CPSC Votes To Terminate Rulemaking On Five-Gallon Buckets

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission voted (2-0) today to terminate rulemaking proceedings on five-gallon buckets. In addressing the issue of 36 drownings of toddlers a year, the five major manufacturers of buckets have placed warning labels in English and Spanish on at least 80 percent of their buckets, with the percentage of labelling to increase in the coming months. In addition, manufacturers have committed $.5 million to an information and education campaign that will warn consumers of the drowning hazard to extend over the next several years.

CPSC Chairman Ann Brown said, "When I came to CPSC, very little had been done to address this hazard, which contributes to the deaths of about three toddlers a month. I am pleased that industry agreed to work cooperatively with CPSC and that we were able to avoid a mandatory standard, which is always the court of last resort."

Commissioner Mary Sheila Gall said, "The federal government cannot mandate changes in products as a substitute for responsible adult supervision. The tragedy is that none of these children had to die."

Statement of Ann Brown, Chairman, US Consumer Product Safety Commission
Five-gallon Buckets - February 8, 1995

I have voted today to terminate the Commission's rulemaking proceeding for five-gallon buckets. In view of the progress made by the bucket industry in placing English and Spanish warning labels on five-gallon buckets, its commitment to an ongoing information and education campaign, the significant cost to the Commission and industry that could result in attempting to redesign buckets to meet a performance standard with no assurance that such a standard would be practicable and reasonable for all buckets, or even a majority of buckets, it makes sense to terminate the proceeding.

On May 19, 1994, the Commission unanimously voted to start a rulemaking proceeding by publishing an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) to address the hazard of toddlers drowning in five-gallon plastic buckets. This hazard has been a hidden one not appreciated by parents and caregivers. An estimated 36 toddlers drown each year in five-gallon buckets.

The Commission began its rulemaking proceeding in large part because with the exception of the gypsum industry and The Procter and Gamble Company, the bucket industry had not taken adequate steps to label its buckets voluntarily with a warning of the drowning hazard. Further, it had failed to initiate an aggressive information and education campaign to warn consumers of the risk of drowning.

Because of the Commission's vote to start a rulemaking proceeding, the bucket industry got the message. Industry understood, perhaps for the first time, that this Commission was serious about addressing the hazard of children drowning in five-gallon buckets. By letter dated January 17, 1995, counsel for five major bucket manufacturers, Bennett Industries, Plastican, Inc., Letica Corporation, North America Packaging Corporation (NAMPAC), and Ropak Corporation, represented that those five companies comprise approximately 90% of the U.S. bucket market, and that approximately 80% of their buckets were now being labeled in both Spanish and English. Counsel also represented that those figures would increase in the upcoming months.

I fully expect these firms will honor their commitment to label their buckets. Indeed, to the extent buckets do not bear a drowning hazard warning, it may be appropriate for the Commission's Compliance staff to investigate whether it believes the failure to label rises to the level of a substantial product hazard under the Consumer Product Safety Act.

As a result of the ANPR, the five largest bucket manufacturers also began a substantial information and education program. They issued an audio news release and an audio public service announcement in late fall, 1994, warning of the bucket drowning hazard. They are in the final stages of producing a large color poster which will be widely distributed to a good cross section of organizations. To date, these firms have committed or spent approximately one quarter million dollars on this campaign.

More importantly, counsel to these firms has represented that the five firms are committed to continuing their information and education campaign over the next 2 1/2 years, for roughly an additional one quarter million dollars.

I am pleased with the new approach of the five bucket manufacturers identified above. Their commitment to educating the public about the hazard of drowning in buckets through labeling and an information and education campaign is laudable.

My decision to vote to terminate this rulemaking proceeding is not an easy one. When I voted for an ANPR, I expressed concern that warning labels and an information and education campaign alone might not be sufficient to reduce the drowning hazard. I still have that concern. I am heartened, however, by the fact that since September, 1993, when the California legislation requiring buckets sold in that state to bear warning labels in both English and Spanish took effect, the Commission is unaware of any deaths in California involving a labeled bucket.

The staff advises that to continue to seek solutions to the bucket drowning hazard through a performance standard is likely to involve significant staff time and Commission resources that would divert the Commission from other important activities. It also would take many years of work with no assurance of success. This Commission has a myriad of safety issues to address and limited resources. I believe it is best to concentrate those resources on problems that are more clearly solvable within a reasonable period of time.

In voting to terminate the rulemaking proceeding, I am not suggesting the bucket industry should stop looking for design solutions to the bucket drowning hazard. I encourage industry to continue to work on possible design alternatives to address the drowning hazard. For example, the Olin Corporation has developed a child access restrictor designed to fit easily in buckets. The device which Olin anticipates installing in its buckets by the end of the year has the potential to eliminate the drowning risk, does not interfere with the use of the buckets' contents, and is very inexpensive. Although this fix may not work for all products packaged in buckets, it shows that when industry puts its considerable ingenuity to work, it can come up with innovative, practical, and economical safety fixes. I commend Olin's efforts and urge industry to continue to explore other alternatives.

STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER MARY SHEILA GALL
ON THE TERMINATION OF RULEMAKING PROCEEDINGS REGARDING FIVE GALLON BUCKETS
February 8, 1995

Today's decision by the Commission to terminate rulemaking proceedings on plastic five gallon buckets is an appropriate ending to the Commission's activities in this area. I am pleased that we were able to take decisive action, rather than allowing this project to continue into 1998. Based on today's update, it is clear that development of a voluntary performance standard and prototype solutions were unworkable, despite the best efforts of industry and our staff.

I am pleased that industry has stepped up to the task of voluntarily labeling and implementing the sort of targeted aggressive information and education campaign that was envisioned at the time of the Commission's last briefing on this subject. Although industry's efforts are laudable, they did not form the basis for my vote to terminate the proceedings.

As I had done previously, in preparing for today's meeting, I read all of the in-depth investigations that the Commission had received on bucket incidents since our last briefing. Once again, I found that the culprit was not the bucket. It was the absence of adult supervision. Much like our experience with baby bath seats and baby walkers, the product works just as it should. It is those charged with the responsibility of caring for young children who are creating the hazard. It is not the product.

My vote to end the Commission's activities in this area reaffirms my position that the Federal government cannot mandate changes in products as a substitute for responsible adult supervision. The deaths of these children are inexcusable. The fact that they were preventable is tragic.

CPSC Chairman Ann Brown said, "When I came to CPSC, very little had been done to address this hazard, which contributes to the deaths of about three toddlers a month. I am pleased that industry agreed to work cooperatively with CPSC and that we were able to avoid a mandatory standard, which is always the court of last resort."

Commissioner Mary Sheila Gall said, "The federal government cannot mandate changes in products as a substitute for responsible adult supervision. The tragedy is that none of these children had to die."

Statement of Ann Brown, Chairman, US Consumer Product Safety Commission
Five-gallon Buckets - February 8, 1995

I have voted today to terminate the Commission's rulemaking proceeding for five-gallon buckets. In view of the progress made by the bucket industry in placing English and Spanish warning labels on five-gallon buckets, its commitment to an ongoing information and education campaign, the significant cost to the Commission and industry that could result in attempting to redesign buckets to meet a performance standard with no assurance that such a standard would be practicable and reasonable for all buckets, or even a majority of buckets, it makes sense to terminate the proceeding.

On May 19, 1994, the Commission unanimously voted to start a rulemaking proceeding by publishing an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) to address the hazard of toddlers drowning in five-gallon plastic buckets. This hazard has been a hidden one not appreciated by parents and caregivers. An estimated 36 toddlers drown each year in five-gallon buckets.

The Commission began its rulemaking proceeding in large part because with the exception of the gypsum industry and The Procter and Gamble Company, the bucket industry had not taken adequate steps to label its buckets voluntarily with a warning of the drowning hazard. Further, it had failed to initiate an aggressive information and education campaign to warn consumers of the risk of drowning.

Because of the Commission's vote to start a rulemaking proceeding, the bucket industry got the message. Industry understood, perhaps for the first time, that this Commission was serious about addressing the hazard of children drowning in five-gallon buckets. By letter dated January 17, 1995, counsel for five major bucket manufacturers, Bennett Industries, Plastican, Inc., Letica Corporation, North America Packaging Corporation (NAMPAC), and Ropak Corporation, represented that those five companies comprise approximately 90% of the U.S. bucket market, and that approximately 80% of their buckets were now being labeled in both Spanish and English. Counsel also represented that those figures would increase in the upcoming months.

I fully expect these firms will honor their commitment to label their buckets. Indeed, to the extent buckets do not bear a drowning hazard warning, it may be appropriate for the Commission's Compliance staff to investigate whether it believes the failure to label rises to the level of a substantial product hazard under the Consumer Product Safety Act.

As a result of the ANPR, the five largest bucket manufacturers also began a substantial information and education program. They issued an audio news release and an audio public service announcement in late fall, 1994, warning of the bucket drowning hazard. They are in the final stages of producing a large color poster which will be widely distributed to a good cross section of organizations. To date, these firms have committed or spent approximately one quarter million dollars on this campaign.

More importantly, counsel to these firms has represented that the five firms are committed to continuing their information and education campaign over the next 2 1/2 years, for roughly an additional one quarter million dollars.

I am pleased with the new approach of the five bucket manufacturers identified above. Their commitment to educating the public about the hazard of drowning in buckets through labeling and an information and education campaign is laudable.

My decision to vote to terminate this rulemaking proceeding is not an easy one. When I voted for an ANPR, I expressed concern that warning labels and an information and education campaign alone might not be sufficient to reduce the drowning hazard. I still have that concern. I am heartened, however, by the fact that since September, 1993, when the California legislation requiring buckets sold in that state to bear warning labels in both English and Spanish took effect, the Commission is unaware of any deaths in California involving a labeled bucket.

The staff advises that to continue to seek solutions to the bucket drowning hazard through a performance standard is likely to involve significant staff time and Commission resources that would divert the Commission from other important activities. It also would take many years of work with no assurance of success. This Commission has a myriad of safety issues to address and limited resources. I believe it is best to concentrate those resources on problems that are more clearly solvable within a reasonable period of time.

In voting to terminate the rulemaking proceeding, I am not suggesting the bucket industry should stop looking for design solutions to the bucket drowning hazard. I encourage industry to continue to work on possible design alternatives to address the drowning hazard. For example, the Olin Corporation has developed a child access restrictor designed to fit easily in buckets. The device which Olin anticipates installing in its buckets by the end of the year has the potential to eliminate the drowning risk, does not interfere with the use of the buckets' contents, and is very inexpensive. Although this fix may not work for all products packaged in buckets, it shows that when industry puts its considerable ingenuity to work, it can come up with innovative, practical, and economical safety fixes. I commend Olin's efforts and urge industry to continue to explore other alternatives.

STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER MARY SHEILA GALL
ON THE TERMINATION OF RULEMAKING PROCEEDINGS REGARDING FIVE GALLON BUCKETS
February 8, 1995

Today's decision by the Commission to terminate rulemaking proceedings on plastic five gallon buckets is an appropriate ending to the Commission's activities in this area. I am pleased that we were able to take decisive action, rather than allowing this project to continue into 1998. Based on today's update, it is clear that development of a voluntary performance standard and prototype solutions were unworkable, despite the best efforts of industry and our staff.

I am pleased that industry has stepped up to the task of voluntarily labeling and implementing the sort of targeted aggressive information and education campaign that was envisioned at the time of the Commission's last briefing on this subject. Although industry's efforts are laudable, they did not form the basis for my vote to terminate the proceedings.

As I had done previously, in preparing for today's meeting, I read all of the in-depth investigations that the Commission had received on bucket incidents since our last briefing. Once again, I found that the culprit was not the bucket. It was the absence of adult supervision. Much like our experience with baby bath seats and baby walkers, the product works just as it should. It is those charged with the responsibility of caring for young children who are creating the hazard. It is not the product.

My vote to end the Commission's activities in this area reaffirms my position that the Federal government cannot mandate changes in products as a substitute for responsible adult supervision. The deaths of these children are inexcusable. The fact that they were preventable is tragic.