CPSC Decisional | Notice: Proposed Rulemaking – Safety Std for Li-Ion Battery Micromobility Products

Summary

In a recent public meeting, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) discussed a proposed rulemaking to establish a safety standard for lithium-ion batteries used in micromobility products such as ebikes and escooters. Lithium-ion battery fires have become a significant safety concern, causing numerous injuries and fatalities. The meeting included robust debate among commissioners regarding the path forward for the proposed rule, highlighting differing opinions on regulatory processes and executive oversight. Despite disagreements, the proposed rule was approved for publication to gather public comment, marking a significant step towards enhancing consumer safety.

Highlights

• CPSC meeting focused on lithium-ion battery safety for micromobility products 🚴
• Commissioners debated the timing and process of the proposed rulemaking ⌛
• Several commissioners opposed defying executive oversight on the rule 🤔
• Tragic consequences of battery fires were cited to emphasize the need for new standards 🔥
• The approval of the proposed rule marks a significant regulatory move 🎉

Key Takeaways

• Lithium-ion battery fires pose a significant safety risk 🧯
• Proposed rule aims to enhance safety standards for micromobility products 🚲
• Debate highlighted tensions between CPSC independence and executive oversight ⚖️
• The proposed rule was approved amid strong opinions and dissenting votes 🙌
• Public involvement in the rule's comment stage is crucial for its development 📢

Overview

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has taken a crucial step forward in addressing the hazards posed by lithium-ion batteries in micromobility products such as ebikes and escooters. The commission convened to deliberate on a notice of proposed rulemaking aimed at setting new safety standards for these increasingly popular devices, which have been linked to dangerous fires.

Key moments in the meeting included intense discussions among commissioners regarding whether to adhere to traditional processes or to submit the proposed rule for executive review as per recent directives. Some commissioners emphasized the need for urgency in addressing these life-threatening risks, while others were more concerned with procedural compliance and the potential legal ramifications of diverging from established processes.

Despite the contentious discussions, the proposed rule was approved to proceed to the public comment phase. This move is seen as vital in gathering feedback from experts, industry stakeholders, and the general public, which will help shape the final version of the regulation. The commission's efforts underscore the pressing need for enhanced safety measures to prevent future tragedies related to faulty lithium-ion batteries.

Chapters

• 00:00 - 00:30: Introduction and Opening Statements The chapter titled 'Introduction and Opening Statements' covers the beginning of a public meeting held by the Consumer Product Safety Commission. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss a proposed rulemaking process aimed at establishing safety standards for lithium-ion batteries utilized in micromobility devices. At the start of the meeting, the focus is on commissioner questions directed to the staff, with particular mention of Dwayne Bonafice, Assistant Executive Director for Risk Reduction, and Daniel Vice, Assistant General Counsel, who are present to address inquiries. Each commissioner is allocated five minutes for their questions.
• 00:30 - 06:00: Commissioner Questions and Concerns about Lithium-Ion Batteries The chapter discusses the topic of lithium-ion batteries, focusing on a session where commissioners are addressing questions related to the subject. However, specific questions from the commissioners and detailed discussions are not included here. The session includes various formal procedures such as considering amendments and motions related to the NPR, while avoiding legal inquiries at this stage. The chapter appears to highlight the administrative and procedural aspects rather than technical details of lithium-ion batteries.
• 06:00 - 18:00: Motion and Discussion on Regulatory Process The chapter discusses the inherent dangers of lithium-ion batteries used in devices such as ebikes, e-scooters, and hoverboards. These batteries can catch fire unexpectedly, spreading rapidly and burning with high intensity, which poses significant risks to people and properties, especially in apartment buildings. There is a growing concern nationwide as these fires have resulted in fatalities and injuries. The fear extends beyond just the owners of these devices; it affects neighbors who worry about potential fires in their own residences.
• 18:00 - 21:00: Voting on the Proposed Rulemaking The chapter discusses a fire that broke out in a 37-story apartment building in New York, injuring 43 people. Firefighters had to rescue residents from above the fire by repelling down from the roof. The chapter highlights the ongoing struggle of fire departments nationwide to manage high-intensity fires, while emphasizing the importance and urgency of taking preventive measures to save lives and prevent such fires from occurring.
• 21:00 - 33:00: Closing Statements and Conclusions The chapter titled 'Closing Statements and Conclusions' highlights the importance of implementing life-saving solutions, particularly focusing on a proposed CPS-C lithium-ion battery rule. The narrator emphasizes that their role is to promote such solutions and that there is unanimous support for this rule from all stakeholders, including the industry. The chapter concludes on the resolution to vote on advancing this popular and crucial safety measure.

CPSC Decisional | Notice: Proposed Rulemaking – Safety Std for Li-Ion Battery Micromobility Products Transcription

• 00:00 - 00:30 Good morning and welcome to this public meeting of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. We are meeting today to consider a notice of proposed rulemaking to establish a safety standard for lithium ion batteries used in microobility devices. We will start with commissioner questions for staff. We have several staff members uh present today to answer any questions. Specifically, we're joined this morning by Dwayne Bonafice uh assistant executive director for risk reduction and Daniel Vice, assistant general counsel. Each commissioner will have five minutes for questions and we'll
• 00:30 - 01:00 have multiple rounds if necessary. After the questions are complete, we'll then move to consideration of any motions or amendments to the NPR. As a reminder, if you have questions that address the agency's legal authority or other legal advice, do not ask them at this time. We will now move to questions. Starting with myself, I have no questions for staff. Commissioner Honesaric. I thank staff for all their work on this, but I have no questions. Commissioner Trunka, thank you. Uh taking time bumps. I mean, that's what we're dealing with here, right?
• 01:00 - 01:30 It's lithium-ion batteries and ebikes, e- scooters, and hoverboards can be taking time bombs, and it's leaving people across the country on edge. Fires start without warning. They can spread fast. They burn with great intensity for long periods of time. It's a threat that's left scores of people dead and injured. And you don't even have to own one to fear being harmed by one. People in apartment buildings are worried that their neighbor's ebike might burn down the entire building. And that's not a hypothetical concern. We know that it's
• 01:30 - 02:00 happening. One fire broke out on the 20th floor of a 37story New York apartment building. It hurt 43 people. And for those living on floors above the fire, firefighters had to repel down from the roof to save them through their windows. Fire departments across country are admirably trying but struggling to figure out how to contain these highintensity fires. But we can do something about it. We can prevent fires from happening. We have a solution before us to save lives, to eliminate
• 02:00 - 02:30 fear that homes will burn down as we sleep. And so it's not a close call. The entire reason we're in our positions is to advance life-saving solutions like this one, to simply do the right thing. And so today, we take a vote on advancing it. It's also interesting to note just how uniquely popular this solution is. There's strong support for a CPS-C lithium-ion battery rule from every single voice that's weighed in on this issue, including the industry that makes these products, and that never
• 02:30 - 03:00 happens. So why here? It's because we've got companies here making safe products, and they're being undercut by dangerous foreign goods. And there's something else that never happens. At a time when politicians can't seem to agree on anything, there's bipartisan support in both chambers of Congress for a CPS-C rule. So, it seems that everyone appreciates the importance of our life-saving work. And here's just one example to drive home the point of why today's action is so critical and why
• 03:00 - 03:30 it's necessary. According to a report from ABC News, just last month, happy, healthy twin six-year-old girls went to sleep in their home in in San Leandro, California. One of those girls never saw the morning. Fire that burned down her house claimed her life along with the lives of her grandmother and her great grandmother. Three generations of that family gone in an instant. The kind of unimaginable pain that that family's reeling from has to
• 03:30 - 04:00 be stopped. and we sitting here can stop it. So, I'm proud to support moving forward this safety solution for lithium-ion batteries. Thank you, Commissioner Bole. Thank you both for being here. I want to thank staff for all their work uh on this project over many years. I don't have any questions, Commissioner Zak. Thank you. Uh no questions. Hearing no further questions, staff is excused. Uh and we'll move to consideration of the package. Thank you both. I will now uh entertain any motions or
• 04:00 - 04:30 amendments that uh the commissioners may propose. And starting with myself, I have a motion and we'll recognize myself for uh three minutes to introduce it. I want to state clearly and for the record that I believe today's decisional uh to advance an NPR on lithium ion batteries is misguided and I opposed bringing it up at the time and in this way. Lithium ion battery safety has been a priority uh not only for me but for all of us here on the dis. were well aware of the devastation caused by thermal runaway fires. It's fair to say that all of us recognize that safety standards for
• 04:30 - 05:00 lithium-ion batteries will not only protect American consumers from harm, but will also be a useful tool to interdict deadly batteries at the border from China and elsewhere. That said, the path my colleagues have chosen today is ill advised and may further delay the safety benefits we'd all like to see. To put it plainly, the Democrat majority uh who who retains a a 3-2 majority here at CPSC are proposing a path that could delay safety benefits for consumers and place this entire rule at risk. My colleagues are upset with the new
• 05:00 - 05:30 regulatory framework put in place by President Trump and his administration, including the formal inter agency review process coordinated through the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Rather than follow the prescribed process, they appear ready to cut corners and place a rulemaking at significant legal risk uh of challenge or congressional disapproval. Rules that are stayed, overturned, or eliminated under the Congressional Review Act offer zero consumer protection. If a court overturns this rule, CPS-C would be forced to uh to expend significant
• 05:30 - 06:00 resources to cure any identified deficiencies, delaying any and all of the safety benefits in the process. That would actually be the better scenario under the path that Democrats have laid out uh for CPSC because if Congress disapproves this rule under the CRA, CPSC would be prohibited from re reissuing any such rule even in a different form or another proceeding. And that's not a risk I'm willing to take for consumers. Advancing this rule at this time undercuts congressional efforts to address the very same issue.
• 06:00 - 06:30 Just this week, the House of Representatives passed legislation introducing uh instructing CPS-C uh to proceed with a different regulation on lithium-ion batteries. The Senate Commerce Committee has already passed identical legislation. This legislation, it's a compromised bill with broad bipartisan support. Everyone from Chairman Cruz to Minority Leader Chuck Schumer agrees that this bill is the preferred path forward. Instead, my colleagues today are choosing to defy both the president and Congress. It's
• 06:30 - 07:00 important to remember that President Trump won a historic reelection last year. The lawmakers who advanced battery legislation all have won majorities in their respective districts and states. None of us here have been elected to anything. Nevertheless, under the commission rules, the majority of the commission can set the agency's agenda, and there's nothing Commissioner Zak and I can do to stop them. And so here we are. As a final attempt to comply with the cru clear clear direction that the
• 07:00 - 07:30 president has set for CPSC, my motion would direct the commission to submit this NPR to OIRA pursuant to President Trump's February 18th executive order ensuring accountability for all agencies and the associated OM guidance. Doing so would ensure compliance with the new inter agency review process to allow CPSC the benefit of the views of other executive agencies and further ensure that the federal government speaks with one voice on complex policy matters like the one before us today. We should be seeking input from our sister agencies
• 07:30 - 08:00 on lithium ion safety. For example, it would be a great benefit for us to hear from the US fire administration, DOT, EPA, and others with a stake in this matter. and doing so before we issue an NPR is the appropriate time to do so. Accordingly, I move to call up Feldman one. Is there a second? Second. Thank you. We'll now move to consideration of my motion. Each commissioner will have five minutes to ask questions or make comments on the motion. Commissioner Hark, do you have any questions or comments? I do. Thank
• 08:00 - 08:30 you. CPSC is an independent agency with independent authority to issue regulations. And now the executive order that you're talking about proposes to eliminate the independence of the agency by requiring all of our rules to be sent to the office of management and budget within the white house review. I disagree that this is a a requirement under the the EO or that the EO actually um is consistent with the law. In fact, I believe that the language of the EO and the implementing menu memo violate
• 08:30 - 09:00 the requirements of our statute CPSA and CPSA and there are contrary to existing law and the courts have repeatedly made clear that the president can't override enrolled laws of the United States through executive orders. Nor can OM do so through a memo. CPSC CPSAs section seven and nine require the commission only the commission to make certain findings and promulgate rules following the specific procedures set forth in the statute. The
• 09:00 - 09:30 executive order and OMB's memo are intended to empower the White House to make changes to a proposed rule that the commission must defer to and the White House can even direct the commission to withdraw rules from consideration. Effectively, the White House is looking to replace the commission as a decision maker and ignore the procedural requirements set forth in statute. Furthermore, this is a case where referral to OM is not just inappropriate, it's also unnecessary and undermine
• 09:30 - 10:00 safety. CPS-C statute already requires the agency to conduct a complex and detailed work to move regulation forward and this can take years. Adding the hoop suggested by OM on top of CPS-C's pro process will delay a final rule by a year at least and may prevent it altogether. CPS-C already provides the opportunity for OM to weigh in as well as our sister agencies out there as you have suggested. We're talking about a notice of proposed rulemaking that would
• 10:00 - 10:30 be put out for comment and if OM or any other agency or stakeholders have feedback on that proposed rule, they can and should submit comments. CPS-C staff and the commission are required to consider those comments in the development of any final rule. But in the end of the day, because the EO and implementing memo conflict with the law, I can't support this motion. And in addition, I believe that we have waited long enough. The proposed rule has been before the commission for three months
• 10:30 - 11:00 at this point in time. And even before that, we had put together a panel in 2003 talking about the risks associated with this. Every every moment that we wait, we continue to put lives and people at risk. So I feel important to move forward. I yield back. Thank you, Commissioner Trumpa. An independent agency is able to make determinations unfettered by political dictates or self-interested industry
• 11:00 - 11:30 pressure. That's a quote from the 1972 US Senate report on the Consumer Product Safety Act, the act upon which this agency is built. Independence in our rulemaking is enshrined in statute and no prevailing legal authority takes it away for the rule before us today. I will not support an action that conflicts with the law. Commissioner Bole. Thank you. Uh I oppose this motion. By
• 11:30 - 12:00 its own terms, the executive orders that the acting chair refers to instructs us to heed the terms of the AY's governing statutes above any directive contained in an executive order. For example, the executive order entitled ensuring accountability for all agencies states, "Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof." Similarly, executive order 12866 states that nothing in that order
• 12:00 - 12:30 shall be construed as displacing the agency's authority or responsibilities as authorized by law. Subjecting the proposed rule on lithium-ion batteries to OIRA review in advance of public comment and following the extensive procedures set forth in the OM memorandum cited by the acting chair, many of which would occur outside of public view would impair authority granted by law to CPSC and similarly would displace agency authority as authorized by law. The CPSA sets forth a
• 12:30 - 13:00 highly specific and detailed process that the commission must follow in order to promulgate a regulation, including prescribing an elaborate and precise costbenefit analysis procedure. The statute also envisions robust public input and sets out clear timelines. In addition, the CPSA envisions the agency engaging with an external entity as part of the rulemaking process, but that entity is Congress, not OM. at several stages of the rulemaking process. I note
• 13:00 - 13:30 that the statute directs the agency to transmit notice to the appropriate congressional committees to the extent that the detailed procedures and timetables provided in the OM memorandum conflict with many of the statutory requirements set forth in section 7 and 9, which I contend that they do, the statutory regime must prevail accordingly by the terms of the executive orders themselves. We should follow the clear statutory requirements and proceed with publication of the proposed rule in Federal Register. Thank you, Commissioner Zak. Thank you. I
• 13:30 - 14:00 commend my colleague Chairman Feldman on his common sense motion to submit this NPR to OIR. In October 2019, the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion that stated, quote, "The president may direct regulatory agencies to comply with centralized regulatory review process. It's a legal point in which I agree as do, as detailed in this memo, a number of legal scholars on both sides
• 14:00 - 14:30 of the political aisle. President's authority extends to the supervision of all agencies that execute federal law, which includes, in my view, rulemaking such as this. There's nothing radical about such a review. In fact, it makes sense to ensure regulatory consistency that other agencies can spot and deconlict any potential issues and ensure coherence in execution of the law. And that process is done via OIR, not via the Federal Register. Therefore, to comply with OM's
• 14:30 - 15:00 review prior to publication, I strongly support the chairman's motion. And I would note in in the document, the president's constitutional authority extends to the supervision of all agencies as the executive leading the executive branch, including so-called independent agencies. And so I will support your motion and I look forward to moving on. Thank you, Commissioner Zak, and thank you all for your consideration. We will now move to a vote on the motion. Commissioner Hansar, how do you vote? I vote no. Commissioner Trumpa, no.
• 15:00 - 15:30 Commissioner Bole, no. Commissioner Zak, yes. And I vote yes. The yeses are two, the nos are three. The motion is not agreed to. Commissioner Hunark, do you have any motions or amendments? I don't. Commissioner Trunka, I do not. Commissioner Bole, no, I don't. Commissioner Zak, do you have any motions or amendments? I do not. Hearing no further motions or amendments, uh, is there a motion to approve the uh, notice of proposed rulemaking and direct its publication in the Federal Register? Yes. Second.
• 15:30 - 16:00 Is there a second? Yes. And there's a motion. Hearing a second, we Yeah, I guess mine's the motion. Alex, is a second? Hearing a second. We will proceed to a final vote. Commissioner Hunar, how do you vote? I vote I. Commissioner Trunka, yes. Commissioner Bole, yes. Commissioner Zak, no. And I vote no. The yeses are threes, the nos are twos. The notice of the proposed rulemaking has been approved and shall be published in the Federal Register.
• 16:00 - 16:30 We'll now move to closing statements. Each commissioner will have up to 10 minutes. Commissioner Hunaric. Thank you. I am pleased that we're moving forward with this proposed rule today and that will be published in the Federal Register to receive comment from the public and the administration. In 2023, the CPS-C held a forum on lithium-ion battery fires and microb mobility products. The consensus of the event was that mandatory standards were necessary to save lives. The forum
• 16:30 - 17:00 focused on a growing market of cheap shoddily made batteries mostly from foreign manufacturers that created unnecessary risks to the American public. It became clear that a mandatory standard would be needed if we were going to address the hazards posed by these products. Last month in California, the need for this rule became into stark perspective once again. Three people died from a house fire ignited by a lithium ion battery uh in an ebike. The victims included a
• 17:00 - 17:30 six-year-old girl, her grandmother, her aunt, and the girl left behind, her parents, and her twin sister. I expect there will be robust comment, and I hope there's robust comment uh on this role. But I'm hopeful that the staff will be able to move quickly to review these comments and make changes as needed and send a final uh rule package up for consideration. Publication of this rule is long
• 17:30 - 18:00 overdue and we should move forward quickly to consider a final rule package. It's been suggested that we should wait for Congress to pass legislation to address this hazard. And while I support congressional action, an all hands approach is really needed to address this hazard. Congress unfortunately can be capricious and people know that a single senator can stop a bill from becoming law. Our action today creates a second path to address deadly hazards of ebike battery
• 18:00 - 18:30 fires. And while I hope Congress will be able to pass the law, I'm not going to rely upon it as Americans continue to die in preventable fires. What we do on this das matters and it can save lives. And when we delay, we put lives at risk. We have a lot on our docket this year and I look forward to continuing to do the work of the commission because no twin should have to grow up because of a defective consumer product. I'd also like to conclude by
• 18:30 - 19:00 acknowledging the difficult times the CPSC and so many other federal agencies are experiencing. The administration is pushing for changes and staff reductions and are hurting the agency's ability to achieve its mission. carry and doing so in a way that is scaring and driving off much of our staff. We are a small but mighty agency that can be stretched too thin. I know that happens when CPSC doesn't I know what happens when CPSC doesn't have the adequate resources, authorities, and staff to perform its safety mission. I was a congressional
• 19:00 - 19:30 staffer in 2008 when Congress passed the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act into law and it was signed into law by President Bush. Before CPSIA, the agency was deeply underfunded, lacked the authorities it needed to do its job. Congressional hearings and investigative journalism exposed the dangerous toys that were routinely sold to families, including Thomas the Tank Engine toys that included high levels of lead. It became known as a summer of recalls as
• 19:30 - 20:00 CPS-C struggled to keep up with more and more defective products found on store shelves. Congress had stepped in with legislation that authorized increases to the agency's staff and resources, new authorities to address safety hazards in children's products, and direction to create a risk assessment methodology to catch dangerous products at import. Since then, the agency has used this uh infusion of resources and new
• 20:00 - 20:30 authorities wisely to increase the presence at ports across the country, promulgate mandatory safety rules for toys and nursery products, and vigorously enforce our nation's product safety laws. During my time as chair, this agency took actions to strengthen consumer safety across the country and to save lives. We issue mandatory standards to protect the most vulnerable among us among including the elderly with uh adult portable bed rails as well
• 20:30 - 21:00 as to create safe places for infants to sleep. One of those rules establishing safety standards for nursing pills took uh effect just last week. We developed a riskbased approach to target education campaigns towards communities that were disproportionately impacted by consumer product deaths and injuries. We issue nearly more than or nearly 200,000 takeown requests to online marketplaces for recalled ban and violative products. We assess more than 125 million in civil
• 21:00 - 21:30 penalties for violations of safety laws and secure the first ever ever criminal convictions of corporate executives in collaboration with the justice department's consumer protection branch. These actions are possible because we have the resources and staff to do this work. When agencies like CPSC are doing their job well, they are largely unnoticed because it's hard to quantify the number of deaths that didn't happen, the emergency room visits that were avoided, and the fires that never
• 21:30 - 22:00 started. While the administration may argue that downsizing, reorganizing federal safety agencies like the safety CPS-C will not affect safety, parents who have childrens who have been irreparably harmed from consumer products could tell us otherwise. History has shown that in the world of product safety, inadequate resources and lack of staffing can have long-term and fatal consequences. While I'm a commissioner at the CPSC, I will continue to push for the agency to
• 22:00 - 22:30 pursue common sense regulatory agenda as exemplified by the lithium ion battery proposed rule we approved today and to support increased staffing levels consistent with our appropriations. I do want to thank the staff who have worked on today's important proposed rule and to thank all of the CPSC employees who strive daily to advance the mission of protecting consumers from unreasonable risks of injury and death associated with consumer products. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank you very much, Commissioner Trump.
• 22:30 - 23:00 Well, to everyone here at CPSC working on this issue, thank you. and to everyone else at CPSC working on our other life-saving work. Thank you. I see you. I support you. I'm indebted to you. People across this country are indebted to you for that life-saving work that you do. You're doing a great job. I ask that you please keep it up. In hard times like this, we need to stick together and keep grinding. I'd also like to thank the fire departments
• 23:00 - 23:30 across the country that are doing innovative work to understand and address the lithium-ion battery fire problem. FDNY has been on top of this issue from the start. Phoenix Fire Department and its regional partners have been great innovators in this space, both in fighting the problem and ensuring that they're capturing great data. And we're going to need your help on that going forward with that data. You know, we know that what we're using data wise at CPSC is a severe undercount of the real number of deaths and injuries that are happening from
• 23:30 - 24:00 lithium-ion battery fires. We know that fire departments across this country might have that information about the lithium-ion battery fires in their jurisdictions and I ask that you please share it with us. In the next few days, this rule will be published in the Federal Register and a comment period will open up and it's going to stay open for the next 2 months. During that period, please come forward with information and I look forward to learning from you as we move forward today towards safer lithium-ion batteries. I think one
• 24:00 - 24:30 thing should be very clear. Even in these the most challenging of times, CPSC is still pushing forward on safety solutions for the American people. Thank you, Commissioner Bole. Thank you. First, I want to extend my heartfelt thanks to all the staff who have worked on the package in this package in particular and to the entire staff of the agency who have continued to perform their jobs with dedication and professionalism in
• 24:30 - 25:00 extraordinarily difficult circumstances. Today, we took an important step forward to protect consumers from a wellocumented hazard. fires caused by lithium-ion batteries found in ebikes, escooters, hoverboards, and other microobility products that continue to proliferate on our streets and roads. We voted to seek public comment on a proposed safety standard that is rooted in industry consensus and expert evaluation by commission staff. Our action underscores the critical imperative that safety keep pace with
• 25:00 - 25:30 innovation. There is no reason for delay. Dozens of fatalities and scores of injuries have occurred as a result of electric shock, fires, explosions, burns, overheating, and smoke inhalation from the lithium lithium ion batteries in these micromobility products. Not only that, many of the victims were not direct users of the products. Unsuspecting residents of apartment buildings, for example, have perished in fires started by an ebike in a neighboring unit. People using these
• 25:30 - 26:00 products range from seniors who are choosing ebikes over traditional bicycles to delivery workers to children and teens who are embracing the battery powered devices to get to school or to hang out with friends. I am proud to vote in favor of the proposed rule and believe this action represents a common sense safety solution that embraces a new technology while at the same time imposing needed guardrails for its safe use. I began urging the commission to take decisive action on lithium-ion battery fires early in my tenure as a
• 26:00 - 26:30 CPSC commissioner. On December on December 9th, 2022, I issued a statement about the urgent need to address this issue calling specific attention to the lithium ion battery fires occurring in ebikes and microobility devices in my native New York City and across the country. On the heels of my call to action, CPSC enforcement staff issued a letter later that month to more than 2,000 manufacturers and importers urging compliance with UL safety standards. Although that action was a step in the
• 26:30 - 27:00 right direction, buyers continue a pace. Unfortunately, it is clear that industry did not heed staff's message urging compliance with the UL standards. Two years after the letter was issued, CPSC staff found a compliance rate of just 45% across all micromobility products and a dismal rate below 11% for ebikes. Central to the proposed rulemaking the commission advanced today are these same UL standards recommended by our technical staff along with several other elements to bolster
• 27:00 - 27:30 safety. As always, the development of voluntary standards plays an important role in the CPSC rulemaking process. And today's proposal reflects the importance the commission places on those standards, but the industry obligation is twofold. Not only must industry develop strong standards, it must comply with them. The CPSA compels the commission to rely on a voluntary standard if the standard would adequately reduce the risk of injury and there will be substantial compliance with the standards. Absent compliance, a
• 27:30 - 28:00 strong sand standard amounts to no standard. Here, even if the voluntary standards committee were to adopt the additional elements the commission proposes today, the evidence in the staff package demonstrates an abysmal level of industry compliance with the voluntary standard necessitating mandatory action by the commission. Finally, I want to address again the process of advancing the rule today. What we did was both very important, taking steps to address a serious safety hazard, and utterly routine. For my
• 28:00 - 28:30 entire 15-year career at the agency, the process we are using today, issuing a draft rule and soliciting public comment has been the same. This has been true regardless of who is sitting in the chairman's seat or at OM. I see no reason, nor has a legitimate reason been profered for doing otherwise. Deviating from that wellestablished path would not only violate the principles of independence at the center of the commission's authorizing statute but also contradict the specific instructions for the this agency's
• 28:30 - 29:00 rulemaking set for forth in law by Congress. It could add unnecessary delay under undermine transparency and impose criteria that have nothing to do with the mission and expertise of this agency. The process we have followed historically and today is designed for fairness to all stakeholders as we seek to apply legal, scientific, and policy expertise to decisions that are laser focused on the CPS-C mission, protecting people from injury and death. Thank you,
• 29:00 - 29:30 Commissioner Zak. Thank you, Mr. Acting Chair. I am very disappointed not only with the fact that we held today's hearing at this decisional meeting in violation of President Trump's executive order and related guidance, but also that my fellow commissioners would not support acting chairman Feldman's motion to put us in compliance and would provide a path to move forward appropriately. I believe the president as the head of the executive branch has
• 29:30 - 30:00 the authority to require the commission to undertake this review process. We are not independent of the executive branch and as an agency of the executive branch, we must act accordingly. Chairman Feldman's motion would have paved paved a path forward on this important issue without putting the rule needlessly at risk in an effort to delay the president's lawful oversight of executive branch agencies. Moreover, on Monday, as noted, the House
• 30:00 - 30:30 of Representatives in an overwhelmingly bipartisan fashion passed the Setting Consumer Standards for Lithium Batteries Act, and the Senate is poised to follow suit. And I would add one correction. One senator cannot block the enactment of a bill. That is categorically false. It is clear there's substantial interest in reducing the dangers of lithium-ion batteries and microobility products. And in general, as my colleagues mentioned, Congress supports a bill, but it is not
• 30:30 - 31:00 this rulemaking. It differs. By passing this and moving forward, we are going to create confusion in the market in addition to the defiance that we are exhibiting. In my view, new explicit statutory authority provides a clearer, cleaner path without the regulatory and legal risks that we are creating. To be clear, today's action puts the agency in this rulemaking at risk. And as a result, I was unable to support this ill-advised and defiant
• 31:00 - 31:30 path my colleagues have chosen because they object to the outcome of an election. Acting chairman, I yield time. Thank you. And finally, I'll recognize myself. I I I too am disappointed in the results today. My colleagues have now directly defied the president, OM, OIRA, and Congress. I believe they put an important safety rule at risk in the process. There was a clear path forward to strengthen this rule through consultation with our sister agencies and to benefit from their views and
• 31:30 - 32:00 expertise. Rather, my colleagues at at today's decisional have have chosen this meeting as a forum for their protests. The Democrat commissioners at CPSC are using the serious issue of lithium-ion battery safety to resist the policies of a dulyeleed president. They're even invoking the memories of consumers who have died tragically in lithium-ion battery fires. To honor these families, CPSC instead should be doing all we can to ensure that we're on the strongest footing possible to advance durable
• 32:00 - 32:30 consumer protections rather than using these victims as props in a political theater. I think that's beneath the agency. But let's be clear, this isn't about lithium-ion battery safety. Today, these Democrats are upset about our efforts to find efficiencies at the agency, which has been bloated and inefficient for too long. When I look across the dis, I see a former chairman and a former executive director, and I understand that they're upset. This agency under President Trump is outpacing their records on recalls and dangerous goods interdicted at the
• 32:30 - 33:00 border. And we're doing it with leaner staffing, more responsible budgeting, and a rededication of critical agency resources from DEI projects to our core safety mission. I'd be upset, too, if I were them because we're beating them at safety. But I have nothing further to add. And this concludes today's decisional meeting at the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission.