CONSUMER 

PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION

A More Active Role in 

Voluntary Standards 

Development Should 

Be Considered

Report to Congressional Committees

May 2012

GAO-12-582

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-12-582 a report to 

congressional committees

May 2012

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

A More Active Role in Voluntary Standards 

Development Should Be Considered

Why GAO Did This Study

Growing numbers of recalls in 2007 

and 2008, particularly of children’s 

products, focused increased attention 

on CPSC. Consumer products can be 

subject to mandatory or voluntary 

standards, or both. Questions have 

been raised about the level of 

compliance with voluntary standards 

and CPSC’s ability to encourage 

compliance. The Consolidated 

Appropriations Act of 2012 directed 

GAO to analyze manufacturers’ 

compliance with voluntary industry 

standards. This report evaluates (1) 

what is known about the extent to 

which manufacturers comply with 

voluntary standards for consumer 

products, (2) CPSC’s authority and 

ability to require compliance with 

voluntary standards, and (3) the 

consequences for manufacturers that 

fail to comply with voluntary standards.

To do this, GAO reviewed CPSC’s 

statutory and regulatory authorities to 

encourage compliance with voluntary 

standards; reviewed agency 

documents and literature on consumer 

product safety; analyzed data on 

CPSC corrective actions; and met with 

representatives from national 

consumer, industry, legal, and 

standard-setting organizations who 

have expertise in developing consumer 

product safety standards.

What GAO Recommends

To strengthen the adequacy of 

voluntary standards, CPSC should 

review the policy for participating in 

voluntary standards development 

activities and determine the feasibility 

of assuming a more active, engaged 

role in developing voluntary standards.

CPSC supported the recommendation.

What GAO Found

Although the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) enforces 

compliance with mandatory federal safety standards, it is also required by law to 

rely on voluntary safety standards when it determines that the standard 

adequately addresses the product hazard and is likely to have substantial 

compliance. Voluntary standards—developed by industry, consumer, and 

government participants through a consensus process—cover many of the 

thousands of types of products in CPSC’s jurisdiction. Compliance with voluntary 

standards is not routinely tracked, but it is generally considered to be high by 

industry participants. Compliance with these standards also depends on industry 

and legal factors, such as retailer requirements to demonstrate proof of 

compliance with voluntary safety standards and risk of liability in product liability 

lawsuits. 

Because voluntary standards do not have the force of law, CPSC cannot compel 

compliance with them. However, noncompliance with a voluntary standard can 

inform a determination of a substantial product hazard by the CPSC that in turn 

can lead to CPSC enforcement actions. CPSC has exercised its expanded 

authority to place a product on the substantial product hazards list. Specifically, it 

designated drawstrings from children’s upper outerwear and hair dryers without a 

ground fault circuit interrupter as hazardous products, and Customs has seized 

violative items at ports. CPSC also participates in standard development 

activities with industry and consumer representatives and monitors select 

voluntary standards. CPSC attends standard development meetings, supplies 

hazard and injury data and analysis, and provides input on draft standards. 

However, CPSC’s regulation prohibits staff from voting on the final standards or 

from participating in any meeting that excludes other groups, such as media or 

consumers. CPSC’s rationale for limiting involvement in standards development 

activity is to maintain its independence—such as not appearing to endorse a 

specific standard. Office of Management and Budget guidance gives agencies 

discretion to determine their level of participation in standard setting activities, 

including full involvement in discussions, serving in leadership positions, and 

voting on standards. A January 2012 White House memorandum states that the 

federal government may need to be actively engaged in standards development 

and implementation, including playing an active role in standard setting and 

assuming leadership positions in Standard Development Organization

committees. Committee participants GAO spoke to value CPSC’s input but 

generally agreed that CPSC should participate earlier and take a more active role

in standards development. These actions could enhance CPSC’s oversight, and 

may strengthen voluntary standards.

Manufacturers that fail to comply with voluntary standards can face 

consequences when CPSC has determined that noncompliance poses a 

significant risk of injury or death to consumers. CPSC can take corrective action 

against the manufacturer, including recalls, or take longer term action to ban the 

hazardous product. CPSC has focused much of its surveillance and compliance 

work on imported products. For fiscal years 2008 through 2011, 80 percent of 

CPSC recalls have been of imported products that may be subject to voluntary 

standards, highlighting challenges CPSC faces in helping to ensure the safety of 

consumer products.

View GAO-12-582. For more information, 

contact Alicia Puente Cackley at (202) 512-

8678 or cackleya@gao.gov.
Page i GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

Letter 1 

Background 3

Standards Development Process, Industry Certification, and Legal 

Factors Help Ensure Compliance with Voluntary Standards 7

While CPSC Cannot Legally Require Compliance with Voluntary 

Standards, Industry Monitoring and Participation in Standards 

Development Help Encourage Compliance 10

CPSC Can Impose Corrective Actions When Noncompliance with 

Voluntary Standards Presents a Substantial Product Hazard 20

CPSC Databases Do Not Identify Products with Voluntary 

Standards, but the Agency Collects Data That Could Help 

Identify Patterns of Noncompliance 25

Conclusions 27

Recommendation for Executive Action 28

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 28

Appendix I Scope and Methodology 30

Appendix II Comments from the Consumer Product Safety Commission 32

Appendix III GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 33

Tables

Table 1: Number of Voluntary Standards Monitored and Code 

Revisions Supported by CPSC Staff for fiscal years 2007 

through 2012 14

Table 2: CPSC Recalls of Regulated and Unregulated Products for 

fiscal years 2007 through 2011 22

Table 3: CPSC Standards Activities and Recall Actions for Selected 

Products for fiscal years 2007 through 2011 23

Contents 
Page ii GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

Abbreviations

ANSI American National Standards Institute

CPSA Consumer Product Safety Act

CPSC Consumer Product Safety Commission

CPSIA Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology

OMB Office of Management and Budget

SDO Standards Development Organization

UL Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

May 21, 2012

The Honorable Richard Durbin

Chairman

The Honorable Jerry Moran

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government

Committee on Appropriations

United States Senate

The Honorable Jo Ann Emerson

Chairwoman

The Honorable José E. Serrano

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government

Committee on Appropriations

House of Representatives

Growing numbers of recalls in 2007 and 2008, particularly of toys and 

other children’s products, focused increased attention on the Consumer 

Product Safety Commission (CPSC). On August 14, 2008, the Consumer 

Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) was enacted to reform CPSC 

and strengthen its authority to enforce consumer product safety 

standards.1

Voluntary standards are generally determined by standard-setting 

organizations, with input from government representatives and industry 

groups, and are also referred to as “consensus standards.” These 

voluntary standards do not have the force of law. Amendments in 1981 to 

the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA)—CPSC’s original authorizing 

legislation—directed CPSC to defer to voluntary standards rather than 

issue mandatory standards if it determines that the voluntary standard 

adequately addresses a potential product hazard and that there is likely to 

Many safety standards covering consumer products are 

known as voluntary standards, developed by industry, consumer, and 

government representatives through a consensus process. Questions 

have been raised about the level of compliance with voluntary standards 

and CPSC’s ability to encourage compliance.

 

1

Pub. L. No. 110-314, 122 Stat. 3016 (2008).

 
 

Page 2 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

be substantial compliance with it.2

In the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 Congress directed us to 

analyze compliance with voluntary industry standards for consumer 

products overseen by CPSC.

CPSC monitored or provided technical 

support for 174 new, revised, or reaffirmed voluntary standards from fiscal 

years 2007 through 2011, according to CPSC reports.

3

To address these objectives, we reviewed CPSC’s statutory and 

regulatory authority to encourage compliance with voluntary standards. 

We also reviewed CPSC’s standard operating procedures, performance 

and accountability reports, budget documents, and our relevant prior 

reports. We met with cognizant CPSC officials to discuss their authorities 

and their ability to enforce them, including all of CPSC’s current 

commissioners and the Chairman.

In this report, we evaluate (1) what is 

known about the extent to which manufacturers comply with voluntary 

standards for consumer products, including inexpensive imported 

products; (2) CPSC’s authority and ability to require compliance with 

voluntary standards; (3) the consequences for manufacturers that fail to 

comply with voluntary standards; and (4) CPSC’s efforts to identify 

patterns of noncompliance.

4

 

2

Consumer Product Safety Amendments of 1981, Pub. L. No. 97-35, title XII-A, 95 Stat. 

357, 703 (1981), amending 15 U.S.C. §§ 2056 and 2058.

Additionally, we obtained and 

analyzed data from CPSC’s compliance databases to identify (1) the 

number of reported instances of noncompliance; (2) the number of times 

these instances led to a corrective action; (3) the numbers of corrective 

actions that resulted; (4) the number of product units recalled; and (5) the 

type of standard, if any, that covered the product. We assessed the 

reliability of these data by reviewing existing information about the data 

and the system that produced them, and interviewing agency officials 

knowledgeable about the data and related management controls. Based 

on this assessment, we determined the data to be sufficiently reliable for 

the purposes of this report. We interviewed the three standards 

3

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012, Division C - Financial Services and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 2012, Title V, Pub. L. No. 112-74, § 504, 125 Stat. 786, 

908 (2011).

4

The Consumer Product Safety Act established CPSC as an independent regulatory 

commission. The act provides for the appointment by the President of five commissioners 

for staggered 7-year terms. One of these commissioners is designated the Chairman, who 

directs all the executive and administrative functions of the agency. See generally 15 

U.S.C. § 2053. As of May 2012, CPSC was led by four commissioners.
 

Page 3 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

development organizations that coordinate the development of more than 

90 percent of voluntary standards developed with CPSC staff technical 

support. We obtained testimonial and documentary information from 

national consumer, industry, and legal organizations that have expertise 

in working on voluntary standards development for consumer products. 

See appendix I for additional information on our scope and methodology.

We conducted this performance audit from January 2012 to May 2012 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.

CPSC was created in 1972 by the Consumer Product Safety Act to 

regulate certain consumer products and address those that pose an 

unreasonable risk of injury; assist consumers in using products safely; 

and promote research and investigation into product-related deaths, 

injuries, and illnesses.5

 

5

Pub. L. No. 92-573, 86 Stat. 1207 (1972), codified, as amended, at 15 U.S.C. §§ 2051-

2089. In addition to enacting the CPSC’s organic authorities, the Consumer Product 

Safety Act transferred to CPSC enforcement authority under four existing statutes: the 

Flammable Fabrics Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1191-1204, the Federal Hazardous Substances Act, 

15 U.S.C. §§ 1261-1278, the Poison Prevention Packaging Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1471-1477, 

and the Refrigerator Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1211-1214. CPSC has also subsequently 

been charged with administering other safety statutes such as the Virginia Graeme Baker 

Pool and Spa Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 8001-8008, and the Children’s Gasoline Burn 

Prevention Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2056note. These statutes confer various regulatory and 

enforcement powers on CPSC with respect to the specialized areas that they cover, 

including in some cases authority to prescribe safety standards as well as labeling and 

packaging requirements.

According to CPSC, this jurisdiction covers 

thousands of manufacturers and types of consumer products. CPSC does 

not have jurisdiction over some categories of products, including 

automobiles and other on-road vehicles, tires, boats, alcohol, tobacco, 

firearms, food, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, and pesticides. Other 

federal agencies—the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 

U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Justice, Department of Agriculture, 

Food and Drug Administration, and Environmental Protection Agency—

have jurisdiction over these products.

Background 
 

Page 4 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

CPSC has jurisdiction over thousands of types of consumer products and 

hazardous substances, many of which are subject to mandatory 

regulations or voluntary standards, or both.6 Mandatory standards are 

federal rules set by statute or regulation that define the requirements 

consumer products must meet. These standards establish performance 

and labeling criteria that products must meet before they are 

manufactured, imported, distributed, or sold in the United States. CPSC 

may set a mandatory standard when it determines that a voluntary 

standard would not eliminate or adequately reduce a risk of injury or finds 

that substantial compliance with a voluntary standard would be unlikely.7

The Commission also may impose a mandatory ban of a hazardous 

product when it determines that no feasible consumer product safety

standard adequately would protect the public from an unreasonable risk 

of injury.8 In some cases, Congress has enacted a specific statutory 

requirement for CPSC to create a mandatory standard, or convert a 

voluntary standard to a mandatory standard. For instance, CPSIA 

mandated the conversion of voluntary standards for durable infant and 

toddler products, all-terrain vehicles, and children’s toys to mandatory 

standards.9

Many consumer products under CPSC’s jurisdiction, including smoke 

alarms, candles, and portable generators, are subject to voluntary 

standards.

Mandatory standards and bans are enforceable by CPSC, 

allowing the agency to stop imported products that do not meet federal 

requirements at ports and seek civil or criminal penalties for violations of 

the mandatory standards or bans. Approximately 200 products are 

currently regulated and subject to mandatory standards, including 

automated garage door openers, fireworks, and children’s cribs.

10

 

6

CPSC officials said that certain products are covered by both mandatory and voluntary 

standards. In these cases, certain features of a product may be covered by a mandatory 

standard, while other features are subject to a voluntary standard. For example, safety 

features for bicycle brakes, frames, pedals, and tires are stipulated by a mandatory safety 

standard, while specifications for serial numbers to facilitate recalls and identification of 

stolen property fall under a voluntary standard.

More than 700 standards development organizations (SDO) 

7

15 U.S.C. § 2056.

8

15 U.S.C. § 2057.

9

15 U.S.C. §§ 2056a, 2056b, and 2089.

10According to CPSC, prior to the passage of CPSIA, the ratio of voluntary standards to 

mandatory standards was 10 to 1.
 

Page 5 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

develop most voluntary standards used in the United States, including 

safety standards. SDOs include private-sector professional and technical 

organizations, trade associations, and research and testing entities. 

According to CPSC, three SDOs—Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. (UL); 

ASTM International; and the American National Standards Institute 

(ANSI)—coordinate the development of more than 90 percent of 

voluntary standards developed with CPSC staff technical support.

Participants in the standards development process include 

representatives from government agencies, manufacturers, consumers, 

retailers, testing laboratories, technical experts, and other interested 

parties. In general, most SDOs operate by principles that govern the 

voluntary standards process, such as openness, balance, consideration 

of views and objections, consensus vote, and the right to appeal. The 

process of developing consensus standards is designed to be 

transparent, with written procedures covering each step. Participation in 

the standard development process is intended to be voluntary. Standards 

developed by an SDO are considered the property of the SDO. CPSC 

officials told us that once a standard is published and copyrighted, 

members of the public and government agencies generally must 

purchase them.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the federal 

agency that coordinates standard activities, maintains a database of 

standards that have been incorporated by reference into federal 

regulations. NIST also has online search tools that members of the public 

may use to locate other standards—including voluntary standards not 

incorporated by reference into federal regulations—but according to 

agency officials, the agency does not collect or maintain voluntary 

standards.

CPSC’s voluntary standards activities are overseen by a Voluntary 

Standards Coordinator, appointed by the Commission’s Executive 

Director. The coordinator is the senior agency official responsible for 

managing the Commission’s voluntary standards program. One of the 

coordinator’s main duties is to prepare and submit to the Commission a 

semiannual summary of staff’s voluntary standards activities. Duties also 

include providing advice and recommendations for the development of 

new voluntary standards or the revision of existing voluntary standards, in 

conjunction with CPSC management. The coordinator also proposes 

policies and guidelines concerning voluntary standards activities, reviews 

associated public comments, and prepares recommended policies for 

approval by the Commission. The coordinator works with SDOs, and 

recommends and trains CPSC staff to serve as technical experts to those 

organizations. Further, the coordinator is the liaison to industry 
 

Page 6 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

associations, other government agencies, and any other group interested 

in voluntary standards.

CPSC’s Office of Compliance and Field Operations, currently with 166 

staff, has primary responsibility for helping ensure compliance with 

product safety standards. Its activities include enforcing mandatory 

standards and reporting requirements, investigating product hazards, and 

determining corrective actions (such as recalls) for manufacturers not in 

compliance with safety standards.11 CPSC also has an Office of Import 

Surveillance and Inspection that coordinates enforcement efforts with 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection to help ensure import compliance 

with safety standards. CPSC has investigators stationed at some ports of 

entry to assist in surveillance activities. In a past report, we made 

recommendations to strengthen CPSC’s ability to target unsafe consumer 

products, especially imported products.12 We recommended that CPSC 

work to educate foreign manufacturers about U.S. product safety 

standards and best practices, including the importance of complying with 

voluntary standards. CPSC concurred with our recommendation. The 

2011-2016 Strategic Plan states that CPSC has been seeking to create 

and strengthen partnerships with domestic and international stakeholders, 

including foreign regulators and manufacturers, to improve product safety 

throughout the supply chain. Also, CPSC’s Office of Education, Global 

Outreach, and Small Business Ombudsman has separately developed 

and issued plans for addressing consumer product safety on a countryspecific and regional basis.

 

11The Office of Compliance and Field Operations conducted formal voluntary standards 

compliance programs until 2002, when it transferred the function to CPSC’s Office of 

Hazard Identification and Reduction.

12See GAO, Consumer Safety: Better Information and Planning Would Strengthen 

CPSC’s Oversight of Imported Products, GAO-09-803 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 14, 2009).
 

Page 7 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

Industry representatives and consumer groups we spoke to said that 

compliance with voluntary standards developed through the consensus 

process is generally considered to be high, although they do not track 

compliance. Some representatives and consumer groups said that it can 

reach 90 percent for some standards. However, consumer product safety 

experts suggested that standards for some products have lower 

compliance, especially commonly low-priced items, products primarily 

sold over the Internet or by nonconventional retailers, products made by a 

large number of manufacturers, or products primarily manufactured 

overseas. For instance, cigarette lighters manufactured overseas and 

sold at low prices in the United States have been found to be 

noncompliant with voluntary standards.

Consumer product safety experts we spoke to generally said that industry 

prefers voluntary to mandatory standards. They noted the voluntary 

standard development process is faster than mandatory rulemaking, and 

allows the industry a greater level of input. According to CPSC, the time 

required for mandatory rulemaking varies depending on the complexity of 

the product or of the rule requirements, the severity of the hazard, and 

other agency priorities, among other factors.13

Industry participants told us that advantages of the voluntary standards 

process include open participation and proceedings by consensus, which 

For example, a legal expert 

told us that a mandatory rulemaking for cigarette lighters took 10 years 

from the decision to take action to final rule. CPSC also has been 

considering a mandatory rule to address the risk of fire associated with 

ignitions of upholstered furniture since 1972. Generally, the flexible 

process for developing voluntary standards is considered to facilitate 

revisions to the standards. Working through SDOs, interested parties 

have been able to revise existing standards to respond in a timely manner 

to emerging hazards or risks. According to two legal experts, a 

disadvantage of mandatory standards is that revision or repeal can be 

difficult. One expert also told us that because mandatory standards set 

fixed requirements for product safety, the rules can stifle product 

development and innovation. 

 

13Interested parties generally have 60 days to comment on an Advance Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) and 75 days to comment on a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking. CPSIA contains some provisions designed to shorten the timeframe for 

rulemaking, such as making an ANPR optional, though it may be issued when the CPSC 

deems it a necessary part of rulemaking.

Standards 

Development Process, 

Industry Certification, 

and Legal Factors 

Help Ensure 

Compliance with 

Voluntary Standards

Standards Developed 

through a Consensus 

Process with Open 

Participation Generally 

Gain High Compliance
 

Page 8 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

can help ensure compliance with the resulting standards. Other industry 

representatives said that they also invest considerable time and 

resources in writing standards, which raises the likelihood of compliance.

Factors that affect compliance for some manufacturers include discerning 

and accessing applicable standards. Some consumer product safety 

experts told us that some small businesses and foreign manufacturers 

are not aware of applicable standards for their products. CPSC has 

responded by extending greater outreach to these businesses through 

the agency’s Office of Education, Global Outreach, and Small Business 

Ombudsman. The office coordinates with, and provides education and 

outreach activities to, various domestic and international stakeholders, 

including manufacturers, retailers, resellers, small businesses, and 

foreign governments. Among its responsibilities, the office works with 

foreign governments and regulatory bodies to help them increase their 

capacity to develop voluntary and mandatory product safety standards 

and plans to develop information and guidance tailored specifically to 

small batch manufacturers. Staff from this office plan to update the CPSC 

web page to assist small businesses in learning about their obligations 

under CPSIA, by informing them about voluntary standards, and 

encouraging them to comply. CPSC also plans to conduct two extended 

training exchanges with foreign partners, including developing country 

officials, to increase foreign regulatory agencies’ understanding of CPSC 

procedures and policies and help ensure that CPSC safety standards are 

met for U.S.-bound exports.

Although not legally mandated for voluntary standards, some retailers 

require a certification mark or other proof of compliance from 

manufacturers before they will agree to sell their product in stores.14

 

14A certification mark is used on the goods and services to provide a visible guarantee 

that those goods and services meet standards set by the owner of the certification mark. 

UL, owner of one of the most commonly-seen certification marks, certifies that consumer 

products comply with safety standards.

For 

instance, according to a legal expert, specialty retailers who sell gas 

fireplaces require proof of adherence to a new standard, which is being 

revised to address a safety hazard, for glass panels for the front of gas 

fireplaces. For many products, consumers and retailers expect that they 

meet a minimum safety standard, such as a voluntary standard. Some 

retailers conduct their own product safety programs, often certifying 

Some Retailers and 

Industry Associations 

Require Proof of 

Compliance with Voluntary 

Safety Standards to Sell 

Consumer Products
 

Page 9 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

compliance with safety standards through testing at third-party labs, to 

better ensure the safety of products sold in their stores.

In addition, some industry associations have programs to certify 

compliance with voluntary standards applicable to their members’ 

products.15 Entities found not to be in compliance with applicable 

standards could lose the right to bear the association’s certification mark. 

Industry associations that have certification programs include the furniture 

industry and children’s products manufacturers. One furniture association 

provides hang tags to members who have paid to certify their 

conformance with the industry-developed standards, primarily addressing 

fire hazards. A group representing children’s products manufacturers has 

implemented a lab testing and inspection process to certify members’ 

compliance with applicable standards. Manufacturers contract with the 

industry group to receive certification that their products, such as cribs, 

strollers, and baby walkers, comply with standards.

Although industry representatives and legal experts we spoke to said that 

manufacturers largely prefer voluntary over mandatory standards, they 

also told us that certain industries have sought mandatory standards. Two 

reasons were cited for an industry’s preference for mandatory standards: 

first, to level competition across an industry sector, especially where 

some manufacturers were not complying with the voluntary standard to 

which the rest of the industry agreed; and second, to preempt divergent 

state laws.16

 

15Provisions of CPSIA impose certification requirements for imported products that are 

subject to mandatory safety rules under statutes enforced by CPSC as well as third-party 

lab testing for products subject to children’s product safety rules. 15 U.S.C. § 2063.

The Lighter Association, a group representing cigarette 

lighter manufacturers, petitioned CPSC in 2001 to adopt the prevailing 

voluntary standard for lighters as a mandatory standard. The association 

cited widespread noncompliance with the voluntary standard, especially 

for lighters imported from China. Although CPSC has not as yet 

promulgated a general rule for mechanical requirements for cigarette 

lighter safety, it had adopted a regulation requiring child-resistant 

mechanisms for disposable lighters in 1994. A legal expert who has 

worked with the arts and creative materials industry told us that the 

industry sought to convert the industry’s voluntary standard, developed 

16Mandatory safety standards under the CPSA generally preempt state and local 

standards dealing with the same product risks unless they are identical to the federal 

requirements. See 15 U.S.C. § 2075.

Certain Industries Prefer 

Mandatory Standards to 

Ensure a Level Playing 

Field and Preempt State 

Laws 
 

Page 10 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

with input from consumers and product users, to a mandatory standard to 

preempt differing laws in at least seven individual states.

Potential liability in product liability lawsuits for noncompliance with 

voluntary standards is another factor that affects compliance. Consumer 

product safety experts also told us that the risk of incurring reputational 

and financial costs associated with product liability lawsuits provides an 

incentive for manufacturers to comply with voluntary standards. Courts 

generally consider noncompliance with a voluntary standard as relevant 

evidence to establish a product defect or to prove a case of negligence. 

By the same token, if litigants can show compliance with applicable 

voluntary standards, the compliance may provide evidence of lack of a 

product defect or negligence. However, evidence of compliance usually is 

not sufficient on its own to negate liability.17

CPSC cannot compel compliance with voluntary standards. However, 

according to CPSC officials, the agency has requested that U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection seize at the ports defective products that are 

subject to voluntary standards and that constitute a substantial product 

hazard. CPSC also participates in voluntary standard development 

activities, although their effectiveness is limited by constrained resources 

and a restrictive meetings policy. While consumer product safety experts 

value CPSC’s input, they generally agree that earlier and more active 

participation could increase CPSC’s efficiency and effectiveness in 

developing standards.

 

17Compliance or noncompliance with mandatory governmental standards likewise is 

relevant in product liability litigation and generally carries even greater weight than a 

voluntary standard.

Risk of Potential Liability 

in Product Liability 

Lawsuits Helps Ensure 

Industry Compliance with 

Voluntary Safety Standards

While CPSC Cannot 

Legally Require 

Compliance with 

Voluntary Standards, 

Industry Monitoring 

and Participation in 

Standards 

Development Help 

Encourage 

Compliance 
 

Page 11 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

Since voluntary standards do not have the force of law, the Commission 

cannot compel compliance with them. Noncompliance with a voluntary 

standard, however, can inform a determination of a substantial product 

hazard by the CPSC. The CPSA defines a substantial product hazard as 

a failure to comply with an applicable consumer product safety rule, which 

creates a substantial risk of injury to the public; or a product defect, which 

(because of the pattern of defect, the number of defective products 

distributed in commerce, the severity of the risk, or otherwise) creates a 

substantial risk of injury to the public.18

We found that CPSC does not routinely track broad product compliance 

with voluntary standards. Although they have internal guidance for 

monitoring compliance with voluntary standards, CPSC officials said that 

the agency has not conducted a formal program to test for product 

conformance with voluntary standards since 2002. The agency cited 

limited resources and competing priorities, including Congressional 

mandates and monitoring mandatory standards, as reasons for not doing 

so. According to CPSC officials, following the enactment of CPSIA in 

2008, the agency reallocated resources from voluntary standards 

activities towards meeting mandatory rulemaking deadlines required in 

the act.

If the CPSC finds that a product 

presents a substantial product hazard, it can lead to an enforcement 

action, such as a public notice or recall. Consequences for 

noncompliance with voluntary standards that amount to a substantial 

product hazard are discussed in the next section of this report.

With the enactment of CPSIA in 2008, CPSC was granted expanded legal 

authority relative to certain voluntary standards under section 15(j) of the 

Consumer Product Safety Act to create a substantial product hazard list.19

 

1815 U.S.C. § 2064(a). Product safety rules for this purpose include mandatory safety 

standards and product bans under CPSA as well as similar standards and bans under 

other laws enforced by CPSC.

It allows the Commission to issue a rule for any consumer product or 

class of products identifying certain characteristics whose presence or 

absence must be deemed a substantial product hazard. CPSC must 

determine that the characteristics are readily observable and that the 

hazard has been addressed by voluntary standards. CPSC must also 

determine that voluntary standards have been effective in reducing the 

1915 U.S.C. § 2064(j), added by section 223(a) of the Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008, Public Law 110-314, 122 Stat. 3068. 

Though Voluntary 

Standards Do Not Have the 

Force of Law, CPSC Is 

Using Expanded Legal 

Authority to Seize 

Defective Products
 

Page 12 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

risk of injury from the products and there is substantial compliance with 

the voluntary standards. When CPSC publishes a rule making such 

determinations, the products involved are subject to all of the 

enforcement consequences that apply to a substantial product hazard.20

We spoke with legal experts to discuss their views on the CPSC’s 

expanded authority to declare substantial product hazards. Two legal 

experts told us that exercising the authority essentially converts a 

voluntary standard to a mandatory one without undergoing the 

established rulemaking procedures. According to one expert, the 

expanded authority gives the CPSC the ability to use the voluntary 

standards that were intended to address design and performance issues 

to create a mechanism for seizure of defective products at the ports, 

without putting the burden of proving a substantial product hazard on the 

CPSC. Another product safety expert also said that the expanded 

authority will not substantially enhance CPSC’s enforcement capability 

because inspectors must have the ability to readily observe the hazard at 

the port of entry. Some hazards are not readily observable and require 

testing for compliance, such as lead content. CPSC told us that while the 

section 15(j) authority allows them to respond more quickly to substantial 

product hazards, not enough time has passed to assess the effect this 

authority will have on helping ensure compliance with voluntary 

standards.

Among other actions, the product must be refused admission into the 

United States. CPSC works cooperatively with Customs and Border 

Protection staff at ports of entry to detect and seize defective products. 

Agency officials stated that, to date, CPSC has twice exercised authority 

under section 15(j) to identify products containing substantial product 

hazards: children’s upper outerwear containing drawstrings, because of 

risk of strangulation; and hand-supported hair dryers without integral 

immersion protection, due to risk of electric shock.

 

20Section 15(j) provides that rules issued under that authority are subject to judicial review 

in the same manner as mandatory safety rules. Such rules may be affirmed only if CPSC’s 

determinations are supported by substantial evidence. 15 U.S.C. § 2060(c).
 

Page 13 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

CPSC staff participate in the voluntary standard development process by 

providing expert advice, technical assistance, and information based on 

data analyses of the numbers of and causes of deaths, injuries, or 

incidents associated with the product. According to CPSC, it supplies the 

standard-setting bodies with epidemiological and health science data, 

including extrapolated injury and death data from hospitals; death 

certificates associated with products causing the death where available; 

anecdotal data; and incident reports from SaferProducts.gov.21

CPSC officials told us that in developing voluntary standards, CPSC 

interacts primarily with ASTM International for children, juvenile, toddler, 

and infant products; ANSI for products such as bicycles and garage door 

operators; and UL for electrical products. CPSC staff told us they have a 

representative who serves as a nonvoting member on the board at ANSI 

and on ANSI’s accrediting council.

CPSC 

officials said that support of voluntary standards development can be 

moderate or intensive. They told us that a moderate level of support 

would include reading the minutes of subcommittee meetings and 

monitoring the proceedings. More intensive support may consist of 

conducting and presenting CPSC research, performing lab tests, and 

writing draft language for the standard.

22

According to CPSC officials, the agency has recommended 31 products 

for SDO standards review, development, or revision for fiscal years 2007 

through 2011. In fiscal year 2011, CPSC staff report that they provided 

technical support and contributed to the completion of work on 37 new, 

revised, or reaffirmed voluntary standards, while they provided technical 

According to ANSI representatives, 

CPSC staff participate in discussions related to accrediting and 

maintaining procedures for international standards. Representatives from 

UL told us that CPSC staff participate in UL’s Consumer Advisory 

Council, which convenes at least once a year to discuss products and 

standards.

 

21SaferProducts.gov is a database maintained by CPSC. Through a web portal, 

consumers and others meeting statutory requirements may submit reports of harm or the 

risk of harm from products and can search for information on products reported to be 

unsafe that they own or may be considering for purchase. See 15 U.S.C. § 2055a.

22ANSI’s role in standards development differs from that of SDOs. ANSI serves as 

administrator and coordinator of the U.S. private sector, voluntary standardization system. 

ANSI also accredits U.S. standards developers using criteria based on international 

requirements. SDOs accredited by ANSI include ASTM International, UL, and the National 

Fire Protection Association.

CPSC Participates in 

Standards Development 

Activities, but Its 

Effectiveness is Limited by 

Resource Constraints and 

a Restrictive Meetings 

Policy
 

Page 14 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

support or monitored the development of 60 voluntary safety standards. 

These standards addressed hazards associated with cradles and 

bassinets, children’s play yards, portable generators, and garage door 

openers, among other products. According to CPSC’s Operating Plan, the 

agency plans to monitor 68 voluntary standards in fiscal year 2012, 

including standards addressing tip-over hazards of kitchen ranges, 

cadmium levels in children’s jewelry, strangulation risk posed by window 

blind cords, and sulfur emissions in drywall (see table 1).

Table 1: Voluntary Standards and Code Revisions Supported by CPSC Staff for 

Fiscal Years 2007 through 2012

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

2012 

(planned)

Number of standards/code 

revisions supported

66 74 39 61 60 68

Number of CPSC voluntary 

standard project managers

26 a 25 22 30 29 24-27

Source: CPSC.

a

CPSC officials told us that employees may be involved with more than one voluntary standard and 

their level of involvement can vary significantly. The numbers reflect those employees who are project 

managers/contacts. They may be supported by other CPSC technical staff in specific areas such as 

engineering sciences, human factors, health sciences, and laboratory sciences.

CPSC officials told us that voluntary standards monitoring activity 

decreased substantially after the enactment of CPSIA because of 

reallocation of resources to meet the act’s requirements. The number of 

standards selected for monitoring was at a 5-year low in fiscal year 2009; 

however, the number of voluntary standards selected for monitoring has 

increased in the past 3 fiscal years and is expected to continue at current 

levels in the near future. CPSC officials said that staff recommendations 

based on criteria, such as death and injury data, available resources, and 

exposure of vulnerable populations to hazards, guide the selection of 

standards to monitor. They told us that staff consider where participation 

in voluntary standard setting could help reduce unreasonable risk of injury 

posed by a product. Management considers and approves or rejects the 

staff recommendations based on Commission priorities and available 

resources. Staff approved recommendations are then sent to the 

Commission for final approval. According to CPSC’s Operating Plan and 

Performance Budget, the agency plans one recommendation to voluntary 

standards or revisions to code organizations for fiscal year 2012. The 

Operating Plan also includes plans for two new data analysis or technical 

review activities on carbon monoxide alarms and enhanced smoke 

alarms. Additionally, 10 activities related to nanotechnology in consumer 
 

Page 15 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

products are planned for fiscal year 2012.23 These activities will identify 

the potential release of nanoparticles from selected consumer products 

and determine the potential health effects from such exposure, which may 

lead to CPSC participation in voluntary standards development, according 

to CPSC officials.24

CPSC officials said that the level of support provided by CPSC to 

standards development and monitoring is dependent on available 

resources. One CPSC staff member is assigned to each standard as a 

project manager responsible for monitoring committee activity and draft 

revisions. According to CPSC officials, the 68 standards to be monitored 

in fiscal year 2012 represent the limit the agency can handle given current 

resource and staff levels. For example, about 25 staff are responsible for 

monitoring the activities related to these standards. Sixty-eight standards 

is a small fraction of standards developed for consumer products. For 

instance, ASTM International has developed more than 12,000 standards 

while UL maintained more than 1,400 as of 2011. These standards cover 

many types of products, not exclusively consumer products.

CPSC’s relationship with SDOs is outlined in CPSC regulations.25

• the likelihood the voluntary standard will eliminate or adequately 

reduce the risk of injury addressed,

CPSC 

policy sets criteria for deciding on CPSC’s involvement in voluntary 

standards activities. The criteria include:

• the likelihood that there will be substantial and timely compliance with 

the voluntary standard,

• the likelihood that the voluntary standard will be developed within a 

reasonable period of time,

 

23Nanotechnology relies on the ability to design, manipulate, and manufacture materials at 

the nanoscale. Nanoscale refers to materials on the order of one billionth of a meter.

24In the area of human health, scientists believe some characteristics of nanoscale 

particles could produce both positive and negative consequences. For example, 

nanoscale silver is highly effective as an antibacterial agent. However, some scientists 

believe that carbon nanotubes exhibit properties similar to asbestos fibers and may 

become lodged in organs harming humans and animals.

2516 C.F.R Part 1031.
 

Page 16 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

• openness to all interested parties,

• establishment of procedures to provide for meaningful participation in

the development of standards by representatives of a variety of 

interested parties, and

• due process procedures.

CPSC’s regulation guides the extent and form of CPSC staff involvement 

in voluntary standards organizations. Staff may attend standards 

development meetings, take an active part in the discussions, and 

provide data and explanatory material, but CPSC’s regulation prohibits 

staff from voting on the standards or from holding leadership positions in 

standards development committees. Except in extraordinary 

circumstances and with the approval of the Executive Director, they 

cannot become involved in standards development meetings that are not 

open to the public (including members of the media) for attendance and 

observation.26

CPSC has authority to revise its regulations pertaining to voluntary 

standards activities. The first regulation concerning involvement in 

standards development was issued in 1978, and revised in 1989 and 

again in 2006. According to CPSC, its regulation is similar to the Office of 

Management and Budget’s (OMB) Circular No. A-119 (Revised), which 

provides guidance for agencies participating in voluntary consensus 

standards bodies.

This may include technical subcommittees largely 

comprised of industry representatives. The regulation also states that 

active involvement in standards development activity must not be done in 

a manner that might present an appearance of preferential treatment for 

one organization or group or put CPSC’s impartiality at risk.

27

 

26UL and ASTM International told us that they maintain an ANSI-accredited voluntary 

standards development process, which includes openness to any interested party.

However, in our review of CPSC’s regulation, we 

found the agency interpreted its level of participation more strictly than 

OMB guidance for such activities as voting on standards and taking 

leadership positions. CPSC’s rationale for limiting involvement in 

standards development activity, as described in its regulation, is to 

maintain its independence—such as not appearing to endorse a specific 

27Office of Management and Budget, Federal Participation in the Development and Use of 

Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities, Circular A-119 

(revised). (Washington, DC: February 10, 1998.) 
 

Page 17 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

standard. OMB guidance states that agency representatives should 

participate actively and on an equal basis with other members, including 

full involvement in discussions, technical debates, registering of opinions, 

and if selected, serving in leadership positions. According to OMB 

guidance, agency representatives may vote at each stage of the 

standards development process unless prohibited by law or their 

agencies. A January White House memorandum further outlines 

principles for federal government engagement in standards activities, 

especially where statute, regulation, or administration policy identifies a 

national priority. Specifically, it states that the federal government may 

need to be actively engaged or play a convening role to accelerate 

standards development in standard setting and implementation, including 

supporting leadership positions for federal agency staff in SDO 

committees.

CPSC, consumer groups, and industry officials with whom we spoke 

generally viewed CPSC’s participation in voluntary standards 

development activities favorably. Consumer groups and other consumer 

product safety experts told us that CPSIA has strengthened CPSC’s 

authority, effectiveness, and level of influence at SDOs. They also told us 

that the industry now knows that if they do not develop an adequate 

voluntary standard, CPSC will make a mandatory standard for those 

products specified by CPSIA. According to consumer representatives who 

have participated in the process, the dynamic has changed: prior to 

CPSIA, CPSC’s input was ignored or voted down. With their new 

authority, CPSC is more active and their input is incorporated a great deal 

more, resulting in stronger and more protective outcomes, especially for 

durable goods for infants. Consumer group representatives also told us 

that CPSC’s involvement in standards development has been effective for 

helping ensure consumer participation, especially since the passage of 

CPSIA. In one instance, a consumer group had concerns about the 

standards development process for window blind cords because of what it 

thought was a lack of transparency, limited access to information, and 

lack of consideration of its views, after they were excluded from 

participating in a technical subcommittee. CPSC appealed directly to 

industry groups to open the process, and consumer groups eventually 

were allowed to participate in the window blinds standard development.

CPSC officials told us that staff’s effectiveness in standards development 

partially depends on their own persuasiveness and the direction given 

from top management. Management recommends and approves staff to

participate in standards development activity based on their ability to 

listen, negotiation skills, analytical proficiency, and level of technical and 

Consumer Product Safety 

Experts Value CPSC’s 

Input, but Also Called For 

Earlier and More Active 

CPSC Participation
 

Page 18 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

scientific expertise. Staff also receive training from the Voluntary 

Standards Coordinator to prepare for SDO meetings. According to CPSC 

officials, staff selected to participate in standards development activities 

may seek further advice and training from the Voluntary Standards 

Coordinator and other colleagues as needed.

While consumer product safety experts we spoke to said that CPSC has 

good working relationships with the SDOs, some added that the agency 

could take a more active role in standards development activities. 

Voluntary standard committee participants told us that they value CPSC’s 

contributions during standards development, one group especially valued 

its incident data and analysis, and another appreciated the agency’s 

ability to help ensure an inclusive process. One industry official told us 

that they work collaboratively with CPSC; for example, they receive data 

from the CPSC in the process of developing voluntary standards for 

particular products. In one case, CPSC had identified, through its incident 

data, a laceration hazard resulting from a certain design of high chair with 

two hooks on the back. CPSC communicated this information to industry 

representatives, and it was incorporated into the voluntary standard 

process for the product. Another industry stakeholder told us that CPSC 

is viewed as a valuable partner in stronger standard development. By 

simply being present at voluntary standards development meetings, 

CPSC shows the industry that it is monitoring their activities.

Other consumer product safety experts said that CPSC’s participation in 

committees could be more active and its position on the draft standards 

better articulated. Because of limitations stemming from CPSC’s 

regulation governing staff participation in standards development activity, 

the resulting standard may not fully reflect the CPSC staff input and the 

standard development process can be delayed. According to some 

consumer product safety experts, CPSC staff are restrained and act 

largely as observers at standard development committee meetings. 

Others said that, at times, CPSC staff does not challenge the adequacy of 

the standards. For example, although CPSC converted the voluntary 

standard for all-terrain vehicles to a mandatory standard in 2009, as 

required by CPSIA, in the view of some experts, all-terrain vehicles 

remain covered by a weak standard. In public statements regarding the 

all-terrain vehicle standard, one CPSC commissioner said that the recent 

update to the standard, while not diminishing the safety of the product, 

remains a low threshold for federal safety standards. Our analysis of 

CPSC public recall notices showed that there have been 36 recalls of all-
 

Page 19 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

terrain vehicles involving 15 companies for fiscal years 2007 through 

2011.28

Some industry representatives emphasized that they wanted CPSC’s 

more active and earlier participation in standards development. They said 

that they would benefit from more information about CPSC’s views on 

specific provisions of a standard, such as certain performance 

requirements, level of risk tolerance, or aspects of a product CPSC 

wanted changed. Some industry representatives said that if the agency’s 

position on a standard were more apparent from the outset, the process 

would be faster and more efficient, which could result in stronger 

standards. One industry representative also noted that more active and 

earlier participation would allow CPSC to consider unforeseen business 

consequences of their proposed revisions to standards earlier in the 

process. For instance, according to this industry representative a revised 

standard for child bed rails was delayed by CPSC proposing costly 

revisions after the standard had already been approved by SDO 

participants.

Manufacturers have recalled all-terrain vehicles for reasons such 

as a risk of a crash caused by pieces of the main suspension breaking off

and a risk of loss of vehicle control due to faulty speed controls. Recall 

notices do not indicate if the hazards posed by the product are covered 

by voluntary or mandatory standards. In discussions with consumer 

product safety experts, they said that if CPSC challenged the adequacy of 

the standards more frequently this would send a signal to industry that the 

agency was committed to obtaining a high level of safety in voluntary 

standards.

29

 

28CPSIA has mandated the conversion of standards for all-terrain vehicles from voluntary 

to mandatory. 15 U.S.C. § 2089.

29The standard was approved by SDO participants in October 2010. CPSC proposed 

changes in January 2011 to address a hazard. In April 2011, a draft standard identical to 

CPSC recommendations received negative votes from other participants and discussions 

continued to address the disagreement. The standard that was finalized in February 2012 

reflected all points of view.
 

Page 20 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

Manufacturers can face consequences ranging from civil monetary 

penalties to the reputational and financial losses associated with 

corrective action if their products fail to comply with voluntary standards 

and if they present a substantial product hazard. Corrective actions 

include recalls, which encompass refunds, replacements, or repairs. 

CPSC may also sue to prevent distribution or sale of a product pending 

completion of a recall proceeding. Although voluntary standards do not 

have the force of law, manufacturers are legally required to report 

substantial product hazards to CPSC.30 Every manufacturer of a 

consumer product must inform the Commission if they obtain information 

that reasonably supports the conclusion that the product contains a defect 

that could create a substantial product hazard.31 Such a report may 

include information the manufacturer obtained about a product outside 

the United States if it is relevant to products sold or distributed in the 

United States.32

Although failure to meet a voluntary standard alone is not sufficient for 

CPSC to take action against a company—because voluntary standards 

are not enforceable by law—CPSC’s analysis of the evidence of 

noncompliance and determination that the product could pose a 

substantial product hazard can lead to corrective action. According to 

CPSC’s interpretive regulations, compliance or noncompliance with 

applicable voluntary standards may be a factor in determining whether a 

substantial product hazard exists.

Manufacturers that knowingly fail to report potential 

substantial product hazards could be subject to civil or criminal penalties. 

In 2011, CPSC negotiated out-of-court settlements in which five

companies agreed to pay $3.26 million in civil penalties related to their 

failure to report substantial product hazards to the agency.

33

 

30Manufacturers must also notify the Commission immediately if they obtain information 

which reasonably supports the conclusion that a product distributed in commerce (1) fails 

to comply with a voluntary standard upon which the Commission has relied under the 

CPSA, (2) fails to meet a consumer product safety standard or banning regulation under 

the CPSA or another law enforced by the Commission, or (3) creates an unreasonable 

risk of serious injury or death. 15 U.S.C. § 2064(b).

To determine if corrective action is 

needed, CPSC staff review incident reports on a daily basis and forward 

them to appropriate integrated teams for extensive analysis. CPSC 

integrated teams comprise subject matter experts such as engineers, 

3115 U.S.C. § 2064(b). 

3216 C.F.R. § 1115.12(f).

3316 C.F.R. § 1115.6.

CPSC Can Impose 

Corrective Actions 

When Noncompliance 

with Voluntary 

Standards Presents a 

Substantial Product 

Hazard 
 

Page 21 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

human factors experts, health scientists, statisticians from the Office of 

Hazard Identification and Reduction, and compliance officers from the 

Office of Compliance. The teams then assess the reports for hazard type, 

whether the incident affected vulnerable populations, and the severity of 

injury. CPSC also collects data on injuries and deaths for products under 

its jurisdiction, and staff conduct investigations on specific injury cases to 

gain better knowledge of how the product was involved. Based on 

analysis of these data, the integrated teams decide if further action would 

be warranted, such as additional monitoring of the situation, an in-depth 

investigation, or a product safety assessment. In our discussions with 

CPSC officials, they told us that the agency decides on further actions 

based on other agency priorities, resources, and the level of risk that a 

product poses. Once CPSC has identified a hazardous product, the 

agency will take action to remove the product from the market. If a recall 

is necessary, CPSC staff negotiates with the responsible company to 

seek a voluntary recall, if appropriate.

Manufacturers that report product defects propose a remedy that must be 

deemed acceptable to CPSC staff. This often involves the product’s 

recall, which consists of the purchase price refund, repair, or replacement 

of the product. CPSC considers whether the plan adequately addresses 

the risk of injury presented by the product. For example, if the 

manufacturer’s proposed solution was to repair its product, CPSC 

engineers would test the repair to determine if it addressed the hazard 

adequately. Similarly, if the proposed solution was a refund, CPSC 

officials would evaluate the refund process to determine if it would cause 

undue burden to the consumer. CPSC takes steps to ensure that recalled 

products are not reintroduced in the market through second-hand stores 

by monitoring the internet and through market surveillance programs. 

Table 2 contains information about CPSC’s recall activities for fiscal years 

2007 through 2011 for products covered by mandatory standards and 

those that are unregulated.
 

Page 22 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

Table 2: CPSC Recalls of Regulated and Unregulated Products for Fiscal Years 

2007 through 2011

Fiscal year

Number of recalls 

of regulated products 

Number of recalls of 

unregulated products 

2011 30 383

2010 60 416

2009 46 452

2008 169 449

2007 92 385

Total 397 a 2,085

Source: CPSC.

a

These recalls were tabulated from CPSC data for regulated and unregulated products. Unregulated 

products may include those covered by voluntary standards. According to CPSC officials, recalls of 

unregulated products are not necessarily associated with violations of voluntary standards; on some 

occasions the recall could be associated with issues in manufacturing or assembly of the product.

In our review of CPSC documents, the agency focused much of its 

surveillance and compliance work on imported products. According to 

CPSC, approximately 80 percent of recalls from 2008 through 2011 have 

been of imported products. The agency’s Office of Import Surveillance 

and Inspection has primary responsibility for product surveillance at ports 

of entry in cooperation with other appropriate federal agencies. U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection notifies CPSC and other regulatory 

agencies with import safety responsibilities of the arrival of imported 

products and provides information about those products. CPSC identifies 

potentially unsafe products and requests that U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection set them aside for CPSC examination. Once samples are 

delivered to or taken by CPSC for examination, CPSC may detain the 

shipment pending further examination and testing, conditionally release 

the shipment to the importer’s premises pending examination and testing, 

or release the shipment to the importer outright. Compliance investigators 

examine the sample to determine whether it (1) complies with the relevant 

mandatory standard or standards; (2) is accompanied by a certification of 

compliance with relevant product safety standard that is supported by 

testing, in some cases by a third party, (3) is or has been determined to 

be an imminently hazardous product; (4) has a product defect that 

presents a substantial product hazard; or (5) is produced by a 

manufacturer who failed to comply with CPSC inspection and 
 

Page 23 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

recordkeeping requirements.34

Table 3 illustrates standards activities and recall actions for selected 

products for fiscal years 2007 through 2011. Some products are covered 

by both mandatory and voluntary standards, which may address different 

aspects of the product features. For example, all-terrain vehicles, cribs, 

infant bath seats, infant walkers, and cigarette lighters are subject to both 

mandatory and voluntary standards.

According to a CPSC notice, from October 

1, 2011, to December 1, 2011, officials identified about 240 noncompliant 

products at ports of entry, including defective hair dryers, lamps, and

holiday lights.

Table 3: CPSC Standards Activities and Recall Actions for Selected Products for Fiscal Years 2007 through 2011

Product CPSC standards activities as of 2011a Corrective actions, 2007-2011

All-terrain vehicles Mandatory standard, amended November 2008; 

effective date: April 2009.

Voluntary standard last revised December 2010.

CPSC is completing rulemaking, per P.L. 112-28, and 

will monitor product through planned field enforcement 

programs.

36 recalls involving

15 companies 

Candles Six ASTM International voluntary standards relating to 

candles and candle products. Last revision for three

standards, 2009; last revision for two standards, 2007; 

last revision for one standard, 2005. 

CPSC continues to work with ASTM International in 

developing standards for candle products.

45 recalls involving 35 companies

Cribs Mandatory standards, December 2010 (last update); 

effective date June 28, 2011.

Voluntary standards last revised 2011. 

CPSC issued final rules regarding crib standards and 

will continue to monitor this product area.

56 recalls involving 37 companies

Extension cords (power cords) Voluntary standard related to cord sets and flexible 

cords and cables, October 2008.

5 recalls involving 5 companies 

 

34An imminently hazardous consumer product presents imminent and unreasonable risk 

of death, serious illness, or severe personal injury. 15 U.S.C § 2061(a). CPSC states that 

it has not used its authority to refuse admission of an imminently hazardous consumer 

product because it requires filing an action in U.S. District Court, which is a resourceintensive process. Instead, CPSC states that it works cooperatively with the manufacturer 

to remove the product from the market, which can include seizure and detention of 

products at the port by Customs and Border Protection, if necessary. 
 

Page 24 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

Product CPSC standards activities as of 2011a Corrective actions, 2007-2011

Infant bath seats Mandatory standard, 2010 (last update).

Voluntary standard last revised 2011. 

CPSC issued final rule in 2010 and will continue to 

monitor this product through planned field enforcement 

programs.

No corrective actions

Infant walkers 

b

Mandatory standard, 2010.

Voluntary standard, last revised June 2011.

CPSC issued final rule in 2010 and will continue to 

monitor this product through planned field enforcement 

programs.

3 recalls involving 3 companies

Cigarette lighters Mandatory standard for child resistance, 1994. 

Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for 

mechanical malfunction, 2008 (no decision on 

proceeding).

Voluntary standard for mechanical malfunction, most 

recent edition of voluntary standard is 2010. 

Utility lighters voluntary standard 2010. 

3 recalls involving 3 companies

Portable generators Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 2006. 

Voluntary standard, last revised 2011. 

CPSC is conducting technical work related to carbon 

monoxide emissions from portable generators. 

5 recalls involving 5 companiesc

Space/electric heaters Voluntary standard, July 2007.

CPSC staff is participating in voluntary standard 

activities for portable and fixed-position electric heaters 

under UL Standards Technical Panel 1042 to address 

fires associated with electric heaters.

13 recalls involving 11 companies

Window blinds Voluntary standard, March 2009.

CPSC is participating in voluntary standard activities to 

address strangulation hazards associated with cords on 

window covering products manufactured under the 

existing standards.

41 recalls involving 38 companies

Source: GAO analysis of data from SaferProducts.gov.

Note: Some of these recalls included items sold at discount stores, retail liquidators, or dollar stores, 

but often this information may not be known unless that specific store initiates the recall.

a

CPSC continues to participate in standards activities for these products. Through April 2012, there 

have been updates to standards for some of these products.

b

CPSC issued a Safety Alert involving one company.

c

There are no recalls involving generators and a carbon monoxide hazard, which is the focus of 

current CPSC standards work.
 

Page 25 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

CPSC has no tracking mechanism specific to voluntary standards in its 

compliance database, but the agency can identify patterns of 

noncompliance and address safety hazards. CPSC tracks reports of 

noncompliance with mandatory standards and identifies potential product 

hazards. CPSC has two internal databases for tracking noncompliance 

one for regulated products (products subject to mandatory standards) and 

the other for products that could pose a substantial product hazard (either 

unregulated products or products subject to voluntary standards).35 In 

discussions with CPSC officials, they told us that there is no field in the 

databases to indicate whether a product is covered by one of the 

thousands of existing voluntary standards. However, they noted that they 

have internal policies for tracking compliance with voluntary standards. 

According to agency officials, CPSC’s policy states that when staff has 

determined that noncompliance with voluntary standards amounting to a 

substantial product hazard has occurred, staff should create a file with a 

case number to track this issue. The case number is an internal tracking 

number that does not correspond to the unique identifier assigned by 

SDOs and cannot be linked to a voluntary standard. 36

CPSC’s compliance databases for both the regulated products and 

substantial hazard (section 15) products are case management systems. 

According to CPSC officials, more than 50,000 distinct firm names are in 

the databases. CPSC can classify incidents by manufacturer, retailer, 

distributer, and country of origin. In some cases a foreign company may 

have a U.S. agent or representative, making it difficult for CPSC’s 

database to discern whether the reporting company is foreign or 

domestic. In addition, CPSC assigns more than 800 different product and 

product category codes to help track case files. CPSC’s case files track 

information about the firm, the product, the type of noncompliance, and 

other relevant information. The agency also tracks correspondence with 

However, agency 

officials said that if CPSC finds that the product poses a substantial 

product hazard and staff determine that the voluntary standard is 

inadequate or that no standard exists, they refer the case to the voluntary 

standards coordinator to address through standard setting activities.

 

35Section 15(a)(2) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. § 2064(a)(2) provides that a product not 

covered by a mandatory rule presents a substantial product hazard if it has a defect 

which, because of various factors, creates a substantial risk of injury to the public.

36CPSIA directed CPSC to upgrade and improve its information technology systems. Pub. 

L. No. 110-314, § 212(b), 122 Stat. 3052. In its March 2012 Operating Plan and 

Performance Budget, CPSC indicated that it has been creating a single data source to 

help provide linkages across CPSC data systems.

CPSC Databases Do 

Not Identify Products 

with Voluntary 

Standards, but the 

Agency Collects Data 

That Could Help 

Identify Patterns of 

Noncompliance 
 

Page 26 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

the manufacturer, distributor, retailers, and public about the case, as well 

as the corrective action implemented to address the noncompliance.

Agency officials said that the databases have the capacity to track 26 

hazards in 8 hazard categories, including fire hazards for fabrics, 

materials, and electric appliances; mechanical hazards in children’s, 

household, and sports and recreation products (involving choking, 

strangulation, and other injury hazards); electrocution; and chemical 

hazards. Staff use data from the compliance databases to identify types 

of product defects such as those associated with design, construction, 

and packaging of a product, or absence of warning labels or instructions. 

They also track the number of defective products in the market and 

assess the severity of risk of defects and likelihood of injury.

In addition to tracking trends from compliance data, agency staff, 

including the Hazard Analysis Division, perform a range of statistical 

analyses across reported incident data to identify patterns of 

noncompliance. CPSC staff said they analyze compliance in terms of the 

product rather than the manufacturer. Incident data comes from various 

sources, including retailers; manufacturers; public safety professionals; 

health care professionals; death certificates; news reports; state and local 

governments; and incident reports submitted by consumers through 

CPSC’s website, SaferProducts.gov. CPSC staff identify potential 

emerging patterns, produce estimates of injuries and quantify the 

frequency of fatalities based on emergency room data, test for injury 

trends over time, and characterize hazard patterns. Analysts evaluate 

these data on a daily basis and report increased frequency of reports for 

a given product or manufacturer to appropriate teams in the agency. 

Officials said that on a weekly basis, analysts apply algorithms across 

reports to characterize the frequency by product code. They generate 

statistics comparing the number of reports received in the week for 

particular products to the number received for the same product over a 

20-week period. CPSC officials then use the data to determine which 

incidents should be investigated and report on their findings to internal 

teams. For example CPSC has identified instances of appliance tipovers 

and issued press releases with information to consumers to raise 

awareness of tipover hazards. To address this, the agency plans to 

participate in standard revision activity to address kitchen range tipovers.

In a previous report we addressed CPSC work resulting from 

identification of certain hazard patterns. We reported that during the 

1980s, the data CPSC collected on injuries and fatalities related to allterrain vehicles, especially among children, led it to file a lawsuit alleging 

that the vehicles were an imminently hazardous product. CPSC and 
 

Page 27 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

manufacturers eventually settled the lawsuit through a consent decree in 

which manufacturers and distributors agreed to implement certain safety 

measures and stop selling certain vehicles considered dangerous for 

young children.37 In its fiscal year 2012 Operating Plan and Performance 

Budget, CPSC also noted that it plans to update safety publications 

addressing children’s hazards, fire and electrical hazards, mechanical 

hazards, sports and recreational hazards, and chemical and combustion 

hazards.

Voluntary standards establish safety guidelines for many of the thousands 

of consumer products in CPSC’s jurisdiction. CPSC is required by law to 

rely on these standards, developed through consensus by industry, 

consumer, and government participants, when the standards are 

adequate to address the risk of harm and substantial compliance with 

them is likely. Because of the substantial prevalence of voluntary 

standards for consumer products, CPSC’s early and active participation in 

standards development activity is critical to establishing adequacy of the 

standard. If CPSC finds that a manufacturer does not comply with a 

voluntary standard and it creates a substantial product hazard, the 

agency can seek a corrective action, such as a recall; however, CPSC 

does not have the authority to compel compliance with voluntary 

standards as such. For fiscal years 2008 through 2011, 80 percent of 

recalls have been of imported products that may be subject to voluntary 

standards, highlighting challenges CPSC faces in helping to ensure the 

safety of consumer products. CPSC has taken steps to ensure 

compliance by (1) performing industry surveillance through analysis of 

incident and other data, (2) participating in standards development 

activities, and (3) monitoring selected voluntary standards. Although 

CPSC regularly participates in standard development activity to the extent 

possible, consumer product safety experts we spoke to generally agreed 

that earlier and more active CPSC participation could increase its 

efficiency and effectiveness in developing standards. Our review also 

found that CPSC regulations concerning meetings policies and allowable 

conduct for CPSC staff participating in standards development activity are 

generally more restrictive than the existing general government policy on 

such participation. While OMB guidance gives agencies discretion to 

determine their level of participation in standard setting activities, CPSC 

 

37GAO, All-terrain Vehicles: How They Are Used, Crashes, and Sales of Adult-Sized 

Vehicles for Children’s Use, GAO-10-418 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 8, 2010).

Conclusions 
 

Page 28 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

has chosen to limit participation to maintain impartiality and avoid 

appearance of endorsing a specific voluntary standard. Further, a recent 

White House memorandum on national standards policy states that

where statute, regulation, or administration policy identifies a national 

priority, the federal government may need to be actively engaged or play 

a convening role to accelerate standards development and 

implementation. Changing regulations to enable staff to more actively 

participate, especially when working with technical committees for which 

CPSC has expertise and permitting CPSC staff to vote on the standard, 

could result in stronger voluntary standards without compromising 

CPSC’s independence. Without more active participation from CPSC, 

standards emerging from standards development organizations risk being 

less stringent and may be inadequate to protect the public from hazards.

To strengthen the adequacy of voluntary standards, we recommend that 

the Chairman of CPSC direct agency staff to review the policy for 

participating in voluntary standards development activities and determine 

the feasibility of assuming a more active, engaged role in developing 

voluntary standards.

We provided a draft of this report to CPSC for comment. In their written 

comments, reproduced in appendix II, CPSC supported our 

recommendation and wrote that staff would review agency policies and 

determine the feasibility of changes to the policies. CPSC staff also 

provided technical comments that were incorporated, as appropriate.

Recommendation for 

Executive Action

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation
 

Page 29 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

We are sending copies of this report to interested congressional 

committees and the Chairman and commissioners of CPSC. In addition, 

the report will be available at no charge on GAO’s website at 

http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff members have any questions about this report, please 

contact me at (202) 512-8678 or cackleya@gao.gov. Contact points for 

our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found 

on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to 

this report are listed in appendix III.

Alicia Puente Cackley 

Director, Financial Markets and Community Investment
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

Page 30 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

To evaluate the extent to which manufacturers comply with voluntary 

standards for consumer products, we interviewed officials from the 

Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and national consumer, 

industry, standard-setting, and legal organizations that have expertise in 

working on voluntary standards development for consumer products. We 

reviewed internal CPSC operating procedures and learned about the 

agency’s outreach programs to educate the public about safety 

standards. We reviewed statutory authorities and procedures for 

establishing voluntary standards. We interviewed the three standards 

development organizations that coordinate the development of more than 

90 percent of voluntary standards developed with CPSC staff technical 

support to learn about how standards and certification programs are 

developed.

To evaluate CPSC’s authority and ability to encourage compliance with 

voluntary standards, we reviewed CPSC’s statutory and regulatory 

authority related to voluntary standards. We also reviewed CPSC 

standard operating procedures, performance and accountability reports, 

and budget documents to obtain information about CPSC’s work plans 

with respect to voluntary standards. We met with cognizant CPSC 

officials, including all of CPSC’s current commissioners and the 

Chairman, to discuss their authorities and ability to enforce them. We 

reviewed relevant laws, regulations, and our prior reports on CPSC’s 

authorities. We interviewed legal experts in the consumer product safety 

field regarding CPSC’s authorities. We conducted a literature search for 

information regarding CPSC’s effectiveness in getting manufacturers to 

comply with voluntary standards. We attended a conference on the 

adequacy of voluntary standards sponsored by the Consumer Federation 

of America and a conference by the International Consumer Product 

Safety and Health Organization on trends in international consumer 

product safety.

To evaluate the consequences for manufacturers that fail to comply with 

voluntary standards, we reviewed documents from CPSC officials and 

obtained and reviewed publicly available data on recalls and other

corrective actions. We obtained and analyzed data collected by CPSC 

through SaferProducts.gov regarding product safety incident reports and 

corrective actions assigned to manufacturers whose products did not 

comply with voluntary standards. We assessed the reliability of these data 

by (1) reviewing existing information about the data and the system that 

produced them and (2) interviewing agency officials knowledgeable about 

the data and related management controls. We found the data to be 

reliable for the purposes of determining the number and trends of product 

safety incident reports and corrective actions. We interviewed CPSC 

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

Page 31 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

officials, legal experts, and consumer and industry participants to learn of 

possible corrective actions that could be imposed on firms that fail to 

comply with voluntary standards. Further, we conducted a legal literature 

search for information about CPSC’s authorities to determine 

consequences for manufacturers who fail to comply with voluntary 

standards.

To evaluate CPSC’s efforts to identify patterns of noncompliance with 

voluntary standards, we interviewed CPSC officials about their data 

collection methods and internal processes for analyzing incident data and 

tracking patterns. We obtained and reviewed data from CPSC’s 

compliance databases to identify (1) the number of reported instances of 

noncompliance; (2) the number of times these instances led to a 

corrective action; (3) the numbers of corrective actions that resulted; (4) 

the number of product units recalled; and (5) the type of standard, if any, 

that covered the product. We assessed the reliability of these data by (1) 

reviewing existing information about the data and the system that 

produced them and (2) interviewing agency officials knowledgeable about 

the data and related management controls. Based on this assessment, 

we determined the data to be sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this 

report. 

We conducted this performance audit from January 2012 to May 2012 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Appendix II: Comments from the Consumer 

Product Safety Commission

Page 32 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

Appendix II: Comments from the Consumer 

Product Safety Commission
Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 33 GAO-12-582 Consumer Product Safety Commission

Alicia Puente Cackley, (202) 512-8678 or cackleya@gao.gov

In addition to the individual named above, Debra Johnson, Assistant 

Director; Nina E. Horowitz; DuEwa Kamara; Angela Messenger; Barbara 

Roesmann; Jessica Sandler; Andrew Stavisky; and Henry Wray made 

major contributions to this report.

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contact

Staff 

Acknowledgments 

(250662)
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO’s website (www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, 

GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, 

go to www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.