The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) unanimously approved a new rule setting guidelines and requirements for information in mandatory recall notices. A mandatory recall can be ordered by the Commission or a U.S. District Court.
Each section of the rule is either required by Section 214 of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA), or CPSC has determined it will likely increase recall effectiveness by helping consumers:
(a) Identify the product subject to a recall
(b) Understand the hazard identified with the product
(c) Understand what remedy is offered regarding the product.
Information required by the rule includes: product description, action being taken, number of units, identification of the substantial product hazard and reason for the action, identification of manufacturers and significant retailers, dates when product was manufactured and sold, number and description of any injuries or deaths, the ages of anyone injured or killed, remedy available to consumers and other information the Commission deems appropriate. The Commission could determine some of the information is unnecessary or inappropriate for a particular recall.
The rule does not contain requirements for voluntary recall notices but will serve as a guide for those notices. If CPSC decides to extend these requirements to voluntary recall notices, it would proceed with separate rulemaking.
In 2009, 100 percent of the recalls announced to consumers were done voluntarily and cooperatively with impacted firms. As more products get recalled each year, the high rate of cooperative recall announcements negotiated by CPSC staff is a benefit to the safety of consumers.
The requirement to create a mandatory recall rule was proposed as an amendment to the CPSIA by President Barack Obama when he was a member of the Senate.
The final rule goes into effect upon publication in the Federal Register.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Thursday, January 7, 2010
EPA Delays Report on Flea and Tick Products That May Harm Pets
EPA Delays Report on Flea and Tick Products That May Harm Pets
Pet owners continue to report adverse effects on animals
Pet owners worried about the adverse reactions thousands of animals nationwide have experienced to topical flea and tick products will have to wait a little longer for any action from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The agency previously told ConsumerAffairs.com that it planned to issue a report last fall about "spot-on" flea and tick products, which pet owners say have triggered "horrific" reactions in their dogs and cats. But according to the EPA, the agency is still reviewing reports and other "complex technical issues" regarding the problem, and will likely not take any action for weeks.
"[The] EPA has been evaluating the data submitted on adverse incidents associated with the spot-on flea and tick pet products and is nearing completion of its review," the agency's spokesman, Dale Kemery, said. "Due to the large amount of data and the complex technical
issues associated with the review of the data, our report is not ready for public release."
Read more: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2010/01/fleatick02.html#ixzz0bzey59NW
Pet owners continue to report adverse effects on animals
Pet owners worried about the adverse reactions thousands of animals nationwide have experienced to topical flea and tick products will have to wait a little longer for any action from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The agency previously told ConsumerAffairs.com that it planned to issue a report last fall about "spot-on" flea and tick products, which pet owners say have triggered "horrific" reactions in their dogs and cats. But according to the EPA, the agency is still reviewing reports and other "complex technical issues" regarding the problem, and will likely not take any action for weeks.
"[The] EPA has been evaluating the data submitted on adverse incidents associated with the spot-on flea and tick pet products and is nearing completion of its review," the agency's spokesman, Dale Kemery, said. "Due to the large amount of data and the complex technical
issues associated with the review of the data, our report is not ready for public release."
Read more: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2010/01/fleatick02.html#ixzz0bzey59NW
Monday, January 4, 2010
FDA Takes Action Against New Jersey Cheese Manufacturer Quesos Mi Pueblito
FDA Takes Action Against New Jersey Cheese Manufacturer
Company failed to correct violations despite federal, state warnings
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today announced intentions to ask a federal court to shut down a New Jersey cheese manufacturer with an alleged history of operating under insanitary conditions and producing cheese contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes.
The U.S. Department of Justice filed a complaint for permanent injunction against Quesos Mi Pueblito and two of its officers, Felix Sanchez and Jesus Galvez. The complaint alleges that recent inspections by the FDA and the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services found Listeria-contaminated cheese and insanitary conditions at the Passaic company.
If entered by the court, the injunction would stop the company and its officers from manufacturing and distributing food until they can bring their operations into full compliance with FDA food safety regulations and produce cheese that does not test positive for the presence of Listeria.
The complaint for permanent injunction was filed in the U.S. District Court - District of New Jersey."FDA’s work with federal and state partners to root out or remedy food manufacturers not compliant with food safety laws ensures safer foods get to our dinner tables," said Michael Chappell, the FDA’s acting associate commissioner for regulatory affairs.
Quesos Mi Pueblito currently manufactures and distributes a variety of soft, semi-soft, and hard Mexican cheeses in grocery stores and supermarkets in Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Florida, Virginia and the District of Columbia. Among Quesos Mi Pueblito’s products are queso oaxaca, queso fresco, queso requeson and queso cotija molido.
Consumers can report problems with FDA-regulated products to their district office consumer complaint coordinator.
Company failed to correct violations despite federal, state warnings
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today announced intentions to ask a federal court to shut down a New Jersey cheese manufacturer with an alleged history of operating under insanitary conditions and producing cheese contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes.
The U.S. Department of Justice filed a complaint for permanent injunction against Quesos Mi Pueblito and two of its officers, Felix Sanchez and Jesus Galvez. The complaint alleges that recent inspections by the FDA and the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services found Listeria-contaminated cheese and insanitary conditions at the Passaic company.
If entered by the court, the injunction would stop the company and its officers from manufacturing and distributing food until they can bring their operations into full compliance with FDA food safety regulations and produce cheese that does not test positive for the presence of Listeria.
The complaint for permanent injunction was filed in the U.S. District Court - District of New Jersey."FDA’s work with federal and state partners to root out or remedy food manufacturers not compliant with food safety laws ensures safer foods get to our dinner tables," said Michael Chappell, the FDA’s acting associate commissioner for regulatory affairs.
Quesos Mi Pueblito currently manufactures and distributes a variety of soft, semi-soft, and hard Mexican cheeses in grocery stores and supermarkets in Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Florida, Virginia and the District of Columbia. Among Quesos Mi Pueblito’s products are queso oaxaca, queso fresco, queso requeson and queso cotija molido.
Consumers can report problems with FDA-regulated products to their district office consumer complaint coordinator.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Company’s Record on Beef Treatment Questioned
Eight years ago, federal officials were struggling to remove potentially deadly E. coli from hamburgers when an entrepreneurial company from South Dakota came up with a novel idea: injecting beef with ammonia.
The company, Beef Products Inc., had been looking to expand into the hamburger business with a product made from beef that included fatty trimmings the industry once relegated to pet food and cooking oil. The trimmings were particularly susceptible to contamination, but a study commissioned by the company showed that the ammonia process would kill E. coli as well as salmonella.
Officials at the United States Department of Agriculture endorsed the company’s ammonia treatment, and have said it destroys E. coli “to an undetectable level.” They decided it was so effective that in 2007, when the department began routine testing of meat used in hamburger sold to the general public, they exempted Beef Products.
With the U.S.D.A.’s stamp of approval, the company’s processed beef has become a mainstay in America’s hamburgers. McDonald’s, Burger King and other fast-food giants use it as a component in ground beef, as do grocery chains. The federal school lunch program used an estimated 5.5 million pounds of the processed beef last year alone.
FULL STORY: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/us/31meat.html?_r=1
The company, Beef Products Inc., had been looking to expand into the hamburger business with a product made from beef that included fatty trimmings the industry once relegated to pet food and cooking oil. The trimmings were particularly susceptible to contamination, but a study commissioned by the company showed that the ammonia process would kill E. coli as well as salmonella.
Officials at the United States Department of Agriculture endorsed the company’s ammonia treatment, and have said it destroys E. coli “to an undetectable level.” They decided it was so effective that in 2007, when the department began routine testing of meat used in hamburger sold to the general public, they exempted Beef Products.
With the U.S.D.A.’s stamp of approval, the company’s processed beef has become a mainstay in America’s hamburgers. McDonald’s, Burger King and other fast-food giants use it as a component in ground beef, as do grocery chains. The federal school lunch program used an estimated 5.5 million pounds of the processed beef last year alone.
FULL STORY: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/us/31meat.html?_r=1
Thursday, December 17, 2009
CPSC Renews Crib Warning After Another Death
CPSC Renews Crib Warning After Another Death
All cribs have been recalled but death toll rises to 11
The warning is increasingly urgent. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is telling parents not to use the recalled Simplicity drip side crib after the report of yet another infant who became trapped and suffocated.
The death toll is now 11, the agency says.
The crib is made by Simplicity Inc. and SFCA of Reading, Pa. The CPSC says the firm has ceased day-to-day operations and presumably has gone out of business.
In September the agency recalled about 600,000 Simplicity drop-side cribs because of an entrapment and suffocation hazard. At the time, two infant deaths had been attributed to the beds.
The recall notice said that, due to sizing problems with the crib's hardware, the drop side can come off the tracks. When the drop side detaches or partially detaches, it creates a hazardous gap, which can lead to infant entrapment and suffocation.
CPSC said it is also is aware of an additional 25 incidents involving the drop side detaching from the crib. To date, CPSC has recalled over 2 million Simplicity drop side cribs due to problems with the crib's plastic hardware.
Read more: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2009/12/simplicity_cpsc03.html#ixzz0a0ir0eKx
All cribs have been recalled but death toll rises to 11
The warning is increasingly urgent. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is telling parents not to use the recalled Simplicity drip side crib after the report of yet another infant who became trapped and suffocated.
The death toll is now 11, the agency says.
The crib is made by Simplicity Inc. and SFCA of Reading, Pa. The CPSC says the firm has ceased day-to-day operations and presumably has gone out of business.
In September the agency recalled about 600,000 Simplicity drop-side cribs because of an entrapment and suffocation hazard. At the time, two infant deaths had been attributed to the beds.
The recall notice said that, due to sizing problems with the crib's hardware, the drop side can come off the tracks. When the drop side detaches or partially detaches, it creates a hazardous gap, which can lead to infant entrapment and suffocation.
CPSC said it is also is aware of an additional 25 incidents involving the drop side detaching from the crib. To date, CPSC has recalled over 2 million Simplicity drop side cribs due to problems with the crib's plastic hardware.
Read more: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2009/12/simplicity_cpsc03.html#ixzz0a0ir0eKx
Test results on formaldehyde in Noodlefish---Hong Kong
Test results on formaldehyde in noodlefish
The Centre for Food Safety (CFS) recently conducted a targeted food surveillance exercise to assess the situation of formaldehyde in noodlefish.
Results showed that one of the 10 samples taken contained formaldehyde at a level of 1,200ppm. The samples had been collected from retail outlets for testing.
"We believe formaldehyde was added as a preservative after the fish were caught, or during transportation or storage," a CFS spokesman said today (December 17).
"At the level of formaldehyde detected in the noodlefish sample, health effects such as abdominal pain and vomiting and kidney problems cannot be ruled out for high consumers," the spokesman said.
"Consumption of noodlefish by the general public with the same detected level as this sample on a long-term basis might have effects on the gastro-intestinal tract. The main health concern of formaldehyde is its cancer-causing potential through exposure via inhalation. According to the World Health Organization, there is not sufficient evidence showing that formaldehyde is carcinogenic through exposure through the oral route."
The CFS called on the trade not to add formaldehyde to fish or other marine products. Under the law, formaldehyde is not permitted for use as a food preservative. Contravention of the law could lead to a maximum fine of $50,000 and six months' imprisonment.
"Regarding the unsatisfactory sample, the CFS issued warning letters to the stall operator concerned asking him to stop selling the affected products. We are tracing the source of the fish in question. We are also collecting sufficient evidence for prosecution," he added.
The CFS also advised the public to take note of the following when buying or cooking marine products (e.g. noodlefish):
* Avoid buying noodlefish that are stiff (formaldehyde could stiffen flesh of fish);* Choose only fish that are fresh and avoid those with an unusual smell;* Wash and cook marine products thoroughly as formaldehyde is water soluble and could dissipate upon heating.
The Centre for Food Safety (CFS) recently conducted a targeted food surveillance exercise to assess the situation of formaldehyde in noodlefish.
Results showed that one of the 10 samples taken contained formaldehyde at a level of 1,200ppm. The samples had been collected from retail outlets for testing.
"We believe formaldehyde was added as a preservative after the fish were caught, or during transportation or storage," a CFS spokesman said today (December 17).
"At the level of formaldehyde detected in the noodlefish sample, health effects such as abdominal pain and vomiting and kidney problems cannot be ruled out for high consumers," the spokesman said.
"Consumption of noodlefish by the general public with the same detected level as this sample on a long-term basis might have effects on the gastro-intestinal tract. The main health concern of formaldehyde is its cancer-causing potential through exposure via inhalation. According to the World Health Organization, there is not sufficient evidence showing that formaldehyde is carcinogenic through exposure through the oral route."
The CFS called on the trade not to add formaldehyde to fish or other marine products. Under the law, formaldehyde is not permitted for use as a food preservative. Contravention of the law could lead to a maximum fine of $50,000 and six months' imprisonment.
"Regarding the unsatisfactory sample, the CFS issued warning letters to the stall operator concerned asking him to stop selling the affected products. We are tracing the source of the fish in question. We are also collecting sufficient evidence for prosecution," he added.
The CFS also advised the public to take note of the following when buying or cooking marine products (e.g. noodlefish):
* Avoid buying noodlefish that are stiff (formaldehyde could stiffen flesh of fish);* Choose only fish that are fresh and avoid those with an unusual smell;* Wash and cook marine products thoroughly as formaldehyde is water soluble and could dissipate upon heating.
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Excelligence Learning Corp. to Pay $25,000 Civil Penalty Due to Violation of Lead Paint Ban
Excelligence Learning Corp. to Pay $25,000 Civil Penalty Due to Violation of Lead Paint Ban
WASHINGTON, D.C.- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) announced today that Excelligence Learning Corp, of Monterey, Calif. DBA Discount School Supply has agreed to pay a $25,000 civil penalty for allegedly violating the federal lead paint ban. The penalty settlement has been provisionally accepted by the Commission.
The settlement resolves CPSC staff allegations that Excelligence imported more than 33,000 units of children’s products that contained lead paint above the 0.06 percent legal limit at different intervals between August 2000 and August 2007. In 1978, a federal ban was put in place which prohibited toys and other children’s articles from having more than 0.06 percent lead (by weight) in paints or surface coatings. As a result of the Consumer Product Safety
Improvement Act of 2008, the regulatory limit was reduced to 0.009 percent on August 14, 2009. These products were recalled in November 2007, December 2007and January 2008.
In agreeing to the settlement, Excelligence denies that it knowingly violated federal law, as alleged by CPSC staff.
WASHINGTON, D.C.- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) announced today that Excelligence Learning Corp, of Monterey, Calif. DBA Discount School Supply has agreed to pay a $25,000 civil penalty for allegedly violating the federal lead paint ban. The penalty settlement has been provisionally accepted by the Commission.
The settlement resolves CPSC staff allegations that Excelligence imported more than 33,000 units of children’s products that contained lead paint above the 0.06 percent legal limit at different intervals between August 2000 and August 2007. In 1978, a federal ban was put in place which prohibited toys and other children’s articles from having more than 0.06 percent lead (by weight) in paints or surface coatings. As a result of the Consumer Product Safety
Improvement Act of 2008, the regulatory limit was reduced to 0.009 percent on August 14, 2009. These products were recalled in November 2007, December 2007and January 2008.
In agreeing to the settlement, Excelligence denies that it knowingly violated federal law, as alleged by CPSC staff.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
