Pettit Trinidad SR Anti Fouling Paint Discontinued

[fstbttms]

Having heard from several sources that this was the case (but not believing it), I called their sales department. Apparently Trinidad SR has been discontinued because Pettit got tired of “fighting the Irgarol battle”, as a technical sales rep just told me. They’ve decided to go back to an older, non-Irgarol formulation of the paint and it is available as Trinidad Pro, which used to be available through boatyards only but now will be available everywhere.

[GRIT]

The rep told me that they were coming out with a new paint to replace the Trinidad SR, and that his boss was already using it. This was Oct 2020. He told me the new name, but I can't remember what it was.

We won't know the whole truth until it's on the shelves!

He said they stopped making it in September, and that what was being sold was out of the warehouse, and even then, it was (supposedly) difficult to get black.

We got black, without much trouble.

Interestingly enough, he said the irgarol manufacturer "forgot" to renew a license or something; and that it had happened before now. That seems like a story to me. I mean, have you (fastbottoms) ever "forgotten" to renew your diving or business license?

Whatever the reason; it does seem like it's being replaced. (Trinidad SR, not the license. )

Cheers.
Paul.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by GRIT

The rep told me that they were coming out with a new paint to replace the Trinidad SR, and that his boss was already using it.

Was it Trinidad HD?

[GRIT]

I can't honestly say, one way or the other.

Cheers.
Paul.

[Thumbs Up]

Once I opened a can of Trinitdad SR. Greenish watery liquid was on top. Without thinking, I used my breath to blow away a pine needle that had landed on the rim. The liquid splashed into my eye. Since then I have always been sensitive to the smell of that paint. Farewell Trinidad SR! Goodbye Irgarol! I think the SR stood for slime resistant.

[Montanan]

FYI:

US EPA
Irgarol
Proposed Interim Registration Review Decision
Case Number 5031
September 2020


International Maritime Organization (IMO) Environmental Actions for Irgarol

The IMO is the United Nations technical organization responsible for setting safety, environmental, and other standards for international shipping.
The U.S. Coast Guard formally represents the U.S. Government in the work of the IMO. It establishes U.S. negotiating positions in close consultation with EPA, National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of State, Navy, Maritime Administration (MARAD), Department of Justice, and other federal entities.

When the proposal to ban cybutryne (irgarol) was first considered at the IMO in 2017, the Coast Guard consulted with EPA offices (Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, Office of Water, and Office of International and Tribal Affairs) as well as NOAA, Navy, Department of State, Department of Transportation, and other federal entities. Following consideration of the
technical merit of the proposal, current market demand and alternatives, and the anticipated support at the IMO for the proposal, the Coast Guard – with concurrence from EPA and other federal entities – in 2019 expressed “no objection” to the recommendation to go forward with a comprehensive proposal to a ban on the antifoulant paint use.

During the discussions of the proposal at IMO meetings, the Coast Guard and NOAA representatives noted strong support, even among industry entities, for the recommended ban. EPA’s subsequent conversations with industry counterparts, e.g., the American Coatings Association, confirmed that industry agreed that the IMO’s risk assessment was rigorous and
well done and that industry groups do not oppose the ban.

Reference link:

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production...review-pid.pdf

PROPOSED INTERIM REGISTRATION REVIEW DECISION

A. Proposed Risk Mitigation and Regulatory Rationale

In evaluating potential risk mitigation for the applications of irgarol, the agency has considered the risks and benefits. EPA has determined that there are human health and ecological risks of concern from the use of irgarol in antifoulant paints, preserved paint, and as a materials preservative. However, the agency has also identified areas where risk mitigation measures are appropriate and is proposing to implement label changes for antifoulant paints and preserved paints containing irgarol. Mitigation measures are expected to greatly reduce human health and ecological risks of concern from the use of irgarol in antifoulant and preserved paints. The
agency has notified registrants of the proposed mitigation measures to address the risks of concern and the registrants are in general agreement with the agency’s proposed mitigation.

1. Proposed Removal of Antifoulant Paint Uses for Irgarol

To mitigate occupational handler inhalation and dermal human health risk as well as the freshwater and marine ecological exposure risks to aquatic plants that affect coral reefs, the agency is proposing to remove the antifoulant paint use of irgarol. The agency has been working with the registrants who are planning to cancel their antifoulant paint uses of irgarol along the
same timelines of the IMO (see Section III.C.). EPA understands the most recent IMO recommendation is to ban the use of irgarol (cybutryne) as an antifoulant paint with no new applications as of October 2025 and no existing irgarol-containing coatings after October 2030 unless sealed. Therefore, the agency is proposing that registrants with product labels that include marine and freshwater antifoulant paints uses must request removal of those uses by September 30, 2023. If the products are only registered for antifoulant paint uses, then registrants must submit a voluntary cancellation request by September 30, 2023. The timing for the FIFRA 6(f) process and allowing for use of existing stocks is estimated to take 2 years; therefore, the antifoulant paints uses will be effectively cancelled by October 2025, which aligns with current IMO recommendations. Once all labels are received, the agency will use its FIFRA 6(f) authority to officially cancel the antifoulant paint uses.
The agency would like stakeholder feedback on this proposed timeframe during the comment period for this PID.


Irgarol containing products are currently registered for use in antifoulant paints for boat and/or vessel hulls in both marine and freshwater settings; as a algicidal preservative in paints, caulks, coatings, sealants, grouts, vinyl roofing, roof coatings, stucco, wood stains, adhesives, plasters;
and is incorporated into boat hulls themselves. In antifouling paints, irgarol is often combined with copper, or copper compounds such as cuprous oxide or copper thiocyanate. While irgarol effectively controls algae, copper is effective at controlling aquatic animals such as mussels and barnacles. Irgarol is a s-triazine algaecide used in combination with copper in antifoulant paint as a “booster” biocide, intended to diminish algae growth on ship hulls. In material preservative products, irgarol is often combined with carbendazim (MBC), chlorothalonil, and/or DCOIT (3(2H)-Isothiazolone, 4,5-dichloro-2-octyl-).

Currently, there are six registrants with 16 active products in this case; one is a technical product and 15 are end-use products.

[GRIT]

Well done. Good research Montanan.

Thank you.

Paul.

[gamayun]

This is the paint that I have on one of my boats. Am I understanding that Petitt has quit making SR as of fall 2020 even though it will take a few years before phase out of Irgarol occurs? Seems like there might be more to the story.

[jak3b]

I wanted to paint mine with SR, Svensons said they were not selling it anymore. That was November 2020. I wound up using Trinidad HD. Seems ok, I liked the old Petit Trinidad before the Pro, SR, HD came out.

[rslifkin]

I wonder what this Irgarol phase out means for the other paints that use it. I wonder if Interlux will find an alternative for slime protection in Micron Extra, or if everyone using it in fresh water has to go back to Micron CSC and extra slime scrubbing?

[rwidman]

It seems if something is a good antifoulant product, the EPA is going to ban it sooner or later. And if not the EPA, some state legislature will surely ban it.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by rslifkin

I wonder what this Irgarol phase out means for the other paints that use it.

You didn't read post #6. In it, the EPA suggests that the U.S. will follow the International Maritime Organization's proposed ban on Irgarol. So yes, all anti fouling paint products will stop using it.

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

You didn't read post #6. In it, the EPA suggests that the U.S. will follow the International Maritime Organization's proposed ban on Irgarol. So yes, all anti fouling paint products will stop using it.

I did see that. That's why I'm wondering whether the other paints using it will just ditch Irgarol and leave the rest alone, or if they'll try to find a substitute slime preventer.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by rslifkin

That's why I'm wondering whether the other paints using it will just ditch Irgarol and leave the rest alone, or if they'll try to find a substitute slime preventer.

I suspect if such an ingredient were available, manufacturers would have explored its use the first time Irgarol became unavailable.

[Montanan]

Fstbttms, well without that biocide additive to mitigate against slim growth, it looks like your services will become closer in periodicity.

What other biocides are compatible with bottom paint and commonly used to mitigate slime growth?