# CPSC OGC Advisory Opinion No. 293 (1982): CPSC OGC Advisory Opinion No. 293 > Federal · Agency guidance · In force URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CPSC_AO_293 ## Section - **Citation:** CPSC OGC Advisory Opinion No. 293 (1982) - **Heading:** CPSC OGC Advisory Opinion No. 293 - **Jurisdiction:** Federal - **Kind:** Agency guidance - **Status:** In force - **Text as of:** August 14, 2026 - **Source:** Compiled text - **Location:** CPSC Office of General Counsel Advisory Opinions / CPSC OGC Advisory Opinion No. 293 ## Text U.S. PROOUCT SAFETY COMl\njSSlON C. > -._,-_- ,- 1982 H- ‘. .i _.--. Rill, RiIl & Ri.11: responsea Sarld - o'f consumef 4 2052(a)(IL). ab,le l.982, by Sarlo's -other nowers - - C O N S U M E R . W A S H I N G T O N , 0 . 2 0 2 0 7 - - - SEP 3 OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL James F. Esquire Collier, Shannon, Scott . Attorneys-at-Law 1055 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20007 Dear Mr. This is in to your letter of August 27, 1982, concerning the request of Power Mowers, Inc., ("Sarlo") . for an advisory opinion regarding the status their highwheel power lawn mowers as products, as defined in 15 U.S.C. In an earlier exchange of correspondence, we advised you that the information avail- to us as of August 18, was insufficient to determine whether these mowers were consumer products. In your more recent letter, you explain that Sarlo does not believe that it would be able to obtain sufficient information to establish that its mowers are not used more than occasionally consumers. Accordingly, you ask for an If proposed marketing system operates as intended, no mowers of that model designation would be sold to or used by consumers, and mowers of that model would not be consumer products. Thus, such mowers would not have to comply with the safety standard for walk-behind power lawn mowers. Of course, if Sarlo manufactures that would be used more than occasionally by consumers, those other mowers must comply with the standard. tes as intended, no mowers of that model designation would be sold to or used by consumers, and mowers of that model would not be consumer products. Thus, such mowers would not have to comply with the safety standard for walk-behind power lawn mowers. Of course, if Sarlo manufactures that would be used more than occasionally by consumers, those other mowers must comply with the standard. _ We sufficient- em info-t ccasional While Please ne ?Iartin Katz .- t -_ I -_-----s .--1-m - - if becomes available. -- would also suggest that Sarlo include checks in i ts marketing syst to ensure that the system operates as intended, since our determination could change ion showing more than o use by consumers the views expressed in this letter are based upon the most current interpretation of the law by this office, they could subsequently be changed or superseded by the Commission. do not hesitate to contact if you have further questions regarding these matters. Sincerely, Howard General Counsel & SCOII Pdorneys-al-Law 1055 Streei,N.VL Cotlier David Hmt uist 9, RiChmd E. wad2 p7ilz Time 27-Howard 0. CuUen Kathieen E. .McDermott ,Michael Shemmn Compmn Stewm Sch- Ma-k LAusrrian -.- Walter Wiuian William Apple+ 01 Counsel Tekphonc: 342-8400 ‘%&r’s 342-8430 August Gddtrank 7 la A. .Vebergall 8. W~llmms Rosenthat J&r7 W. J&e .?4. Saulnier Thomas Handton Jeffrm Leaer Alan %. RdbeR .Meuser Danret Retch E. Harr. Keishow Davwl L. Michele Guslana Dawd Hacken Judith Otdham Kartin 5401 Westbard 202017 ; !4owers, .the oroducts. kd Sarlo's -of -of the- I-, trans- 1 C L Collier, Shannon, Rill Thomas Jefferson Robert A. Washington, D. C. 20007 Joan L. (202) Paul C. ohn A. King Direct Did Number SC Richard s. - W. J&e .?4. Saulnier Thomas Handton Jeffrm Leaer Alan %. RdbeR .Meuser Danret Retch E. Harr. Keishow Davwl L. Michele Guslana Dawd Hacken Judith Otdham Kartin 5401 Westbard 202017 ; !4owers, .the oroducts. kd Sarlo's -of -of the- I-, trans- 1 C L Collier, Shannon, Rill Thomas Jefferson Robert A. Washington, D. C. 20007 Joan L. (202) Paul C. ohn A. King Direct Did Number SC Richard s. - (202) J. R. L. Dunn Paut L. L. D. Scott Sterling R. Sarah Thomas A. Jr. 27, 1982 Michael R. Dick A. P. Plowers L. P. Pox, Jr. D. Katz, Esquire General Counsel Consumer Product Safety Commission Avenue Bethesda., Maryland Dear Mr. Katz: Sarlo Power Inc.., was extremely disappointed with your response to their July 21, 19 a2 request for an advisory opinion regarding commercial status of their highwheel Sarlo believes that both its-product and its sales distribution patterns are identical to those of its competitors who have received opinions that their products are commercial mowers and are, therefore, excluded from the Safety Standard for Walk-Behind Mowers. request included very specific information, pain­ stakingly assembled, as to the disposition of at least- its products. Yet, you have concluded that the amount of information submitted is insufficient because Sarlo presented no records with respect to its sales, representing single-unit transactions, and failed to identify or precisely quantify the retail purchases from as well as the nature and level of rental actions. Sarlo has concluded that it' is not possible to obtain precise information in each of these areas sufficient to satisfy your request with respect to purchasers' identities or precise percentages of consumer versus commercial users. An exhaustive search in this regard would consume valuable time and money and is unlikely to yield sufficient additional information and level of rental actions. Sarlo has concluded that it' is not possible to obtain precise information in each of these areas sufficient to satisfy your request with respect to purchasers' identities or precise percentages of consumer versus commercial users. An exhaustive search in this regard would consume valuable time and money and is unlikely to yield sufficient additional information. At the same time, it would be extremely unfair to Sarlo if, as a result of the Commission's decision, it were forced to relinquish its share of the commercial highwheel market to its competitors who have received favorable opinions and are able to supply non­ complying units as requested by commercial establishments and Zartin Collier, Shannon,RiU 2~ - " l-V docment such fi: consideratj pro- ;?osal it highwheel matter'k . -- /* At,korney Makers, Scott Katz, Esquire August 27, 1982 Page Two governmental entities. The production of specially designated non­ complying machines, should satisfy your requirement that Sarlo "control or its channels of distribution in such a way as to assure that the mowers in question'are not sold to or used by consumers more than occasionally." No orders for units would be Sarlo requests your immediate ion of this so that may continue to compete in this limited segment of the market. Please contact us if we can provide additional information to expedite this any way. Sincerely; for Sarlo Power Inc. JFR/eam n in such a way as to assure that the mowers in question'are not sold to or used by consumers more than occasionally." No orders for units would be Sarlo requests your immediate ion of this so that may continue to compete in this limited segment of the market. Please contact us if we can provide additional information to expedite this any way. Sincerely; for Sarlo Power Inc. JFR/eam U.S. CONSUMER FWOOUCT COMMISSION WAS+HNGTON, .\a AU6 1982 -1, F.,Rill, Rill LO55 2000.7 OFFlCE . Rill: of * § custom.arily '\ me &;;:;ne a.product okasionally. review available partiouiar . S A F E T Y 0 . C . 2 0 2 0 7 . . OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL . . James Esq. Collier, Shannon, 6: Scott Attorneys-at-Law Thomas Jefferson Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. . Dear Mr. This letter responds to your letter of July 21, 1982 in which you request a determination whether certain models of high-wheel lawn mowers manufactured by Sarlo Power Mowers, Inc. ("Sarlo") are consumer products and thus subject to the Safety Standard for Walk-Behind Power Lawn Mowers, 16 CFR Part 1205. The data you have submitted are insufficient to determine whether these mowers are consumer products. As you know, the tera "consumer product" is defined in 15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(l), and the term does not include "any article which is not produced or distributed for sale to, or use or consumption by, or enjoyment of, a consumer." legislative history of this section indicates that products that are not used more than occasionally by consumers are not consumer products. H.R. Rep. No. 1153, 92d Cong., 2d. Sess. 27 a "consumer product" is defined in 15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(l), and the term does not include "any article which is not produced or distributed for sale to, or use or consumption by, or enjoyment of, a consumer." legislative history of this section indicates that products that are not used more than occasionally by consumers are not consumer products. H.R. Rep. No. 1153, 92d Cong., 2d. Sess. 27 (1972). In general, we have established no specific criteria to whether consumers use more than we all Information relevant to a determination. Rill, the'41 1-1 lawzi -of menttone'd reflec:ted a ha2 purchase dis- - CszL- ti K'atz .- - -b James F. Esq. Page 2 Although much of the information you have submitted-concern­ ing these Sarlo mowers would tend to show their suitability for commercial use, the possibility remains that these mowers are sold to, or used by, consumers more than occasionally. For example, which markets of the mowers in the sampling of accounts on page four of your . letter, states that it sells these mowers "primarily" to businesses and to individuals who use the mowers in their and garden businesses. This obviously leaves open the possibi­ lity that there could be a significant degree of consumer use of these mowers. In addition, the approximately Sarlo's production that is not included in the sample above consists largely of single-unit transactions. Sales to consumers may be more likely to be in such transactions than in the bulk transactions described in the chart on page four. Furthermore, the chart in your letter indicates that a number of these mowers are sold to rental outlets. The extent to which these rental mowers may be used by consumers not been established. We note that there is an indication in your letter that there may be a consumer demand for these mowkrs to be in such transactions than in the bulk transactions described in the chart on page four. Furthermore, the chart in your letter indicates that a number of these mowers are sold to rental outlets. The extent to which these rental mowers may be used by consumers not been established. We note that there is an indication in your letter that there may be a consumer demand for these mowkrs. It is not clear how the price, weight, or other features of the complying mower that is to be produced would motivate these consumers to the complying version rather than the commercial version. Generally, the manufacturer of a product should be in the best position to determine the use and distribution patterns of the product. We recommend that manufacturers consider their products to be consumer products unless the available information clearly establishes that this is not the case. If Sarlo is able to control or document its channels of tribution in such a way as to assure that the mowers in question are not sold to or used by consumers more than occasionally, the mowers would not be consumer products. However, we believe that the information available at this time is insufficient to make such a determination. . Sincerely, , Martin Howard General Counsel _. _._...” . * . . ’ -. UNITED Memorandum COMMl&lCf’-! : -TE. - : SuedECT Oldham, Rill, oue of Oldham Oldham ,-. Oldhak wo