```

[House Report 114-394]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

114th Congress }                                         { Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session    }                                         { 114-394

======================================================================
            CHILD NICOTINE POISONING PREVENTION ACT OF 2015

                                _______
                                

January 11, 2016.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
                     State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                
 
  Mr. Upton, from the Committee on Energy and Commerce, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 3242]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Energy and Commerce, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 3242) to require special packaging for liquid 
nicotine containers, and for other purposes, having considered 
the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and 
recommend that the bill do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     1
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     2
Hearings.........................................................     2
Committee Consideration..........................................     2
Committee Votes..................................................     2
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................     3
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............     3
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures     3
Earmark, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff Benefits.......     3
Committee Cost Estimate..........................................     3
Congressional Budget Office Estimate.............................     3
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................     4
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................     4
Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings..............................     5
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................     5
Applicability to Legislative Branch..............................     5
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation...................     5
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............     5

                          PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

    The purpose of H.R. 3242, the Child Nicotine Poisoning 
Prevention Act of 2015, is to require special packaging 
commonly referred to as child resistant or child-proof 
packaging for liquid nicotine containers, and for other 
purposes.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    As sales of e-cigarettes increase in the United States, the 
accidental ingestion, absorption, and inhalation of liquid 
nicotine has become a growing public health and safety concern, 
especially among children.\1\ According to the American 
Association of Poison Control Centers (AAPCC), liquid nicotine 
exposures are on the rise.\2\ In 2012, 460 exposures were 
reported to the AAPCC, and in 2013 there were 1,543 reported 
incidents.\3\ Before the end of 2014, the AAPCC had received 
3,638 exposure calls.\4\ Between January 1, 2015 and August 31, 
2015, there were 2,209 reported exposure incidents.\5\ 
Similarly, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) published a 
study in 2014 showing an increase in poisonings related to 
liquid nicotine.\6\ The study showed that calls to the CDC 
related to liquid nicotine poisonings had gone from one call 
per month in September 2010 to 215 per month in February 
2014.\7\ To date, there has been one reported death attributed 
to nicotine poisoning from an e-liquid container.\8\ The intent 
of H.R. 3242 is to ensure that liquid nicotine is sold in 
special or child-resistant packaging, as determined and 
enforced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) under 
the Poison Prevention Packaging Act of 1970, to reduce 
accidental poisonings among children.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Consortium
    \2\American Association of Poison Control Centers Press Release. 
December 12, 2014. Available online at: http://www.aapcc.org/press/37/
    \3\Id.
    \4\Id.
    \5\American Association of Poison Control Centers. Electronic 
Cigarettes and Liquid Nicotine Data, August 31, 2015. Available online 
at: https://aapcc.s3.amazonaws.com/files/library/E-
cig_Nicotine_Web_Data_through_8.2015_BjzqUYv.pdf.
    \6\Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Press Release. New 
CDC Study Finds Dramatic Increase in E-Cigarette-Related Calls to 
Poison Centers. April 3, 2014. Available online at: http://www.cdc.gov/
media/releases/2014/p0403-e-cigarette-poison.html.
    \7\Id.
    \8\American Association of Poison Control Centers Press Release. 
December 12, 2014. Available online at:  http://www.aapcc.org/press/37/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                HEARINGS

    The Committee on Energy and Commerce has not held hearings 
on the legislation.

                        COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

    On July 23, 2015, the Subcommittee on Commerce, 
Manufacturing, and Trade met in open markup session and 
forwarded draft legislation of H.R. 3242 to the full Committee, 
without amendment, by a voice vote. On September 29 and 30, 
2015, the full Committee on Energy and Commerce met in open 
markup session and ordered H.R. 3242 reported to the House, 
without amendment, by a voice vote.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires the Committee to list the record votes 
on the motion to report legislation and amendments thereto. 
There were no record votes taken in connection with ordering 
H.R. 3242 reported.

                      COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee has not held hearings 
on this legislation.

         STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    The goal of H.R. 3242 is to require special packaging--
child resistant packaging--for liquid nicotine containers, and 
for other purposes.

   NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX EXPENDITURES

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee finds that H.R. 
3242 would result in no new or increased budget authority, 
entitlement authority, or tax expenditures or revenues.

       EARMARK, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, AND LIMITED TARIFF BENEFITS

    In compliance with clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI 
of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee 
finds that H.R. 3242 contains no earmarks, limited tax 
benefits, or limited tariff benefits.

                        COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

    The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared 
by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to 
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                  CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                 Washington, DC, November 17, 2015.
Hon. Fred Upton,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3242, the Child 
Nicotine Poisoning Prevention Act of 2015.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Daniel 
Hoople.
            Sincerely,
                                                        Keith Hall.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 3242--Child Nicotine Poisoning Prevention Act of 2015

    H.R. 3242 would direct the Consumer Product Safety 
Commission (CPSC) to develop regulations requiring special 
packaging for liquid nicotine containers. CBO estimates that 
implementing the bill would cost about $1 million over the 
2016-2020 period, assuming the availability of appropriated 
funds. Enacting the legislation would not affect direct 
spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do 
not apply. CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3242 would not 
increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of 
the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2026.
    Under the bill, the CPSC would require liquid nicotine 
containers to be packaged in a way that would make it difficult 
for children younger than five years to open or to obtain a 
harmful amount of the enclosed substance. Based on information 
from the agency, CBO estimates that the cost of developing the 
regulation and conducting compliance testing would total about 
$1 million over the next five years.
    H.R. 3242 contains an intergovernmental mandate as defined 
in Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) because it would preempt 
some state laws that are inconsistent with regulations adopted 
by the CPSC governing child-resistant packaging for containers 
holding liquid nicotine. The preemption would have a limited 
effect on state laws because the majority of those laws conform 
to the standards outlined in the bill. While the mandate would 
limit the application of those state laws, it would impose no 
duty on states that would result in additional spending or a 
loss of revenues. Consequently, CBO estimates that the cost of 
the mandate, if any, would fall well below the threshold 
established in UMRA for intergovernmental mandates ($77 million 
in 2015, adjusted annually for inflation).
    The legislation would impose a private-sector mandate, as 
defined in UMRA, on manufacturers of consumer products 
containing liquid nicotine. The bill would require those 
manufacturers to use special packaging for such products to 
make them child resistant. The cost of this mandate would be 
the incremental cost of using packaging that would comply with 
the standard established by the CPSC. Based on data from 
representatives of affected manufacturers about the number of 
products sold annually and information from the CPSC about the 
cost of special packaging per unit for similar products, CBO 
estimates that the cost of the mandate would fall below the 
annual threshold established in UMRA for private-sector 
mandates ($154 million in 2015, adjusted annually for 
inflation).
    On March 26, 2015, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S. 
142, the Child Nicotine Poisoning Prevention Act of 2015. The 
two bills are similar and CBOs estimates of the budgetary 
effects are the same.
    The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Daniel Hoople 
(for federal costs), J'nell Blanco Suchy (for intergovernmental 
effects), and Amy Petz (for private-sector effects). The 
estimate was approved by Holly Harvey, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                       FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act.

                    DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS

    No provision of H.R. 3242 establishes or reauthorizes a 
program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of 
another Federal program, a program that was included in any 
report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress 
pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program 
related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of 
Federal Domestic Assistance.

                  DISCLOSURE OF DIRECTED RULE MAKINGS

    The Committee estimates that enacting H.R. 3242 does not 
direct any rulemakings to be completed within the meaning of 5 
U.S.C. 551.

                      ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

                  APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

             SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title

    Section 1 provides that the Act may be cited as the ``Child 
Nicotine Poisoning Prevention Act of 2015.''

Section 2. Special packaging for liquid nicotine containers

    Section 2 establishes a requirement that liquid nicotine 
containers that are sold, manufactured for sale, distributed 
for commerce, or imported in the U.S. are packaged according to 
special packaging standards as defined in the Poison Prevention 
Packaging Act of 1970. It also establishes a savings clause 
providing that nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit 
or otherwise affect the authority of the Secretary of Health 
and Human Services to take action regarding the manufacture, 
marketing, sale, distribution, importation, or packaging of 
nicotine, liquid nicotine containers, or electronic nicotine 
delivery systems. This includes the authority for final 
rulemakings on the proposed ``Deeming Tobacco Products to Be 
Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as Amended 
by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act; 
Regulations on the Sale and Distribution of Tobacco Products 
and the Required Warning Statements for Tobacco Products'' and 
``Nicotine Exposure Warnings and Child-Resistant Packaging for 
Liquid Nicotine, Nicotine-Containing E-Liquid(s), and Other 
Tobacco Products.''
    If the Secretary decides to adopt, maintain, enforce, 
impose, or continue in effect any packaging requirement for 
liquid nicotine containers, this section directs the Secretary 
to do so in consultation with the CPSC. This section also sets 
forth definitions for terms contained within the Act.

         CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

    This legislation does not amend any existing Federal 
statute.

                                  [all]
```