Nautilus, Inc., Provisional Acceptance of a Settlement Agreement and Order, 20107-20110 [05-7682]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 73 / Monday, April 18, 2005 / Notices
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
NOAA must analyze the potential
environmental impacts, as required by
NEPA, for applicant projects or
proposals which are seeking NOAA
federal assistance opportunities,
including special fishing privileges.
Detailed information on NOAA
compliance with NEPA can be found at
the following NOAA NEPA website:
https://www.nepa.noaa.gov/ including
our NOAA Administrative Order 216–6
for NEPA, https://www.nepa.noaa.gov/
NAO216l6lTOC.pdf and the Council
on Environmental Quality
implementation regulations, https://
ceq.eh.doe.gov/nepa/regs/ceq/
toclceq.htm.
Consequently, as part of an
applicant’s package, and under their
description of their program activities,
applicants are required to provide
detailed information on the activities to
be conducted, locations, sites, species
and habitat to be affected, possible
construction activities, and any
environmental concerns that may exist
(e.g., the use and disposal of hazardous
or toxic chemicals, introduction of nonindigenous species, impacts to
endangered and threatened species,
aquaculture projects, and impacts to
coral reef systems). NEPA analysis for
RSA projects is normally conducted by
the Council through the Council’s
annual fishery management
specifications process for RSA species.
If the Council’s NEPA analysis is not
adequate, applicants may be required to
provide additional specific information
that will serve as the basis for any
required impact analyses, applicants
may also be requested to assist NOAA
in drafting of an environmental
assessment, if NOAA determines an
assessment is required. Applicants will
also be required to cooperate with
NOAA in identifying and implementing
feasible measures to reduce or avoid any
identified adverse environmental
impacts of their proposal. The failure to
do so shall be grounds for the denial of
an application.
System (DUNS) number during the
application process. See the October 30,
2002, (67 FR 66177) Federal Register for
additional information. Organizations
can receive a DUNS number at no cost
by calling the dedicated toll-free DUNS
Number request line at 1–866–705–5711
or via the internet https://
www.dunandbradstreet.com.
Executive Order 12372
Applications under this program are
subject to Executive Order 12372
‘‘Intergovernmental Review of Federal
Programs.’’
Funding for programs listed in this
notice is contingent upon the
availability of Fiscal Year 2005
appropriations. In no event will NOAA
or the Department of Commerce be
responsible for application preparation
costs if these programs fail to receive
funding or are cancelled because of
other agency priorities. Publication of
this announcement does not oblige
NOAA to award any specific project or
to obligate any available funds.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This document contains collection-ofinformation requirements subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The
use of Standard Forms 424, 424A, 424B,
SF-LLL, and CD–346 has been approved
by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under the respective
control numbers 0348–0043, 0348–0044,
0348–0040, 0348–0046, and 0605–0001.
Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, no person is required to respond to,
nor shall any person be subject to a
penalty for failure to comply with, a
collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA unless that
collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
Executive Order 12866
This notice has been determined to be
not significant for purposes of Executive
Order 12866.
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
The Department of Commerce PreAward Notification Requirements for
Grants and Cooperative Agreements
contained in the Federal Register notice
of December 30, 2004 (69 FR 78389) are
applicable to this solicitation.
It has been determined that this notice
does not contain policies with
Federalism implications as that term is
defined in Executive Order 13132.
Administrative Procedure Act/
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Applicants should be aware that, they
are required to provide a Dun and
Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:08 Apr 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
not required pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 or
any other law, the analytical
requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) are
inapplicable. Therefore, a regulatory
flexibility analysis has not been
prepared.
Dated: April 13, 2005.
John Oliver,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Operations, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 05–7722 Filed 4–15–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
Limitation of Liability
Pre-Award Notification Requirements
for Grants and Cooperative Agreements
Universal Identifier
20107
Prior notice and an opportunity for
public comment are not required by the
Administrative Procedure Act or any
other law for rules concerning public
property, loans, grants, benefits, and
contracts (5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2)). Because
notice and opportunity for comment are
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
COMMISSION
[CPSC Docket No. 05–C0008]
Nautilus, Inc., Provisional Acceptance
of a Settlement Agreement and Order
Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: It is the policy of the
Commission to publish settlements
which it provisionally accepts under the
Consumer Product Safety Act in the
Federal Register in accordance with the
terms of 16 CFR 1118.20(e). Published
below is a provisionally-accepted
Settlement Agreement with Nautilus,
Inc., containing a civil penalty of
$950,000.00.
Any interested person may ask
the Commission not to accept this
agreement or otherwise comment on its
contents by filing a written request with
the Office of the Secretary by May 3,
2005.
DATES:
Persons wishing to
comment on this Settlement Agreement
should send written comments to the
Comment 05–C0008, Office of the
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety
Commission, Washington, DC 20207.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dennis C. Kacoyanis, Trial Attorney,
Office of Compliance, Consumer
Product Safety Commission,
Washington, DC 20207; telephone (301)
504–7587.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of
the Agreement and Order appears
below.
ADDRESSES:
Dated: April 4, 2005.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
In the Matter of Nautilus, Inc.
Settlement Agreement and Order
1. This Settlement Agreement is made
by and between the staff (‘‘the staff’’) of
E:\FR\FM\18APN1.SGM
18APN1
20108
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 73 / Monday, April 18, 2005 / Notices
the U.S. Consumer Product Safety
Commission (‘‘the Commission’’) and
Nautilus, Inc. (‘‘Nautilus’’ or
‘‘Respondent’’), a corporation, in
accordance with 16 CFR 1118.20 of the
Commission’s Procedures for
Investigations, Inspections, and
Inquiries under the Consumer Product
Safety Act (‘‘CPSA’’). This Settlement
Agreement and the incorporated and
attached Order settle the staff’s
allegations set forth below.
I. The Parties
2. The Commission is an independent
federal regulatory agency responsible for
the enforcement of the Consumer
Product Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 2051 et
seq.
3. Nautilus is a corporation organized
and existing under the laws of the State
of Washington with its principal
corporate offices located at 1400 NE
136th Avenue, Vancouver, WA 98661.
Nautilus manufactures and sells, either
through retailers or direct sales
methods, such as infomercials, health
and fitness products under several
brand names, including Bowflex.
II. Allegations of the Staff
A. Bowflex Power Pro Fitness
Machines-Backboard Bench
4. Between January 1995 and
December 2003, Nautilus manufactured
and/or sold in commerce nationwide
approximately 420,000 Bowflex Power
Pro Fitness Machines equipped with a
Lat Tower and a backboard bench.
5. The Bowflex Power Pro Fitness
Machine is sold to, and/or is used by,
consumers in or around a permanent or
temporary household or residence, a
school, in recreation, or otherwise and
is, therefore, a ‘‘consumer product’’ as
defined in section 3(a)(1) of the
Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA),
15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(1). Respondent is a
‘‘manufacturer’’ and ‘‘retailer’’ of the
Bowflex Power Pro exercise equipment,
which is ‘‘distributed in commerce’’ as
those terms are defined in sections
3(a)(4), (6), (11), and (12) of the CPSA,
15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(4), (6), (11), and (12).
6. The Bowflex Power Pro Fitness
Machine is an item of exercise
equipment that uses 10 to 14 resistance
rods, a pulley system, and a backboard
bench. The Bowflex Power Pro’s
backboard bench can break apart and
collapse unexpectedly during normal
and foreseeable use of the exercise
equipment. If a backboard bench breaks
apart and collapses unexpectedly during
use, it may cause the consumer to fall
and suffer serious injuries.
7. Between December 1998 and July
2002, Nautilus learned of about 25
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:08 Apr 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
reports of consumers sustaining injuries
when the Power Pro’s backboard bench
broke apart and collapsed unexpectedly
during use of the exercise equipment.
Nautilus knew of lacerations requiring
sutures, back, neck, and spinal injuries.
8. In June 2000, after learning of about
eight reported incidents of the Bowflex
Power Pro Fitness Machine’s backboard
bench breaking apart and collapsing
unexpectedly during use, Nautilus
reinforced the backboard bench by
adding a steel plate.
9. On July 1, 2002, the Commission’s
National Injury Information
Clearinghouse forwarded to Nautilus an
in-depth investigation report. In this
report, a consumer alleged the
backboard bench broke apart and
collapsed unexpectedly during use. The
consumer suffered injuries to his back,
tongue, and teeth. In its letter, the
Clearinghouse advised Nautilus about
the CPSA’s reporting requirement and
the procedures for submitting a report to
the Commission. At the time it received
this letter from the Clearinghouse,
Nautilus knew of at least 27 incident
reports of which 25 claimed injuries
resulting from the Bowflex Power Pro’s
backboard bench collapsing and
breaking apart unexpectedly during use,
but did not report the defect or risk to
the Commission.
10. As the facts described in
paragraphs 4 through 9 above show,
Nautilus obtained information which
reasonably supported the conclusion
that the Bowflex Power Pro exercise
equipment described in paragraph 4
above contained a defect which could
create a substantial product hazard or
created an unreasonable risk of serious
injury or death, but failed to report such
information to the Commission as
required by sections 15(b)(2) and (3) of
the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2064(b)(2) and (3).
11. By failing to furnish information
as required by section 15(b) of the
CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2064(b), Nautilus
violated section 19(a)(4) of the CPSA, 15
U.S.C. 2068(a)(4).
12. Nautilus committed this failure to
timely report to the Commission
‘‘knowingly’’ as the term ‘‘knowingly’’ is
defined in section 20(d) of the CPSA, 15
U.S.C. 2069(d), subjecting Nautilus to
civil penalties under section 20 of the
CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2069.
B. Bowflex Power Pro and Bowflex
Ultimate Fitness Machines-Seat Pin
13. Between January 1995 to April
2004, Bowflex manufactured and/or
sold in commerce nationwide
approximately 420,000 Bowflex Power
Pro Fitness Machines with a Lat Tower
and approximately 102,000 Bowflex
Ultimate Fitness Machines, respectively.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Each of these items of equipment is
equipped with a seat pin that is used to
reposition the seat for different types of
exercises.
14. The Bowflex Power Pro and
Bowflex Ultimate Fitness Machines are
sold to, and/or are used by, consumers
in or around a permanent or temporary
household or residence, a school, in
recreation, or otherwise and are,
therefore, ‘‘consumer products’’ as
defined in section 3(a)(1) of the
Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA),
15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(1). Respondent is a
‘‘manufacturer’’ and ‘‘retailer’’ of the
Bowflex Power Pro and Bowflex
Ultimate, which are ‘‘distributed in
commerce’’ as those terms are defined
in sections 3(a)(4), (6), (11), and (12) of
the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(4), (6), (11),
and (12).
15. The Bowflex Power Pro and
Ultimate Fitness Machines are items of
exercise equipment with resistance
rods, pull down pulleys, and a bench.
The seat pins on the Bowflex Power and
Ultimate Fitness Machines can
disengage or break unexpectedly during
normal and foreseeable use. If a seat pin
disengages or breaks unexpectedly
during use, it may cause the seat to
move suddenly and cause the consumer
to fall and suffer serious injuries.
16. Between August 5, 2002, and
April 16, 2004, the date Nautilus
submitted a full report to the
Commission, Nautilus learned of about
32 reports of consumers sustaining
injuries when the Bowflex Power Pro’s
and Ultimate’s seat pins disengaged or
broke unexpectedly during use. Injuries
reported included a blood clot, a
laceration requiring sutures, pulled
ligaments, and back, disc, and neck
injuries.
17. As a result of the Commission’s
investigation of the Power Pro’s
backboard bench, Nautilus reviewed its
products and reported on April 16,
2004, the defect associated with the
fitness machines identified in paragraph
13 above.
18. As the facts described in
paragraphs 13 through 17 above show,
Nautilus obtained information which
reasonably supported the conclusion
that the Bowflex Power Pro and
Ultimate Fitness Machine described in
paragraph 13 above contained a defect
which could create a substantial
product hazard or created an
unreasonable risk of serious injury or
death, but failed to report such
information in a timely manner to the
Commission as required by sections
15(b)(2) and (3) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C.
2064(b)(2) and (3).
19. By failing to furnish the
information to the Commission in a
E:\FR\FM\18APN1.SGM
18APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 73 / Monday, April 18, 2005 / Notices
timely manner as required by section
15(b) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2064(b),
Nautilus violated section 19(a)(4) of the
CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2068(a)(4).
20. Nautilus committed this failure to
timely report to the Commission
‘‘knowingly’’ as the term ‘‘knowingly’’ is
defined in section 20(d) of the CPSA, 15
U.S.C. 2069(d), thus subjecting Nautilus
to civil penalties under section 20 of the
CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2069.
C. Bowflex Power Pro Fitness MachineIncline Support Bracket
21. Between January 1995 and April
2004, Nautilus manufactured and/or
sold in commerce nationwide
approximately 260,000 Bowflex Power
Pro exercise equipment without a Lat
Tower, which were equipped with an
incline support bracket.
22. The Bowflex Power Pro Fitness
Machine is sold to, and/or is used by,
consumers in or around a permanent or
temporary household or residence, a
school, in recreation, or otherwise and
is, therefore a ‘‘consumer product’’ as
defined in section 3(a)(1) of the
Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA),
15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(1). Respondent is a
‘‘manufacturer’’ and ‘‘retailer’’ of the
Bowflex Power Pro Fitness Machine,
which is ‘‘distributed in commerce’’ as
those terms are defined in sections
3(a)(4), (6), (11), and (12) of the CPSA,
15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(4), (6), (11), and (12).
23. The incline support bracket of the
Bowflex Power Pro Fitness Machine can
break or bend unexpectedly during
normal and foreseeable use of the
exercise equipment. If an incline
support bracket breaks or bends
unexpectedly during use, it may cause
the consumer to fall and suffer serious
injuries.
24. Between May 7, 2001, and April
16, 2004, the date Nautilus submitted a
full report to the Commission, Nautilus
was aware of approximately 28 reports
of consumers sustaining injuries when
the include support bracket of the
Bowflex Power Pro Fitness Machine
broke or bent unexpectedly during use
of the exercise equipment. Injuries
reported included lacerations requiring
sutures, fractures, back pain, and
numbness. Nautilus reported after
completing the product review
described in paragraph 17 above.
25. In August 2002, Nautilus made a
running change to the material used in
the incline support bracket to make it
more robust and resistant to accidental
breakage, but did not report the defect
or risk to the Commission.
26. As the facts described in
paragraphs 21 through 25 above show,
Nautilus obtained information which
reasonably supported the conclusion
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:08 Apr 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
that the Bowflex Power Pro Fitness
Machine described in paragraph 21
above contained a defect which could
create a substantial product hazard or
created an unreasonable risk of serious
injury or death, but failed to report such
information in a timely manner to the
Commission as required by sections
15(b)(2) and (3) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C.
2064(b)(2) and (3).
27. By failing to furnish the
information to the Commission in a
timely manner as required by section
15(b) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2064(b),
Nautilus violated section 19(a)(4) of the
CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2068(a)(4).
28. Nautilus committed this failure to
timely report to the Commission
‘‘knowingly’’ as the term ‘‘knowingly’’ is
defined in section 20(d) of the CPSA, 15
U.S.C. 2069(d), thus subjecting Nautilus
to civil penalties under section 20 of the
CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2069.
III. Nautilus’ Response
29. Nautilus denies the staff’s
allegations that it violated the CPSA as
set forth in paragraphs 4 through 27
above.
30. Nautilus believed that injury
reports about the backboard bench and
incline support breakage were
consistent with the type of injuries
associated when exercising with the
type of exercise equipment identified in
paragraphs 4, 13, and 21. With respect
to the seat pin, Nautilus believed that
the reports of seat pin disengagement
did not reflect a product defect, but
instead reflected consumer error in
removing and repositioning the seat pin.
The product change made in August
2002 to the incline support bracket was
to address warranty claims, not a
recognized risk of injury.
31. Nautilus denies that a defect in
any of its products caused injury to any
person, or that it knowingly violated the
reporting requirements of the CPSA.
Nautilus is entering into this Agreement
to resolve the staff’s claims without the
expense and distraction of litigation. By
agreeing to this settlement, Nautilus
does not admit any of the allegations set
forth above in this Agreement, or any
fault, liability or statutory or regulatory
violation.
IV. Agreement of The Parties
32. The Consumer Product Safety
Commission has jurisdiction over this
matter and over Nautilus under the
Consumer Product Safety Act, 15 U.S.C.
2051 et seq.
33. This Agreement is entered into for
settlement purposes only and does not
constitute an admission by Nautilus or
a determination by the Commission that
the products referenced in paragraphs 4
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20109
through 26 contain or contained a defect
or defects which could create a
substantial product hazard or create an
unreasonable risk of serious injury or
death, or that nautilus knowingly
violated the CPSA’s reporting
requirements.
34. In settlement of the staff’s
allegations, Nautilus agrees to pay a
civil penalty in the amount of
$950,000.00 as set forth in the
incorporated Order.
35. This Settlement Agreement and
Order resolves the failures to report set
forth in paragraphs 4 through 29, above.
36. Upon final acceptance of this
Agreement by the Commission and
issuance of the Final order, Respondent
knowingly, voluntarily, and completely
waives any rights it may have in this
matter (1) to an administrative or
judicial hearing, (2) to judicial review or
other challenge or contest of the validity
of the Commission’s actions, (3) to a
determination by the Commission as to
whether Respondent failed to comply
with the CPSA and the underlying
regulations, (4) to a statement of
findings of fact and conclusions of law,
and (5) to any claims under the Equal
Access to Justice Act.
37. Upon provisional acceptance of
this Agreement by the Commission, this
Agreement shall be placed on the public
record and shall be published in the
Federal Register in accordance with the
procedures set forth in 16 CFR
1118.20(e). If the Commission does not
receive any written objections within 15
days, the Agreement will be deemed
finally accepted on the 16th day after
the date it is published in the Federal
Register.
38. The Commission may publicize
the terms of the Settlement Agreement
and Order.
39. The Commission’s Order in this
matter is issued under the provisions of
the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2051 et seq., and
that a violation of this Order may
subject Nautilus to appropriate legal
action.
40. This Settlement Agreement may
be used in interpreting the Order.
Agreements, understandings,
representations, or interpretations apart
from those contained in this Settlement
Agreement and Order may not be used
to vary of contradict its terms.
41. The provisions of this Settlement
Agreement and Order shall apply to
Nautilus and each of its successors and
assigns.
42. This Settlement Agreement and
Order shall expire and have no force or
effect if it is not provisionally accepted
by the Commission on or before April
2nd, 2005.
E:\FR\FM\18APN1.SGM
18APN1
20110
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 73 / Monday, April 18, 2005 / Notices
Respondent, Nautilus, Inc.
Dated: March 28, 2005.
Wayne Bolio,
Senior Vice President-Law and General
Counsel, Nautilus, Inc., 1400 NE, 136th
Avenue, Vancouver, WA 98661.
March 28, 2005.
Erika Z. Jones,
Esquire, Attorney for Nautilus, Inc., Mayer,
Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP, 1909 K Street, NW.,
Washington, DC.
Commission Staff.
John Gibson Mullan,
Assistant Executive Director, Office of
Compliance, Consumer Product Safety
Commission, Washington, DC 20207–0001.
Eric L. Stone,
Director, Legal Division, Office of
Compliance.
March 28, 2005.
Dennis C. Kacoyanis,
Trial Attorney, Legal Division, Office of
Compliance.
Order
Upon consideration of the Settlement
Agreement entered into between
Respondent Nautilus, Inc. and the staff
of the Consumer Product Safety
Commission; and the Commission
having jurisdiction over the subject
matter and Nautilus, Inc.; and it
appearing that the Settlement
Agreement and Order is in the public
interest, it is
Ordered that the Settlement
Agreement be, and hereby is, accepted;
and it is
Further Ordered that upon final
acceptance of the Settlement Agreement
and Order, Nautilus, Inc. shall pay to
the Commission a civil penalty in the
amount of $950,000 within twenty (20)
days after service upon Respondent of
this Final Order of the Commission.
Provisionally accepted and Provisional
Order issued on the 4th date of April, 2005.
By Order of the Commission.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety
Commisison.
[FR Doc. 05–7682 Filed 4–15–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355–01–M
CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND
COMMUNITY SERVICE
New Information Collection;
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
Corporation for National and
Community Service.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Corporation for National
and Community Service (hereinafter the
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:08 Apr 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
‘‘Corporation’’), has submitted a
proposed new public information
collection requests (ICR) entitled Field
Network Pilot Study Field Guidance to
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13),
(44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). Copies of this
ICR, with applicable supporting
documentation, may be obtained by
calling the Corporation for National and
Community Service, Kelly Arey, (202)
606–5000, ext. 197. Individuals who use
a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TTY–TDD) may call (202) 565–
2799 between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m.
Eastern time, Monday through Friday.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
submitted, identified by the title of the
information collection activity, to the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Attn: Ms. Katherine Astrich,
OMB Desk Officer for the Corporation
for National and Community Service, by
any of the following two methods
within 30 days from the date of
publication in the Federal Register:
(1) By fax to: (202) 395–6974,
Attention: Ms. Katherine Astrich, OMB
Desk Officer for the Corporation for
National and Community Service; and
(2) Electronically by e-mail to:
Katherine_Astrich@omb.eop.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The OMB
is particularly interested in comments
which:
• Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the Corporation, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
• Propose ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
• Propose ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate
automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submissions of responses.
Comments
A 60-day public comment Notice was
published in the Federal Register on
December 10, 2004. This comment
period ended on February 8, 2005. No
public comments were received.
Description: The Corporation has
contracted with the Nelson A.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Rockefeller Institute of Government to
carry out a Field Network Pilot Study to
learn how the Corporation’s goals and
requirements regarding sustainability,
capacity building, and performance
measurement are affecting the
AmeriCorps program and the nonprofit
organizations where AmeriCorps
members serve. The Pilot Study will
consider how grantee and subgrantee
organizations are selected; how the
Corporation communicates with
grantees and subgrantees; how local
contexts and available funding
opportunities vary from state to state;
and how the Corporation’s goals and
requirements fit into the context of the
grantees’ and subgrantees’ own policies
and the many diverse responsibilities
they face. The Field Network Pilot
Study Field Guidance will be used to
assess the impact of the Corporation’s
policies around sustainability, capacity
building, and the performance
measurement initiative. Independent,
local field researchers will be employed
in collecting the information. During the
data-gathering phase of the Pilot Study,
the researchers will refer to background
information about the Corporation, its
programs, and the Field Network
method.
Type of Review: New.
Agency: Corporation for National and
Community Service.
Title: Field Network Pilot Study Field
Guidance.
OMB Number: None.
Agency Number: None.
Affected Public: Non-profit
institutions, Government.
Total Respondents: 105.
Frequency: Once.
Average Time Per Response: 3 hours.
Estimated Total Burden Hours: 315
hours.
Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):
None.
Total Burden Cost (operating/
maintenance): None.
Dated: April 4, 2005.
Robert Grimm,
Director, Research and Policy Development.
[FR Doc. 05–7707 Filed 4–15–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6050–$$–P
CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND
COMMUNITY SERVICE
Information Collection; Submission for
OMB Review, Comment Request
Corporation for National and
Community Service.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Corporation for National
and Community Service (hereinafter the
E:\FR\FM\18APN1.SGM
18APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 73 (Monday, April 18, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20107-20110]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-7682]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
[CPSC Docket No. 05-C0008]
Nautilus, Inc., Provisional Acceptance of a Settlement Agreement
and Order
AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: It is the policy of the Commission to publish settlements
which it provisionally accepts under the Consumer Product Safety Act in
the Federal Register in accordance with the terms of 16 CFR 1118.20(e).
Published below is a provisionally-accepted Settlement Agreement with
Nautilus, Inc., containing a civil penalty of $950,000.00.
DATES: Any interested person may ask the Commission not to accept this
agreement or otherwise comment on its contents by filing a written
request with the Office of the Secretary by May 3, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to comment on this Settlement Agreement
should send written comments to the Comment 05-C0008, Office of the
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, DC 20207.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis C. Kacoyanis, Trial Attorney,
Office of Compliance, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington,
DC 20207; telephone (301) 504-7587.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of the Agreement and Order appears
below.
Dated: April 4, 2005.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
In the Matter of Nautilus, Inc.
Settlement Agreement and Order
1. This Settlement Agreement is made by and between the staff
(``the staff'') of
[[Page 20108]]
the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (``the Commission'') and
Nautilus, Inc. (``Nautilus'' or ``Respondent''), a corporation, in
accordance with 16 CFR 1118.20 of the Commission's Procedures for
Investigations, Inspections, and Inquiries under the Consumer Product
Safety Act (``CPSA''). This Settlement Agreement and the incorporated
and attached Order settle the staff's allegations set forth below.
I. The Parties
2. The Commission is an independent federal regulatory agency
responsible for the enforcement of the Consumer Product Safety Act, 15
U.S.C. 2051 et seq.
3. Nautilus is a corporation organized and existing under the laws
of the State of Washington with its principal corporate offices located
at 1400 NE 136th Avenue, Vancouver, WA 98661. Nautilus manufactures and
sells, either through retailers or direct sales methods, such as
infomercials, health and fitness products under several brand names,
including Bowflex.
II. Allegations of the Staff
A. Bowflex Power Pro Fitness Machines-Backboard Bench
4. Between January 1995 and December 2003, Nautilus manufactured
and/or sold in commerce nationwide approximately 420,000 Bowflex Power
Pro Fitness Machines equipped with a Lat Tower and a backboard bench.
5. The Bowflex Power Pro Fitness Machine is sold to, and/or is used
by, consumers in or around a permanent or temporary household or
residence, a school, in recreation, or otherwise and is, therefore, a
``consumer product'' as defined in section 3(a)(1) of the Consumer
Product Safety Act (CPSA), 15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(1). Respondent is a
``manufacturer'' and ``retailer'' of the Bowflex Power Pro exercise
equipment, which is ``distributed in commerce'' as those terms are
defined in sections 3(a)(4), (6), (11), and (12) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C.
2052(a)(4), (6), (11), and (12).
6. The Bowflex Power Pro Fitness Machine is an item of exercise
equipment that uses 10 to 14 resistance rods, a pulley system, and a
backboard bench. The Bowflex Power Pro's backboard bench can break
apart and collapse unexpectedly during normal and foreseeable use of
the exercise equipment. If a backboard bench breaks apart and collapses
unexpectedly during use, it may cause the consumer to fall and suffer
serious injuries.
7. Between December 1998 and July 2002, Nautilus learned of about
25 reports of consumers sustaining injuries when the Power Pro's
backboard bench broke apart and collapsed unexpectedly during use of
the exercise equipment. Nautilus knew of lacerations requiring sutures,
back, neck, and spinal injuries.
8. In June 2000, after learning of about eight reported incidents
of the Bowflex Power Pro Fitness Machine's backboard bench breaking
apart and collapsing unexpectedly during use, Nautilus reinforced the
backboard bench by adding a steel plate.
9. On July 1, 2002, the Commission's National Injury Information
Clearinghouse forwarded to Nautilus an in-depth investigation report.
In this report, a consumer alleged the backboard bench broke apart and
collapsed unexpectedly during use. The consumer suffered injuries to
his back, tongue, and teeth. In its letter, the Clearinghouse advised
Nautilus about the CPSA's reporting requirement and the procedures for
submitting a report to the Commission. At the time it received this
letter from the Clearinghouse, Nautilus knew of at least 27 incident
reports of which 25 claimed injuries resulting from the Bowflex Power
Pro's backboard bench collapsing and breaking apart unexpectedly during
use, but did not report the defect or risk to the Commission.
10. As the facts described in paragraphs 4 through 9 above show,
Nautilus obtained information which reasonably supported the conclusion
that the Bowflex Power Pro exercise equipment described in paragraph 4
above contained a defect which could create a substantial product
hazard or created an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death, but
failed to report such information to the Commission as required by
sections 15(b)(2) and (3) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2064(b)(2) and (3).
11. By failing to furnish information as required by section 15(b)
of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2064(b), Nautilus violated section 19(a)(4) of
the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2068(a)(4).
12. Nautilus committed this failure to timely report to the
Commission ``knowingly'' as the term ``knowingly'' is defined in
section 20(d) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2069(d), subjecting Nautilus to
civil penalties under section 20 of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2069.
B. Bowflex Power Pro and Bowflex Ultimate Fitness Machines-Seat Pin
13. Between January 1995 to April 2004, Bowflex manufactured and/or
sold in commerce nationwide approximately 420,000 Bowflex Power Pro
Fitness Machines with a Lat Tower and approximately 102,000 Bowflex
Ultimate Fitness Machines, respectively. Each of these items of
equipment is equipped with a seat pin that is used to reposition the
seat for different types of exercises.
14. The Bowflex Power Pro and Bowflex Ultimate Fitness Machines are
sold to, and/or are used by, consumers in or around a permanent or
temporary household or residence, a school, in recreation, or otherwise
and are, therefore, ``consumer products'' as defined in section 3(a)(1)
of the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA), 15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(1).
Respondent is a ``manufacturer'' and ``retailer'' of the Bowflex Power
Pro and Bowflex Ultimate, which are ``distributed in commerce'' as
those terms are defined in sections 3(a)(4), (6), (11), and (12) of the
CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(4), (6), (11), and (12).
15. The Bowflex Power Pro and Ultimate Fitness Machines are items
of exercise equipment with resistance rods, pull down pulleys, and a
bench. The seat pins on the Bowflex Power and Ultimate Fitness Machines
can disengage or break unexpectedly during normal and foreseeable use.
If a seat pin disengages or breaks unexpectedly during use, it may
cause the seat to move suddenly and cause the consumer to fall and
suffer serious injuries.
16. Between August 5, 2002, and April 16, 2004, the date Nautilus
submitted a full report to the Commission, Nautilus learned of about 32
reports of consumers sustaining injuries when the Bowflex Power Pro's
and Ultimate's seat pins disengaged or broke unexpectedly during use.
Injuries reported included a blood clot, a laceration requiring
sutures, pulled ligaments, and back, disc, and neck injuries.
17. As a result of the Commission's investigation of the Power
Pro's backboard bench, Nautilus reviewed its products and reported on
April 16, 2004, the defect associated with the fitness machines
identified in paragraph 13 above.
18. As the facts described in paragraphs 13 through 17 above show,
Nautilus obtained information which reasonably supported the conclusion
that the Bowflex Power Pro and Ultimate Fitness Machine described in
paragraph 13 above contained a defect which could create a substantial
product hazard or created an unreasonable risk of serious injury or
death, but failed to report such information in a timely manner to the
Commission as required by sections 15(b)(2) and (3) of the CPSA, 15
U.S.C. 2064(b)(2) and (3).
19. By failing to furnish the information to the Commission in a
[[Page 20109]]
timely manner as required by section 15(b) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C.
2064(b), Nautilus violated section 19(a)(4) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C.
2068(a)(4).
20. Nautilus committed this failure to timely report to the
Commission ``knowingly'' as the term ``knowingly'' is defined in
section 20(d) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2069(d), thus subjecting Nautilus
to civil penalties under section 20 of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2069.
C. Bowflex Power Pro Fitness Machine-Incline Support Bracket
21. Between January 1995 and April 2004, Nautilus manufactured and/
or sold in commerce nationwide approximately 260,000 Bowflex Power Pro
exercise equipment without a Lat Tower, which were equipped with an
incline support bracket.
22. The Bowflex Power Pro Fitness Machine is sold to, and/or is
used by, consumers in or around a permanent or temporary household or
residence, a school, in recreation, or otherwise and is, therefore a
``consumer product'' as defined in section 3(a)(1) of the Consumer
Product Safety Act (CPSA), 15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(1). Respondent is a
``manufacturer'' and ``retailer'' of the Bowflex Power Pro Fitness
Machine, which is ``distributed in commerce'' as those terms are
defined in sections 3(a)(4), (6), (11), and (12) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C.
2052(a)(4), (6), (11), and (12).
23. The incline support bracket of the Bowflex Power Pro Fitness
Machine can break or bend unexpectedly during normal and foreseeable
use of the exercise equipment. If an incline support bracket breaks or
bends unexpectedly during use, it may cause the consumer to fall and
suffer serious injuries.
24. Between May 7, 2001, and April 16, 2004, the date Nautilus
submitted a full report to the Commission, Nautilus was aware of
approximately 28 reports of consumers sustaining injuries when the
include support bracket of the Bowflex Power Pro Fitness Machine broke
or bent unexpectedly during use of the exercise equipment. Injuries
reported included lacerations requiring sutures, fractures, back pain,
and numbness. Nautilus reported after completing the product review
described in paragraph 17 above.
25. In August 2002, Nautilus made a running change to the material
used in the incline support bracket to make it more robust and
resistant to accidental breakage, but did not report the defect or risk
to the Commission.
26. As the facts described in paragraphs 21 through 25 above show,
Nautilus obtained information which reasonably supported the conclusion
that the Bowflex Power Pro Fitness Machine described in paragraph 21
above contained a defect which could create a substantial product
hazard or created an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death, but
failed to report such information in a timely manner to the Commission
as required by sections 15(b)(2) and (3) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C.
2064(b)(2) and (3).
27. By failing to furnish the information to the Commission in a
timely manner as required by section 15(b) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C.
2064(b), Nautilus violated section 19(a)(4) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C.
2068(a)(4).
28. Nautilus committed this failure to timely report to the
Commission ``knowingly'' as the term ``knowingly'' is defined in
section 20(d) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2069(d), thus subjecting Nautilus
to civil penalties under section 20 of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2069.
III. Nautilus' Response
29. Nautilus denies the staff's allegations that it violated the
CPSA as set forth in paragraphs 4 through 27 above.
30. Nautilus believed that injury reports about the backboard bench
and incline support breakage were consistent with the type of injuries
associated when exercising with the type of exercise equipment
identified in paragraphs 4, 13, and 21. With respect to the seat pin,
Nautilus believed that the reports of seat pin disengagement did not
reflect a product defect, but instead reflected consumer error in
removing and repositioning the seat pin. The product change made in
August 2002 to the incline support bracket was to address warranty
claims, not a recognized risk of injury.
31. Nautilus denies that a defect in any of its products caused
injury to any person, or that it knowingly violated the reporting
requirements of the CPSA. Nautilus is entering into this Agreement to
resolve the staff's claims without the expense and distraction of
litigation. By agreeing to this settlement, Nautilus does not admit any
of the allegations set forth above in this Agreement, or any fault,
liability or statutory or regulatory violation.
IV. Agreement of The Parties
32. The Consumer Product Safety Commission has jurisdiction over
this matter and over Nautilus under the Consumer Product Safety Act, 15
U.S.C. 2051 et seq.
33. This Agreement is entered into for settlement purposes only and
does not constitute an admission by Nautilus or a determination by the
Commission that the products referenced in paragraphs 4 through 26
contain or contained a defect or defects which could create a
substantial product hazard or create an unreasonable risk of serious
injury or death, or that nautilus knowingly violated the CPSA's
reporting requirements.
34. In settlement of the staff's allegations, Nautilus agrees to
pay a civil penalty in the amount of $950,000.00 as set forth in the
incorporated Order.
35. This Settlement Agreement and Order resolves the failures to
report set forth in paragraphs 4 through 29, above.
36. Upon final acceptance of this Agreement by the Commission and
issuance of the Final order, Respondent knowingly, voluntarily, and
completely waives any rights it may have in this matter (1) to an
administrative or judicial hearing, (2) to judicial review or other
challenge or contest of the validity of the Commission's actions, (3)
to a determination by the Commission as to whether Respondent failed to
comply with the CPSA and the underlying regulations, (4) to a statement
of findings of fact and conclusions of law, and (5) to any claims under
the Equal Access to Justice Act.
37. Upon provisional acceptance of this Agreement by the
Commission, this Agreement shall be placed on the public record and
shall be published in the Federal Register in accordance with the
procedures set forth in 16 CFR 1118.20(e). If the Commission does not
receive any written objections within 15 days, the Agreement will be
deemed finally accepted on the 16th day after the date it is published
in the Federal Register.
38. The Commission may publicize the terms of the Settlement
Agreement and Order.
39. The Commission's Order in this matter is issued under the
provisions of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2051 et seq., and that a violation of
this Order may subject Nautilus to appropriate legal action.
40. This Settlement Agreement may be used in interpreting the
Order. Agreements, understandings, representations, or interpretations
apart from those contained in this Settlement Agreement and Order may
not be used to vary of contradict its terms.
41. The provisions of this Settlement Agreement and Order shall
apply to Nautilus and each of its successors and assigns.
42. This Settlement Agreement and Order shall expire and have no
force or effect if it is not provisionally accepted by the Commission
on or before April 2nd, 2005.
[[Page 20110]]
Respondent, Nautilus, Inc.
Dated: March 28, 2005.
Wayne Bolio,
Senior Vice President-Law and General Counsel, Nautilus, Inc., 1400
NE, 136th Avenue, Vancouver, WA 98661.
March 28, 2005.
Erika Z. Jones,
Esquire, Attorney for Nautilus, Inc., Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP,
1909 K Street, NW., Washington, DC.
Commission Staff.
John Gibson Mullan,
Assistant Executive Director, Office of Compliance, Consumer Product
Safety Commission, Washington, DC 20207-0001.
Eric L. Stone,
Director, Legal Division, Office of Compliance.
March 28, 2005.
Dennis C. Kacoyanis,
Trial Attorney, Legal Division, Office of Compliance.
Order
Upon consideration of the Settlement Agreement entered into between
Respondent Nautilus, Inc. and the staff of the Consumer Product Safety
Commission; and the Commission having jurisdiction over the subject
matter and Nautilus, Inc.; and it appearing that the Settlement
Agreement and Order is in the public interest, it is
Ordered that the Settlement Agreement be, and hereby is, accepted;
and it is
Further Ordered that upon final acceptance of the Settlement
Agreement and Order, Nautilus, Inc. shall pay to the Commission a civil
penalty in the amount of $950,000 within twenty (20) days after service
upon Respondent of this Final Order of the Commission.
Provisionally accepted and Provisional Order issued on the 4th
date of April, 2005.
By Order of the Commission.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commisison.
[FR Doc. 05-7682 Filed 4-15-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-M