Timeline of Reviews of Phthalates DINP and DIDP


The European Chemicals Agency’s (ECHA) Risk Assessment Committee (RAC) concluded that di-isononyl phthalate (DINP) does not warrant classification for reproductive and developmental toxicity effects under the European Union’s Classification, Labelling and Packaging regulation. The RAC opinion rejected by consensus the proposed classification of DINP as a reproductive toxicant category 1B (Development) and Category 2 (Fertility) and concluded “no classification for DINP for either effects on sexual function and fertility, or for developmental toxicity is warranted.”


Environment and Climate Change Canada in October released its Draft Screening Assessment for the Phthalate Substance Grouping. The proposed conclusion states “all 14 phthalates in the Phthalate Substance Grouping [including DINP] do not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(c) of CEPA as they are not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or health.”


The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) in October proposed to make the ban on the use of DINP in toys and child care articles permanent and lift the restriction on the use of DIDP and DnOP in toys and child care articles.

2014  The Chronic Hazard Advisory Panel (CHAP) report from the CPSC was released in July 2014. The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA) mandates that CPSC promulgate a final rule within 180 days after receiving the CHAP report.
2014  The European Commission concludes that “ no unacceptable risk has been characterised for the uses of DINP and DIDP in articles other than toys and childcare articles which can be placed in the mouth.” The Commission aligned with the main conclusions presented in August 2013 by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), including that “no further risk management measures are needed to reduce the exposure of adults to DINP and DIDP.”
2012 The National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme (NICNAS) of the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing finalized the Priority Existing Chemical Assessment Report (PEC No. 35) on DINP finding that current exposures to DINP do not indicate a health concern for children, even at the highest exposure levels considered
2012 Heger et al. study funded by NIEHS, EPA and ACC published in Environmental Health Perspectives, finding that human fetal testis xenografts are resistant to phthalate-induced endocrine disruption.
2010   CHAP convenes in the spring of 2010 and was to complete its work within 18 months.
2008    The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA):                  

Imposed an interim prohibition on the manufacture for sale, distribution or import into the U.S. of any children’s toy or child-care article that contained more than 0.1 percent of DINP, DIDP or DnOP; and mandated the appointment of a seven-member CHAP to study the effects on children’s health of all phthalates and phthalate alternatives as used in children’s toys and child care articles.            
2007     In a 2007 letter to California Senator George Runner regarding children’s toys and PVC, the CPSC staff reinforced its 2002 decision and indicated “the CPSC staff has kept abreast of the new research and has not seen anything that would cause a change in the staff’s position on this issue."
2006 The Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (the “OSPAR Convention”) concluded, “DINP and DIDP are not PBT [persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic] substances according to OSPAR DYNAMEC or EU-TGD criteria and there is no indication of potential for endocrine disruption.”
2003 The European Union (EU) 2003 risk assessment report on both DINP and DIDP concluded that current uses in applications, such as PVC and polymers, are not expected to pose a risk to human health or the environment, including sensitive populations/children.

The National Toxicology Program’s Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction (NTP-CERHR) concluded that there was “minimal concern” regarding risk of developmental or reproductive effects from current exposure levels to DINP and that there was “minimal concern” regarding risk of developmental effects and “negligible concern” regarding risk of reproductive effects from current exposure levels to DIDP.

2003 CPSC staff reaffirms the safety of DINP in voting unanimously to deny a petition calling for the ban on the use of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) in children’s products after conducting an updated risk assessment, an oral exposure study and a migration study of DINP in children’s products.            
2001 The CPSC conducted a CHAP on DINP, affirming its safety in consumer products.
1999 A distinguished panel of physicians and scientists led by former U.S. Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop found that DINP, as used to soften vinyl toys, is not harmful to children or adults, in a review done for the American Council on Science and Health. 

News & Resources

View our resource center to find press releases, testimonies, infographics and more.