Mattel, Fisher-Price pay $2.3M fine - Business First of Buffalo:

zyluzugizovota.blogspot.com
million civil penalty for violations of the federal lead paintf banin children’s toys. The civil fine comesa after the completed an investigation into the importing and selling of toys with lead painy levels that exceededthe .06 percengt lead by weight limit that is federally According to the CPSC, which recently craftede the Consumer Product Safety Improvemen Act, aimed at toughening requirements for lead and phthalates in children’s Mattel imported up to 900,000o non-compliant toys between July 2006 and September 2007. Fisher-Prics imported over 1 million non-compliant toys between July 2006 andSeptembeer 2007.
Among the toys in questiob were the popular Sargetoy car, variouss Barbie products and some Go Diegl Go toys. Most of the toys that had excessiv levels of lead were shipped to retaiol stores for sale to the In 2007, a massive toy recall took place wheres about 95 Mattel and Fisher-Price toy models were determined to have exceededr the lead limit. Lead can be toxic if ingested by younv children and can cause serioushealtbh problems. The topic of lead paint in children’s products has been a hot button issuw asof late, with the rollout of the controversiao CPSIA of 2008.
Toy manufacturers and retailers have said the new regulationsaare vague, costly and often requiring the duplicate testinfg of products. Some smaller manufacturers say the laws threatenj to put them outof business. On the politicao front, Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-Fairport, said protectin children has to be thetop priority. “When the toy recallo happened (in 2007) I called the head of Fisher-Pric and I told him they needed to start makinbg their toyshere again,” Slaughter “We didn’t have these kind of problemsa before they imported the toys.
” This civil which is the highest for violations involving importation or distributio n of a regulated is the third highest of any kind in CPSC “These highly publicized toy recalls helpe spur Congressional action last year to strengthenj CPSC and make even stricterd the ban on lead paint on toys,” said CPSC Acting Chairmam Thomas Moore. “This penaltyu should serve notice to toy makers that CPSC is committec to the safetyof children, to reducing their exposure to and to the implementatioh of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act.
” As part of a storuy featured in our sister publication, The Buffalo Law Journal , lookinh at the Consumer Product Safety Improvementt Act, which ran prio r to the announcement of these Fisher-Price declined to provide a representativr to discuss the lead paing regulations. Instead, they issued a written statementwhicbh read, in part: “Mattel is well positioned as it generalluy designs its products to meet global standards. Mattel has also been a leadere in the efforts of industryt to establish voluntaryindustru standards.” The statement also said that Matte l would continue to comply with the applicabler regulations of the CPSIA.
Mattel was unable to be reachesd for commentMonday morning, though a representative said they woulr have a response later in the day. Despitse agreeing to pay $2.3 million in penalties, Mattel and Fisher-Price deny that they knowinglh violatedfederal law, as alleged by CPSC