Bis 14 980 Furniture Fire Safety Regulations Consultation Document August 2014 Protected (1)

8/15/2019 Bis 14 980 Furniture Fire Safety Regulations Consultation Document August 2014 Protected (1)

1/62

FURNITURE AND FURNISHINGS(FIRE) (SAFETY) REGULATIONS1988

Consultation on popos!"a#!n"#!nts to S$%!"ul! & ' t%!at$% T!st ' at 1 an" S$%!"ul! *

' t%! Ci+a!tt! T!st

AUGUST 2014


2/62

Consultation on changes to the Furniture Regulations

2


3/62


Cont!nts

1, Fo!-o" .o# /o S-inson0 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,&

2. How to respond...................................................................................................................

!. Additional copies.................................................................................................................

4. Con"identialit# $ %ata &rotection.........................................................................................'

(. Help with )ueries.................................................................................................................*

+. The proposals.................................................................................................................10

T%! FFRs Fla##a2ilit3 T!sts,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,11

. Consultation )uestions......................................................................................................1'

'. ,hat happens ne-t..........................................................................................................1*

Anne- 1/ rie" list o" re"erence aterial regarding the e""ects o" FRs on healthen3ironent 20

Anne- 2/ rie" suar# o" results o" coparing Schedule ( &art 1 o" the FFRs and the new

proposed atch test $ indicati3e e-eptions list "or unregulated aterials within 40 o"

the co3er............................................................................................................................... 22

Anne- !/ Results o" FRA5s research into the proposed test changes....................................2(

Anne- 4/ Additional 6ac7ground detail...................................................................................2+

Annex 5: Consultation principles.....................................................................................2'

Anne- +/ 8ist o" indi3idualsorganisations consulted.............................................................. 2*

Anne- / pact Assessent o" proposed aendents to schedule ( 9 the atch test 9 part1 and schedule 4 9 the cigarette test 9 o" the "urniture and "urnishings :"ire; :sa"et#;

regulations 1*''....................................................................................................................!1

I#pa$t Ass!ss#!nt (IA),,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,41

Su##a35 Int!6!ntion an" Options,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,41

RC Opinion5,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,41

Evidence Base,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 47

Anne- '/ Response "or....................................................................................................... (

!


4/62


Consultation on Proposed Amendments toSchedule 5 - The Match Test - Part 1 - andSchedule 4 - The Cigarette Test - of The urniture

and urnishings !ire" !Safet#" $egulations 1%&&

i!. !planation o. -%at t%is $onsultation s!!:s to a$%i!6!/

The Furniture and Furnishings :Fire; :Sa"et#; Regulations 1*'' :FFRs; set le3els o""ire resistance "or doestic upholstered "urniture< "urnishings and other productscontaining upholster#. This consultation sets out the Go3ernent=s intention tochange the speci"ication "or the atch test and the re)uireents "or the cigarettetest :6oth "or co3ering "a6rics; in the FFRs and see7s sta7eholders= 3iews.

n essence< the new speci"ication will change the re)uired test "illing aterial in theatch test "ro a non9"ire retardant pol#urethane "oa to a co6ustion9odi"ied"oa. S 6elie3es this can result in a reduction o" up to (0> o" "lae retardantcheicals o"ten currentl# used to eet this test. :Also< with the utilisation o" new ande-isting technologies which the changes will a7e 3ia6le< there could 6e a 100>reduction.; This will 6ring 6ene"its to health and the en3ironent< as well assu6stantial sa3ings to anu"acturers< suppliers and retailers. n addition< S intendsto e-clude ost co3er "a6rics "ro the cigarette test re)uireent :on the groundsthat an# "a6ric which passes the atch test will also pass the cigarette test;.

The FFRs were ade using the power to a7e sa"et# regulations under section 11

o" the Consuer &rotection Act 1*'. Section11:(; o" the sae Act re)uires theSecretar# o" State to consult with 3arious interests< and this consultation docuent<which will 6e ade a3aila6le to sta7eholders and to other "oral and in"oralcontacts< satis"ies that re)uireent.

ssued/ th August 2014

Respond 6#/ th ?cto6er 2014

@n)uiries to/ Terr# @dge%epartent "or usiness< nno3ation and S7ills?rchard 1< 4th Floor 1 ictoria Street8ondon S,1H 0@T

Tel/ 020 21( ((+@ail/ terr#.edgeB6is.gsi.go3.u7

This consultation is rele3ant to/ the "urniture industr#< regulator# 6odies co3ering theindustr#< test houses< other Go3ernent %epartents< Trading Standards< localauthorities< "ire sa"et# ser3ices< and consuers.

4

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


5/62


The %e3ol3ed Adinistrations o" Scotland< ,ales and orthern reland ha3e 6eenconsulted in the preparation o" these proposals.

The Go3ernent o" the Repu6lic o" reland was also consulted. The Repu6lic o"

reland has "urniture "laa6ilit# regulations near9identical to the UD5s. TheirGo3ernent has indicated it appro3es o" the UD5s proposed changes and intends toa7e the sae changes to its own regulations.

1, Fo!-o" .o# /o S-inson0

(


6/62


The docuent #ou are a6out to read represents the results o" around two #ears o" trul#colla6orati3e wor7 6etween S< industr#< en"orceent authorities< the "ire rescue ser3ices< other Go3ernent %epartents and international e-perts in product testing and cheicals research.

The UD is rightl# proud o" the record o" the Furniture and Furnishings :Fire; :Sa"et#; Regulations1*'' :FFRs; in sa3ing li3es and pre3enting "ires. ac7 in the 1*'0s< we responded to thetreendous challenge o" a7ing doestic upholstered "urniture sa"er "ro "ires. Foa "illingshad replaced natural< "ire9resistant< aterials such as horse hair< pro3iding cheap "urniture thate3er#one could a""ord. Howe3er< the price was greater "laa6ilit#. The FFRs strengthened thee-isting re)uireents "or a7ing co3er "a6rics resistant to ignition and introduced a new"laa6ilit# re)uireent "or "oa "illings. The result has 6een that "ires and li3es lost ha3erapidl# declined.

For the past "ew #ears< in colla6oration with all sta7eholders< S has 6een re3iewing the FFRs.nitiall#< this was on the 6asis that the# are "it "or purpose 6ut need updating. This wor7 is still ontrac7. Howe3er< o3er the past two #ears< we ha3e 6ecoe aware o" a growing concern a6out theactual< potential and percei3ed negati3e e""ects o" soe 6roinated "lae retardants on healthand the en3ironent. @3idence suggests that when 6roinated "lae retardants 6rea7 downinto their constituent parts< the# a# get into the "ood chain< children5s 6lood and other5s6reast il7. n Cali"ornia< "or e-aple< this has led to a change to their "urniture "laa6ilit#standard that should lead to a coplete a6sence o" "lae retardants in doestic "urniture.

Although the FFRs do not stipulate the use o" "lae retardants< in practice the# are the ostcost9e""ecti3e eans "or anu"acturers to eet the re)uireents. ?n the whole< the cheicalsused in "oa "illings are considered 6enign< so we loo7ed at wa#s to 6ring a6out a reduction in

those that appear in co3er "a6rics. This was a huge challenge< 6ecause we were coitted toaintaining our high standards o" "ire sa"et#.

n short< this consultation is on our resulting proposal that in "uture the FFRs5 atch test willre)uire co3er "a6rics to 6e tested not o3er the current highl#9"laa6le prescri6ed test "oa 6utinstead o3er the "ire9resistant 3ariet# "ound in the "inished product. The result< we 6elie3e< should6ring a6out a reduction in "lae retardant usage 6# up to (0>< and pro3ide the 6asis "or newtechnologies currentl# not applica6le to reduce that to nothing in tie. t could also 6ringconsidera6le sa3ings to industr# o" up to E(0 per #ear. n addition< we are proposing that thecigarette test 6e dropped "or an# "a6rics that pass the atch test< 6ecause none such ha3e e3er"ailed. This will also 6ring sa3ings to industr#.

The "ear has 6een e-pressed that i" we reduce "lae retardants< surel# products will 6e lesssa"e n "act< "uture products will 6e sa"er "ro "ires. This is partl# 6ecause the new test willre)uire additional aterials that now appear in products< soe highl# "laa6le< to 6e tested.

+


7/62


Also< the new test will reo3e a current< un"oreseen< testing anoal# that eans soe "a6ricswhich pass under test conditions a# 6e ignita6le in the "inished product.

loo7 "orward to hearing #our 3iews.

o Swinson< &


8/62


;, Ho- to !spon"

'


9/62

S running header

1. ,hen responding< please state whether #ou are doing so as an indi3idual orrepresenting the 3iews o" an organisation. " #ou are responding on 6ehal" o" anorganisation< please a7e it clear who the organisation represents 6# selecting theappropriate interest group on the consultation "or and< where applica6le< how the

3iews o" e6ers were asse6led.

2. The Consultation Response "or is a3aila6le electronicall# at---,+o6,u:


10/62


4. ou a# a7e printed copies o" this docuent without see7ing perission. Sconsultations are digital 6# de"ault.

(. The standard electronic 3ersion is at/

---,+o6,u:


11/62

&, H!lp -it% >u!i!s

*. Juestions a6out the polic# issues raised in the docuent should 6e addressed to/

Terr# @dge@urope Re"or %irectorate%epartent o" usiness< nno3ation and S7ills

4th

Floor< ?rchard 11 ictoria Street8ondon S,1H 0@TTel/ 020 21( ((+@ail/ terr#.edgeB6is.gsi.go3.u7

The consultation principles are at Anne- (.

?, T%! poposals

T%! !istin+ !+ulations

10. The Furniture and Furnishings :Fire; :Sa"et#; Regulations 1*'' :as aended in 1*'*<1**! and 2010; :FFRs; are ade in accordance with Section 11 o" the Consuer&rotection Act 1*'.

11. The FFRs set le3els o" "ire resistance "or new and second9hand doestic upholstered"urniture< "urnishings and other products containing upholster# supplied in the UD. TheFFRs appl# to all persons suppl#ing aterials "or use in "urniture and "urnishingsthrough to suppl# o" the "inished article. The# also appl# to persons who hire out"urniture in the course o" a 6usiness< including accoodation such as holida# hoesand residential "urnished lettings. The# also appl# to charities suppl#ing "urniture in thecourse o" 6usiness.

12. The FFRs pro3ide the highest le3els o" "ire sa"et# "or doestic upholstered "urniture inthe world :onl# the Repu6lic o" reland has siilar re)uireents;. The# sa3e around (4li3es per #ear and pre3ent around '00 inIuries and 1000 "ires1. The# recei3e strong

support "ro consuers< industr#< the "ire ser3ices and en"orceent authorities.

1!.&roduct ranges co3ered 6# the FFRs include an# o" the "ollowing which contain upholster#/

• Furniture intended "or pri3ate use in a dwelling< including children5s "urniture

• eds< head 6oards o" 6eds< attress "illings :o" an# siKe;

• urser# "urniture

• Garden "urniture which is suita6le "or use in a dwelling

1 LA statistical report to in3estigate the e""ecti3eness o" the Furniture and Furnishings :Fire; :Sa"et#; Regulations 1*''M N Greenstreeteran< %ece6er 200*/ http/www.6err.go3.u7"iles"ile(4041.pd"

11

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


12/62

• Furniture in cara3ans

• Scatter cushions< seat pads< pillows

• 8oose and stretch co3ers

14. The FFRs do not appl# to/

• Sleeping 6ags< 6ed clothes< loose co3ers "or attresses< pillowcases< curtains<

carpets

• Furniture ade 6e"ore 1*(0

• @-ports o" "urniture

1(. The ain "laa6ilit# re)uireents o" the FFRs are pro3ided 6#/

S ('(2/ &art 1/ 1**/ Lethods o" test "or the ignita6ilit# 6# so7ers5 aterials o"upholstered coposites "or seatingM< and

S ('(2/ &art 2/ 1*'2/ Lethods o" test "or the ignita6ilit# o" upholstered coposites "or seating 6# "laing sourcesM

9 as odi"ied 6# the Schedules to the FFRs.

1+. @n"orceent o" the FFRs is the responsi6ilit# o" Trading Standards :in accordance withpowers pro3ided 6# The Consuer &rotection Act 1*';. The FFRs re)uire suppliers topro3ide Trading Standards< upon re)uest< with details o"< e.g. the nae and address o"

the principle place o" 6usiness o" the anu"acturer or iporter who "irst supplied theproduct in the UDO all the "illing aterials and co3er aterials included in the product.

T%! FFRs Fla##a2ilit3 T!sts

1. There are "our ain "laa6ilit# tests in the FFRs/ two "or co3er "a6rics 9 =atch= and=cigarette= 9 and two "or "illings 9 "or "oa and non9"oa aterials. The FFRs do notstipulate the route to copliance 6ut in practice ost anu"acturers use "lae retardantcheicals :FRs; "or the atch test "or ost "a6rics. The potentiall# ore har"ulcheicals 9 e.g. 6roinated "lae retardants :FRs; 9 are used inunder co3er "a6rics.The current atch test is set out in Schedule ( o" the FFRs< in three parts 9 the "irst "or

co3ering "a6rics< the second "or stretch co3ers< and the third "or in3isi6le lining aterials.

1'. A 7e# "actor is that the current atch test re)uires co3er "a6rics to 6e tested o3er non9co6ustion9odi"ied pol#urethane "oa< unli7e the e)ui3alent @U standard< @ 1021&art 2< which re)uires the actual "inal coposite to 6e assessed :e.g. as is "ound in "inalUD products;.

T%! n!!" .o $%an+!

1*. There is growing e3idence that FRs< particularl# FRs< can 6e har"ul to health and

the en3ironent< especiall# when the# 6rea7 down into indi3idual constituents< e.g. 6#wear or through 6urning :see Anne-1 "or a list o" papers and research in this su6Iect;.The ost coon FR "ound in UD "urniture< %eca%@< has 6een ade a Su6stanceo" er# High Concern under the @U5s cheical legislation< R@ACH. The cheicalindustr# has replaced %eca%@ with a new FRO howe3er< it is possi6le that this too in

1;


13/62

tie will 6e "ound to 6e a su6stance o" concern. Aside "ro health and theen3ironent< prices "or cheicals used to eet the re)uireents o" the atch testha3e 6een rapidl# rising in recent #earsO partl#< this is due to the restrictions placed 6#R@ACH on FRs< i.e. the cheical industr# regularl# produces a new FR< "or which itdeands a higher price than the pre3ious FR.

20. Strong consuer concern< along with lo66#ing 6# the Green Science &olic# nstitute inthe USA< recentl# resulted in Cali"ornia5s :and de "acto the USA5s; "urniture "laa6ilit#

standard 6eing changed so that in "uture it will e-clude the use o" FRs. Siilar concernis growing in UD consuers. ,hile S 6elie3es that the new Cali"ornia standard o""ersless "ire sa"et# than the FFRs< it is wise to anticipate growing consuer opposition toFRs in products.

21. n addition< it is li7el# that in the near "uture @U legislation will re)uire that "urniturecontaining potentiall# har"ul su6stances :including FRs; 6e disposed o" sa"el#. Thiscould 6e an e-pensi3e process< especiall# in light o" there currentl# 6eing onl# twoincinerators in the UD that can deal with the sa"e disposal o" such products :e.g. inso"as;.

22. Finall#< the FFRs are ac7nowledged as a 6arrier to trade in the @U 6ut are allowed onsa"et# grounds. For an# #ears< the @uropean Coission< recognising that house"ires are not con"ined to the UD< tried to raise the @U standard to UD le3els. Howe3er< achie" o6stacle to this was soe e6er States5 o6Iection to FRs in "urniture. TheCoission has recentl# indicated strongl# that it will not a7e an# ore e""orts toraise @U standards while the issue o" FRs in "urniture reains contentious.

ain points o. t%! popos!" $%an+!s

2!. ain points are/

• atch test re)uireent "or test "illing aterials to change "ro non9co6ustion

odi"ied "oa to co6ustion odi"ied "oa< in one o" two "ors :see 24 6elow;.

• @-eption "ro the cigarette test "or an# "a6ric which passes the atch test.

• Reo3al o" the cigarette test "or in3isi6le linings.

• Regulation o" lining "a6rics which are directl# 6ehind the 3isi6le co3er 6# incorporation

into the new 3isi6le co3ers test :with the e-eption o" non9wo3en pol#prop#lenes with

weights o" less than *0gP e.g. Coro3in;.

• Re)uireent to test currentl# unregulated aterials within 40 o" the sur"ace o" the

product 3ia a odi"ied 3ersion o" the atch test :see 292* and !4 6elow;.

D!tails o. t%! popos!" $%an+!s

24. atch resistance o" 3isi6le co3ers will 6e esta6lished 6# testing o3er two t#pes o" "illing/

• Filling 1/ Co6ustion odi"ied pol#urethane "oa< as in the current test "oa re)uired

"or Schedule ( &art ! o" the FFRsQ :as aended 1*'*;.

• Filling 2/ Co6ustion odi"ied "oa< as in the current test "oa re)uired "or Schedule

( &art !Q< plus 200 g2 therall# 6onded sheet pol#ester "i6re copliant withSchedule 2 &art 1 6ut not treated with a "lae retardant.

14


14/62

:QFurther description/ elaine odi"ied con3entional pol#ether pol#urethane "oaOcopliant with Schedule 1 &art 1O speci"ication as in accordance with S !!*/200(Odensit# 2492+Dg!O hardness 11(91(0O "atigue Class A.;

2(. To operate as "ollows/

o Co3ers that eet the re)uireents using Filling 2 can 6e ta7en as also eeting the

re)uireents using Filling 1.

o Co3ers that "ail when tested o3er Filling 2 a# 6e tested o3er Filling 1 pro3ided that in

the "inal product the co3er aterial will 6e directl# o3er "oa :howe3er< this does notinclude lainated or )uilted "a6rics o3er a 3er# thin la#er o" "oa;.

o Co3ers that will 6e used o3er an# other "illing than "oa< or used where no "illing is

present :assuing the product contains soe "or o" upholster#;< will re)uire testingo3er Filling 2.

o For co3ers which do not eet the coposition re)uireents o" 6eing (> 6# weight

o" cotton< "la-< 3iscose< odal< sil7 or wool< used separatel# or together and notcoated with pol#urethane or a pol#urethane preparation and which ha3e a lining "a6ricdirectl# 6ehind the< the 3isi6le co3er in conIunction with the lining "a6ric shall 6etested together o3er the appropriate "illing.

Changes to the regulation o" lining "a6rics

2+. The proposal could present soe issues where lining "a6rics are re)uired< i.e. 6ecausethe lead tie "or suppl# could 6e increased 6# appro-iatel# one wee7. This isparticularl# the case "or aterials such as downproo" co3ers. Howe3er< current ar7et7nowledge suggests that the outer co3ers "or these t#pes o" copositions will not in "act

present pro6les. The o3erall changes proposed a# lead to reo3al o" soe liningaterials. The# also pro3ide an e-eption "or non9wo3en pol#prop#lenes with weights o"less than *0gP. :See Anne- 2 "or "urther details o" the proposed test< including anindicati3e list o" aterials that can 6e e-epted "ro it.;

nclusion o" currentl# unregulated aterials within 40 o" the outer co3er within the upholster#coposite

2. This change a# arginall# increase testing costs< the e-act degree o" which willdepend upon the nu6er o" aterials present in an# particular piece o" "urniture. ut itshould 6e ree6ered that these aterials can 6e pre9certi"ied on a aterial t#pe 6asis<e.g. i" 20 di""erent weights o" "i6re 6oard are produced with the sae sur"acecharacteristics and ancillar# "inish< and the thinnest< lightest "i6re6oard passes the test< itis reasona6le to assue that all 20 t#pes o" 6oard will also pass. Siilarl#< S alsointends to e-ept "ro "urther testing/

• an# standard aterials which pass the test< and

• an# aterials which are placed under a standard aterial :co3er "a6ric< lining

"a6ric or other coponents; which passes the rele3ant test and which does not"or a hole.

:See Anne- 2 "or "urther details< results o" initial testing o" these aterials 6# Ste3e ?weno" nterte7 and an indicati3e aterials e-eption list.;

1*


15/62

2'. The "act is that soe highl# "laa6le unregulated aterials are currentl# placed inproducts which when coing into contact with a "lae )uic7l# negate the "lae9resistance o" the copliant co3er "a6ric and "oa "illing. S is 7een to ensure that in"uture products will not 6e ore "laa6le than consuers e-pect the to 6e.

2*. As a "urther guidance easure< Snterte7 widel# circulated an e-planator# docuentin Fe6ruar# 2014< setting out the details o" the proposed test and the 6ene"its it can 6ring:along the lines descri6ed a6o3e;.

E6i"!n$! o. t%! 6ia2ilit3 o. t%! n!- #at$% t!st

!0. Along with the testing underta7en 6# Ste3e ?wen :see a6o3e;< the Furniture ndustr#Research Association :FRA; also conducted testing research on the proposed atchtest. Their results corro6orate the 3ia6ilit# o" the new test and the appro-iate range o"FR9reduction en3isioned 6# S :see Anne- !;.

o! "!tails on t%! 2!n!.its o. t%! poposal $%an+!s

Greener UD "urniture will 6e a3aila6le sooner

!1. UD retailers and anu"acturers ha3e 6een reporting growing UD consuer concerna6out the actual and potential negati3e e""ects o" FRs on huan health and theen3ironent. n o3e6er 201!< Cali"ornia introduced a new "urniture "laa6ilit#standard :T119201!; that eans its "urniture will not contain FRs in "uture. ,hile S6elie3es this standard o""ers poor "ire sa"et# copared with the FFRs< it is iportantne3ertheless to note that pu6lic opinion in the USA contri6uted strongl# to the change.

Cost sa3ings

!2. The new atch test< along with the reo3al o" the cigarette test "or "a6rics that pass theatch test< could 6ring sa3ings to industr# o" roughl# up to E(0 per #ear :see pact Assessent "or details;. ringing "orward this change eans industr# will there"ore6ene"it "ro these sa3ings earlier. S would li7e to stress< howe3er< that this is 3er#uch an estiate and that we are loo7ing to consultation returns to pro3ide oreaccurate "igures.

@uropean "laa6ilit# pro3isions

!!. ,hile the @uropean Coission has "or an# #ears e-pressed the desire to raise @Ustandards to the le3els o" the FFRs< it has alwa#s ac7nowledged that the ain 6arrier to

doing so is soe e6er States= opposition to FRs in "urniture. As said a6o3e< the UD iso6liged to noti"# the @uropean Coission :which in turn noti"ies all e6er States; o"an# intended changes to national regulations li7e the FFRs. There"ore< noti"#ing @uropewith a change that greatl# reduces dependence on FRs will help the Coission=scause. Con3ersel#< there is the distinct possi6ilit# that i" we go 6ac7 to @urope with anunchanged atch test< we will recei3e strong criticis "or perpetuating a trade 6arrier6ased on a test that re)uires the use o" test "oa that is in e""ect illegal in the UD and o"a t#pe that is not "ound in the "inal product.

nclusion o" currentl# unregulated aterials

!4. The new test will include currentl# unregulated aterials< such as we66ing and card< thatappear in "urniture products within 40 o" the co3er< and which can 6e highl#"laa6le. The C =Fa7e ritain= prograe :6roadcast anuar# 2014; has aderetailers highl# concerned a6out pro3iding "urniture which could 6e unsa"eO there"ore< the

1&


16/62

new test will ensure onl# "ull# "ire9sa"e products "ind their wa# into consuers= hoes.:See Anne- 2 "or "urther 6ac7ground details< including a chart o" initial testing underta7en6# Ste3e ?wen o" nterte7 on aterials li7el# to 6e "ound in products.;

Correcting un"oreseen "ailures under the current atch test

!(. The new test will also sol3e the un"oreseen situation in which soe odern "a6rics passthe current test in test conditions 6ut can "ail to per"or in the "inished product.

@ssentiall#< the current test re)uires co3er "a6rics to 6e placed directl# against the test"oa on the test rig. This eans that on application o" the sall "lae "or 20 seconds< adoe o" FR gas "ors o3er the 6urn area< sealing it "ro outside o-#gen. Howe3er< inthe "inished product< there are o"ten eleents present< e.g. a la#er o" "i6re wrap 6etweenthe co3er and the "oa< which allow the 6urn hole to spread wider< which in turn allowso-#gen in and the "a6ric to continue 6urning 6e#ond the two9inute liit o" the testre)uireent. This e""ect was not so pro6leatic when the FFRs were introduced< sinceost co3ers then were ade "ro natural "a6rics such as cotton which "or a char la#erwhen 6urned. The aIorit# o" UD "urniture co3er "a6rics are now an9ade< howe3er<and do not contain this oderating char e""ect. The new test reo3es this discrepanc#6etween test conditions and "inished product 6# a co6ination o" co6ustion9odi"ied"oa and the re)uireent to include a "i6re wrap la#er 6etween the test "oa and theco3er "a6ric :unless the "inished product coprises "a6ric placed directl# against "oa; Nsee description o" Filling 1 and Filling 2 a6o3e. S wishes to stress that this e""ect couldnot ha3e 6een predicted and it was also understanda6l# o6scured 6# the "act that "a6ricspass the re)uired test and are there"ore legall# supplied.

&re3enting insu""icientl# cheicall# treated products getting into UD hoes

!+. Trading Standards has disco3ered that signi"icant aounts o" co3er "a6rics "or UD"urniture are insu""icientl# treated with FRs 6# soe cheical treatent processors.

ecause the current test coposite can 6e sensiti3e to certain "a6rics< there e-ists aperception in the industr# that results are not reproduci6le "or those t#pes o" "a6rics. Also<that "a6rics which are 6orderline in test are accepta6le 6ecause the actual "inalcoposites will contain co6ustion odi"ied "illings rather than the current non9co6ustion odi"ied test "oa. The non9co6ustion odi"ied test "illing has historicall#6een considered as the argin o" sa"et#. Soe processors then use this argin5 toassue reasona6le dou6t upon "ailures in the current test< producing test passes "or the"a6rics. ,hen Trading Standards use other test houses< howe3er< the sae "a6ric "ailsthe test. n short< this eans "urniture has 6een reaching UD hoes that is ore ignita6lethan the consuer would e-pect. The new atch test reo3es this argin o" sensiti3it#<i.e. produces clear passes or "ails. orderline aterials will still e-ist and will gi3e siilar

6orderline results 6ut the perception o" an accepta6le ris7 o" "ailure will 6e reo3ed.

%isposal o" products containing haKardous waste

!. Retailers and anu"actures are concerned a6out ipending @U legislation that a#re)uire products< e.g. so"as< containing potentiall# har"ul su6stances< includingspeci"ied 6roinated FRs


17/62

"i6res. Also< e-isting and eerging 6arrier technologies should in tie help to cut out FRuse altogether.

A""itional $osts

40. S anticipates there will 6e soe additional testing re)uired "or currentl# unregulatedaterials that appear within 40 o" the co3er "a6ricO howe3er/

• the test "or unregulated aterials is siple and cheapO

• gi3en that an# standard aterials will alwa#s pass the test< S intends to pu6lish

regularl# updated lists o" aterials which are there"ore e-ept "ro testingO

• aterials placed under aterials which are e-epted and which are protecti3e5 placed

will also 6e e-eptedO

• an# additional costs will 6e greatl# outweighed 6# sa3ings ade "ro reduced FR use

and the e-eption "ro the need "or the cigarette test "or ost co3er "a6rics.

:See Anne- 2 "or "urther details.;

in+in+ .o-a" t%!s! $%an+!s

41. For the past "ew #ears< S has 6een re3iewing the FFRs o3erall< wor7ing closel# with allsta7eholders. S ac7nowledges< there"ore< that soe sta7eholders would pre"er to 6econsulted once< not twice< on the aendents to the FFRs. Howe3er< there is no o3erlap6etween the new atch and cigarette test changes and the rest o" the aendents< i.e.industr# will not "ace additional 6urdens 6ecause there is a split in the tiing o" theaendents. The new test represents the 6iggest change in the aendents< as well asthe point o" greatest potential costs sa3ings to industr#O there"ore< it will 6ene"it "ro6eing considered in isolation to the other proposed aendents.

42. Also< as noted a6o3e< Cali"orniaUSA has recentl# changed its "urniture "laa6ilit#standard to e-clude the use o" FR cheicals. FRs are a growing concern in the UD andrepresent a stu6ling 6loc7 to the @U standard 6eing raised. For these reasons< S6elie3es that an earl# stateent o" the UD=s intention to reduce the aount o" FRs in our"urniture will 6e recei3ed positi3el# 6# UD consuers and the Coissione6erStates< to pa3e the wa# "or the rest o" the aendents to 6e recei3ed ore positi3el# ata later date.

Ti#in+

4!. Su6Iect to the results o" this pu6lic consultation< S proposes to ipleent thesechanges in Apil ;@1&.

L!a"'in ti#!s

44. The new atch testcigarette test will include suita6le lead9in ties to a; allow industr# tode3elop new copliant products< and 6; to sell o"" e-isting stoc7 :copliant with thecurrent tests;. The "inal lead9in period will 6e deterined 6# the "eed96ac7 S recei3esduring the consultation period 6ut this a# 6e around 1291' onths "ro theipleentation date.

H!lp -it% !sti#at!s

4(. S is aware that "igures )uoted in this docuent are 3er# uch rough estiates and wewould 6e grate"ul there"ore "or ore speci"ic "igures that industr# ight 6e a6le to suppl#.

17


18/62

All such in"oration will 6e 7ept anon#ous and used to estiate o3er9all costssa3ingsto industr# o" the proposed changes :see '. Consultation )uestions 6elow;.

To discuss these proposed changes or coent on the please contact/

Terr# @dge 9 for general points

S< 4th Floor< ?rchard ?ne

1 ictoria Street< 8ondon S,1H 0@T

Tel/ 020 21( ((+

@ail/ terr#.edgeB6is.gsi.go3.u7

Ste3e ?wen 9 for technical questions

nterte7<

The ,arehouse

rewer# 8ane< 8eigh , 2RTel/ 01*42 2+(00

@ail/ ste3en.owenBinterte7.co

18


19/62

7, Consultation >u!stions

4+. elow are the )uestions we would greatl# appreciate #our responses to. Howe3er<please enter #our responses a"ter each )uestion where the# are repeated in Anne- '. n addition< #ou will see there are soe "urther ore costs9"ocussed)uestions in the pact Assessent at Anne- / these too are repeated "orresponses in Anne- '.

u!stion 15 Do 3ou t%in: t%is poposal -ill a$%i!6! its ai#s o.5 %!lpin+ to #a:!UB .unitu! +!!n!0 sa6! #on!3 to in"ust3 an" #a:in+ UB .unitu! #o! .i!sa.!

u!stions ;5 Do 3ou t%in: t%at paa+ap%s 19'; a$$uat!l3 s!t out t%! n!!" .o a$%an+! to t%! $u!nt #at$% t!st

u!stion 45 Do 3ou t%in: t%! popos!" $%an+!s a! 6ia2l! (paa+ap%s ;4';9)

u!stion *5 %at a! 3ou 6i!-s on t%! in$lusion o. $u!ntl3 un!+ulat!"#at!ials (paa+ap%s ;7';9)

u!stion &5 Do 3ou a+!! -it% t%! 2!n!.its IS 2!li!6!s t%! $%an+!s -ill 2in+

u!stion ?5 %at is 3ou 6i!- on ISs !asons .o 2in+in+ .o-a" t%! $%an+!s(paa+ap%s *1'*;)

u!stion 75 G!n!al atin+ o. t%! poposals,

u!stion 85 Do 3ou %a6! an3 ot%! $o##!nts t%at #i+%t ai" t%! $onsultationpo$!ss as a -%ol!

8, %at %app!ns n!tFollowing the conclusion o" the consultation< S will pu6lish a go3ernent response aroundid9anuar# 201(. This will pro3ide detailed responses to all issues raised 6# consultees. The

19


20/62

response will appear on the S we6site< including a lin7 "ro the central S consultationwe6pages< with paper copies ade a3aila6le on re)uest.

Assuing the proposed changes are agreed< the aended Regulations will 6e laid in&arliaent around Fe6ruar# 201(< with a coenceent date o" April 201(.

n addition< S will host an open da# on 1*th August 2014 at 1 ictoria Street< 8ondon S,1H0@T. The purpose is to pro3ide "uller details should the# 6e re)uired and to answer an#

)uestions #ou a# ha3e. " #ou would li7e to attend< please register #our interest with/

ohn ?5Shea< Tel/ 020 21( 12'(< eail/ ohn.?=SheaB6is.gsi.go3.u7.

Ann! 15 i!. list o. !.!!n$! #at!ial !+a"in+ t%! !..!$ts o.FRs on %!alt%

lame retardants in food

S$i!nti.i$ Opinion on ol32o#inat!" ip%!n3ls (s) in Foo"

http/www.e"sa.europa.eudee"saIournalpu61'*.ht

S$i!nti.i$ Opinion on ol32o#inat!" Dip%!n3l Et%!s (DEs) in Foo"

http/www.e"sa.europa.euene"saIournalpu621(+.ht

S$i!nti.i$ Opinion on H!a2o#o$3$lo"o"!$an!s (HCDDs) in Foo"

http/www.e"sa.europa.eu"re"saIournalpu622*+.ht

S$i!nti.i$ Opinion on T!ta2o#o2isp%!nol A (TA) an" its "!i6ati6!s in .oo"

http/www.e"sa.europa.euene"saIournalpu624.ht

S$i!nti.i$ Opinion on o#inat!" Fla#! R!ta"ants (FRs) in Foo"5 o#inat!"

%!nols an" t%!i D!i6ati6!s

http/www.e"sa.europa.euene"saIournalpu62+!4.ht

S$i!nti.i$ Opinion on E#!+in+ an" No6!l o#inat!" Fla#! R!ta"ants (FRs) in Foo"

http/www.e"sa.europa.euene"saIournalpu62*0'.ht

Fla#! !ta"ants in %u#ans0 %ous! "ust0 !t$

Stu"3 on Toi$ Eposu! an" H!alt% Ris:s to US Fi!.i+%t!s

;@

http://www.efsa.europa.eu/de/efsajournal/pub/1789.htmhttp://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2156.htmhttp://www.efsa.europa.eu/fr/efsajournal/pub/2296.htmhttp://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2477.htmhttp://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2634.htmhttp://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2908.htmhttp://www.efsa.europa.eu/de/efsajournal/pub/1789.htmhttp://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2156.htmhttp://www.efsa.europa.eu/fr/efsajournal/pub/2296.htmhttp://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2477.htmhttp://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2634.htmhttp://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2908.htm


21/62

http/www.eriresearch.orgR@S@ARCH&u6licationsFire"ighterStud#Highlightsta6id!+1%e"ault.asp

-

'ndoor Contamination (ith )e*a+romoc#clododecanes, Pol#+rominatediphen#l Ethers, and Per.uoroal/#l Compounds0 An 'mportant E*posurePath(a# for People

Harrad et al 2010BFR review.pdf

In Utero an" C%il"%oo" ol32o#inat!" Dip%!n3l Et%! (DE) Eposu!s an"N!uo"!6!lop#!nt in t%! CHAACOS Stu"3

http/www.nc6i.nl.nih.go3pcarticles&C!(+*+*1

!natal Eposu! to DEs an" N!uo"!6!lop#!nt

http/www.nc6i.nl.nih.go3pcarticles&C2'+++*0

!natal Eposu! to O+ano%alo+!ns0 In$lu"in+ o#inat!" Fla#! R!ta"ants0In.lu!n$!s oto0 Co+niti6!0 an" !%a6ioal !.o#an$! at S$%ool A+!

http/www.nc6i.nl.nih.go3pcarticles&C2**42

A"6iso3 Co##itt!! on Haa"ous Su2stan$!s5 opinion on "!$a2o#inat!" "ip%!n3l!t%! ("!$aDE)5

http/archi3e.de"ra.go3.u7en3ironent)ualit#cheicalsachsdocuentsachs9deca%@9opinion9

100*2!.pd"

Sto$:%ol# Con6!ntion5 su2#issions .o# nations on ("!$aDE)5

http/ch.pops.intTheCon3ention&?&sRe3iewCoitteeeetings&?&RC*&?&RC*Followupdeca%@Su6issionta6id!(0%e"ault.asp-

Ann! ;5 i!. su##a3 o. !sults o. $o#pain+ S$%!"ul! & at1 o. t%! FFRs an" t%! n!- popos!" #at$% t!st = in"i$ati6!!!#ptions list .o un!+ulat!" #at!ials -it%in *@## o. t%!$o6!

i!. su##a3 o. !sults o. $o#pain+ S$%!"ul! & at 1 an" t%! n!- #at$% t!st5

nitial testing was underta7en 6# Ste3e ?wen :nterte7; towards con"iring the arguentsproposed in this docuent< resulting in the "ollowing 7e# points/

;1

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3569691/http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2866690/http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2799472/http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/quality/chemicals/achs/documents/achs-decaBDE-opinion-100923.pdfhttp://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/quality/chemicals/achs/documents/achs-decaBDE-opinion-100923.pdfhttp://chm.pops.int/TheConvention/POPsReviewCommittee/Meetings/POPRC9/POPRC9Followup/decaBDESubmission/tabid/3570/Default.aspxhttp://chm.pops.int/TheConvention/POPsReviewCommittee/Meetings/POPRC9/POPRC9Followup/decaBDESubmission/tabid/3570/Default.aspxhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3569691/http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2866690/http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2799472/http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/quality/chemicals/achs/documents/achs-decaBDE-opinion-100923.pdfhttp://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/quality/chemicals/achs/documents/achs-decaBDE-opinion-100923.pdfhttp://chm.pops.int/TheConvention/POPsReviewCommittee/Meetings/POPRC9/POPRC9Followup/decaBDESubmission/tabid/3570/Default.aspxhttp://chm.pops.int/TheConvention/POPsReviewCommittee/Meetings/POPRC9/POPRC9Followup/decaBDESubmission/tabid/3570/Default.aspx


22/62

• Fa6rics which pass the current Schedule ( &art 1 atch test alwa#s pass the new test.

• ,ith Schedule ( &art 1 copliant co3ers< "ailures were "ound in "inal coposites when

used o3er easil# ignita6le ites. ,hen these ites are reo3ed< passes are achie3ed.Clearl#< each t#pe o" easil# ignita6le ite onl# needs to 6e tested once. Reo3ing suchites ipro3es the o3erall "ire per"orance o" the product.

•

8ining "a6rics could change results o" the new test and hence their inclusion is re)uired.

Results o" nitial testing/

Linin+ Fa2i$s

?uter co3er FRTreated 8ining Fa6ric

FRTreated

FillingT#pe

Co3er onl#result

Co3er 8ining"a6ric result

100> Cotton es 100> Cotton oSheetFi6re &U &ass &ass

100> &ol#ester o 100> Cotton oSheetFi6re &U &ass Fail

100> Cotton es 100> &ol#ester oSheetFi6re &U &ass &ass

100> Cotton es 100> Cotton o &U &ass &ass

100> &ol#ester o 100> Cotton o &U &ass Fail

100> Cotton es 100> &ol#ester o &U &ass &ass

@-trees o" copositions were selected here so as to ephasise the distinct possi6ilit# that i"lining "a6rics are e-cluded "ro the new test ethod< a reduction in sa"et# is possi6le.

at!ials n!a t%! out! $o6! Se3eral aterials which a# 6e in coon use internall# and within 40 o" the outer co3er o" "urniture were tested. Soe o" the results are gi3en 6elow.

Material !pe "#nition $ %on&i#nition

Card'oard ( co)pressed* approx+))

%on&i#nition

Card'oard ( co)pressed* approx2))

%on&i#nition

Card'oard ( corru#ated* approx

2))

"#nition

,aper ( approxi)atel! 120#s) "#nition

Card ( approxi)atel! 200#s) "#nition

AB- ,lastic ( approx 2)) t.ic/ %on&i#nition

,l!wood ( + pl!* approx +)) t.ic/ %on&i#nition

,ine wood ( approxi)atel! 10))t.ic/

%on&i#nition

C.ip'oard ( approxi)atel! 10))t.ic/

%on&i#nition

Fi're'oard ( approxi)atel! 5))t.ic/

%on&"#nition

5)) Fi're'oard wit. pol!)ericcoatin# "#nition

inin# fa'ric* 100 Cotton* 10#s) "#nition

Co#paison o. !sults 2!t-!!n S$%!"ul! & at 1 = t%! popos!" n!- #at$% T!st

;;


23/62

For 6re3it#< the "ollowing results are suarised in two sections 6elow. Section 1

Schedule 5 Part 1 Pass ≥ Proposed Match Test Pass

This eans that "a6rics which pass the Schedule ( &art 1 atch test will usuall# pass the

proposed new atch test< 6ut "a6rics which eet the proposed new atch test a# not eetthe re)uireents o" the Schedule ( &art 1 test. Testing o" soe "a6rics has pro3en thisstateent.

Cover )aterial t!pe -c.edule 5 ,art1 test

,roposed new)atc. test

100 ,ol!ester 3Bac/coated4 ,ass ,ass

50 ,ol!ester* 50 Cotton ,ass ,ass

100 Cotton ,ass ,ass

100 Acr!lic ,ass ,ass

100 ool 3200#s)4 ,ass ,ass

Section 2

Full set of measures in relation to materials within 40mm of the visile cover ! new proposedmatch test ≥ Schedule 5 Part 1 pass

This section "ollows care"ul selection o" aterials to identi"# the ost sensiti3e copositeswhich a# 6e odelled. ssues arose priaril# in relation to s#nthetic aterials.

Cover )aterial t!pe -c.edule 5 ,art1 test

,roposed new)atc. test

100 ,ol!ester 3"n.erentl! Fla)eRetardant4 Fail ,ass

50 ,ol!ester* 50 Cotton ,ass ,ass

100 Cotton ,ass ,ass

100 Acr!lic ,ass ,ass

100 ool 3160#s)4 Fail ,ass

Cover )aterialt!pe3.er)oplastic4

Material closeto cover inco)posite

Fillin# )aterial ,roposed new)atc. test

100 ,ol!ester3Bac/coated4

,aper 3"#nitionin test as

a'ove4

oose 7ll pol!ester3208#$)94

Fail

100 ,ol!ester3Bac/coated4

%one oose 7ll pol!ester3208#$)94

,ass

100 ,ol!ester3"n.erentl!Fla)eRetardant4

,aper oose 7ll pol!ester3208#$)94

Fail

100 ,ol!ester3"n.erentl!Fla)eRetardant4

%one oose 7ll pol!ester3208#$)94

,ass

Un!+ulat!" #at!ials -it%in *@## o. t%! $o6!5 in"i$ati6! !!#ptions list

;4


24/62

S intends to pu6lish a regularl# updated list o" aterials that will 6e e-epted "ro testing6ecause the# ha3e 6een show to alwa#s pass the test. There are two t#pes o" e-eption/

• aterials which in thesel3es are e-eptedO

• aterials which are under e-epted aterials that the# do not "or a hole when tested<

tered protecti3e5 co3erings.

t is intended that the aended FFRs will contain descriptions to the e""ect/

LThe criteria "or "ailure shall 6e an# "laing which continues "or ore than 10 seconds a"ter thereo3al o" the ignition source and an# souldering which continues "or ore than 120 seconds.Hole "oration in the test saple should 6e recordedO aterials which do not "or a hole areclassed as protecti3e5. Hole5 eans the a6sence o" the aterial in an area greater than 22.M

elow is an indicati3e list o" e-eptions< "ollowing research testing 6# Ste3e ?wen.

n the ta6le 6elow< all the aterials in the le"t hand colun would 6e e-epted "ro testing and

an# aterials underneath the which the# are protecting would also 6e e-epted "ro testing.

at!ial Class

Ferrous etals $ Allo#s 9 All 3arietiesand thic7nesses 0.(

&rotecti3e

on9Ferrous etal Allo#s< Copper $ Aluiniu N All 3arieties andthic7ness 0.(

&rotecti3e

Sheet Card N All 3arieties :6ut notcorrugated; and thic7ness 1.0

&rotecti3e

Fi6re oard N All 3arieties andthic7ness 1.0

&rotecti3e

Chip6oard N All 3arieties andthic7ness 1.0

&rotecti3e

Hard $ So"t ,ood N All 3arieties andthic7ness 1.0

&rotecti3e

&l#wood N All 3arieties and thic7ness 1.0

&rotecti3e

Stone N All t#pes and thic7nesses &rotecti3e

&laster &rotecti3e

Furt.er results of "nterte/s testin# of currentl! unre#ulated co)ponents:

;nre#ulated

Co)ponents 0ist.xls

Ann! 45 R!sults o. FIRAs !s!a$% into t%! popos!" t!st$%an+!s

S is grate"ul to &hil Re#nolds and Tristine Hargrea3es o" FRA "or the attached test results.

;*


25/62

est Results.xlsx

Ann! *5 A""itional 2a$:+oun" "!tail

The proposed new atch test

For the past 1' onths< S has e-plored wa#s in which FR le3els in UD "urniture ight 6ereduced< without lowering "ire sa"et# le3els. Ste3e ?wen o" nterte7 has wor7ed with S onalternati3e test ethods which could achie3e this goal. n ul# 201!< S circulated "or in"oralconsultation a discussion paper on a new atch test< detailing "i3e possi6le options. The paperloo7ed at all the testing re)uireents "or possi6le a3enues "or reducing FR use and sa3ingcosts< and concluded that the ost 3ia6le was Schedule (< &art .

S ac7nowledged that the paper was necessaril# a little cople-. e3ertheless< S recei3ed11 :ostl# detailed; responses "ro a i-ture o" retailersanu"acturers< test houses<en"orceent o""icers< trade associations and consultants. All were positi3e a6out S=s intentionto reduce FR le3els in UD "urniture. @ight were supporti3e o" our alternati3e atch test :despiteit 6eing in a 6asic "or at that stage;. ?" the reaining three< two were o3erall positi3e withsoe concernsO one was ostl# negati3e. ?" those who e-pressed a pre"erence< ?ption ! :see6elow; was the ost popular and the one S also pre"erred.

?ption ! proposed the su6stitution o" co6ustion odi"ied "oa "or non9co6ustion odi"ied&U "oa in the atch test "illing re)uireent< and to include currentl# unregulated lining "a6ricsand an# =easil# ignita6le= aterials which a# sit 6etween the co3er "a6ric and the "oa "illingso" a product< e.g. card6oard sheeting. This easure clearl# will in3ol3e soe e-tra testingO

howe3er< S 6elie3es this additional cost is ore than o""set 6oth 6# the reduction o" testingre)uired under the cigarette test and cost sa3ings ade "ro a reduction in le3els o" cheicalsused to eet the re)uireents o" the new atch test. Also< as stated a6o3e< Snterte7 ha3esu6se)uentl# disco3ered that ost aterials which pass this e-tra test can 6e peranentl#e-epted "ro testing.

&otential sa3ings "ro the aendents

The pact Assessent at Anne- sets out S=s estiates o" the potential sa3ings industr#a# a7e "ro the proposed atch test. These are 6ased on an estiate :6ased on "iguressupplied 6# anu"acturers and treatent processors; that the cost o" treating co3er "a6ric with

FRs is around E1.!0p per etre :6ut can 6e higher "or soe "a6rics;< dependent on sales3olues< i.e. S@s ordering saller aounts o" treatent will tend to pa# )uite a lot ore thanlarger copanies. ?" this cost< a6out hal" represents the cost o" cheicals. S 6elie3es therange o" sa3ings on this 6asis to 6e 6etween E1 and E(0 per #ear< with E(0 per #ear asthe 6est estiate.

Howe3er< the pact Assessent points out that these "igures are uncertain and S there"orewelcoes ore accurate costs details "ro industr#.

B!3 i#pa$ts an" .utu! "i!$tion o. t!stin+

pact on use o" FRs

ndustr# a# need to reassess the aount o" FRs re)uired to achie3e copliance :See Anne-! "or FRA5s initial "indings in this area;. n order "or an# research underta7en in this area to 6e

;&


26/62

"ull# e""ecti3e< howe3er< a "ull cheical anal#sis o" an# 6ac79coating i-tures added to test"a6rics will 6e essential. This is in light o" Trading Standards= e-perience that theisapplication o" FR treatents to "a6rics "or the purposes o" the FFRs is a not an uncoonpro6le in the UD.

Soe anu"acturers will 6e a6le to odi"# "i6re copositions to achie3e copliance with littleor no FRs :e.g. the nurser# "urniture industr#< where the presence o" FRs is seen asincreasingl# undesira6le 6# consuers;. S also intends to encourage research into new

6arrier technologies that could reduce FR use e3en "urther.

pact on "ire sa"et#

t could 6e argued that reducing le3els o" FRs will a7e "a6rics ore ignita6le. Howe3er< it=siportant to 6ear in ind that the atch test is intended to achie3e a relati3e rather than ana6solute le3el o" sa"et#. Also< the range o" products co3ered 6# the FFRs is 6road. Fore-aple< with products "ro which the occupant is una6le to "ree thesel3es :e.g. oses6as7ets< push chairs;< non9ignita6ilit# is paraount. # contrast< with products that pass thetest 6# 3irtue o" a Schedule ! interliner< it would see non9ignita6ilit# is not so iportant.

As stated a6o3e< S 6elie3es the new atch test will in "act a7e products ore "ire9sa"e/ 6#reo3ing the ris7 o" co3ers that pass the test itsel" 6ut which can 6e ignita6le on the "inishedproductO 6# reo3ing the =argin= o" sensiti3it# "or soe "a6rics under the current test whichallows "or under9treatent with FRs and there"ore potentiall# unsa"e co3ersO and 6# includingcurrentl# unregulated aterials that appear in products and which can 6e highl# "laa6le.

Future %irection o" Testing

n "uture< it a# 6e possi6le to deregulate soe "illing aterials< e.g. i" the 6arrier techni)ueseplo#ed were ade ore ro6ust. This would o""er anu"acturers an alternati3e that could

"urther reduce FR use< 6# utilising 6oth alternati3e aterials and coponent design. Additionall#< current US research suggests that 6arrier techni)ues can signi"icantl# increasethe tie ta7en "or "urniture to reach pea7 heat release rate. This< lin7ed to the growingpre3alence o" so7e detectors and alars a# "or a 7e# eleent in 6alancing the non9ignita6ilit# o" "urniture against the "iscal cost o" non9lethal "ires< and the lethalit# o" "ires againstthe use o" FRs. n these cases< it a# 6e possi6le to allow "or the option o" a "ull scale test :inUS st#le; so that FR usage could 6e signi"icantl# reduced and concentrated in areas where itis ost e""ecti3e.

Anne* 50 Consultation principles

The principles that Go3ernent departents and other pu6lic 6odies should adopt "or engagingsta7eholders when de3eloping polic# and legislation are set out in the consultation principles/

http/www.ca6ineto""ice.go3.u7sitesde"ault"ilesresourcesConsultation9&rinciples.pd"

Co##!nts o $o#plaints on t%! $on"u$t o. t%is $onsultation

" #ou wish to coent on the conduct o" this consultation or a7e a coplaint a6out the wa#this consultation has 6een conducted< please write to/

Angela Ra6essS Consultation Co9ordinator<

;?

http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/sites/default/files/resources/Consultation-Principles.pdfhttp://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/sites/default/files/resources/Consultation-Principles.pdf


27/62

1 ictoria Street<8ondonS,1H 0@T

Telephone Angela on 020 21( 1++1or e9ail her at/ angela.ra6essB6is.gsi.go3.u7

;7

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


28/62

Ann! ?5 List o. in"i6i"uals


29/62

United Dingdo Te-tile 8a6orator# Foru:UDT8F;

,orld Te-tile n"oration etwor7

Test Houses< cheicals copanies< treatent processors and others

rad"ord Te-tile Societ#ureau eritasCheturaClar7son Te-tilesFR@T,?RDGreenurethanesHoworth5s Te-tilesnterte7

ational Coposites CentreSATRASol3a#Te-cheTe-tile 8a6orator# Ser3ices,est or7shire oint Ser3ices,est6ridge Fa6rics

?ther Go3ernent %epartentsAgencies

Ca6inet ?""ice%e"ra%epartent "or Counities and 8ocalGo3ernent

@n3ironent Agenc#Food Standards Agenc#Foreign ?""ice

Health and Sa"et# @-ecuti3eorthern reland @-ecuti3e&u6lic Health @nglandRepu6lic o" reland Go3ernent

Scottish @-ecuti3e,elsh Asse6l#

?thers

Cali"ornia %epartent o" Consuer A""airs :US;Consuer &roduct Sa"et# Coission :US;%epartent o" To-ic Su6stances Control :US;%anish Standards Coittee "or Furniture

%G Sanco< @uropean Coission@n3ironent &rotection Agenc# :US;Green Science &olic# nstitute :US;nternational %#er

;9


30/62

Ann! 75 I#pa$t Ass!ss#!nt o. popos!" a#!n"#!nts tos$%!"ul! & ' t%! #at$% t!st ' pat 1 an" s$%!"ul! * ' t%! $i+a!tt!t!st ' o. t%! .unitu! an" .unis%in+s (.i!) (sa.!t3) !+ulations1988

Titl!5

Furniture Fire Regulations Aendent

IA No5

L!a" "!pat#!nt o a+!n$35

%epartent "or usiness< nno3ation and S7ills

Ot%! "!pat#!nts o a+!n$i!s5

pact Assessent :A;

Dat!5

Sta+!5 Consultation

Sou$! o. int!6!ntion5 Do#!sti$

T3p! o. #!asu!5

Conta$t .o !n>uii!s5 Terr# @dge

020 21( (2+

Su##a35 Int!6!ntion an" Options RC Opinion5

Cost o. !.!!" (o #o! li:!l3) Option

Total N!t!s!nt alu!

usin!ssN!t !s!ntalu!

N!t $ost to 2usin!ssp! 3!a :@AC on 200*prices;

In s$op! o. On!'In0 T-o'Out

!asu! >uali.i!s as

E1+0940 E1+0940 9 E1(94! es ?ut

%at is t%! po2l!# un"! $onsi"!ation %3 is +o6!n#!nt int!6!ntion n!$!ssa3

The Furniture and Furnishings :Fire; :Sa"et#; Regulations 1*'' :FFRs; are e-pected to 6e su6stanti3el#updated< 6# the earliest in 201+. Howe3er< go3ernent inter3ention is re)uired now to aend the"laa6ilit# atch test re)uireent that in practice has led to "urniture producers and retailers using largeaounts o" en3ironent9 and health9daaging "lae retardant cheicals. The inter3ention tac7les a

go3ernent "ailure to aend regulation to technological ad3ances and changes in industr# practiceO toiniise the cost to 6usiness. The new atch test reduces the cost o" eeting sa"et# re)uireents toensure "urniture is "ire resistant< and has 6een de3eloped "ro per"orance e3idence gained 6# researchsponsored 6# S. A "urther cost sa3ing was identi"ied in light o" test house e3idence< S intends to e-cludeost "urniture co3er "a6rics "ro the FFRs= cigarette test< on the grounds that i" the# pass the atch test< the#will autoaticall# pass the cigarette test.

4@


31/62

%at a! t%! poli$3 o2!$ti6!s an" t%! int!n"!" !..!$ts

1. To aintain and ipro3e the current high le3els o" "ire sa"et# o" UD doestic upholstered"urniture< which pre3ents inIur# and the loss o" li"e.

2. To reduce the cost to 6usiness o" eeting the "laa6ilit# re)uireents o" the FFRs.

!. To reduce the use o" "lae retardant cheicals< on health and en3ironental grounds.

%at poli$3 options %a6! 2!!n $onsi"!!"0 in$lu"in+ an3 alt!nati6!s to !+ulation l!as! usti.3 p!.!!"option (.ut%! "!tails in E6i"!n$! as!)

?ption 1< =%o nothing= 9 This would not eet the 2nd $ !rd polic# o6Iecti3es. ndustr# will not 6ene"it "rotechnological progress that reduces costs. This is 6ecause the current atch test does not allow "orcopliance to 6e et through the ignition resistance o" the o3erall coposite o" "lae9resistant "illings and

co3er "a6rics :i.e. the ignition resistance currentl# re)uired o" the co3er "a6ric alone is unnaturall# high;.There"ore< anu"acturers will continue to use ore "lae retardants than is necessar# :with the new test;. Also< in the course o" researching the proposed new test< S has disco3ered that in soe cases< "a6ricswhich pass the current atch test under test conditions do not alwa#s copl# in practice< in the "inishedproduct. ,hich eans this option is not 3ia6le "or the 1st o6Iecti3e either. n addition< S intends to includecurrentl# unregulated aterials within 40 o" the co3er "a6ric< there6# a7ing "urniture sa"er< i.e. 6ecausesoe o" these aterials :such as soe "ors o" we66ing; can 6e highl# "laa6le and negate the 6ene"itso" the current atch test.

?ption 2< Vpre"erred optionW =ntroduce a new "laa6ilit# test now= 9 rings earl# and signi"icant costreductions to industr# and puts the go3ernent ahead o" growing concern o3er "lae retardants. Costs will6e reduced in two wa#s/

1. The tests ha3e 6een aended to re"lect changes in aterials standards< reducing the aount andcost o" cheicals currentl# used in eeting the "laa6ilit# re)uireent o" the FFRs.

2. # introducing a change to the cigarette test< e""ecti3el# e-cluding ost "a6rics :on the 6asis i" the#pass the atch test< the# will autoaticall# pass the cigarette the test;< 6ringing "urther sa3ings toindustr#.

?ption !< =pleent all Regulator# changes at the sae tie= 9 %ela# the new "laa6ilit# test andcigarette test aendents 6# one #ear to 201+ so the# are ipleented at the sae tie as the rest o" theaendents to the FFRs. Transition costs a# 6e reduced copared to option 2 6ut this would dela# the

aIorit# o" sa3ings< eaning industr# would 6ene"it later than "or option 2.?ption 4< =Re3o7e the Regulations= 9 This would ean rel#ing on the e-isting @U sa"et# pro3isions whichha3e lower "ire resistance re)uireents than the UD=s. This would lead to an increase in "ire deaths andinIuries copared to the do nothing5 6aseline. This option was not ta7en "urther and is not costed in thispact Assessent gi3en the ris7 to consuer sa"et#< as detailed in the Rationale "or nter3ention 6elow.

ill t%! poli$3 2! !6i!-!" es. I. appli$a2l!0 s!t !6i!- "at!5 ;@;@,

%oes ipleentation go 6e#ond iniu @U re)uireents es

Are an# o" these organisations in scope " icros note-epted set out reason in @3idence ase.

i$oes

;@ es

S#alles

!"iu#

es

La+!es

,hat is the C?2 e)ui3alent change in greenhouse gas eissions:illion tonnes C?2 e)ui3alent;

Ta"!"5N


32/62

I have read the Impact Assessment and I am satisfied that, given the available evidence, it represents areasonable view of the likely costs, benefits and impact of the leading options.

Signed 6# the responsi6le S@8@CTSGAT?R/ %ate/

Su##a35 Anal3sis = E6i"!n$! ' &olic# ?ption 2

D!s$iption5 Into"u$! a n!- .la##a2ilit3 t!st no-

FULL ECONOIC ASSESSENT

i$! as! Y!a 2014

as! Y!a 2014

Ti#! !io" Y!as 10

N!t !n!.it (!s!nt alu! ()) (#)

Lo-5 1?@# Hi+%5 *7@# !st Esti#at!5 1?@'*7@#

COSTS (#) Total Tansition:Constant &rice; ears

A6!a+! Annual:e-cl. Transition; :Constant &rice;

Total Cost :&resent alue;

Lo- E0.2

2

0 @

Hi+% E0.2 0 @

!st Esti#at! E0.2 E0.00 @,@@D!s$iption an" s$al! o. :!3 #on!tis!" $osts 23 J#ain a..!$t!" +oups

E2007 "ailiarisation cost to "urniture anu"acturers.

Ot%! :!3 non'#on!tis!" $osts 23 J#ain a..!$t!" +oups

Cost o" "ailiarisation with the legislation to other groups< such as pu6lic 6odies and other 6usinesses thatcould 6e a""ected. Ris7s "or increased costs or reduced 6ene"its considered 6elow were/ increased ris7 o""ires< cost sa3ings not 6eing passed on "ro test houses to anu"acturers and transition costs.

ENEFITS (#) Total Tansition:Constant &rice; ears


Total !n!.it :&resent alue;

Lo- E0.0

0

E1* 1?*#

Hi+% E0.0 E(( *74#

!st Esti#at! E0.0 E1*9(( 1?@'*7@#

D!s$iption an" s$al! o. :!3 #on!tis!" 2!n!.its 23 J#ain a..!$t!" +oups

Assuing 6etween +( and 1!0 illion etres o" "a6ric is treated e3er# #ear in the UD then cost sa3ings to6usiness< assuing a 209(0> reduction in the cost o" "lae retardant cheicals< would 6e in the order o"E11.( to E4.( a #ear. This 6ene"it accrues to "urniture anu"acturers selling to the UD ar7et andderi3es "ro a sa3ing on the process o" treating "a6rics so the# can eet the =atch test= re)uireents o"the FFRs. n addition< it is assued that the cost o" testing "a6rics to the cigarette test will 6e reduced 6#E.( gi3ing a total range o" E1* to E(( annual sa3ings.

Ot%! :!3 non'#on!tis!" 2!n!.its 23 J#ain a..!$t!" +oups

The reduction o" 209(0> o" "lae retardant cheical costs in UD "urniture could a7e UD copanies orecopetiti3e in the @U non9doestic ar7et< since @U FR regulations are less stringent :i.e. while oste6er States don=t want FR cheicals in their doestic "urniture< the higher "laa6ilit# re)uireents "or their non9doestic "urniture ean soe FR use is essential;. There are also considera6le health 6ene"itsthat a# result "ro this reduction in "lae retardant use. Research proIects show that 6roinated FRsaccuulate in "auna< and are present in huan 6lood and 6reast il7. &u6lic concern a6out this issue inthe US has directl# a""ected "ire sa"et# polic# there< and industr# in the UD in"or us there is growing pu6licconcern here too.

ndustr# has also indicated that the cost o" cheicals used in treatent a# rise in the "uture< which has not

6een "actored in to the current calculations< "or e-aple one large UD "urniture producer said the# will 6epa#ing E2 per etre "or treatent 6# the tie the new test is ipleented :up "ro E1.!0 per etre now;.

4;


33/62

B!3 assu#ptionsuali.i!s as

Costs5 @,@@ !n!.its5 1&'*4# N!t5 ' 1&'*4# es ?ut

Su##a35 Anal3sis = E6i"!n$! ' &olic# ?ption !

D!s$iption5 I#pl!#!nt all R!+ulato3 $%an+!s at t%! sa#! ti#!

FULL ECONOIC ASSESSENT

i$! as! Y!a 2014

as! Y!a 2014

Ti#! !io" Y!as 10

N!t !n!.it (!s!nt alu! ()) (#)

Lo-5 1*@# Hi+%5 *;@# !st Esti#at!5 1*@'*;@#

COSTS (#) Total Tansition:Constant &rice; ears


Total Cost :&resent alue;

Lo- E0.2

2

0 @

Hi+% E0.2 0 @

!st Esti#at! E0.2 E0.00 @,@@

D!s$iption an" s$al! o. :!3 #on!tis!" $osts 23 J#ain a..!$t!" +oups

nitial estiate o" E2007 "ailiarisation cost to "urniture anu"acturers.

Ot%! :!3 non'#on!tis!" $osts 23 J#ain a..!$t!" +oups

Cost o" "ailiarisation with the legislation to other groups< such as pu6lic 6odies and other 6usinesses thatcould 6e a""ected.

ENEFITS (#) Total Tansition:Constant &rice; ears


Total !n!.it :&resent alue;

Lo- E0.0

0

E1 1*

Hi+% E0.0 E(0 *18#

!st Esti#at! E0.0 E19(0 1*@'*;@#

D!s$iption an" s$al! o. :!3 #on!tis!" 2!n!.its 23 J#ain a..!$t!" +oups

As with option 2 6ut 6ene"its are dela#ed 6# 1 #ear. The 6ene"it o" introducing all aendents to theFurniture Fire Regulations Aendents at the sae tie< through lower "ailiarisation costs< is notincluded. This is 6ecause the 6ene"its and costs o" "uture aendents are not considered in this A< sincethe# are still 6eing considered< there"ore "ailiarisation costs are also not considered.

44


34/62

Ot%! :!3 non'#on!tis!" 2!n!.its 23 J#ain a..!$t!" +oups

As with option 2

B!3 assu#ptionsuali.i!s as

Costs5 !n!.its5 14'48# N!t5 ' 14'48# es ?ut

Evidence Base

13 Bac/ground to the urniture and urnishings !ire" !Safet#"

$egulations

1.1 The Furniture and Furnishings :Fire; :Sa"et#; Regulations 1*'' :FFRs; pro3ide

"laa6ilit# per"orance le3els "or all UD doestic upholstered "urniture< e.g. so"as<

chairs< cushions< pillows< attress "illings< etc. ,hile the FFRs do not stipulate an#

particular route to copliance< in practice anu"acturers ostl# choose to use Flae

Retardants :FRs; as the ost cost9e""ecti3e solution.

1.2 The FFRs are highl# success"ul in pre3enting inIur# and loss o" li"e. A S9coissioned

report in 200* shows that the current regulations were annuall# sa3ing around (4 li3es<

pre3enting around '00 inIuries< o3er 1


35/62

2.2 The current "laa6ilit# tests re)uired 6# the FFRs are/ atch and cigarette tests "orco3er "a6rics and the =cri6 (= test "or "illing aterials. Soe FRs are needed "or "illingaterialsO howe3er< these are largel# non9contentious. ore potentiall#actuall# har"ulFRs 9 particularl# the 6roinated 3ariet# :FRs; 9 are used to eet the stringentre)uireents o" the atch test. These are applied either 6# ipregnating the "a6ric or 6#=6ac7coating= it. There is growing e3idence that a; FRs are worn awa# during noraluse< getting into house dust and 6; daage the en3ironent 6# releasing to-ins anddio-ins when 6urnt or duped in land"ill at end o" li"e :see Anne- 1 a6o3e "or e3idence

lin7ing cheicals with en3ironental and health outcoes;.

2.! The current FFRs atch test :see te-t 6o-; re)uires co3er "a6rics to 6e tested o3erhighl#9"laa6le :and now illegal in the UD; pol#urethane "oa "illings. This eans theadditional "lae resistance supplied 6# the co6ustion9odi"ied "illings that are presentin the "inal product is not utilised< leading to a higher than necessar# ignition resistancestandard in the co3er "a6rics :and ore cheicals used to eet it;.

"o# 1$ The match test

• The current atch test under the FFRs re)uires co3er "a6ric to 6e tested o3er highl#

"laa6le pol#urethane "oa. Howe3er< this "oa would not pass the FFRs "illing test< i.e. it

is not "ound in "urniture sold in the UD. The @U atch test< 6# contrast< re)uires co3er

"a6rics to 6e tested o3er the sae co6ustion9odi"ied "oa that appears in "inal products<

which is the 6asis o" S=s new proposal. The proposed new atch test will 6e underta7en

o3er representati3e actual "oa "illings. This will reduce the aount o" "lae retardant

cheicals needed to pass the atch testO the sae sa"et# le3el pre3iousl# tested "or will 6e

et with less cheicals in co3er "a6rics.

• The current test ser3es two purposes/ to reduce the ignita6ilit# o" the co3er "a6ric and to

protect the "illing aterial underneath. The current test does not ta7e account o" the "act thatthe co6ustion9odi"ied "oa present in the actual product reduces the ignita6ilit# o" the

co3er "a6ric and is also< 6# its nature< ore protected than the test &U "oa.

"o# %$ The cigarette test

• ,e also intend to odi"# the e-isting cigarette test< essentiall# to e-clude ost "a6rics "ro

ha3ing to 6e tested. This is 6ecause the cigarette test is less stringent than the atch testand an# "a6rics ha3e ne3er "ailed the test. The ain reason the# do not "ail the cigarettetest is 6ecause the# ust also pass the atch test< which is a uch ore se3ere test.

4, %at solution is popos!"

!.1 S intends to introduce to the FFRs a new "laa6ilit# atch test :see te-t 6o-; which<while aintaining current sa"et# le3els< will allow anu"acturers to reduce FR use 6#6etween !0>9(0>0. ased on the assuptions detailed 6elow this could lead to anannual un9discounted sa3ing o" 6etween E1* and E(( A 6est estiate is notcurrentl# gi3en due to the uncertaint# o" the data a3aila6le. S hopes this consultation A

will elicit e3idence to ipro3e the ro6ustness o" these estiates.

0 @stiate pro3ided 6# 6oth nterte7< one o" the UD=s largest test houses< and Clar7sonTe-tiles< the largest cheical treatent copan# in the @U< 3eri"ied 6# "urther testingunderta7en 6# the Furniture ndustr# Research Association :see Anne- ! a6o3e;.

4&


36/62

!.2,e 6elie3e that i" we a7e copliance possi6le with less FR cheicals< industr# will 6eencouraged to e-plore other eans o" achie3ing "lae retardance< e.g. inherentl# "lae9retardant "a6ric "i6res< which re)uire no treatent at all. This is 6ecause we are reo3ingthe need to test "a6rics o3er highl# "laa6le pol#urethane 6ut instead testing the wholeproduct including the "oa "illing that will 6e used. The new test should also encourageanu"acturers to e-plore copliance through design. 8ong9ter< "or e-aple< Sintends to encourage and support research into new =6arrier= technolog# :currentl# used"or attresses in the USA; which does not re)uire the use o" an# FR cheicals.

!.! A discussion paper 6ased around the proposed new dra"t atch test and aendent tothe cigarette test was circulated to 7e# sta7eholders in ul# 201!< and recei3ed 3er#positi3e support. There were soe concerns< which S 6elie3es were ostl# down tothe discussion paper 6eing :necessaril#; soewhat cople- as it needed to pro3ide< withe-planation< se3eral options.

!.4 Regarding our plans to e-clude ost "a6rics "ro the cigarette test 9 this was agreed 6#a group o" proinent test house e-perts in a wor7shop eeting with S. @ssentiall#< an#"a6ric which passes the atch test will autoaticall# pass the cigarette test :6ecause the

atch test is ore se3ere;. ,hen the FFRs were introduced< this was not "oreseen< andhas 6ecoe apparent o3er the #ears with the results o" ultiple testings.

!.( The proposed new atch test was discussed with 3arious e-perts o3er a two9da# periodat D@A=s research esta6lishent in Alhult< Sweden. D@A ha3e strong greencredentials and too7 a great interest in S=s proposal< e.g. 6ecause it can allow the touse a greater range o" co3er "a6rics that at present :the# do not use FRs in "urniture<there6# restricting the range the# can o""er in the UD;. D@A were strongl# supporti3e o"the 3eracit# o" the test re)uireents< coenting that it was highl# copetent. The#"oresee that it could support soe o" their new technologies< too.

*, Rational! .o int!6!ntion

4.1 Go3ernent inter3ention is necessar# to aend a "laa6ilit# test re)uireent that inpractice has led to "urniture producers and retailers using large aounts o" "laeretardant cheicals to copl# with the regulations. The new test reduces the cost o"eeting sa"et# re)uireents to ensure "urniture is "ire resistant< in light o" newper"orance e3idence gained 6# research sponsored 6# S. S 6elie3e the "ire sa"et#o" UD consuers should not 6e le"t to e-isting @U legislation0 as that would ean thestandard o" "ire sa"et# in "urniture will "all< increasing the ris7 o" loss o" li"e. Juanti"#ingthe ris7 to loss o" li"e is di""icult as there are issues with data collection across @uropeancoparators 6ut the UD is widel# recognised as ha3ing an e-cellent "ire sa"et# record "or

"urniture within the @U.

0 @U "urniture "laa6ilit# "alls under the General &roduct Sa"et# %irecti3e. This re)uiressuppliers to ensure their products are sa"e. Sa"et# is deonstrated 6# recoended

standards. The recoended standard in this case is @ 1021 &arts 1$2< which pro3ides aatch and cigarette test 6ased originall# on the FFRs :with slight di""erences;. There is no"illings test. S understands< "ro test houses and standards9a7ers "ro other e6erStates< that ost @U "urniture at 6est coplies with the cigarette test< which is the wea7est o"the two.

4?


37/62

4.2The @uropean Coission has "re)uentl# stated its intention to raise the @U standard to UD

le3els. Howe3er< it has recentl# ac7nowledged that a stu6ling 6loc7 to acceptance "ro

soe e6er States is that such high standards tend to re)uire the use o" FR cheicals

in "urniture. The Coission has "ound it di""icult to pro3e that the cheicals used in

"urniture :particularl# FRs; are not har"ulO indeed< as said a6o3e< e3idence is growing

that in "act the# can 6e daaging to health and the en3ironent. n short< the new test

will also help the Coission in that the new atch test will considera6l# reduce FR use.

S o""icials 3isited the Coission to discuss these proposed changes in April 2014.

The Coission :%G SAC?; e-pressed strong enthusias o" the direction the UD is

ta7ingO howe3er< the# also ade it clear that the increasing concern a6out FR cheicals

in @urope eans the# are not as willing as 6e"ore to push "or a rise in standards until this

issue is addressed.

&ote on the effects of F's on human health and the environment

4.! There is a growing literature that has lin7ed health and en3ironental har with "laeretardant cheicals :6roinated< chlorinated and phosphate; used in "urniture0. Furniture

"lae retardants are associated with endocrine disruption< iunoto-icit#< cancer< andor reproducti3e and neurological ipairents< lowered J< and h#peracti3it#. Flaeretardants igrate out o" "urniture< settle in dust< and are ingested 6# huans andanials. oung children ha3e the highest 6lood le3els due to hand9to9outh 6eha3iour.n the USA< a aIorit# o" residential "ire deaths result "ro inhalation o" to-ic gases< andsoot and so7e can o6scure escape. ?ne stud# indicates that US "ire "ighters ha3e highrates o" t#pes o" cancers associated with dio-in e-posureO the dio-ins produced when"lae retardants 6urn are 6elie3ed to contri6ute.

4.4Cali"ornia also "ollowed an open "lae "urniture "laa6ilit# standard :li7e the UD5s atchtest;. This standard< called Technical ulletin 11 :T11;< led to the use o" "lae

retardant cheicals in "urniture "oa across the United States. ?n 1 anuar# 2014<Cali"ornia ipleented a re3ised "urniture "laa6ilit# standard called T119201!. Thiscould lead to US "urniture not containing FR cheicals in "uture. t is anticipated that thenew standard will increase "ire sa"et#. Howe3er< in S=s 3iew the original standardo""ered less "ire sa"et# than the UD regulation and the aendents are unli7el# to reachthe UD5s high standards. e3ertheless< S ac7nowledges that there was strong pu6licsupport in the USA "or a "ire standard that would e""ecti3el# reo3e FRs "ro "urniture.

53 $is/s associated (ith option

(.1 S@s a# need ore helpguidance initiall#< since the new test is ore cople- in soe

respects. S will dra"t guidance< in conIunction with nterte7< and place it on S=swe6site. The "oral consultation paper will also contain clear guidance as to what will 6enecessar# to eet copliance. ,e will also wor7 with the appropriate trade associations.n addition< UD test houses will 6e an a3aila6le and accessi6le source o" guidance gi3enthat S@s regularl# use their ser3ices.

Fire safet(

(.2 Soe sta7eholders a# assue the new atch test will lower sa"et# le3els 6ecause itre)uires less FRs to eet copliance. Howe3er< there will 6e no lowering o" sa"et#standards. At a eeting S held in %ece6er 201!< all sta7eholders present agreed thatthe new test will not lower sa"et# in an# wa# :attendees included/ FRA 9 the Fire ndustr#Research Association< the ritish Furniture Con"ederation< the a6# &roducts Association< nterte7 :test house;< and retailers such as &ar7er Dnoll;. nterte7 has also

0 See Anne- 1 a6o3e "or lin7s to saple papers.

47


38/62

underta7en test research on representati3e coposites under the new test andconcludes that it is as sa"e as the current test. A"ter a nu6er or wor7shops and 3isitsade 6# S and nterte7 during the "irst hal" o" 2014< there is widespread acceptancethat the new test will actuall# a7e "urniture sa"er "ro "ire :see ain consultationdocuent "or details;. At a wor7shop on 1+th une 2014< including "urnitureanu"acturersretailers< "lae retardant anu"actures< trading standards and others<FRA announced that its research into the proposed test con"ired S5s clais on thepotential reductions in FR le3els< as well as that it should pro3ide ore "ire sa"et# than

the current test.

(.! ?ne o" the reasons the new test pro3ides slightl# ore sa"et#< 6ecause it now includespre3iousl# unregulated parts o" "urniture< e.g. the ars. Test houses in"or us that inrecent #ears< cheap and highl# "laa6le aterials ha3e soeties appeared in theseunregulated parts< a7ing the o3erall product ore "laa6le than was en3isaged at theintroduction o" the FFRs. Another reason is that in the course o" researching the new testit has 6ecoe apparent that the current test does not alwa#s produce "ire9resistant "inalproducts< i.e. soe pol#ester "a6rics :now 3er# coon in "urniture; will pass the test intest conditions 6ut when placed in the "inal product< construction "actors ean the# willo"ten "ail to 6e non9ignita6le to the sae le3el. The new test caters "or these e-tra<un"oreseen< "actors.

(.4 There will 6e a sall aount o" e-tra testing re)uired "or soe products :although itshould 6e noted that onl# a saple o" a 6atch needs testing< not each product;. Howe3er<the e-tra cost o" this is negligi6le copared with the sa3ings to 6e ade "ro reducedFRs. t is also ore than o""9set 6# sa3ings that will 6e ade "ro reductions in cigarettetesting :i.e. onl# soe "a6rics re)uiring e-tra atch tests copared to ost "a6rics notneeding the cigarette test;. n addition< S has in"ored industr# that costs can 6ereduced "urther 6# the esta6lishent o" e-eption lists "or aterials which pass theodi"ied test "or additional aterials.

)omplicated regulator( transition

(.( At the eeting in %ece6er entioned a6o3e< FRA said its e6ers would pre"er allthe FFRs aendents to 6e ade at the sae tieO that this proposal will ean the#=rere)uired to respond to two consultation e-ercises. ,e agreed that this would 6e sipler6ut e-plained that the ain aendents can not 6e ipleented 6e"ore 201+ an#wa#O#et it is possi6le within that tie scale to 6ring "orward the relati3el# sipleratchcigarette test changes and there6# pro3ide sa3ings to industr# a #ear earlier. Also<while we accept there will 6e two consultations< the aterial "or each is separate and willre)uire no ore consideration tie9wise than i" the# were ade together.

)ost savings of the flame retardant treatment is not passed on to furniture producers and ultimatel( the consumers

(.+ This ris7 is inial as "urniture anu"acturers are well aware o" the 6rea7down o"treatent costs< i.e. that hal" the cost co3ers the processing while hal" co3ers thecheicals< and will there"ore 6e a6le to negotiate e""ecti3el# with treatent copanies.Soe larger anu"acturers ha3e their own treatent "acilities so will directl# 6ene"it "rothe sa3ings. 8arger copanies will also 6e aware that the change in the atch testS=sthin7ing< can lead to the de3elopent o" technologies that will reduce FR use "urther<possi6l# cut it out altogether :e.g. the USA has a attress "laa6ilit# test that is astough as the UD=s 6ut is et 3ia =6arrier= technolog#< with no FR treatent re)uired.Research is currentl# 6eing underta7en on de3eloping siilar technolog# "or so"as< too;.

?, Costs an" 2!n!.its .o Option ;

48


39/62


40/62

+.!The reduced cost to "urniture anu"acturers selling in the UD ar7et is a loss in earnings to

test houses. This re3enue is a regulator# cost and there"ore not considered to 6e a loss

in econoic 6ene"it to the UD. This is 6ecause the la6our pre3iousl# allocated to testing

can 6e re9allocated to ore econoicall# producti3e acti3it#.

15 s the assuption on the cost o" testing a6o3e right in #our 3iew Could #ou pro3ide

e3idence supporting #our arguents Please note: all questions in this impact

assessment are repeated in Anne ! below. "e would be grateful if you made your

responses in the Anne, not here.

)ost in lost earnings to chemicals manufacturers

+.4 ,e understand that all cheicals used in the anu"acture o" UD "urniture are produced

6# non9UD copanies< ainl# in China and the %ead Sea area.

Familiarisation costs

+.( There will 6e a cost to 6usiness in "ailiarising thesel3es with the new legislation. To

calculate these costs it was assued it would ta7e 2 hours o" a retail or wholesale

anager5s tie0. There are assued to 6e +


41/62

+ead,in times and cost of scrapping old inventor(

+.+ A suita6le lead9in tie will 6e pro3ided 6# the new test aendent to iniise cost to

6usiness. S assues this would 6e around 1' onths. The aendent will include a

pro3ision "or outstanding stoc7 copliant with the current test "or "urniture anu"actured

prior to the aendent coing into "orce. t is assued< there"ore< that there will not 6e

an# signi"icant losses o" "urniture in3entor# stoc7 or additional testing costs gi3en the

length o" the transition period. Howe3er< an# "eed96ac7 "ro industr# to the contrar#<

6ased on wor7ing practice< will 6e considered. Again< in"oration on this is welcoe.

*5 %o #ou agree with the assuption that there will 6e inial losses o" stoc7 gi3en thetransition period ,hat is #our noral turno3er o" stoc7

*1


42/62

!n!.its

+. There are two onetised econoic 6ene"its o" the change in regulation/

• reduced cost o" "a6ric testing<

• reduced cost o" "a6ric treatent due to a reduction in cheicals needed.

+.' The "irst is the reduced cost o" testing in order to eet regulationsO the second is a

reduced cost "or UD 6ased upholstered "urniture anu"acturers in eeting the

"laa6ilit# re)uireent o" the FFRs. The total onetised sa3ings are estiated to 6e

within the range E1* to E(( per annu. These "igures are uncertain and it is hoped

that this consultation will help S ipro3e the ro6ustness and e3idence 6ase o" the

estiates.

+.*This section proceeds 6# "irstl# discussing the onetised cost sa3ings< the 6ene"its< o"

the new regulations and then turns to the non9onetised 6ene"its. The anal#sis in this

pact Assessent represents current e3idence 6ut is also a call "or e3idence as part o"

this consultation. An# data and e3idence #ou can pro3ide to ipro3e the e3idence 6ase

"or this anal#sis would 6e greatl# appreciated in order to strengthen the ro6ustness o" the

"inal pact Assessent.

'educed cost of faric testing

+.10 The cost sa3ings UD 6ased copanies will a7e on "a6ric testing was estiated

a6o3e in the costs section. The cost sa3ings were estiated 6# a test house to 6e

appro-iatel# E.( per annu.0 The cost sa3ings are due to copanies no longer

6eing re)uired to conduct the cigarette test "or a large nu6er o" products. This is shown

again in the ta6le 6elow/

Ta6le 1. %i""erence in testing re)uireents and costs 6etween old and new regulation

Ol" R!>ui!#!nts N!- !>ui!#!nts (options

;=4)

T!stin+ !>ui!" on .a2i$ Cigarette Test

atch Test

atch Test onl# "or a large

nu6er o" products :see

consultation;

Cost Un7nown @stiated sa3ing o" E.(

per annu0 copared to the

old re)uireents

0 Cost sa3ings pro3ided 6# UD test houses

0 6id.

*;


43/62

&5 %o #ou agree with the assuption on annual cost sa3ings to UD 6ased copanies testingo" "a6rics "or the cigarette test Could #ou pro3ide in"oration on the cost o" the cigarettetesting "or #our copan#

'educed cost of treating faric

+.10 To calculate these cost sa3ings< S needs to estiate/

1; the cost sa3ings in treating "a6rics< and

2; the aount o" "a6ric treated 6# UD anu"acturers

This section 6egins with the "irst estiation and concludes with the second< which is

ore uncertain.

1- The cost savings of treating farics

+.11 To eet current "ire tests< a lot o" "a6rics "or upholstered "urniture sold in the UD are

treated 6# cheical processors. The cost o" treatent is estiated 6# industr# to 6e in

the range o" E1.1( 91.!0 etre< at the low end. S has 6een in"ored 6# the largest

cheical processor 0 that hal" this cost coprises FR cheicals and the other hal" the

treatent process. The# also estiate that the new test should reduce the need "or FRs6#

Documents

Bis 14 980 Furniture Fire Safety Regulations Consultation Document August 2014 Protected (1)