Last year, California regulators implemented new fire safety standards that don’t require the use of flame retardant chemicals in furniture.
Supporters of the regulation say flame retardants are associated with a variety of health problems including cancer, hormone disruption and decreased fertility.
The proposed bill, authored by Democratic Senator Mark Leno, would require manufacturers to disclose on the furniture’s label whether flame retardant chemicals were used. He says it's the says this is the logical next step.
“To minimal allow manufacturers to meet a fire safety standard without the need of chemicals and then to communicate whether or not a consumer product has these chemicals to the consumer is a great step forward for all of us,” says Leno.
Judy Levin is with the Center for Environmental Health.
“I know that as purchasing a couch, I spent many times thinking about what color I wanted it to be, what shape I wanted it to be, whether I wanted legs on it or no legs on it and I didn’t realize that the biggest issue I had to make as a consumer was whether I wanted flame retardant chemicals or not, I didn’t have that information," says Levin.
The legislation would also require disclosure near the furniture’s price or description. The first hearing on the legislation is next week.
UC Davis researchers have identified 'high priority' dams in California where releasing water may be a key for the survival of native fish species.
Scientists may soon have a more accurate way to predict the extent and severity of droughts, floods and even the amount of food California can produce.
This week, crews from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife have hiked miles into Trinity County between Redding and the ocean. They've gone in to dismantle six illegal marijuana grows and clean up tons of waste and chemicals.
As California faces the prospect of another year of drought, a group tasked to coordinate water quality monitoring across state agencies is working to streamline the process.
On November 4th, California voters will decide the fate of a $7.5 billion bond intended to improve the state’s water system. Proposition 1 is one of the most closely watched measures on the ballot. But it has divided some environmental groups.