GAO Says CPSC's Limited Resources & CPSIA Delays Constrain Its Authority Over Imported Products

GAO found broad consensus that CPSC's authorities over imported consumer products have the potential to be effective, especially with the enactment of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA). However, CPSC has been constrained by competing priorities, and limited resources and delays in implementing key provisions of CPSIA, among other things.

Highlights of GAO's Findings

The following are highlights of the GAO's findings with respect to CPSC's authority over imported products.

Incomplete CPSIA implementation. GAO states that CPSC's incomplete implementation of the CPSIA does not allow CPSC to exercise its full authority to prevent the entry of unsafe consumer products into the U.S. In particular, GAO points to the stay until February 10, 2010 of certain CPSIA testing and certification requirements and delay in the establishment of a substantial product hazard list.¹ According to GAO, once fully implemented, the CPSIA testing and certification requirements and substantial products hazard list should strengthen CPSC's surveillance at ports of entry.

Inadequate port presence. CPSC's presence at U.S. ports is limited to 9 compliance investigators at seven ports of entry, as well as about 100 product safety investigators located across the U.S. who work episodically. (In comparison, GAO notes that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has approximately 1,800 port staff to inspect fruit and plants at 139 ports of entry.) GAO states that this level of port presence may not be adequate to prevent unsafe products from entering the U.S.

Limited access to CBP data. While CPSC has access to CBP entry summary data, it does not have access to manifest data, which is provided to CBP 24 hours before a shipping vessel bound for the U.S. is loaded at a foreign port. CPSC believes that this data would be useful to target incoming shipments for inspection, but CBP has thought it not specific enough for CPSC purposes. The two agencies have not updated their agreement regarding such issues.

Inadequate border surveillance, targeting. GAO compared CPSC with other agencies and found that both the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have more robust border surveillance activities than CPSC because they obtain more data on incoming shipments, have more staff working at U.S. ports, use more developed programs to target risks, etc. CPSC says it seeks to assign a staff person to a health and safety targeting center to give it access to CBP's Automated Targeting System, but the creation of the center has been delayed.

Limited staffing and funds. While the number of consumer products imported into the U.S. has been increasing, CPSC has become progressively smaller in terms of staff and resources. In fiscal year 2008, CPSC had 396 full-time employees, compared with 480 full-time employees in fiscal year 1997. CPSC's fiscal year 2008 appropriation totaled about $80 million, and CPSC's fiscal year 2009 appropriation was not passed until March 2009 - about 6 months into the fiscal year 2008 - due to a congressional continuing budget resolution.

No funding for product destruction. Even though CPSC can refuse entry for products that violate U.S. laws, it does not have immediate funding available to subsequently destroy these products if the importers do not destroy or export these products at their own expense. Instead, CPSC generally asks CBP, which uses the Treasury funds to seize unsafe products. However, these funds are used by CBP for other competing enforcement purposes, and CBP is concerned that the costs of product destruction are likely to increase as CPSC fully implements CPSIA. CBP and CPSC are working on but have not yet resolved this issue.

Outdated strategic plan. CPSC has not updated its agency-wide Strategic Plan, which was issued in 2003 and was due for revision in 2006. CPSC's current Strategic Plan does not reflect its import safety work, its plans for international education and outreach activities, its plans to use new authorities granted in CPSIA to prevent the entry of unsafe products, or its plans to respond to mandates in CPSIA to improve its risk assessment and coordination with CBP. (See ITT's Online Archives or 08/12/09 news, 09081210, for BP summary of CPSC's announcement of an August public hearing to discuss its Strategic Plan, etc.)

GAO Recommends Implementing Key CPSIA Provisions, Improving Targeting, Etc.

The GAO recommends that CPSC:

expeditiously implement key provisions of the CPSIA, including establishing the substantial product hazard list and implementing the testing and certificationrequirementsthat are subject to stay of enforcement until February 2010;

update agreements with CBP to clarify each agency's roles and to resolve issues for obtaining access to advance shipment data;

work with CBP, as directed under CPSIA through the planned targeting center for health and safety issues, to develop the capacity to analyze advance shipment data;

link data CPSC gathers from surveillance activities and from international education and outreach activities to further target incoming shipments; and

expeditiously update its agency-wide Strategic Plan, including plans to educate foreign manufacturers about U.S. product safety standards and best practices, and coordinate on development.

¹The CPSIA gave CPSC new authority to determine by rule that certain characteristics of a product or class of products, by their absence or presence, shall be deemed a "substantial product hazard" if: (1) the characteristics are readily observable and addressed by voluntary standards, (2) the voluntary standards have been effective in reducing the risk of injury, and (3) there is substantial compliance with such standards. Characteristics of products often used as examples for the substantial product hazard list include the presence of drawstrings in hooded sweatshirts intended for children and the absence of a ground fault circuit interrupter in electric hairdryers.

GAO Report (GAO-09-803, dated August 2009) available at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09803.pdf