In early December 2012, the California Center for Environmental Hygiene (CEH) took legal action against 24 baby product retailers and distributors under the state's Safe Drinking Water and Prohibition of Toxic Substances Act (commonly known as Proposition 65), alleging that these companies' products contained excessive levels of the chlorinated flame retardant tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCPP). The products involved included foam-filled cradle mattresses, crib mattresses, and portable cribs.
The violation notice issued by the Environmental Health Centre states that the sponge filling of the product has been treated to contain the aforementioned flame retardant. Consumers, including children, have the opportunity to inhale, ingest, or come into contact with the substance through their skin. The Environmental Health Centre also stated that the product did not include clear and reasonable warnings regarding the carcinogenic risk of TDCPP.
On October 28, 2011, the California Office of Environmental Health Risk Assessment (OEHHA) added TDCPP to the restricted list of Proposition 65, but manufacturers were not required to formally comply with warning labeling requirements until October 28, 2012. In other words, California could not prosecute consumer products containing this substance until recently. The OEHHA set a safety standard for TDCPP at 5.4 micrograms per day; if exposure is below this level, warning labels are not required.
Proposition 65 requires businesses to notify California consumers if they become aware that consumer products, food, drugs, or other products they supply contain large amounts of regulated chemicals. This is typically achieved by affixing a warning label to the product. Small businesses with fewer than 10 employees, government agencies, and public water systems are exempt from this warning requirement.
In recent years, flame retardants that have garnered attention mainly include brominated diphenyl ethers (including pentabromodiphenyl ether, octabromodiphenyl ether, and decabromodiphenyl ether), tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate (TCEP), and TDCPP. Flame retardants have long been used in various household products, such as furniture, baby products, and other everyday items. However, consumer organizations are increasingly concerned about the health risks posed by flame retardants, arguing that the disadvantages outweigh the benefits. Furthermore, the Chicago Tribune reported earlier this year that some chemical companies are suspected of misleading US lawmakers and the public into believing that the flame retardants they sell are safe and effective.
Several U.S. states have already banned the use of certain types of flame retardants in household goods and other products, and due to recent litigation, there is a greater chance of further restrictions being enacted at the state or federal levels. In 2011, New York State passed legislation banning the sale or distribution of any childcare products containing tri(2-chloroethyl) phosphate, effective December 1, 2013. The New York State Legislature voted to extend the ban to the TDCPP, effective December 1, 2014. The bill is still pending review by the New York State Senate.
Sources: Hong Kong Trade Development Council Economic and Trade Research (2012-12-
