Marc Schoem to lead ICPHSO

/in /by

The International Consumer Product Health & Safety Organization (ICPHSO)  announced that Marc Schoem, currently with the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), will be taking the reins as Executive Director of ICPHSO on October 15, 2015. The position has been unfilled since the founding Executive Director Ross Koeser retired in February of this year. Schoem will retire from CPSC in early October.

Founded in 1993, ICPHSO (pronounced IC – FAH – SO) is the only organization which attracts a global membership of consumer product health and safety professionals, all of whom come together to exchange ideas, share information, and address health and safety concerns affecting all consumers. ICPHSO members represent U.S. and global government agencies, manufacturers, importers, retailers, trade associations, certification/testing laboratories, law firms, academia, standards development organizations, media, and consumer advocacy groups.

Al Kaufman, current ICPHSO president, stated, “I know I speak for the entire ICPHSO board of directors when I say that we are very excited to have Marc on board. Having someone of Marc’s caliber, with the vast experience he brings to this role, serving as Executive Director will enable ICPHSO to grow and prosper, furthering our mission of providing a neutral forum where product safety practitioners from many organizations can come together to advance the art and science of protecting consumers.”

Schoem brings 40+ years of experience at CPSC to IPCHSO, working directly with many of the members and stakeholders in the product safety arena. His current position is Deputy Director, Office of Compliance and Field Operations, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. Since joining the Commission in 1974, Mr. Schoem has served in a number of positions in its Bureau of Information and Education, Office of Education, Global Outreach and Small Business Ombudsman and the Office of Compliance and Field Operations.

“I am looking forward to this unique opportunity to lead ICPHSO,” stated Schoem. “ICPHSO is an organization that exists to bring together consumers, members of industry, global government regulators and other key players in the consumer product safety field to discuss and exchange ideas to improve consumer product safety throughout the world. This is a natural extension of the role I have played at CPSC for the last 40 years. My hope is to build ICPHSO into an even stronger and more vibrant organization that can help stakeholders address emerging safety issues and further the dialogue between all parties involved with consumer product safety in a non-partisan and inclusive approach.”

Schoem will make his first appearance as executive director of ICPHSO at the organization’s International Symposium in Billund, Denmark on October 20-21, 2015.

 

CPSC Issues Direct Final Rule on the Safety Standards for Infant Bath Seats, Toddler Beds, and Full-Size Baby Cribs

/in , , /by

CPSC_logo_redblue_QR The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) on Monday, December 9, 2013, issued a direct final rule on the Safety Standards for Infant Bath Seats, Toddler Beds, and Full-Size Cribs. Under the authority of section 104(b) of the CPSIA, the CPSC is publishing this direct final rule, revising the CPSC’s standards for infant bath seats, toddler beds, and full-size cribs, to incorporate by reference more recent versions of the applicable ASTM standards.

The rule is effective on March 24, 2014, unless the CPSC receives significant adverse comment by January 8, 2014. If the CPSC receives timely significant adverse comments, they will publish notification in the Federal Register, withdrawing this direct final rule before its effective date.

Infant Bath Seats

On September 25, 2013 the ASTM revised the safety standard for infant bath seats to the current ASTM standard, ASTM F1967-13. The differences between the previous version, ASTM F1967-11a and the current version, ASTM F1967-13 is outlined below.

Attachment Components. The 2013 version of the ASTM standard contains a new definition and requirement for attachment components. The requirement specifies that all components needed to attach the bath seat to the bath tub (attachment components) must be permanently attached to the bath seat. The CPSC is aware of a bath seat design that provides some attachment components that are separate from the bath seat. With this design, consumers must install the attachment components, consisting of adhesive discs, on to the bath tub surface. If the consumer fails to install the adhesive discs or fails to install them properly, these bath seats pose a tip over hazard.

Test Surface Preparation. ASTM F1967-11a specifies that bath seats be tested for stability on two specific test surfaces and also provides specific directions for preparing the test surfaces. The CPSC is aware of third party testing laboratories that interpreted one step in the testing preparation directions differently than ASTM intended. Following this alternate interpretation, the testing laboratory provided passing test results for some bath seats that otherwise would not have passed the stability requirement. Therefore, ASTM changed this section of the standard to specify more clearly test surface preparation.

Definition of a Bath Seat/Restraints Systems. In 2011, ASTM changed the definition of a “bath seat” to specify better the type of support that a bath seat provides. Before the ASTM F1967-11a version, the definition of “bath seat” did not specify the type of support the product provided. The revised (and current) definition states that a bath seat provides, at a minimum, support to the front and back of a seated infant. Thus, a product with only back support is no longer considered a bath seat. ASTM F1967-13 removes a provision that applied to bath seats with only back support because the provision is no longer relevant, given the current definition of “bath seat” as a product with front and back support.

Suction Cup Requirements. ASTM clarified two requirements for testing bath seats that use suction cups. The standard provides two suction cup test requirements: One provision evaluates the attachment between the suction cups and the test surface; the other evaluates the attachment of the suction cups to the bath seat itself. The first difference between the two versions clarifies the test requirement to emphasize that the bath seat must actually attach to the test surfaces as part of the test. The second difference specifies that this particular test only needs to be performed on one of the two test surfaces.

Markings and Labeling. ASTM made two minor changes to labeling requirements. One revision changed the test for label permanency to the relative humidity (RH) to be a range rather than a specific RH. The CPSC considers this a practical change that was needed because producing an exact RH for the test is difficult. The second change to the labeling requirements removes the word “adult” before the term “caregiver” in a provision that requires a warning to “be located on the product so that it is visible to the [adult] caregiver.”

Toddler Beds

On September 25, 2013, ASTM notified the CPSC that ASTM has revised ASTM F1821 again and has published a new version, ASTM F1821-13. This version contains 12 significant changes from ASTM F1821-09. These changes bring the ASTM standard into accord with the CPSC’s mandatory standard for toddler beds at 16 CFR part 1217.

Full-Size Cribs

The revised standard, ASTM F1169-13, differs from ASTM F1169-11 (the current CPSC standard) in one aspect that is reflected in two sections of the revised standard. ASTM F1169-11 requires that before and after testing a crib, the crib must comply with all general requirements of the standard. These general requirements address the distance between slats. However, the specific testing procedure for slats allows for one slat to fail during testing if the load at failure is at least 60 pounds and an additional 25 percent of the slats are tested and meet the 80-pound force requirement. Thus, a tested crib potentially could comply with the specific testing procedures for slats even if a slat failed during testing, but not meet the general slat spacing requirements because of the failed slat. In that situation, the crib would not comply with the requirements in the current standard because the crib would not meet all of the general requirements after the crib had been tested.

The revised standard, ASTM F1169-13, provides an exception for this specific situation so that a crib’s failure to meet the slat spacing requirement under the testing circumstances described above would not cause the crib to be considered noncompliant.

CPSC Issues Final Rule for Hand-Held Infant Carriers

/in , /by

Hand-Held Infant Carrier

The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has issued a Final Rule for Hand-Held Infant Carriers on Friday, December 6, 2013. The rule will become effective on June 6, 2014.

On December 10, 2012, the CPSC issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) for hand-held infant carriers. 77 FR 73354. The NPR proposed to incorporate by reference the then current voluntary standard, ASTM F2050-12, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Hand-Held Infant Carriers, with certain modifications to strengthen the ASTM standard.

One proposed modification provided for a change in the warning label to better address suffocation and restraint-related hazards. The other proposed modification addressed the testing procedures for the carry handle auto-locking requirement and specified using an aluminum cylinder as the surrogate for the occupant of the carrier rather than a CAMI Mark II 6-month infant dummy (CAMI dummy).

Since the CPSC published the NPR, ASTM has revised ASTM F2050 twice. On July 1, 2013, ASTM approved an updated version of the voluntary standard, ASTM F2050-13, which includes the warning label modification proposed in the NPR.

On September 1, 2013, ASTM approved another revision of the voluntary standard, ASTM F2050-13a, which includes a carry handle auto-locking performance requirement that is different than the requirement proposed in the NPR.

The draft final rule incorporates by reference the most recent version of the ASTM standard, ASTM F2050-13a, with one modification—a clarification of the definition of “hand-held infant carrier,” to include a specific reference to both “rigid-sided” and “semi-rigid-sided” products.

Changes to Requirements of ASTM F2050-13a

The final rule modifies the definition of “hand-held infant carrier” to clarify that the definition includes products with semi rigid sides, as well as products that are rigid-sided. ASTM revised the hand-held infant carrier standard in 2012, to include a separate definition for “hand-held bassinets/cradles.”

A Moses basket meets the definition of a “hand-held bassinet” because a Moses basket is a freestanding product with a rest/support surface that is no more than 10° from horizontal, that sits directly on the floor, without legs or a stand, and has handles or hand-holds intended to allow carrying an occupant whose torso is completely supported by the product. However, because hand-held infant carriers (of which hand-held bassinets/cradles are a subset) are defined in part as “a rigid-sided product” and many Moses baskets have flexible sides, some manufacturers and importers may have interpreted the standard as excluding semi-rigid-sided products such as Moses baskets.

Because Moses baskets meet the definition of “hand-held bassinet/cradle,” and Moses baskets are not subject to any other durable children’s product standard (specifically ASTM F2194-13, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Bassinets and Cradles), the CPSC has determined that Moses baskets are within the scope of the rule. The modification of the definition of “hand-held infant carrier” to include semi rigid-sided products clarifies that Moses baskets are covered by the rule.

Warning Label: The NPR proposed requiring a strangulation warning label to be affixed to the outer surface of the cushion or padding of a hand-held carrier seat in or adjacent to the area where the child’s head would rest. Under the proposal, the warning label for hand-held carrier seats that are intended to be used as restraints in motor vehicles would include a pictogram, while the warning label for hand-held carrier seats not intended to be used as restraints in motor vehicles would not include the pictogram because these seats do not have the chest clips depicted in the pictogram.

Handle Auto-Lock Test: The NPR proposed a modification of the test method for preventing the carrier from rotating and spilling an unrestrained infant when a caregiver picks up the carrier and the handle is not locked in the carry position. The test method in ASTM F2050-12 required the tester to use a standard CAMI dummy as an infant surrogate. The NPR proposed a change that would require the tester to use an aluminum cylinder designed as a surrogate for a 6-month-old infant, in lieu of the CAMI dummy, because testing had revealed that the CAMI dummy could be wedged into the seat padding or otherwise manipulated, so that the CAMI dummy did not fall out during the lift test when the CAMI dummy otherwise should fall. Furthermore, the Commission was concerned that the ability to pass or fail the test based on friction or placement of the CAMI would affect the consistency and repeatability of the test results.

New California Proposition 65 Settlements

/in , /by

A number of California Proposition 65 settlements have been reached involving a wide variety of products including vinyl flooring, air compressors, cosmetic bags, bandages, eyewear, kitchen and door mats, bathroom accessories, and small novelty items. These settlements establish requirements for these products that the defendants have agreed to meet.

These requirements apply to accessible materials of the following adult and children items.Proposition 65 Settlements

PHTHALATES

Bandages

Dashboard Accessories

Bathroom Accessories

Temporary Tattoos

Place Mats and Shower Curtains

Watches and Clocks

Bathroom, Kitchen, and Door Mats

Stationary

Plastic Figures, Charms and Small Novelty Items

Requirement:

  • No more than 1000 ppm DEHP, BBP and DBP each
  • Warning labels cannot be used as an alternative to meeting the 1000 ppm limit

Eyewear

Requirement:

  • No more than 1000 ppm total DEHP
  • Warning labels cannot be used as an alternative to meeting the 1000 ppm limit

Vinyl Flooring

Requirement:

  • No more than 1000 ppm DEHP, BBP, DBP, DIDP and DnHP each
  • Or provide specified warning label

LEAD

Holiday Lights

Cosmetics Bags

Luggage Tags

Requirement:

  • No more than 50 ppm total lead
  • No more than 1.0 μg in wipe test

Note: Both requirements must be met

  • Warning labels cannot be used as an alternative to meeting both requirements

Air Compressors

Requirement:

  • No more than 100 ppm total lead
  • Warning labels cannot be used as an alternative to meeting the 100 ppm limit

Brass Pencil Sharpeners

Requirement:

  • No more than 100 ppm total lead
  • No more than 1.0 μg in wipe test

Note: Both requirements must be met

  • Or provide specified warning label

New ASTM Standard for Sling Carriers Released (ASTM F2907-13b)

/in , /by

The new ASTM Standard for Sling Carriers has a revised scope which further defines slingwhich infant carriers fall within the scope of F2236 (Soft Infant and Toddler Carriers) and which fall within F2907 (Sling Carriers).  The CPSIA requires all baby carriers to belong to one or the other.

The standard defines a sling carrier as “a product of fabric or sewn fabric construction, which is designed to contain a child in an upright or reclined position while being supported by the caregiver’s torso. In general, the child will be between full term birth and 35 lb (15.9 kg).”

Further definition includes; “Slings consist of a variety of unstructured designs ranging from a hammock-shaped product suspended on the caregiver’s upper torso to a long length of material wrapped around the caregiver’s body.”

Additionally the standard says, “The sling carrier is normally “worn” by the caregiver, and thus the child is supported from one or both shoulders of the caregiver. These products are worn on the front, hip or back of the caregiver, with the child either facing towards or away from the caregiver or reclined on the front only of the caregiver.”

No sling carrier produced after the approval date of new standard shall either by label or other means, indicate compliance with the specification unless it complies with all of the requirements of the new standard.

Marketer of Outdoor Accessories Agrees to Drop Made in the USA Claims

/in , /by

A marketer of iPhone accessories, bottle holders, lens cleaners, dog collars, leashes, and other outdoor Made In Usa Stamp Shows Product Or Produce Of Americaaccessories has agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it falsely claimed certain of its products were “Made in the USA,” or “Truly Made in the USA” even though the products contained substantial foreign content.

The proposed settlement prohibits the company from deceiving consumers about the degree to which its products are made in the United States.

Based in Logan Utah, E.K. Ekcessories, Inc. sells merchandise directly to consumers on its website, ekusa.com, and through online sellers such as Amazon and REI.

The company claimed on its website that “For 28 years E.K. Ekcessories has been producing superior quality made accessories in our 60,000 sq. ft. facility in Logan, Utah;” and “Our source of pride and satisfaction abounds from a true ‘Made in USA’ product.”  In fact, the company imports many of its products and components, according to the complaint.  The FTC also alleged that the company distributed deceptive promotional materials for its products to third-party retailers such as Amazon and REI.

The FTC alleged that E.K. Ekcessories, Inc. violated the Federal Trade Commission Act by making false and unsupported statements that its products were all or virtually all made in the United States.

Under the proposed order, the company is prohibited from claiming that any product is made in the United States unless that product is all or virtually all made in the United States.  The company also is prohibited from making any misleading claims about a product’s country of origin and from providing deceptive promotional material to third-party retailers, or otherwise providing the “means or instrumentalities” for others to make deceptive U.S.-origin claims.  The company also is required to contact all distributors who bought or received products between January 1, 2010 and May 1, 2013, and provide them with a notice and a copy of the order.

According to the Commission’s 1997 U.S. Origin Claims Enforcement Policy Statement, for a product to be advertised or labeled as “Made in the U.S.A,” the product must be “all or virtually all” made in the United States – that is, all significant parts and processing must be of U.S. origin, and the product should contain no (or negligible) foreign content.

CPSC Approves New Safety Standard for Bassinets and Cradles

/in , /by

At the end of September 2013, the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) approved a newbassinets and cradles safety standard for bassinets and cradles over the objection of Commissioner Nancy Nord. On October 23, 2013, the Final Rule was published in the Federal Register and is effective six (6) months after the publication date in the Federal Register.

The new standard is based on a voluntary industry standard known as ASTM F2194-13, but places stricter requirements on the pass-fail criterion for the so-called “mattress flatness test.” In the mattress flatness test, a cylindrical weight is placed on a seam, and the angle between the weight and the mattress is measured. The voluntary standard allows the test to be performed up to three times, and the results averaged. The new standard, by contrast, does not permit averaging.

In voting against the safety standard, Commissioner Nord urged CPSC to defer to the voluntary standard’s averaging methodology. In her view, it is difficult to know if the proposed criterion is any safer than that already being used in the industry. She stated: “although no concrete evidence has been presented that demonstrates a difference in safety between the two criteria, and that alone is sufficient to convince me that the Commission should adopt ASTM’s criterion, the voluntary standard also strives to address the variability inherent in manufacturing and testing, and that is something the agency equally should strive to address appropriately.”

The new safety standard also imposes a removable bassinet bed stability requirement.
Because of the time required to redesign removable bassinet beds, manufacturers and importers have until eighteen months after the date of publication to comply with the new requirements for removable bassinet beds.

California’s Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has issued two preliminary lists of Chemical of Concern

/in /by

California’s Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) issued two preliminary lists on Thursday, September chemical_migration_study26th; List One identifies hundreds of chemicals that DTSC could eventually deem a Chemical of Concern.  A chemical becomes a Chemical of Concern only when it is the basis for a product being listed as a Priority Product.

List Two, a subset of the first (also known as the “Initial List”), contains approximately 150 chemicals that the agency will focus on within the next six months when deciding which products to list under its Priority Products list.  Among others, the Initial List contains chemicals sometimes found in cosmetic and Over the Counter (OTC) drug products such as: formaldehyde (nail care products, hair products), cyclotetrasiloxane (moisturizers, makeup, hair products), aluminum (anti-perspirants), benzene, lead, silica/silicon dioxide (crystalline, respirable size), dibutyl phthalate (nail care products and hair sprays), parabens (makeup, moisturizers, hair products, and shaving products), diethanolamine, and mineral oils: untreated and mildly treated. On April 1, 2014, or 180 days after the Green Chemistry regulations took effect, the DTSC is required to list up to five (5) Priority Products for public comment based on the chemicals in the aforementioned Initial List.

All consumer products, except for a very specifically exempted few, could potentially be listed as a Priority Product.  This includes anything from hairspray to stereo systems.  However, Debbie Raphael, Director of DTSC, told the Los Angeles Times that the first Priority Products under consideration are: nail polish (tolulene interferes with reproduction); carpet adhesive with formaldehyde; and mercury in fluorescent light bulbs.   For any company selling into the state of California, now is the time to take action, become familiar with the listed chemicals, and pursue alternative, safer product formulations before finding your product on the Priority Product list.

DTSC releases initial chemical list (candidate chemicals) for the Safer Consumer Products Regulation

/in /by

Safer Consumer Products RegulationThe California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has released its initial list of candidate chemicals as required under the Safer Consumer Products Regulation. All companies selling products into California will want to review this list and determine if any of their products contain these chemicals.

Under the regulation a candidate chemical is defined as one that exhibits a “hazard trait and/or an environmental or toxicological endpoint” and is either (a) found on one or more of the authoritative lists specified within the regulation or (b) listed by DTSC using the criteria specified within the regulation.

The purpose of the list is to inform stakeholders [manufacturers, importers, assemblers and retailers] about chemicals that may be named as Chemicals of Concern if they are identified as part of a product-chemical combination that is listed as a Priority Product.

All companies selling products containing an identified “chemical of concern” will want to determine which entity in their supply chain has the most information about the chemicals on the list and determine contractually which entity will be responsible for compliance with the data requests, toxicity testing and notification requirements that DTSC will impose under the regulations.

California’s Safer Consumer Product Regulations

/in /by

On August 28, 2013, California’s safer consumer product regulations (otherwise known as the “green chemistry rules”) Californias-Green-Chemistry-Initiativewere approved by the Office of Administrative Law and were filed with the Secretary of State; they will take effect on October 1, 2013.

California now has the authority to regulate every ingredient in every product sold in California, with limited exceptions.   At 72 pages, the regulations set out a multi-year, information- and paperwork-intensive process that gets more voluminous and complex with each successive phase of implementation.

Step One [September 2013]

  • An initial list of chemicals (“chemicals of concern”) will be released that will be the basis for regulation and is expected to contain around 230 chemicals.  Any company selling products into California will need to review the list of chemicals against their product’s chemical formulation to determine if their products contain any of these chemicals.
  • If products do contain any of these chemicals, companies will need to begin the process of identifying who within their supply chain will be responsible for compliance requests, toxicity testing and notification under the regulations.
  • These regulations apply to “manufacturers, importers, assemblers, and retailers”

Step Two [Spring 2014]

  • A plan will be published that will identify the products in need of immediate regulation and for the particular product/chemical combination and the “alternatives analysis” to determine if “safer chemicals” could be used.
  • Final selection of priority products is expected to occur no later than October 2014

Step Three [Fall 2014]

  • Once priority products have been identified, companies supplying those products can respond by sending a “Priority Product Notification” indicating that they do not sell a product in California that contains the chemical of concern.
  • A company can send a “Priority Product Notification” indicating that they will remove the product for sale in California (“Product Removal Intent Notification”)
  • A company can send a “Priority Product Notification” indicating that they will remove the chemical of concern from the product (“Chemical Removal Intent Notification”)
  • A company can send a “Priority Product Notification” indicating that they will replace the chemical in the product (“Product-Chemical Replacement Intent Notification”)
  • After the company submits their initial notification they must then submit a second notice indicating that the first action has been completed (“Confirmation Notification”)
  • Within the first 60 days of the “Priority Product Notification” the company can submit a “Alternative Analysis Threshold Notification” which indicates that the chemicals of concern contained within the product are less than the threshold amount.  This notification must include;
    • Name and Contact information of the person submitting the notification
    • Name and Contact information for all manufacturers, importers, assemblers and retailers
    • Certification that the chemical is present in the product only as a contaminate and the concentration does not exceed the PQL threshold and the method used to determine the PQL
    • Source of the chemical in the product
    • All brand names and labeling information for products and if a component the names of all known products in which the component is used
    • Laboratory methodologies, location and quality assurance/quality control protocols used to measure the chemical
    • Attestation for the controls that will be in place to assure that threshold will not be exceeded