SUBSCRIBE   |   MY ACCOUNT   |   VIEW SHOPPING CART   |   Log In      
   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   SEARCH  

 

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on LinkedIn
Monday September 08, 2014

CSPC Could Add Individually-Sold Units to Magnets Proposal

Bookmark and Share

 

Product Safety Letter
Other Headlines This Week
available only to paid subscribers

 

CPSC Focuses on Post Height in ASTM Toddler Bed Standard

 

Refrigerator Panel Seeks North American Harmonization

 

ASTM Pool Drain Task Group Reviews Instrumentation

 

Generators Again Top CO Deaths Linked to Engine-Driven Tools

 

Feds Get Guilty Pleas in New York Toy Imports Case

 

Consumers Union Reiterates Bike Helmet Suggestions to CPSC

 

WCMA Says It Will Consider CPSC Requests for Window Cord Work

 

PTI Voices Concern about CPSC Revisiting Saw Survey Conclusions

 

RAPEX Record Possible But Not Certain

 

Reactions Continue Lead over Last Year

 

NSW Launches Multilingual Toy Safety Education

 

CDC Provides Public Pool Water Safety Guidance

 

EPA Cites Concern about Paint Stripper Chemical

 

California Passes Fire Retardant Reporting Bill

 

California Updates Tools for Products Survey

 

To subscribe, click here

 

 

Magnets sold at per-piece prices would be covered under revisions urged by CPSC staff for the proposed rule for small, strong magnets. The original proposal (PSL, 8/13/12) aimed to ban sets containing units that fit in a small-parts chamber and that lack flux indexes less than 50. However, explained the briefing package made available September 3, the agency is aware of existing and previous pricing structures that might get around the sets specification such as 10¢-per-magnet with a $5.00 charge to send many individually-sold units in a single shipment.

 

CPSC would address another potential loophole by replacing the phrase “intended or marketed by the manufacture primarily” with “intended, marketed or commonly used.” The phrase after both versions is “as a manipulative or construction item for entertainment, such as puzzle working, sculpture building, mental stimulation, or stress relief.” The additional focus on consumer use is aimed at stopping companies from asserting in marketing and instructions that, for example, the items are for science kits only. The agency said it would look at information such as users’ reviews on manufacturers’ websites or injury reports to decide common uses regardless of companies’ asserted intended uses.

 

Other suggested changes include:

  • Replacing the term desk toy with item to ensure that products not labeled as “desk toys” still would be covered.

     

  • Replacing the word children with consumer because incident data show that teens are a subgroup at risk of injuries.

     

  • Removing permanent from “separable, permanent magnetic objects” because temporarily-magnetized items still would be risky.

     

  • Adding clarification on deciding if products meet the definition of magnet set. This includes not only marketing, labeling, and packaging, but also common consumer use considerations.

The package includes a lengthy section with responses to complaints about the proposal, including 1st Amendment worries.

 

Read it at www.cpsc.gov//Global/Newsroom/FOIA/CommissionBriefingPackages/2014/SafetyStandardforMagnetSets-FinalRule.pdf.

 

CPSC has a September 10 briefing scheduled on the new proposal.