of alternative products with a proven performance provides the market with a real choice.

“Whilst costs of treatment may be slightly higher for some end uses than CCA, for many end uses they are similar or even lower.”

And while Osmose European marketing manager Andy Hodge agreed there is still some uncertainty about the situation and the alternative preservative options to CCA, he said customers should have confidence in the new products, all of which have proven performance.

“We have to be united in assuring the specifiers and end consumers that they will continue to get an attractive and durable preserved wood that will suit their requirements,” he added.

So, with the June 30, 2004 deadline fast approaching, the UK’s timber treatment suppliers’ say their customers can be confident – and if any confusion remains, then just pick up the phone!