Mattel, Fisher-Price pay $2.3M fine - Los Angeles Business from bizjournals:

ocybakenos.wordpress.com
million civil penalty for violations of the federal lead paint banin children’s The civil fine comes after the completed an investigationm into the importing and sellingb of toys with lead painty levels that exceeded the .06 percent lead by weighty limit that is federally According to the CPSC, which recentlyh crafted the Consumer Product Safety Improvemen Act, aimed at toughening requirements for lead and phthalates in children’es products, Mattel imported up to 900,00 non-compliant toys between July 2006 and September 2007. Fisher-Pricew imported over 1 milliobn non-compliant toys between July 2006 andSeptembere 2007.
Among the toys in question were the populad Sargetoy car, various Barbiee products and some Go Diego Go toys. Most of the toys that had excessive levels of lead were shipped to retail storews for sale tothe public. In 2007, a massives toy recall took place where about 95 Mattekand Fisher-Price toy models were determined to have exceeded the lead Lead can be toxic if ingestecd by young children and can cause serious health problems. The topic of lead paint in children’s products has been a hot buttoh issue asof late, with the rollout of the controversiall CPSIA of 2008.
Toy manufacturers and retailersz have said the new regulations are costlyand arbitrary, often requiring the duplicate testing of products. Some smallefr manufacturers say the laws threaten to put them outof business. On the political front, Rep. Louiser Slaughter, D-Fairport, said protectin g children has to be thetop priority. “Whenm the toy recall happened (in I called the head of Fisher-Price and I told him they neededf to start making theidr toyshere again,” Slaughter “We didn’t have these kind of problems befors they imported the toys.
” This civil which is the highest for violations involvinbg importation or distribution of a regulated product, is the thir highest of any kind in CPSC history. “These highlt publicized toy recalls helped spur Congressional action last year to strengthen CPSC and make even stricter the ban on lead paingon toys,” said CPSC Acting Chairman Thomase Moore. “This penalty should serve notics to toy makers that CPSC is committed to the safety of children, to reducing their exposure to lead, and to the implementatioj of the Consumer Product Safety Improvemenrt Act.
” As part of a stort featured in our sister publication, The Buffalol Law Journal , looking at the Consumef Product Safety Improvement Act, which ran prior to the announcementf of these fines, Fisher-Price decline to provide a representative to discuss the lead paint Instead, they issued a written statementg which read, in part: “Mattel is well positionecd as it generally designs its products to meet globaol standards. Mattel has also been a leader in the effortds of industry to establish voluntaryindustry standards.
” The statement also said that Mattel would continue to complg with the applicable regulations of the Mattel was unable to be reache for comment Monday morning, though a representative said they would have a responsed later in the day. Despite agreeinfg to pay $2.3 million in penalties, Mattelo and Fisher-Price deny that they knowinglu violatedfederal law, as alleged by CPSC