CPSC has broad authority to identify, assess, and address hazards  associated with consumer products under the following laws:
Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA), which consolidated federal  safety regulatory activity relating to consumer products within CPSC;
Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) of 2008,  which amended CPSA to, among other things, expand CPSC’s  authorities to address consumer product safety risks and direct the  agency to develop a risk assessment methodology to identify  hazardous imports;
Flammable Fabrics Act, which, among other things, authorizes  CPSC to prescribe flammability standards for clothing, upholstery, and  other fabrics; and
Federal Hazardous Substances Act, which establishes the  framework for the regulation of substances that are toxic, corrosive,  combustible, or otherwise hazardous. CPSC’s Authorities and Other Factors Affect How Quickly It Responds to New and Emerging Hazards

Certain aspects of CPSC’s authorities, as well as other factors, impact  how quickly CPSC responds to new and emerging hazards, including (1)  compliance actions involving litigation, (2) reliance on voluntary  standards, (3) rulemaking procedures, and (4) information-sharing  restrictions. Reliance on Voluntary Standards Can Prolong Response to Product Safety Hazards

As previously discussed, consumer product safety laws require CPSC to  rely on voluntary standards if it determines that (1) compliance with a  voluntary standard would eliminate or adequately reduce the risk of injury  identified and (2) there is likely to be substantial compliance with the  voluntary standard. CPSC does not control the voluntary standards development process,  and the laws do not establish a time frame within which standard- development organizations must finalize a voluntary standard. For example, CPSC has worked with  the window-covering industry since 1994 to develop voluntary standards  to address strangulation hazards stemming from window blind cords, but  conflicting consumer and industry goals have prolonged the process. Our report concluded that  this restriction on sharing information may hinder CPSC’s ability to  identify risks from new products in a timely manner, possibly leading to  injury and death if unsafe products enter the U.S. market. As of  September 2014, there have been no changes to section 29(f) of CPSA. These options and their trade-offs are summarized in   figure 1. Representatives discussed various challenges the approach could  present. Opinions vary among  current and former commissioners about the extent to which expedited  rulemaking authority should be used. Enhancing CPSC’s Authorities to Address Unsafe Imports

In September 2011, CPSC staff submitted a report to Congress that  recommended several statutory changes designed to improve CPSC’s  ability to identify hazardous products at the ports of entry and prevent  them from entering the marketplace. In August 2014, CPSC officials confirmed that  they continue to support all of the statutory changes recommended in the  2011 report. Almost half of the 23 consumer and industry representatives and  commissioners we interviewed expressed an opinion about whether the  proposed statutory changes would enable CPSC to respond more quickly  to new and emerging risks. However, a commissioner and a consumer safety expert we interviewed  did not support the proposed statutory changes and said that they would  not help CPSC address new and emerging risks. Specifically, because the  agency relies heavily upon analyses of scientific and technical data to  assess potential hazards from a growing number of consumer products,  these representatives said that additional resources to hire staff with  expertise in technical areas, such as toxicology, public health,  epidemiology, and engineering, could improve the timeliness of CPSC’s  response to new or emerging product risks. For example, changes to expand CPSC’s use of  preventive approaches to consumer product safety could give the agency  greater ability to respond to risks by preventing hazardous products from  entering the market, but also could inhibit market innovation and impose  costs on manufacturers. This report discusses (1) how CPSC’s authorities and other factors  may affect the time it takes CPSC to respond to new and emerging risks  and (2) proposed options that may be available to improve CPSC’s ability  to respond to new and emerging risks in a timely manner and trade-offs  associated with those options.
Why GAO Did This Study

CPSC is responsible for ensuring the safety of thousands of consumer products, including imports, after they enter the U.S. market. Its jurisdiction covers a range of products–from children's toys to off-road recreational vehicles. Identifying and assessing new and emerging consumer product risks can present challenges. Questions have been raised in recent congressional hearings about the length of time CPSC takes to address a safety hazard, during which injuries and fatalities can continue to occur. Section 4 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2014 mandated that GAO review CPSC's ability to respond quickly to new and emerging risks.
This report discusses (1) how CPSC's authorities and other factors may affect its response time to new and emerging hazards and (2) options and their trade-offs that may be available to address CPSC's ability to respond to these hazards. GAO reviewed CPSC's laws and regulations, prior GAO reports, and other published studies. Additionally, GAO interviewed CPSC commissioners and staff, consumer safety experts, legal experts, and representatives from consumer and industry organizations.

What GAO Found

According to Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) officials, industry representatives, consumer groups, and subject-matter experts GAO interviewed, the timeliness of CPSC's responses may be affected by several factors, including (1) compliance actions that can involve litigation, (2) reliance on voluntary standards, (3) rulemaking procedures, (4) restrictions on sharing information with the public and international agencies, and (5) limited agency resources. For example, CPSC must defer to a voluntary standard if it determines that compliance with a voluntary standard would eliminate or adequately reduce the risk of injury and there is likely to be substantial compliance with the voluntary standard. However, because the laws do not establish a time frame for finalizing a voluntary standard, conflicting industry and consumer interests can delay its development, sometimes for years. CPSC has worked with the window covering industry since 1994 to develop a voluntary standard to address strangulation hazards stemming from window blind cords, but as of September 2014, no voluntary standard that addresses the ongoing safety concerns had been finalized. Further, new and emerging product safety risks present challenges because, statutorily, CPSC was established to respond to risks after products have been introduced into market.
Various options have been suggested for improving CPSC's ability to respond to new and emerging product safety risks, including the following examples:
Preventative regulatory approaches . Many representatives said that regulatory approaches designed to prevent hazardous products from entering the market—such as premarket approval—could reduce consumer injuries, but could also inhibit market innovation and impose burdensome costs on manufacturers and CPSC.
Expedited rulemaking authority . Some stakeholders proposed expanding CPSC's authority to use expedited rulemaking procedures similar to those authorized in 2008 in the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, which streamlined the rulemaking process for durable infant products. Most believed streamlined procedures would enable CPSC to promulgate rules in a more timely manner to address risks, but opinions differed on the extent to which the authority should be expanded.
Enhancing CPSC's authorities to address unsafe imports . CPSC has proposed several statutory changes to improve its ability to identify hazardous products at the ports of entry and prevent them from entering the marketplace. About half the representatives GAO talked to supported the proposed changes, with some exceptions where the changes would impose additional burdens on industry.
Enhanced data analysis capabilities . Most representatives agreed that CPSC could respond to new and emerging hazards more quickly if it had additional funding for technology and staff with technical expertise in the areas of engineering, toxicology, and public health to analyze product hazard data and conduct risk assessments.

What GAO Recommends

GAO makes no recommendations in this report. In prior reports GAO has made a recommendation related to CPSC's participation in voluntary standards development and suggested that Congress address restrictions on how CPSC is able to share information with its international counterparts.