The authors would like to make the following corrections to the published paper [1]. The changes are as follows:
(1). Author replacements: the authors would like to make changes to the cut-off limit for the hazard statement code H410 in the Table 6, so we need to replace the original Table 6.
Compounds that could be found in the samples considering “worst-case scenario”, their concentrations, the hazard class/category code(s) and hazard statement code(s) according to the list of harmonized classification and labeling of hazardous substances (Annex VI of CLP) as well as the cut-off limits established in Regulation (EU) No 1357/2014.
Chemicals | A1 (%) | A2 (%) | A3 (%) | A4 (%) | A5 (%) | A6 (%) | HP | Hazard Class and Category Code(s) | Hazard Statement Code(s) | Cut-Off Limits |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Zn (dust) | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.22 | 0.23 | 0.29 | 0.14 | HP 3 | Water-react. 1 | H260 | - |
HP 3 | Pyr. Sol. 1 | H250 | - | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Acute 1 | H400 | 0.1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Chronic 1 | H410 | 1% | |||||||
Zinc oxide (ZnO) | 0.31 | 0.31 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.37 | 0.18 | HP 14 | Aquatic Acute 1 | H400 | 0.1% |
HP 14 | Aquatic Chronic 1 | H410 | 1% | |||||||
Zinc sulfate (ZnSO4) | 0.61 | 0.62 | 0.55 | 0.56 | 0.72 | 0.35 | HP 6 | Acute Tox. 4 | H302 | 1% |
HP 4 | Eye Dam. 1 | H318 | 1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Acute 1 | H400 | 0.1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Chronic 1 | H410 | 1% | |||||||
Zinc chloride (ZnCl2) | 0.51 | 0.52 | 0.46 | 0.48 | 0.61 | 0.29 | HP 6 | Acute Tox. 4 | H302 | 1% |
HP 8 | Skin Corr. 1B | H314 | 1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Acute 1 | H400 | 0.1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Chronic 1 | H410 | 1% | |||||||
Cu | 0.22 | 0.33 | 0.05 | 0.13 | 0.07 | 0.002 | - | - | - | - |
Copper(II) oxide (CuO) | 0.27 | 0.41 | 0.07 | 0.16 | 0.09 | 0.002 | HP 14 | Aquatic Acute 1 | H400 | 0.1% |
HP 14 | Aquatic Chronic 1 | H410 | 1% | |||||||
Copper(I) oxide (Cu2O) | 0.48 | 0.74 | 0.12 | 0.29 | 0.16 | 0.004 | HP 6 | Acute Tox. 4 | H332 | 1% |
HP 6 | Acute Tox. 4 | H302 | 1% | |||||||
HP 4 | Eye Dam. 1 | H318 | 1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Acute 1 | H400 | 0.1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Chronic 1 | H410 | 1% | |||||||
Pb | 0.09 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.36 | - | - | - | |
Lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in Annex IV of CLP | >0.09 | >0.04 | >0.03 | >0.03 | >0.06 | >0.36 | HP 10 | Repr. 1A | H360 | - |
HP 6 | Acute Tox. 4 | H332 | 1% | |||||||
HP 6 | Acute Tox. 4 | H302 | 1% | |||||||
HP 5 | STOT RE 2 | H373 | - | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Acute 1 | H400 | 0.1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Chronic 1 | H410 | 1% |
With:
Table 6Compounds that could be found in the samples in a “worst-case scenario”, their concentrations, the hazard class/category code(s) and the hazard statement code(s), according to the list of harmonized classification and the labeling of hazardous substances (Annex VI of CLP), as well as the cut-off limits established in Regulation (EU) No 1357/2014.
Chemicals | A1 (%) | A2 (%) | A3 (%) | A4 (%) | A5 (%) | A6 (%) | HP | Hazard Class and Category Code(s) | Hazard Statement Code(s) | Cut-Off Limits |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Zn (dust) | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.22 | 0.23 | 0.29 | 0.14 | HP 3 | Water-react. 1 | H260 | - |
HP 3 | Pyr. Sol. 1 | H250 | - | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Acute 1 | H400 | 0.1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Chronic 1 | H410 | 0.1% | |||||||
Zinc oxide (ZnO) | 0.31 | 0.31 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.37 | 0.18 | HP 14 | Aquatic Acute 1 | H400 | 0.1% |
HP 14 | Aquatic Chronic 1 | H410 | 0.1% | |||||||
Zinc sulfate (ZnSO4) | 0.61 | 0.62 | 0.55 | 0.56 | 0.72 | 0.35 | HP 6 | Acute Tox. 4 | H302 | 1% |
HP 4 | Eye Dam. 1 | H318 | 1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Acute 1 | H400 | 0.1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Chronic 1 | H410 | 0.1% | |||||||
Zinc chloride (ZnCl2) | 0.51 | 0.52 | 0.46 | 0.48 | 0.61 | 0.29 | HP 6 | Acute Tox. 4 | H302 | 1% |
HP 8 | Skin Corr. 1B | H314 | 1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Acute 1 | H400 | 0.1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Chronic 1 | H410 | 0.1% | |||||||
Cu | 0.22 | 0.33 | 0.05 | 0.13 | 0.07 | 0.002 | - | - | - | - |
Copper(II) oxide (CuO) | 0.27 | 0.41 | 0.07 | 0.16 | 0.09 | 0.002 | HP 14 | Aquatic Acute 1 | H400 | 0.1% |
HP 14 | Aquatic Chronic 1 | H410 | 0.1% | |||||||
Copper(I) oxide (Cu2O) | 0.48 | 0.74 | 0.12 | 0.29 | 0.16 | 0.004 | HP 6 | Acute Tox. 4 | H332 | 1% |
HP 6 | Acute Tox. 4 | H302 | 1% | |||||||
HP 4 | Eye Dam. 1 | H318 | 1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Acute 1 | H400 | 0.1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Chronic 1 | H410 | 0.1% | |||||||
Pb | 0.09 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.36 | - | - | - | |
Lead compounds with the exception of those specified elsewhere in Annex VI of CLP | >0.09 | >0.04 | >0.03 | >0.03 | >0.06 | >0.36 | HP 10 | Repr. 1A | H360 | - |
HP 6 | Acute Tox. 4 | H332 | 1% | |||||||
HP 6 | Acute Tox. 4 | H302 | 1% | |||||||
HP 5 | STOT RE 2 | H373 | - | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Acute 1 | H400 | 0.1% | |||||||
HP 14 | Aquatic Chronic 1 | H410 | 0.1% |
(2). We will also add one sentence into the Section 3.2.11. The replacement will appear as follows:
3.2.11. HP 14 “Ecotoxic”
Council Regulation (EU) 2017/997 was followed when evaluating the ecotoxicity of IBA (samples A4–A6) from a chemical point of view. According to Annex VI of CLP, Zn dust is classified into Aquatic Acute Toxicity Category 1 and Aquatic Chronic Toxicity Category 1. Considering the “worst-case scenario”, some of the compounds that could be found are ZnO, ZnSO4 or zinc chloride, which are all classified as Aquatic Acute Toxicity 1 and Aquatic Chronic Toxicity 1. For copper, one could find CuO and copper (I) oxide, both also classified with Aquatic Acute Toxicity 1 and Aquatic Chronic Toxicity 1. Lead compounds not specified elsewhere in Annex VI of CLP are also classified as Aquatic Acute Toxicity Category 1 and Aquatic Chronic Toxicity Category 1. The limit value of 25% for the sum of all the substances present in IBA classified as toxic to the aquatic environment was exceeded, according to the calculation formulas from Council Regulation (EU) 2017/997. Nevertheless, Commission Decision 2014/955/UE indicates that when a hazardous property has been assessed via a test and using the concentrations of hazardous substances, the results of the test shall prevail. The possible combined effect of the substances was verified through an ecotoxicity test with Daphnia magna. An EC50 value > 160,000 mg/L was obtained via the test. Regulation (EC) 1272/2008 establishes that EC50 < 100 mg/L demonstrates ecotoxicity. Thus, the results of the test indicate low acute toxicity for the environment, and the waste was not classified with HP 14 for any of the samples.
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Reference
1. Bandarra, B.S.; Silva, S.; Pereira, J.L.; Martins, R.C.; Quina, M.J. A Study on the Classification of a Mirror Entry in the European List of Waste: Incineration Bottom Ash from Municipal Solid Waste. Sustainability; 2022; 14, 10352. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su141610352]
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details




1 CIEPQPF, Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Coimbra, Rua Sílvio Lima, Pólo II—Pinhal de Marrocos, 3030-790 Coimbra, Portugal;
2 Teramb-Empresa Municipal de Gestão e Valorização Ambiental da Ilha da Terceira, EM, Central de Tratamento e Valorização de Resíduos da Ilha Terceira, Canada do Cidral n°55, São Bento, 9700-135 Angra do Heroísmo, Portugal;
3 CESAM—Centre for Environmental and Marine Studies, Department of Biology, University of Aveiro, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal;