Comment from Sharon Flanders

To whom it may concern, I am writing in regards to CPSC Docket No. CPSC-2010-0042, Substantial Product Hazard List: Hand-held hair dryers. I have read through the proposed regulation and I agree that there needs to be an update to the current regulation to make all hair-dryers have submersion protection whether they are for home use or professional use. More and more companies are offering professional use products to the public for various different reasons, but it seems they one of the reasons is so they can get away with not having to make all modifications to make the product safe. I find it unimaginable that it is the year 2010 and we still have these safety issues going on. As stated before I support your proposal for the change. There is one section of the proposed rule that I would like you to reconsider. In section F. Substantial Compliance, the last paragraph states that “the staff estimates that over 95% of hand-held hair dryers for sale in this country comply with the UL standards.” The section continues that you find this as “substantial compliance”. I would like you to reconsider. 100% compliance is what we need, one death or injury from accidental electrocution is too many! As a mother of four, I do consider off brands more than name brands and the wrong choice can put my family in danger. Unless we mandate that all companies are in compliance we cannot guarantee that no one will be harmed by a product that is meant to make life just a little bit easier. I want to thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Please understand that I do support this proposed regulation, but I do feel it needs some minor modification. Thank you again for your time. Sharon E. Flanders