Learn about the negative effects the flame retardants can have on your health and how businesses to can reduce their use for safer work environments.

1. Environmental and Public Health Impacts
And
Opportunities for Businesses
to ReduceTheir Use
Speakers:
Roger McFadden, Staples, Inc ,
Judy Levin, Center for Environmental Health
Kathryn Rodgers, Silent Spring Institute
.
FLAME RETARDANTS

2. Center for Environmental Health
(CEH)

3. Advisory Group Members
 Jean Hansen: HDR Architects, Senior Professional Associate, Sustainable
Interiors Manager
 Roger McFadden: Staples, Senior Scientist,Vice President
 HowardWilliams: Construction Specialties, Vice President-General
Manager
 Brian Smith: Multnomah County Oregon, Purchasing Manager
 Chris McGough: Fairfax County (Virginia), Green Purchasing Program
 Susan ChemerynskiWason: Harvard University, Research Fellow:
Department of Environmental Health at Harvard School of Public Health

4. Webinar Overview
1. Flame Retardant Chemical Concerns
 Human and Environmental Health
Hazards
 Lack of Fire Safety Benefit
1. Changing Regulations-Opportunity for
Change
2. LeveragingYour Purchasing Power
3. Questions and Answers

5.  What are flame retardants?
 Human and environmental health
hazards of flame retardants
 Lack of fire safety benefit
What are the Concerns?

6. Flame Retardants
What are flame retardants?
Inhibit ignition or spread of flames
Where are flame retardants
used?
Electronics
Building Insulation
Foam Furniture
Wires and Cabling

7. Flame Retardant Chemicals
Many flame retardants are:
Persistent
Bioaccumulative
Toxic
Carcinogens
Mutagens
Reproductive Toxicants
7

8. Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) (1976)
Most Chemicals in the U.S. are Not Regulated
62,000 chemicals in commerce “grandfathered”
• EPA has regulated only five chemicals
2,000 new chemicals enter market each year
• No environmental or health data required
• 85% lack data on chemical health effects
Burden of proof on EPA to prove chemical is
harmful

9. Flame Retardants Are Ubiquitous
Slide courtesy of Green Science Policy Institute

10. How are We Exposed?
 Inhalation or ingestion of contaminated dust
particles
 Ingestion from food, especially meat and dairy
 Occupational Exposure
Unique to Children
 Absorption across the placenta
 Breast milk
 Frequent hand-to-mouth activity

11. Flame Retardants:At Home and Work
WORK HOME

12. Indoor Air Quality
 Most Americans spend up to
90% of their time indoors.
 Indoor air can have higher levels
of pollutants than outside levels.
 Impacts health, comfort, well
being, and productivity

13. Brominated Flame Retardants in
Offices in MI (2010)
 “BFRs are now ubiquitous contaminants with large
reservoirs and high concentrations in buildings.”
 “The widespread distribution of BFRs found in offices in
both new and old buildings suggests the significance of
workplace exposures, the need for controls to
minimize human exposure, intra-building migration, and
environmental releases of these chemicals…”
Environ Int. 2010 Aug;36(6):548-56. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2010.04.008. Epub 2010 May 18.
Batterman S, Godwin C, Chernyak S, Jia C, Charles S.

14. Flame Retardants in MA Offices (2013)
 Chlorinated Tris was present in 99% of dust samples
taken from participants’ homes, vehicles and offices.
Widespread presence of this flame retardant in the
indoor environment.
Environment International, Volume 55,May 2013, Pages 56-61

15. Health Effects of Flame Retardants
Neurodevelopmental Effects
Decreased memory and learning
Reduced IQ
Hyperactivity Diabetes
Cancer
Endocrine System Disruption
Obesity
Chemicals that mimic estrogen
Alters thyroid hormone
ReproductiveToxicant
Decreased fertility
Decreased birth weight
Decreased sperm quality

16. Occupational Exposures
 Fire Fighters/First
Responders
 FRC Manufacturing
Workers
 Foam Workers
(manufacturers,
installers and recyclers)
 Gymnasts

17. Lack of Fire Safety Benefit
 No significant difference in fire growth between
foam with flame retardants formulated to pass TB
117 and untreated foam. Source: U.S. Dept. of Commerce,
National Bureau of Standards.
 Chairs with flame retardant foam offered no
practically significant difference than those
without FR-treated foam. Source: CPSC, 2012.

18. Additional Considerations
 Presence of automatic fire
sprinklers in buildings
 People not allowed to smoke
 No fire data supports need for
flame retardant chemicals in
office furniture

19. Flame Retardants May Make
Fires Less Survivable
Data Source: Chandra Jayakody, et al. J. Fire Sciences, Vol. 18, pp 430-455, 2000
16
19
413
833
(m2
/kg) (kg/kg) (kg/kg)
0.02
0.13
0.01
0.88

20. FIRES IN DORMITORIES, FRATERNITIES,
SORORITIES AND BARRACKS
Approximately 3,810 fires in dorms, fraternities,
sororities/barracks
Leading causes of these fires:
 Cooking equipment (84%)
 Smoking materials
 Heating equipment
 Playing with a heat source
 Electrical distribution and lighting equipment
2 deaths and 30 injuries nationally (causes not
reported)
Source: NFPA Study 2013

21. Fires in Health Care Facilities
2006-2010
Roughly 1,430/year in hospitals/hospices
Leading causes include:
• Cooking equipment (largest %)
• Dryers
• Arson
• Smoking materials
• Heating equipment
• Electrical distribution/lighting equipment
• Playing with heat sources
** NO reported fire deaths or injuries from
furniture. **
Source: National Fire Protection Agency 2012

22. Furniture Flammability
Regulations
Technical Bulletin 117
• Small open flame test for filling
inside upholstered furniture
Technical Bulletin 133
• Severe, large open flame test for
seating in “public occupancies”
• Voluntary if building is fully
sprinklered

23. New California Furniture Standard:
TB 117-2013
 Addresses leading
cause of fires
 Reflects real life fire
scenarios
 Can meet with
smolder proof fabrics
and barrier if needed

24. Governor Brown Announces New Standards
to Reduce Toxic Chemicals in Furniture
November 21, 2013
Beginning January 1, 2014, manufacturers
may begin manufacturing to the new standards.
They will have a year to complete the transition
and must come into full mandatory
compliance on January 1, 2015”

25. Comparison
TB 117 vs. 117-2013
TB 117 TB 117-2013
Small Open Flame
Standard
Smolder Standard (largest
cause of fires and deaths)
Does Not Reflect Real
Life Fire Scenarios
Reflects Real Life Fire
Scenarios
Typically met with flame
retardant chemicals
Can be met without use of
flame retardant chemicals
Exempts 3 baby products Exempts 15 baby products

26. Technical Bulletin 133
Seating Furniture for Public Buildings
or Assembly Areas
CA includes:
Hospitals, health care facilities, nursing
homes, board and care homes,
convalescent homes
Jails, prisons, penal institutions
Stadiums, auditoriums,
Public assembly areas of hotels/motels.

27. Key ComparisonsTB 133
vs.TB 117-2013
TECHNICAL
BULLETIN 133
TECHNICAL BULLETIN 117-
2013
Addresses public buildings or
public assembly areas
Non- public occupancy or
assembly buildings OR those public
occupancy buildings that are fully
sprinklered
Large Open Flame Test Smolder Test
Typically met with FRs in
fabric, foam and/or barrier
materials
Can be met without FRs
More expensive to meet
than TB 117-2013
Less expensive to meet than TB
133

28. Entities Known to Reference
CA Regulations
Ohio- Public Buildings must comply
with TB 133 (no exceptions for
sprinklers)
Illinois-Public Buildings must
comply with TB 133 unless fully
sprinklered, then may comply with
TB117 and TB 116

29. Massachusetts Rules (527 CMR 29)
In fully sprinkled building, spaces may meet TB-
117 OR TB-133
In building not fully sprinkled,
spaces must meet TB-133
Regulated Spaces:
Assembly (A), Educational (E), Institutional (I), and Residential (R):
R1 – public/enclosed spaces in space of transient nature, e.g. hotel
R2 – public spaces in apartment houses, dormitories (more than 2 units)
R5 – enclosed spaces in group residence (12 people max) for impaired people
(all defined in 780 CMR 3)

30. Boston Rules (BFD IX-10)
All regulated spaces must
meet TB-133, regardless of
sprinklers
Regulated Spaces:
Assembly (A), Educational (E), Institutional (I), and Residential (R):
R1 – public/enclosed spaces of transient nature, e.g. hotel
R2 – public spaces in apartment houses, dormitories (more than 2 units)
R5 – enclosed spaces in group residence (12 people max) for impaired people
(all defined in 780 CMR 3)

31. Boston Rules - Update
As of 4/1/14 seating in “Business” and
“Mercantile” spaces no longer regulated
*EXCEPT:
B and M spaces with no
sprinklers, and R above
B and M spaces with A
occupancy load > 49
people
Temporary structure
with open flame
(candles, cooking)

32. Staples Leadership & Engagement
Staples seeks to offer
organizations of all sizes
products that are inherently
safer for human and
environmental health and
that address environmental
impacts throughout their
lifecycle.

33. Chemicals of Concern
 Hexavalent Chromium
 Formaldehyde
 Perfluorinated Compounds (PFCs)
 PVC (vinyl)
 Heavy Metals
 Nonyl phenol ethoxylates
 Phthalates
 Bisphenol A
 Triclosan
 Today’s focus is Flame Retardants due to regulation change
 Other chemicals of concern in the market

34. Market is Moving
 Consumer awareness is growing – ChicagoTribune “Playing with
Fire”, social media and crowd sourcing.
 Business customers are beginning to ask for flame retardant free
furniture in their RFPs.
 Architectural / Design Firms are requesting HPDs
 Living Building Challenge raises the bar
 BIFMA and BIFMA members are supportive
 Flame Retardant free foam furniture already exists

35. Suppliers Are Important In Helping Meet Our Goals
We challenge and ask our suppliers to:
• Consider chemicals of high concern like flame
retardants to be pollutants or contaminants;
• Consider direct and indirect chemical exposure to
vulnerable sub-populations including children,
women of child-bearing age and workers;
• Consider life cycle impacts of chemicals
including harmful degradation and combustion by-
products;
• Consider full life-cycle costing including
externalities when making a product;
• Apply green chemistry/green engineering
principles into their product design or product
re-design whenever possible.

36. Health Product Declaration (HPD)
PromotingTransparency

37. Changing Supplier Behavior
Lessons Learned
• Be clear with suppliers about what you
want. Suppliers are looking for ways to
differentiate themselves and bring you
value.The best in class will cooperate
and collaborate.
• Be fair with suppliers and provide
them reasonable time to meet your
expectations, but don’t allow them to
use this to stall or delay taking action.
• Don’t be deterred or obstructed by
“status quo”. Be willing to look at new
options.

38. Safer Chemicals, Materials and Products
Benefits For Everyone
• Workers that make and/or use them;
• Firefighters that are exposed to them;
• Suppliers that sell them;
• Logistics that transport them;
• Consumers that buy and use them;
• Our children that inherit them.

39. PURCHASER STRATEGY
ADVISORY GROUP TOOLS
 FR Free Products
Purchaser Preference
 Letter to Suppliers
 Talking Points for
Supplier Meetings
 RFI / RFP / Contract
Language
 Fact sheet

40. NEXT STEPS
 Engage others!
 Build awareness re: value of transitioning to less
toxic products (CEH can help)
 Screen current product inventory for chemicals
of concern
 Send letter or meet with suppliers: Express
preference & ask for their help in meeting your
toxic reduction objectives
 Explore / develop environmentally preferable
purchasing policies
 Find out your org’s. furniture contract
timeframe
 Sign the pledge

41. CELEBRATE !!!

42. QUESTIONS?
Judy Levin Roger McFadden
CEH Staples, Inc.
Pollution Prevention Co-Director Senior Scientist,VP
(510) 655-3900 ext. 316 (303) 862-0421
judy@ceh.org roger.mcfadden@staples.com
Kathryn Rodgers
Silent Spring Institute
Research Asst.
(617) 332-4288 ext. 225
rodgers@silentspring.org