It's great to see everybody today. I'm looking forward to hearing from stakeholders about what they think about the priorities should be for the consumer product safety commission for the coming years. Each year, the commission conducts a public hearing on our agendas and priorities to better inform the work that we do. This is our second over 1 in which I've overseen this hearing and I know today's hearing will provide valuable guidance for the plans in the future. Thanks to everyone who has submitted testimony and to those who are here to talk to us today, we're going to hear from panels in 4 panels of witnesses. Each panelist will have 10 minutes for their presentations and then I'll call my colleagues, ask questions for the panel again in 10 minutes per round and remind all the panelists to mute themselves when they're not speaking. And now I'm going to introduce our first panelist, which we are honored to have the representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who represents Florida's 25th congressional district and is a member of the appropriations committee where she serves as a ranking member for the military construction veterans affairs and related agency subcommittee on the house appropriations committee. She also authored the 1st federal pool and spa safe safety legislation, the Virginia Graham Baker pool and spa safety act, and has been a long time champion of drowning prevention and CPSC's pool safety work. It's our privilege to have her today. Representative Wasserman Schultz, you're recognized for 10 minutes. Thank you so much. Mr. Chairman. Thank you for inviting me to speak today at the consumer product safety commissions public hearing on your 24 agenda and priorities. I want to thank the commissioners for the opportunity to address my top priority for the CPSC and 1 that I am confident you acknowledge and to which you are committed, which is drowning prevention. Before I begin, I really want to thank you for holding this important public hearing and giving the general public a chance to address issues that are so very close to them issues that truly protect lives. I have long supported the CPSC and its mission and I look forward to our continued partnership. Drownings and near drownings and pools and spas posed a significant public health risk to our nation's children drowning is a public health crisis and it remains the leading cause of unintentional death for children ages 1 to 4.  However, we're not powerless in addressing these tragedies. Collectively parents advocacy groups industry members of Congress and the CPSC can and should do everything in our power to prevent drowning deaths. Strong education awareness and enforcement efforts can help make children safer around the water and save lives. Drowning prevention and pool safety issues mean so much to me personally and have helped shape my professional policy making career beginning with my early days in the Florida state legislature. As a young state representative in 2000. I first passed the Preston the I burn Miriam Mackenzie residential pool and spa safety act, which required Floridian to install new pools or hot tubs to install 1 of 4 safety obstacles to ensure that when supervision lapses. There's an obstacle in the path of a child that prevents falling in the pool or alerts supervision. The bill also called for the Department of Health to begin a drowning prevention program and required licensed pool contractors and home builders to provide clients with drowning prevention information. Then at the federal level in 2007 I passed the Virginia Graham Baker pool and spa safety act. In all my years of public service 1 of my proudest moments was when we were able to pass the VGB act into law. I know that most of you are familiar with the story of Virginia Graham Baker and her mom Nancy for whom the VGB act was named. Graham was a 7 year old little girl who became entrapped in a hot tub drain resulting in her tragic and entirely preventable death. The VGB act aimed to improve the safety of all pools and spas by increasing the layers of protection and promoting parental supervision and directed the consumer product safety commission to launch pool safely. A national drowning prevention education campaign. It also required every public pool in America to install safe drains. Forgive me. My computer is not cooperating me. It also required every public pool in America to install safe drain covers that prevent suction and trap. And it created a grant program that incentivizes states and municipalities to adopt their own pool and spa safety laws and support education efforts. After years of hard work and advocacy in 2007 VGB was signed into law by President George W. Bush and it was and remains the first and only federal pool and spa safety legislation signed into law in our nation's history. Since VGB's passage we've allocated millions of dollars for pool safety grants and the pool safety awareness program and the funding has steadily increased in the last few years. An effort I have and will continue to champion to ensure the CPSC is appropriated sufficient funding toward this end. I'm encouraged by the recent grant opportunity announced for FY23 which will make three and a half million dollars available in new grants as well as the increase in applicants for this funding cycle. So heartening to see. And thank you for your efforts Mr. Chairman. But this federal initiative did expire several years ago in terms of its authorized funding. And while we've been successful at appropriating the funding for its continue moving forward we cannot make any substantive changes to it unless we fully reauthorize the program. The VGB Act is and will remain a strong layer of drowning protection. But after more than a decade all worthy initiatives do need to be restructured. In the last session of Congress I introduced a bill to reauthorize VGB for five years making several vital changes and I plan to reintroduce this bill again in the coming weeks. First it would expand eligibility to both nonprofits and Indian tribes to expand its reach. Second after learning that past recipients want funds for swim lessons which is also a important factor in preventing drownings. We modified the text to allow grant funds to pay for it. Swim skills are so key to drowning prevention. Third we wanted to create a grant awareness campaign. Given trends and drownings coupled with expanded eligibility this is key to building momentum and expanding the reach of the grants. And finally the reauthorization also includes more oversight and reporting. So we maximize the program's effectiveness over time. As we negotiated a final spending package late last year we made a huge step forward by inserting VGB into that final budget spending bill which President Biden signed into law. Unfortunately we didn't get everything we wanted but we did get a one-year reauthorization. We made Indian tribes eligible grantees and we laid the groundwork for a full reauthorization this year. So there's a lot more work to be done. The CPSC played a pivotal role in helping to pass this one-year reauthorization through technical assistance and general support and I hope for and anticipate that same support this year. All this is to say I firmly believe drowning prevention and pool safety must continue to be at the top of your priorities list for the foreseeable future. Just during these last two weeks Mr. Chairman communities and families in my home state felt the tragedy of two drownings and one near drowning. I don't need to explain to you what losing a child must be like. I know you hear from those parents often as do I but I do believe that we can and must do better. With that I want to express my concern with and invite the CPSC to walk me through the CPSC's FY24 budget request released March 9th 2023 which states the FY 2024 request does not include new dedicated funds for the VGB grant program. Every appropriation cycle I make it a priority to request and fight for $10 million for the VGB program $5 million for the grants and $5 million for the education campaign. I understand the limited budget the CPSC receives on an annual basis. This is also something that I regularly push to increase but firmly believe more emphasis and funding should be placed on drowning prevention through VGB. In addition I believe the CPSC should increase its focus attention and staffing for drowning prevention. I have language in the VGB reauthorization act to address this point and urge you to designate at least one single CPSC pool safely campaign employee to be solely responsible for this risk area. I understand you may have staffing constraints and I acknowledge the progress made towards this issue since the OIG's audit from September 2020 but still urge you to increase staffing for drowning prevention in this manner. Finally it is vital for CPSC to more formally and more often widely engage stakeholders from industry to medical professionals to advocacy groups in regular quarterly meetings to discuss substance and priorities. And in that same vein attend more public facing events as commissioners like the annual drowning prevention conference which I know you already attend. Their account and the film showing that you and I Mr. Chairman came together to speak at just a few weeks ago. There are countless events and opportunities to have first hand discussions with individuals who have stories to tell, solutions to issues or those who lack awareness about your work to prevent drownings. I implore you to take a grassroots approach toward drowning prevention. I commend the CPSC for their tireless mission protecting consumers particularly children. It is absolutely critical that we make sure that when it comes to safety we know that children can't ensure that people do the right thing when it comes to keeping them protected and so your job is so critical. I've had the pleasure to work with and meet with many of you and I've shared a stage to discuss drowning prevention with the chairman as I mentioned on several occasions. I'm a strong ally of the CPSC fighting for every dollar available toward your mission and your agenda. Drowning prevention is not and should never be a partisan issue. I am still in the fight. I will never give up and I know you won't either. I'm still carrying the banner on this issue because it's one more child's life that might be saved. Again, I thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony for this public hearing and look forward to your questions. Thank you so much. Thank you. And I'm going to turn to questions from commissioners in order of seniority. I'll start with myself and I don't have particular questions, but I do really want to thank you again for all the work and advocacy you've done in the pool safety area and for the support for CPSC over the years. There is no doubt that the VGBA and the work of the CPSC in implementing it has saved lives and will continue to save lives in the future with your support, the support of Congress. So thank you again. I look forward to working with you on this and other safety issues going forward. Thank you. Turn to my colleagues. Commissioner Feldman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for joining us today. Congresswoman, it's good to have the chance to speak with you again. Pool safety is an issue that's important to both of us and to many of the others that are joining us today in person online. You and I have worked together in the past on pool safety issues during my time in the commission. And before that, when I was a Senate staffer, so it's your attention on this issue that's kept pool safety a priority for the commission over the years and we should recognize that. I am particularly grateful about the expansion of the VGBA grant eligibility to native tribes. That's something that I've made a priority during my tenure here at CPSC. And I recently returned from a trip to Arizona, New Mexico, where I had an opportunity to meet with the Intertribal Council of Arizona and the Pueblo Council of Governors in Albuquerque. And I can tell you that there's a recognition of the problem and an interest in the program, the grant program expansion. So I appreciate your efforts and I thank you again for taking the time to speak with us and look forward to working with you going forward. Thank you so much, Commissioner. I represent, you may know, the Seminole Tribe of Florida and the main reservation is in my congressional district. Yes. The Mikosuki Tribe of Florida is adjacent to my congressional district. So I wholeheartedly agree and that's why it was so critical to make sure that underserved populations who unfortunately disproportionately have a portion of their population at risk of drowning. It's so critical that we include them as well. So thank you. Thank you very much. I have the questions. Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Trump. Congressman, thank you for your work to protect kids from drowning and thank you for your support of CPSC. I know it's important to you. It's certainly important to us too. I'm around the water a lot with my two young kids and I'm always on high alert when I am. So these issues are always top of mind. And in recent years, drowning has been a leading cause of accidental childhood death. And in future years, I hope that we can work to reduce that to record lows with your continued help and support. So thank you for everything you're doing. Thank you so much. Commissioner Boyle. Thank you, Mr. Chair and thank you Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz. I will just echo my colleagues in thanking you for all that you've done to champion these issues and to stick with it through all these years. I welcome the opportunity to meet with you recently in your office to talk about these issues and I stand ready to continue to support VGBA and anything we can do to reduce drowning deaths. It's one of the most critical issues. And if I may, in advance of Mother's Day, I would also like to thank you for your work on the moms in the house caucus. I think we all know that moms are on the front lines of safety and I think the panelists that we're going to hear from later will indicates that given the number of moms who will be testifying. So these are critical critical issues and I want to thank you for that as well. I don't have any questions. I don't have any questions. Sure. It was wonderful to welcome you to my office and to partner with you on these issues and the whole commission really because I've had a chance to talk with and work with each of you. And I know how committed you are. And look, this is this this entire issue. I mean, we have to let's let's set a goal of making sure that the number 1 killer through unintentional death of children under under 5 years old is not drowning. I mean, let's let's let's set that goal. There are steps we can take together to aggressively make sure that we can reduce that reduce the likelihood and incidences of drowning. I know you're committed to it and I appreciate your partnership so much. Thank you so so much for having me. And thank you again. Representative Washington Schultz and we really appreciate you taking the time to speak with us this morning. Pleasure. It's an honor. Thank you so much. Bye. Bye. I'm going to now introduce the 2nd panel and ask people to come up please. The 2nd panels are seating themselves. We have Nancy calls who is the executive director of kids in danger. Courtney Griffin, who is director of consumer product safety for consumer federation of America. Karen. Nathan's. We pronounce that correctly. Is that the executive director at the tick council of America? Oh, actually, we don't have. She is actually virtual. Sorry. Thank you. Thank you. I looked up and I said, I saw Ori, Ori Shin, who is policy council over at consumer reports and Alan corn is the executive director of Abby's hope charitable foundation. Thank you all for being here both in person and virtually. We're going to start with Miss Coles. You're recognized for 10 minutes. Thank you. Thank you for this opportunity to submit comments on CPSC's agenda and priorities for the fiscal year 2024 and 25. Kid was founded 25 years ago to protect children by fighting for product safety. Danny Kaiser died on May 12, 1998 at a Chicago childcare home strangled by a recalled portable crib. We've remained dedicated to keep children safe by enhancing transparency, improving product safety, better education and stronger advocacy for children. Through implementation of the consumer product safety improvement act and Danny's law or section 104. The CPSC has successfully developed strong mandatory standards for dozens of types of durable infant and toddler products. We appreciate the amount of time, energy, research and knowledge that the CPSC staff dedicate to this task. We applaud the CPSC for finalizing rules to protect children from clothing storage unit tip overs, unsafe infant sleep products, window covering cord strangulation and magnet ingestion. Kid has been working for years with parent advocates and other consumer organizations to protect children from these hazards. We urge the CPSC to implement and enforce these new standards by ensuring consumers and manufacturers are aware of the new standards and enforcing the standards by taking actions such as recalls and warnings of unsafe products are unlawfully still found on the marketplace. The CPSC proposed a rule in February 2023 to reduce the risk of button cell or coin battery ingestion by children as required by Reese's law. These small, flat, round batteries as we all know can lead to severe internal damage and deaths when ingested. We urge you to finalize the rule and get it in place to prevent child injuries and deaths caused by battery ingestion. With the passage of the Safe Sleep for Babies Act and the new infant sleep product rule, products for infant sleep are safer than ever. We support CPSC's continuing work on the BASINET standard to provide safe sleep options for newborns and babies under five months. Working with ASTM International and Safe Sleep Experts, Kid supports the development of strong requirements to allow for products that may not be traditional BASINETs on a stand or with legs, but still do not lend themselves to use unraised surfaces such as couches and beds. We also strongly support CPSC's work both in ASTM and on a CPSC rule for infant feeding supports which would provide safer nursing and other feeding support for new parents that don't lend themselves to be used as unsafe sleep environments for children. While there is also ongoing work on loungers, infant loungers, many of which have been marketed and still being used for in bed sleep or napping, Kid does not see a way to standardize current products on the market and avoid the very high risk of sleep-related deaths in the product. While loungers might be a substitute for a blanket on the floor to lay a baby down inside of their parents, they pose too many additional risks most related to unsafe sleep or a child being left unattended. Another emerging hazard in the toy category, which I know you'll hear more about from Ashley, are tiny polymer beads known as water beads that explain in fluids posing serious risks of swallowed, inserted in ears or nose or inhaled into lungs. We asked CPSC to prioritize work on this issue. Just, I believe it was yesterday I saw this morning, Health Canada released information and a warning to their consumers about water beads and included U.S. data from the NICE data that just since 2017 through November of last year, there were 248 emergency room visits for these products. 100 involved ear insertion, 112 ingestion, 35 nasal insertion, and one was an eye injury. This very important and dangerous product or important issue is to get these dangerous products out of the reach of children. Another ingestion hazard, liquid laundry packets, are not addressed by mandatory standard. The voluntary standard was completed in 2014, renewed in 21 with no changes, addresses only the outer container labeling and warnings. While serious injuries have declined since the high in 2012, the number of exposures, which means a child is getting access to the product, is growing. In addition, the ASTM Subcommittee on Liquid Laundry Packets was recently made aware that Health Canada had additional data on U.S. deaths involving laundry packets that did not appear in the CPSC or Poison Center data we had been using to track injuries and deaths. We urge CPSC to carefully watch future data to consider additional action if needed. Since our founding, KIT has advocated for the elimination of Section 6B of the Consumer Product Safety Act. This secrecy provision is unique to CPSC and prevents the timely release of information patterns, hazards related to children's product. The shadow of Section 6B exists as well here. Additional work undertaken by CPSC staff when it is unlikely the information should be subject to 6B or decisions made by staff to not release information because of the delay it might include it may cause in their work. In February, the CPSC issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking, which makes modifications that streamline and modernize the current Section 6B regulation, still in line with the CPSA. Essentially, however, this proposed rule does not change the inherent problem and the inequality created by Section 6B, which is that a federal agency, CPSC, and industry know of dangers for weeks, months, or even years while the public is kept in the dark and unwittingly continue to expose their children to known hazards. KIT supports most of the changes included in the SMPR and offered public comments. We urge CPSC to finalize the rule, which will better enable CPSC to inform consumers about hazardous products. Since 2001, KIT has been reporting on children's product recalls. We released our report looking at 2022 in March. Our report found that last year had the highest number of children's product recalls since 2013, 100 recalls making up about a third of all CPSC recalls. Recalls due to excessive lead content increased to the highest number of lead recalls in the last 10 years and clothing recalls doubled just from last year, most due to a failure to meet federal flammability standards. These prohibitions against lead and violations of flammability standards have been on the books for decades. The large number of their, in addition, so they've been on the books, but they're also a hidden hazard that parents are not going to discover on their own. The large number of recalls reveal that there are still too many hazardous products on the marketplace being sold, but it also shows that CPSC is acting by recalling these products at a higher rate, which is a good thing. In 2022, none of the children product recall releases on the CPSC webpage were translated into Spanish, which seems an easy step to encourage broader understanding of what's been recalled. Spanish translations were few and far between before that. The CPSC should translate all children's product recalls and additional safety information into Spanish with a priority on those recalls involving injuries or deaths. We are heartened to read in upcoming plans that CPSC will address this in coming years. The CPSC should negotiate stronger recall remedies to increase recall effectiveness. Recently, the CPSC chair wrote to Metta and Mattel to get both companies take more action to get the recall deadly Fisher Prize rock and play out of homes and online marketplaces. The CPSC should insist recalling companies and online marketplace do more after product is recalled, but that action on CPSC's part should take place in the negotiating phase prior to a recall. If there is not an adequate remedy for recall, such as a full refund, consumers will not likely participate, leaving potentially deadly products in use or put on secondhand marketplace. CPSC should push companies to offer adequate remedies and also to publicize recalls to consumers to the same extent they marketed the products to consumers in the first place. The CPSC should also focus on products that violate newer existing standards. We continue to see bumper pads, play yard mattresses, in bed sleep products for sale that do not meet CPSC's requirements. Monitoring online sales effectively takes perseverance and effort, but is vital to provide safe products for our children. Enforcement of rules is essential to get wider compliance. CPSC is soon adding another rule to the mix, that storage, clothing storage unit rule, which will also require close monitoring. SaferProducts.gov has great potential to educate consumers on hazards and recalls, as well as provide vital information to CPSC and manufacturers about product hazards. It keeps vital information in the public eye, rather than hidden behind Section 6B blinders. CPSC must prioritize this database and make all efforts to increase the ease of reporting and thereby publish more of the reports made both by consumers as well as medical examiners and healthcare providers. The agency can then use the data to provide reports and postings on social media for consumers to increase awareness and educate the public. CPSC is vital to the safety of all children and consumers, and we thank you for your commitment to protecting consumers from harm, and thank you for this opportunity to provide comments. We look forward to continuing to work with you on these issues, and I look forward to answering your questions. Thank you, Ms. Coles. Now I'm going to turn to Ms. Griffin. Thank you, and good morning. I am Courtney Griffin, testifying on behalf of Consumer Federation of America, or CFA. CFA is a non-profit association of more than 250 national, state, and local consumer groups founded in 1968 to advance the consumer interests through research, advocacy, and education. The CPSC is an incredibly important independent agency. Its mission to protect the public from unreasonable risk of injury or death associated with the use of consumer products impacts every American every day. CFA appreciates this opportunity to make recommendations to the CPSC on its agenda and priorities for the next fiscal year. Please accept my written testimony into the record, and today I will share some of the highlights from that submission. The CPSC's recent work has focused on many critical safety issues that have posed significant harm to consumers for far too long. We applaud the CPSC's attention to these and other hazards, and urge the CPSC to continue to protect the public with its decisive, resolute action. In connection to the CPSC's most recent CSU rule, we will urge the CPSC to remain diligent in its enforcement of the rule and use all of the tools in its tool chest to ensure compliance. However, despite this rule, unstable furniture and TVs will remain in homes across the country. The CPSC must increase the scope and engagement of the Anchor It program. The CPSC should work in partnership with other stakeholders like childcare providers or housing authorities to make sure that the program is promoted. The CPSC should engage parents and caregivers with informative social media posts at a regular cadence on platforms likely to reach the target audience. Finally, the CPSC should ensure that the anchor kits available to consumers on the market are performing their function and they're not providing consumers with false confidence. In connection to outstanding product safety issues, I'm going to discuss off-highway vehicles or OHVs. CFA has identified at least 120 OHV fatalities this year. We are continuing to collect data from 2022, but we have already identified at least 419 OHV fatalities, and the percentage of these fatalities that is children is shocking. According to a CFA report, an increasing number of OHVs have been pulled from the market due to safety concerns from 2 in 2010 to 21 last year. There have already been 172 OHV recalls from January 2010 to April 2023. And so far this year, at the time of my written submission, there had already been 8 OHV recalls. And the brand with the most recalls has over triple that of the brand with the second most recalls. There are numerous reasons why these OHVs are being recalled from the market, but the number one cause is fire hazards. Fire-related hazards account for approximately 40% of the recalls. So these issues include fuel hoses leaking, exhaust pipes cracking, firewalls failing, melting of components and other fuel-related issues. Throttle issues account for the next largest percentage of recalls and steering-related issues thereafter. And those top three hazards represent nearly three quarters of the hazards that led to recalls. We urge the CPSC to be a strong voice in opposing the operation of OHVs on roads and to be a leader in educating consumers about the dangers of on-road OHV use. The CPSC must investigate why the number of OHV recalls is increasing, carefully review the industry-wide incidents, evaluate the effectiveness of the standards and work to prevent more tragedies. The CPSC could also improve the reporting of OHV death data by including how many deaths occur on private versus public roads. And the commission should seek to reduce the significant time lags in releasing the OHV death and injury data. Laundry packets. Highly concentrated single load laundry detergent packets pose a serious risk to children. As of March 31, 2023, poison centers have already managed over 2,000 cases related to exposure in children 5 and younger. Exposure incidents have not consistently decreased since the voluntary standard was published. And we urge the CPSC to investigate why the number of ingestions of laundry packets remains so high every year. In addition to addressing specific product hazards, CFA urges the CPSC to use all the available tools to share critical safety information, issue meaningful and effective recalls, and hold non-compliant entities accountable. CFA continues to applaud the creation of SaferProducts.gov and NICE. These databases have incredible potential and they can and should be used to provide critical safety information. The CPSC must continue to expand the scope, reach and awareness of these important databases. A fiscal year 2021 report noted gaps in CPSC's incident data on race, i.e. many people are failing to include this information in the reports to the agency. CFA urges the CPSC to continue to examine and rectify this issue because it does impede the agency from fully analyzing disparities and injuries and deaths. Increase use. The commission should develop, implement and publicly share a plan to increase awareness and use of the databases through a more consumer-friendly interface as well as outreach and training. Improve the ease of reporting. The commission should consider ways to increase information collected from key groups and improve how that data is collected. And the CPSC should use that data it collects to provide reports and social media information about specific emerging hazards. Recall effectiveness. This is an ongoing concern and dangerous products remain in many homes. More must be done. The CPSC should use its social media accounts in creative ways to provide direct notice to consumers and disseminate recall information. The CPSC should require more robust initiatives on the part of companies to ensure adequate recall participation. And finally, the commission should make public the status of all recalls and inform the public about whether companies are meeting their obligations to consumers under recall agreements. Section 6B of the Consumer Product Safety Act continues to restrict the flow of critical safety information to consumers. We applaud the CPSC's recent effort to modernize and streamline the regulation and we look forward to the final rule. In order to improve and provide more transparency, the CPSC should consider preparing an annual report regarding its experience implementing the provisions of Section 6B each year. Specifically, the report could track the time and resources spent in connection to Section 6B as well as how Section 6B is being used practically. The CPSC plays a critical role in ensuring that consumers are safe from product hazards and we are so grateful for this commission's work. We urge the commission to continue to use all the tools Congress gave it to protect consumers from potentially hazardous consumer products. And we look forward to working with commission to address these and other concerns. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Griffin. We're actually going to turn to our virtual participant as Athanas. You are now recognized for 10 minutes. Thank you so much, Chairman Hohenstowe, Hohenstarek and commissioners Boyle Feldman and Tromka. Thank you for the opportunity to share our views today. The TIC Council Americas is the U.S. branch of the TIC Council, a trade association representing over 100 international independent third party testing, inspection, certification and verification organizations. The industry represents an estimated 1 million employees across the world and supports a diverse range of industry sectors. TIC organizations share the view of the commission and the stakeholders attending today that safety of consumers is paramount. And through that shared understanding, we as a community can work collaboratively to seek solutions to emerging risks faced by consumers. On behalf of the TIC Council Americas, I encourage your continued engagement and outreach to stakeholders such as the TIC Council and its members to further the mission of the organization and continue to identify potential risks and solutions to protect the safety of consumers. TIC Council members have a global footprint and with facilities in over 160 countries and have the technical expertise and capabilities in all aspects of product safety. In our value of TIC study, our research identified that of the 1 million TIC employees around the world, many work in STEM roles and serve service industry around the globe. By tapping into that technical expertise, we feel strongly that solutions to even the most challenging of problems can be found and we encourage the CPSC to take advantage of and to work with the TIC industry to support consumer safety. To further support the CPSC's work, the TIC Council Americas recommends that the CPSC consider counterfeits. First, let me thank the commission for its work to date on addressing the counterfeiting crisis. Each day, counterfeit products are sold online and shipped through the US Post directly to consumers. These products pretend to be from reputable companies, but the branding and the labeling on them including TIC certification marks meant to convey safety have been fraudulently duplicated. The products present a real risk to consumers because they haven't been tested, inspected and certified as meeting US safety requirements. And when those same consumers seek remedies for injuries they sustain, they find it difficult to identify and bring bad actors to justice. Through implementation of the CPSC e-filing baited pilot and monitoring of products sold through e-commerce platforms, less dangerous products will reach consumers. We encourage the CPSC to continue the growth of these programs. We also ask the CPSC to work with the TIC Council Americas and other industries to continue to put pressure on e-commerce platforms to confirm the legal status of sellers prior to allowing them to sell products on their sites, to quickly remove products found to be counterfeit and to prohibit those sellers from continuing to sell online if they've been found to be listing counterfeit products. We also ask the CPSC to join us in promoting data transparency to help the industry better identify, track and report counterfeiters. Understanding which countries counterfeiters reside in, which sellers are the biggest offenders, and which shipping methods they prefer to use would greatly benefit our efforts to combat this issue and reduce the number of unsafe products reaching consumers. Second, battery safety. Batteries present a major challenge in the product safety space due to their range in size, construction, many uses, and their need to be charged or replaced. And as batteries such as lithium-ion batteries continue to proliferate in the marketplace, we recommend continued vigilance from the CPSC of this emerging hazard. When hoverboards first gained popularity, their use skyrocketed amongst consumers, but so did fires caused by the batteries used in the hoverboards. We are now facing similar challenges and need to apply those same lessons learned to batteries and the devices that use them today. Batteries must be designed and manufactured to prevent thermal runaway, which can cause fires and explosions. In addition, manufacturers must consider their product as an electrical system, ensuring compatibility components and placement to avoid fire and electrical hazards. They must also consider heat exposure to other components that could cause a structural failure. And where applicable, products must be designed to prevent children from gaining access to the battery while still allowing the battery to be replaced or recharged. We thank the CPSC for their ongoing work implementing Reese's law for button cell and safe coin batteries. We also commend the CPSC for its December 2022 letter to manufacturers and porters and retailers of battery-powered micro-ability products, urging them to ensure their products are designed, manufactured, and certified to applicable voluntary safety standards. Going into fiscal year 2024, the CPSC should continue to educate consumers on the risks associated with batteries and battery-operated products, including button and coin cell ingestion risks and on safer charging practices for e-bikes and micro-mobility devices. We would also ask that in fiscal year 2024, the CPSC consider requirements for batteries and battery-powered products, focusing on high-risk products. While there are standards to address the safety of lithium-ion batteries and battery-powered products, they are not consistently adhered to nor are there mandatory requirements that they be met. As reported by the CPSC, there were at least 208 micro-mobility caused fires from 2021 through 2022, leading to at least 19 deaths. More must be done to ensure these products meet safety standards. The TIC Council America stands ready as a resource through workshops, meetings, and other means to support the CPSC and industry in developing a path forward for the safety of consumers. Switching to AI, IoT, and cybersecurity. Just this year, chat GPT and other natural language processing tools driven by AI became available to consumers, and with their release calls from policymakers to set appropriate safeguards have risen. The TIC Council America has held a virtual panel in the fall of 2022, where our panelists identified beneficial uses of AI to support consumers. However, these advancements must be accompanied by policies to ensure consumers are not negatively affected. This includes evaluating the AI data sets and outputs for potential bias and ensuring proper safeguards are in place to prevent the AI from functioning in a way that would create a safety risk for consumers. In 2021, the TIC Council was honored to be a speaker at the CPSC workshop on artificial intelligence, and we are thankful that the CPSC again held a workshop in 2022 on AI. We ask that the commission continue to explore the potential risks associated with products that are internet ready or include AI functionality to ensure the proper safeguards such as cybersecurity are in place to protect consumers. And finally, looking to sustainability. As the conversation on sustainability, ESG and green claims continue to grow, the TIC Council has taken a lead role and on May 25th will bring policy experts from around the globe together to discuss ESG and the safe transition to green products. And we ask the CPSC to join us and industry partners in exploring the life cycle of products and a path forward in ensuring the safety of those products through their first, second and future lives. Areas where continued discussion is needed include making products eco-friendlier and greener, ensuring products continue to be safe when re-entering the market as new or resold products, and mechanisms to confirm that products can be safely recycled, refurbished or discarded when they reach their end of life. As countries around the world pursue low carbon, green and circular approaches to products, we encourage the CPSC to be an advocate for future consumer health in these discussions and collaborate with stakeholders to identify common sense solutions. As an example, if a product can be repaired extending the life of the product, this is good for the environment and good for the consumer, but how can we ensure that those repairs do not negatively impact the safety functionality of the product and that consumers buying that repaired product on the secondary market are aware that a repair has been made. Today, many products that would now be considered toxic or unsafe are entering the secondary market. How do consumers identify and remove or recycle these products? How can the CPSC in coordination with the APA and other agencies help to educate consumers? And how, as a community, can we do this while ensuring products continue to be safe for consumers? The TIC Council of America's looks forward to continuing discussions with the CPSC, consumer advocate groups and industry on the issues to identify next steps and promote green practices while ensuring the safety of consumers. In closing, the TIC Council thanks the CPSC, its commissioners and staff for being a force for good and protecting the safety of consumers, for engaging with all stakeholders on these critical issues and for working collaboratively with the TIC Council and its members to identify solutions to protect the safety of consumers. We look forward to exploring these issues and seeking solutions with the CPSC and our industry and consumer partners and thank you for your time today. Thank you, Ms. Athens. We're now going to turn to Ms. Shin for 10 minutes. Thank you. On behalf of Consumer Reports, an independent nonprofit and nonpartisan member organization, I welcome the opportunity to present the following comments on the CPSC's agenda and priorities for the fiscal years 2024 and 2025. For more than 85 years improving product safety has been central to CR's mission. We assess safety risks, investigate their impacts on consumers and inform the public and the CPSC when we identify product hazards all on a data driven basis. We push for strong action from the CPSC to keep the public safe from unreasonable risk posed by consumer products and defend the agency's authority to carry out its duty. The CPSC is tasked with a vital mission to protect U.S. consumers from the unreasonable risk of injuries and deaths associated with consumer products. We applaud the commission's ongoing work that puts consumers first and for making considerable progress recently on a number of persistent hazards and it should continue to take the lead and take bold action in line with this mission to protect the public. In working to fulfill its mission, it is essential for the commission to ensure that staff has the tools and resources and continue to seek a greater level of investment into their work. For their part, CPSC staff must remain ambitious, creative and vocal proponents of consumer safety. With the support of the commission, CPSC staff can and do play a central role in advancing product safety. It is also fundamental for the CPSC staff and the commission to communicate with the public in a clear, effective and timely manner. This includes communication of safety messaging, new or ongoing to inform people on specific potentially hazardous products. It also means CPSC staff remaining accessible to interested members of the public for discussions that could help deliver the greatest possible benefits to consumers. One idea for the commission to consider as part of its public outreach is an initiative that identifies and public publicizes a top 10 list of persistent hazards in the home and what both consumers and companies can do to prevent injury. An initiative like this could help give the public a clear and compelling vision for safety and a better understanding of the CPSC's leadership role. It could also serve as an organizing mechanism to help facilitate a range of CPSC efforts, including proposing and implementing strong new or updated standards, visual and compliance and enforcement and initiating other steps to create safer homes. The top 10 list could include hazards that my fellow panelists have already mentioned, but these include home fires and improper use of smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, pool safety and the risk of drowning, exposure to poisonous products including liquid laundry detergent packets. Criteria to use to identify the rest of the list should include hazards that face the American public in a significant fashion and can be readily addressed by the public and by companies. The CPSC should also include steps to integrate into its everyday work ways to better identify, reach and serve an increasingly diverse country. Its efforts need to reflect the reality that the physical and economic costs of product safety hazards are often borne disproportionately or differently by certain groups of consumers. The CPSC's decisions and communications with the public must be informed by a drive for equity and an unwavering commitment to serve consumers who may have been overlooked or underrepresented in the past. Next, given that the Consumer Product Safety Act generally requires the CPSC to first rely on voluntary standards, it is important for the agency to help ensure that the voluntary standards setting process yields strong safety minimums that protect the public and provide clear expectations for companies, not just to give products a rubber sample of approval. We applaud and urge the agency's continued expert participation and unyielding support for safety in recent voluntary standards meetings. We also commend the commission for rejecting revisions to voluntary standards when they did not improve the safety of the product. In addition, CR commends the CPSC for advancing and finalizing mandatory standards to address product hazards that have hurt people for years. This includes hazards associated with clothing storage units, custom window coverings and high powered magnets. The CPSC should continue to pursue mandatory standards for hazards that have not been adequately adequately addressed, including those associated with table saws and portable generators. We recognize that promulgating a mandatory standard through under section seven and nine of the CPSC can be onerous without industry cooperation. However, it is critical for the CPSC to explore all avenues to address product hazards and put that put consumers at risk of injury or death. Furthermore, we support the agency's continued work to issue strong safety standards under section 104 of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act. It is paramount that the agency ensures that only those durable infant and toddler products that meet strong safety standards and align with expert medical recommendations remain on the marketplace. We urge the agency to remain vigilant and to work to address any potential hazard found in infant or toddler products, including those with weak voluntary standards, as well as those with voluntary standards under development. As such, we look forward to reviewing and commenting on upcoming proposals for a safety standard for infants feeding support pillows and the proposed ban on infant pillows. Next, the CPSC should continue to hold companies accountable and carry out robust compliance and enforcement work. We applaud the CPSC's ongoing efforts to use tools such as unilateral warnings, administrative proceedings as substantial civil penalties to ensure companies put consumers safety before profits. The CPSC should also take steps to help increase consumer participation and recalls of hazardous products. In 2017, the agency reported that on average only about 6% of consumers participated in corrective actions across all products. While estimates range dramatically depending on the product, increasing consumer participation is critical to ensure the hazardous products are removed from people's homes and prevented from being sold unlawfully on secondary marketplaces. As necessary, the CPSC should renounce recalls to help ensure that as many hazardous products as possible are accounted for and destroyed. One way for the CPSC to help increase recall participation is to push for recalls that are as easy and as appealing as possible for consumers. Including a default option for most recalls of receiving a full cash refund of the purchase price for any CPSC overseen recall, not a partial refund, not a gift card or store credit or a discount for a future purchase. Companies also need to follow through on their commitment to carry out recalls as quickly and as completely as possible and make sure that consumers are not left not knowing the next steps in a recall and without the use of a product that they may need for their daily lives. The CPSC should also continue to be aggressive in its response to violations of the law of laws and regulations under the agency's jurisdiction and to coordinate with the justice of department as necessary to make full use of the agency's enforcement authority. As warranted, the commission should not hesitate to levy fines at the highest levels permitted under the law and by making it clear with when those current civil penalty caps results in a lower penalty than otherwise would have been appropriate. Too often the law has resulted in fines that are too low and do not hold companies accountable. A recent example in August 2022 TGX company agreed to pay a $13 million civil penalty, which is only a tiny fraction of its market value at 90 90.5 billion dollars. Furthermore, when criminal conduct has occurred, the agency should not hesitate to make use of his criminal penalties authority in collaboration with the justice department. Finally, the CPSC should continue its efforts to increase transparency and to keep the public informed, even as section 6B of the CPSA places severe constraints on its ability to communicate clearly and effectively with the public. We applaud the agency's recent supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking that would update the regulations interpreting section 6B. We also urge the CPSC to take steps regarding the availability of information and agency accountability to the public. These steps should include prioritizing the agency's Freedom of Information Act backlogs and make public the current status of all recalls. We also want to be clear. Section 6B is anti-consumer and anti-safety. We support its full repeal in Congress. In conclusion, CR looks forward to the CPSC continuing to take a strong pro-consumer action to address hazards associated with consumer products. We are eager to work with the agency to fulfill its mission in fiscal years 2024 and 2025. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Shen. Now turn to Mr. Corn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and fellow commissioners. I'm tempted to skip reading my testimony and just say what she said. Almost completely what the congresswoman said, we agree with 100%. In fact, I'll do a little business as to who I'm representing here today and who I work for and with. And then I'll speak a bit more extemporaneously about some of the issues that she spoke of and one or two that were not. With your permission, Mr. Chairman, two personal comments first. Chairman is too modest to mention it, but I'm going to. I attended an event with the chairman about two weeks ago, three weeks ago, a premiere of a drowning prevention documentary that's going to be on Apple TV May 12th. It's called No More Under, a very good documentary. There was a panel beforehand and the congresswoman was there. And she said when speaking of the chairman, and I quote. The chairman chairman home, Sarah is the best chairman I have ever worked with. I've worked with the congresswoman for 25 years. I have never heard anything like that, not even close. So congratulations. I know your commitment to this issue. It's been recognized by the by the congresswoman. Who I often say bleeds coral chlorinated pool water. This is a very important issue for her. So thank you. I'd be remiss if I didn't mention commissioner Feldman who worked on the Virginia Graham Baker pool and spa safety act in the mid 2000s was drafting help with the hearings help with the promotion and of course now with the enforcement. And I think that's one of the times in the in 2007 2008 that I was speaking to the commissioner more than I was speaking to my family. So his commitment is is pretty unwavering on this issue also. In fact, I believe you've got a signed copy of the piece of legislation in your office. I don't even have that Nancy's pointed out she doesn't even have that so but it's deserving and I'm glad you have it in a place of honor in your office. If you read just a little bit of business as to who I'm speaking then I felt it's almost silly for me to read my testimony given what the congresswoman have to say but I'll just highlight a few points. First just a bit of business. I'm speaking on behalf today of Nancy Baker and the Baker family. Abby's hope charitable foundation Scott and Katie Taylor. And the Zach foundation for children safety. Karen and Brian Cohen. As the commission knows very well, these three families and organizations have worked collectively and tirelessly over the past 15 years to address the public health crisis of drowning entrapments and other water risks with the goal of preventing these tragedies from occurring in the first place. Each of these families suffered a tragic loss of a child due to an entrapment in either a public or residential pool or spa. Their stories are well known. I won't repeat them. And in fact, their stories and their incidents were the catalyst for the ultimate passage of the Virginia Graham Baker pool and spa safety act, which changed the way pools and spas are built and maintained in this country. And we believe for the better. Of course, we are all very proud of the fact that the VGB act to this day is a piece of legislation that is regularly held up as an example of how government of example of how government can actually work well to protect Americans and especially children. The district nonprofits families who experience loss public health and medical officials. This agency, among many others all came together to craft and ultimately implement a public policy response to the hidden hazard of entrapment, and even the broader issues of the VGB act. In fact, there has not been a single entrapment in the United States at any public pool or spa. To be honest, I'm not sure there's been that many in residential pools and spas either. Notwithstanding the success of the VGB. The families believe that there is still a lot we can do, especially as it relates to traditional forms are drowning. And we believe the CPSC has and should have an outsize role in those prevention efforts. I'll lift up for my reading, just to emphasize a couple of things four or five points. First, the consumer product safety commission, we believe must their effort must reflect where drowning falls in the public health risk. We believe that there is a hidden matrix which is collected and published each year by the Centers for Disease Control. We all know it's a leading cause of children from one to four. It's a second leading cause for others. The number one killer is motor vehicle crashes. There's an entire federal agency the National Highway Traffic Safety Commission with a $450 million budget addressing almost single handedly that sole issue. The Water Product Safety Commission doesn't have that kind of funding. And they do a lot of other important issues, many of which we've heard here today. But we do believe that the effort on the drowning prevention side the traditional forms are drowning. The water safety issue could be more robust here at the agency. In fact, it's really the only agency that has jurisdiction over this in the same fashion as you all do. The three points all of almost all of which were mentioned by the Congresswoman was a dedicated state safety pool person here at the commission. We think the public health risk justifies that assignment of a full time employee here right now as good as the team is they are working on all kinds of issues from tip overs to magnets to carbon monoxide to crib safety, but having a dedicated staff person for drowning. And as I mentioned, and as she mentioned, we think the public health statistics justify that kind of response. A second you have a very good cool safely campaign and we enjoy working with them very much and it's gotten better. In recent months and past year, but we think it still can do better right now that will safely campaign really only attends one conference a year. And that's the national drowning prevention alliance. I know travel is always a budget budget issue, but I believe and the families believe that an old fashioned face to face is the best way. And there's so many conferences out there that the pool safely campaign can attend to educate about what is going on in this community. Still to this day, most people even stakeholders in the community don't really recognize and understand what the CPSC does, and their pool safely campaign. And it includes the pool professionals, the ones who, you know, the international association pool and spot professionals, the people who clean the pools, there's a foundation or association for everything here in Washington DC, and no different in this particular area. We'd like to see the pool safely campaign get out on the road a little bit more and educate about what the pool safely campaign does. And the enforcement of this agency, how these stakeholders can play a role, my testimony lists, many of the organizations that need to be informed about this. And also all the materials that you all have that presumably are ready to get out from a warehouse somewhere here in the district. And then, you know, obviously engage the stakeholder community. I noticed that sitting behind me as the consumer ombudsman who held a meeting on carbon monoxide, carbon monoxide poisoning about, I don't know, about a month ago. Maybe six months ago. And I thought it was excellent. And it struck me at the time that maybe something related to the water safety and drowning prevention community would be worthwhile doing also. So just a thought for the agency to think about as they move forward in their fiscal year. Be prepared number two be prepared that that the VGB reauthorization will be introduced in both the House and Senate. We think next week. I won't go through my testimony as relates to what happened with the single year authorization last year which got a portion of what we wanted together. This new bill does much, much more than that. I'm just going to emphasize at the risk of being redundant. Three three points is the expansion of the grant money that goes out to include nonprofits. The agency has had a problem finding people and getting people to apply for that money. Rest assured that if it's opened up to nonprofits, they're chomping at the bed. I don't think they need to be 50 to $400,000 grants. We could have micro grants for many of these good organizations. This is families united to prevent drowning at another organization. And they're ready for micro grants $5,000 $10,000 to help what they do out in their communities. And we're hoping in the bill that the staffing issue as we see it a more committed effort from a personnel point of view will be contained in the bill, even if it isn't we would suggest that the agency do that on its own. Third, in February of this year, the Abbey's hope and the families found recall products in the marketplace on on on e retail, and we filed, I believe it was in the beginning of February, three or four reports through unsafe products the recall and or the unsafe product portal and I'm there extremely impressed. I don't know what the the common custom and practices with timing, but within about six weeks those products were recalled announced about, I guess about two weeks ago. That's outstanding. I think I'd be interested in hearing what the average time between a report and investigation and an actual recall. However, that was that recall was motivated by a filing from a consumer, albeit a stakeholder community consumer. I would hope that the agency would be self motivated to do its own independent search of the web. I did it yesterday, last week, and the week before and found several more examples of recall products and banned drain covers that are still in the marketplace. All the ones that we reported those sites, those links are now dead so I do want to compliment the agency for moving so quickly, but maybe just a bit of self motivation I don't think it's difficult if I'm a Luddite. And if I can do it and find them on the web your team here. And I think you've got a committed team that does that here the chairman and I talked about that at a conference. So, and then finally, I just as a, as a very casual comment back in to in 2000. We did a project with the Consumer Product Safety Commission with safe kids safe kids worldwide, where we sent out the entire safety network to inspect. Cribs at hotels we actually every safe kids coordinator or volunteer that checked into a hotel, either personal or business rented a crib or a play pin, delivered it. We applied a checklist to it. They took pictures that was back when it was actually film. And we had over 1000 investigative reports from the community, and the CPSC took that information and really ran with it. 25% of the cribs were recalled. Many of them. I did every time I checked into a hotel either personal I rented a crib, or, or a playpen. They were delivered with a delivered with adult sheets they were delivered with adult pillows they had exposed nails slats finials recall cribs recall play pens, the ones that collapsed. Thank you. It was our thought that we could also do that for take advantage of the stakeholder community and get out and do informal inspect inspections of the pools of the public pools with a checklist report back to see what the condition and character and quality of those pools are in the area. Thank you so much. Sorry for going over just a minute. Thank you, Mr corn. This point time I'm going to turn to questions from the commissioners going to recognize myself for 10 minutes. First off, just thanking all the panelists for bringing forward the issues and going to them such details and and really raise issues of extreme importance and safety throughout the entire community. I'm just going to make a couple comments and ask a couple questions. Yeah, I appreciate all of your focus, including score and your lessons on the need for enforce our new and existing rules are out there. It's critical not only to have strong standards out there to make sure that the marketplace is following those rules. And as you mentioned, you pointed out some drink covers that were non compliant and action was taken. And I appreciate you're continuing that work but this work that we should be doing as well but honestly, I have to say it's work that the marketplaces, especially the e commerce platforms should be proactively doing they shouldn't. They are the size and have the resources to go and take a look on what's their sites to make sure that what is being sold whether it's on a primary marketplace as you're pointing out, or the secondary marketplace as was calls pointed out. Haven't been recalled our meeting the standards. If they have sellers who are on there that are not following federal law. They shouldn't be on the site in the first place. So we do have a team of people who are dedicated to this they are active, they sent around 55,000 takedown requests. Last year, I think we're on track for similar or greater numbers this year. But, you know, as a small federal agency, we are going to do our job, but it's a massive problem out there on that the e commerce side of things. And as we're moving forward on things like our safe sleep rules, we have issued the numerous notices of violation at this point in time we're going to continue to do so anticipate that there will be, as you say, recalls or notices out there coming on on activities as well because we're going to take extremely seriously our rules and industry should know that we will take action whenever we find that there's a violator product out there. And we're going to do that with all of our the rules that we just passed and will set have been existence for some time. And that there are things that you're seeing, whether it's violator products or other issues I would encourage people to go to safer products dot gov provide us that information as Mr corn just said, we do look at those and we do take quick action on those to be able to make sure that unsafe products are taken off. So the extra eyes and ears are extremely valuable and important to us and I encourage folks to to go there yourselves or tell other people about them as well. You know, so appreciate that the points that people have made about need to communicate our safety messages better whether it's about recalls or about information that is that people can use to make their homes safer. We need to be able to reach all audiences and to reach underserved communities as well as general audience because in the end of the day, we all know that people hear things differently. They act upon things differently and we need to be cognizant both of whether safety risks are hitting different populations differently. To better target our information, whether it is, I think we're putting up billboards to be able to reach communities like those of Native Americans that may not have the same access to the internet or whether it's translating recalls or other safety information to be able to make sure that various communities are being met. So, and as you have ideas about those issues, we welcome those as a continuing conversation as well. And I also appreciate everybody's raising the 6b issues as well. It is an issue that the CPSC faces that no other safety agency faces. It is a statutory limitation, but I recognize that our regulations are beyond what the law requires. And so until the law is actually changed, we should continue to try and be as aggressive as possible that when we know a safety issue that we get that information out to consumers as quickly as possible so they can protect themselves in the end of the day. You know, I do, going back to where I started on the e-commerce side of things, I would be curious from the panel's perspective and maybe I'll start with Ms. Calls, how to try and address the e-commerce issues that you're seeing be able to best do. We certainly, when we see things, will request from the platforms to take them down. There are other ways to be able to address the both secondary market or primary market. I know you talked about the secondary market, so I'd be curious about your thoughts on that. Yes, thank you. And I agree that we kind of all need to work together in this, but it really is the platform's responsibility to sell safe products. I also want to go back to what you were saying about asking us to report things which I think is great, but I want to remind the commission and the general counsel that the CPSIA deputized states attorney generals and states attorneys to enforce CPSC rules. Maybe a reminder of that on a national level. States attorneys are often looking for local issues to work on. The Facebook marketplace is certainly a local issue since they localize things and perhaps you can get some support by states taking action on some of these rules if you yourselves are kind of going piecemeal on individual products. So I think that we all need to figure this out on the second hand market. I think, again, it's, you know, it's the site's responsibility to understand when you're basically a national garage sale. It's hard to watch every single product, but you have to have the parameters in place, the policing in place to make sure that things get removed quickly if they do go up or that you have stronger algorithms to keep them off. So I think, you know, both CPSC, but I would say there's probably other federal agencies that might have some role in the in the truthfulness and the safety of online sites could work together on this. Thank you. I mean, I'd make the comment that on some of these like secondary marketplaces, you don't see drugs for sale. There's a reason for that because they're doing their job and monitoring and preventing things from going up there. There's no reason that they shouldn't be able to do the same thing when it comes to recall products or other products along those lines. I don't know if other people have thoughts on the e-commerce side of things and whether it's, you know, addressing the drain covers that are coming up or other issues, but I welcome comments. Yes, thank you. The one thing that I would add is the continued pressure to place on these online platforms. I think the recent renouncement and the letters to meta were extremely helpful on getting this information out to the public and make sure that the public also knows that this is an issue and to stay vigilant and to, you know, put pressure on social media sites and online platforms to do better. And I, and this seems to be the first step of many that are necessary to make sure the online platforms are safer. I would second all of these comments, but I would also add that these platforms also have the ability to introduce reporting features and that's not always available. So you can report when there's illegal activity. There should be the ability to report recall the appearance of recalled products on the e-commerce platforms and making that as easy as possible for consumers. Thank you, Ms. Griffin. Thanks again to the full panel for all your comments. They will be core and us moving forward and thinking about our priorities going forward. I'm going to turn to my colleagues for questions. So Mr. Felton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  This hearing is an important practice at the commission. It's an opportunity for stakeholders to tell us directly and publicly what they think we should be focusing on over the next couple of years. But it's more than just a nice thing to do. The First Amendment of our Constitution protects the right of Americans to petition government. And that's not just the powerful and the well-connected, but all people. And what we're doing today is part of that tradition. So your willingness to be here is important for the system to work properly and to ensure that we consider the broadest possible array of perspectives. I want to assure you that the presentations today, every time we have the opportunity to speak about these are valuable. It informs and improves our understanding of consumer product safety issues that we can't replicate in any other way, but doing a hearing like this. Some of the folks that are here today are parents that are still grieving the loss of a child or caring for a child that's been injured by a consumer product or representing organizations that are intimately involved with these folks. Some of you are professionals in health safety and consumer advocacy. We've got familiar faces. We've got new faces. And regardless of what led you here, you all have something important to say and I appreciate you taking the time to be here. So I want to join the chairman and my colleagues in welcoming each and every one of you and I do appreciate all the testimony. I just had a couple of questions. Mr. Corn, it's good to see you again. And we've spoken a lot, including on the first panel about pool safety. But the traditional forms of drowning still seem to be the biggest risk to children today. One of the biggest risks, certainly a predominance of the issues that we're facing here at the agency. And these incidents seem to mostly still be occurring in residential pools and spas. So in your view, is the most effective? What is the most effective layer of protection that can contribute to the prevention of these deaths that we're seeing? Preventing them from happening in the first place. And if so, how can the agency and the pool safely campaign help promote a layered approach to safety? Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. The layers of protection is a continuum. There is all kinds of efforts that can be had and taken, implemented, either by way of behavior or public policy from the front end all the way to the back end. And your question was, what is the most effective? I trained under a, from my public policy perspective, from the head of trauma surgery at Children's Hospital, Marty Eichelberger, the founder of Safe Kids. And he said, which is better? Put a fence at the top of the hill or fast ambulances at the bottom. You need both. You need the entire continuum represented, but his point was it's best to prevent the injuries from happening in the first place. And in my opinion, the two most important are proper barriers between homes and pools, not just perimeter fencing, but isolation fencing. And that means fencing that goes around all four sides of the pool, including a barrier between the between the home and the pool. And I think the pool safely campaign to do a good job and even a better job talking about that particular component of the layers of protection. And then second I'll do very quickly is active supervision. That's a behavioral concept. A young girl died at her birthday party in Florida. The congresswoman made a reference to it. We want to avoid the situation where everybody's watching the pool, but nobody is really watching the pool. You need to have someone who is actively supervised, supervising the children when kids are in the pool. The water watcher cards, which are used, not enough. I brought an example, but you guys know what they look like. I think it's a great tool. You put it on, it changes the way you feel. I wear that for 15 minutes, watch the pool, then I take it off, give it to you. And then it's your turn to watch the pool and I can go have a hot dog or check the phone. So those two components are, in my opinion, the most important. Everything on the continuum is important, but those are two critical ones. On the fencing issue that you raised, I know that the commission developed pool fencing guidelines. I think we did that during the Clinton administration and I'm not aware that we've actually updated them since. Is it time for CPSC to consider revisiting the pool fencing guidelines and tell what might that look like? You're absolutely right. Those were crafted during the Clinton administration, Chairman Brown's administration. I do the math quickly, maybe 30 years ago, 25 years ago. I think it's probably time to revisit those. Fencing has changed, the materials have changed. There's now the influence of technology as it relates to barriers and fencing. And I'll also note that many public policy, many state laws around the country actually refer to the consumer product safety guidelines as what needs to be done at a residential pool. So updating that so that it eventually is reflected in the public policy or can be updated in the public policy is a really good point. And I think that was worth exploring. Absolutely. It's so much of this discussion seems to center around in-ground pools. Are there special risks that are associated with above-ground pools that we should be aware of and take into consideration? Yeah, I believe so. I think a lot of people view above-ground pools and some that hold 5,000 gallons of water, some just a few hundred gallons of water, almost aftermarket toys. Put them in your backyard, up they go and that's the end of it. They don't think of them and view them like you do a normal in-ground pool. But the physics of drowning, the access are no different in those than they are in in-ground pools. So all the layers of protection, maybe even in a heightened level for the above-ground pools. Probably something that we all need to address better right before pool season opens. You can buy these things for a few hundred dollars. Some of them are much, much more expensive and you can buy them at big box retailers. It's not an $80,000 pool. It's a $600 pool, but you need to have the same prevention tips for above-ground pools as you do in-ground residential pools. I appreciate that. I appreciate your perspective as always and thank you to the rest of the panel as well. Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions for this panel. Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Trumka. Thank you and thank you to each of the panelists. I know how much each of you thinks about this agency and thinks about what we do right and what we can do better. And the suggestions that you've thought through and worked on and submitted to us and talked about today will lead to solutions that help us better serve folks. I'm confident of that. So thank you. I did just want to ask a few questions to allow you. You covered so much ground. There's a few points I'd like to give you the opportunity to elaborate on. And Ms. Griffin, you talked about ATVs and side-by-sides. And those are associated with more deaths than any other consumer product we regulate. We estimate over a thousand deaths per year and you pointed out the shocking incidents of those that involve children. I'm increasingly convinced that we're going to need to do more to help industry along in protecting consumers and preventing these tragedies. So according to your testimony, Polaris is the OHV company with the most recalls. You pointed out that fire is the most common recall issue. But according to CPS staff, if we zoom out from the recalls and we look at the CPSC public reporting on OHV incidents, rollovers are the leading hazard pattern that we're seeing associated with fatal incidents. So here's my question to you, Ms. Griffin. How can the commission best prevent deaths and injuries in OHVs? I mean, should we be focusing on changing the behavior of specific companies, you know, pushing towards incorporating safety by design? Should we be moving faster on a rule to speed up the rollover prevention? Should we be doing both? Thank you, Commissioner. I mean, the reality of this situation is as you identified, the fatalities are enormous as it relates to OHVs. And so in my mind, doing as much as possible as quickly as possible is needed. And as you also identified, the other reality is that many of these recalled vehicles are associated with a particular brand and also associated with particular issues. So those fire issues do need to be rectified at some point. That isn't to undermine the efforts that are required to analyze and rectify the rollover issues because that's a serious and ongoing problem. But in my opinion and the opinion of CFA and the OHV safety coalition is that both of those issues are important and need to be addressed by the commission. So I heard mentioned before the specter of 6B infiltrating the culture. You just said a particular brand instead of naming the brand. You can go ahead and say it out loud if you want to. I don't mean right now. I mean in general that blocks us. You can say whatever you want. Another one of the things that's been a top priority of mine and I think many other members of the commission, Infancy products and making them safe and a few members of this panel have talked about those Miss Coles. You mentioned loungers and I guess for everybody else out there, that's the name companies put on these soft pillows that they sell to caregivers and get used to things. As you pointed out, like in bed sleeping with adults or napping on the floor. We've taken action in this space. We recalled Bobby loungers and we sued to force a recall of leech go loungers that were associated with sleep deaths. You said that you don't see a way to create a standard for these products that would avoid the very high risk of sleep death. And can you explain why and can you explain what actions you would like to see from CPSC to avoid deaths and infant loungers? Yes, and thank you for the question. This is an area that's, you know, these are fairly new products, although the manufacturers act as if, you know, people won't know what to do without them. But we all managed as I keep saying, we're really replacing a blanket on the floor, which is fairly safe.  There's not soft padding, you know, so if they do fall asleep before you can move them, it's going to be safe. My point is that the products currently in the market and you mentioned two CPSC actions, but you've also taken action through the infant sleep product rule on things like the docket and other kind of the loungers that were both sold as loungers and embed sleepers. Then they couldn't call them embed sleepers anymore. But if you search for embed sleepers, they all turn up on the same page on on Amazon. So they're clearly still hoping that people will buy them for that reason. I don't think any of those products we can make safe enough to for non sleep use to market. I do think that by formulating a standard as if we can get ASTM or CPSC could take it over in terms of doing a mandatory rule that described what a lounger was, which was no, none of those things, but maybe a thinly padded, you know, firm padding, I should say. Like a play mat, but without the play toys that again, a blanket on the floor, but maybe something a little different that then that way then you could exclude those because they wouldn't fit into that standard they would no longer be allowed. But I know you're also looking into ban of infant pillows that would take care of some of these products, but I just don't think there's space on the marketplace for them because I don't think that they're going to be used safely. Well, thank you for that for that. And Miss Coles, you also flagged our use of warnings to consumers about hazardous children's products in 2022 ones that we or we didn't recall the product. Several of those unilaterals and at least three of those were products that were tied to deaths. And sometimes we simply can't sit on information while we work on other solutions like a recall, for example. So I love that we're doing those kids hidden hazard report discusses those and I want to get your thoughts briefly on a few of them. We warn the public about the Fisher price infant to Todd the rocker and the newborn to Todd the rocker after 13 publicly reported deaths and we warned about kids to rockers after one reported death. But we did the warning. Those products are still for sale. Do you think that we solved the problem with those products? And if not, what more could we do? What what else should we be thinking about doing there? Thank you. I think that in terms of those particular products and other seeded products that we often talk about whether it be swings or rockers bouncers that parents use to for a child to sit and interact with the family. I think more can be done both in terms of warning, although that's the least effective measure, but in terms of the shape, the look, the marketing of the products. People do want a place to set their child down to entertain them with the bouncing or the rockiness. They kick their legs while the parents are interacting with them, but anything added to those products that encourages their use for sleep. I think which can just be soft padding. It could be the fabric pattern. It can be the way again that it's marketed the Fisher price rocker infant toddler rocker that you mentioned has a function where you can kind of prop up it. So it stops rocking but actually lays back a little farther, but still not flat, which seems to me what else would you use that for but sleep so it has that feature that encourages parents again for the child to sleep. So I think there is much more that can be done. Maybe it has to start at the ASTM level and then new products at least would be safer. But I think that, you know, with 12 that's a lot of deaths 12 deaths and I think the parents using them are probably even with your one warning are probably not aware that it poses that much of a risk. Thank you. And I think this panel has also mentioned that across the board, we need to do everything we can to make sure that recalled products get returned or destroyed get out of homes. And I know you've expressed ideas for how to make that happen and I appreciate those, you know, this commission has talked about, you know, any agreements with companies on recalls should be public and I think we've evolved our policy there and and the company progress on recalls should be public too. And that creates a way to hold companies accountable when they're not doing everything they need to to get those products out of homes. And on the flip side of that, it could be showing companies that are doing a good job and we should acknowledge that as well to raise the bar for everyone else mission. This is something you've talked about in your testimony. So I'll ask you, have we delivered on our commitment to make enough of this information public? Are we making that easily accessible in a useful way? Are we giving everything on the caps and on the progress reports? And if not, what else could be more useful there? Thank you so much for the question, Commissioner. The short answer is, we hope that the commission will do more. We appreciate all the work that the commission is doing, including providing the monthly, the monthly progress reports online. However, when you click open that progress report, most of it is blanks. And so we appreciate that there are mechanisms for the public to better understand where the where the commission and the CPSC is on certain product hazards. However, without the data, we don't know what we don't know. And we would appreciate a, we would, it would be, it would be fantastic if more information could be, could continue to come out, especially understanding 6B. But within, within what is possible, the more information that the public has, the better equipped that the public can be. And so I guess the short answer is, we hope that you all can do more and do plan to do more to get that information out to the public. You said that the spreadsheet, most of the information is blank. Can you explain what you mean by that? So it lists all the, all the recalls since August 2022, I believe, to the present, there's two spreadsheets, I believe. And when you click open it and download it when you open it up, it provides certain information, it provides a list of the recalls, but it doesn't. It looks as though there are a lot of empty cells where information is missing. That would be helpful for CR other organizations and other advocates and consumers and the public to have a better understanding of where the company is with their recall. Because we all, as stated in my testimony, on average, is a 6% consumer participation rate. I know that companies also do a great job of doing, of getting products out of retailers and, and the supply chain, but to get consumer participation. The public needs to know more about where consumers are and what consumers have been doing to get those products out of their homes. And it's, it's hard to know without more information in those spreadsheets. Okay. Well, I think we've got a duty to get, get you an answer as to why those, those squares are blank. And if we don't, please, please stay honest about that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. I would actually note on the sheet itself, it explains the blanks can be due to delay in reporting. This is confidential information six weeks. So it does try and provide information as to why the banks are there, but I recognize getting more information out to the public is key to getting this done as well as the rework of the sheet to be able to provide the percentages as to what has been recalled or not to be able to try and address the business content, confidential side of things. Sorry, Commissioner Boyle. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to all the panelists. I really appreciated your testimony that I've read carefully and I do have a couple of questions. I know we've been going a while so I will try to be synced. Ms. Coles, I'd like to circle back to talk a little bit more about what Commissioner Trump could raise in terms of the loungers. I think you sort of circled around this, but I wanted to ask you directly. Do you consider the loungers to be infant pillows? I consider the loungers that are pillows to be infant pillows, but there's other designs like the docketot where the child is not actually laying on the pillow that are still very dangerous. So I don't think it's just restricted to that one design of kind of the pillow shaped ones with a little indentation. I think anything someone makes that is either fatted or has a perimeter because I think that perimeter just indicates to parents that it is a sleep product. Otherwise, why would you need it if you're watching your child? But I'm just trying to distinguish. Yes, those loungers are definitely pillows and should fall into the infant pillow band that CPSC already has for other types of pillows. Right. And I would point out, I think it was about 30 years ago that the commission adopted the infant pillow band. Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify that. I appreciate that. You also, I'm going to go down the line if that's okay. I'll just keep with you and then hopefully get to the others if time allows. You mentioned Reese's law and I agree. Hopefully we will be moving expeditiously to finalize the rule. What's concerning to me and I wrote a letter to the ASTM toy subcommittee is the evident shortcomings in the toy standard with respect to battery ingestion hazards. And I just ask you, do you have a view on that? And do you have a view on the pace of activity in the voluntary standards in terms of addressing those issues? Yes. So one of the issues was actually out for ballot at the time that CPSC started. And that's the intention for the screw to remain attached. So there wouldn't be a loose screw once you open the battery compartment. That ballot, I believe has, I know it is finalized. I don't know that there are any negatives on it. So that hopefully will be in the standard. They are also meeting now to discuss the other recommendations for that thing. I can't speak to the pace of ASTM because as you know, most of it is in the hands of the industry association who is in that in this case, the toy association. But I, we are certainly putting pressure and I know your staff who attends as well and other consumer groups are putting pressure on them to deal with this. And some of the other issues we raise like the water beads more quickly. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that here. I just have a comment. I appreciate your focus on having translations into Spanish. That's something I have been pushing here repeatedly. And I was happy in our mid year that we got some funding for that. So thank you for your voice on that. You also are recommending that CPSC focus on removing products that violate existing standards. Again, I completely agree with that, particularly with the very positive pace of new rules. I, and I think you mentioned in response to the chair that, you know, there's a lot of obligation on the platforms, not to sell violated products, which, you know, it's hard to disagree with that. But at the same time, you know, the agency, I think has to step up and I, one of the things I think we should be doing is increasing staffing to make sure that we are enforcing because without the enforcement, you know, there's really those rules are undercut. So in addition to the platform stepping up and increasing staffing, are there other ideas that you have that you might want to share with us? Yeah, I think that certainly CPSC could use to increase staff and almost everything that you do. And this is certainly one of them. But you're never going to keep up with the internet just with staffing. I think you have to look at things like the, like the platform shoes, which are crawlers and different types of AI or technology to find these things, you know, and it might take a human then to look and make sure that it's actually the product that you're thinking about. But I think that just more needs to be done and more pressure on again on the on the platforms. They certainly have that technology and whether it's new products. So and I'll say that several of the concerns that I raised in terms of the play our mattresses, the three inches or more that violate the CPSC standard. Crib bumper pads were brought to me actually by industry and not necessarily me going out and looking so so good players who actually completely got out of the market because you had a new rule are now seeing there's actually a bigger market now for Violative play yard mattresses than there was before the band because once the biggest player got out of the market meeting your rule. We ended up with a lot of other smaller, you know, some of the counterfeiters and other other things in that space. So that problem is certainly not solved. Okay, thank you very much. I appreciate it. And Miss Griffin. Welcome to you. A couple of questions. First, I do have a comment again to follow up a little bit on what Commissioner Trump was speaking to you about in terms of OHVs. I think we often hear with respect to those type of products, you know that they're inherently dangerous and operators assume the risk. I think that's hard to swallow when we're talking about the numbers of children who are killed. So I appreciate your emphasizing that. And in general, I question that proposition is overly facile and certainly cars are inherently dangerous and I don't see a reason why that would have stopped looking at seatbelts and for example, so I just appreciate your emphasis on that. I do have a question for you about laundry packets. I believe industry stakeholders would point to their work on that as a success story. Can you comment on whether you agree with that assessment? Sure. I think that the rate of exposure. It has not consistently gone down. As I mentioned in my oral testimony and my written submission this year alone. There's at least 2000 exposure cases in 2022. There was at least 10,000 exposure cases in 2021. There was at least 10,000 exposure cases. That's very concerning. And there are ways in which the laundry packets can be used where they are safe where they are less attractive to children or adults with dementia where those folks have less access to those type of products. So there are things that can be done and the exposure data would indicate that those things should be done. Are you recommending changes to the actual individual packets or are you still or would you just are you still looking at the outer packaging or is that something you have thought about? So, I think that there are many things that could be done with the individual packet. The individual packets can be made more child resistant. They can be made less attractive. They are brightly colored. They are a size similar to a toy and the composition of the ingredients should be looked at too because there are probably ways in which that composition could be less severe when exposure cases do occur. Okay, thank you. That that's very helpful in terms of social media. You raise that with respect to recall effectiveness. Can you just elaborate on what we would be what we should be doing sure. And thank you commissioner because I think that's a great question. Many of the products that this commission looks at are for infants and social media is such a powerful way to reach caregivers of infants and small children. And I think it would be who this commission to consider ways in which promoting information about their recalls on their social media platforms at a regular cadence that is meant for those targeted audience of parents and caregivers. There's also I also think that it would be so helpful for every daycare facility and early education facility to have recalls printed out on when you walk in the lobby and that's the first thing you see. There are many ways creative ways in which this commission can work with stakeholders and social media to make sure that parents and caregivers caregivers are getting the information they need about recalled dangerous products. Thank you that's helpful and I do have a question for Miss shins I'll do but I have one final one for you miss Griffin in terms of recall effectiveness other than refunds do you do you support only total refunds as the best way or the only way that's to achieve recall effectiveness. Well I will second everything that Miss Coles and mission have offered today I think full refunds is a great way to encourage consumer participation but there are other ways in which consumers can be incentivized to participate in recalls. This is another way in which social media can be used there is so much effort as Miss Coles mentioned in her testimony so much effort gone and it goes into the marketing of these dangerous products. There should be an equal effort to make sure that these products when they are recalled or are also mentioned on those platforms. Okay, thank you so much and mission I do have a number of questions but I think I'll just the most important one that I wanted to ask you about was your discussion that CBC should continue to take steps to integrate into our everyday work ways to identify and reach all communities in those that have not had a seat at the table and so I would and I certainly agree with that I offered an amendment that was approved by the Commission at mid year so that we embed equity in all of our research and analysis. So do you have suggestions other suggestions for how we we could go about doing that. Thank you so much for the question I think what Miss Coles already mentioned about providing warnings and information multiple languages would be helpful. I appreciate the translation is Spanish but also now expanding it into other languages would be especially critical, knowing that there are probably hundreds of languages in the country with the top 10 being, you know, Chinese others, especially went, but also finding a way to communicate with communities where the caregiver or the parent might not or the consumer might not be, might not be able to read or something or just have a multiple facets of communication including social media translations, but also better data to understand where the issues are. I think that's going to be especially important to take more of a scalpel approach when addressing the just the different communities across the country, especially as as we as we all know and see every day the impacts of how products can harm harm homes so consumers excuse me and so, in addition to additional further translations into other languages, it is, I think, getting a better understanding, including potentially over sampling data and surveys of understand to better understand maybe communities that may not always be statistically included in any analysis this. And so, those would be the few things that I would encourage the commission to look into and. And apply what's what can be done to to address this disproportionate impact. Thank you. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. I believe that they're going to go to a second round because there were requests for additional questions, but I don't think you had any questions. I do now this time so Commissioner Trump did you want. Sure, I just had a few more. Thank you. So, so going back to mission, you mentioned recall, renouncements, a tool that we've been using more often and I think it's great that we are because those can be really useful on their own. I'm curious if you have any thoughts on how we can make those even more effective once we go that route. So if the first recall didn't get enough people to participate, should we be thinking about how to ratchet up the remedies that we're offering to increase participation as we renounce those? Should we be pushing for things like funding for targeted digital ads on those secondary markets where we might be seeing these things for sale? Any other ideas in that space? Thank you so much for the question. Yes, to all of those suggestions, I think those would be fantastic to see stronger. By an effect of recall effectiveness or consumer participation is low with the initial recall announcement is clear that communication is not getting to the right people. And so it is it is necessary for the commission to identify what the breakdown could be and how to how to address it and make sure that the net that the people who need to see the announcement can see the announcement. Making increasing the remedies ensuring that consumers are incentivized to participate is also important. But it needs to be as simple and as clear and as easy as possible for the consumer to participate as well. And it is also necessary for the company to continue to track and monitor what is going on. And especially when we're talking about a recall that might might include millions of products to better account for where all of those products are because we're seeing currently that that that accounting is not really matching what is really impacting what we're seeing in the secondary markets. And yeah, and so I'll stop there but those would be the few things that I would I would also recommend the commission to consider. Thank you. Thank you. And I think when you were talking about civil penalties, I think I also caught you understood you to say about our very low statutory cap on our maximum penalty. Did you mention that you thought we should be pointing out where the cap prevented us from seeking a civil penalty that we otherwise would have gone higher on. And if that is what you were suggesting, can you talk a little bit about the utility of what that what information that would provide to us. Sure. So when it comes to the cap the cap is is low, especially with some of the corporations that this commission works with on a daily basis they are multi billion dollar companies that, you know, a 17 at 13 million dollar fine might not be the incentive they need or to deter future. Practices that aren't aligned with what we want from product safety. We'd be interested in. We'd be interested to seeing more of the information because I think what consumers are missing and what policymakers might not have is a better understanding of how. A higher penalty might make the CPS these penalties more. More effective right now it's not clear that the current penalties are are effective and if we have that comparison. With we could this this violation should have brought in X million dollars instead of why million dollars and might provide the policymakers the appropriate information to to move forward and either remove the cap altogether or significantly increase the cap. I think that's a great idea and I mean, you can understand why our compliance staff might not have been doing that because that's living in a world that is not reality for them. But it would be a very useful exercise to be thinking in those terms for for those reasons you point out I would support that. Miss Coles can you talk a little bit more about. I think you mentioned reporting hurdles on safer products dot gov and written testimony. What are what are you seeing what are you hearing in terms of any barriers were we're putting up for ourselves there that we don't need to be. So thank you for that question safer products, you know, it's something that we worked on very hard to include in the CPS I. A. We had hoped similar for instance to the to the finance board that set up their database at the same time and get millions of reports we'd certainly hope more for 10s of thousands over these 11 years. We would really love to see barriers removed not just for the individual so the individual reporting may have the product they may be able to provide you all that information. But medical examiners doctors emergency room people who could add to that data and sometimes do. But they don't necessarily have that specific information CPSC may then get that information through their investigative report, you know work and their ideas. That information should then be added to that so it could be published for the public it didn't come from the company there's no reason to keep it secret. So CPSC in the future gets additional information any of those reports should be put up there. I mean we were frankly shocked when we learned that well under a half of the reports that come through safer products actually get published. And I don't think that's what consumers think they think that's all the information you have but because something was missing and it will take some work to figure that out. It may even at some point take going back to Congress to reduce some of those hurdles that were put on that. And they were put there because companies didn't want that information to be public and any hurdle keeps your reports from being reported. But it is the only public information that we have that identifies the product so we can use nice data. We can use your clearinghouse. We'll never know what the product itself was though, which is not useful for a consumer who's looking to get information for a purchasing or wants to know if someone else had the same problem they had. So I just think it needs to be a higher priority. I feel like it just kind of sits over there and is it used to its full ability. Well I agree with you there and I think one of the other things that I've seen in clicking through if you try to submit a report yourself. We've got multiple warning labels there that might have a good intention to let people know what's going to happen but they might also have the unintended effect of scaring people off. We're going to share this information with the company. They're going to contact you. This is going to be public. I think we should think through the user experience on it. Yes and I don't know if the warning is still there that was there that did scare people off. It says if you're lying you're going to get in trouble. So I think people aren't taking the time to report these things with lies. Something happened to them. I mean you have families who came all the way here or who are on the phone to report what happened to their family. People want people to know if something happened and they're not doing it for any nefarious purpose. Thank you and I wanted to go back to one thing that you said Miss Griffin. You mentioned furniture stability. Specifically you highlighted the ongoing need for anchor it messaging and I agree with you completely on that. I think it's a really good point because I think it actually might be more important now than ever because the last time we were all in this room was a tough day. When we cast aside our rule on furniture stability and accepted the industry written rule. I think that means dressers are going to be less safe going forward than they should be but at the same time people are going to have a false sense of confidence that we've taken care of the problem. And when that's the case it becomes more important to anchor these things to the wall and it's our duty if we're not going to take the steps we need to do to make sure these dressers are as safe as they can be. It's certainly our duty to at least get the message out to people that we're putting the burden on them and that they need to affix these things to the wall to keep their families safe. So thank you very much for making that point. I wish you didn't have to make it. I wish we had done something different there but we did and it's an important one to keep pushing on. So thank you there. Ms. Miss Athanas. I hope you're still there on on the line. I had a question for you about you mentioned that CPSC should focus on the full life cycle of products and that we should work to educate the public on the dangers with batteries. End of life for lithium ion batteries is a big issue because the fire hazards there, particularly if you have batteries that are already damaged and we're thinking about how to move them on down the line. Do you have any suggestions for what CPSC could do to address end of life issues with lithium ion batteries. Yeah, thank you Commissioner Trumka for the question. The tick council is actually launching an educational campaign on June 1 on battery safety and will be including education for consumers on what to do with those lithium ion batteries. There's multiple issues 1 being that they are not enough recycling plants that can recycle the lithium ion batteries. They come in different formats and the recycling center has to be set up for that specific formats. You need to connect the right battery to the right recycling center. Not every state has a setup system for doing that and consumers don't know where to put them. They don't know what to do with them. And if you commingle them with other batteries of fire is very likely because of how the electronics work where you need to cover the ends to prevent a circuit and you have to keep them from getting overheated and so forth. I think education is the first step so that consumers know what to do. It doesn't go with all of the other batteries that are not rechargeable that they are special and unique. They have to go somewhere different in a container typically that's metal and that's away from other combustible materials. And if we start with education, we can then talk about helping industry set up the right recycling channels so that consumers can make sure those batteries don't end up in landfills because we've heard that when they end up in landfills, they have fires there too. Excellent. Thank you so much for that. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Balth. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think I'll just finish up the conversation I was having with Miss Shen earlier just in terms of disparate impact and I did want to ask you in the last couple of years we've learned that auto safety has been affected by the use of crash dummies that have male characteristics. How should we be looking at such gender biases in the products we regulate and test at CPSC. Thank you for the question. I have some familiarity with how NHTSA addresses crash dummies and the current analysis and their work on looking at female crash dummies and other sizes. That is a that is a question I have to be completely honest, not completely thought through when it comes to product safety and I'd love to continue the conversation once I've had a moment to kind of wrap my head around it and kind of. Okay, well, I look forward to having that conversation because it's the one I think we need to have. So thank you very much. I appreciate it. And thank you to all the panelists today. Thank you. Thank you commissioner and thanks again to the whole panel for raising the issues that you have and for continuing to work with us going forward on these and other priorities. So this time. You are going to move on to the third panel, but we're going to take a 10 minute recess as we transition to the virtual panel. So we're back in 10. Welcome back. Now, I'm going to introduce our third panel. We actually have this actually mostly virtual, but we do have 1 person in attendance. So 2 of the witnesses. As interesting as the panel 2 of the witnesses are parents who lost their children, terrible tragedies and since then have advocated on behalf of safety to protect others. And I want to thank them for being here and honor them for. Sharing and continuing to keep others safe. So the. Panel is Kimberly a motto is founding member of parents against tip overs. We have Teresa Joseph is the development director for love for Lily. Aubrey McCoy, select patient counselor for simple, if. Myra Thomas Romero, who's with us in person. The parent of a. Victim of a product safety hazard. And we have Dr. James. Doddington, who is a pediatric emergency physician, as well as a as the direct medical director of the center for injury and violence prevention at Yale. New Haven health and speak on half of the American Academy of pediatrics. Thank you all for being here and for bearing with us. I know we're. Running a little bit. At this point in time, I'm going to recognize miss a motto for 10 minutes. Thank you. You hear me. Okay. Yes, please go ahead. Good afternoon. Chairman home and Sonic mission or Feldman mission or Trump and commissioner Boyle. Thank you for allowing me this opportunity today to present oral comments for your agenda and priorities hearing. On behalf of parents against tip overs or Pat. We are a nationwide coalition of parents who all lost children to a tip over. Your excuse me would like to begin by thanking you and your staff for your dedication and swift action on the issue of clothing storage furniture tip overs over the past few years. After decades of inaction by the CPSC ASTM and Congress to create a safety and stability standard for clothing storage furniture. That addresses the real world factors that contribute to tip over injury and deaths to children. As you know, we now the other sturdy act. Finally have a mandatory and direct final rule that does exactly that. We are certain that if it existed 20 years ago, it would have saved our children. And we're over the moon that it will save countless lives and spare other families our pain from the bottom of our broken hearts. We thank all of you. While long overdue ASTM of 2057 23 is a standard that was developed by consensus and Pat along with other non industry stakeholders, including the CPSC were very involved in its development. This is the way safety standards were intended to be developed and implemented. We request that the agency devote immediate resources to reaching out to and educating manufacturers, especially those who are independent or not part of the AHFA about the direct final rule as they may not be aware of it. And we'll likely have many questions that could proactively be answered via a dedicated informational page or a hotline. We fully intend to hold the industry accountable and have made it clear that we expect immediate compliance with ASTM of 2057 23 and we encourage the commission to continue to aggressively pursue recalls of unstable furniture and strictly enforce the mandatory CSU rule once it's in effect. Rest assured that we will continue to be actively involved in the ASTM process and ensure that industry continues to refine and improve the ASTM standard. Our mission is not done. We're encouraged by the collaborative relationships we've built with all stakeholders on this issue and expected to continue. The CPSC staff is a very important and integral part of the ASTM process and we look forward to their continued active involvement as we all work together to refine and update the standard in the future to continue to protect children from tip over injuries and deaths. One of the agency's priorities is communication and collaboration with stakeholders. There are several areas where we feel the agency should devote some resources to accomplish this objective. The first is data collection and sharing. Incident data is key to protecting the public from product safety hazards. While the NICE system and saferproducts.gov provide good data, surely injuries and deaths are going unreported because those in a position to report them simply don't know how or why to do so. Educational campaigns aimed at pediatricians, emergency room staff, urgent care facilities, assisted living and nursing homes, child and family services, childcare providers and medical examiners would surely increase and improve the reporting of incident data and allow you to better protect the public. We also encourage the swift sharing of incident data that the agency receives and we will continue to notify you of incidents we learn of directly from other parents. Pat and the CPSC have a great history of collaboration on the issue of tip over awareness and prevention and we intend and hope for that collaborative relationship to continue and for the agency to form similar collaborative relationships with other parent advocates. Second, saferproducts.gov. While recent improvements in saferproducts.gov have made the website much more user friendly, the vast majority of consumers as well as professionals in a position to report injuries and deaths due to product hazards are still unaware that it exists. Parents often reach out to us first if they've experienced a tip over. They typically have no idea the CPSC even exists, let alone how and why reporting of their incident is important to preventing future injuries and deaths. We always encourage and often assist them in reporting their incident, but these incidents would otherwise go unreported so parent and consumer advocates are a valuable resource for the agency in this way. We all know that many minor incidents and surely some serious injuries and deaths go unreported and this data is desperately needed. We also know that many consumers, especially parents, are fearful of reporting incidents due to fear of getting in trouble, shame, or because of devastating grief. Saferproducts.gov is less intimidating than a phone call and consumers, especially parents, are more likely to use an online reporting tool, but they have to know how to access it. An informational video on the agency's YouTube channel, social media posts, an infographic, and cross posting and linking Saferproducts.gov to other CPSC pages such as the AnchorIt, PoolSafely, and National Safety Network pages are easy ways to increase awareness and subsequently provide the agency with data they might not otherwise receive. Third, recalls. Similarly, the vast majority of parents in the public are unaware of most recalls or that the CPSC has a page devoted to product recalls. The search and subscription features with regards to recalls are another incredibly valuable resource the agency already has to educate and protect the public, but one far too consumers are aware of. And lastly, the AnchorIt campaign. The ASTAM Furniture Safety Committee is also updating standard F3096, which is the companion anti-tip device standard to the CSU standard. The goal is to update the standard to include material recommendations via new testing, static and dynamic testing of a wide variety of currently used and available anti-tip devices, and updates to the scope and instructions. Our hope is that the standard also becomes mandatory once it's updated so that not only manufacturers be required to comply, but those who sell aftermarket anti-tip devices will also have to comply. This would ensure manufacturers include anti-tip devices that meet a much more stringent standard than the current one. It would also mean that consumers are able to make an informed choice when purchasing aftermarket anti-tip devices, and once mandatory counterfeit or knockoff anchors would be eliminated. Parents would no longer have a false sense of security for unknowingly using or purchasing a potentially inferior product that has a greater likelihood of failing to prevent a tip over. It would go a long way to ensuring that the secondary safety system would work as intended. As Anchor It collaborators, we meet regularly with the Anchor It campaign and feel the campaign is as important as ever. The new CSU rule does not eliminate or reduce the need to raise awareness about the risk of tip over injuries and deaths. As you well know, the direct final rule only applies to CSUs. Yet children and even adults continue to be injured and killed by TVs including flat screens, appliances, and other types of furniture such as shelving units, tables, and while less common, even other household and outdoor items. We would like to see the Anchor It campaign expand its and update its website and social media campaign to include a wider breadth of tip over information. A few quick suggestions include including images of other types of products that pose a tip over risk. A focus on flat screen TV hazards addressing the widespread belief that flat screens don't pose a danger because they're lighter. I often say a 10 pound TV is the same as dropping a bowling ball on your child's head. A link to saferproducts.gov and recalls both current and past of furniture and televisions on the Anchor It website directly. Greater diversity and messaging. A PSA and social media posts featuring fathers and grandparents sharing their tip over stories and the importance of anchoring to reach a really important demographic that is often resistant to anchoring. A greater emphasis on the risk of injury and death to elders who account for 15% of tip over fatalities. Addressing that the soon to be mandatory standard will only apply to CSUs and that millions of pieces of furniture are currently in homes right now that still pose a risk and need to be anchored. More frequent posting on social media about tip over risks and prevention. And we recommend the development of a new infographic. Our informal polling has shown that parents really find them useful and educational and they're more likely to pay attention to them. In closing, Pat would like to thank the CPSC staff who are the unsung heroes for their hard work and dedication to consumer safety. Would also like to thank each of you for your passion for child and consumer safety, your dedication to protecting the public from product safety hazards through your educational campaigns, recalls and rulemaking. And for your willingness to listen and to collaborate with parents and consumer advocates like us. We're hopeful the agency's budget will be increased to allow for these and other priorities to reach their full potential. And for consumers of all ages to remain safe from product safety hazards. Thank you. Thank you, Miss motto. We're now going to recognize Miss Joseph for 10 minutes. Hi, and thank you to the CPSC and the commissioners for this opportunity to speak today. My name is Teresa Joseph and I'm the development director for a nonprofit organization based in Colorado called love for Lily. We support families in the neonatal ICU across hospitals in Colorado, as well as virtually for any family who has experienced the NICU. We currently serve families from 22 states outside of Colorado. Our mission is to empower support and connect families so that no one has to walk the NICU alone. I'm aware of the proposed mandatory standard that is being developed for the nursing pillow and I'm here today representing a tiny but mighty population as it relates to any changes to the current C shaped nursing pillow. I'm also speaking to you today as the mom of a micro preemie born at 24 weeks and a late term preemie born at 36 weeks. So I am not only the representative for an organization concerned about the outcomes for premature babies, but I am a mom who has walked this journey inside the NICU twice. Today I want to outline why the NICU population is critical when thinking through changes to the nursing pillow, a vital tool for families in the NICU. It may feel like this is a small subset of infants supported by this type of product, but I hope to demonstrate that changes to the nursing pillow are indeed quite consequential to such a vulnerable population and could dramatically decrease outcomes for NICU babies. Let me start with some statistics. One in 10 babies are born prematurely in the United States. According to the CDC and the National Center Health Statistics, the birth rate across the United States for 2021 was just over 3.6 million. This was a 1% increase over 2020 and the first increase in birth rates since 2014. Prior to 2021 birth rates were decreasing by 2% per year, including a 4% drop from 2019 to 2020. Preterm birth rate, babies born before 37 weeks, was 10.48%, an increase of 4% over 2020, which is the highest rate reported since 2007. While birth rates dropped across the U.S., premature birth rates continue to rise at a much higher rate. This is a population of babies that is growing across the U.S. and cannot be ignored. According to the March of Dimes, prematurity is the leading cause of newborn death and disability among infants, including developmental delays, chronic respiratory problems, and vision and hearing impairment. Knowing this, it's important to understand what can be done to increase outcomes for premature babies. Across the medical community, there is an undeniable agreement that the best thing a premature baby can receive to improve their outcomes is mom's milk. The American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy for Family Physicians agree that breast milk is the best form of nutrition for an infant in the NICU. In the NICU, breast milk is referred to as liquid gold. In an article from the National Institute of Health States, human milk is considered essential in reducing the incidence of comorbidities and improving long-term outcomes for very low birth weight premature infants, infants born under 1,500 grams or 3 pounds. Several observational studies have shown that human milk is superior to formula in reducing the rate of comorbidities. Several studies have shown that human milk feeding can reduce the rate of bronchial pulmonary dysplasia, sepsis, necrotizing enterocolitis, and severe retinopathy of prematurity, more than formula feeding can. These studies demonstrate how critical it is to supply breast milk to premature infants. However, feeding a premature infant is challenging and comes with multiple barriers. These babies are very tiny and extremely fragile. Premature babies are hooked up to multiple wires such as heart rate monitors, pulse oximeters. They most likely have an IV in their arm or their head. They have a nasal gastric tube and an oxygen cannula in their nose. These babies are very intimidating to hold and manipulate and take a lot of patience and coordination. Premature babies are not born ready to breastfeed. They lack the development and instincts. Most premature babies are also born with low tone, particularly orally and midline, making it harder for them to hold their bodies in positions with an open mouth. Mothers can be encouraged to begin oral feeding at the breast as soon as infant shows physiological readiness, i.e. feeding cues, and the infant levels of respiratory support allow for oral feeding. The oral feedings at the breast have been studied as early as 31 to 33 weeks postmenstrual age. These feedings can either be non-nutritive sucking at the breast or the beginnings of breastfeeding. The C-shaped nursing pillow plays a critical role in supporting mom during this early period of feeding and gives her the support and confidence she needs for the task. Moms, especially postbirth, come in all different shapes and sizes. The C-shaped fits comfortably around many sizes and creates the perfect ledge to have the baby positioned at the breast at the correct height. The C-shaped n