 Welcome to the public meeting of the consumer product safety commission. We are meeting today to consider the draft. No, suppose rulemaking to establish safety standards for infant support cushions before I begin. I want to make sure that. Any commissioners who are not in person can hear us and we can hear them. Can you hear us? I can indeed. Yeah, we can hear you we're going to start with questions for staff. We have several staff members present to answer questions. If there are any joining us today. We have. Dr Stephanie Marquez project manager and super supervisory scientists with the office of hazard identification and reduction. And miss Elizabeth Layton attorney office of general counsel. Each commission will have 5 minutes for questions can have multiple rounds if necessary after the questions are complete. We're going to consider any amendments. If there are any. As a reminder, if you have any questions that address statutory interpretation or legal advice, please don't ask them at this time. We're going to now move to questions. I myself don't have any questions. Commissioner Feldman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr Marquez and Miss Layton. I want to thank you both for for being here and for your work on the NPR. And thank you in particular for the the public briefing that you put on earlier this month. That was very helpful. I did have a question that I've had an opportunity previously to discuss with with with Mr. Levine, CPSC executive director. So this question is for you and your team. But I did want to ask about stockpiling on a number of recent occasions, the commission's directed the inclusion of anti stockpiling provisions, including, for example, the SNPR on portable generators that we considered back in April. And in certain contexts, I think this makes sense, particularly where we're concerned about excess non compliant inventory here. However, staff's proposal doesn't include this language in the context of infant support cushions or even durable infant products more broadly. I'm curious whether staff has evidence that stockpiling is occurring. I'm concerned that the inclusion of an anti stockpiling provision in a final rule may be a solution in search of a problem or worse may inject unnecessary litigation risk into a final rule. But I want to hear staff's view about what the marketplace looks like. Do you have evidence that manufacturers are likely to stockpile non compliant products before the rules effective date? Thank you for the question. And, you know, this is on behalf of staff, having spoken with technical staff and otherwise currently we're not seeing evidence of stockpiling in this context, particularly when we're looking at rules that have involved industry significant industry and put in what we call the 104 context and the durable nursery. Historically, we have not seen that. So it's not to say that it isn't something that is worthy of consideration, but it's not something where we have seen active evidence of significant stockpiling. Okay, I appreciate that response that that that helps clarify a few things. Thank you for that. Again, Dr. Marquez, Ms. Leighton. Thank you so much for your work. I have no further questions and would yield the balance of my time. Thank you, Commissioner Trump. Good. You have questions. You know, once again, thank you so much for your tremendous work on this issue. I have no questions. Mr. Boyle. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don't have any questions, but we'd like to thank you for all your work. Thank you. Hearing no further questions, staff is excused and we'll move to consideration of the package before pointing the matter. It's proposed by staff to a vote. I'm going to entertain any amendments to the motion that the commissions may propose. I myself don't have any amendments. Commissioner Feldman. Do you have any amendments? I do not. Thank you. Commissioner Trump could you have an amendment? I do have one amendment that I circulated last week. I want to recognize you to introduce your amendment for up to 3 minutes. Okay. So the amendment asks for a request, it would insert a request for comment on whether we should include an anti-stock piling provision and would see comment on that. And it gives the example of the one you mentioned, Commissioner Feldman, the SNPR on portable generators, the anti-stock piling provision we added there. Is there a second? Second. Hearing a second, we now turn to comments and questions from other commissioners going to begin with myself. You know, at this point in time, I don't have comments. Generally, if it's a neutral question, I have been supportive of length being added, not weighing in on the final merits. Commissioner Feldman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I do want to thank my colleague, Commissioner Trump go for offering this amendment for comment on the anti-stock piling provision. Whether or not including that in the rule would be appropriate. Earlier, I just asked staff for their views on whether such a provision would be necessary and based on the evidence, it appears that their view of what the marketplace looks like that such a provision wouldn't be necessary. And I'm not convinced that it would be anti-stock piling provisions may make sense where we have evidence to support concerns about excess non-compliant inventory. But as we heard, we're just not seeing that here. Nevertheless, consistent with long-standing commission practice, commissioners should enjoy the right to ask questions for comment. When the agency publishes NPRs, it's been my view so long as the questions are asked in a neutral manner that commissioners be able to do so. And while I do have concerns about including such provision in a final rule, I will vote in favor of this amendment. Thank you. Commissioner Moll, questions or comments? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm satisfied with the staff package as written, so I don't plan to support the amendment. Thank you. Commissioner Trumka, do you have anything to add? No, thank you for consideration. I'm going to move to a vote on the amendment. Commissioner Feldman. I vote yes. Commissioner Trumka. Yes. Commissioner Boyle. No. And I vote yes. As I said, generally, questions are neutrally asked. I'm not opposed without weighing in on the underlying merits of it. So the yeses are three. The noes are one. The amendment is adopted. Commissioner Trumka, do you have any other amendments? I do not. Thank you. Commissioner Boyle, do you have an amendment? I don't. Thank you. Hearing no additional amendments, I move to approve the draft of the proposed rulemaking on infant support cushions. As amended, is there a second? Second. Hearing a second, now I'm going to move to a vote. Commissioner Feldman, how do you vote? I vote yes. Commissioner Trumka. Yes. Commissioner Boyle. Yes. And I vote yes as well. With that, the yeses are four. The noes are zero. The draft knows proposed rulemaking on infant support cushions as amended is approved. And now we can move to closing statements with each commissioner having up to 10 minutes. First, I'm going to start where my fellow commissions have also started, which is thanking the staff for the hard work in putting together this important proposal. The rule covers an important set of products that to date have fallen outside of the reach of our mandatory voluntary performance standards. This includes infant loungers, positioners and other pill-like products that don't meet the definition of a banned infant pillow. As staff described in the briefing package, this is a vital need for safety standards here from 2010 to 2022. We know of at least 79 deaths and an additional 125 incidents with these products involving infants. I urge stakeholders to comment. I would look forward to a robust common period and considering a final package and appreciate the engagement of my fellow commissioners. Commissioner Feldman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for convening this decisional meeting today. I want to again extend special thanks to our dedicated staff for their work, not only on today's package and presentation, but also their work on durable infant nursery products in general. I'm pleased that the commission will now put this proposal out for public comment and consideration. This rulemaking process would not work without valuable input received from stakeholders and advocates in the form of comments, which I look forward to reviewing when we get them. Again, thank you to all involved. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time. Mr. Trumka. Again, thank you to the staff and this agency. You have put forward tremendous ideas on how to solve this problem. Thank you. Mr. Boyle. Again, thank you to the staff for their work on this issue for a long standing amount of time. I'm pleased that the packages finally come to the commission that it will be moving forward. I know in particular that this package demonstrates heightened risks for the youngest infants. In this instance, the data revealed that more than 80% of the fatalities associated with the products involved infants, three months and younger. And the NPR on rockers that we recently approved showed a similarly concerning pattern in this youngest cohort. The staff said in this package while all infants younger than 12 months of age are considered at risk of positional asphyxia. Infants two to six months of age premature infants and infants who are born as a set of multiples are particularly vulnerable on or at the highest risk primarily due to physical inability and an immature physiological system that regulates breathing and breathing in the first few months of life. In that context, I note that in 2022 CDC reports that are approximately one in 10 infants born in the US is preterm. So as we continue our work on infant products in general, including those for which we already have rules in place, our staff and other stakeholders to focus on this age group so that we can reduce the heightened risk for this most vulnerable population. Thank you again and I look forward to seeing the comments. Sure. Thank you. Thanks again to staff and probably work on this package. This concludes today's decision meeting of the consumer product safety commission.