Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Lab Testing Labeling topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lab finds low perfect‑label rate, DTSC testing underway and most samples declared free of flame retardants
Summary
Bureau lab reported a 13% perfect labeling pass rate, a split of minor/moderate label violations, DTSC testing on eight component samples (three passed, five pending), and that 90% of completed samples declared no flame retardant chemicals.
The Bureau of Household Goods and Services reported detailed lab testing and labeling results to its advisory council, including low perfect‑label compliance and ongoing verification testing with the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC).
Rosemarie Picota, the bureau’s lab manager, said 30 new samples were completed in the reporting period and labeling assessments showed a 13% perfect pass rate, 42% with minor violations, 42% with more moderate violations and about a 3% outright failure rate. Picota said labeling failures can include incorrect registry numbers, misidentification of the manufacturer or missing required flammability information.
Why it matters: labeling accuracy is required by law and affects traceability, consumer information and compliance with flammability testing standards; the low perfect‑label rate prompted requests from council members to break out specific causes and test sources.
Picota reported that of 64 samples reviewed for flame‑retardant declaration, 58 had the “contains no flame retardant chemicals” box checked, four indicated chemicals were present and two checked neither box; the bureau calculated roughly 90% of completed articles declared no flame retardant chemicals. The bureau sent components from eight articles to DTSC for laboratory confirmation; DTSC results returned for three components were passing, and five component results remain pending. From a documentation perspective, three samples met documentation criteria, two failed documentation checks and three remain awaiting documentation results.
Lab staff also presented origin data for tested products: among completed upholstery furniture samples received through the portal, about 31% were manufactured in California, 6% in other U.S. states and 63% overseas. For the mattress samples completed this year, the small sample set (10) were all listed as manufactured in California.
Council members asked the lab to separate TB 117‑2013 (the flammability standard)‑related labeling failures from other labeling issues in future reports to better track trends; lab staff agreed to provide that breakdown going forward.
Ending: The bureau said it has posted consolidated FAQ guidance on law‑label requirements to help industry comply and that staff will refine future reports to show TB 117‑related failures and origin‑based failure rates if possible.
