Letter to The Honorable Nancy Nord, Acting Chairman, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
Letter
May 8, 2007
The Honorable Nancy Nord
Acting Chairman
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
4330 East West Highway
Bethesda, Maryland 20814
Dear Chairman Nord:
I am writing in response to a recent series of newspaper stories about the recall of a toy that has caused more than two dozen life-threatening injuries to children and been responsible for the death of at least one child. The toy described in the articles is Magnetix Magnetic Building Sets, a construction toy that uses powerful neodymium magnets.
On March 31, 2006, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and the manufacturer, Rose Art Industries of Livingston, New Jersey, announced a recall of approximately 3.8 million sets of the toy. The recall announcement identified the toy as a hazard because the tiny magnets in the building sets can fall out and, if ingested by small children, can attract to each other and cause internal perforation or blockage, which can lead to serious illness or death. The announcement followed a series of reported incidents involving the small magnets, including the death of a child in November 2005 and four serious injuries.
For some reason, following the March 31, 2006 voluntary recall, Rose Art Industries, Inc. continued to sell Magnetix Magnetic Building Sets that still contained small powerful neodymium magnets that easily separated from the building pieces. Again, these products caused serious, life-threatening injuries to children who ingested the magnets. On April 19, 2007, Rose Art Industries, Inc. and CPSC announced an expanded recall of 4 million units. Reportedly, fifteen of these injuries occurred after the child's death.
Following both recalls, retailers were quoted as saying that they had not been notified of a recall. The product continues to be available on the shelves of toy stores. In addition, consumer advocates and others have criticized the manufacturing and testing standards promulgated for toys that use small magnetic pieces.
This recall has raised concerns about CPSC's actions in this case and the Commission's ability to protect the public from risks associated with the consumer products under its jurisdiction. Please respond to the following questions in writing:
# 1. Please provide a timeline of incidents, complaints, notification of injuries, actions by CPSC, actions by the retailers, actions by the company, and other pertinent events regarding Magnetix Magnetic Building Sets.
# 2. Has the CPSC lab tested any of these Magnetix Magnetic Building Sets to ensure their safety? If not, why not?
# 3. Between the March 31, 2006 recall and the April 19, 2007 recall, Magnetix Magnetic Building Sets continued to be available to consumers. What steps did CPSC take between these two recalls to ensure that the product did not continue to pose a health risk to children?
# 4. According to media reports, the manufacturer of Magnetix Magnetic Building Sets, Rose Art Industries, Inc., did not notify or attempt to notify some of the largest toy retailers about the recall of its product. What are the requirements for recalling firms to notify distributors and retailers of recalls? Did Rose Art Industries, Inc. comply with this requirement? Beyond issuing a press release, what can the Commission do to notify consumers and retailers?
# 5. Did CPSC conduct any surveillance of Magnetix Magnetic Building Sets at retail stores to ascertain whether defective products had been removed from store shelves? What are the Commission's policies on auditing product recalls? How frequently do audits occur?
# 6. From reviewing the CPSC recall website, it appears that small magnets in toys have posed a health risk to children in other products as well. In promulgating voluntary standards for manufacturers of toys using small, powerful magnets, what testing standards and labeling suggestions is the CPSC considering? Is the CPSC considering banning in toys magnets small enough to easily ingest? What is the CPSC's timeline for generating these standards?
# 7. Other products, including playpens and soapmaking kits, have also repeatedly caused injuries over lengthy periods of time. In fact, of the more than 360,000 injury reports CPSC receives annually from hospital emergency rooms, only approximately 1 percent are the subject of CPSC investigations. Have you sought additional resources for compliance and enforcement activities? If not, why not?
# 8. In issuing a recall, what is the Commission's responsibility to work with the recalling firm? Can the Commission issue a press release announcing a recall without the recalling firm's permission? How much time does the recalling firm have to review and edit the language in a CPSC press release? How much does it slow the work of the CPSC if the Commission doesn't accept a firm's edits?
# 9. If a firm fails to take action to recall a dangerous product, what authorities does the Commission have to order a recall? How quickly could the Commission act in these instances?
# 10. From media reports, it appears that the Commission was notified multiple times by consumers about the dangers of this toy. However, the Commission failed to recall the product until after the death of a young child. What are the Commission's policies once it receives a consumer report of a dangerous product? How many of these complaints did the CPSC receive on this product and on magnetic toys in general? How many of these types of complaints does CPSC receive annually? How many are investigated by the Commission?
# 11. Do you believe current federal statutory authority restricts CPSC from being able to take action quickly and decisively in order to prevent further injuries or death in a given situation such as this?
# 12. Based on your experience with Magnetix, what steps do you plan to take to, or are considering, to better protect consumer safety?
Thank your for your attention to this matter. I look forward to a response within 15 days.
Sincerely,
Richard J Durbin
United States Senator
Source