STATES U.S. CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20207 June 30, 1987 The Honorable William E. Dannemeyer Subcommittee on Commerce, Consumer Dear Representative Dannemeyer: This responds to your June 24, 1987, inquiry for the results of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) investigation into the recent lawn dart incident on which testimony was taken June 4 before your Subcommittee. The investigative reports and documents you requested concerning the tragic death of Michele Snow are enclosed. In summary, they show the following: The original lawn dart carton conformed to the CPSC labeling requirements, based on the Coroner's report of the incident which contained a photograph of the box purchased by Mr. Snow. Mr. Snow's attorney has the original carton which our investigators have inspected. The carton used by Mr. Snow during his appearance before Congress was not in compliance with the labeling requirements. This second carton was purchased in April 1987 by a law clerk from Mr. Snow's attorney's office. This carton was bought at a different store from where Mr. Snow purchased his game set. We believe this noncomplying carton is no longer being distributed by the firm. Mr. Snow bought the three-game combination set containing lawn darts last December 1986. During our inspection in June 1987, the lawn dart display was found at the end of an aisle featuring sporting goods. (See enclosed diagram.) The display of lawn darts in sporting goods departments has been permitted in the past. However, the location was within a few feet of children's tricycles and bicycles with training wheels. Therefore, we requested the manager of the Riverside, California, store to remove the lawn darts from this location because of the close proximity to children's toy articles. Six other retail stores in this The Honorable William E. Dannemeyer 2. chain of outlets were inspected and did not display lawn darts near toys. Our investigators recently inspected the importer of the lawn darts involved in this incident. Samples were collected of all of the firm's lawn dart sets and combination game sets which include lawn darts to evaluate compliance with the regulations. The labeling criteria of the exemption for the front panel on three of the four cartons was being met by the firm. However, although directions and warnings were included on the accompanying literature (instructions), these warnings did not contain the specific language required in the regulations. On a fourth, carton, a four-game combination set, the required labeling on the front panel of the carton was found to be 1/16-inch smaller than the required type. The importer will be told to stop distribution until violations are corrected. Reprinting the instructions with the required specific language would be an acceptable remedy for this type of violation. The actual lawn dart involved in the fatality had been altered subsequent to manufacture, according to the investigation. Instead of having a point less than 2 inches long with a diameter of 1/4 inch, the dart in question had a point of more than 8 inches with a diameter of 1/8 inch. The Riverside County Coroner's report had originally shown the diameter to be approximately 1/16 inch but subsequent examination showed it to be 1/8 inch. With regard to the retailer involved in the Snow case there is no clear violation of the regulation, however, it would have been more prudent for the retailer not to have located the lawn darts near the toy displays. No enforcement action is contemplated at this time, although the retailer has been asked to relocate the lawn dart displays. I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. 15. REASON FOR ACTIVITY (Assignment Reference Follow up to newspaper article regarding death caused by a lawn dart. IDI conducted in response to a newspaper account of a fatality associated with a lawn Investigation disclosed-the dart responsible for the trauma was thrown by the victim' The lawn darts were one item in a combination game set (badminton, volleyball, lawn darts). Labeling on the outer carton of this set appears in compliance with 1500.86 (a) (3) (4). The package had been previously opened and the components apparently used prior to purchase by the victim's father. Examination of a different unit of this same combination game set revealed slightly different labeling that may not be in compliance. The display at the present time of a similar item by the same retailer was examined. The product was found in the sporting goods department of this variety store, but toys were in the vicinity of this item. We have inspected the retail store from which the product involved in the accident was purchased Follow-up ada 19. REVIEWER'S NAME James P. DiGrazia 20. REVIEW DATE SIGNATURE TITLE 21. DISTRIBUTION 6-25-87 0: EPDS via DHL cc; CARM (Nelson) Cc: NYRO Executity CC: SPRO cc: Director via DU & SYNOPSIS OF ACCIDENT OR COMPLAINT 2 YA MO DAY 87 0 4 2 7 EPIDEMIOLOGIC A 7 year old girl suffered fatal intercranial hemorrhage caused by a lawn dart thrown by her 9 year old brother. The children were playing on opposite sides of a 6 foot fence. The lawn dart had been altered by placing |