A recent study from Indiana University showed that 15 of 18 child car seats tested contained new or traditional flame retardants (FRs).

These chemicals have been linked to a variety of adverse health issues and are therefore regulated in many regions. In this article, we explore legislative action regarding flame retardants in North America.

Because the ability to stop the spread of flames is so important in consumer products, flame retardants are found in a variety of products we use every day. In addition to child car seats, they can be found in infant carriers, adult car seats, changing table mats, clothing, electronics, crib mattresses, cushions, nursing pillows, paints and coatings, plastic shipping pallets, upholstered furniture, sleepers, strollers and toys.

As authorities began to understand the dangerous properties of flame retardants, they began to impose restrictions to protect human health and the environment.

Several jurisdictions in the United States regulate flame retardants, including: California, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, San Francisco (CA), Vermont, Washington, and Washington, D.C. While the scope of regulated flame retardants and products varies by jurisdiction, many flame retardants are related to halogenated or organophosphorus compounds, but some places have blanket bans on the use of flame retardants in specific products.

Stakeholders should also be aware that some jurisdictions require reporting when certain specific flame retardants are used in children's products. These states are:

Maine: Toxic chemicals in children's products (Title 38, Chapter 16-D, Priority Chemicals (PCs))

Oregon: ORS § 431A.253 through § 431A.280 (High Priority Chemicals of Children’s Health Concern (HPCCCHs))

Vermont: 18 VSA Chapter 38A (Chemicals of High Concern to Children, CHCCs)

Washington: RCW Chapter 70.240 (Children's Safe Products Act (CSPA), Chemicals of High Concern to Children (CHCCs))

California's Proposition 65 is the "Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986", which requires California to maintain and publish a list of chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects, or reproductive harm. Currently, the Proposition 65 list contains more than 860 chemicals.

Proposition 65 requires businesses operating in California to provide clear and reasonable warnings to certain people before they are known to be exposed to chemicals on the list. Once a chemical is listed, companies have 12 months to comply with this requirement. Exemptions are available when exposure to the chemical does not pose a cancer risk or is significantly below levels observed to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm. Stakeholders should also note that a new revised version using clearer and more reasonable language went into effect in August 2018.

The following organophosphorus and halogenated flame retardants are listed under Proposition 65:

Tris(2-chloroethyl)phosphate (TCEP)

Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate (TDBPP)

Tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl)phosphate (TDCPP)

Polybrominated biphenyls (PBBs)

Pentabromodiphenyl ether mixture (Penta-BDE, DE-71)

TDCPP was listed as a carcinogenic chemical in 2011. It is widely used in products containing polyurethane foam (PU), such as upholstered furniture, automotive products, sports equipment, toys, child care products, textile coatings, camping tents, etc. Since 2012, there have been several settlement agreements involving the reformulation of TDCPP, TDBPP and/or TCEP. Representative settlement agreements on these issues are shown in Table 1.

Canada

Both TCEP and TDBPP are regulated under the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act (CCPSA). TCEP is prohibited in products containing polyurethane foam intended for children under three years of age, while TDBPP is regulated in products made wholly or partly from textile fibers intended for use in clothing.