From: Kaye, Elliot
To: Tsacoumis, Stephanie Cc: Fong-Swamidoss, Jana Subject: FW: CPSC / ROHVA - January 7, 2015 hearing testimony
Date: Monday, March 02, 2015 4:44:50 PM
Attachments: ROHVA - letter to CPSC re CFA testimony.pdf March 21, 2014 Email String.pdf August 4, 2014 Email.pdf Balloting Website.pdf

For the rulemaking record, please. Thanks.

From: Erik Pritchard [mailto:epritchard@rohva.org] Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 4:58 PM To: Kaye, Elliot Cc: Adler, Robert; Buerkle, Ann Marie; Mohorovic, Joseph; Robinson, Marietta; Adkins, Patricia; Paul, Caroleene; Rachel Weintraub Subject: CPSC / ROHVA - January 7, 2015 hearing testimony

Dear Chairman Kaye,

Please see the attached correspondence and related documents from the Recreational Off-Highway Vehicle Association. Thanks for your attention to this matter.

Erik Pritchard ROHVA 949.255.2560 x3006February 27 , 2015

VIA EMAIL U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission Chairman Elliot F. Kaye 4330 East West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814

Re: Recreational Off

- Highway Vehicles / January 7, 2015 Hearing

Dear Chairman Kaye

,

On behalf of the Recreational Off

- Highway Veh icle Association (ROHVA) , I write with regard to Rachel Weintraub’s testimony during the January 7, 2015 public comments hearing

. As you know, she is the Legislative Director and General Counsel of the Consumer Federation of America (CFA)

. In her testimony, Ms. Weintraub correctly reported that ROHVA followed the ANSI procedures. [ Video I, 2:04:50.]

But Ms. Weintraub also testified that canvassee comments and criticisms were not shared with the other canvassees, including the CFA

. For i nstance , the following exchange occurred between Commissioner Robinson and Ms. Weintraub :

CMR. ROBINSON: “In your experience with dealing with ROHVA and dealing with other rulemaking activities in other contexts, you said that you don’t see the negative co mments that might be made by other or ganizations that are canvassed?”

R. WEINTRAUB: “I don’t.” [Video I, 1:50:10.]

Ms. Weintraub’s testimony led you to ask me about her testimony . I testified that I wa s “surprised” by Ms. Weintraub’s claims

. [ Video I, 2 : 07:05.] Paul Vitrano on behalf of Polaris Industries further testified that all of the comments and responses were shared with the canvassees, a website was used to help share information, and there is complete visibility as part of the consensus develop ment process

. [ Video II, 47:45 .]

In addition , Ms. Weintraub’s claims are contradicted by the record. I have attached some of the correspondence between ROHVA and Ms. Weintraub. For example, on March 21, 2014 Tom Yager at ROHVA emailed her the CFA

- spec ific link to the balloting website , which confirmed her email address. If you look at that email string , you will see that Ms. Weintraub submitted CFA’s vote on April 10, 2014 through the balloting website , demonstrating she was aware of it and how to use it

.2 On August 4, 2014 Mr. Yager emailed the entire canvass reg arding the recirculation ballot . That email directed the canvassees to the balloting website , which included all the comments and responses regarding the draft standard (screenshot attached). That is the website described by Mr. Vitrano as the “online portal” during the January 7 hearing

. Hard copies of the unresolved objections also were mailed to all the canvassees. Your staff can confirm these facts, as Caroleene Paul was among the recip ients.

Following the testimony, I talked with Ms. Weintraub about this subject on January 7

. I had no interest in embarrassing Ms. Weintraub during the hearing, and I have no interest in embarrassing her now . But she has refused to correct her erroneous testimony in spite of the facts

. During our conversation on January 7, Ms. Weintraub told me that she is busy and may have overlooked the email and hard copy correspondence

, and that she would look into it whe n she re tu rned to her office. It was frustrating to hear that because her testimony was so emphatic on this subject , but we agreed to talk after she had a chance to look into it

.

One week later on January 14 at the Transportation Research Board meeting, Ms. Weint raub and I spoke again. I asked if she was going to correct her testimony regarding the voluntary standards process now that she had reviewed her files

. S he refused to do so

, but also acknowledged that she still had not reviewed her files

. I again asked her to review her files.

Fast forward to the end of February , which has afforded Ms. Weintraub plenty of opportunity to review her files . I spoke with her earlier today and she told me that she had not located the correspondence, but that she intended to look further and proposed that we talk next week

. I remain ready to talk with Ms. Weintraub about this matter , but at this late date I am compelled to clarify the record. If you have any questions, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Erik Pritchard

Atta chments

cc: Commissioner Robert S. Adler Commissioner Ann Marie Buerkle Commissioner Joseph Mohorovic Commissioner Marietta S. Robinson Executive Director Patricia Adkins Caroleene Paul, Project Manager Rachel Weintraub, CFA