CPSC Draft RFI on Gas Stoves Goes Before Commission

CPSC staff February 22 sent commissioners a draft request for information (RFI) about gas stoves' effects on indoor air. Ballots are due February 28. The comment period would be 60 days. The draft RFI (bit.ly/3Zhgwh5) covers three areas:

48 Mondays a Year   A subscription to PRODUCT SAFETY LETTER is like adding a person to your staff to dig up must-know developments like these for less than $25 a week, and you learn of hundreds every year.   Subscribe Today

• Scope and scale of hazards and risks associated with chronic gas exposure, including consumers' habits and practices, items like hoods and air filters commonly used with stoves, details like definitions and performance considerations for those items, gas leaks frequencies and related defects, details about the chemical hazards, and any other relevant facts.

 

• Data and evaluation considerations, including tests or studies related to chemical emissions, tests or studies on products' performance/design/compliance, tests on effects from different fuel sources, research on the effects of emissions on indoor air quality, studies on links between gas stoves and health, studies involving vulnerable populations, and any other relevant information.

 

• Solutions, including tradeoffs between hazards associated with gas stoves and other cooking appliances, gas exposure mitigation steps not widely deployed, recent or likely-to-be-developed exposure-reduction advances, voluntary standards revisions and other activity, mandatory rules activities, hood range effectiveness, potential labels, indoor air comparisons between homes with and without gas stoves, building code and other state/local activities, costs of rules and standards, and any other relevant details.

Chairman Alexander Hoehn-Saric February 22 told an ICPHSO audience in Orlando, Fla., that the request should be approached seriously and that gas stoves should not be a "punchline." He also quipped in the same speech to be "careful what you wish for," noting that he had wanted CPSC to become a "household name" but not in the way that occurred in January. He was referring to widespread negative reaction to a Bloomberg article that inaccurately suggested (PSL, 1/16/23) that the agency was moving towards a ban of gas stoves. In fact, this RFI – plans for which preceded the controversy (PSL, 10/31/22) – is in lieu of a desire by Commissioner Richard Trumka to direct staff to a consider ban, presumably because that was not something that could get a majority commission vote.

Despite the recent media focus on a ban, potential outcomes of the RFI also include the other end of the spectrum – doing nothing – as well as performance requirements or other steps like labeling and education. Moreover, should CPSC launch a rulemaking, it would be bound by steps that typically take a long time – sometimes many years – as well as its mandate to defer to voluntary standards if those are sufficient and followed. Even if CPSC were to demonstrate that a rule is both needed and allowed – and do so in a way that could withstand a court challenge – a recurring pattern with many products over the decades has been reinvigorated voluntary standards activities that necessitate CPSC putting its rulemakings on hold, often for even more years.

Meanwhile, there nonetheless is a U.S. trend towards gas stoves bans, but those often involve matters like climate worries that are outside of CPSC jurisdiction and typically are at the local-government level. Common are building code restrictions for new constructions.

On the federal level, concern about an effective if not actual ban currently is directed at potential efficiency rules under the Department of Energy.