FTC to host Care Labeling Rule roundtable

Care-LabelingThe Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will host a public round table to discuss proposed revisions to its Care Labeling Rule on October 1, 2013 in Washington, DC.

The Rule requires manufacturers and importers to attach labels with care instructions for dry cleaning washing, bleaching, drying and ironing of garments and certain piece goods.

The round table will focus on the following:

  • a proposal to allow manufacturers and importers to include professional instructions for wet cleaning – an environmentally friendly alternative to dry cleaning – on labels if the garment can be professionally wet cleaned and on whether the FTC should require a wet cleaning instruction for such garments
  • discussion on the differences between the care symbols of ASTM International and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), whether labels should identify ISO symbols as such if used to comply with the Rule, the change in the meaning of the circle P symbol in the ASTM system, and consumer understanding of symbols.
  • how to clarify what constitutes a reasonable basis for care instructions.

The round table will be held on October 1, 2013, from 9:15-3:45, in the FTC’s Satellite Building Conference Center at 601 New Jersey Avenue, NW, Washington, DC.

Requests to participate as a panelist must be received by September 3,  2013. Written comments regarding the agenda topics, the issues discussed by the panelists at the round table, or the issues raised in comments received in response to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking must be received by October 15, 2013.

Do you have questions about the Care Labeling Rule or need help with labeling  related issues regarding product or packaging?

Jacoby Solutions provides consulting services for compliance related issues.

Contact Today if you need help in this area!

Only a few days left to comment – Proposed Rule On Certificates Of Compliance (16 C.F.R. 1110)

With the deadline for comments regarding the Proposed Rule On Certificates Of Compliance only 4 days away, you would think there would be more items posted on the website to date but surprisingly there have only been a few.

Three points of contention posted so far with the proposed rule changes to 16 CFR 1110 (Certificates of Compliance)

  1. The requirement to list on the certificate the place “including street address” where the product(s) were manufactured, produced or assembled. Commenters have objected based on the fact that by providing this information the identification of suppliers would be made public and open to competitors or even large customers to by-pass and go directly to these suppliers.
  2. The requirement that “a certifier shall list all applicable testing exclusions and include on the certificate the basis for the statutory or regulatory testing exclusion to such regulation.” Commenters have objected based on the burden to administer these exclusions on the certificate.  For example even though the CPSC has given guidance on the testing of certain components of a product from lead testing due to the material (unadulterated  wood, gold, silver, bone, textiles, etc.) of the component it would require that these exemptions be listed on the certificate.  Most test reports currently list exemptions from testing that apply to the product being tested; they are not currently being listed on the product certificates.  It is unclear at this point how extensive these “exemptions” must be.  For example, if you have a product evaluated for Toy Safety using the current ASTM F963 standard, there would be portions of the standard that would not apply to that product.  If it were not battery powered, the sections that apply to battery powered toys would not apply to the product and therefore it would be exempt by exclusion.  Would there be a need to include these types of exemptions?
  3. The requirement for certificates of imported products to be filed electronically with Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) at the time of entry or entry summary.Commenters have objected based on the previous definition of electronic certificates under section 1110.9 which allows for the use of a unique identifier (URL) when referencing the certificate, as opposed to the certificate itself.  The feeling is that by requiring the filing of the certificate with CBP rather than providing a reference for it through a unique identifier (URL) would again cause additional administrative burdens.


Need help creating your Certificates. Jacoby Solutions has just launched CPSIA Ready, which helps companies quickly and affordably comply with all aspects of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) and leverage and dramatically improve operational processes across core financial, IT and processing systems. CPSIA Ready’s highly intuitive user interface and unprecedented customer support programs, including customized initial training programs, on-demand, technical consultants and access to comprehensive CPSC and industry information, combine with its robust tools to make it much more than a compliance solution. With CPSIA Ready, companies can protect, improve and transform their business.

Environment Canada seeks information on phthalates for priority assessment

DuckyThe current Canadian regulation for phthalates as it applies to children’s products is SOR/2010-298.  The regulation covers phthalates DEHP, DBP and BBP in the vinyl components of a toy or child care article not to exceed 1,000 mg/kg or 1,000 ppm (0.1% by weight) and phthalates DINP, DIDP and DNOP in the vinyl components of a toy or child care article that in a “reasonably foreseeable manner, be placed in the mouth of a child under four years of age” not to exceed 1,000 mg/kg or 1,000 ppm (0.1% by weight).

The requirement of this regulation is very similar to the one in the U.S. under the CPSIA which covers both toys and child care articles.

On July 13, 2013, Environment Canada issued a notice to manufacturers and importers directing them to provide information about their use of phthalates in food and beverage contact materials along with other consumer products.  Through this notice the government has listed more than 30 phthalate substances which will undergo priority assessment through its Chemicals Management Plan.  Environment Canada has asked for details about the manufacture, importation and use of the substances “for the purposes of assessing whether [they] are toxic or capable of becoming toxic, or for the purpose of assessing whether to control [them].”

As a U.S. based manufacturer or distributor to the Canadian market, your Canadian based importer will likely make inquiries of your product if “during the 2012 calendar year, [they] imported a total quantity greater than 100 kg [220 lbs.] of a substance listed in Schedule 1 of this notice, at a concentration equal to  or above 0.001% by weight (w/w%) [10 ppm]”

The key for children’s products manufacturers and distributors;

(b) in a manufactured item that is

(i) intended to be used by or for children under the age of six years, or (ii) intended to come into contact with the mucosa of an individual, other than eyes, or (vi) clothing or footwear, or (vii) furniture intended to be used in a residence, or a furnishing intended to be used in a residence if the substance is contained in a textile

If you know or might know that your products fall within this range you and your importer would have to respond to this notice by November 13, 2013.  Failure to submit the required information would subject companies to fines and/or jail terms under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.

Proposed changes to Prop. 65 warnings focus of upcoming OEHHA workshop

A public pre-regulatory workshop has been scheduled for July 30, 2013 by California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) to discuss “the content of a regulation that would address Proposition 65 (Prop. 65) warnings”.  If adopted as proposed it would either supplement or replace existing OEHHA regulations governing Proposition 65 warnings and conform to any statutory changes enacted.  California Governor Jerry Brown as indicated his intent to amend the law this year.

The OEHHA is considering the following changes; (a) requiring information in all warnings of the health effects which the chemical listed, how a person will be exposed and “simple information such as washing hands” on how to avoid or reduce exposure, (b) means to provide additional information concerning exposure to the chemical(s) listed through a website or other generally accessible medium.


Example of Label that would satisfy the proposed changes

Warning: Using this product will expose you to lead, a chemical known to cause cancer, birth defects and other harm to a developing baby. Wash hands after touching this product.

For more information go to: www.oehha.ca.gov/warnings


CPSC Issues Rule on Exemptions to Lead Limits in Children’s Products

On July 10, 2013, the US Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC) published in the Federal Register a final rule [Docket No CPSC-2009-0004] to amend its existing regulations pertaining to procedures and requirements for exclusions from lead limits under section 101(b) of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA).

The CPSIA provides a “functional purpose” exemption from the lead limits of Section 101 (or lead in substrate material) of 100 ppm.  This functional purpose exemption can apply to a specific product, class of products, type of material or component part.

To qualify for this functional purpose exemption the product, class of product, material or component part would have to require lead in excess of 100 ppm because it would not be practicable or technologically feasible to manufacture the product without lead in excess of the limit.

Exemptions can be issued based on how likely the product, class of product, material or component part could either be placed in the mouth, ingested or will have no measurable adverse effect on public heath, taking into consideration “normal and reasonably foreseeable use and abuse”.

If a party seeks exemption under this rule, they bear the “burden of proof” in demonstrating that product, class of product, material or component part meets the requirement of the exemption.  The CPSC may base its decision solely on the materials presented by the party seeking the exemption and any materials received through the notice and hearing.

If an exemption is sought for the entire product or class of products then every accessible component or material must meet the criteria of the functional purpose exception.

If the CPSC grants an exemption for a product, class of products, material or component part they may; establish a new lead limit, place an expiration date on the exemption or establish a schedule after which the manufacture of the product, class of product, material or component part would be in compliance with existing lead limits.

The CPSC anticipates providing the public with staff guidance on the applicable procedures for requesting an exemption, which will be made available on the CPSC website. The effective date of this rule is July 10, 2013.



Jacoby Solutions Launches CPSIA Ready, The First and Only Product-Centric CPSIA Compliance Solution

Proprietary software platform helps manufacturers and importers reduce the time, cost and resources needed to be compliant

Malvern, PA (PRWEB) June 25, 2013

Jacoby Solutions has launched CPSIA Ready, a cloud-based software platform and services solution giving manufacturing and importing companies the ability to quickly and effectively comply with all aspects of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA). Developed by a veteran juvenile products distributor, this product-centric solution was designed with business operations and continually evolving compliance regulations in mind. CPSIA Ready helps customers embed compliance into operations so they can easily become and remain compliant across all of the CPSIA’s requirements.

The U.S. Government recently and dramatically changed its compliance requirements for product manufacturers and importers. Three recent Settlement Agreements issued by the CPSC require the companies to set up an expansive compliance system including: (1) proof of written compliance standards and policies, (2) retention of all compliance-related records for a minimum of five years; (3) assignment of a senior-level compliance manager/officer; (4) a confidential and operational process for employees to be able to report compliance related questions or issues to a compliance manager/officer; and (5) mandatory training on company compliance-related policies and procedures for all applicable employees and stakeholders.

“Compliance is no longer about testing. Companies must ‘exercise due care,’ across many of the CPSC’s mandates,” says Bill Jacoby, principal of Jacoby Solutions. “With CPSIA Ready and our on-line compliance training program, CPSIA U, companies can easily achieve compliance with reduced time, cost and resources. CPSIA Ready also tracks and stores product information, and provides easy due process for employees to achieve mandatory training on various elements of the compliance law,” Jacoby continues.

CPSIA Ready notifies companies of new compliance regulations and provides manufacturers and importers with a system that enables them to:

  • Quickly create and send compliance certificates to retailers/distributors;CpsiaReady.com
  • Create and manage test plans by product and manufacturing facility;
  • Manage and document material changes within products;
  • Centralize storage of test reporting and compliance documentation;
  • Provide access to a company compliance portal with an e-learning portal for mandatory training; and
  • Reduce documentation storage costs in a tightly secured, cloud-based environment.


“The financial, operational and managed-risk benefits of working with CPSIA Ready are unprecedented in today’s manufacturing industry. We’ve combined our comprehensive experience with implementing on-going compliance requirements with the CPSIA, with our experience improving operational effectiveness of our clients’ businesses, to give CPSIA Ready clients a total compliance solution that also offers unparalleled customer support options. From our customized initial training programs, to our on-demand, technical consultants, we’ve made CPSIA Ready an extremely user-friendly and easy to implement and use solution,” explains Bill Jacoby.

Flexible pricing programs enable CPSIA Ready to create the exact solution to fit the needs of every organization, whether companies need a five-user license, a ten-user license, on-line training and documentation for employees, or need to create a company compliance plan. For more information, or to schedule a virtual walkthrough of the platform, please visit http://www.cpsiaready.com.

About Jacoby Solutions:

Jacoby Solutions is a professional consulting firm with a focus on providing a one-stop resource for assistance in making sure a company is “Operationally Ready” for CPSIA compliance. Specializing in the Juvenile, Toy and Consumer Goods space, Jacoby Solutions provides companies with the technology and knowledge necessary to adhere to the current and impending compliance mandates related to CPSIA.

Ross Stores Agrees to $3.9 Million Civil Penalty, Internal Compliance Improvements for Failure to Report Drawstrings in Children’s Upper Outerwear

Release Date: June 21, 2013

Release Number: 13-224

WASHINGTON, D.C.-The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)

announced today that Ross Stores Inc., of Pleasanton, Calif., has agreed to

pay a $3.9 million civil penalty.  The penalty agreement has been accepted

provisionally by the Commission in a 3-0 vote.


The settlement resolves CPSC staff’s charges that from January 2009 to

February 2012, Ross knowingly failed to report to CPSC immediately, as

required by federal law, that it sold or held for sale, about 23,000

children’s upper outerwear garments with drawstrings at the neck or waist.

In February 1996, CPSC issued guidelines (which were incorporated into a

consensus industry voluntary standard in 1997) to help prevent children from

strangling or getting entangled on neck and waist drawstrings in upper

garments, such as sweatshirts and jackets.


In May 2006, the Commission posted a letter on its website which stated that

staff considered children’s upper outerwear with drawstrings at the hood or

neck to be defective and present a substantial risk of injury to young

children.   In July 2011, based on the 1996 CPSC guidelines and the 1997

voluntary standard, CPSC issued a final rule which designates the hazards

presented by drawstrings in children’s upper outerwear as substantial

product hazards.


Ross’s distribution of some children’s garments occurred during the same

period of time as CPSC’s investigation and negotiation of a 2009 civil

penalty.  The $500,000 penalty that Ross paid in 2009 was to settle staff

charges that it failed to report four series of children’s upper outerwear

drawstring garments distributed between 2006 and 2008.  Ross’s distribution

of the other garments in this matter occurred either partially or entirely

after the effective date of CPSC’s Final Rule. There have been no reported

injuries associated with the recalled garments.


In addition to paying a monetary penalty, Ross has agreed to implement and

maintain a compliance program designed to ensure compliance with the

reporting requirements of Section 15(b) of the Consumer Product Safety Act

and the Final Rule.  Ross also agreed to enhance its existing compliance

policies by ensuring that its ongoing program contains written standards and

policies, a mechanism for confidential employee reporting of

compliance-related questions or concerns, and appropriate communication of

company compliance policies to all employees through training programs. Ross

has designed and implemented a system of internal controls and procedures to

ensure that the firm’s reporting to the Commission is timely, truthful,

complete, accurate, and in accordance with applicable law.  The company will

also take steps to ensure that prompt disclosure is made to management of

any significant deficiencies or material weaknesses in the design or

operation of such internal controls.


The Commission, in cooperation with Ross and/or other firms that

manufactured, imported, or distributed the Garments, announced recalls of

the garments listed below between March 2010 and May 2012:



Children’s Apparel Network, Ltd. Girls’ hooded sweater with neck



Byer California Girls’ cargo pocket jacket with neck and waist drawstrings

Puma North America Inc.     Youth training jacket with waist drawstrings

LA Fashion Hub Inc. Girls’ winter jacket with neck drawstrings

Umbro Boy’s jacket with waist drawstrings

Hot Chocolate Boy’s jogging suit with waist drawstrings

Bonded Apparel Boy’s Hooded jacket with neck drawstrings

Me Jane Louise Paris Ltd Girl’s fur hood bubble fleece with waist

drawstrings and Fur hooded bubble jacket with waist drawstrings

LANY Group LLC Girls’ terry hooded sweatshirt with neck drawstrings

YMI Jeanswear Girls’ hooded sweatshirt with neck drawstrings


Federal law requires manufacturers, distributors, and retailers to report to

CPSC immediately (within 24 hours) after obtaining information reasonably

supporting the conclusion that a product contains a defect which could

create a substantial product hazard, creates an unreasonable risk of serious

injury or death, or fails to comply with any consumer product safety rule or

any other rule, regulation, standard, or ban enforced by CPSC.


In agreeing to the settlement, Ross denies staff charges that it knowingly

failed to inform the Commission about the garments, as required by CPSA



Statement of Chairman Inez M. Tenenbaum on the Commission Decision to

Approve Provisionally a Civil Penalty Settlement with Ross Stores, Inc.


June 21, 2013


On June 19, 2013, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC or the

Commission) provisionally approved a civil penalty settlement with retailer

Ross Stores, Inc., to resolve CPSC staff allegations that Ross committed

prohibited acts by failing to inform the Commission of Ross’s continued sale

of children’s garments with drawstrings, which pose a substantial risk of

injury to children due to the risk of entanglement and strangulation.  The

settlement requires Ross to pay a monetary penalty of $3.9 million and, just

as important, to take meaningful measures to reduce the risk of future

noncompliance through implementation of significantly enhanced compliance

procedures and internal controls.  After a review of the specific facts

presented in this case and a careful consideration of the civil penalty

factors, I voted to approve the settlement.


During my tenure as Chairman of the CPSC, my colleague Commissioner Robert

S. Adler and I have written together and separately regarding the need for

civil penalties to truly serve the policy objectives of deterring violations

and promoting compliance with the law, particularly in light of the

increased penalty amounts Congress authorized in the Consumer Product Safety

Improvement Act of 2008.  This settlement reflects the goals and importance

of our enhanced authorities, and I commend the CPSC staff for this result.

This settlement is also a reminder to the regulated community that the

Commission will use every tool at its disposal to keep consumers and their

families safe from unreasonable risks of injury.


Ross is a repeat violator.  In 2009, it paid a civil penalty of $500,000 for

violating the same law, Section 15 of the Consumer Product Safety Act

(CPSA).  Neither the fine nor the supposed remedial measures Ross

implemented on its own initiative following that settlement was sufficient

to prevent the continued sale of defective garments.  Vendors who were

contractually obligated to provide compliant products continuously failed to

do so; internal policies prohibiting the purchase, inventory, and sale of

garments with drawstrings were equally ineffective.  Regardless of what

Ross’s management may have wanted to believe about the effectiveness of

their policies, they clearly did not work.  Moreover, the fact that Ross did

not design, manufacture, or import the garments did not relieve it of the

obligation to ensure that they comply with all applicable safety statutes

and regulations.


As part of this settlement, Ross has agreed to maintain a vastly improved

compliance program designed to prevent the sale of garments with drawstrings

and to ensure timely reporting, if necessary, under Section 15 of the CPSA.

This compliance program, similar to others the Commission has begun to

require as a warranted condition of settlement, includes the following key

elements: (i) written standards and policies, (ii) whistle-blower

protections, (iii) compliance training programs, (iv) management oversight

of compliance, and (v) five-year record retention requirements.


This case clearly demonstrates that policies cannot exist solely on paper;

individuals must be charged with and held accountable for carrying them out.

It is my hope and expectation that the message we are sending with the

substantial fine and the compliance requirements in this agreement will

increase the likelihood that Ross-and other firms-will not only make the

right decision next time they are confronted with whether to report a safety

issue, but also-and more importantly for consumer safety-will take all

necessary steps to ensure they produce and market only compliant products,

thus obviating the need for any reporting at all.


Jacoby Solutions Launches CPSIA U©, an e-learning Portal, Providing Companies Easy Solution to Meet Consumer Product Safety Commission’s Mandatory Compliance Requirements

On-Line Undue Influence Training Course Now Available

CPSIA U Training

MALVERN, PA (PRWEB) June 04, 2013

Jacoby Solutions has launched CPSIA U, an e-learning portal, to provide companies with an efficient, cost-effective way to comply with the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s mandatory compliance and training requirements. The U.S. government regularly adds new compliance requirements for manufacturing companies. Jacoby Solutions’ e-learning portal, CPSIA U, provides an unbiased, industry-endorsed method of tracking and providing proof of compliance to the government. Employees can complete training anytime, anywhere via any digital device including computers, laptops, tablets and mobile iOS or Android devices.

“We understand how difficult it is for many businesses to keep up with compliance regulations, especially small to mid-sized organizations that do not have the time or resources to continuously monitor and interpret the CPSC’s mandates,” said Bill Jacoby, principal of Jacoby Solutions. He continued, “By using our on-line training, we provides companies with the process and documentation to identify their compliance director, map out their escalation and provide the notification process to help prevent what can be massive government fines for organizations that cannot prove they exercised due care when implementing incident notification and reporting to the CPSC.”

CPSIA U.’s initial course offerings are designed to help manufacturers comply with the requirements set out in CPSC’s 16 CFR 1107 ruling. The ‘Undue Influence Training’ requirement is designed to ensure that companies making children’s products do not apply pressure on third-party testing labs to influence positive results. Jacoby Solutions’ experts developed the Undue Influence Training module to help company employees understand the nature and impact of undue influence, and provide a confidential pathway to contact the CPSC if a potential breach is identified.

Mr. Jacoby furthered, “The training module is especially important for organizations who are concerned about their overall compliance for the recent CPSIA requirements that went into effect this past February. The Undue Influence module also provides a comprehensive review of the CPSC’s changes in requirements going back to 2010.” Undue Influence Training is available in English and Chinese. Material Change Testing and Periodic Testing- Creating your Test Plan courses are included in the enrollment and more modules will be made available in the coming months. Details regarding training courses can be found at http://www.CPSIAU.com.

About Jacoby Solutions:
Jacoby Solutions is a professional consulting firm with a focus on providing a one stop resource for assistance in making sure a company is “Operationally Ready” for CPSIA compliance. Specializing in the Juvenile, Toy and Consumer Goods space, Jacoby Solutions provides companies the technology and knowledge necessary to adhere to the current and impending compliance mandates related to CPSIA.

Harper Government Announces New Fines to Strengthen the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act

OTTAWA, ONTARIO–(Marketwired – June 4, 2013) – Today, the Honourable Leona Aglukkaq, Minister of Health, announced the Harper Government has introduced new fines of up to $25,000 per day for companies who violate orders under the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act (CCPSA). The Administrative Monetary Penalties (Consumer Products) Regulations coming into force provide a flexible and responsive enforcement approach for dealing with specific incidents of non-compliance with an order made under the Act, such as refusing to comply with a recall order.

“Canadian consumers expect the products they pick up on store shelves to be safe for them and their families,” said Minister Aglukkaq. “By introducing significant fines for companies who violate orders to recall unsafe products, our Government is ensuring that companies who break the law will pay the price.”

Penalties are calculated based on the Administrative Monetary Penalties (Consumer Products) Regulations. They reflect the seriousness of the violation and past violation history of the person or company. The maximum penalties range from $5,000, (for a violation committed by an individual or a non-profit corporation, for non-commercial purposes), to $25,000, (in any other case). These numbers represent daily penalties – meaning that the financial burden on the company can increase with each passing day until the matter is resolved.

“We all share an interest in making sure that Canadians are protected from unsafe consumer products,” said Louise Logan President and CEO of Parachute. “Today’s announcement by Minister Aglukkaq brings in new measures to support compliance with the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act. Canadian parents now have further reassurance that the products they’re buying won’t harm their children.”

Typically, industry voluntarily takes action to address unsafe products. Administrative monetary penalties only come into effect when a company does not comply with government orders to recall a product within specified time frames, or orders to take other measures such as stopping the manufacturing, importation, sale or advertising of a non-compliant product.

“In most cases industry shares our concern for having safe products on the Canadian marketplace,” concluded Minister Aglukkaq. “These penalties will zero in on companies and organizations who won’t take action to protect Canadians from dangerous products.”

Également disponible en français

Health Canada news releases are available on the Internet at www.healthcanada.gc.ca/media


Administrative Monetary Penalties (Consumer Products) Regulations

What are the Administrative Monetary Penalties (Consumer Products) Regulations?

The Administrative Monetary Penalties (Consumer Products) Regulations are a key component of the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act (CCPSA). They provide a flexible and responsive enforcement approach for dealing with specific incidents of non-compliance with an order made under the Act, such as refusing to comply with a recall order.

The Regulations prescribe the time and manner in which a monetary penalty under the CCPSA is calculated, modified, or paid, as well as the manner in which certain documents must be provided.

Health Canada expects that the financial penalties issued under the Regulations will encourage compliance with the CCPSA and its requirements over the long term.

When is an Administrative Monetary Penalty issued?

Typically, industry voluntarily abides by Health Canada’s product safety recommendations. Administrative monetary penalties only come into effect when the government orders a company to recall a product or orders to take other measures such as stopping the manufacturing, importation, sale or advertising of a non-compliant product, and the company does not comply within the specified timeframes.

What are the penalties under the Regulations?

Penalties are calculated in accordance with the Regulations and reflect both the seriousness of the violation and any past violation history of the person or company. The maximum penalties range from $5,000, (for a violation committed by an individual or a non-profit corporation, for non-commercial purposes), to $25,000, (in any other case).

Each day that an incident of non-compliance is not addressed represents a separate violation of the Act – meaning that the financial burden on the company can increase with each passing day until the matter is resolved.

Media Inquiries:

Health Canada

(613) 957-2983

Office of the Honourable Leona Aglukkaq

Federal Minister of Health

(613) 957-0200

Public Enquiries:

(613) 957-2991

1-866 225-0709


Obama Nominates former U.S. Rep. Ann Marie Buerkle as CPSC Commissioner

Obama Nominates Buerkle as CPSC Commissioner

By Bill Jacoby

The White House announced Thursday afternoon that President Barack Obama has nominated former U.S. Rep. Ann Marie Buerkle to serve on the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

Ann Marie Buerkle is President Barack Obama’s newest nomination to sit on CPSC. A Republican, she is a former New York congresswoman who lost her seat in 2012. She was a a member of the House Tea Party Caucus and the Republican Study Committee. She sat on various subcommittees of the Foreign Affairs, Oversight and Government Reform, and Veterans Affairs committees. In 2011, Obama named her as a representative to the 66th UN General Assembly but she lost her reelection bid in 2012.

Prior to serving in Congress, she was an assistant attorney general for New York State from 1997 to 2009 and was in private practice from 1994 to 1997. She previously worked as a registered nurse. She has degrees from the St. Joseph’s Hospital School of Nursing (1972), Le Moyne College (1977), and Syracuse University College of Law (1994).

Commissioner Nancy Nord is serving her extra year and leaves in October. Last year, Obama nominated Marietta Robinson, a Democrat, to fill Thomas Moore’s former seat with a term until 2017. Robinson received her Senate hearing a year ago and still awaits a confirmation vote. Speculation is that the Senate has been waiting to vote on a Republican and Democrat together.

Buerkle said one of her main tasks as a commissioner will be to uphold the federal Consumer Product Safety Act and to establish standards for products.

“What happens is if there’s a faulty product out there or someone has a complaint, they reach out to the commission,” she said. “So really it’s about consumer product safety and us upholding the law. The commission upholds the law and makes determinations about standards for products produced by manufacturers.”

Before serving on the commission, Buerkle must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. If confirmed, she will serve out the remaining time on a seven-year term  vacated by Anne Northup that expires in 2018.