In addition, CPSC does not maintain systematic information on past and ongoing projects, which makes it difficult to assess and prioritize the need for new projects in different hazard areas. These criteria, which are incorporated in agency regulations, include the following: the frequency of injuries and deaths resulting from the hazard; the severity of the injuries resulting from the hazard; addressability—that is, the extent to which the hazard is likely to be reduced through CPSC action—agency regulations note that the cause of the hazard should be analyzed to help determine the extent to which injuries can reasonably be expected to be reduced or eliminated through CPSC action; the number of chronic illnesses and future injuries predicted to result from the hazard; preliminary estimates of the costs and benefits to society resulting from unforeseen nature of the risk—that is, the degree to which consumers are aware of the hazard and its consequences; vulnerability of the population at risk—whether some individuals (such as children) may be less able to recognize or escape from potential hazards and therefore may require a relatively higher degree of protection; probability of exposure to the product hazard—that is, how many consumers are exposed to the potential hazard, or how likely a typical consumer is to be exposed to the hazard; and other—additional criteria to be considered at the discretion of CPSC. CPSC collects information on product-related deaths and injuries to provide information for project selection as well as to perform risk assessments and cost-benefit analyses. CPSC Uses COST-BENEFIT Analysis and Risk Assessment, but Improvements Are Needed in Data and Methodology

CPSC uses two analytical tools—risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis—to assist in making decisions on regulatory and nonregulatory methods to address potential hazards. CPSC frequently conducts cost-benefit analysis with respect to regulatory procedures, whether or not it is required to do so. We found 24 risk assessments conducted by CPSC between January 1, 1990, and September 30, 1996; only 4 of these were associated with regulatory action. CPSC Cost-Benefit Analyses Are Often Not Comprehensive and Not Reported in Sufficient Detail

The methodology used to conduct a cost-benefit analysis will frequently depend on the circumstances and the context of the analysis. CPSC Has Established Procedures for Complying With Statutory Requirements for Releasing Manufacturer-Specific Information

To help minimize the possibility that a product might be unfairly disparaged, in section 6(b) of the Consumer Product Safety Act the Congress imposed restrictions on the disclosure of manufacturer-specific information by CPSC. CPSC staff and commissioners, industry representatives, and consumer advocates expressed a wide variety of opinions on the effectiveness of these requirements, and some individuals favored specific changes. CPSC’s procedures outline several steps to verify all information before it is released. Evidence Suggests That CPSC Complies With Legal Requirements Regarding the Release of Information

Information from three sources of evidence—industry, published legal cases, and data on retractions—suggest that CPSC complies with its statutory requirements concerning information release. Our review of published legal decisions found no rulings that CPSC violated its statutory requirements concerning the release of information. Conclusions

CPSC’s current data provide insufficient information to monitor ongoing projects and to determine whether potential projects adhere to the agency’s selection criteria. Recommendations

We recommend that the Chairman of CPSC take the following actions: Improve the quality of CPSC’s injury, death, and exposure data by consulting with experts both within and outside the agency to (1) prioritize CPSC’s needs for additional statistically valid surveillance data on injuries and deaths related to consumer products and on exposure to consumer products and product-related hazards, (2) investigate the feasibility and cost of alternative means of obtaining these data, and (3) design data systems to collect and analyze this information. The literature on cost-benefit analysis makes a key distinction in this area. CPSC does not conduct a formal, numerical risk assessment for each project it undertakes. GAO Comments

1. 2. 10. 3. 7-8. 14-15. U.S. Commission on Risk Assessment and Risk Management.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the Consumer Product Safety Commission's (CPSC) project selection, use of cost-benefit analysis and risk assessment, and information release procedures, focusing on: (1) the criteria CPSC uses to select projects and the information it relies upon in making these choices; (2) the information CPSC draws on to perform risk assessment and cost-benefit analyses and CPSC's methodology for conducting cost-benefit analyses; and (3) CPSC's procedures for releasing manufacturer-specific information to the public and whether evidence exists that CPSC violated its statutory requirements concerning the release of such information.

What GAO Found

GAO noted that: (1) although CPSC has established criteria to help select new projects, with the agency's current data these criteria can be measured only imprecisely, if at all; (2) although CPSC has described itself as "data driven," its information on product-related injuries and deaths is often sketchy; (3) this makes it more difficult not only for agency management to monitor current projects but also for staff and commissioners to assess and prioritize the need for new projects in different hazard areas; (4) CPSC has insufficient data on both internal agency efforts and external product hazards to assess the impact and cost of each project; (5) to help evaluate alternative methods of addressing potential hazards, CPSC may perform a risk assessment to estimate the likelihood of injury associated with a hazard or conduct a cost-benefit analysis to assess the potential effects of a proposed regulation; (6) although CPSC does not complete either a risk assessment or cost-benefit analysis for every project, the agency conducts these analyses more often than it is required to by law; (7) nevertheless, CPSC's data are often insufficient to support a thorough application of these analytical techniques; (8) to evaluate relative risks, it is usually necessary to have information on how many consumers use the product--information that CPSC frequently does not have; (9) risk assessment of consumer products requires measurement of the number of harmful incidents; (10) CPSC's imprecise and incomplete death and injury data make risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis at best less reliable and at worst impossible to do; (11) the cost-benefit analyses conducted by CPSC between 1990 and 1996 were often not comprehensive; (12) CPSC has established procedures to implement statutory requirements concerning the release of manufacturer-specific information; (13) when releasing information to the public that identifies a specific manufacturer, CPSC is required to verify the information and allow the manufacturer an opportunity to comment; (14) evidence from the industry and from legal cases suggests that CPSC has met its statutory requirements in this area; (15) individuals within CPSC, as well as some industry representatives and consumer groups, expressed dissatisfaction with the requirements of this law; and (16) some of these individuals have proposed statutory changes that range from reducing to expanding the current requirements.