The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission recently extended the deadline for compliance with the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act's interpretation of an "unblockable drain" from May 28, 2012, to May 23, 2013. The law is aimed at preventing suction entrapment in pool drains and now mandates that public pools with a single main drain have a back-up system capable of shutting the drain's suction.
CPSC commissioner Nancy Nord says the agency's September 2011 revocation of the original interpretation of that terminology caused problems for pool operators who relied on the initial guidelines. Previously, an unblockable drain - originally defined by the act as a "drain of any size and shape that a human body cannot sufficiently block to create a suction entrapment hazard," such as a dome-shaped cover - was considered acceptable. But commissioners expressed concerns that the drain cover could break, come loose or be improperly installed. Hence, the decision to reverse course in September.
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission recently extended the deadline for compliance with the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act's interpretation of an "unblockable drain" from May 28, 2012, to May 23, 2013. The law is aimed at preventing suction entrapment in pool drains and now mandates that public pools with a single main drain have a back-up system capable of shutting the drain's suction.
CPSC commissioner Nancy Nord says the agency's September 2011 revocation of the original interpretation of that terminology caused problems for pool operators who relied on the initial guidelines. Previously, an unblockable drain - originally defined by the act as a "drain of any size and shape that a human body cannot sufficiently block to create a suction entrapment hazard," such as a dome-shaped cover - was considered acceptable. But commissioners expressed concerns that the drain cover could break, come loose or be improperly installed. Hence, the decision to reverse course in September.
In a statement issued earlier this week, Nord expressed dismay that after nearly 18 months, the commission (by a 3-2 vote) reversed itself and began requiring anti-entrapment systems to be installed on pools with single main drains - even those with the unblockable drain covers the CPSC had originally approved - and issued an unrealistic deadline.
"The commission's reversal, in my view, cannot be justified either substantively or procedurally," wrote Nord, who cast one of the dissenting votes in September. "Responsible pool owners and operators spent their limited (often public) funds complying with the federal mandate before the reversal. The reversal negated their efforts to comply with the P&SS Act. The reversal was substantively wrong: [A]nalysis showed that a properly installed unblockable drain cover was the best protection against the hazards of entrapment. Moreover, the reversal was procedurally wrong: A decision to revoke an important determination - relied upon around the country - should have only proceeded after giving the public adequate notice and a chance to comment."
Nord was one of three commissioners who voted for the extension, with the lone dissension coming from CPSC chairman Inez Tenenbaum.
It also should be noted that, according to the National Swimming Pool Foundation, there have been no reports of entrapment or entrapment-related injuries since 2008.
