02-12044. In the Matter of DAISY MANUFACTURING COMPANY Inc.; d/b/a/ Daisy Outdoor Products, 400 West Stribling Drive, Rogers, Arkansas 72756; Prehearing Conference

AGENCY:

Consumer Product Safety Commission.

ACTION:

Notice of first prehearing conference.

DATES:

This notice announces a prehearing conference to be held in the matter of Daisy Manufacturing Company, Inc. on June 7, 2002 at 10 a.m.

ADDRESSES:

The prehearing conference will be in hearing room 420 of the East-West Towers Building, 4330 East-West Highway, Bethesda, Maryland 20814.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Todd A. Stevenson, Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, DC; telephone [phone]; telefax [phone].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This public notice is issued pursuant to 16 CFR 1025.21(b) of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission's Rules of Practice for Adjudicative Proceedings to inform the public that a prehearing conference will be held in administrative proceeding under section 15 of the Consumer Product Safety Act (“CPSA”), 15 U.S.C. 2064 and section 15 of the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (“FHSA”), 15 U.S.C. 1274, captioned CPSC Docket No. 02-2, In the Matter of DAISY MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Inc. doing business as Daisy Outdoor Products. The Presiding Officer in the proceeding is United States Administrative Law Judge William B. Moran. The Presiding Officer has determined that, for good and sufficient cause, the time period for holding the first prehearing conference had to be extended to the date announced above, which date is beyond the fifty (50) day period referenced in 16 CFR 1025.21(a).

The public is referred to the Code of Regulations citation listed above for identification of the issues to be raised at the conference and is advised that the date, time and place of the hearing also will be established at the conference.

Substantively, the issues being litigated in this proceeding are described by the Presiding Officer to include: Whether certain identified models of the Daisy Powerline Airgun, designed to shoot BBs or pellets, contain defects which create a substantial product hazard defect in that, allegedly, BBs can become lodged within a “virtual magazine,” or fail to feet into the firing chamber, with the consequences that one may fire or shake the gun without receiving any visual or audible indication that is still loaded. Consequently, the complaint asserts that these alleged problems can lead consumers to erroneously believe that the gun is empty and that such phenomena means that the gun is “defective” within the meaning of section 15 of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2064 and section 15 of the FHSA, 15 U.S.C. 1274. The Complaint further alleges that the gun's design, by making it difficult to determine when looking into the loading port whether a BB is present, constitutes a “defect” under the CPSA and the FHSA and presents a “substantial product hazard,” creating a substantial risk of injury to consumers, within the meaning of section 15(a)(2), of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2064(a)(12), and presents a substantial risk of injury of children under section 15(c)(1) and (c)(2) of the FHSA, 15 U.S.C. 1274(c)(1) and (c)(2). The public should be mindful that these are allegations only and the CPSC bears the burden of proof in establishing any violations. Should these allegations be proven, Complaint Counsel for the Office of Compliance of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission seeks a finding that these products present a substantial product hazard and present a substantial risk of injury to children and that public notification of such hazard and risk of injury be made pursuant to section 15(c) of the CPSA and that other appropriate relief be directed, as set forth in the Complaint.

Dated: May 9, 2002.

Todd A. Stevenson,

Secretary.