California hearing draws experts urging repeal of TB 133 and adoption of TB 117-2013 for commercial furniture

Nicholas Oliver, chief of the Bureau of Electronic and Appliance Repair, Home Furnishings, and Thermal Insulation, opened a public hearing Sept. 17, 2018, in Sacramento to take oral and written comment on the bureau’s proposal to repeal Technical Bulletin 133 (TB 133) and to extend the smolder-resistance standard TB 117-2013 to commercial furniture.

The discussion matters because speakers from fire, public-health and environmental organizations said TB 133 has driven the use of chemical flame retardants in upholstery foam without demonstrable improvements in fire safety. Megan Kalsman of the San Francisco Department of the Environment said, “There’s no evidence that TB 133 has improved fire safety or reduced fire losses,” and urged repeal to allow manufacturers to meet TB 117-2013 instead.

Proponents told the bureau the change would reduce exposure to potentially toxic flame retardant chemicals. Mark Pedraya of Santa Rosa Firefighters Local 1401, speaking on behalf of the California Professional Firefighters, said TB 133 helped produce unintended harms and stated, “We support repealing TB 133 and conforming to the newer TB 117-2013 standard.” Multiple public-health researchers and advocates echoed that theme. Catherine Rogers of Silent Spring Institute summarized her team’s dormitory dust study, saying rooms with TB 133-certified furniture showed significantly higher concentrations of several flame retardant chemicals.

Speakers pointed to changes in building fire protection since TB 133 was adopted, including wider use of automatic sprinklers and alarms, and said modern smolder-resistance testing (TB 117-2013) addresses common ignition sources. Donald Lucas, a retired combustion scientist from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and member of the bureau’s Technical Advisory Committee, said uniform national standards would help and voiced support for the bureau’s proposal.

Public-health groups described links between certain flame retardants and health risks. Susan Little of the Environmental Working Group and Lizette Van Fleet of Breast Cancer Prevention Partners cited research tying flame retardants to cancer, endocrine disruption and developmental harms, and warned that some flame retardants increase smoke and toxic gas production in fires.

Several commenters noted the Consumer Product Safety Commission has moved to limit certain organohalogen flame retardants and cited a recent barrier research study. The San Francisco Department of the Environment and other speakers said the city’s ordinance banning sale of upholstered furniture containing certain flame retardant chemicals will take effect Jan. 1, 2019, and currently exempts products meeting TB 133 because manufacturers typically must use chemical retardants to comply with TB 133.

The hearing was a record-gathering step in the regulatory process; bureau staff did not respond to comments during the session. The bureau’s notice stated the proposed amendments were published in the California Regulatory Notice Register on July 27, 2018, and eight written comments had been received as of the hearing. Written comments were accepted through 5 p.m. on Sept. 17, 2018. The hearing record will include responses to objections and recommendations in the final statement of reasons prepared after the close of the public comment period.

The hearing concluded at about 9:38 a.m. after roughly 31 minutes of testimony. No vote or final regulatory action was taken at the session; the meeting served only to gather public input for the bureau’s rulemaking record.