AHFA Advises EPA on Formaldehyde
February 4, 2009
The American Home Furnishings Alliance (AHFA) favors a uniform national standard on formaldehyde emissions but told the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) last week 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 Vice President Bill Perdue told the agency at the Jan. 29 public hearing. "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."
Last week's public hearing in Washington, D.C., was the fifth in a series of forums EPA held in January to gather information from various stakeholders about the risks associated with formaldehyde exposure from composite wood products. The agency also sought input on current and future technology for controlling formaldehyde emissions from these products, plus testimony on the effectiveness of the formaldehyde emission standard adopted by the State of California last year.
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," Perdue told the agency. "Such a process has not been vetted and an established testing protocol has not yet been defined. 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 said. 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.
AHFA further recommended that EPA develop an oversight body to enforce its standards. Although the California rule essentially gives third-party certifiers oversight responsibility, the rule virtually exempts these organizations from responsibility for the products they are certifying.
"A national approach to this issue is crucial in order to avoid conflicting state standards," AHFA Vice President Bill Perdue told the agency at the Jan. 29 public hearing. "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."
Last week's public hearing in Washington, D.C., was the fifth in a series of forums EPA held in January to gather information from various stakeholders about the risks associated with formaldehyde exposure from composite wood products. The agency also sought input on current and future technology for controlling formaldehyde emissions from these products, plus testimony on the effectiveness of the formaldehyde emission standard adopted by the State of California last year.
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," Perdue told the agency. "Such a process has not been vetted and an established testing protocol has not yet been defined. 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 said. 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.
AHFA further recommended that EPA develop an oversight body to enforce its standards. Although the California rule essentially gives third-party certifiers oversight responsibility, the rule virtually exempts these organizations from responsibility for the products they are certifying.
Companies Mentioned:
 |
