What evidence bridges the exposure assessment when a substrate, supplier, process or assembly component changes?
Last reviewed: .
What evidence bridges the exposure assessment when a substrate, supplier, process or assembly component changes?
A study covers the article it tested, so a change of substrate, supplier, process or assembly is assessed again by the party that makes the changed article.
The Terms of Use state: “A test of C-POLAR material, a component, or a prototype does not establish the performance of a finished product that incorporates it. Construction, processing, storage, wear, cleaning, other components, and actual use may change the result.” They also state: “A prospective partner or manufacturer must perform its own testing, validation, compatibility work, safety review, risk review, and quality controls for its proposed product and use,” and: “Use evidence, specifications, instructions, and warnings specific to the actual finished product and use.” The About page states that development runs configuration by configuration, and that each partner controls what is said about the work.
The studies the company names are Product Safety Labs, Study 65321, Study 65322, Study 65323 and Study 65324, each completed in 2024 and each run on a sponsor-supplied sample. What a complete appliance gives off is a matter for the maker of that appliance, and C-POLAR publishes no assessment of one. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.
Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use, sections 3 and 5, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — About, https://cpolar.tech/about/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/.
Reviewed on .
All questions