US CPSC to Hold Hearing on Petition to Ban Flame Retardants

The US Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC) will hear presentations on an NGO petition to ban organohalogenated flame retardants in several consumer product categories. Announcement of the 14 September public hearing came two years after the petition was filed, and just a few weeks after the agency's staff recommended that the commissioners reject it.

The petition, submitted by several NGOs in August 2015, asks the CPSC to name products containing any non-polymeric, additive organohalogen flame retardant as "banned hazardous substances". It would apply to:

children's products;

upholstered residential furniture;

mattresses; and

electronics devices with external casings containing the substances.

The petition attracted more than 150 comments. Among these were dozens of supporting submissions from non-petitioning NGOs, doctors, governmental bodies and private citizens.

But a coalition of industry groups argued that the petition seeks to eliminate chemicals "that are distinct from one another in their properties, uses and levels of risk, at particular exposure levels", and that a ban of the full class of substances "is inappropriate and flies in the face of sound science".

The CPSC staff agreed with that criticism in a June 2017 briefing package, concluding that "OFRs, in fact, represent several subclasses of chemicals that should be examined separately".

The staff said that the data presented in the petition provides insufficient basis "to conclude that all products defined by the petitioners with OFRs are hazardous substances" as defined by the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA). They said "not all chemicals in this class have the same toxicity under the FHSA or the same exposure potential" and the data presented do not establish any link between the presence of the chemicals and specific products.

In addition, they said, "the mere presence of a chemical (including those that may be considered toxic under the FHSA) in a person's blood or urine is not enough to demonstrate that an adverse health effect or disease may occur because levels may indicate exposures that are too low to cause these effects in humans".

The staff recommendations conclude with a statement that it will continue to monitor flame retardants in children's products and mattresses, and will work closely with voluntary standard setting organisations, as well as with the EPA, "to coordinate activities on FR chemicals, including OFRs".

The five CPSC commissioners can either accept the staff recommendation or reject it and begin a rulemaking process. It is unclear why the CPSC is acting on the petition now, or why the panel has asked for additional presentations beyond those comments already submitted.

The term of one member of the panel's 3-2 Democratic majority will expire in September, and President Trump could shift the balance by appointing a Republican to fill the vacancy. The Trump administration has already indicated it will nominate current acting chair Ann Marie Buerkle to permanently fill the role, and to serve an additional seven-year term.

The CPSC and an attorney from petitioning organisation EarthJustice did not respond to a request for a comment by publication time.