Williams-Sonoma Agrees to $987,500 Civil Penalty

/in /by

Significant Internal Compliance Improvements for Failure to Report Defective Pottery Barn Wooden Hammock Stands

 

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) announced today that Williams-Sonoma, Inc., of San Francisco, Calif., has agreed to pay a $987,500 civil penalty.

WilliamsSonoma-LogoAs the CPSC did recently in the Kolcraft agreement, in addition to paying a monetary penalty, Williams-Sonoma has agreed to implement and maintain a compliance program designed to ensure compliance with the safety statutes and regulations enforced by the CPSC.

Williams-Sonoma has also agreed to maintain and enforce a system of internal controls and procedures designed to ensure that:

  • information required to be disclosed by the firm to the CPSC is recorded, processed, and reported, in accordance with applicable law(s);
  • all reporting made to the CPSC is timely, truthful, complete, and accurate;
  • prompt disclosure is made to Williams-Sonoma’s management of any significant deficiencies or material weaknesses in the design or operation of such internal controls that are reasonably likely to adversely affect, in any material respect, the company’s ability to report to the CPSC.

Williams-Sonoma further agreed to provide written documentation of such improvements, processes, and controls, upon request to the CPSC; to cooperate fully and truthfully with CPSC staff; and to make available all information, materials, and personnel deemed necessary to staff to evaluate the company’s compliance with the terms of the agreement.

The settlement resolves CPSC’s charges that the firm knowingly failed to report to CPSC immediately, as required by federal law, a defect involving Pottery Barn wooden hammock stands which were found to contain a defect that could pose a fall and laceration hazard to consumers.

Williams-Sonoma did not file its full report with CPSC until September 11, 2008. On October 1, 2008, Williams-Sonoma and CPSC announced the recall of 30,000 wooden hammock stands. By that time, Williams-Sonoma was aware of 45 incidents involving the hammocks, including 12 reports of injuries requiring medical attention for lacerations, neck and back pain, bruising, and one incident involving fractured ribs.

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.

CPSC seeks information on materials that can be determined not to include lead, soluble heavy metals or phthalates

/in /by

This Request for Information (RFI) is seekingCPSC_Blocks information on materials that do not, and will not; contain the prohibited elements or chemicals in concentrations above the legally allowable limit. Information provided by the public concerning the characteristics of such materials will be used to develop recommended courses of action for the Commission.

This RFI consists of four parts, seeking data and information concerning the following children’s products and materials used to manufacture those products:

  • Toys subject to ASTM F963-11, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Toy Safety, and the presence, if any, or at what levels, of the eight elements designated in section 4.3.5 of the standard. The solubility of each element is limited to no more than the levels listed in Tables 1 and 2 of the standard. Additionally, for accessible component parts of toys primarily intended for children 12 years old and younger, the lead content must be no greater than 100 parts per million (ppm), and the lead content of paints or surface coatings must be no greater than 90 ppm, in accordance with section 101 of the CPSIA;
  • Toys and certain child care articles, and the presence, if any, or at what levels, of the six prohibited phthalates listed in section 108 of the CPSIA. These products are subject to a maximum concentration of 1000 ppm (or 0.1 percent) for each of the six prohibited phthalates;
  • Manufactured woods and the presence, if any, or at what levels, of lead. Accessible manufactured wood in children’s products is subject to the maximum allowable lead content requirement of 100 ppm;
  • Synthetic food dyes and the presence, if any, or at what levels, of lead. Accessible synthetic food dyes in children’s products are subject to the maximum allowable lead content requirement of 100 ppm.

 

The agency requests written responses to the RFI by June 17, 2013. See Federal Register, April 16, 2013

CPSC Approves New Lead Testing Method in Substrates of Children’s Products

/in , /by

Feb 25, 2013

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has approved High-Definition X-Ray Fluorescence (HDXRF) technology for the substrate testing of lead in children’s products using the test method ASTM F2853-10. HDXRF technology, used to detect regulated elements, had previously been approved by the CPSC for testing of lead in paint and other surface coatings of children’s products.

This new action by the CPSC expands the use of HDXRF for third-party testing to support product certification and clears the way for its use in “production testing” under the new CPSC Testing and Certification Rule, which became effective February 8, 2013. HDXRF offers the additional benefits of taking coating and substrate measurements simultaneously and non-destructively, reducing testing time and cost.

“The CSPC’s approval of HDXRF for lead in substrate testing means that manufacturers, importers, retailers and laboratories now have a complete, precise, and reliable alternative to traditional wet chemistry,” said Satbir Nayar, director of sales and marketing for consumer products of XOS, a developer of the HDXRF technique.

The detailed new CPSC regulation, called the 1112 Rule, approving HDXRF for lead in substrate testing and restating the agency’s April 2011 approval of HDXRF for lead in paint testing, can be accessed atwww.cpsc.gov.

CPSC Updates from Small Business Ombudsman

/in /by

U.S. CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION LOGO

Dear CPSC Small Business Community,

In this post, please find a list of recent CPSC news, regulatory updates, and other activities that may be of interest to you.

 

Periodic Testing Requirements

On this Friday, February 8, 2013, a new regulation that requires the periodic testing of continuing production of children’s products becomes effective.  The regulation is 16 CFR part 1107. We have posted some new information and FAQs at the following Web page:

http://www.cpsc.gov/periodic-testing  NEW!

Please note that we are currently reorganizing the testing and certification pages during the transition to a new CPSC.gov website.  Further updates, information, and FAQs about third party testing and certification will be coming soon.

 

CPSC.gov Website

You may have noticed that CPSC recently redesigned its website to provide a better user experience for stakeholders.  With the migration to the new website, some users have reported difficulty finding certain resources.  We appreciate your patience as we fix the new website’s nits and ask you to report problems at:  http://www.cpsc.gov/cgibin/epifeedback.aspx.

Upcoming Presentations

New York, NY – Monday, February 11, 2013: General CPSIA Presentation

26 Federal Plaza, Downtown Manhattan, Conference Room A, 6th Floor, 2 pm

I will be speaking to any interested small business in the metropolitan New York City area this coming Monday.  The presentation will be an overview of U.S. regulatory requirements for consumer products (including children’s products) and will also explain the requirements and benefits of registering as a small batch manufacturer with CPSC.   The presentation will include a discussion of third party testing requirements, including periodic testing requirements.

The presentation is free and open to the public.  Advance registration is requested (but not required) to ensure adequate seating.  The presentation will take place in Conference Room A at the Federal Plaza Conference Center located at 26 Federal Plaza, which is at the southeast corner of Worth Street and Broadway in downtown Manhattan.  Please allow approximately 30 minutes to get through security and arrive to the 6th floor.  There also is a café on the 6th floor.  You may contact me at ncohen@cpsc.gov with any questions and to RSVP.

 

New York, NY – Tuesday, February 12, 2013: Presentation on Third Party Testing

Jakob K. Javits Convention Center, Room 1E19, 10 am

I will be speaking to attendees at the New York International Toy Fair this coming Tuesday.  The presentation was requested by the Toy Industry Association and addresses the U.S. third party testing requirements for toy manufacturers, including periodic testing requirements.   CPSC Chairman Inez Tenenbaum will be the keynote speaker at 9 am.

You may also contact me at ncohen@cpsc.gov with any questions or to schedule a time to speak individually.  More details about this presentation are available here:  http://www2.toyassociation.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=tf_Home&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=18494.

 

Washington, DC – Thursday, February 28, 2013: Panel on Third Party Testing

Hyatt Regency Crystal City at Reagan National Airport, Room TBD, 1:45 pm; 3:30 pm

I will be moderating a panel for attendees on Day 3 (“CPSC Day”) of the International Consumer Product Health and Safety Organization (ICPHSO) conference.  The panel will address third party testing, including the periodic testing requirements.   More information, including the list of CPSC panelists, is available here: http://www.icphso.org/conference/2013annual/agenda.html.

 

Regulatory Update:

Newly proposed regulations are open for public comment and recently enacted regulations are set to go into effect.  If you have never commented on a rule before, you can learn more about the rulemaking process and how you can add your comments to the proposed rule before it is finalized.  Your comments are vital to ensuring that the Commission has as much information as possible as the Commissioners consider whether to finalize proposed rules into law.

New Regulations:  Effective Dates for Compliance

Cribs – The crib standards went into effect for all new cribs sold on or after June 28, 2011.  Child care providers, family child care homes, places of public accommodation (e.g. hotels), and crib rental companies were given until December 28, 2012 to ensure that their cribs comply with the new regulations.  Please see our Crib Information Center for more information tailored to child care providers to enable you to determine if your cribs comply:  www.cpsc.gov/cribs.

 Play Yards –The new play yard regulation was published on August 29, 2012 and has an effective date of February 28, 2013.  It is codified at 16 CFR Part 1221.

 Infant Swings –The new infant swing regulation was published on November 7, 2012 and has an effective date of May 7, 2013.  It is codified at 16 CFR Part 1223.

 Reducing Third Party Testing Burdens – In October, the Commission voted to direct the CPSC staff to study possible options for reducing the burdens related to third party testing.  Such studies would be subject to staff resource availability.  The results and the Commissioners’ statements are available at:   http://www.cpsc.gov/PageFiles/130209/3rdparty.pdf.

In January, the Commission voted to direct the staff to draft “Requests for Information” (RFIs) on four possible burden reduction options to be included in CPSC’s 2013 operating plan.  The four areas about which the Commission will gather information concern:  heavy metal content in certain materials, phthalates in certain materials, and lead content in synthetic food additives and adhesives used in manufactured woods.  See the Commission’s action at: http://www.cpsc.gov/PageFiles/139100/2013operatingplan.pdf.

Representative Samples – On December 5, 2012, the Commission finalized its rule on ensuring the use of representative samples used in third party testing.  The rule also has an effective date of February 8, 2013.  You can learn more here.

 

Open For Public Comment (Selected items)

Hand-Held Infant Carriers – The Commission voted to publish a draft final rule for a new Safety Standard for Hand-Held Infant Carriers.  The proposed rule was published December 10, 2012 and public comments are due by 11:59 pm on February 25, 2013.  You can watch the staff presentation in archived format here and comment here.

Bedside Sleepers – After a recent staff briefing, the Commission voted to publish a draft final rule for a new Safety Standard for Bedside Sleepers.  The proposed rule was published December 10, 2012 and public comments are due by 11:59 pm on February 25, 2013.  You can watch the staff presentation in archived format here and comment here.

 

Comment Period Recently Closed

Bassinets and Cradles – The public comment period for a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for a Safety Standard for Bassinets and Cradles recently closed on January 2, 2013.  The Commission staff is currently evaluating the comments received.

Make sure to get your products into compliance before the new regulations become effective, which has generally been about six months after the final regulations are published.

 

Small Batch Manufacturers:

PLEASE NOTE that if you were a registered small batch manufacturer with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) for calendar year 2012 and you wish to continue in this status, you must register for calendar year 2013.  Registration must be submitted annually.    Registration is ongoing, and you may register at any time during this calendar year – through December 2013.

If you wish to register as a small batch manufacturer for calendar year 2013, your registration must be based upon the total number of product units sold and the total gross revenues from the sales of all consumer products in the previous calendar year – January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012.  If you meet these requirements, you may now register for calendar year 2013 by logging into your user account in the Business Portal at: www.SaferProducts.gov.

When you log in to your account at: www.SaferProducts.gov and you click the “Small Batch Manufacturer” tab with your cursor, you will be asked to attest that your company satisfies the criteria to register; the criteria are the same as last year and have only been updated to account for your company’s sales in calendar year 2012.  Once you are certain that you can attest to the truth and accuracy of the statements for your sales in calendar year 2012, you may check the boxes and submit your registration.  Within the next day or so, you will receive a confirmation e-mail message with your new, unique Small Batch Manufacturer Registration Number for 2013.  *Please save that e-mail message for your reference.* If you do not yet know whether you will qualify as a small batch manufacturer based on sales through December 2012, please wait to register until you have full information regarding your sales numbers.  Registration is ongoing, and you may register at any time during this calendar year – through December 2013.

Please note that when you log in to your account after your registration for calendar year 2013 is accepted, your Business Portal account will display your unique Small Batch Manufacturer Registration Number for both calendar years 2012 and 2013.  Please use the appropriate number (based on the date of your product’s manufacture or final assembly) in drafting your Children’s Product Certificate.

If you have any questions or require assistance with the registration process, please e-mail: clearinghouse@cpsc.gov.

If you have any questions about how registration as a small batch manufacturer with the CPSC affects your obligations to test and certify your products as compliant with applicable consumer product safety rules or compliance with other CPSC rules, regulations, standards, or bans, please review the program information at: www.cpsc.gov/smallbatch.  If you need further assistance, please e-mail me at:  ncohen@cpsc.gov.

As always, please let me know if you have additional questions or concerns.  We post updates – especially about regulation comment periods – frequently to our Twitter account at www.twitter.com/CPSCSmallBiz.

Best regards,

Neal

Neal S. Cohen

Small Business Ombudsman

U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission

Tel: 301.504.7504

ncohen@cpsc.gov

www.cpsc.gov/smallbiz

www.cpsc.gov/gettingstarted

Connect With Us On:

Twitter (@CPSCSmallBiz)

New Year, New Rules: Consumer Product Contacts Safety Commission (CPSC) Safety Testing and Certification Rules Taking Effect for Children’s Products

/in /by

In an advisory issued by the law firm of Arnold & Porter LLP, they highlight the new testing and certification rules coming into effect February 8, 2013 for manufacturers and importers of children’s products.  The two rules; 16 C.F.R. Part 1109 (effective December 2011), which permits certification of the product by relying on component part testing or another party’s finished product testing and 16 C.F.R. Part 1107, which outlines the additional requirements concerning certification and ongoing testing and labeling of children’s products.  They summarized the key provisions of these regulations which have been discussed previously in this blog.

  • Third Party Testing for Certification (§1107.20) – the initial certification must be based on a “sufficient number of samples” that are “identical in all material respects” to a third party laboratory that is accredited by the CPSC to do the testing for initial product certification.  If any of the samples submitted fails certification testing then the failure must be investigated by the manufacturer/importer of record and corrective action must be taken and documented before additional samples are re-submitted for testing and certification.
  • Periodic Testing (§1107.21) – after the initial certification of the product, periodic testing of the product must continue as long as it is in production.  The test plan selected by the manufacturer/importer of record can either be; periodic testing plan (at least once per year), production testing plan (at least once every two years) or ISO 17025 testing plan (at least once every three years).  The type of testing plan chosen will depend on several factors and must be done for each manufacturing site.
  • Material Change (§1107.23) – any change in a children’s product after initial certification and before the test plan testing time, that would affect the products ability to continue to be compliant, must be re-tested.  A material change is defined as; change in manufacturing process or facility, change in souring of component parts or suppliers.
  • Undue Influence Policy (§1107.24) – every manufacturer/importer of record must establish a undue influence policy with regard to third party laboratories which should include; a written policy statement from company officials, training for all appropriate employees, attestation of training, means of immediately notifying the CPSC of any attempts of undue influence or attempts to hide undue influence and retraining of employees if undue influence requirements should change.
  • Recordkeeping (§1107.26) – records on all children’s products must be maintained by the manufacturer/importer of record for a period of five (5) years and must be made available to the CPSC upon request.  These records should include; children’s product certificate per product per manufacturing site, periodic testing records (including the test plan and test results within those test plans), representative samples chosen and the methodology for the representative samples, documentation of all material changes by product by manufacturing site and undue influence training and materials.
  • Labeling of Consumer Products to Indicate Compliance (§1107.30) – once a children’s product has met all the applicable rules, bans and standards that would apply to the product, the manufacturer/importer of record can label their product with “Meets CPSC Safety Requirements”
  • Reliance on Component Part Testing or Another Party’s Testing or Certification (§1109.5) – a manufacturer/importer of record can rely (with conditions) on testing and certification supplied by a component part supplier or a finished product supplier (manufacturer) for the purposes of final product certification.  The CPSC expects the manufacturer/importer of record to exercise “due care” when accepting this testing or certification.  Due care (as pointed out in the alert) could include; conducting a reasonable review of the other party’s certification or test reports and addressing any discrepancies or other concern over the validity, confirming that the testing labs have been accredited by the CPSC, asking other third party labs to confirm the authenticity of the test reports, inspecting or auditing factories to ensure that good manufacturing practices have been carried out, proper sampling procedures and the periodic test plan are being followed and that the necessary records are being kept, or submitting samples to another third party lab to verify compliance of the product.  The alert goes on to point out that certain documentation must be received from the component supplier or finished product supplier (manufacturer) before the manufacturer/importer of record can rely on these test reports or certifications.  They include;
    • Identification of a lot or batch number to identify the component part or finished product that the testing or certification applies to
    • Identification of the testing methods and sampling protocols used
    • Attestation by the third party lab that performed the testing
    • Records to support the traceability
    • Attestation by component supplier or finished product supplier (manufacturer) and third party lab that while the component part or finished product was in their care, custody and control they exercised due care to ensure compliance with test integrity requirements.

The challenges pointed out in the alert to comply with all the above regulations as it pertains to component part or finished product certification and testing really comes down to; does a manufacturer/importer of record have enough control over the manufacturing process comply with the record keeping of these two rules?  There are really only two paths that an importer or finished product manufacturer can take for compliance; either do all the testing on the product themselves or rely on the foreign manufacturer (or component part supplier) testing and certification of the product.

Questions to Ask?

  1. Can I obtain all of the documentation and develop/implement all the necessary procedures to show that we have exercised “due care” when relying on other parties testing and certification?
  2. What steps do we need to take to “reasonably” know when there has been a material change in the product or the components of the product?
  3. Should we test the product (or component parts) from each purchase order/shipment to ensure that the product (or component part) are still representative of those in distribution and that no material change has been made?

The Year Ahead

/in , /by

2013 – What to Watch from the Consumer Product Safety Commission

In a recent article from the law firm of Roetzel & Andress by attorneys, Brian E. Dickerson, John Boudet, Amanda M. Knapp and Jonathan R. Secrest, they outline five (5) areas for companies to watch out for in the New Year with regard to the CPSC.

  1. Commission Membership – currently the commission is made up of two Democratic commissioners and one Republican commissioner.  It is pointed out that President Obama can fill the two vacancies on the Commission this year; however one of those vacancies must be a Republican.  He has the choice of just letting the Commission continue as it is currently.
  2. Civil Penalties – civil penalties were dramatically increased with the passage of the CPISA in 2008 but thus far have not resulted in increased civil penalties for companies.  It was noted in the article that until October 2012, the commission was evenly split between Republican and Democrat commissioners and now with a Democratic majority the expectation is that civil penalties will increase.   An example of this was the 2012 Hewlett-Packard penalty where the number of incidents and the timing of reporting a product defect was the basis of the large civil penalty.
  3. Online Database Rulings – the CPSC’s online database, SaferProducts.gov, was another issue brought forth by the law firm.  They discussed a recent opinion by a U.S. District judge in the matter of Company Doe v. Tenenbaum, where it was held that “the Commission had abused its discretion in seeking to publish a complaint on its online database because it failed to meet the statutory requirement that a compliant of harm be ‘related to’ the product identified in the compliant.”  Since this is the first court challenge to the online database it is uncertain as to if other companies will use judicial review to prevent publication in the database.  Additionally the current case is being appealed and is being joined by several consumer interest groups who are seeking to obtain the identity of the company and the product.
  4. Administrative Complaints – a more aggressive approach by the commission in the filing of administrative complaints and recalls of products was noted.  The case of the manufacturer of “Buckyballs” was used to show how the Commission went from working with the manufacturer on the development of education, packaging and warnings for the product to litigation, product ban and recall.  In addition the Commission showed a wiliness to go directly to retailers, urging them to stop selling the product.  It would seem that the Commission has adopted the stance that warnings are not sufficient to prevent hazards presented by products.
  5. New Section 6(b) Interpretation – section 6(b) of the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) prohibits the Commission from disclosing information about a consumer product and the identity of the manufacturer or private labeler until the Commission has taken “reasonable steps” to assure that the information is accurate and fair.  In a new interpretation of section 6(b) the Commission has stated that it will announce that it is “investigating” a product or company solely on the information provided in an initial or full report submitted under section 15 of the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA)

Is your company compliant? Need help in deciphering the law as it pertains to you? Jacoby Solutions can review your companies compliance plan and help you tailor your business operations to ensure you comply.  Contact us to get started today!

Standing Guard for Consumers: CPSC & CBP Working at U.S. Ports to Protect Families This Holiday Toy Shopping Season

/in /by
CPSC Media Contact: (301) 504-7908

NEWS from CPSC

U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission

Standing Guard for Consumers: CPSC & CBP Working at U.S. Ports to Protect Families This Holiday Toy Shopping Season

PORT ELIZABETH, N.J. – Today, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) Chairman Inez Tenenbaum and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Deputy Commissioner David Aguilar announced at Port Elizabeth, N.J. that more than 2 million units of dangerous or violative toys and children’s products were seized in 2012 and were prevented from reaching the hands of children. CPSC investigators and CBP inspectors are working arm-in-arm at ports across the United States to keep families safe during this holiday toy shopping season.

Over the past four years, CPSC and CBP have stopped more than 8.5 million units of about 2,400 different toys and children’s products due to safety hazards or the failure to meet federal safety standards. By seizing dangerous toys and children’s products at the ports, those products remain off store shelves and out of consumer’s homes.

Chairman Tenenbaum and Commissioner Aguilar urged parents to remain vigilant when making toy purchases and always keep safety at the top of their toy shopping list.

“Proactive port surveillance, strong toy standards, and educational efforts create a safer holiday toy shopping experience for consumers by keeping dangerous products off store shelves,” said Chairman Tenenbaum. “Ultimately our goal is to protect our most vulnerable population – kids – and keep them safe this holiday season.”

“Together with CPSC, we have intercepted record amounts of unsafe products,” said Deputy Commissioner Aguilar. “We are here to raise consumers’ awareness about the very real danger of unsafe products and urge consumers to be vigilant when buying toys and children’s products this holiday season.”

In fiscal year 2012, CPSC recalled 38 toys, three of which involved a lead violation. Toy recalls continued to decline since 2008. There were 172 recalls in fiscal year 2008, 50 recalls in fiscal year 2009, 46 toy recalls in fiscal year 2010, and 34 recalls in 2011. Most toy recalls in 2012 were due to small parts, choking hazards or sharp points.

Toy-related death reports to CPSC involving children younger than 15-years-old decreased to 13 in 2011 from 19 fatalities in 2010 and 17 reported in 2009. The majority of these toy-related fatalities were attributed to asphyxiation, choking or drowning. These included children choking on balloons, drowning after trying to retrieve a toy from a swimming pool, or being found with tricycles in swimming pools.

A new report (PDF) released by CPSC today estimated 193,200 toy-related, emergency department-treated injuries to children younger than 15 years of age occurred in 2011. Many of the incidents were associated with, but not necessarily caused by, a toy. For children younger than 15-years-old, non-motorized scooters continued to be the category of toys associated with the most injuries. Frequently, these injuries involved lacerations, contusions, and abrasions to the child’s face and head.

Here are some safety tips that consumers should keep in mind this holiday season:

  • Balloons – Children can choke or suffocate on deflated or broken balloons. Keep deflated balloons away from children younger than 8-years-old. Discard broken balloons immediately.
  • Small balls and other toys with small parts – For children younger than age 3, avoid toys with small parts, which can cause choking.
  • Scooters and other riding toys – Riding toys, skateboards, and in-line skates go fast, and falls could be deadly. Helmets and safety gear should be worn properly at all times, and they should be sized to fit.
  • Magnets – High powered magnet sets are dangerous and should be kept away from children under 14. Building & play sets with small magnets should also be kept away from small children.

 

Once gifts are open:

  • Immediately discard plastic wrapping or other toy packaging before they become dangerous play things.
  • Keep toys appropriate for older children away from younger siblings.
  • Battery charging should be supervised by adults. Chargers and adapters can pose thermal burn hazards to young children. Pay attention to instructions and warnings on battery chargers. Some chargers lack any mechanism to prevent overcharging.

 

Along with educating the public, CPSC is committed to working with foreign and domestic toy manufacturers, importers and retailers to help them understand and comply with U.S. toy requirements.

In addition this year, CPSC joined international safety agencies in Canada and Mexico to promote toy safety education and awareness. CPSC along with Health Canada and Mexico’s Procuraduria Federal del Consumidor (PROFECO) have released toy safety tips for choosing, purchasing and supervising the use of children’s toys. This cooperative effort with CPSC’s North American partners helps to ensure a safer marketplace.

—

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is charged with protecting the public from unreasonable risks of injury or death associated with the use of the thousands of consumer products under the agency’s jurisdiction. Deaths, injuries, and property damage from consumer product incidents cost the nation more than $900 billion annually. CPSC is committed to protecting consumers and families from products that pose a fire, electrical, chemical, or mechanical hazard. CPSC’s work to ensure the safety of consumer products – such as toys, cribs, power tools, cigarette lighters and household chemicals – contributed to a decline in the rate of deaths and injuries associated with consumer products over the past 30 years.

To report a dangerous product or a product-related injury, go online to: SaferProducts.gov, call CPSC’s Hotline at (800) 638-2772 or teletypewriter at (301) 595-7054 for the hearing and speech impaired. Consumers can obtain this news release and product safety information at www.cpsc.gov. To join a free e-mail subscription list, please go towww.cpsc.gov/cpsclist.aspx.

Voices from Outside the Echo Chamber

/in , /by
  Voices from Outside the Echo Chamber

by Nancy Nord

A regulator’s job description should include a requirement to get out of Washington echo chamber, from time to time, to visit and talk with folks who have to live with our mandates. That is one of the best ways we have to gauge if regulations make sense out in the real world and if there are any issues surfacing as companies work to comply with the law. Last week I was on the road, having just those kinds of conversations.

 

The ABC Kids Expo was a wonderful opportunity to talk one-on-one with smaller companies who make a wide variety of infant and children’s furniture and other products. Without exception, these companies expressed a strong commitment to safety. This makes sense because many of the companies represented were started by entrepreneurial parents who saw either a need going unmet or a way to improve a product. While these companies were very pleased and eager to get whatever information we can offer on how to comply with our rules, I also heard concerns about both the process of writing the rules and the substance of the rules themselves. For example, the agency, working with the voluntary standards bodies, has been issuing the Congressionally-directed durable infant and toddler products regulations at a rapid pace.  Yet there is growing concern, which I heard expressed again last week, that this is resulting in a process that is less rigorous, at times more arbitrary and more error-prone than it used to be. Certainly, this is something that warrants greater attention at the CPSC.

 

I also spent time at the Specialty Graphic Imaging Association Expo, talking with the association’s Board of Directors, conducting a safety seminar and walking the show floor talking with individual members of this very complex and dynamic industry. Here are some of the key points I took home:

  • Overall, component testing is not working as the cost saver we hoped for this industry;
  • CPSIA-required testing is posing challenges in terms of expense and frustration as companies test for substances that are not present but do not fit into the exemptions; and
  • Testing variability among labs, in particular with respect to phthalates testing, is adding time and expense to the process, and is consuming resources in an unproductive manner.

While there are some very large players, the bulk of the industry is made up of small, domestic companies. Because of the nature of the business, the small batch testing exemption does not apply. One small business owner, with fewer than 10 employees, told me of needing to add an employee to do nothing but administer and document his testing and regulatory compliance program. Another told me that since children’s garments were not a major part of his business, he has decided just to get out of that aspect of the business altogether rather than have to hassle with all the rules.

 

I am concerned when I hear reports like that. Congress directed us to look at ways to cut costs. I suspect that, if and when we get serious with a commitment to action, taking that directive seriously, rather than just playing charades with that directive, we will find that there is ample opportunity to provide some real relief. In the meantime, with no boost to safety, the clock is ticking on the existence of numerous U.S. based low-volume businesses and their employees’ livelihoods.

CSPC Draft Staff Briefing Outlines 11 Ideas to Reduce Testing Costs

/in /by

The CPSC has released a Staff Briefing that will be discussed and voted on by the Commission on October 3, 2012 that outlines 11 areas the will help reduce the cost of testing and compliance for children’s product manufacturers and importers of record.  The aim at finding burden reducers during fiscal 2013, which begins October 1 and are;

  • Education of companies on testing rules
  • Expand the determination of what should be tested by;
    • Creating a list of tests in international standards that companies could use to show conformity with corresponding CPSC product safety rules
    • Using the same process used now to determine if certain materials need not be tested for lead to be applied to the eight heavy metals now tested for under ASTM F963
    • Expand the current list of materials exempt from testing for phthalates
    • Allow Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) to show phthalate compliance
    • Allow for production volume exemption (under 10,000 units produced) for periodic testing which would require testing compliance every 3 years instead of very year
    • Expand the bodies responsible for accrediting third-party laboratories beyond ILAC-MRA signatories to increase number of testing labs
    • Allow “de minimis” testing exemptions for lead in paint and phthalates
    • Increasing the materials exempt from lead determination to include those deemed safe for addition to food by the FDA
    • Allow companies that do short production runs and recertify their product with each run, not have to create a periodic testing plan for doing so
    • Create classes of products that are deemed “low risk” of noncompliance and allow companies that produce those products to expand the intervals of compliance testing.
    • Reducing administrative costs of compliance through information technology
    • Seek authority from Congress to certify certain manufacturing processes as satisfying testing requirements due to ongoing reassessments involved.

 

The full staff briefing (all 117 pages) can be found here

 

http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia12/brief/reduce3pt.pdf

Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act celebrates 4th anniversary

/in /by
Aug 14, 2012 2:30 PM

Today is the anniversary of the national consumer product safety law that changed safety standards in the U.S. after an outbreak of recalls, injuries, and deaths linked to dangerous children’s products in 2007 and 2008. Under the law, which was supported by Consumer Reports, toys must be tested for safety before they’re sold.

The product safety law, CPSIA, greatly reduced the lead levels found in children’s products, as well as set tougher safety standards for cribs. The law also created the nation’s first online database, SaferProducts.gov, where consumers can file safety complaints about products.

“The database is a tremendous resource for consumers,” said Ellen Bloom, director of federal policy for Consumers Union, the advocacy arm of Consumer Reports. “You can search for safety reports about the products you buy, and if you wind up with an unsafe product, the database is there for you to report the problem.”