Improving consumer safety by minimizing fire risks in electronic components remains a priority; however, the approach taken by the Washington State Department of Ecology in its latest rule raises significant concerns. The new regulations under Safer Products for Washington – Cycle 1 cover all organohalogen flame retardants (OFRs) in casings and enclosures for electronic and electrical equipment. The new requirement unreasonably impacts everything from consumer electronics like TVs and laptops to household appliances and professional equipment used outdoors.
Historically, regulators have scrutinized flame retardants on a chemical-by-chemical basis, allowing for nuanced rules tailored to the specific potential exposures and associated risks relating to human health and the environment. This method aligns with the recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences, which advises organizing OFRs into 14 subclasses for more precise assessment. Contrary to this scientifically backed approach, Washington State's new regulation treats all OFRs as one group, undermining decades of research and practice that have improved both safety and product performance globally.
The rule's broad application could compromise the safety, functionality, and availability of many products that meet critical safety standards. It also imposes a regulatory framework that is out of step with how other jurisdictions regulate OFRs, potentially leading to confusion and inconsistency in the marketplace. This misalignment threatens innovation and hinders the ability of manufacturers to provide products that meet the safety and performance requirements of consumers.
The North American Flame Retardant Alliance (NAFRA) remains deeply concerned about the implications of this rule for the industry and consumers alike. We believe that a more balanced approach, which considers the diverse properties and uses of flame retardants, is essential to maintaining safety without restricting innovation.
We encourage all stakeholders to engage with the regulatory process to advocate for a changes to this rule that better aligns with scientific understanding and practical application. Further, we suggest exploring the provisions for exemptions and preparing to comply with the new requirements where applicable.