Can I use a software program or website to conduct the training needed to satisfy the “undue influence” requirement within the Testing and Labeling Pertaining to Product Certification rule or does it have to be in person?
Manufacturers are required under 16 CFR § 1107.24(b)(1) to make sure “that every appropriate staff member receive training on avoiding undue influence and sign a statement attesting to participation in such testing.” The CPSC has stated that a digital signature or other electronic attestation (such as a check box) that an employee took the training included as part of software or online training would meet the requirement to “sign a statement attesting.”
Need help with Undue Influence training. please contact us today as Jacoby Solutions can help you meet this requirement!
https://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpg00BillJhttps://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpgBillJ2012-12-27 09:54:582012-12-27 09:54:58Conducting Undue Influence Training
Here is the essence of what the final rule (16 CFR Part 1107, Testing and Labeling Pertaining to Product Certification Regarding Representative Samples for Periodic Testing of Children’s Products) says.
In order to ensure continued compliance of children’s products produced, the Commission has taken the approach of requiring the manufacturer/importer of record to have knowledge of how tested product samples are similar to untested product samples.
The manufacturer/importer of record can demonstrate this knowledge by; results from prior testing (product has been tested several times with no issues of non-compliance), detailed knowledge of the product itself (in design and material sourcing), the production processes used in the manufacture of the product, the quality control processes used in the production of the product and the production testing plan for the product (testing done at the manufacture site to ensure continued compliance of the product).
So long as the manufacturer/importer of record has a rational basis for demonstrating the similarity of the untested product samples to the tested product samples and documents this rational, then the manufacturer/importer of record is said to have met the requirements in the final rule.
Numerous times the Commission has stated that manufacturers/importers of record are required to know about their products and the manufacturing processes used and implement a testing program accordingly which includes the ability to provide a basis for inferring the compliance of the tested product samples to the untested product samples. Without this basis the testing done by the manufacturers/importers of record on their products would serve no purpose other than to demonstrate the compliance of the tested product samples and not the entire population of product samples.
Manufacturers/importers of record can use “process” to show that the product samples selected for testing are like the untested product samples. For example, a process that manages the lots or batches of raw materials used in the manufacture of children’s products (like surface coatings or resins) can be used as a basis to demonstrate the homogeneity of the population of products with regard to chemical testing for lead and phthalates.
Another example would be a process that creates uniformly spaced holes in the crib rails for the uniformly constructed crib slats which can be used as a basis to demonstrate the homogeneity of the population of products with regard to the component spacing test of ASTM f1169-10.
Without this documented basis, mere testing alone is not sufficient to infer compliance of the untested product samples and as such would not meet the minimum due care requirements of 16 CFR Part 1107.
https://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpg00BillJhttps://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpgBillJ2012-12-26 09:51:172012-12-26 09:51:1716CFR Part 1107 will be in effect soon
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.
https://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpg00BillJhttps://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpgBillJ2012-10-24 13:50:292012-10-24 13:50:29Voices from Outside the Echo Chamber
Can compliance be innovative? Or can innovation inform your compliance program? Can some of the techniques and strategies of the world’s most innovative companies be brought to bear in the field of anti-corruption and anti-bribery?
I thought about those questions, and perhaps some others, while reading the March issue of Fast Company that had a cover title of “The World’s 50 Most Innovative Companies.” In his column, editor Robert Safian wrote about the “The Lessons of Innovation.” He said in reviewing the Top 50 most innovative company, he drew eight key themes. As I read these I thought about them and their relationship to compliance. So with a tip of the hat to Mr. Saflan, here is my compliance spin on his eight key themes of corporate innovation.
1. Compliance should be a strategy, not a tactic. Starbucks recognized that profit alone is a “fairly shallow aspiration, and it’s not enduring.” Most people want to do business with companies that do not engage in bribery and corruption. Indeed the U.K. Bribery Act enshrines this in its Six Principles of an Adequate Procedures by stating that a company should only conduct business with other ethical companies.
2. Big companies need to be as nimble as small companies. Safian notes that the top four companies: Apple, Google, Facebook and Amazon all continue to “drive the agenda across the global economy.” This should also be true of your compliance program. You need to use the tools available to you to update your risk assessment if you move into new business lines, products or geographical areas. Similarly if one of your competitors comes under anti-corruption scrutiny, you should review any similar practices that your company might have, such as its sales model or vendors in the supply chain.
3. Technology is disruptive in unexpected places. Here Safian gives the example ofLegalZoom, which is “challenging the definition of a law practice” by providing useful legal forms and documents to consumers. In the compliance arena, the number of technological innovations is as broad as it is deep. Companies like Catelas and Visual Risk IQ have developed software products that can allow review and assessment of a large number of data points or other quantitative data. You can even get apps for smartphones that allow submission of expense requests directly to your compliance department.
4. Compliance is a competitive advantage. Apple has never been publicly reported as going through a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) investigation. What is their stock price today and is it still undervalued? Even when it recently received negative publicity regarding its manufacturing facilities in China, it responded quickly and brought in an outside monitor to assess and report. Apple also annually assesses its third-party vendors and makes that report public. Do you think that keeps vendors on their collective toes? You bet it does.
5. Use of social media makes compliance better. My former speaking cohort, Stephen Martin, then General Counsel for Corpedia, often spoke about Code of Conduct 3.0, which is a web-based interactive tool that helps guide employees through a code in an interesting and stimulating manner.
The same is true of training. You no longer need to simply have a video conference to deliver compliance training around the world. Companies like Click4Compliance have interactive, web-based solutions that you can utilize. I noted above about the smartphone app that allows employees from around the world to submit expense requests to the compliance department and receive an instant response back from an assigned compliance team member.
6.Data is power. If you don’t document it, you can’t measure it. If you don’t measure it, you can’t assess it. If you don’t assess it, you can’t improve it. That is how an engineer tends to look at things. In the compliance world, if you don’t document it, it never existed (Cue drum roll for: document, document and document). Both are true. You have to document things to prove that you actually did them. But if you do not have data, you cannot determine if your corporate compliance program is successful or improve it.
7. Money is flowing. Here, Safian does not mean necessarily that more funding is available. However, in the compliance world, what I believe that this means is forces, other than legal compliance.
For example: the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) or the U.K. Serious Fraud Office (SFO) enforcements are beginning to drive compliance. Insurance companies have developed insurance coverage for FCPA investigations; D&O insurers are requiring companies to have a compliance program to cover directors and officers sued in shareholder derivative actions based upon admitted FCPA violations; and perhaps most interestingly, banks and other financial institutions are reviewing anti-corruption compliance programs to determine if they meet minimum best practices and then writing maintenance of these programs into their loan covenants.
8. Copycats are history. Safian notes that emerging market entrepreneurs aren’t just following the successes of others, they are creating new, distinct models. In the compliance arena I believe that out-of-the-box solutions are no longer best practices. Companies need to assess their specific compliance risks and then design programs to specifically manage those compliance risks.
If your company uses a sales model of agents, one type of compliance management strategy may need to be employed. However, if your company is a manufacturing company that sells through distributors, another compliance management strategy may be required. Do not simply purchase a compliance program off the shelf. Either design it to fit the needs (and realities) of your business model or work with an expert who can do so.
The innovation angle is not one that is usually in the front of the line at compliance conferences or in thinking through compliance programs. But if you listen to Lanny Breuer, Chuck DuRoss or any other DOJ speaker, they continually talk about evolving best practices in anti-corruption compliance. Any reader of deferred prosecution agreements (DPAs) from the past 18 months is well aware of the changes in focus that the DOJ has in these documents. Certainly, many of the compliance techniques are driven by the compliance challenges in the individual companies.
But if your company has engaged in mergers and acquisitions, why would it not follow the “enhanced” compliance guidance found in the Johnson & Johnson DPA and train all high-risk employees within 12 months of acquisition and perform a full compliance audit within 18 months of acquisition? So my conclusion is that innovation in the compliance arena is key. As compliance programs mature and as companies mature in their approach to compliance, innovation will continue to lead best practices.
https://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpg00BillJhttps://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpgBillJ2012-03-01 11:49:002012-03-01 11:49:00Is Innovation Key to Compliance Best Practices?
There has been a lot of confusion on what information needs to be included in a Children’s Product Certificate (CPC). While the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has not given any guidance on the format of a CPC they have given detailed instructions on the type of information which needs to be included in a CPC (Final Rule, 16 CFR Part 1110, Certificates of Compliance dated November 18, 2008).
There are seven (7) major areas of information which at a minimum must be on each CPC and they include;
1. Identification of the product covered by this certificate:
The information provided here must be more than just the common name of the product as it is known by the consumer or retailer. It must contain model, item or SKU number to uniquely identify the product from other products manufactured or imported by the issuer of the certificate. The CPSC has allowed for “family” of products to be listed on the certificate where the testing has been the same or when the issuer is citing one laboratory report to show compliance for the whole family of products as for an example; the issuer had a stuffed bear that was in a variety of fabric colors and each color was a different item or SKU number and the testing was the same for each item or SKU number then one certificate could be issued for the family of bear products.
2. Citation to each CPSC product safety regulation to which this product is being certified:
Each CPSC product safety regulation must be listed which builds the case for compliance of the product. The safety regulation must be identified so that there might not be any confusion as to what the safety regulation is. As for example; if the product was tested for small parts then the safety regulation would be cited as, ASTM F963-08 (or most current version) Section 4.6 Small Parts.
3. Identification of the U.S. importer or domestic manufacturer certifying compliance of the product:
The information provided here MUST be the company name, full mailing address and telephone number of the manufacturer or importer of record certifying the product.
4. Contact information for the individual maintaining records of test results:
The information provided here MUST be the company name, full mailing address, e-mail address and telephone number of the person maintain test records for the company in support of the certification of the product.
5. Date and place where this product was manufactured:
The information provided can be the date or dates when the product was manufactured using at least a month and year format (MM/YYYY). The place of manufacture needs to be identified as well with AT LEAST the city and country or administrative region of the place where the product was finally manufactured or assembled. If the factory that produced the product has more than one location in the city listed then the street address of the factory will be used to further identify the place of manufacture.
6. Date and place where this product was tested for compliance with the regulation(s) cited above:
Information provided here must be the date or dates of the testing on the test reports, the report numbers and the location or locations of testing.
7. Identification of any third-party laboratory on whose testing the certificate depends:
The third-party laboratory which tested the product for conformity must be listed with AT LEAST their name, full mailing address and telephone number of the laboratory.
At the recent Toy Fair conference, Neil Cohen, Small Business Ombudsman of the CPSC announced that companies can use the same certificate and add Production Run / Tracking label information to it for each production run in the testing calendar year as long as there is no material change in that batch or run. This will give companies the option of consolidating certificates under each product. As more information regarding this practice becomes available, I will share it on this site.
Remember that the issuance of Children’s Product Certificates is the responsibility of the manufacturer and it is their duty to provide access to these reports with each sale to retailers. CPC’s are not required when selling directly to consumers.
Bill Jacoby is the principal at Jacoby Solutions which has developed a CPSIA Operational Readiness CORE Audit to help companies identify risk and improve their company’s business operations.
https://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpg00BillJhttps://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpgBillJ2012-02-22 10:33:322012-02-22 10:33:32The Anatomy of a Children’s Product Certificate
CPSIA became fully effective on January 1st, 2012. As of this date, all Children’s product Manufacturers and Distributors are required to issue a Children’s Product Certificate (CPC), based on third-party testing from a CPSC-recognized laboratory, to Retailers and Distributors, and upon request to the CPSC for children’s products imported or distributed in commerce on or after Jan 1,2012. As a retailer, it is important to understand what is required of the manufacturer/importer who is providing the children’s products that you sell at the retail level. If you sell products on your website and the manufacturer drop ships the product, they are still technically responsible to send you the certificate.
What does certification of children’s products mean in light of current regulations? Certification means the issuance of a written Children’s Product Certificate (CPC) in which the manufacturer, importer or private labeler certifies that the children’s product complies with all of the safety rules that applies to it. This certification must be based upon the results of third-party testing that is used as the basis for which the manufacturer, importer or private labeler certifies the product. The manufacturer, importer or private labeler by law is responsible for drafting and issuing the CPC.
This CPC must be furnished to the retailer and can be an actual hard copy of the certificate or the manufacturer/importer can provide a reasonable means to access the certificate such as a dedicated website. A CPC does not have to be filed with the government. The CPC must “accompany” the product shipment and be furnished to distributors or retailers, and upon request to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) or Customs.see CPSC advice here: http://www.cpsc.gov/info/toysafety/3ptfaq.html#cert2whom
If the product is manufactured overseas and imported into the country, a CPC is required with each import shipment. This requirement applies to both imports and products that are manufactured domestically. Again, the CPC can either be in a hard copy format or an electronic certificate (if the certificate is identified by a unique identifier and can be accessed via a web URL or other electronic means).
The CPC does not have to be signed by the manufacturer/importer as the act of issuing the certificate satisfies this regulation. Failure to furnish a CPC or to issue a false certificate is a violation of the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) and can lead to a civil penalty of between $100,000 and up to $15 million along with possible criminal penalties and asset forfeiture.
As a retailer, how are you set up to receive these certificates? Most likely they are being sent either as a pdf document or as a link to stored document. As you currently do not have a requirement to store these certificates, you should as good business practice be able to track certificates back to the manufacturer for products you sell. As the GCC/CPC requirement is not going away soon, now is the time to think about how you receive, store and or access these documents now before they start piling up and provide your preference of receipt to your manufacturer if asked as this will make it easier on you in the long run to access these certificates if requested.
FYI – Important if you are a Manufacturer of Children’s Products.
The CPSC has defined a “children’s product” to mean a consumer product designed or intended primarily for children 12 years of age or younger. In determining whether a consumer product is primarily intended for a child 12 years of age or younger, you need to take the following factors into consideration:
A statement by the manufacturer about the intended use of the product, including a label on the product if such a statement is reasonable.
Whether the product is represented in its packaging, display, promotion or advertising as appropriate for use by children 12 years of age or younger.
Whether a product is commonly recognized by consumers as being intended for use by a child 12 years of age or younger
The Age Determination Guidelines issued by the CPSC staff in September 2002, and any successor to such guidelines
If you qualify and if you are a manufacturer of children’s products and produce in small batches, it is critical that you register for a small batch exemption if your sales are less than 1 million dollars from the previous calendar year or you have manufactured less than 7,500 qualifying (children’s products) units. Registering for an exemption will exempt you from third party testing requirements under CPSIA. Most apparel products were granted broad exemptions already but this will help you in the event your items include non-exempt components. Another thing to keep in mind is that this is just a testing exemption, you are still required to comply with standards defined under the CPSIA law.
HOW TO REGISTER
This is a two step process. Part one is to register your business which will get you an account user ID if you don’t already have one. It is pretty straightforward.
After you request the business ID, you’ll get an email saying that the CPSC is overwhelmed with applicants but they’ve got you in the queue and will get back to you as soon as they can. This may take up to 12 hours, maybe more. Once they get back to you, you will need to confirm the registration by activating your account by creating a password. You may hit a snag at this point if you’re using the wrong username -say, your company name. The username was created at sign up and consists of your first and last name. Once you’ve activated your account, you can sign up as a small batch manufacturer. This is also fairly straightforward.
As a qualifying small batch manufacturer, you will need to register with the CPSC on an annual basis. You will still need to issue a certificate (CPC/GCC), however you will not need to conduct third -party testing for either lead or phthalate content. Additionally, your products must still meet both the lead and phthalate content limits.
https://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpg00BillJhttps://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpgBillJ2012-01-02 18:04:302012-01-02 18:04:30Are you a Small Batch Manufacturer? If So you need to register today with CPSC!
Are you a Manufacturer, Distributor or Retailer Selling Children’s Products
TOP 10 Things You Need to Know as we start the New Year
The intent of this list is to provide guidance to Children’s Product manufacturers and Retailers as they implement the provisions of the Consumer Product Safety Information Act (CPSIA), as administered by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). The information in this article should not be construed as legal advice.
Dec 28,2011 by Bill Jacoby
1. Overview CPSIA becomes fully effective on January 1st, 2012. As of this date, all Children’s product Manufacturers and Distributors are required to issue a General Certificate of Conformity (GCC), also known as a Children’s Product Certificate (CPC), based on third-party testing from a CPSC-recognized laboratory, to Retailers and distributors, and upon request to the CPSC for children’s products imported or distributed in commerce on or after January 1, 2012
2. Children’s Products Defined The CPSC has defined a “children’s product” to mean a consumer product designed or intended primarily for children 12 years of age or younger. In determining whether a consumer product is primarily intended for a child 12 years of age or younger, you need to take the following factors into consideration:
A statement by the manufacturer about the intended use of the product, including a label on the product if such a statement is reasonable.
Whether the product is represented in its packaging, display, promotion or advertising as appropriate for use by children 12 years of age or younger.
Whether a product is commonly recognized by consumers as being intended for use by a child 12 years of age or younger
The Age Determination Guidelines issued by the CPSC staff in September 2002, and any successor to such guidelines
3. Third-Party TestingAll Children’s Products are required to undergo third- party testing. Third – party testing must be conducted at a CPSC-approved, accredited laboratory to determine the total lead content in children’s product meets the approved limit.
4. ExemptionsUnder the Legislation, which was passed and signed by President Obama in August 2011, there is an exemption for small batch Manufacturers. To qualify as a small batch manufacturer, you must meet this two-part test:
Income: Total gross revenues from the prior calendar year (2011 sales to qualify for 2012) from the sale of all consumer products is $1million or less.
Covered product: No more than 7500 units of the same product were manufactured in the previous calendar year. (2011)
As a qualifying small batch manufacturer, you will need to register with the CPSC on an annual basis. You will still need to issue a certificate (CPC/GCC), however you will not need to conduct third -party testing for either lead or phthalate content. Additionally, your products must still meet both the lead and phthalate content limits.
5. Phthalate Content Considerations Congress has permanently prohibited three phthalates: DEHP,DBP and BBP ( in concentration of more than 0.1percent ) in children’s toys or child care articles. “Three additional phthalates: DINP,DIDP and DnOP, have been prohibited pending further study
A “children’s toy” means a product intended for a child 12 years of age or younger for use when playing, and a “child care article” means a product that a child three years of age and younger would use for sleeping, feeding, sucking or teething. Please note that wearing apparel falls under the definition of a child-care article if it is intended to facilitate eating and sleeping.
6. General Certificate of ConformityA GCC / CPC is a document that certifies that the product complies with the CPSIA regulations, based on a test of each product or a reasonable testing program. The law requires that each import (and domestic manufacturer) shipment be “accompanied” by the required certificate. This certificate does not need to physically accompany the product. Under CPSC regulations, an electronic certificate is “accompanying” a shipment if the certificate is identified by a unique identifier and can be accessed via a World Wide Web URL or other electronic means, provided the URL or other electronic means and the unique identifier are created in advance and are available with the shipment.
Each GCC/ CPC certificate must include the following information:
Identification of the product covered by the certificate
Applicable CPSC rule or ban to which product is being certified
Identification of manufacturer
Identification of the person maintaining the testing information
Date and place where the product was manufactured.
Date and place where he product was tested.
Identification of the third– party testing facility used.
Note: GCC’s area used for consumer products and CPC (Children’s Product Certificate) is used for children’s Products.
7. Component Part Testing Component testing, as outlined by the CPSC, is voluntary ad can be undertaken by either the component manufacturer or the manufacturer of the children’s product. For manufacturers producing children’s wearing apparel, the textile garment does not need to be tested as it has been exempted through regulation. Only the other components, such as the ink, zippers, buttons, etc. must be tested for lead content. If the children’s product also could be classified as a child-care article, only those plasticized elements need to be tested, and a component testing program can also be initiated to satisfy the testing requirements. There are documentation / recordkeeping requirements associated with component –part testing, and all records must be kept for at least five years.
8. Retailer Requirements Each retailer must keep a GCC or CPC for each product sold on file. These will be sent by the manufacturer or distributor with each shipment or via email or other electronic format such as a url, or website starting on 1/1/12. You must maintain these certificates and be able to produce them to the CPSC upon request.
9. Enforcement Penalties The CPSC has issued a final rule that outlines the civil penalties associated with noncompliance activities. As of August 14th, 2009, the commission has the ability to seek penalty amounts of up to $100,000 for each violation. Maximum penalty amounts for a related series of violations have been increased from $1.8 million to $15 million. At a recent Toy Industry event there was a firm acknowledgement by CPSC Commissioner Nord that the January 1, 2012 enforcement date for CPSIA regulations will bring a change to the industry. All Stays of Enforcement will have expired and the CPSC will be more diligent in its review of toys at ports of entry and failure to comply … with third party testing regulations, leaving off traffic information, and other discrepancies, will result in the holding of the shipment and fines of up to $100,000.
10. Are you Ready? For products manufactured or distributed in commerce after December 31, 2011, a GCC or CPC must accompany each shipment which clearly states that the product complies with either the lead or phthalate content limit as applicable and must contain information of the third-party testing facility used. All documentation must be retained for five years!
Do you have the operational process place in your company to makes sure the certificates are sent out each and every time? As a retailer, are you prepared for the flood of certificates coming your way and do you have documentation procedures in place for retention?
Jacoby Solutions has developed the CORE Audit™ (Compliance Operations Readiness Engagement Audit), the company’s proprietary approach to business operations compliance readiness. A one-stop shop for manufacturing and distribution companies in need of a solutions partner who can help them evolve their business while keeping an eye on compliance, Jacoby Solutions saves companies time, money and resources while helping them become CPSIA ready.
https://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpg00BillJhttps://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpgBillJ2011-12-28 14:26:432011-12-28 14:26:43CPSIA,You & January 1, 2012….Are You Ready?
In August 2011 an amendment to the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) was signed into law and provides an exemption to certain types of tests for children’s products. To qualify for these exemptions you must first be classified as a “small batch manufacturer”. The amendment identifies a small batch manufacturer as (both criteria must be met to qualify);
Sales – Total gross revenue from the prior calendar year (e.g., calendar year 2011 sales would be used to qualify for calendar year 2012) from the sale of all consumer products is $1 million or less
Production – Manufacture of no more than 7,500 units of the covered product from the prior calendar year (again like the example above, calendar year 2011 production would be used to qualify for calendar year 2012)
If a manufacturer qualifies based on the above, the next step is to register in The Small Batch Manufacturers Registry and once registered the manufacturer can apply the exemptions to certain types of testing to their products.
Small batch manufacturers will always be required to third party test for compliance certain children’s product safety rules as it applies to their product. These rules that must be tested for are called Group A (http://www.cpsc.gov/info/toysafety/smallbatch.html). Small batch manufacturers would not be required to test for other children’s product safety rules call Group B (http://www.cpsc.gov/info/toysafety/smallbatch.html). It should be noted that even though the small batch manufacturer would not have to test for the safety rules in Group B, they must ensure that their products are in compliance with the underlying children’s product safety rules found in Group B.
Small batch manufacturers are still responsible for issuing a general certificate of conformity (GCC) for their products and must make sure they include their small batch manufacturers number issued by the CPSC to show their exemption from certain testing.
Registration is required every year to prove qualification as a small batch manufacturer and can be done on individual product groups. For example, a manufacture can register as a small batch manufacturer for Product X (less than $1 million in sales and under 7,500 units produced in once calendar year) but still have Products Y and Z that are above either the sales or units threshold.
An importer can register as a small batch manufacture IF both the importer and the manufacturer of the product meet the sales and production standards of a small batch manufacturer. For example, an importer that has no more than $1 million in gross revenues qualifies as a small batch manufacturer if it is importing goods from a foreign manufacturer that produces fewer than 7,500 units of a covered product and also has a gross revenue of less than $1 million. On the other hand, an importer that imports goods from a foreign manufacturer that mass produces goods cannot be considered a small batch manufacturer for that product, even if that importer has less than $1 million in gross revenue and is importing fewer than 7,500 units of a product from that foreign manufacturer.
Some things to consider, as a small batch manufacturer there is some relief from required testing but in return the manufacturer agrees to have their business information made available to the public in a searchable database. Registered small batch manufacturers will also be notified electronically of any Report of Harm involving their products submitted by consumers through the Safer Products publically available website.
2012 is just days away …. is your company ready? Need help in deciphering the law as it pertains to you? Jacoby Solutions can review your testing program and labeling process to make sure it contains all the elements as outlined under 1107 including record keeping. We also can provide services for Sourcing/Project Management testing for any new products you have in development or act as a liaison between you and your factory. Contact us today and see how we can save you money!
Bill Jacoby is the founder / principal at Jacoby Solutions and has developed the CORE Audit™ (Compliance Operations Readiness Engagement Audit), the company’s proprietary approach to business operations compliance readiness. A one-stop shop for manufacturing and distribution companies in need of a solutions partner who can help them evolve their business while keeping an eye on compliance, Jacoby Solutions saves companies time, money and resources while helping them become CPSIA ready.
Section 14(a)(2) of the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) requires certification testing for children’s products before they may be imported for consumption, warehousing or distribution into commerce. Because testing is done prior to the product entering into the marketplace the risk to the manufacturer of a having a nonconforming product in the stream of commerce is low. At this stage the manufacturer/importer of record can address the deficiency and resubmit the product for certification. Once a product has entered the marketplace, continuing compliance is demonstrated through “periodic testing” of the product, which specifies a maximum testing interval based on the implementation of a periodic test plan by the manufacturer/importer.
Risk then becomes a factor for the manufacturer/importer as it weighs the possibility of “the potential for serious injury or death resulting from a noncompliant product” with the determination of the appropriate periodic testing interval. The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) in a recent final ruling indicated that periodic testing should be conducted at a minimum of once per year when using a periodic test plan. The CPSC does make clear in this ruling that manufacturers/importers of record may need to conduct periodic testing more frequently than on an annual basis in order to ensure their products continue to meet the safety regulations that the product was first certified under. They indicate that more frequent testing will help the manufacturer/importer identify noncompliant products faster and as a result, may limit the scope of any potential product recall, reduce the liability for civil penalties and potential damage to the manufacturer/importers reputation.
Managing risk can then be addressed using the mantra “test, test, test” which is managing it from the front end of the product cycle. While substantially reducing risk it can prove to be very expensive and time consuming for the manufacturer/importer. A less costly way of substantially reducing risk is by managing it from the back end at the production level.
Do you have the controls put into place to manage your manufacturers and supply chain to coordinate your testing plan with your compliance policy?
2012 is just days away …. is your company ready? Need help in deciphering the law as it pertains to you? Jacoby Solutions can review your testing program and labeling process to make sure it contains all the elements as outlined under 1107 including record keeping. We also can provide services for Sourcing/Project Management testing for any new products you have in development or act as a liaison between you and your factory. Contact us today and see how we can save you money!
Bill Jacoby is the founder / principal at Jacoby Solutions and has developed the CORE Audit™ (Compliance Operations Readiness Engagement Audit), the company’s proprietary approach to business operations compliance readiness. A one-stop shop for manufacturing and distribution companies in need of a solutions partner who can help them evolve their business while keeping an eye on compliance, Jacoby Solutions saves companies time, money and resources while helping them become CPSIA ready.
https://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpg00BillJhttps://jacobysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jacobysolutions-300x150.jpgBillJ2011-12-22 14:29:042011-12-22 14:29:04CPSIA – Managing Your Product Testing Risk in 2012
