CPSC flame retardant decision 'political'

New Orleans, Louisiana — The US consumer product safety commission (CPSC)'s split guidance to ban the use of halogenated flame retardants in polyurethane foam was 'political,' said Lee Salamone,  speaking here on the fringes of the CPI annual meeting.

The CPSC decision was unexpected.

Arlene Blum, who's Green Science Policy Institute petitioned for the CPSC to adopt CAL TB 117 flammability standard  along with the American Home Furnishings Alliance  in 2015 wrote in an email 'many years of hard work paid off when, to our amazement, the CPSC commissioners voted to enact the petition.'

It was an unusual decision, Salamone added, because having issued the guidance the CPSC then ordered that a Chronic Hazard Advisory Panel should be convened to examine the risks of these flame retardants in polyurethane foam.

She added that “the [CPSC] staff position was that this should not be adopted' partly on grounds that the test is difficult to perform and it is difficult to reproduce.

According to the Federal Register, 'This guidance is not a binding or enforceable rule and would not change any person’s rights, duties, or obligations under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act or any other Act administered by the Commission.'

The CPSC said that the ruling covers 'additive, non-polymeric chemicals only; it does not include reactive or polymeric organohalogen flame retardants.'