 Good morning and welcome to this public meeting of the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission We have one item on the agenda today And that is that our CPSC staff will brief the Commission on the fiscal year 2017 operating plan The CPSC staff members briefing us are mr. J Hoffman our chief financial officer miss Patricia Atkins our executive director and mr. Dwayne Ray our deputy executive director for safety operations At the conclusion of staff's briefing We will turn to questions from the commissioners and those will last 10 minutes each But we'll begin now, please with the staff briefing mr. Hoffman you're going first or miss Atkins miss Atkins if you can please begin Thank you Good good morning, and thank you chairman K. Good morning to the commissioners In terms of the the slides that you have in front of you there are brief slides And at the conclusion certainly we will be prepared to answer to answer questions As far as the fyi 2017 operating plan process There was a broad range of inputs Considered in formulating the plan including suggestions from our stakeholders certainly the public As well as individual commissioners I think if you recall back in june when we had the priorities hearing that certainly gave us A list of things to consider with respect to our stakeholders in the public Congress has not Enacted the fyi 2017 appropriations or a continuing resolution at this time And the fyi 17 operating plan is premised on the 130.5 million dollar budget that we submitted in february 2016 There are six point five million dollars of new initiatives that we have added to the fyi 17 President's budget those items will be deferred upon final until We have final appropriations enactment Agency funding allowances will be certainly calibrated to the enacted short-term cr We expect that this is going to be approximately 125 million dollars, which is our current funding level As is certainly our process we expect that in the spring 2017 Mid-year we will use that opportunity to align and amend the operating plan To make it consistent with the full-year appropriations The new strategic plan alignment CPSC's operating plan is the key implementation plan for the agency's strategic plan The staff has identified priority Activities to accomplish as a result of the strategic plan And I think that you notice that we added an appendix to the operating plan that highlights the new strategic activities Just to do a summary of the strategic goals and then some of the Significant priorities that had appeared in the fyi 17 President's budget request The strategic plan for goals that we have certainly shared with you Going through the strategic plan process. The first is Workforce in terms of cultivating the most effective consumer product safety workforce that we have here at CPSC strategic goal to is prevention Prevent hazardous products from reaching consumers the third goal Response respond quickly to address hazardous consumer products both in the marketplace as well as in With consumers and the last strategic goal communication Communicate useful information quickly and effectively to better inform decisions on the right-hand side are the priorities as I mentioned that came from the February 2016 submission those four items improving us effectiveness at ports of entry in identifying and interdicting products that do not meet us Laws the second one identifying emerging technology and consumer issues related to nanotechnology as well as chronic hazards The third warning about product hazards Empowering our stakeholders and the public through effective communication We also would be responsible for implementing congressional requirements in a prudent and timely manner this goes through the contents of the Operating plan the areas which certainly we have shared with you in earlier Pre-briefings the summary of changes from the 2016 enacted to where we are proposing the fyi 2017 operating plan then that's followed by The funding and FTE by organization and then we go into the key performance measures That are externally reported and describe the progress of the new strategic plan objectives We also have the proposed voluntary standards and then the proposed mandatory activities After the first section there is a more detailed section in the plan And these are the areas that are covered Within each of the major mission Organizations certainly the resource and summary that identifies the funding and the FTE's There's the overview and key priorities by organization Then we have the strategic plan alignment and then we have performance and operating plan measures and then the annual milestones This is the last slide And it's the summary of changes between our fyi 716 and what we're proposing for 2017 and on the left-hand side of the chart you'll see where we're starting from with the 125 million and then these are the activities that are planned for But certainly these will be deferred Pending when we get our enacted appropriation So the key changes here first there is a reduction of one million dollars For the third-party testing birding reduction assure compliance because of what was enacted in 2016 and we have sufficient funds to cover that in 2017 the next item has to do with our safety incident data gathering and we're setting aside $500,000 for that Activity the next one import Expansion this is the three million dollars in terms of increasing port Presence for our surveillance pilot program and then the last item Has to do with our research and exposure to potential chronic hazards related to nano materials In consumer products and then crumb rubber related to playgrounds So as indicated those items in the middle would be deferred until we have our final appropriation That concludes my presentation. I would like to say thank you to the staff That prepared the FY 17 operating plan certainly that is Jay Hoffman and his staff Also James Baker all of our program area staff that can contribute contributed to that So we are prepared to answer all of your questions Thank You miss Atkins. I'm gonna we'll begin the round of questions now. Thank You mr. Stevenson for the Laborious job of keeping track of all this. I'm gonna begin where you left off and begin start by thanking the staff This is obviously a very heavy lift every year Significant amount of work goes into it. It requires offices to gather a lot of data early in the process months from prior to now and To run that up the chain and for OEX the office executive director working with the Office of Financial Management To really try to turn this into what we have now and we're deeply appreciative and mr. Baker Thank you for your work as well. You're not at the table probably happily so But as our chief budget officer, obviously you are at the nexus of this So thank you very much. I'm gonna turn and I'm sure we'll have multiple rounds and so the just topics I'm sure many of these topics will get covered in multiple different vantage points, but I want to start with Trying to frame some of the Visibility into some of the work and why things move and don't move so I guess I'll start with miss Atkins But maybe dr. Borlase who's sitting behind mr. Ray might end up joining us Can you give some visibility into the? unplanned A work that comes up during the fiscal year last year for instance We had a number of major compliance actions that staff so successfully completed on behalf of the American consumer But those have a resource implication Can you explain how that works in how you try to manage to that and then also what the practical aspects of those things are please? Certainly, and I'll invite my colleagues to the you know, certainly to the right and left as well as George to share We had some very major activities last year, and I think you all are aware of the hoverboard at activities certainly lumber liquidators There were other activities that because of the overlap be it with compliance or Certainly an ex HR it involves staff Moving away from their existing packages to bring forward to the Commission and focusing on on those I Usually refer to the bench in terms we have we have a very sort of short Bench in terms of people being able to fill in when we have other activities that draw them away from The packages the programs that we're working on to bring up to the to the Commission So it does have a resource in implication has a timing implication and I think you'll see by way of the Different mandatory standards that were carried over For FY 17 there are a considerable number of them and they are in varying stages But nonetheless, we still were not able to bring them forward to the to the Commission or to complete Some of the other either data analysis or the technical activities. So that's what affects the timing of bringing things forward Thank you, and I would just ask and maybe dr. Borlase has this information. Have you been able to? Quantify what that means in terms of real effects on staff time to have those types of compliance actions like we have last year yes Using an analysis of the time sheets for the staff where they've had to put the time the last year versus where we had planned in the FY 16 operating plan EXH are specifically has put about five additional staff years of time Towards compliance support above what we had planned already in the 16 operating plan And just to contextualize that is that a significant or an insignificant number for EXH our staff? Well, it's Five staff years that's significant in that it has to come from somewhere and that's five staff years then of project work That we were deferring as we reprioritized that time towards the compliance activities thank you for that that's that's very helpful and In terms of trying to get a little bit more visibility into some of the projects and I'm going to start with petitions For instance because obviously people petition us for a reason they're looking for a specific action whether it's warranted or not We have to do that analysis, but they certainly have an expectation In we get a little bit more visibility into some of the petitions and where they stand I think there are at least three there's probably a lot more, but there are at least three that come to mind There's your organo halogen petition there's a residential elevator petition and there is a supplemental mattress petition and I didn't see anything and that's okay I don't think we need every little bit of detail But do you have a sense as to since they're not on a table is showing that they will reach some specific regulatory milestone Do you have a sense as to what the expectation should be of the Commission for this kind of work and what the limitations are if we're not able to Cover it as much as we would what is that resources of that because of scientific information that hasn't yet been learned Can you help us with that please? so For the ones you mentioned especially then the next step for staff is to bring to the Commission the briefing package That recommends whether the Commission approve Deferred deny or take some other action on those petitions So just a reminder of where we are in the process because sometimes that can get a little confusing where we are in terms of work on it We had time in 16 operating plans some of that got deferred staff has been working on those packages So for each of those listed in as a briefing package to the Commission and 17 We do plan to bring to the Commission that briefing package for those to Recommend grant deferred and I are other action and we do have the time planned in this 17 operating plan In our kind of internal planning process. We've put the time towards those Projects so that we can complete them and bring them to the Commission and 17 Great, thank you for that and the reason I mentioned petitions is really because of they are similar in my mind to the compliance actions Where they are somewhat unplanned and I know in the operating plan you carve out space for it But ultimately you can't anticipate with any type of accuracy How many we're going to get and what the magnitude are and not every petition is the same I would imagine that organo halogens requires a different level of work than Something else would for instance. So thank you for that While you're still up there if we can switch to the Epidemiology side can we talk a little bit about the work that's mentioned in the operating plan about predictive modeling and How the epi team envisions that? Helping us. What are we not able to do now and how would the predictive modeling enable us to do our work better? Thank you So on the predictive modeling What we're trying to do and we've been working on this in epi starting last year on this is really tie together Kind of and create a feedback loop from the injury reports that we get in say through safer products dot gov through actions that the Staff take especially compliance related actions that then get captured by Dynamic case management. So the idea is if we can link injury reports coming in with actions that we've taken as we get future Injury reports in we can have a better idea of Instead of doing an independent analysis every time say well, we've seen this pattern before we know how we've adjudicated before and Like I said create that feedback loop then between the two systems And how quickly would you anticipate we would be able to see some type of yield from this effort? Um for 17 staffs going to be implementing the software that we need and then creating the model and Testing its ability to predict so perhaps by the end of 17. We'll have some raw results, but from staff's plan It's not necessarily envisioned that We've got full results in 17. It also takes some time We've been using the integrated teams to populate the fields to get the information But it takes some time to develop enough of a baseline if you will so that you can have enough Results from injury port reports coming in that you can use it with some accuracy great And for those who might not be familiar with obviously early mission is but anyone viewing can you explain just briefly what our integrated teams are? How that works sure so for the integrated teams we have interdisciplinary teams involving different offices both within EXHR, but also with the Office of Compliance and These are the teams that look at every incident report that we get in so as an integrated team this Introduce plenary team of subject matter experts actually reads and Reviews every incident report the injury report that we get into the Commission Great, thank you. Obviously data is central to all that and on the topic of data. I'm going to switch to mr. Ray for a moment Can you give us a sense? We I think during the last operating plan based on an amendment by Commissioner Burkle We talked about having industry Be able to upload monthly progress reports for corrective action plans Can we get a census to where that is please and then what it would take to be able to push that out to the public? Like we have our letters of advice Sure, so at this point we have put together the statement of work and are in the process of Getting the contract piece together on that Assuming that flows then they'll go through into business requirements Make sure they fully understand what we need to happen and and then they'll start specking out the system and ultimately build that piece So that's the piece on allowing companies to submit the reports currently We do not currently have plans for the outward public publication of that Assuming we were headed down that direction You know, I think we we need to work through some of the policy issues related with that But beyond that from a technology perspective We would you know do a similar process Develop a statement of work Also speck out the requirements and then integrate it into the existing system for publication Great my time expiring. Thank you for that. There's obviously legal issues associated with it Not only the policy issues, but it's something I'd like to continue to explore Commissioner Adler Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman First I want to join in the Thanks to the staff for doing an excellent document Over the years, I've noticed these have gotten more and more readable and This one probably is as readable as anyone I've seen so congratulations to everyone who's put in all the work to do that I Also can't help but note that our funding level is within The margin of error from most other departments and it's just amazing What this agency achieves with such incredibly modest funding? And so again, that's a credit to the staff for for being so diligent So the first point I want to make is if you were to look on page nine You'll see that a project called table saws has slipped from this fiscal year to next fiscal year And I don't think it surprises anybody to hear that that makes me extraordinarily sad and disappointed And so I actually had a what I thought was a Five-minute eloquent discourse on why this is so important But my staff this morning assured me that it was a ten-minute snarky rant so I'm not going to say anything further other other than to Make the most urgent plea I can to Ms. Adkins and the staff that they work as diligently as possible to move this project along And you don't even have to respond to that. That's just a a plea from me, but I also Picking on page 10. I see that we have resources and as a priority Moving a voluntary standards training program. I can't tell you how thrilled I am to see this I'd first like a brief description if I might I think this is one of the most critical Activities were undertake this year. So could somebody just give me a brief synopsis of what's going to be in this voluntary standards training program? Good morning, so Patricia Edwards our voluntary standard coordinator is still putting the training together but and she's come along on it and what we're envisioning is training for the staff so that They develop the skills to be able to be as effective as they can be in the voluntary standards participation We recognize that just being hired at CPSC is probably not enough on its own to have you Have the skills to work on the voluntary standards. So we're looking at putting that together And I can't think of anybody anybody better Situated to do that because Patty's been involved in negotiations for years and by all accounts when you talk to the folks at ASTM and you talk to the folks in the industries where she's been doing the negotiating. She's extremely respected liked and Effective in making points that are so critical. This is a terrific way to have a multiplier And so I'm thrilled to see that we're doing that and I applaud you for having Patty Edwards do that and I also can't avoid saying how thrilled I am to see Patty Edwards in this job She hit the ground running and she is a whirlwind of activity I think she's identified some serious issues with respect to the voluntary standards process generally I think we now at least I now appreciate that as good as it's become There's still substantial reforms that I think need to be done with respect to the groups that are writing voluntary Standards and I'm so glad that Patty is immersed in that at this point And I just wanted to alert the chairman that I'm thinking through a possible Proposal for the decisional that would free up some greater resources for patty to do the job that she's She's doing and I know you're very very sympathetic to this and a lot of it depends on what available resources we have So just a couple of Questions my my normal question, which is on page four and it has to do with fast track and it says that 90% of fast track cases will have corrective action Initiated within 20 business days. So two questions first of all, what does the term initiated mean? And secondly within 20 days of what is that within 20 days of the initial report? And what starts the clock running on that? Commissioner, I do not have that exact answer for you right now, but I would be happy to get back. Okay. I appreciate it I will note. It's not a new measure. I know it's not a new question I wish all the base of baselines, but I am not prepared to give you that Thank you. I certainly appreciate that and And then just a small question, but it's one I've been meaning to ask and I Apologize for not having asked it during the weekly briefings But when I'm looking through the list of voluntary standards, I keep running across flammable refrigerants And that that has been a big issue But I I don't have a sense of where we are and what we're doing with respect to flammable refrigerants. Can somebody give me a 32nd update So Staff from engineering sciences is working with the voluntary standards on Looking at how the standards could be updated to allow What are called? colloquially called flammable refrigerants. They're viewed as a Green alternative to some of the refrigerants in use now are 134 a etc So that's staff's focus is working with the voluntary standard on updates to allow these You know what they would call like green refrigerants, okay? Yeah, and I'm just very interested in that because I was at the commission when we were petitioned and I don't know I'm blanking on the chemical that was used as refrigerants But it had all of these devastating effects on the environment and so now that that's been removed We've moved back to these other refrigerants that seem to work well They just have this problem of being flammable which the others didn't so that and because we know Their refrigerants are used so widely. It's an important issue to stay on top of on page 12 I Notice we have this project 1 1 2 a 2 mortality instant data incident data And for years, I know we have had serious problems getting other agencies which are collecting this data to share the data with us and I've blanked on the reasons for that there was either a Statutory reason why they couldn't share it or they wanted to charge us a whole lot of money But have we gotten on top of getting I think it's National Center for Health Statistics But whether whatever agencies are collecting these data are we now Satisfied and comfortable with that. We're getting the data as quickly as we can get it I'll Dig into what were the specific problems before in terms of what's captured in 1 1 2 8 2 we do have a Robust medical examiners and coroner. Yeah, no that already we've had for years, right? So but I'll have to get back to you on the specifics of What were the hold-ups with yeah, I appreciate that and by the way I want to apologize this year unlike most years I haven't had a chance to send the questions to staff that I planned on asking so Apologize for putting you on the spot. I I don't like doing pop quizzes The other a sort of a broader question. I've noticed and that is This year and if you look at pages 17 and 18 and 23 and 24 and other pages throughout there are a lot of things that are listed as metrics that have the word baseline and I think I know why that is and I think it is a reflection of the strategic plan But I'm wondering if somebody could explain to me why so many of these have the word baseline and do we have a general sense of Is this a anytime we see the word baseline next year? We won't see the word baseline Bob I'm gonna have Jay Hoffman answered the question, but I asked the same question as well because I was comparing the various milestones and and certainly the what was intended to be accomplished That so it and they seemed very similar to what we may have already done in in the past So Jay Hoffman can share some more information about it Sure, so Baseline is actually a term that comes from the OMB circular a11 So it's a process that a lot of agencies use the reason we use the word is typically when we have a new measure That the data sources and definitions have not been sort of sufficiently put together Defined and so it's basically a one-year period to sort of get things together Make sure the calculations work before actually committing to a target in some of the baseline measures that Appear in these pages and I spent quite a bit of time going through each of them It would appear that we have some of the historical data and so I've asked my staff to between now and you know Probably budget time come this spring to say hey Can we start calculating some of these prior to the one-year mark? But if not the short answer your question is yes next year these would be populated with a number Yeah, and it's not a criticism. I think that's a Source of constant revision is in the constant upgrading is is generally a good thing. I see my time has expired. Thank you Mr. Robinson Thank you This is my fourth up plan and every year I appreciate Even more how important this document is and how much effort goes into it And I not only thank the four of you but all of staff who put in so many hours of effort In putting together this operational plan and I also just want to thank all of you And then there are others also who have answered questions of ours and given us briefings And I just really appreciate the effort in and helping us understand this plan As you all know last year I did not share the laudatory comments of a couple of my fellow commissioners on the Transparency of the op plan and I was quite critical of the timing because I think we were passed half half the fiscal year when we got the op plan there wasn't any participation by commissioners and That the I at the plan itself was very very opaque This is a very different year and I really want to thank all of you and I want to compliment you on what we got this year We're getting to it before the end of the fiscal year 2016 I was very appreciative as I know at least some of my fellow commissioners with whom I've spoken about this Are is are with respect to the participation that we had in terms of giving ideas Obviously, it didn't get in our ideas necessarily got incorporated, but I understand that but at least it was participatory And I just thought it was just so professionally done this year And also the plan is much more transparent in terms of the description of the project so that we can understand it So much more so I really wanted to thank you for that preliminarily I'm still as you know waiting a couple well some pieces of information We're getting a breakdown of the hours and the and the contract dollars that are being expended on the line items as I understand it And also there are some specific questions that I think each of you have that you're going to be getting back to me on before we We vote on the on the final op plan. I also just wanted to note that And particularly thank Ms. Atkins for the effort on the strategic plan I really really appreciate how much you're trying to make this into a living document to use your words and by aligning the op plan with the strategic plan goals and Even as Commissioner Adler was just talking about with these baselines that we're trying to get some new metrics I just really appreciate the enormous effort that's gone into that by all of staff But obviously you've been you've been the person coordinating that and I want to thank you The deferment of of the of the six point five million, I just wanted to add a couple notes Just to flesh that out a little bit as I understand it on the three million Ms. Atkins that is deferred pending approval of the final budget that we're hoping will be over the 130 a number they help the children at home play in school a million of that as I understand it is for the Crumb rubber project and two million is for the nanotechnology project. Is that right? I'm not sure if that's from as Mr. Hoffman or Ms. Atkins It'll probably go over to to George it depending on what specifics you want for each of those I just wanted to but that I just wanted to break down that that's correct. They were numbers are correct And then the three million For what to increase the port presence would be 15 new staff members with respect to monitoring our ports Is that correct? That's correct as well. And then the last thing that I understand is that is deferred and pending The approval by Congress is the five hundred thousand dollars for escalated Nice contract costs and improving functionality of nice That's that's correct. Do you want to add to that? There's there's one aspect of it so it The the only wrinkle in that is that the contract escalations have already been agreed to and so we'll be working with the Xhr to make sure those are funded. It's not huge dollars. Most of the money was for the technology Okay, good. I because I just want to know how strongly I feel for anybody from Congress who might be Listening how strongly I feel that each of these items is so important to consumer safety and for us to be able to do Our missions. I have some specific questions of my own But I just wanted to follow up on a couple of them that Chairman Kaye asked Dr. Borlase with respect to the predictive Modeling am I understanding this correctly that Once this is in place what we're hoping is if there's a particular type of hazard that we'll be able to Compliance will be able to quickly look at what we've done in the past For purposes of defining our course, right? It'll be the entire integrated team So it won't be great for the integrated team. So all of the different offices Could see that relationship. Okay. And so when we do this we're it doesn't necessarily will do what we did in the past We'll just know what we've done. Is that right? I mean, I just I remember I remember one recall recently that when we went back With that particular hazard we'd handled it very differently in a number of of recalls and Then we decided that we would do it better this time So I'm just hoping that that analysis would go into it I could jump in a little bit that the The idea is really to help us improve The ability to identify things that we should investigate and start working on Okay, so it's not so much like what did we do as far as a compliance action the specifics of a case, but You know, if you think about the volume of reports coming in If we have to put eyes on every one Is there a way to have a system help us focus our eyes to the most important one This one may be like one that we did something with meaning we recalled And try to focus our energies on that and and using a system to do that versus You know, like we say in a whole team of folks looking at every report every week So that's the vision of the the predictive modeling piece We've been working on it for some time And so we're hopeful that we can get to that point through this process Thank you for that explanation and that's that's terrific. Um, the the other thing I just wanted to quickly follow up on is these these electronic monthly reports, which I think you have all five commissioners agree This is this is a great idea, but in your explanation, mr. Ray of Um, of what we're hoping to do this year. I'm wondering If as part of this in terms of the description of the work I know there's a more technical word phrase that you just used But Are we giving some thought to because I know what's in it for the company's reporting to us But I I wonder if we're able to do this electronically if they're if we're putting Real analysis into what the cpsc can gain in terms of being able to more carefully monitor What companies are doing? With respect to the recalls that we're coordinating with them Yeah, I think uh, we're hopeful that by getting the information in a in a system in a more timely manner than You know that we'll be able to react more quickly Um to the data that we're we're receiving right now. I mean, that's a challenge because um, like you said, it's a manual process Um, and it doesn't get updated as quickly as if companies are able to put it right into the system So we're hoping those efficiencies will help us react Um to the data as we're as we're getting in okay I would just strongly encourage you that not just not just to focus on the Speed but the quality of the information we're getting because some of the some of the information some of the reports that I've looked at and when we examine it with with You in particular we've looked at some of them Um at the quality of the information is such that we have to dig behind it as opposed to having it Right in front of us. So I just I just would encourage that Um, and Dr. Borlase I I asked you a question in our in our private meeting on this But I just wanted to follow up on this Description on page seven um, it's number 76 on the child safety locks um, could you just um tell us what What that what is anticipated? In terms of what what is included in the safety locks and other household child and accessibility devices? Sure. So, uh staffs proposing adding a voluntary standard activity number 76 on page seven related to the safety locks and from staffs Work on product safety assessments, etc. 16 identified that There could be performance requirements developed or improved related to these are the small Childproofing locks if you will that they're known as where you could put a plastic lock over the toilet So that a child can't lift the toilet usually used under the sinks To as cabinet locks so that the cabinets can't be easily opened So staffs proposing actively working with the voluntary standards to develop and improve The performance requirements for those so that they don't break easily and that they Um are strong enough from a physical sense that they don't break when Used and could you tell us why we're adding that at this point? yes, so uh, we're staffs proposing adding it at this point uh from Information we learned when we did product to safety assessments in 16 during the course of normal work with the office of compliance We had reports in uh, we bought we bought samples or had samples brought in As our engineering sciences staff was looking at the locks We identified some what we felt were gaps in the voluntary standard And so that feeds into our recommendation here in the 17 out plan And are you aware of any voluntary standards? Presently that cover the use of biometrics or RFID technology It's only recently come to my attention how ubiquitous those are even in books, right? Following up on our conversation staff did do a initial look We didn't have honestly much time before today's hearing so they're still looking to get more specifics But we did identify some Standards just at a first initial glance from IEEE and a couple other standards development organizations I'm out of time so Thank you, mr. Chair and I want to echo my colleagues appreciation for the ops plan and for your willingness to meet with us and talk with us and um As i've said to many this is really the beginning of a process until we have our decision on october 19th For input into the ops plan and concerns and or suggestions so But again, thank you for your willingness and your Cooperation and answering some of the questions ahead of time I do want to follow up on just a couple of things that were already talked about and again It has to do with this increase in the budget the We're in the ops plan the 6.5 million So I just want to clarify Will these changes only be incorporated in the operating plan? if The number of our budget is 130 million or I mean is that going to be how it's deferred if otherwise it won't be entered in That's correct. We don't have the funding and so what if we get something between 125 and 130? How will we decide how to do? Implement it. Yeah, that's a fair question. We'll have to look at that and bring back a prioritized recommendation through the executive director And then on page two the fte breakdown for the various offices It's already been mentioned, but I just want to clarify the 15 fte's So it's for import surveillance, but 10 will go to import surveillance three will go to ex hr And two will go to compliance. That's correct. Okay, but they will all support the import surveillance Their role with that whether it's in ex hr compliance is to support the port presence. That's correct um I don't see mr. Wolfson at the table, but um, this this is actually for him charge. He'll be happy to move Um on page two the office communications will have an operating budget of 1.65 million dollars and um That will be allocated to each of the major educational campaigns Can you break that down for us as to how they will be spent whether it's anchor it or pull safely? Yeah, I wish I could but it is a bit situational so For anchor it that has its own standalone budget for pool safely its own budget So really is based upon the ideas of the staff for the needs at the time So there's some discretion at this point. Um, so I would say a million dollars is allocated for pool safely No, that's a standalone allocation of one million beyond the 1.65 Okay, so that's so that's a line. I don't want to do that. Okay, so that doesn't come from the 1.65 Okay, and then anchor it has to do with what we've agreed to in the plans in mid year, right? Okay, and then Any of the other like back to sleep? What else is included at 1.65? Sure, it's it's the 24 Activities that we have and it's really we know where staff feels like there's new priorities for the office new opportunities to partner with other Organizations new media opportunities. So we it's it's a bit organic We allow the staff to share their ideas coming up to us But we we just allow the flexibility to have opportunities present themselves While utilizing our resources to the best we can But it speaks to the value that we have through the anchor it campaign through the pool safely campaign To have that full scale public relations activity We just don't have that luxury with the other activities We have to build a little bit more opportunistic through the development of videos Uh production of posters and then the partnerships or the collaborations that we have with our other organizations Thank you very much Mr. Birchwell, I'd just like to add one thing to that in terms of anchor it Related to the how long anchor it is funded and I think Certainly scott can confirm it's funded through september Of next year, let me 17 17, okay, if I can provide one clarification to that We are not working with enough dollars to get us through september of 2017 The contract was just signed yesterday for the anchor it contract with widmeyer to extend Into the next f y but it is only at 288 thousand dollars That will not get us through the entire fiscal year But that can be a further discussion if the commission wishes And I will defer to my colleagues to carry that water At the mid-year f y 16 atv work was changed from an mpr to a d atr Um now the table on page nine has a target for f y 17 back to the npr But I note that now specifically we're mentioning Terrible word conspicuity So are we now segmenting atv work? Why are we just singling out conspicuity? Scott was on a roll. I was hoping to continue um for atvs on page nine the uh Proposed work is the same as what we had originally in the 16 op plan specifically on conspicuity Um when it was deferred last year it was for the voluntary standard and the reason it's npr this year It is the same scope of work of what we had last year. We're looking at um should the Voluntary standard process finish where they incorporate conspicuity We believe we would need to do a rulemaking activity to update how The atvs are already captured in the cfr and then should The voluntary standard not be updated to capture conspicuity then staff would be bringing forward an npr package specifically on conspicuity separately, but the standards committee addresses that issue then we don't have to Do rulemaking. Well, we would we believe we would need to do it. It would not be to um It would be to update the cfr because under when they did the consumer and Honestly, that's uh, I don't follow all the exact how I got incorporated But because there are atv requirements incorporated into the cfr. We would have to update those thank you, um Commissioner edler brought this up and I just want to talk about a little bit more of this Voluntary standards training program. Can you expound on that a little bit and also? It was mentioned by commissioner edler that there are some problems with voluntary standards And I'm not sure if you have that information or if I would need to talk to patty edwards But I would like to hear more about the training who will participate Will what will the substance be and whether or not policy will be discussed during that training The scope of the training as we're putting it together is really envisioned To be training that develops and sharpens the skill of staff and participating in voluntary standards We recognize that It's an essential part of their job and it's an essential part of their performance So just like any other skill that they would need as a professional here at cpsc We're just Specifically focusing on that skill of participating and being engaged in voluntary standards Like what skills? I think skills associated with being able to Clearly communicate a position Clearly describe the foundation for recommendations those sorts of skills On page six, we've added to the voluntary standards column swimming pools spa safety vacuum relief Is this a new voluntary standards committee? Or are we just or is it just because we're joining it now? I'm going to participate in it That's uh, you're referring to number 23. Yes on the yes, so there's uh Two different Voluntary standard activities and we are recommending adding this one because we believe that there will be new activity On the safety vacuum relief systems that occurs this year. That's why we're recommending adding it On page 20 one of and this is actually for dwayne I would guess one of the compliances priority activities is to conduct research on the submission of incident data From third party platforms and e-commerce websites Can you further explain this? What does that mean? Sure, this is um, this is a follow-on of some work that we did over the last year with uh, virginia tech and um, I what I'll say it's very Much in the early stages. Um, we had some interns for the summer. So we were Um, happy to have them part of this process. But what we realized through that is there's a lot of potential To use publicly available information if you think uh comments and and and things like that that you see on online sites and somehow using that through a computer system similar to um, To what we're looking for with george's team and the integrated teams to Try to help identify through this vast amount of information out there where there may be potential problems It's very much in the early stages We've got some ideas on how that will Will play out, but um, it is something that we're very interested in continuing to investigate research So for instance, we would maybe peruse the amazon websites and look at people's comments as to whether or not they like the product That they had a problem with the product if there was you know, if they cut this out It could be broader than just that um, and you know, we're looking You know some of the some of the ideas that at least from the Technical standpoint is how do you get systems to help you? parse this data and help you identify Where there really could be a safety issue? And that's that's kind of the the end state that we're looking at My time has expired, but I will just add to that conversation. That seems like a good place for retailer reporting Thank you, mr. Chairman Ms. Atkins mr. Hoffman, I want to also echo my appreciation for this document For the details provided therein I think mr. Hoffman you emphasize the change in year over year What's different with this document in terms of how it looks or how it reads? It's been mentioned by my by my colleagues. I appreciate that and all the work from all the staff that went into the development of it But I also very much want to Demonstrate my appreciation for commissioner robinson. I really believe commissioner that you elevating the importance of The timing of this document as well as the level of detail Helped to provide some momentum behind the situation where we stand today So I really very much appreciate your leadership there. I believe getting into getting on regular order Is a demonstration of regulatory best practices? So I really appreciate where we are today and we're really looking forward to getting to that Where we are today and what we're looking at. I do want to mention Something that commissioner adler had to say about table saws and I'm sympathetic to his disappointment with where we are on the on the project, but I do want to mention commissioner Your personal efforts on this subject what you do Behind the scenes to get to An acceptable position to mitigate this hazard is something that I think very few Recognize or appreciate. I know it won't come as great solace to you But I do want to tell you how much I appreciate that you do it in your typical modest Quiet fashion without seeking any praise or or recognition of it And you're very very generous with sharing your thoughts on it. So I hope you appreciate that and you mentioned that your staff Suggested you curtail your remarks because they sounded Snarky like a snarky rant and if my staff suggested I don't say what I planned on saying I wouldn't have much to say if they said don't say the something that'll come off as a snarky rant The chairman mentioned something in terms of I don't know if it's a correct way of putting it in a distraction of resources from our operating plan Mr. Borlase you mentioned that there were five staff years That were dedicated to projects or efforts that were Unforeseen in our operating plan Is that right? correct So five staff years. I know the chairman tried to get to putting five staff years in a perspective Can you give it another shot in terms of five staff years? Just a general not holding it to it but your best guess in terms of what kind of a an unforeseen distraction That was imposed upon the staff and therefore impacted Staff's work in time to get other foreseen projects in the operating plan completed. Sure. I mean I You know so in terms of staff years, I guess a perspective would be that I mean i'm just looking behind me But that would be as if half of the special assistant behind you And half the special assistants, you know We're gone for a year or for some of our division or directorates even I mean that is half of our directorate of economics So, you know putting it in context of five staff years It is as if suddenly, you know, there were five people that we thought we were going to have in fy 16 working on projects That were not then just there right now in terms of allowing the staff time to be distracted away from commission approved projects, how is that How is that determined? Who makes that call to take a project to take staff time and effort away from something that The commission has decided through either the original operating plan or the mid-year review To dedicate time and effort towards and then have those resources to be rededicated elsewhere Yeah, I just I want to be clear. I think when george was describing Some of these unplanned activities Um these are activities that we try our best to anticipate and allow some level of When they're developing the plans for this year And they're estimating the number of staff months that it'll take to do the job That historically in the xhr and the technical directorates They set aside a certain amount of time for these unforeseen things petitions Compliant support, you know all these different areas and I think what george was trying to say is Well, we thought it was going to be this And we had a bunch more in those areas and we had you know, we had you know, we had the support compliance and their support We were required to do some of these petition pieces. So that's where the the shifting of that focus is but it It's not so much a not following the direction of the commission. It's just that inability to Predict what's going to come in for things that we can't so the project work We define it well in advance the rulemaking activities and we do our best to predict that But the things that we cannot predict that those are the issues where we get that uncertainty in the in the staff months And I can appreciate that and I can appreciate how that comes up I guess in terms of my consideration where I think it might be worth discussing a little bit is to what extent Do we allow ourselves or does staff allow those resources to be rededicated? Where is the is there a threshold period at which point in time? Someone would say well this particular incident this consumer product safety crisis Emerged we have to we have we have to address it But it will have a certain level of impact on what was already considered and approved by the commission in the operating plan It's the threshold is certainly not five full staff years What is the comfort level with which staff is willing to redirect away from the commission approved direction in in resource dedication Before it it should come up to the commission and or if this is an element that is Identified in a particular directive and I'm not aware of it. I apologize for it and you can direct me to that But I'm not familiar with it if it does exist What what is that threshold where it becomes uncomfortable that we're moving away from express commission? direction in terms of staff resourcing I think as far as a process goes The mid-year process is part of that feedback mechanism there So we make that assessment at mid-year now that's once throughout the year And you will see not just the money issues that we reallocate but also where projects that we anticipated Getting done. We need to readjust And so I think as a process that's where we come back to the commission and say we thought we could get all this done Here's where we're at and and we need to adjust excellent. Okay. I appreciate that. Thank you very much Just in terms. I know you described them as uh, I believe distractions well unforeseen resource Unresourced activities okay, so certainly Dwayne ray did give some background on on on that in terms that there are things that are are planned and there are things that are not planned But when do we make a decision to not do do something? And I think when we have just as an example tip overs with Ikea Certainly with hoverboards. Those were very major Projects and we certainly felt that the supportive From the commission that we should engage in those and we certainly shared with the commission Where we were in those projects So I only use those as two examples of things that we felt that were critical to Accomplish and take the necessary resources to to do those Is there a directive or something along those lines that we were following? I would probably say say no it was it was a judge a judgment And we knew that those were important areas to address not only certainly from our mission But we certainly felt as though we had the support of the commission in moving those forward Thank you. That's a good point. What also would be helpful is As much as you'll see a lot of the discussion today when we're talking about resourcing items It's usually not a matter usually it's usually not a matter of the commission Not wanting to resource a particular project. I've found through going through this exercise It's more a matter of opportunity costs if we had an unlimited budget if we had more money to spend We would spend it in this area, but we have to make tough choices So when the situations do come up and I appreciate mr. Ray's Comment that we have mid-year to make those adjustments And I think that is a reasonable amount of time Please give us the understanding of what will be sacrificed To the best that you can make those estimates when we're going to redirect our Our resources in ways that are not foreseen by by the operating plan But at that point in time, I've got too many questions on specific matters, mr. Chairman So I think it's a good time for me to pause and wait for the next round. Thank you. So we'll continue the next round Just picking up where commissioner morovic was miss Atkins Uh clearly though Not only does the commission bless the specific activity on the rulemaking side But the commission has historically blessed through delegations and directive compliance to use that discretion Meaning just to fill out that picture. It's not as if staff Has gone off on frolics and detours without the commission having provided a blessed framework to do so, correct That would be accurate. Okay. I just want to fill that picture out. Thank you Turning to That blend of compliance actions picking up on the phone recall from last week and our ex hr activities I am concerned about lithium ion batteries and How many recalls we do see? And where this is going and today it's lithium ion tomorrow. It's going to be something else They're going to be smaller. They're going to be more malleable. They're going to be more powerful And right now you see on airplanes that you have an issue with some of these loose batteries External batteries ending up in seats. We saw that last week with an airline There have been reports that in with the larger seats that have more folding pieces to them that these batteries can get caught on them And end up creating fires on airplanes I noticed in the operating plan Dr. Borla is on page 14 that staff has in the project description 21518 electrical hazards voluntary standards and codes the last bullet point is study in scope Study of scope of unprotected lithium ion and lithium polymer cells and batteries I would like to see and this will be an amendment that I will circulate for the decision I would like to see a more thorough examination by staff of the state of affairs of lithium ion batteries What is a regulatory landscape? What are the voluntary standards issues? Is it that we are seeing products that don't comply with the standards? Do we see products that do but there are regulatory or voluntary standards gaps? Where are we on partnering and I see mr. Simmons from compliance who has done a phenomenal job of working with our Sister agencies. Where are we in partnering with the fAA and other agencies that have oversight dot? And then where are we and you might have to bring in our international programs Office for this where are we in partnering with other countries and trying to get our arms around lithium ion batteries So can you give me a census to the resources that you have dedicated in the proposed operating plan? Based on that project sheet and then I think we'll have a further discussion as to what it would take To try to fulfill the requests that i'll make through the amendment if it is adopted So certainly uh from staff's perspective we see these we'll call them high energy storage devices lithium ion lithium polymer Etc. We've seen through Compliance activities over the last few years Also from our you know work Supporting that and other research the issues related to and we staff's identified this as one of the You know top hazards that needs to be addressed So in the 17 op plan specifically on the voluntary standard and then this other supporting activity We do have the resources already for Doug Lee specifically in electrical engineering others in engineering sciences laboratory sciences and ex hr to do Engagement with ul and other standards development organizations on not just the batteries themselves But then the systems we've seen from hoverboards for example that you've got to look at the system Not just the battery and for all the different emerging systems for lack of better way to describe it that a lithium ion battery Or lithium polymer battery or any of these other high energy batteries are in how do we kind of build that those layers of safety Starting at the cell level to the battery pack level all the way to the system level So hopefully you we're open to working with my office to try to come up with what the resource implications would be Beyond what you have allocated in the operating plan And I think you mentioned mr. Lee who has led many of our electrical investigations Electrical engineering investigations and the challenge is right there of as these batteries continue to become an issue He would get pulled off I'm preparing one of these reports to try to do the investigation and that's part of the challenge But I do think the public has an expectation that somebody in the united states government And I think we are the somebody who's most appropriate Is looking at this and is thinking ahead as to how we can get on top of it and provide assurances This is not a product or it's usage in a product It might end up getting here unfortunately, but right now people shouldn't expect that when they use one of these That this provides presents a risk of their house burning down That's that is unreasonable And so I do think that we need to do more work and really get ahead of this issue I want to pivot now to section 15 j of the consumer product safety act I noticed in the operating plan that there is a notice to propose rule making identified can you give us a sense as to what 15 j so to speak we should be expecting to see The mandatory standards table page 9 Substantial product hazard list 15 j rule staff had a npr in the 2017 performance budget request But staff does not have a 15 j proposed rule in the 2017 operating got it so it's looking at the wrong column And if we were to be able to fund it what would be next? Um We'd have to go back and look at a specific one part of the issue was after we had completed the work that we did last year on the holiday lights And the extension power cords staff didn't have Product or a candidate readily available. So that's why we did not recommend a 15 j in 17 Okay, so at some point if your office could follow up though with my office as to what those items might be because I I think I remember from previous years There was a long list and it's possible that some of those items may have taken care of themselves But it is a great tool that we have when appropriate. Oh, yes, and absolutely will follow up with you. Thank you I also see that the federal toy standard is due to be updated this year Do we have a sense as to maybe you can just give us the top line as to what kind of changes that we should see I don't actually have all the different changes in front of me um staff though has been working with ASTM 963 committee All the way through and providing inputs all the way through so that we're ready when we do get the Re-notification or revision from ASTM to be able to turn that package around quickly And get it to the commission because it's on a short timeline Got it And do we have at least a basic sense as to whether or not these are safety related changes or may Other sort of cleanup items There's a combination of both but uh staff's been engaged on the safety items to make sure if we had any concerns We were voicing them early Great. Thank you. Uh, miss boil or general counsel if I can just ask you a quick question about an item in the package Having to do with updating our freedom of information act regulation Could you give us a brief sense, please as to why we're doing that now and what we should expect to see Sure, um congress uh passed legislation that went into effect in june to update the foyer It had a number of um provisions that uh to increase transparency, but one of the things The legislation requires us to update our foyer regs to reflect the changes in the foyer statute amendments And clearly we've had conversations over the years about changes that we can initiate that would modernize our foyer processes Is that in a vehicle for that or is staff looking exclusively at whatever congress required? Right now we're focusing on um implementing what congress required I don't see why it wouldn't be a vehicle to do other things once we're opening up our regulations I think that opportunity is there Thank you very much commissioner albert Thank you and just a couple of points that the chairman made that I did want to follow up on I hope that when we're reviewing our foyer regs that one of the things we'll look at is the fees that we charge I think uh, it's it's a good thing that we don't charge people who don't have much money for foyer requests But people who can afford it, uh, I think we're doing that Subsidizing folks who don't need subsidizing so I urge you to look at the fees that we charge for foyer requests And actually that is one of the elements of the uh amendments and so we will be looking at that I'm delighted to hear that. I also wanted to mention about batteries It's interesting to hear the chairman talk about it This past week I went out and talked to a group called ppai product placement association And unfortunately I missed the morning speaker and it was somebody from a group of that is the battery trade association I mean we have trade associations for everything I think they're trade associations for the flammability of belly button lint whatever it is there are trade associations But this is a critical group that I hope that we will follow up on because over the years I've noticed that It isn't just hoverboards. Uh, it isn't just the iphone's its laptops We've had endless recalls involving those products. And so I think Jumping to the more broad omnibus approach is a really sensible one and uh I haven't seen the chairman's proposal But I have a feeling that I will probably support it because I think it's really a good idea Um, I also did want to just make a quick comment In concurrence with commissioner moho rovick We're always choosing between our children when it comes to Doing what the commission does it's always a resource trade-off And I'm I think one of the better things I've seen happen at this commission over the years We're not perfect is if somebody wants to propose something We're always asking what is it? We're giving up and we have to be prepared if we're coming in to make a proposal to say We'd like to see this but that may mean this slips and we ought to do that explicitly So I commend commissioner moho rovick for reminding us of that So, uh, I did have one question and I'm sorry, this is the the lighthearted question of the day But if you look at page three I'm always intrigued by these Um items so on page three if I can actually turn to it Towards the bottom of the page. I see under this s o 2.2 Two categories one of which says that we're going to have a 90 percent Foreign-based representatives indicating increased understanding after cpsc training and below that I see that we're going to try for 90 percent for the percentage of foreign regulatory agencies Who indicate increased know-how and I'm wondering what's the difference between increased understanding and increased know-how But but more than that if I might I realized that that it's important at times to try to measure the unmeasurable and so I think it's fine that we're doing this. I'm just curious. Is there a metric? Are we going to give them a quiz to see how much they know? Or is this just uh, they we've run them through the training and and we think that it's been successful to your point um Commissioner we probably will give them a Survey a feedback form At the conclusion of the the training activities and hopefully the questions that are provided to them will give us some insight As to whether they have Gained the knowledge that we were intending Yeah, and I think that's a perfectly appropriate approach I wouldn't hold my breath as saying that that will necessarily be the absolute Picture of what's happening. It's the same way when you ask voters. Are you planning on voting? Oh, yeah, and then you compare the number of people who say they're going to or even who say they have With the actual vote turnout and there's a discrepancy, but I think it's first of all, I think the underlying project a very good one I did also Just a quick question on fte's Uh, I'd noticed on page 40 that we are looking to have 90 of our fte's utilized and I have an impression That we've done better and better in recent years in Coming close to we'll never hit it perfectly and I'm not sure we ever should hit it perfectly but uh, am I correct in saying we've been Coming closer and closer to hitting our fte target and is there some new approach that we've adopted that Is enabled us to do that or is my premise wrong? So I guess I would say two things to that one We have gotten closer and closer to consuming all of our available fte In fact, I think it exceeds 90 percent if that gives you a warm and fuzzy it does it does congratulations The other thing that we're doing is the budget office. We haven't implemented it yet But they're working with the human resources office to try to get more fidelity on this is a little bit esoteric I apologize, but sort of fun certifying each position And what that will allow us to do is to really push the envelope to maximize staffing throughout the year We're hoping to implement that new approach in in the f y 2017 We'll be talking to all of you more about it once we have the details in place I'd like to ask a question of mr. Wilson So george you can step down for just a second. We try to Bring in pitch hitters from time to time and Uh Mr. Wilson, it's my understanding that In recent years we you have gone out of your way to try to build in some evaluation component for some of the education campaigns And again, that's one of those things that consumes resources So you're spending money to see what you've done as opposed to spending money to do it But uh, I was hoping that I was hoping that you could give me a brief description of Uh, which programs we built in an evaluation component and what it is precisely that we're evaluating So to your point about the question about the training on the foreign level We like to be able to do some of the same things at the domestic level We know we have a lot of our field staff that go out and speak publicly a lot of people headquarters do the same It'd be nice to get a sense in the aftermath of that Speech that training session. What was the response? The word usefulness is throughout the strategic plan as it pertains to communications Was the presentation was the the nature of the information useful That is kind of a no cost approach. You'll take omb review There is another activity we like to do formally We've been sensitized through the feedback from the commission to get more survey results Um, I will have some results to share with the commission Hopefully very soon from the national awareness survey that was completed this fiscal year But we want to build on that. So we are hoping to work Off of a contract that I know ex hr is considering to do some more formal survey work We feel good about our reach, but we need to know how effective it is So is it the right platform that we're communicating on are we communicating at the right grade level? We're very sensitive to Certain people's educational levels and the words we use we can be highly technical at this agency But it may not serve us well the only way to get a sense of that is to serve activities Yeah, I mean the perfect Evaluation tool is that you see injuries or fatalities drop that that gets to be a major Challenge and a major confound But you can certainly move from impressions to awareness And it sounds like you're making that and and doing it as usual in a very thoughtful way Um, and I guess Actually, I think I'm going to stop at this point. I have a couple of additional questions But I can see they would use up more of my time. Thank you Mr. Robinson Forlace dr. Forlace I just wanted to I just wanted to follow up on where we left off when my time ran out ran out the last time You tell me that there's a voluntary standard and you don't have the specifics that I triple E Has with respect to um biometrics and RFID technology and as you and I discussed What what you're envisioning this um standard would do with respect to specific products is somewhat like the compartment requirements for coin cell batteries in electronics that as the voluntary standard comes up sort of a standard Voluntary standard with respect to that kind of device would be applied to a specific product So I guess um what I'd like to know is whether first of all whether cpsc staff has looked at these the standards for these new technologies For biometrics and RFID because I'm thinking of it sort of um with respect to child resistant or child proof packaging certain products And as you know, I was optimistic that that new project that was added might include that But have we looked at that and do we have any intention at this point in this op plan of including that as And I guess included in that question is whether we have the expertise to do that so Staff very recently started looking at RFID and biometrics and to your point They were looking at them in the context of what they usually call horizontal standards i.e. It's a standard that can be applied across. I knew there was a term for number number of things so They just started to look at that but uh as we discussed from the first blush you know staff didn't See anything in there to that was worthy of proposing as an addition to the voluntary standards table Okay, um I want to make a comment, um and I always love it when I find something that commissioner berkeland I agree on and this third party platform data is um a very interesting Proposition right now, and I'm absolutely delighted that we both have it as a list of priorities And then the milestone on page 24 says that uh to quote a report on solutions for submission of incident data from third party platform And e-commerce sites will be prepared And I just wanted to say that um way beyond uh, I think what hasn't been mentioned is that That these types these third party platform Non-traditional retailers if you will did not exist and could not have been anticipated when our statute was passed And so and they're very much a reality in the 21st century marketplace and we when we were looking at retail reporting um Out of my office for the first time and I wish it had been I but it wasn't um miss bramble suggested Well, these retailers already have a duty under our statute to report to us under 15 b Why don't we try to do this kind of reporting with respect respect to third party platform providers? And it was really I confess the first time I had really focused on the fact that so many we not only have exclusive People who are selling exclusively as third party platform providers But so many of our huge retailers are using their websites for marketing in this way so that you've got one stop shopping portals so I know this is the next phase for um american consumers and It's becoming more and more ubiquitous and something that if we don't Find a way of getting industry to cooperate with us. We've got a real problem because under our statute they they Certainly could strongly argue that they have absolutely no duty to report to us And I think that's been the position that we've that we've taken so far So I am delighted that that we are going to use this and I think it's an excellent opportunity and hopefully That what we've what we've learned from retail reporting is going to be able to inform the ways in which we can work With these third party platform providers and and hopefully in a collaborative non adversarial way We can we can get some of them on board with respect to reporting to us And then we can figure out what else we have to do to get that information With respect to the the nice Data I just I would just like to say that I was very very excited About to see the enhancements that are set forth on page 12 That uh that that that have three new areas that we're doing and I do have some questions on that I'm not sure since I don't see anybody from epi here whether somebody Who is here can answer this but one of the one of the The enhancements that is listed on page 12 under 11179 is that we would implement a new mode of collecting hazard scenario information in addition to telephone Interviews and I'm just wondering if anyone who is here knows exactly what that project is describing that project That project's looking at trying to or looking at developing online Has a collection of the information advice having to make phone calls As a follow-up for nice reports Okay, and on the on the enhancement that's that's described as assessing the feasibility of statistical modeling of nice injury data in conjunction with us census bureau bureau and hc up Data from hhs including socio-demographic Group injury estimates. I was absolutely delighted to see that and I'm wondering if you could explain to me A little bit more about the information that's contained in the socio-demographic group inquiry estimates That detail I'll have to get back to you on Okay, so the socio-deconant. Yeah, I really think we could get that information We could so much better target the the communications that we make also And then the third one is expanding the length of the narrative fields and modifying the race and ethnicity Variables to align with those used in us census bureau and I was wondering if you know how those would help us I'll bet you're going to get back to me on that. I can help you on the on the one Expanding the narrative field. So that's a limitation on the database side which By increasing the size of that field they'll be able to capture You know more data. So right now it's cut off at I don't know exactly number characters But that will allow more descriptions in that narrative field that we currently are limited by and the modification of the race and ethnicity The line with the us census field Yeah, I I think that has more to do with being able to capture and report back effectively on that And modifying the system to do that But we will get back to you specifically Okay, that's fine I do have a couple questions and I see mr. Ralph is here. So I'm not sure if he's going to need To answer these but on page 39, we have a description of An it customer satisfaction survey and I don't know if that's describing Customers within the agency or outside the agency Welcome, mr. Alvis Hello, thank you. Uh, yeah, this one is primarily looking at internal agency agency customer evaluations. That's terrific So the because I know that that's been a problem in the past in terms of coordination Coordinating the party who's going to be using the it and and it and I applaud you for that. That's that's outstanding The other thing the other question I have for you before you go away The electronic monthly reports. Do you think those are that we're going to be able to be able to do that this year? That's that's the that's the plan. So as as mr. Ray mentioned earlier, we're in the final phases of issuing the of the procurement actions for that and The anticipated period of performance for that is within the next fiscal year Excellent and just one more question for you. The last item on page 39 um That's 2017 m 5 3 says quote an evaluation of product identification capabilities and of the benefits of standardization Completed what is that? so this is evaluating there's a specifically looking at G tin as a universal product identifier and potential benefits for Applying that to systems and use within the agency to promote Alignment of Products identification specific identification of products across different program areas The reason why there's some need for alignment is because we also have other sources of information that come in that are related to product identification things like tariff codes and also nice data elements that have their own specific requirements and needs They operate within some some specific contexts as well. And so this effort we'll be looking at How we can how and whether it's effective for us to use a standard for product ID And also rationalize that with these other product Description categorization stands right so it's standardized excellent. Thank you. I'm out of time, but thank you mission Robinson Commissioner Burkle I was about to give you more time Just because we agree on data um I have a couple questions for dr. Borlase We are going to be receiving the commission is going to be receiving a briefing package on ROVs and I understand it's not going to come with any recommendation on rulemaking And i'm just wondering so that ROV that rule the proposed rule is On the books. How do we get that? Maybe this is a question for ogc How would one go about taking getting that rule out of? The staff would have to submit a package to the commission explaining the reasons why They would not support continuing rulemaking and whatever those recommendations would be and if the recommendation Uh, they would have to support the record for termination and submit that to the commission for a commission vote And so the briefing package that we're going to get regarding the ROVs Is that going to include the information that miss boil just mentioned? The scope of the briefing package on ROVs is specifically just a Evaluation of the voluntary standard both the recently published rova and opi voluntary standards It is specifically addressing only two questions as staff puts it together The staff expect the voluntary standard to be effective in addressing the hazards related to occupant protection stability and Steering on ROVs and do we expect that those two voluntary standards will be widely adopted And then following that then we have to Request again a briefing package from staff that would say whether or not and advise us whether or not We could terminate this rulemaking I mean, I it's it's a question of process But the main point is that if Staff presents a package the commission can consider that package as the basis for decision making You would have to then direct staff there would be an afar notice involved. So there would be another process Point that we would have to notify the public Of the reasons for termination and the support behind that So there would be an afar notice involved. So there yes the answer is yes There would be another process point But that process does not have to include another briefing package We could maybe surmise from what staff gives us in that original package Well, I guess I don't want to prejudge what's in the briefing package I guess it depends on what's in the briefing package, but The commission could direct staff to Based on its reading of the briefing package to proceed with the termination package in which case the information Necessary for a termination package would be represented to the commission along with an afar notice or proposed afar draft after our notice Thank you very much Um On page 25 of the ops plan it talks about the e-filing program and the pilot that is now Currently up and running Is there any idea or estimation of what the cost of the e-filing program will be for fiscal year 2017? So I think as we presented it we The current pilot finishes Hopefully at the end of december And then based on an evaluation of The alpha pilot as we've been calling it And assuming that is Positive in staff feels like we need to move on to the beta pilot as we've described it We would come to the commission and Recommend proceeding with that beta pilot at this point You know any kind of resources that are associated with that We don't believe there'll be significant to move on to the next phase because a lot of that is about You know this this phase was a very small number of entities. We were looking at expanding it to a larger group But we would at that time if Resources were a constraint within that we would put that forward And and we're and timing wise we're looking more spring time before we we think we could even be at that point Okay, at that point being Completion of the alpha pilot and evaluation of the alpha and then any kind of recommendation on whether to move forward and In the beta and further And you feel you have the resources to get to that point at least I'm not going to say that at this point in time I think we need to get through the evaluation piece And I think if we did we would come forward through a mid-year process and No, I mean to get to the evaluation piece your you feel you have the resources to do that Yeah, I think as we're as we're currently planned in the in the draft version of this plan we can get through the album I wanted to talk just a little bit about ram and the expansion of the ram You know finally referred to as 2.0, but it is the attempt to bring ram in-house so we can Make some of the changes ourselves Do we I guess let's start with Where we're at if you could get provide us with the status of the transition from ram to bringing ram in-house So we're I'll say at the Almost at the end of the cycle as far as the kind of user acceptance testing that is done With our import team. We've done several um Test at ports throughout the country to make sure how it's performing in the field We have what I'll call a punch list of items that still need to be addressed and I do know the team's working through that so I think as far as transitioning to what we've been calling our 2.0 version We're we're getting very close to completing that and In the sense that I have is that we're getting you know, we're we're In a much better place, you know like any software development. There's a process and We're at the end of that process at this point So you're comfortable with the functionality of of the new ram. We're almost there. I don't want to I don't want to give a full Comfort level of the team is not fully through the testing, but I believe we're on on track to get to that point And so when we Eventually we make that transition and I understand there's going to be overlapping for a period of time That's correct When we make that transition then will there be a requirement to have a third party vendor or can we handle that ourselves? so I I think the best way to describe that is we We were transitioning from the least version to the own version But we still have support requirements that we seek outside contractors to help in So that's part of that operation and maintenance budget that's built into Into the ram support piece But what this functionality will allow us to do is it gives us more ability to Adjust and customize the targeting rules and that's probably one of the biggest Biggest changes from the 1.0 to 2.0 is that gives us the ability to adjust that Thank you. I have one last question. I think I can fit in my Time that's left On page 23 of the ops plan item number 34 381 the internet surveillance program support And I um I mean I could read what's on page 23, but can you explain to me what the scope of that is? What will What will motivate? Surveillance of one type or another of what how that is going to be run But this is the this is a continuation of the program that we already have in place Primarily run out of our out of our field directorate Um, and this you know continues the process of looking at um on time online retailers different sites Where you know either recall products Or products that would not meet a standard are being sold And taking appropriate action on those items Products that don't meet a voluntary standard No, I'm I'm for example, let's say there's a site selling Children's clothes with draw strings. We would identify the seller that that is A violation of a of a rule that the commission has and asked them to take it down and educate them on that on that process Thank you. Um, my time is expiring, but I do want to say To dr. Burley is that I still I didn't get in my first round of questioning The follow-up with the concerns regarding the voluntary standards that commissioners have referred to and I think maybe offline I'd like to hear those with the peating meeting with miss edwards to hear what the concerns are with the voluntary standards in our participation We'll work with you on that. Thank you commissioner mover over Thank you, mr. Chairman my first question surrounds the hazard of furniture tip over in the subject of Furniture tip over and starting with the anchorate campaign What is the level of funding in the fy? 17 operating plan for the anchorate camp campaign commissioner, I appreciate that question because The cycle that we're in is a challenging one as I indicated Yesterday we you granted us as the commission mid-year funds It was not until yesterday that that contract was signed So kim dulek is doing an outstanding job as project lead with mark communications is a very good firm. They're serving us well We have 288 thousand dollars now to proceed with this last week and go into next year That is not enough to go through the entire fiscal year My concern is lost momentum Because that campaign is getting results that we saw with the pool safely campaign three or four years into it So it's very encouraging what we have to work with But we could do more with more So at this point the question is, you know, do we just need to do the best we can with the funds we have? Or are we back into that cycle of coming to you at mid-year and saying we've depleted our funds You're an advocate So I hate to treat you this way, but in jeopardy they make the contestant answer the answer the question in the form of a question Can you answer the question in the form of a dollar amount? How much money and I didn't intend to ask you this but let's be honest here How much money in f y 17? Do we have planned or recommended for the anchored campaign f y 17 operating plan There's there's no money at the base level in ocm's budget, but we have indicated In some documentation that to go above the base we recommend another 400 000 dollars to fully support the campaign 0.00 In f y 17 for the award-winning anchored campaign now miss adkins for What activities do we have underway then if we're not recommending any funding for an i&e campaign for anchored What activities do we have underway to mitigate the hazard associated with furniture that is compliant with voluntary standards tipping over I'll certainly ask scott to follow up on on this, but the 250 000 dollars That's correct that we have that will get us through some portion of f y 17 although it was Awarded in f y 16 Will take us through some some portion of the of the year When that is is over then staff will certainly Come back and determine in mid-year what might be available in terms of a proposal and then the commission can consider My point is the following the reason I was asking for it What are the mitigation strategies for the product that's currently out in the marketplace because this is one of those typically vexing situations where we've got our Our usual and maybe most effective approaches to mitigation can be in the standards arena through mandatory Rulemaking or voluntary rulemaking, but that will have little if no impact on product. That's in the marketplace We know of dozens of fatalities Associated with product that complies with voluntary standards So therefore it limits our compliance efforts are we going to Do nothing about that other that product where we know Is in the marketplace, but consumers may continue to to Use them in unsafe circumstances by putting televisions on top, etc Um, and we just we have no other approach if we're deciding not to fund anchor it in 2017 Uh, but that's what I was saying, uh commissioner. Um, if we have funds that take us through a portion of f y 17 and There are funds available through the mid-year and that is is proposed and the commission signs off on that then we would certainly Move forward with that Are you committing that that would be the top of the list of staff recommended mid-year funding levels? I can't commit to that at this at this stage. Certainly staff would propose A list of a product, but that's what you're suggesting How long through the current fiscal year is the is the existing resources going to run through? We'll do all we can to stretch it as far as possible. This this current fiscal year was your best judgment I mean we need to think about trying to go three quarters of the way through the fiscal year based on our current experience because We we ran out of adequate funds prior to coming to you at mid-year and seeking additional funds And therefore we had that gap before funds were actually allocated to us But you know lesson learned for us. We will do the best we can to go as far into the fiscal years No, I appreciate that and I appreciate uh the efforts of your office and working with your contractors on an award-winning campaign But I think we currently have 288 thousand dollars Left from fy 16 appropriations to spend into fy 17. What can we What if we're going to uh make a decision on our fy 17 budget? How much can we recently and hope that there's money that we might be able to redirect towards this effort in mid-year? What's the how much length will how much spend will we're going to get through on that 288 your best judgment? End of year two quarters may not trying to be more specific than right We will do the best we can to kind of look at the allocations of placements for psas Other campaign activities related to development of more partners We'll try to be smart with those dollars just to to give you a bit of a metric For our national awareness survey. We went out and talked to 650 respondents And we had a 33 percent Responsory an affirmative response rate that they had heard about the campaign That that's a pretty good start for where we are this thus far with that activity So we're going to do all we can with the funds we have to get that to 40 50 percent But I think if you know we we view the campaign in terms of where we're at now with pool safely this many years There's a lot of potential there for anchor to to build up to a highly highly recognized campaign I recognize you're going to do everything you can and I applaud those efforts But now I'll be very specific since it was difficult to get a dollar amount answer in terms of how much money We have allocated an f y 17 for this campaign, which is zero dollars in terms of Of the current spend the 288 thousand dollars that we'll be using in f y 17 in an answer of q 1 q 2 q 3 q 4 f y 17 when will those funds be fully used up I think it's fair to say in q 3 to to be realistic about our prior two years of experience. I think that's the best answer Thank you. That wasn't so difficult And I hope my colleagues will in thinking about this hazard As we come to a final decision decision on it in terms of meriting is as commissioner adler pointed out deciding among our children here This remains among the most severe. It's it's got a level of latency That is not seen in the other hazards that we're trying to address and of course it addresses our most vulnerable populations And I will also point out that we have no other strategy other than anchor it That is planned that we could reasonably be confident is being exerted to mitigating the hazard Involving existing product that's in the marketplace that complies with voluntary standards We know that there are continued fatalities from children that are that are dying from being crushed from the furniture tv tip over And this is our only approach. Fortunately, we have an approach that's award-winning and in terms of Making decisions. I appreciate commissioner adler pointing out the international programs efforts on capacity building We've got a metric And I wouldn't have I wouldn't have made note of it had you not commissioner adler But we have a metric the percentage of foreign regulatory agency representatives indicating know how know how after cpsc training as opposed to understanding after cpsc training so What we're doing is we're determining that it's more important to train our international counterparts In in how they can do a better job for their constituencies than putting funding towards anchor it That is an olive branch towards A potential Amendment. I hope my colleagues will consider that if you're looking for somewhere else. I would look there first It's not that the international activities and capacity building for foreign counterparts isn't laudable in some way But certainly in terms of perspective. I don't think it it measures up I'll yield at this point I'm going to continue on the topic Of tip-overs and there are a number of different areas that commissioner mohova got into and I'm going to try to cover them We obviously can't discuss publicly Compliance actions, but we can point to the fact that we've already taken two compliance actions so far This calendar year on this hazard and we may not be done fair to say we may not be done now I think what if I heard commissioner mohova correctly. He's distinguishing from a mitigation strategy between products that Don't comply with the voluntary standard, which may or may not be the basis of our compliance actions between And hazards from products that do comply with the voluntary standard. Did I hear you correct and I'll yield for that What you heard me correct in in suggesting and asking is specifically from staff's point of view what mitigation hazards They plan on employing towards product that complies with the voluntary standards Not making a a difference there, but in in in an honest assessment What resources are to address that knowing what can be disclosed and what cannot be disclosed Got it, and I appreciate that reclaiming my time because that's the first time I think that we've at least publicly acknowledged Well, maybe as a group Concerns about product on the market that complies with the standard as opposed to product on the market that's not comply with the standard Staff is due to send up soon a briefing package. I don't know what's in it I don't think my fellow commissioners know what's in it with their recommendations But based on what I thought was absolutely outstanding work by Underwriters laboratories and kids in danger They have already identified Test methods and changes improvements to the voluntary standards that I think will make a huge difference And yes, that doesn't get to product that's on the market right now That gets to future products, but I do think we need to pursue those And I'm grateful that the staff as part of soliciting commissioner robinson mentioned this beginning as part of soliciting input from the various Offices the one item that I did request that staff Consider including in the operating plan was commencing rulemaking on tip-overs because I do think Based on that report by ul and kid as well as other information That we know enough now including the recalls that we've done We know enough now that we should be considering not only What the standard can evolve to but how we can enforce that better so I am very eager I understand that there's other work that has to come before that but i'm very eager should the staff package warrant or confirm that Those suspicions that we would forcefully move in the direction of improving the standard Both through the voluntary standards process and if that's insufficient or compliance with it is insufficient That we would move on the rulemaking I do want to mention one other topic And dr. Borlaise if you could please return to the table since this is in your Purview I did receive a quest request within the last week or two I think it's the first that we've gotten at least that i'm aware of From an outside party or from any party for that matter to have cpsc staff Lead a voluntary standards technical effort and it's in the area Of sensors for athletic helmets and headgears I was pleased to see it I do think from the experience that i've had Involved with youth sports that parents are desperate To have some type of assistance and figuring out what's going on with the impacts to their Children's brains while they're playing sports And I have serious concerns about the efficacy of the products that are on the market I do think that they're misleading And that they provide a false sense of security to parents There is no current voluntary standard to address the validity and repeatability of those standards So can you just briefly walk us through how we'll stand staff now handle that request to have Staff lead that effort. What's the process and more importantly the timeline on that, please? So After the commission approved the final rule on the 1031 changes to the 1031 16c of our 1031 staff developed and has an approved directive that provides the Steps so with the request within the xhr and this is the step that we're still on We're evaluating the request and the request then comes with documentation of reasons For against and there's a number of criteria that we evaluate The subcommittee that it's related to the hazard that we're trying to address Where is the hazard we're trying to address compared to the other hazards? I guess is it one of the more important hazards for lack of a way to describe it? We're trying to address at the time Where does it fit in our parties the commission's parties? That goes up to the executive director for a call I would say within a couple weeks is when it has to come out of xhr to go to the executive director But by the directive it's the executive director's final decision as to whether staff And it's a request for a task group leadership. So in this case we lead a task group Thank you for that and even if we don't end up leading it and that's what the executive director decides It's still in the operating plan as one of the Voluntary standards are guessing is that under for recreational headgear? Is that does that include sensors? Oh, absolutely The reason we got requested to lead the task group is we sent a letter last fall Requesting a stm to form a task group So I guess we should have seen that one coming right back Around but the specific request from a stm is a direct result of a letter staff sent a stm last fall Great. So whatever the executive executive director's decision It does sound like we'll continue to support that effort at a minimum. Is that correct? Yes, absolutely their Participation in the voluntary standard is Still separate from whether or not we lead the task group great because I know that there's some excellent work out of the University of Ottawa and other institutions including I believe from the gentleman who requested that we Leave the task group to try to find some Way to create a baseline standards for these products So hopefully cpsc staff whether in the leading capacity officially or unofficially can play a major role in that commissioner addler Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman and I just wanted to return to a point that commissioner moho rovick was making Uh, and let me say I I think tip overs is a serious issue And I think you've done a good job of describing tip overs I just want to point out something that's vexing to me about Doing out plan and budget and that is as much as I would love to say that people who are staff who work in the international program Could be reprogrammed to doing tip over What we're talking about with the four hundred thousand dollars is contract dollars. It's not staff resources So if you if you want to free up the four hundred thousand dollars, and I I'm very sympathetic to doing that What you have to do is find four hundred thousand dollars in contract dollars to reprogram and of course, I've got suggestion or two of my own in possibly different directions um, I did also uh Want to return to something that uh, mizad can set at the start because I don't think we've sufficiently congratulated or applauded the tremendous work that you and the staff have done on the strategic plan And the appendix to me is just an extraordinary Thing to see it you trying to integrate the strategic plan into things like the out plan So i'm wondering if you could just give me an overall impression Of your feeling about how effectively the strategic plan Has been and is being integrated into the commission's work with respect to things like budget operating plan in mid-year This was certainly our our first I won't say exactly the first attempt, but certainly the one that has been presented to the to the commission It was a very collaborative activity to develop the strategic plan certainly engaging The commission as well as the commission's Your staff and we really try to Engage across the different functional areas within ncpsc and I certainly have The impression that There was a good job that was done in engaging in employees What i'm concerned about Is that there's a lot of work that was put in into it. We have a document We have some We will have an executive summary document as well as a brochure associated with that And I think my words were used a living document that we really want to develop an appropriate Launch within cpsc So that this will not just sit on on the shelf But this to your to your point commissioner adler. This was the first major Presentation of the strategic plan in a document that will guide us through the certainly through f y f y 6 17 What I think so extraordinary about this is in my experience of At least 40 years of reading strategic plans Is there almost never the real driver of our Of the way we organize our work What typically happens at best is at the end of the process of doing an operating plan or a budget somebody says Oh, yeah, we got to go and make sure that We can find x and y in the strategic plan and it's all done post hope Where they go and say oh, yeah, well this this kind of works for that Part of the strategic plan, but if you really want to have a strategic plan work It's got to be the lead element when you're trying to do things like budget and operating plan And I could be wrong, but my impression is at least it feels like that's what's happened here So again, I congratulate you. I would also like if I could add again some work that fm has done to incorporate the strategic plan Into our day-to-day activities and if I could just have jay speak to that because it does speak to your point Well, thank you. Yeah, we we really have taken the executive director's direction to heart and you know I wanted to just say we had one session back in august Where we when we were finalizing the operating plan It was a four-hour session where we reverse engineered From the performance goals and initiatives in the strategic plan back to the operating plan And that's what you see in the appendix and we're really excited about carrying that same kind of process forward into the fy 18 Budget process that will happen over the next several months In terms of our data reviews that we're doing on a biannual basis And then again, we talked a lot about soliciting commissioner input and priorities I see a lot of possibilities in that area as well. I'm going back and say okay once these planning processes start How can we then pluck from the strategic plan? So a lot of really great ideas? I'm I'm sure the staff really appreciate your compliment on that. So thank you for recognizing the work. Yeah, and please understand I am a long time Skeptic about the value of strategic plans I think they use up a lot more energy than Than the benefit we get from them and this is one that to my delight It feels like all that work is justified. So congratulations Congratulations to you and other folks This is apropos of nothing that I could find in the Op plan, but it is something when I was hearing a question about As we're gathering data and issuing reports about the limitations of the software in terms of expanding data fields And so I think I've made clear to mr. Ray that Over time I would love when I read the compliance reports not to read words that are cut off In the mid spelling and it would also be while I'm at it I'd love to see some spell check element added to the software. I realize this is old software But that it's just an ongoing Annoyance that I have The the the big question I would have at this point is turning to page 20 Excuse me page 14, and I'm looking at the older consumer safety hazards Having been an older person for Many years now. I think when I came to the commission I was already a senior citizen and I'm getting even more seniors Time is going on. I know we do an annual report or a biannual report on senior citizens hazards Is this project 22640 is this going beyond the portable bedrails, but And the annual report, but this is actually exploring additional ways to dedicate the resources to doing projects for senior citizens It is 22640's does include the Adult portable bedrails petition, but does include additional work Specifically what staff's looking on this year is work associated with multi-generational homes We know from the data that there's often Like what they have the sandwich generation older and younger in the same house now So we're looking at safety issues and there's some commonality of safety issues with If you have multiple generations in the home older Citizens and young children for example fire escape making sure that everybody can get out of the house Yeah, and it is true that there's often an overlap between hazards That attach to senior citizens and citizens at large which is not quite the same issue when it comes to children Children have unique hazards that impinge on them but One of the things that I think is so good about the work We do is that we when we do our report on senior citizens, we isolate those products that Produce injuries at a rate greater for senior citizens than for others and that at least gives us a chance to focus our efforts And it is my senior itis that prevents me from remembering the statistic, but If you look at the percentage of senior citizens In the population at large it's growing But the percentage of fatalities that that happen to senior citizens from products is Dramatically disproportionate when it comes to senior citizens. So I'm always delighted to see us Doing that kind of work And I oh one one last point and that is with respect to a question that commissioner berkel Raised about monitoring the internet. I mean the internet is just exploding and so My question is do you feel comfortable that we have the correct level of resources dedicated to monitoring the internet? and that we have The appropriate compliance measures being taken to deal with The violations that we see my sense is now that we just Either send an email or we send a letter but have we developed a way of Finding out whether they're significant bad actors on the internet that we can monitor for compliance purposes I think as you pointed out We we do have a small team that that focuses on this. So You know, there's challenges with that especially when you're dealing with like Aftermarket sales of recalled goods It's often difficult to to deal with that um, you know, the the challenge is Also a tools, you know, we're limited on how much effort can we put into the numbers that are out there and what kind of activities with regards to if we receive Multiple repeat offenders and we believe we're able to identify things like that to that extent we'll escalate that and and and work with our Our general counsel's always for effective remedies as far as I go Yeah, the only last comment I would make before my time expires is that I do seem to Think that we have a fair number of repeat offenders when it comes to selling What they call children's play where but what we call children's sleepwear And I'm glad that we continue to monitor that. Thank you Mr. Robinson Mr. Wilson, I have a couple questions for you I my first one is with respect to the anchor campaign It's no secret that my office has been intimately involved in trying to address the tip-over hazard in on multiple fronts I know we measure impressions and My recollection is that you and I had a conversation Some point in the last few months About trying to find a better metric for the effectiveness of the anchor campaign rather than just people who See it but rather Whether we were actually altering people's behavior whether we were getting people to actually anchor their furniture My first question is whether I'm recalling that correctly and the second one is whether we've been able to find out any information about the effectiveness So you're correct about our intent to endeavor to have such a survey That speaks to the limitations that we have with the current budget for f y 16 into 17 Part of our activities will be to develop such a survey Now that will take time to get through omb presumably And it's expensive So we want to do that. We want to take this singular data point that we got from the aware national awareness survey And build off people are hearing about it, but are they acting upon it? So we needed to be on both tracks continuing to do our work to create that awareness But assess whether awareness is translating into action. That's the key Okay, I wasn't sure whether we'd had an opportunity to measure whether it was affecting people's behavior um, I would just like to to say um on this first of all that I am I am in full agreement with the observations that commissioner moharovic made about this being very much a latent hazard About how many deaths we're seeing not only with furniture that doesn't comply with the voluntary standard But furniture that does comply with the voluntary standard my and I know That chairman k has has said what he can say about our compliance um endeavors and about The a and pr so I would certainly strongly disagree with commissioner moharovic's observation that the anchorate campaign is the only effort We're making to address this hazard. I think as I say we've been trying on multiple fronts But because of these observations, I've heard from commissioner moharovic. I would just say that I am Optimistic that he is in my office can work to Aggressively try to get a change in the voluntary standard to make it The stability performance require Requirement much more robust, which I believe is the first and foremost way in which we should be trying to prevent these deaths The education campaign only goes so far for so many different reasons But first of all we have to make our furniture stable So I look look forward to working with you on the on the voluntary standard on that and And on the a and pr that staff will propose Um, I have another question for you. Um, mr. Wilson and that is in the in 2017 op 54 and I and I just spoke about the number of impressions from recalls Um This this I assume is coming from the recalling company's monthly reports No impressions. This is from our own monitoring service. So we were we were worried about double counting Uh prior years, so we pulled out just the recall data and that is a 10 billion impression goal that we have Okay, and and while that's an impressive number. Let me just tell you my concern. I have watched Now on multiple occasions when our staff including you um, is presented With a plan by a company of how they would like to conduct Their recall or sometimes it's a so-called recall And how strongly we push back because what they're proposing is not What we believe would best protect the consumer You carefully negotiate what the press release should be the commissioners approve the press releases That include what we believe at the cpsc needs to be in This recall program for consumers alternatives in order to protect the consumer And then what i'll see is the initial message that goes out both from us and from chairman k and from you And from the company is consistent with what we've agreed upon And then what I watch as the daily clips come in Is that the message gets eroded and within a very short time on multiple occasions What i've seen is the message that the company is getting out there no longer conforms with what we negotiated with them But rather only contains the portions that they brought to us at the get-go and that we said were insufficient And that's very troubling to me. So what I wonder and I and I bring these the the two examples up only because Because our most visible recalls of late have been the ikea recall and the The samsung Galaxy seven recall But is there any way for us because if the impressions That we're measuring in these kind of numbers include messages That are insufficient to protect the consumer By our own Which is clear from what we negotiated those as I understand are still getting counted as the impressions So I guess i'm just wondering is is whether there's any effort to try to develop a metric for the content Of the message that's that is Getting these impressions as opposed to just the message which frequently is insufficient from my observations mish I understand your point and We can always do better in our discussions with companies to make sure what they plan to put out is Pre-cleared through the agency. We try to do that on a regular basis and sometimes There's additional messaging that we see that to your point may not be entirely consistent with what the accepted language was And released let me share one development that we will see as an agency in the coming weeks that we will build upon in 17 And that is the work for responsive design of our website And a more easily understood way to make our website more accessible on mobile platforms I think we will see some very impressive growth of people coming to our site Seeing our information In a mobile platform and there's value to that because then you get the whole story When you see it on our site so something to kind of look forward to as we build that out and sell that to consumers going forward I'm glad to hear that and I and any thoughts that thoughts that you have going forward in terms of a metric of how we can Measure the content would be much appreciated. Um, that's all I have by way of questions. Uh, I have Uh, well, I can't take that back. I've got one more in the past. Um, and this is not for you, mr. Wolfson I'm sure you're glad to hear But in past Op plans there have been there sections each of them has had a section In the different parts of the agency for unfunded work And there are priority projects that are listed That did not make it into the op plan for that particular year and often we will revisit those when we come to the mid-year Adjustments this year. We have no unfunded work Listed so I'm just wondering if this means that all the proposed work from staff is funded in the op plan or Or the op plan or the deferred um portion or are there any specific Projects including contract dollars and fts that are not included that we should know about that we may be seeing in the mid-year So we did not collect and vet unfunded this year as part of the operating plan process Because we're already at 130.5, which is a you know, pretty good increase for us. I would point to two Known Reasonably vetted set of unfunded. It's however the first would be I would refer you to the fy 2017 omb budget request We had requested additional funds for chronic hazards and additional funds for import surveillance Uh and additional funds for maintaining current levels for various things and none of those were included in the congressional request And those are still vetted Known requirements above the 130.5 the second one would be atvs We spent a fair amount of time in the spring developing a multi-year project plan for atvs We funded part of that at the mid-year in 2016, but there's still a fair piece of that that's unfunded Thank you. That's helpful So I I that concludes my questions unless I have any follow-ups after Commissioner mohorovic and commissioner burkle, but I would just say again. Thank you so much and I look forward to our continuing discussions over the next few weeks and Figure out what we do and don't do. Thank you Commissioner burkle Thank you. I do just want to comment on what commissioner robinson just mentioned with regards to Companies getting their messages out. So having been in the public life. I would have put out a press release or I put out a statement And then a local newspaper or an ap press or whomever Would take that and they will interpret my words and so it's not oftentimes the company's fault It is what happens to it once it's dispersed out there in Neverland, so I don't think it is as intentional as it maybe sounds I have a This the tip over issue is of grave concern to me Um, I first of all want to laud My fellow commissioners for the initiatives they've taken for the hard work they've put in with regards to The i&e campaign and the anchor campaign And as you mentioned, it's award-winning So I do want to make sure I express that appreciation. I'm a big proponent of i&e campaigns. I think that Used properly and put in the right form and and when they rise to this level where the quality is good and the All of the markets that it's put in and it's it's that title Really is so indicative of what the campaign is that can be very effective I In this to commissioner rams and I agree with her on this and I disagree with my colleague mr. Mr. Morovic I think the the agency Is gone way and I'll say overboard in mitigating this issue with regards to the compliance actions and with regards to The standards committee And I was very disappointed as I expressed it to the chairman to see the a npr in the in the ops plan Before we got what we requested at mid-year which was an evaluation as to whether or not the 14 standard is adequate It seemed to me before we go to rulemaking and we We make a determination that it's inadequate and we need to strengthen the standard Which is what happened right out of the gate before we've ever measured The data as to whether or not the 14 standard is adequate There's been a push to to change that standard I think I really do believe we should have waited for that package to come to the commissioners and see what staff says And so I do want to spend a little bit of time as to that package And I know it'd be difficult to forecast to us what's in you know in this arena What's in that package, but I'd like to just express my expectations for that package. I think with regards to idei's And Maybe you can answer this question now or you want to go back and see what's in the briefing package I would like to see all of the idei's and which where the incidents where the injuries and the death occurred Were those pieces compliant with the 2014 standard? Do we know that information? Do we know that those dressers even complied with the 2009 standard? Before we're talking about advancing yet another standard a stricter standard I think it's incumbent upon an agency that prides itself in being data driven That we established that What where are the incidents and are those dressers compliant or not compliant and are those dressers ones that were manufactured After 2014 after the standard was enacted where there might be an expectation Certainly not an obligation because it is a voluntary standard an expectation That they would have complied with the 14 standard, but if their dresses that were manufactured Prior to this that 14 standard Do we have that information that is all relevant to whether or not the 14 standard is adequate? And until and unless we get that information I I do think it's irresponsible and it's very aggressive To have an an pr in our in our ops plan and I I've expressed that to the chairman and Really wished that this could have stayed out, but unfortunately It's reminiscent of window coverings You know we And and with regards to the i&e campaigns both of those issues are analogous I would like to see and I I've met with incredible resistance an i&e campaign for window coverings If we're saying it is a hidden latent hazard Then it's incumbent upon us and that 1.6 million dollars to make sure we allocate funds for that campaign as well as for the tip over campaign I think we have to be consistent We have to if it is a hazard We have to look at all of the arenas to make sure we're We're doing what we can do to partner with and hopefully You know with the with the industry will They'll reach an adequate voluntary standard for window coverings. We're hopeful that that will happen But I do believe we should be partnering with them in an i&e campaign and I I've been really I'll say stunned As to the opposition with regards to an i&e campaign when it comes to window coverings And I I think it's analogous with the latent hazard of tip overs But I'm very I want to go back to where I started and that is the the data with regards to whether or not that 14 standard is adequate And I also Want to know with regards to because the Chairman did bring it up The the kids study I want to know if if an analysis was Analysis was performed if we're saying since we don't have our briefing package And we don't know whether or not the standards adequate. So there's some reliance on the Nancy on the Nancy Cole's on the kids Um Study that was done have we done an analysis on that on that study to determine that the testing conducted by them Uh correlates to the incidents that are occurring in the marketplace I think that that um I'm not aware of us doing a independent study. We have we're aware of the report We've reviewed it. I would say a cursory review, but not a not a detailed technical critique of the of the reporter of the testing And so if we're going to rely on that report or at least use it as Supporting evidence why we need to move to a mandatory standard I think it's incumbent upon us to make sure that the data in that In that study is something that we can agree with and we we We need to check it out and I think that is something we should be talking about To make sure our data is valid before we push forward with an You know a stricter or stringent standard or worse yet to mandatory rulemaking um I I don't know independent of what our Package is going to indicate to the to the commissioners What other analysis has been done to put the anpr into the ops plan? Is there anything else or is it what's going to be in that package? What has led us to the point where we Put an anpr in the package without Seemingly as far as I know we have the information we need to support that ampere In evaluating whether to really evaluating to from staff what activities we're going to do on tip over this year Uh, we felt that we needed to put forward a number of different risk management approaches to furniture tip over I&E campaign which we've heard a lot about the vol continued voluntary standard effort Consistent with how we've approached other hazards. We're looking at a parallel track continuing with voluntary standard But an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking and in looking at the risk management approach of an a and pr We purposely looked at an a and pr because it is just that and that it's the notification to the public Should the commission, you know vote to publish the federal register notice that We are considering rulemaking, you know, it's early in the process. It allows us to receive public comment on Proposed approaches. It's early in the process. So we don't yet necessarily have Proposed performance requirements that it would be specifically but it's an opportunity to Put out to the public that we are looking at that as a risk management option being a mandatory regulation And opening up public comment on that approach So if we're talking about mitigating a latent hazard, um, has the staff definitively determined that the 14 standard is inadequate That's still completing that analysis and we're not done with that yet. No So we don't have that information yet Right, okay That's all I have for now, but I will have another round. Thank you Commissioner marhovi. Thank you, mr. chairman chairman, I'd like to start by Having the record removed of all the nice things I said about my colleagues today I wasn't planning on talking more about Furniture tip over and anchor it, but I feel compelled to do so and to defend myself in my position There are millions of products on products in the marketplace today That no effort in the voluntary standards arena No efforts in the mandatory standards arena will will be able to impact Furthermore, we know for a fact that there are non-defective Chest of drawers where people are putting televisions on top of them Doing something that we wish they would not but they are doing it They're going to continue to do it and our only way to get the message across to consumers To not put televisions on on chest of drawers Another furniture that it's not designed to hold Is to go ahead and tell them through the anchorage campaign and to further more to anchor that product So I believe it's dishonest to say that we have mitigation strategies to affect that product To mitigate that hazard through other means through our voluntary through our standards process We don't if we don't continue to fund anchor it. I have not heard of another mitigation strategy for that scenario For product that none of us that nobody in the office of compliance would consider a defective product A hazardous scenario scenario certainly a lethal scenario Certainly, but the only way to mitigate that Is to do it through information and education and we have an award-winning campaign So I'm disappointed that my I don't know what other mitigation strategy My fellow commissioners have in mind to address this hazard other than we're going to choose not to address this hazard because we do have Too many hazards that we'd like to address but funding doesn't allow for it Because I do think it's intellectually dishonest to say that we can address that through Standards through mandatory rulemaking Would you yield If you if you'll get to that particular Point I didn't say anything nice, too But I'd like to remove from the record nice things. I've said about you in the past That's what I was going to say. You didn't say anything nice about me Um, I just want to say I was in north carolina last week in hickory and I spoke to the furniture industry and I would They would beg to differ at what you're saying And I cannot speak to the compliance actions that are going on in this agency But um, that is addressing the dressers that are out in the marketplace aggressively and I Don't agree with the strategy, but it's there prisoner burkle the strategy to address misuse of dressers and putting crt tv's on top of Chest of drawers is being addressed today outside of anchor it Is that what you're suggesting? I would say that our compliance action here Not with the cr tv's But with dressers your original point was whether or not the dressers complied You said there's a all of the incidents dressers not complying with the standard And that issue is being addressed much to my chagrin Mr. Wolfson, what percentage of fatalities associated with furniture tipover involves a crt on top? This is from our standard literature Quickly, please. It's a number I don't have a breakout just the crt But I do know that nearly half involve both the furniture and the tv coming down together Relate to the fatalities. So both of those hazards need to be addressed Agreed and that's what I agree with too And that's why I think the anchorage campaign is so important because also the anchorage campaign covers those other products That are subject to the voluntary standard Or potentially a future mandatory standard if we can get that message across Because if we all just think that a future standard is going to mitigate this Hazard to a level that we're comfortable with I think we're kidding ourselves Even if we have an effective standard consumers will use these products In foreseeable ways that any Reasonable standard wouldn't be able to address unless we come to the conclusion That a chest of drawers needs to be a tv stand and there's a standard for that I personally don't think my chest of drawers should be a tv stand because we know people are going to put A tv stand on top of a chest of drawers. That's my personal opinion So, uh, I've used the first half of my time Talking but it was fun to get in a debate with my republican colleague commissioner berkel on the subject I think we see more alike in the subject than is let on here Um in terms of of letting on as well the chairman mentioned that he suggested to put rule making In the operating plan an a n pr Mr. Borla's you mentioned that staff considered putting an a n pr in in furniture, so Is this a chicken and the egg scenario? I mean who who instructed whom did this bubble up from the staff? Or as the chairman said did he instruct staff to put a n pr in a mandatory standard? It certainly came up from the chairman and but in terms of evaluating You know the chairman's request that is the thought process that staff went through and looking at the rule making It's a smart move. I used to have a ceo to him when he made a recommendation I uh, you know I pretty I gave it the pretty good thought as well Where I where I strongly agree with commissioner berkel here is and chairman with all due respect To put in our operating plan an a n pr Suggests, we don't even have the report this commission funded an essential piece of data to In to inform the commission whether or not the 20 57 14 standard is effective And we don't even have the results of that How can we suggest and dedicate resources that could otherwise be spent elsewhere? Into an a n pr without having the results of that work Now I know for a fact you don't have all these all these reports And i'm not suggesting that you hold them and you know and just keep your only keep you you get informed These come up when it comes up with the rest of the commission But it suggests that almost that why do we need this other report? Some people are saying that systems are rigged in washington dc It seems a little bit like this thing's rigged if we're suggesting that hey the outcome of that report better be A n pr and go into mandatory rule making Um, I was a strong supporter uh behind I think it was a co-amendment, but commissioner robinson took the lead I'm I'm happy to take as much credit for that for that forthcoming project in terms of determining the effectiveness of 20 57 as As is justified, uh, but because I think that's a critical piece of information to inform what we do next with future production and I don't think now is a place to discuss or to debate whether or not an a n pr is appropriate at this point I'm in the op plan, but I do think it's appropriate to talk about whether or not Anchoring it should be funded in the in the operating plan I think before and i'm willing to move off of op plan, but I think the chairman would like would chairman Would you like me to yield to and no, okay? I thought you were looking to wanting to respond on on Further on furniture tip over or anchor it um I will I will move off of anchor it at this point in time, but I felt obliged to to uh Defend my position on why I think it should be a funding priority moving on to crib bumpers If we can the staff just recently completed a a package With four identified regulatory options to address the risks of deaths and injury associated with crib bumpers and In looking at the mandatory standards table staff does not Suggest or recommend preparation of either an a n pr or an n pr But instead suggests data analysis and or technical review What is foreseen in terms of the staff's recommendation as opposed to I would otherwise Lead to be led to believe that staff suggested Rulemaking if there was if it said a n pr n pr as opposed to d atr But there was a thorough amount of work that was done What what more in terms of d a data analysis and or technical review still needs to be done and is recommended by staff So in 17 on crib bumper staff has Main activity is related to the voluntary standards related to crib bumpers There is also some data analysis work in there The last direction from the commission on rulemaking was to initiate rulemaking as a result of approval of the petition and as laid out in the record of commission action So we've have laid out in the package four different rulemaking Options all of which from 104th really through Do require work as we laid out in the package and so the 17 work relates to Voluntary standard work also looking further at performance requirements. I think it was clear from the package that there was still some work that could be done on Defining performance requirements. There's a lot of unknown still and that's the other area that staff's looking at for crib bumpers You mentioned that staff was under direction for rulemaking In that case, why why wasn't there a recommendation for a npr npr in the mandatory standards table? we When we looked at what we needed to do for 17 we just we felt that For the resources we were putting forward that Doing both more I guess additional data analysis that research piece on the mandatory side in the voluntary side Was the appropriate way to go in 17? Okay, I'll just close it up. If can I know I'm out of time But if we were suggesting to to not go forward with mandatory rulemaking I just wonder why it wasn't a similar approach as is suggested with upholstered furniture to send a briefing package to recommend terminating any Rulemaking procedure moving forward to then unclutter further the regulatory agenda. Sorry for going over mr. Chairman Dr. Worley, so you want to address that I'm happy to use my time for that mr. Stevenson Sorry, can you repeat that question? I If staff is not recommending moving forward with rulemaking as they have Recommended not moving forward or terminating rulemaking on upholstered furniture I'm just curious as to why they didn't follow a similar approach with crib bumpers as they did with upholstered furniture And to not increase what's otherwise a cluttered regulatory agenda where we're not really promulgating that's all From the analysis and as we laid out while They were we recognized on crib bumpers that there are going to be difficulties with going forward with rulemaking Staff didn't get to a point where they felt that the recommendation should be to terminate rulemaking Thanks, dr. Borlase, uh, I would hope that uh, we can Run this last round and this will be our final round for a sake of Humaneness for the staff who sit in front of us. I'm sure that they would concur with that and behind us commissioner Others correct. So I'm going to not use up all my time as well I do want to thank dr. Borlase for those answers on the crib bumper package I've had strong feelings about this product for many years even when I worked for the prior chairman And I do plan to offer an operating plan amendment that I will of course circulate amongst the commissioners after discussing the staff About finding a path forward and even in the staff package that was sent up Certainly combined with the package that was sent up in 2013 I do believe that there is an ongoing hazard that is also addressable But I'll get into that later as the plan discussions continue Uh, I do want to just mention briefly about anchor it that I don't think the issue is an abstract one or a conclusive one about the Value of that program. I think just think it's all relative and you hinted at this commissioner moho rovick. It's about making very difficult choices Uh, I'm certainly open to any amendment that you may put forth to find this money But no surprise with the discussions that I've had with mr. Wolfson That at some point we have to know what we're getting for this money and while We may have a belief about its effectiveness for any education program I don't know that we've done the difficult work that I think we need to do to know that this money Considering how precious that it is for us for any I&E campaigns is actually making a difference So that's my hesitation with it. It has nothing to do with its It's uh abstract value. I think it's an excellent campaign In an ideal world, we would get five million dollars above our base I'm sure mr. Wolfson would be very happy with that To fund this and to fund it robustly and to put into it an evaluative component that would actually give us some type of Inclusive responses, so I've nothing more on that. Thank you again to the staff both for sitting here and enduring this I know that these are never easy. I think you did a phenomenal job And we look forward to working with you on the questions that we have and the amendments that we're forming commissioner adler I thank you, mr. Chairman, and I will try to be brief and I Have been reminded that we got a little carried away with the regulatory agenda and I've been implored not to repeat the length of that meeting but listening to commissioner moho rovick and My colleagues on tip over I don't only use a tried expression it you're both right because there are certain things that are Contradicting one another but I think it's fair to say they're both valid points To say that we're doing effective recalls Even if you don't approve of them recalls is a terrific mitigation strategy for stuff that's in the marketplace But the point commissioner moho rovick that I think you're making that is extraordinarily on target is That that's part of a multifaceted approach and we could have an effective recall program that still leaves millions and millions of People at risk and so the two are not inconsistent And it may and what you're doing is making a point which I confess i'm very sympathetic to that This might be an area if we can possibly find some additional resources To use to address tip overs because it is such an extraordinary problem. I also I don't want to get too lost into whether we do an a and pr we don't but I do want to go at least to a more generic Observation one of the things that I heard that makes me uncomfortable is this notion that well We don't know what the injury pattern is and I just want to reiterate that when the people who wrote the consumer product safety act Wrote it they went out of their way to send a strong message that we don't have to wait for a body count And I hope we never get into the posture that we Are immobile until we've seen bodies accumulate There are tremendous engineers within this agency who can look at Products test them and say this product is a hazard And especially when we've got an equally excellent human factor staff that can help Paint that picture and it would be my hope that we never have to wait for bodies to accumulate that we Find out early on that there's a hazard and we act decisively so End of comments. Thank you Commissioner Robinson just very quickly. Um, I I want to be perfectly clear that Mr. Wilson the campaign that's been put together for anchor. It's been outstanding I just and certainly I think this is a multi-front Effort to try to stop kids from dying and being seriously injured from the furniture tipping over But you certainly the beginning and end of what we need to do is not an i and e campaign as commissioner Burkle seems to be implying We first have to design out the hazard So I don't mean anything that I'm saying in terms of the other efforts that we should be making to in any way Imply that the anchor campaign is not important But as we all know it's going to reach a limited number of people number one number two There are so many people with little kids that cannot anchor their furniture to the wall without paying a penalty that they Can't afford whether it's veterans housing whether it's whether it's public housing whether it's rental units There are we just know that there are limitations even if we got the message to everyone in the country There there are limits to what we can do with the anchor at campaign To to describe us as having been overboard going overboard on this. I think is is extremely Very very very inaccurate. There's still so much dangerous product out the dangerous product out there I think all of us have been Impressed in a very negative way at how much furniture both the kids report And we are finding that doesn't even meet the most minimal standard And and anybody will tell you that whether the voluntary standard that's in place does or does not Is or is is not adequate? Nobody's going to say it's anything other than the most minimal standard And there's so much dangerous product out there that doesn't even meet that But then as commissioner mo more rovick pointed out the deaths are happening with things that meet this standard And it doesn't take it a rocket scientist to to stand and watch I mean I was down in north carolina at the ace tam meeting and they brought out Product that had been selected for the committee and for the cpsc to see And they showed us what what furniture met the the standard and it was There was just no way that a real life situation with a two-year-old scampering around was going to in any way Be sufficient to to design out this standard. So I look forward to working on this Design out this hazard. I look forward to working on multiple fronts on this And I certainly think the anchor at campaign has been and is very effective But there are so many other fronts on on which we should be working Nothing further Thank you. I just wanted to emphasize my point and that is that If we are pushing for an anpr or we are pushing for a more stringent voluntary standard It's incumbent upon us to have the data that justifies that And until and unless I see this briefing package with the idis with the information the injury and death information And whether or not those uh dressers complied with the standard I I can't I can't make that judgment call and so I just believe we are data driven and that should be our emphasis I just want to talk briefly about um upholstered furniture and the package we started the discussion and I appreciated the opportunity yesterday um with regards to now what and um So we are going to get a briefing package. Well, we did get a briefing package on tb 117 and um Whether or not to adopt it as a standard and also with um a recommendation from the staff that we terminate the flammability rulemaking standard And I appreciate all the work that went into that and um found it very useful We talked about this a little bit yesterday, but I want to hear um From you today. How will the termination of the rulemaking um on the flammability affect The resources that are allocated with regards to this hazard So for 17 and I appreciate the question because it does highlight a point that staff wanted to make sure was clear in the tv 117 package While staff is recommending terminating the mandatory rulemaking That's not the same as staff not wanting to work to address the hazard anymore staff recognizes that when it comes to residential fires and especially deadly Uh residential fires that upholstered furniture the fuel load In furniture is a contributor to these large fires and we want to address that risk What staff saying is we want to take a couple other approaches that don't include mandatory rulemaking the other risk management approaches So in the 17 operating plan, we've put the resources towards voluntary standards work Put the resources towards Research and then you know other other work with what's available perhaps with scott wolfson and ocm Can you talk a little bit about the the briefing package that we're expecting with regards to terminating the rulemaking? Will that include all of the testing that's been done? All of the chairs and all of the research that's been done out at the lab From time to time we've seen the contracts coming across and being posted but The in-depth information that was gleaned from all of those studies and all of those tests that were done Will that be included in the briefing package? Yes, and that And I guess i'll turn to gc to talk about what are the requirements for terminating the package and What it comes down to is from ex hr. We provide all the technical information to support those requirements without Going into a legal analysis that I would provide to you In closed session the process requirements that are referred to earlier in terms of ROVs would be the same the staff would present to the commission A briefing package recommending termination and the reasons why they recommend termination with that recommendation for the commission To then make the ultimate decision. Thank you. I think my question is more technical in in that Will those the all of the testing that's been done to lead us to the point where Staff is recommending we terminate that room making will that be included in the briefing package? Yes, if it's not already published and referred to in another place we would include that as part of the body Of justifying our recommendation. Okay, and will the briefing package Present us with supporting data as to itb 117 wasn't adequate to address the smolder standard I'm not For the f y 17 planned work staff's not planning on doing any additional Analysis of tb 117 beyond what we presented in the briefing package last week. Okay One of the reasons for terminating the rulemaking is that staff can't make a connection between the small bench scale test results And compare that to the flammability performance So if that's a problem, and it's been an ongoing problem and the reason why they're advising us to terminate the rulemaking how then do we when staff is is In the voluntary standards process, isn't that a problem that will translate to the voluntary standards committees? I mean that same being able to to Find the connection between the small bench test How do you address that? It is and it's a recognized problem and staff's been working for years on providing Recommendations to the voluntary standards. I know From my time in engineering sciences. I think back in 2011 we sent a letter to ASTM with recommendations on how to improve Their voluntary standards. So staff's recognized it as a problem And you know, we've worked with the voluntary standards before and we plan to keep working with them on on addressing it One of my concerns and I think I alluded to this yesterday, but I'll say it publicly because we're now in a In the process of determining which way to go on flammability issue And so we are going to get this briefing package from staff that recommends we terminate rulemaking on flammability It seems to me it would make sense that we would pause And give us time to absorb and to read and review that information and then say to staff Policy-wise this is where we think we should go If we don't do that, how will staff determine Which direction to go in my understanding as nfpa deals with large open flames It seems like we've already made the determination that that's not the way to go So I'm under I'm trying to understand how will staff be directed to In this endeavor and how How will they focus their efforts? So we've uh In the 17 op plant our recommended efforts in 17 are aligned with the way we've we've put forward in the op plant So we would have to then it would be i'm coming upon the commission if we wanted to change directions Or we could do that before we vote on the ops plan. Correct. Okay. All right Um, we talked a little bit yesterday about nfpa and I I think you're going to get us the information about the standards committees and What the makeup of the committees are and whether who's at the table and how they they reach decisions So we'd appreciate that Correct. We're working on that. We just weren't able to get it turned around before this morning That's all I have for today. Thank you Thank you. Mr. Robert. Thank you, mr. Chairman and uh, just to stay with the pulsed furniture for a moment Um, I know you have in front of me because I distributed it to you as a reminder the v-star report from the mid-year f y 16 to get into Um, a level of granularity in terms of what we're going to fund staff To to resource towards a voluntary standard now nfpa 277 You mentioned the extent to which upholstered furniture Adds to the fuel load of a fire. So is that voluntary standards work to Mitigate or create a voluntary standard so that upholstered furniture can withstand large open flame Is that a transition from small open flame? Which might be from a matches or cigarette lighter where upholstered furniture is the first Item ignited to moving towards a different kind of hazard scenario where there's already A fire started and upholstered furniture is as you said contributing to the fuel load. Is that correct? I'll have to get back to you on the whether it's a small open flame or a large open flame with with nfpa 277 in that just to confirm because Different following as we've gone through it over the years There's been different definitions of what's a small open flame versus a large open flame So I just want to make sure I can get correct for you nfpa's approach on how they're defining The different flame sizes and the flame types and what it's simulating because it's been changed over the years Thank you in your own words. You said contributing to the fuel load Is what is envisioned behind contributing to the fuel load? That wouldn't be first item ignited right because fuel load assumes that there's already a load Yeah, not it's already a fire. You are correct that it expands it beyond first item ignited So if it was the something in the trash can that ignited first, you know And then and then the furniture ignites and then it limits egress And then we can find additional fatalities property damage associated with whereas if we mitigated it we could reduce that right correct Yeah, I think we're on the same page Nobody foresees barrier technology At all being a potential effective mitigator for large open flames. Is that correct? I mean I've heard of Barrier technology and it's limited potential with regards to small open flame, but is there is there any is is there any reasonable Mines that think in the fire protection arena that barrier technology could with could help mitigate large open flame I know we're still looking at that. Um, we've just finished in uh posted Last year's rounds of research. We're still looking at it Um, I think it's fair to say that we don't think it's at a point where we can point to You know, there's still a lot of applied research that needs to go on in that area To your point on barriers, we know there's a difference between a barrier for smoldering versus a barrier for Open flame kind of independent of the size and trying to resolve those two because one sometimes Uh propagates the growth of the other So if you have a good smoldering barrier, it may not work well for open flame and vice versa Thank you very much. Mr. Ray. I have some I have two questions in compliance um to page 26 project number 34 352 is um interesting to me in terms of a Suggestion that uh with our import surveillance activities will be able to start Focusing on defects and I know that's come up uh at the commission level And so I think there's a shared appreciation and an understanding of uh of what we hope to gain by that Can you provide some clarity in how we propose to go about that at import? I think uh many are very familiar as I am with our uh with our successful efforts with regulated products But in terms of defect analysis at the port of entry is one that uh peaks my interest So I'll um talk very generically without getting into specific um techniques we'll be using You know, I think we've um Highlighted the how the ram and the targeting system has helped us Um identify potential violations on a on a regulated side Uh, and we realized that on the defect side It's it's a challenge But what I would say is that we are looking at ways that we could do that And work with The import team working with the compliance team to help in those situations And some of that is um as simple as using the data to understand where Things that we've identified as the defects are coming from sources trying to identify potential sources where Products that are defective are coming from and and trying to target on that basis But without getting too much more specific We're looking at different ways to try to use the targeting systems to improve it beyond just the regulated Well, thank you. I applaud those efforts. I'm encouraged by them and excited about it And I'll be continuing to work with you in the uh the extent to which we're successful moving in that direction I think that's a wonderful turn The last point that I have for the meeting to the meeting today is with regards to page 20 on the compliance Uh priorities. I did notice a prioritization with regards to tracking labels And uh tracking labels and and their effectiveness with regards to I I've never seen them pointed to as uh as anything that is Improving recall effectiveness. I recognize that it's a congressional mandate and therefore we had to promulgate a a statute And my research has found out where that came from from a set of recommendations I came from commission or more and congress took their word for it What are we doing with tracking labels in terms of a priority for compliance in fi 17 So I won't get into the specifics of the enforcement policy that we're talking about but how would characterize this as This is really probably more of an internal efficiency Exercise that the office of compliance and import safety team has identified As a way to make the current process that we are using to enforce tracking label violations to make it a more efficient process well I would hope in looking at the limited resources you have available to you considering in a risk-based decision making consideration the extent to which greater compliance with our tracking label Regulation will help safety in any essence at all. I'm not suggesting Enforcement guidance or something other than that But there is a lot of different violations that we can direct attention towards and I'm just wondering what the yield To use a term that the chairman used earlier in get it ramping up compliance with the tracking label as I've still yet to hear anybody finding from what was expected through cps ia the Mandatory tracking labels for children's products. And in fact I researched as many of our recalls and none of them even mentioned the tracking label So I don't know how it it is also as the statute Intends it's going to help consumers Understand better whether or not a recall is associated with a product that they do or don't have so We can follow up on that. Maybe I can get a better understanding on Why that's considered a compliance priority for 2017. Thank you, mr. Chairman Thank you to the commission to the staff including our special assistants We are due to vote on october 19th in a public setting. There will be a lot of