CPSC Says Draft House Bill to Revise CPSIA Goes too Far, but Some Changes Needed
The House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade held a hearing on April 7, 2011 on a draft bill that would revise the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA) to make it less stringent. While the draft received strong support from the trade and many Representatives, some Congressional members likened the bill to a CPSIA wrecking ball, and the CPSC official who testified indicated it went farther than necessary.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
(Among other things, the draft bill would amend the CPSIA definition of children’s products in order to greatly reduce the number of affected products, provide two new exemptions for the lead content limits for children’s products, delay the 100 parts per million lead content limit, significantly reduce the number of children’s product safety rules requiring third-party testing, and change several requirements regarding the public database of consumer product incidents. See ITT’s Online Archives or 04/06/11 news, 11040621, for BP summary.)
CPSC Staff Mostly Want “Exemption Power” for Lead Content Limit
Despite significant discussion about reforms that may be needed to address problems with the CPSIA lead content limits, the CPSC staff member who testified implied that there may not be much need for drastic changes, as the market place has largely already adjusted. He pointed to recent statistics by a CPSC-accredited lab which stated that of 89,273 data points it tested for children’s products, 96% of metal components already tested at or below 100 parts per million (ppm)1, as did 97% of glass and ceramic components, and 99% of plastic components.
He said that the area that most needs reform is the lead content limit exemption provision. He stated that CPSC needs more flexibility and suggested that it be given the authority to completely exempt certain products, like all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), from the lead content limits. If such exemptions were done a notice and comment basis, the underlying analysis and support for any exceptions would be public, allowing for transparency and accountability.
Staff also Want Ability to Regulate on Timetable Dictated by Risk
The CPSC staff member also stated that the agency needs more flexibility to regulate on a timetable influenced by the seriousness of the actual risk.
3 Commissioners Say Draft Would Harm Consumers, Penalize Compliant Firms
Though they did not testify, the three majority-party CPSC Commissioners submitted a letter about the draft bill to the subcommittee. They stated that the draft’s reversal of several of the core provisions of the CPSIA would likely diminish the health and safety of consumers, and they could not support such a reversal. Moreover, many responsible companies, especially here in the U.S., have already taken the steps necessary to meet the law’s requirements. It would be unfair to penalize those who have come into compliance with the law and to reward those less conscientious by undoing these safety features.
The two minority Commissioners Northup and Nord each posted blogs welcoming the subcommittee's attempt to fix the unintended consequences of the CPSIA.
Trade Most Interested in Lead Content Exemptions, Database Changes, Reduced Testing, Etc.
Those witnesses representing industry were most enthusiastic about the draft bill’s attempt to improve the lead content exemption process, reforms to the public database, restoration of certain risk analysis back to CSPC, reduced third-party testing, making the 100 ppm limit prospective, exclusions for small batch and specialty products from the third-party testing requirements, and only applying the phthalates limits to accessible parts.
Least Controversial Reforms Are Small Mnfr. Relief, Lead Content Exemptions
Based on the testimony and questioning by members of the subcommittee, the least controversial areas of CPSIA reform appear to be:
- some sort of targeted relief for crafters and other small businesses from the third-party testing requirements;
- the need to give CPSC the ability to grant exemptions to the lead content limits;
- changing the retrospective nature of the 100 ppm lead content limit; and
- some small, limited changes to the public database, such as the amount of time given to companies to respond to reports of harm.
Certain Subcommittee Members Seem Willing to Find Common Ground
Subcommittee Chairman Bono Mack (R), Representative Schakowsky (D), and certain others indicated a willingness to find common ground in their efforts to reform the CPSIA. However, several alluded to the failed attempt in the 111th Congress to move forward with CPSIA reform legislation. (See ITT’s Online Archives or 03/26/10 news, 10032605, for BP summary of draft legislation put forward by Representative Waxman, who was then Chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.)
1The 100 ppm lead content limit is only set to take effect on August 14, 2011, unless CPSC determines it is not technologically feasible for a product or product category. The current lead content limit is only 300 ppm.