The IGBC simply provides recommendations. It's up to specific Parks and Wilderness areas to either add it to their approval list, or not. I wouldn't hold my breath for it to be approved in Yosemite or Kings Canyon. Given the drawn out legal battle to get the Ursack passed by IGBC, previous Ursack failures, and the strict attitudes towards food storage in those parks, I'll be surprised if they approve it.
I have mixed feels about that. On one hand, I'd sure prefer to carry an Ursack over a bear can; on the other hand, I don't believe that the average park visitor could properly use the Ursack. Some people can't even properly close a bear canister, and we would ask them to tie a knot properly? Remember, bears have been able to get food out of Ursacks before because the opening wasn't closed and knotted tightly and the bear was able to squeeze food out the opening.
Also, there is some misconception about the ways that an Ursack can be used. There are three possibilities:
1) Tie the bag closed and leave it on the ground
2) Tie the bag closed and then tie it around a tree/rock/whatever
3) Tie the bag closed and hang it from a tree
Historically the consensus has been (1) and (3) don't work, because the bear can just pick up the bag, run away from your campsite, and work on getting the food out for days. Bear canisters are specifically designed to be large enough that a bear can't get their jaws around it and walk away with it. As indicated in the IGBC testing, the Ursack is not bear-proof, it's bear-resistant; if you let a bear work at it for long enough, they can eventually tear the fabric or work the knot loose. Option (2) prevents this, but there have been concerns about resource damage to trees from the bear trying to break the bag loose. So it's not clear that even if it were approved by various Parks what the recommended use protocol would be.