CPSC Holds Public Hearing on CPSC Agenda, Priorities, and Strategic Plan for FY 2011

Posted on August 28, 2009 by Lynn L. Bergeson

On August 25, 2009, the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) held a public hearing to receive comments about its agenda and priorities for CPSC during fiscal year (FY) 2011, which begins October 1, 2010, and about its current strategic plan. CPSC invited participation by members of the public, and representatives from the Consumers Union, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies (PEN), Thermo Fisher Scientific, National Association of State Fire Marshals, International Sleep Products Association, Kids in Danger, and American Apparel & Footwear Association testified. Don Mays, Consumers Union, and David Rejeski, PEN, addressed CPSC’s goals concerning nanomaterials.

Tags: , , , , , ,

PEN Releases Report on the Consumer Products Safety Commission and Nanotechnology

Posted on August 22, 2008 by Lynn L. Bergeson

 On August 21, 2008, the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies (PEN) at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars released its latest nanotechnology report, The Consumer Products Safety Commission and Nanotechnology, written by Dr. E. Marla Felcher. Dr. Felcher states that “[a] rapid increase in both the number and complexity of [nanotechnology-enabled consumer] products places significant responsibility on [the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)] to take the lead in regulating this new technology, but the agency is not in a position to do so.” After providing a brief history of the CPSC, Dr. Felcher asserts that the agency “has never lived up to its expectations,” and highlights five weaknesses in CPSC’s oversight capacity as exemplifying why CPSC is unable “to oversee the safety of complex, high-tech products made using nanotechnology”:

  1. Its data collection system is not nano ready;
  2. It has limited ability to inform the public about health hazards associated with nanotechnology products;
  3. It has limited ability to ensure that recalled products are removed from store shelves;
  4. It lacks sufficient enforcement personnel to identify manufacturers that fail to report nanotechnology product hazards; and
  5. It does not have sufficient authority to promulgate mandatory safety standards for nanotechnology products.

 

 

Tags: , , , , , ,