 Welcome back. We're going to resume this public meeting of the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission. We'll now move on to our second decisional matter on the agenda this afternoon. The notice of proposed rulemaking on amendments to fireworks regulations. For the discussion, if there is any, the CPSC staff members before us are Mr. Howard Tarnoff, Mr. or Dr. Rodney Valior, Dr. Aaron Orland and Ms. Meredith Kelch. I have no questions for staff, Commissioner Adler. Do you have any? I don't, but I did want to just join in the general welcoming and applause of our colleague, Commissioner Burkle, into the vice chairmanship. I note that it was a unanimous vote, something I hadn't gotten for a number of years. And I would also say that I did actually think about voting for your colleague, Commissioner Mohorovic. But as he said, I'm smarter than that. So at any rate, we do welcome you. And please understand, Commissioner Mohorovic, that that was said with teasing. Just going to hold on one second. As a procedural matter, we have nobody at the secretary's table to control the time. If that would be possible to have somebody there, please, that would be great. And we're going to go five minutes per question. Commissioner Robinson. I have no questions, and I'll refrain from insults. Commissioner Burkle. I have no questions. Thank you. Commissioner Mohorovic, any questions? OK, we'll now move to consideration of the underlying package. I do have one amendment, and I'm going to take three minutes, even though the clock seems it will run forever, to describe it. And then I'll ask for a second. And I think my staff is going to distribute the amendment, but hopefully everybody's already seen it. Although the NPR, the Notice of Proposed Roommate, includes a broad discussion of the health effects related to HCP and other chemicals, staff has concluded that HCP and lead compounds have many health effects unrelated to the risk of cancer, birth defects, or gene mutations. Accordingly, I do not believe that it is necessary for the commission to convene a CHAP to review these substances prior to rulemaking. My amendment seeks to clarify that the commission is only proposing adding these substances to the list of proposed chemicals to address a particular subset of health effects. Staff has also concluded that these chemicals are associated with hematological, gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, renal, and neurological diseases of the brain, as well as neurobehavioral effects of adults and children and other toxicities. I want to thank our health sciences staff for the assistance they provided to my staff with this amendment. Is there a second? Having heard a second, we'll now move to consideration of this amendment. Commissioner Adler. I'm going to support this amendment and I think this is a very thoughtful and called for amendment. Unfortunately, I missed the actual briefing on fireworks, but I know Commissioner Mohorovic brought up the very good point about the need at times for chronic hazard advisory panels when you've got things that you're proposing to regulate that involve things like carcinogenicity. In this case, the health effects stand alone separate and apart from the chronic effects. And so I think it's important to clarify that so that we can proceed with this regulation without having to convene CHAPS, which I think no one on the table today would support. So I'm delighted to support this. Commissioner Robinson. I thank Commissioner Mohorovic for raising this issue, but after looking at the statute, the package and the amendment, I'm comfortable that there's no need to convene a CHAP with this amendment because obviously the NPR is not based solely on with HCB and lead compounds. It's not the effects are not solely cancer birth defects and gene mutations. So I will support this amendment. Thank you for bringing it. Thank you, Commissioner Robinson. Commissioner Berkel. I don't have anything. Thank you. Commissioner Mohorovic, having heard no further consideration or no further comments, we'll now move to consideration of my amendment. Commissioner Adler, how do you vote? I. Commissioner Robinson. I. Commissioner Berkel. I'm going to abstain. Commissioner Mohorovic, abstain. Excuse me. And I vote I. The yeas are three. The nays are zero. And there are two abstentions. The amendment has been agreed to. Are there any further amendments to the fireworks package? Having heard none, we'll now move to final consideration of the underlying package as amended. Does anybody have any comments they wish to make before I call the vote? Commissioner Adler. No, I don't have a few closing comments, but nothing at this time. Commissioner Robinson. No. Commissioner Berkel. No. Commissioner Mohorovic. No. OK, having heard no further comments, we'll now move to final consideration. The motion is to approve the proposed amendments to fireworks regulations as amended and to publish the same in the Federal Register. Commissioner Adler, how do you vote? I. Commissioner Robinson. I. Commissioner Berkel. Abstain. Commissioner Mohorovic. Abstain. And I vote I. The yeas are three. The nays are zero. The abstentions are two. And the motion to approve the amended fireworks NPR and to publish the same in the Federal Register has been approved. We'll now move to closing statements. I'll begin, and we'll have 10 minutes each. Today's vote to approve this NPR reflects a successful process built on collaboration that includes commission initiative or excellent expert staff, extensive industry experience, and sound regulatory practice. Even though the commission issued an NPR in 2006, the agency was not able to focus on fireworks certainly at the commission level because of other pressing safety issues and the implementation of the Consumer Product Safety Act of 2008. We resume work on this issue after Commissioner Robinson returned from a visit to China, where she saw firsthand how fireworks are made. And they are literally made by hand, which adds a real complexity to regulating two specific criteria. After her trip, she offered an amendment for staff to undertake a complete rule review of our fireworks regulation as part of our fiscal year 2015 operating plan. The commission approved that amendment. At the end of 2015, CPSC staff produced an excellent and thorough briefing package with options to modernize and streamline our regulations in furtherance of consumer safety. And that last part is extremely important. While improving our regulations is a worthy cause, I believe that precious resources spent reviewing rules is our best spent where they can improve and we can improve consumer safety. As chairman, I've been supportive of using our resources to methodically review the rules we have on our books and was pleased to work with Commissioner Mohorovic to have the commission review or revive our rule review process. In particular, I've been interested in those rules that may be outdated or in need of strengthening. This package is a perfect example of how rule review should work. CPSC staff's proposed revisions and clarifications are aimed at increasing safety, better reflecting the current fireworks market and technologies, reducing testing burdens and promoting uniformity with other federal industry standards. It is not easy to accomplish all of these objectives in one package, but I believe this one does so. I wanna thank the fireworks team for their thoughtful and pragmatic approach to enhancing consumer safety through this NPR. I am proud to support the publication of this NPR and look forward to receiving all of our stakeholder comments on what the commission is proposing today. And as a matter of housekeeping, I would just ask our secretary, Mr. Stevenson, to enter into the record, the rulemaking record. Emails that I received, and I believe the other commissioners received both from the American Fireworks Standards Laboratory in support of the rulemaking, as well as from the American Pyrotechnics Association in support of the rulemaking. Great, thank you. He said leave them there, he will collect them. Commissioner Adler. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I'm pleased to vote to approve the notice of proposed rulemaking for fireworks. This NPR is the culmination of years of dedicated staff work and I believe the thoughtful proposal before us is a move in the right direction. I wanna commend the staff from across the agency that contributed to this project, including folks from the Directorate of Library Sciences, Health Sciences, Economic Analysis, General Counsel, and anybody else that I may have left off. And I also particularly wanna commend the folks in the industry who've worked so cooperatively with us over the years and with whom we have really excellent relationship, AFSL in particular, and APA as well. I think as most people know, this is a rule that goes back to the 70s. I was here in the 70s. I actually sat through extensive trial type hearings on fireworks, if you can imagine, being cross-examined over a rule. But that was the rulemaking under 701E of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act that we were compelled to follow. And it was a very long process. And I will even go so far as to confess that I was really hardcore at the start of the proceeding. If it had been up to me, I would have banned fireworks, notwithstanding the fact that when I was a kid, dare I admit it, I played with lots of fireworks, including cherry bombs and silver salutes, which are cherry bombs that you throw and when they hit the ground, they explode big time. But over time and with a more developed record, I think I've come to a better understanding about the use of fireworks. And honestly, I believe if we were to completely ban them, we would have such a massive black market that it would really be counterproductive. So I'm very glad that we have ended up where we are. And it's also the case that the industry has evolved and there are new devices and different types of explosive powders. So the time really is now for updating the standard. I do say that fireworks can be one of the most dangerous products around. I think it's terrific the way the commission on an annual basis demonstrates the hazards associated with fireworks. And I think we've made tremendous progress in the way we present the hazards from fireworks from the days when we had mannequins, when the hand would explode and they'd keep smiling because they were frozen in time and place. At any rate, I believe that both with respect to safety and enhancing compliance, this is a good proposed standard. And I look forward to receiving public comment on it. Thank you. Mr. Robinson. My memories of fireworks are gentler than throwing cherry bombs. But I have to say that when I went to China and addressed a very enthusiastic group of people involved in the fireworks industry, Heather Bramble who went with me had come up with a really very fascinating history of fireworks over hundreds of years, generally, mostly out of China, and then fireworks in this country, which was very interesting. And as I was preparing my speech, I commented to some people that I just sat there for a moment as I was looking over the speech. You okay, Rodney? I feel like you broke, sorry. Yes, okay. That I had some wonderful memories with fire that involved fireworks. And every time I said that to people, they would just get these great smiles on their faces because everybody seems to have those memories. Our job, of course, is to make sure that those magical moments are safe. I'm delighted that we voted to publish this NPR for fireworks as you know, I've been deeply committed since becoming a commissioner, understanding the issues surrounding the safety of fireworks and figuring out solutions to some of the challenges to making fireworks safer and ensuring compliance with our regulations. I really, really want to thank again, staff, for your outstanding effort on this. This is highly technical and very complicated and you've done a tremendous job in putting together a well-presented and research proposal. EXHR, OGC, OEX work together to get this right and I thank you. I frequently quoted David Brooks, but you've probably heard it before when he said if you want to live a meaningful life, get involved in something that will last longer than you do. My time here as a commissioner, as we all know, is short, but I think this is something that is going to go on long after I do and I'm very satisfied with the work that's gone on in trying to make fireworks safer. Although I will add that I hope we have a final role before I have to leave as a commissioner. We've studied the current regulations and testing methods to understand the most basic issues as well as the most complex issues related to how the FHSA regulates fireworks, met with our excellent scientists at the lab to see how we test fireworks in the many possible ways to evolve our testing, discussed all of these issues surrounding compliance with the current fireworks regulations with our import, compliance and legal staff. We've listened to many different external parties from trade association standards organizations as well as small and large manufacturers of fireworks to discern their myriad issues with the current regulations. We visited foreign manufacturers and seen how they were made and we've watched how the CPSC import staff spot checks shipments of fireworks to identify certain possible dangerous products and have worked closely with commissioner Marjorovic's office to figure out the best path forward. I think we were both surprised at the number of comments that we got with the interpretive guidance that we pushed through for the commission to publish an FR notice on and we look forward to even more comments with respect to this full NPR. We want everyone's comments, please, to the public. If you're a consumer activist, a victim, a trade association, an academician, testing lab, manufacturer, importer, retailer, we really want to hear from you because we really want to get this right. We need a common sense cost effective regulation that require fireworks to meet and exceed robust performance tests and ensure the products are safe. Our country is intensely partisan right now. As we witnessed last weekend, watching the transfer of power one day and the record breaking peaceful demonstrations the next day by mostly women in all 50 states and 30 countries against that person's policies to whom power was transferred. This fireworks NPR should not be a partisan issue. We all want to make fireworks safer. As I said, I'm pleased that Commissioner Morrović brought up his concern about whether we needed a chap. Chairman Kay suggested the amendment. We supported this. I think all of this has been a demonstration on fireworks of a completely nonpartisan approach that I'm hoping that we can continue on many issues at the agency. I do have to say that I'm disappointed that my Republican colleagues have abstained from their vote today. My understanding is that it was based on a memo that came from our new president, but we all know that that doesn't apply to us, that we are an independent agency. We are not bound to stop doing our jobs just because the president presidents has told us not to do so because there's a reason that Congress made us an independent agency. Every single issue that's come up since I've been a commissioner when it deals with an executive order, it's very explicitly stated that we are not bound by executive orders. We have some that we have tried to comply with for various reasons, but this is certainly not one where we're instructed not to do our jobs. It's not one we should comply with and we have absolutely no legal obligation to do so. So again, to the public, send us your comments and to staff. Thank you so much. Commissioner Berkelman. Thank you, Mr. Chair. First of all, let me begin as always by thanking the staff for all of their hard work and effort that went into the package as well as your willingness to answer questions at the last, at your briefing that you provided the information to us. And lucky for all of you, you would have had a real coughing spell this morning. I said, we were so tired from this morning that no one had questions today. But again, thank you. Thanks for all your hard work. I also want to commend my two colleagues, Commissioner Robinson and Commissioner Mohorovic, for their leadership on this issue. They have from the beginning focused on specific issues and really contributed very significantly to the proposal that's before us today. After careful consideration and you may have deduced this from our votes, I've decided to abstain and I know I speak for my colleague, Commissioner Mohorovic, from voting on this notice of proposed rulemaking because I believe that we should honor the temporary regulatory freeze ordered by the new administration, even if it doesn't apply to us strictly as a legal matter. On inauguration day last Friday, the new White House staff, Ryan Spribus, issued a memorandum to the heads of executive departments and agencies calling for a moratorium on new regulations with certain exceptions. The same thing apparently was done at the start of the Obama administration in several other administrations. To date, no one at the Consumer Product Safety Commission has received a copy of the memorandum or other instructions from the new administration. It's not clear that the regulatory freeze is even intended to apply to our agency and independent agencies in general. Nevertheless, as a policy matter, and CPSC will often follow the spirit of executive orders and other White House directions, even when they're not directly applicable, I believe that the course is appropriate here, particularly in the earliest days of the transition and from one administration to another. And despite the fact that I abstain from the vote, I do have some concerns and just wanna take this opportunity about the package and just mention how much I look forward to the comments from all of the stakeholders. They're gonna be very important to this package. As proposed, there are major gaps in our knowledge that would prevent us actually from making findings needed for a final rule under FHSA. Therefore, I wanna strongly encourage all stakeholders to share their views and data with the commission, particularly with regards to the safety benefits of the rule and the cost impacts. This proposed rule covers a lot of territory, including new requirements and limits and restricting of certain chemicals. I'm particularly interested in hearing the comments on staff's proposed recommendation to align the mandatory standard to the APA, the American Pyrotechnics Association Standard 87-1, on the method for determining which fireworks are intended to produce an audible effect. Instead of the notorious quote ear test, the proposal will use fine metal content to determine which firework devices are intended to produce an audible effect, and therefore subject to the two-grain limit on the pyrotechnic content. Staff is looking for further information to support the proposal or any alternative proposal. I believe it's very important to establish that the new test is generally equivalent to the old, or if not, to justify any scope or the stringency. At our recent briefing, and this is another issue that has been of concern to me, Dr. Orlin stated that CPSC staff have been working with the APA on updating the APA Standard 87-1A, but the process has come to a standstill, or at least until our package is released for notice and comment. Dr. Orlin indicated at the briefing that the APA was waiting to see our NPR before further advancing changes to their standard. Nevertheless, he did seem confident that the APA Standard and the proposed rule could be aligned and reconciled. I'm very interested to learn and keep abreast of the APA 87-1A Standard once our rule is out for notice and comment. I'm also very interested in the stakeholders' comments on parts of the proposed rule that addresses prohibited chemicals, in particular the addition of lead-led components in HCB to the prohibited chemical list and setting contamination lists for the prohibited chemicals. At the CPSC briefing, my colleague Commissioner Mohorovic inquired as to the need for the CHAP, and today's amendment did address that issue and took care of that problem. In this regard, it would be important to pinpoint the rationale for regulation of all such chemicals, and to make sure that the restriction specified in the standard matches that stated rationale. This is another topic that I'll look forward to reading comments on. The changes being proposed today could have the effect of imposing greater restrictions on consumer fireworks than our current CPSC regulations. Therefore, it's very important, and I just want to reiterate what Commissioner Robinson said. It's very important that we hear directly back from our stakeholders, and I really do look forward to your feedback. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Commissioner Mohorovic, no comments. Okay, this concludes this public meeting of the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission. Thank you.