Posts Tagged ‘Product Safety Laws’

CPSC Postpones Testing and Certification Requirements for Some

Friday, January 8th, 2010

The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) recently voted to extend the stay of enforcement of certification and testing requirements for certain children’s products.  The stay is extended differently depending upon how the CPSC viewed the ability to comply and whether the CPSC is still in the process of issuing requirements and rules.  For some children’s products, the stay will not be extended.  As before, companies are still required to comply with the new safety regulations; the stay only applies to third party testing and certification.

Because of the recent meeting and vote, there will not be another vote to lift the stay on or prior to February 10, 2010.  To understand why the stay was originally put in place read our earlier blog post about the January 2009 stay and what it means to manufacturers and retailers.

Lead-Content Testing and Certification — Stay Extended One Year
The CPSC commissioners voted to extend the stay of enforcement on testing and certification requirements for lead content in children’s products one more year until February 10, 2011.  This is in contrast to the earlier deadline proposed in the staff briefing package, which called for the stay to be lifted August 10, 2010.1  Despite the August date in the briefing package, the Commissioners settled on a later date after the lead content vote was delayed one day and decoupled from other issues.

Chairman Inez Tenenbaum said she voted to extend the stay on lead content testing and certification to February 10, 2011 “in order to allow component testing adequate time to develop and to give our stakeholders adequate notice of new requirements.”  On Commissioner Nancy Nord’s blog, she wrote that the stay was needed “because the deadlines set out in the CPSIA were wildly unrealistic and their enforcement would have resulted in even more chaos in the marketplace than we have already seen over the past year, without increasing safety.”

This stay does not alter the fact that products must comply with lead limit rules, it only relates to certification and testing requirements.  As stated in our earlier article explaining the Lead and Phthalate Bans, as of August 14, 2009 products intended for children twelve and under cannot contain lead (in paint or otherwise) in excess of 300ppm (parts per million) and for paint or surface coatings (on children’s product and, for example, furniture) products cannot contain paint in excess of 90ppm.  There are some exceptions, like for electronics components, such as cathode ray tubes, and some electronics components of children’s products.

Bicycles Testing and Certification — Stay Extended Six Months
For both children’s and non-children’s bicycles the stay on third party testing and certificates will remain in effect until May 17, 2010 due to insufficient testing capacity at accredited labs.  The stay may be extended again for bicycles if manufacturers and labs request additional relief by April 1, 2010.

Certain Other Products — Stay Extended for Unknown Period
The following children’s products will have a stay of enforcement on third party testing and certification in effect while the CPSC continues to review labs and rule on further regulations:

  • Baby walkers
  • Bath seats
  • Caps and toy guns
  • Carpets and rugs
  • Children’s sleepwear (the stay does not extend to guarantees under the Flammable Fabrics Act)
  • Children’s toys and child care articles with banned phthalates
  • Children’s toys subject to ASTM’s F-963 toy safety standard
  • Clacker balls
  • Durable infant products
  • Electrically operated toys
  • Vinyl plastic film
  • Wearing apparel (the stay does not extend to guarantees under the Flammable Fabrics Act)
  • Youth all-terrain vehicles (ATVs)
  • Youth mattresses

The following non-children’s products will continue to have a stay of enforcement on general certificate of conformity (GCC) requirements in effect until further notice:

  • Carpets and rugs
  • Vinyl plastic film
  • Wearing apparel

The stay may be lifted for these products on a rolling basis.  If the stay extension is predicated on current lack of accreditation requirements, as is the case for youth ATVs and youth mattresses, importers and domestic manufactures will have 90 days to comply upon the publication of such requirements.  Additionally, importers and domestic manufacturers are reminded that any testing and certification still is required for the above products to the extent that such testing and certification were required prior to the CPSIA, or for which accreditation requirements had been established before the stay of August 9, 2009.

Various Products — Stay NOT Extended
In addition to any testing and certification that was required prior to the CPSIA, third party testing by a CPSC recognized laboratory and certification will be required for the following children’s products manufactured after February 10, 2010:

  • Bicycle helmets
  • Bunk beds
  • Dive sticks
  • Rattles

A general certificate of conformity (GCC) that shows CPSC compliance will be required for the following non-children’s consumer products manufactured after February 10, 2010 (in addition to any certifications related to preexisting requirements):

  • Architectural glazing materials
  • ATVs
  • Candles with lead wicks
  • CB antennas
  • Cellulose insulation
  • Cigarette lighters
  • Contact adhesives (subject to ban on “extremely flamable”)
  • Fireworks
  • Garage door openers
  • Household furniture subject to lead paint regulations
  • Lawnmowers
  • Matchbooks
  • Mattresses
  • Multipurpose lighters
  • Paint
  • Portable gas containers
  • Products subject to regulations under the Poison Prevention Packaging Act (PPPA)
  • Refrigerator door latches
  • Swimming pool slides
  • Unstable refuse bins

Watch the briefing and meeting held on December 16, 2009.

| More
  1. The briefing package no longer appears available on the CPSC website.  The ballot vote sheet appears to have replaced the briefing package, using the same web address. If we are able to locate a copy of the original brifing in the future, we will include a link here. [↩]

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Certificates of Compliance, Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA), Lead and Phthalates, Systems and Laws | No Comments »

CPSIA Rulings – A Long Road Still Ahead

Monday, March 16th, 2009


 

For as many rulings as have been handed down by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) over the last seven months since the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA of 2008) was enacted, there are as many still to come.  From the content of mandatory product recall announcements to the specifics surrounding registration cards and tracking labels, the extent of the unknowns that linger, as effective dates draw nearer, is as daunting as ever. 

The CPSC still has a huge task ahead.  At a point when, theoretically, about half the rulings should be already worked out, it seems unlikely that the remaining deadlines can be met.  I would not be surprised if we see more “grace periods” or official stays similar to the one we saw in January for certain certification and third-party testing requirements. 

One such case where a stay is possible is with regard to permanent labels for children’s products (CPSIA Section 103).  The CPSC is currently seeking advice as to whether or not to work toward a universal, international labeling and tracking system.  While a global system may be a good move, manufacturers of children's products sold in the US are required by the CPSIA to begin using permanent labels on products and packageing by August 14th of this year.  Although talks are already underway, with a meeting being held this week (see below), given that public comments are not even due until April 27, 2009, my guess is that the effective date for tracking labels will need to be pushed out. 

In the meantime, manufacturers struggle with whether to take steps toward planning the redesign of their production lines and business processes to accommodate the new labeling laws and internal tracking that will be needed – a nontrivial task to say the least – or to wait until they know exactly what the requirements will be.

Either way, there is something manufacturers and others can do besides sit and wait for the CPSC to resolve the ambiguities of the CPSIA.  That is, participate in public meetings and comment requests.  Now is the best time to influence the final rulings on these laws.  Once they become official regulations, it is incredibly difficult to get them reversed.  

Opportunities to make your voice heard for this week are listed below.  You can find more information regarding location, times and links to official announcements on the Consumer Product Safety Information Calendar .  By clicking on the event title you will see additional details as well as a link to copy the event to your own calendar.

Monday, March 16 – Thursday March 19
CPSC Mtg re: ASTM F15 

Tuesday, March 17
CPSC Mtg re: Lead Testing and Tracking Labels for Jewelry

Wednesday, March 18 – Thursday, March 19
CPSC Mtg re: Barrier Fabrics

Wednesday, March 18
Product Labeling Mtg w/ CPSC re: a Proposed Global Traceability

Thursday, March 19
CPSC Mtg re: Certification Requirements, Specialty Products

| More

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA), Systems and Laws, Tracking Labels | No Comments »

New Rules: Phthalates, Lead Ban Exemptions and Prosecution for Violators

Sunday, February 8th, 2009

The number of rulings and interpretations that have been handed down from the CPSC over the last few days is enough to make anyone’s head spin.  For manufacturers and retailers who must understand and comply with these rules, many of which go into effect in just two days on Tuesday, February 10th, the confusion has become overwhelming.  Key issues around which rulings have been recently updated include:

Phthalates in Children’s Products – Ban Applies to Current Inventory:

02/05/09:  A court ruling determined that the CPSC’s earlier guidance with regard to phthalates is incorrect; current inventory that violates the phthalates ban cannot be sold, manufactured, imported or distributed on or after February 10, 2009.  

The CPSC had previously said that items affected by the phthalates ban could be sold as long as they were manufactured and imported before February 10, 2009.

Children’s Electronics – Ruling on Components Exempt from Lead Ban:

02/05/09: In order to issue exemptions on certain electronics and component parts of electronics intended for children before the lead ban goes into effect on February 10, 2009, the Commission withdrew its proposed ruling and issued an interim final ruling with regard to the exemptions.  The interim final ruling is largely similar to the proposed ruling, except that it spells out the uses of lead that will be exempted.  More information on the electronic device exemptions here.

While the Commission is not required to conduct a comment period for exemptions, it has stated that it will review comments for thirty days, at which time it will finalize the rule.  As before, comments can be sent via email to: Sec101ElectronicDevices@cpsc.gov.
http://cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia09/brief/leadwithdrawal.pdf

Additional Proposed Lead Exemptions for Certain Children’s Books and Textiles:

02/05/09: The Commission has added two classes of products to the list of proposed products or materials to be exempted from the lead ban: 1) Regular books printed after 1985, and 2) dyed or undyed fabrics, provided that they have not undergone processes that may impart lead and they do not have added parts, such as decorations or fasteners that could contain lead. 
http://cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia09/brief/101lead.pdf

Violation of Lead Bans – Limits on Prosecution:

02/05/09: The CPSC issued a statement clarifying that any person who has, in good faith, relied on the Commission’s proposed and interim rulings until final rulings can be made, will not be prosecuted for violation of the lead limits unless 1) the person had actuall knowledge that the product violated the lead limits OR 2) the person was put on notice to stop manufacturing, importing, distributing, or selling the product but did not do so.

Any manufacturer, importer, distributor or retailer who gains knowledge that a product or material contains lead in violation of the lead limits is still required to report the finding(s) to the CPSC.  The Commission may require a product to be recalled regardless of whether or not the person(s) involved will be prosecuted.
http://cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia09/brief/101lead.pdf

Disclaimer:  Rules are changing daily.  While I follow consumer product safety issues closely and do my best to update posts accordingly, I cannot guarantee that this blog will reflect the most recent happenings.  Readers are reminded that content on this site is not to be considered legal advice and is offered for information purposes only, and that the terms and conditions of this site apply. 

| More

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA), Lead and Phthalates, Systems and Laws | No Comments »

US Product Recall System is Ineffective…Still?

Thursday, September 4th, 2008

Every year millions of people are
injured or killed in product-related accidents. 
In 2006 (the year before
recalls regained the spotlight) product-related incidents in the US alone
injured 33.1 million people and killed an additional 27,000.1 That same year, in attempt to quell those numbers, the CPSC recalled 471
products, accounting for 124 million product-units.2  35% of those recalls were for children’s
products.3 While
implementing so many recalls may be helpful, as the numbers of injuries and
deaths show, the system is not as effective as it needs to be.

The recent passing of the
Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA) on August 14th takes steps toward
making consumer products sold in the US safer. 
Some of the new rules include:

  • Bans (or near bans) on phthalates and lead in
    children’s products,
  • Requirements for third-party testing on children’s products,
    and testing on all regulated imports,
  • Increases in the number of mandatory safety standards, and
  • Steeper fines for violations, now $100,000 – $15
    Million (previously $8,000 – $1.8M)

All of these are important
measures that should help to increase the safety of products sold in the
US.  But what about those products that
do slip through the cracks or are the result of honest mistakes – the products
that are later recalled?  

As the term implies, products
that are “recalled” are supposed to be retrieved from consumers and returned to
manufacturers, fixed or destroyed.  In
reality, relatively few recalled-products are ever recovered.  On average, manufacturers can only account
for about 20% of the recalled products that have already left their facilities,
leaving up to 80% in homes, schools, childcare facilities and offices around
the country.

The 2008 CPSIA does make some changes to Section 15, the portion of the 1972 Act governing recall procedures, in attempt to
improve recall effectiveness.  As
discussed more thoroughly in my previous blog, Brief Overview of US Product Recall System
- Old and New, changes include:

  • Requirements to post recalls on websites of
    manufacturers, retailers, distributors and licensors,
  • Notifications of recalls to State and local health
    authorities,
  • CPSC discretion over the type(s) of remedy that may be
    offered in a specific recall, and
  • Announcements of recalls on TV or radio, and in
    languages other than English, when the CPSC determines this could reach
    additional affected populations not otherwise reached.

The 2008 CPSIA also aims to increase recall effectiveness by
requiring manufacturers to include product registration cards with durable
infant and toddler goods such as cribs, strollers, high chairs, bath seats,
play yards and activity centers.  In addition, manufacturers will be required to stamp certain children's products with a permanent tracking number that will allow consumers to ascertain information such as when and where the product was produced.

While I think that each of these
measures is a step in the right direction, I am skeptical that they will have a
significant impact on recall effectiveness. 
For example, many companies already list recalls on their websites, but
consumers only click on the “Recalls” links when they suspect a
problem.  In other words, recall links
are most often visited by the 20% of consumers who already know about a
particular recall, not the up to 80% who don’t. 

Similarly, while requiring registration
cards seems like a good idea, cards currently only have about a 15-30% response
rate.  The new rules say that
registration cards must include a statement that customer information will only
be used to contact the customer in the event of a recall, which may increase
response rates, but it will be a long time before we know for sure.  Cards are not required for durable infant and
toddler goods until August 2009, after which the CPSC has up to four years to
determine whether the cards have been successful in increasing recall
effectiveness.  Only after such
determination will the CPSC consider requiring registration cards on other
children’s products. 

Whether the registration cards prove successful or not, they will only help protect the original owner of the product.  If the item is sold to another party or donated to charity, the original owner may not be able (or willing) to contact the current owner.

Similarly, while labeling children's products with a tracking ID will certainly make it easier for consumers to know whether their version of a particular product has been recalled, it still requires the consumer to know about the recall before they will check.

I do think including other
languages and reaching certain populations by TV or radio could be very
helpful, but will require exemplary implementation on the part of the
CPSC.  The circumstances around which
such communication will be required are not outlined in the 2008 CPSIA.  One cautionary note is that widespread media
advertising of recalls, if overdone, could actually reduce recall effectiveness
as consumers begin to tune out the barrage of announcements, a phenomenon
witnessed in the UK.

Perhaps paradoxically, as the
number of regulations designed to make products safer grow, we may see
an increase in the number of product recalls, especially at first while new
testing systems are being developed.  This only
makes getting the recall system right that much more important.  The steps taken through the 2008 CPSIA are good, but we still have a lot of work to do.

Reference Materials

Consumer Product Safety Act of 1972

Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008

| More

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA), Recall Effectiveness, Systems and Laws | 2 Comments »