EPA Working on a Standard Formaldehyde Rule for Furniture

• Tweet

 

The EPA has been holding a series of forums to gather information from stakeholders about the risks associated with formaldehyde exposure from composite wood materials, and is reviewing available technology that can stop the release of formaldehyde from wood. The EPA has been taking into consideration testimony about the effectiveness of the formaldehyde emission standard adopted by California (www.epa.gov).

 

 Industry leaders, including the American Home Furnishings Alliance (AHFA), favor a uniform national standard on formaldehyde emissions, but told the EPA that it should take into account existing international standards in any federal rulemaking.

 

“A national approach to this issue is crucial in order to avoid conflicting state standards,” AHFA’s Bill Perdue told the EPA in Washington, D.C.  “AHFA hopes that a uniform U.S. standard would serve as a starting point for the development of a harmonized international standard that addresses the global nature of the furnishings industry.”

 

 

In its comments, AHFA recommended that the EPA follow California’s lead and adopt its federal regulation in two phases; focus only on hardwood plywood, particleboard and medium density fiberboard (MDF); and regulate only the “raw board” components of finished goods.

 

“EPA should not promulgate a regulation that requires the testing of finished goods, such as furniture or cabinets.  Such a process has not been vetted and an established testing protocol has not yet been defined,” Perdue told the agency.  “If the raw board component parts are properly regulated, the finished goods containing those component parts should be in compliance without additional testing expense.”

 

Toward addressing the global nature of the furniture industry, AHFA recommended that EPA consider adopting a harmonization of the California formaldehyde regulation, the European E-1 standard and the Japanese F4 Star standard.

 

“Many of our suppliers are not domestic and have been meeting the internationally recognized European E-1 standard for formaldehyde for two decades, and others have been meeting the Japanese F4 Star standards for years,” Perdue pointed out.  If a national standard requires the California testing procedures or yet another type of testing, some mills would have to perform three or four different types of testing, depending on where they were shipping their goods. The result would be increased cost and decreased efficiency.

 

The California rule also puts compliance enforcement at the end of the supply chain – on the buyer or user of a certified product – rather than at the point of manufacture and control. “Third party certification of composite wood products must be designed to ensure that the product is safe and worthy of certification,” Perdue pointed out. “Third-party certifiers must oversee the point of control and vouch that they have done so by issuing a legal, public certification that carries their name and responsibility.”  Visit www.ahfa.us for more information.

By Chris Navarro
Get Furniture Jobs, Contributing Editor