Environmentally Preferable Approaches for Meeting Furniture Fire Safety Standards Mark Buczek Supresta American Fire Safety Council Furniture Flame Retardancy Partnership

Design for the Environment Program Collaborative partnerships with industry sectors –Industry leaders –Trade associations –Public interest groups Non-Regulatory Risk reduction through access to EPA’s chemical information and models Convener, facilitator, information broker

Flame Retardancy Partnership Overview Partnership Development Project Goals Flame Retardant Alternatives Report –Low-density foam Next Steps

Partnership Development Events Influencing FRs in Furniture Fire Safety –US Consumer Product Safety Commission ANPR –California TB117 - Proposed update –American Home Fire Safety Act (S 1798 IS) Environmental –Several PBDEs detected in human breast milk and the environment –Voluntary phase-out and SNUR for penta- and octa-BDE –Significant New Use Rule – Residential Upholstered Furniture –State legislation banning select PBDEs

Partnership Development Key Stakeholders San Francisco roundtables Furniture manufacturer interest –AHFA and BIFMA Broad interest and support –CPSC –AFSC –NIST BFRL –GreenBlue –ISPA and SPSC

Project Goals Facilitate industry decision-making Level the playing field –New and existing chemicals Drive innovation toward environmentally safer flame retardancy methods Develop a model for alternatives assessment

Current Activities Flame retardant alternatives report –Finalize report on flame retardants in low-density foam (primary focus pentaBDE alternatives to meet TB117 requirements) Make information available to facilitate industry decision making Broaden Partnership to include mattress industry

Flame Retardant Alternatives Report Overview Enable industry to weigh environmental considerations as they consider cost and performance in decision-making Provide information on : –General characteristics of flame retardant chemicals –Exposure to flame retardant chemicals in foam –Toxicology and exposure for pentaBDE alternatives –Alternative technologies Discuss considerations for selecting a replacement for pentaBDE

Flame Retardant Alternatives Report Hazard Assessments Detailed hazard reviews –Based on publicly available literature –Determine whether endpoints can adequately be characterized based on OECD guidelines Summary of chemicals in flame retardant formulations –Detailed hazard reviews –Measured confidential data from EPA and chemical companies –Estimations from EPA New Chemicals Program –Professional judgment of EPA staff Summary of EPA assessment for environmental and human health endpoints –High, Medium, Low

Flame Retardant Alternatives Report Hazard Assessments Toxicity Summary Table

Flame Retardant Alternatives Report Exposure Routes Description of key elements for exposure assessment Industrial releases and exposures –Chemical manufacturing –Foam manufacturing –Furniture manufacturing Consumer and general population exposures Potential routes of exposure based on physical chemical properties

Flame Retardant Alternatives Report Exposure Routes Fate/Exposure Summary Table

Flame Retardant Alternatives Report Considerations in Selecting Alternatives to PentaBDE Positive Environmental Attributes Aesthetic and Performance Considerations Process, Equipment and Cost Considerations Alternative Technologies and Design

Low Persistence –It breaks down quickly in the environment Breakdown products are not hazardous Low Bioaccumulation/Low Bioavailability –It is not easily absorbed by living organisms Reacts –FR chemical chemically reacts with other chemicals during foam production Low Toxicity –Less potential for harm, even if some exposure occurs Flame Retardant Alternatives Report Considerations in Selecting Alternatives to PentaBDE

Draft report available on website Reviewing comments – plan to finalize in Spring 2005 Flame Retardant Alternatives Report Review Process

Next Steps Develop a process to adequately characterize risk FR Options Analysis – focused on CPSC standards (planned furniture standard and proposed mattress standard) –Fabric, alternative foams, filling materials, barriers, alternative construction/design Drive innovation through a labeling program, innovation challenge, or other means to encourage and recognize environmentally safer FR technologies

Environmentally Preferable Approaches for Meeting Furniture Fire Safety Standards Contact Information Mark Buczek, AFSC, Dick Driscoll, BIFMA, Lauren Heine, GreenBlue, x305 Bill Perdue, AHFA, x117 Kathleen Vokes, EPA DfE, Ryan Trainer, ISPA