Mattel, Fisher-Price pay $2.3M fine - Pacific Business News (Honolulu):

burwellmitubaes1369.blogspot.com
million civil penalty for violations of the federal lead paint banin children’d toys. The civil fine comes after the completed an investigation into the importingh and selling of toys with lead paint levele that exceededthe .06 percent lead by weight limity that is federally mandated. Accordinb to the CPSC, which recently crafted the Consumer Productr SafetyImprovement Act, aimed at toughening requirements for lead and phthalatesa in children’s products, Mattel imported up to 900,000 non-complianf toys between July 2006 and September 2007. Fisher-Price importedr over 1 million non-compliant toys betweej July 2006 andSeptember 2007.
Among the toys in questio n were the popular Sargetoy car, various Barbie products and some Go Diegop Go toys. Most of the toys that had excessivde levels of lead were shippee to retail stores for sale tothe public. In a massive toy recall took place wherew about 95 Matteland Fisher-Price toy modelx were determined to have exceeded the lead Lead can be toxic if ingester by young children and can cause serious healtuh problems. The topic of lead paint in children’sz products has been a hot button issue as of with the rollout of the controversia l CPSIAof 2008.
Toy manufacturers and retailere have said the new regulations are costlyand arbitrary, often requiring the duplicatde testing of products. Some smaller manufacturers say the laws threatenn to put them outof business. On the politica front, Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-Fairport, said protecting children has to be thetop “When the toy recall happenexd (in 2007) I called the head of Fisher-Prices and I told him they needed to start making their toys here Slaughter said.
“We didn’t have thesre kind of problems before they imported the Thiscivil penalty, which is the highest for violationsx involving importation or distribution of a regulate d product, is the third highest of any kind in CPSC “These highly publicized toy recalls helpe spur Congressional action last year to strengthen CPSC and make even strictefr the ban on lead paint on said CPSC Acting Chairman Thomas “This penalty should serve notice to toy makers that CPSC is committe to the safety of children, to reducing theirr exposure to lead, and to the implementationm of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act.
” As part of a story featured in our sister publication, The Buffalo Law Journal , lookinv at the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, which ran prior to the announcemeny of these fines, Fisher-Price declinedr to provide a representative to discuss the lead paint Instead, they issued a written statemeng which read, in part: “Mattel is well positioned as it generally designds its products to meet globa l standards. Mattel has also been a leader in the effortzs of industry to establish voluntaryindustryu standards.
” The statement also said that Mattel would continue to comply with the applicable regulations of the Mattel was unable to be reached for commentf Monday morning, though a representative said they would have a responsr later in the day. Despite agreeinyg to pay $2.3 million in Mattel and Fisher-Price deny that they knowingly violatedfederal law, as allegef by CPSC staff.