As discussed earlier this month, the US CPSC has an open comment period on their proposed rulemaking on table saws and active injury avoidance technology.
Last week I posted about how the opposition seemed to be doomed, that not enough was being done, and that not enough people were voicing their concerns and comments in the right place.
Advertisement
Today is the last day that the CPSC will accept comments from the public.
If you’re in favor of or against the proposed rulemaking and potential regulations that require table saws to have active injury-avoidance technology, please tell them why. Reminder: your comment will be visible to the public.
I am happy to have to eat my words a little. I pointed fingers at the PTI, saying they and tool brands weren’t being vocal enough in opposition to the proposed rulemaking.
I have since been talking to PTI representatives, and am happy to say they have been going to great lengths to fight the proposed rulemaking. Perhaps not as publicly as I had expected, but they’re expending great efforts behind the scenes.
From what I was told – and I’m not sure I can repeat it here and so I won’t – they have done a lot. But there’s more to do, and they still need help, and your comments can do that.
If you’re opposed to the proposed rulemaking, please go to PTI’s special website and submit a comment there, which will be submitted to the CSPC on your behalf.
Advertisement
There’s a standard pre-composed opposition message that you can attach your name, and you can add to it if you want to.
The PTI also has added background information about their position on the proposed rulemaking.
As end-users, your voices matter, perhaps more than anyone else’s. Those who hold active injury-avoidance tech patents might still have a stake in this, and so does the PTI, which represents many power tool brands that manufacturer table saws.
But as an end user, you will be most impacted. Will the requirement that table saws feature active injury avoidance technology be a benefit for you? Will any added cost be too much of a burden?
If you’re in favor of the proposed ruling, tell the CSPC why. If you’re opposed, do the same, or go to PTI’s site to learn more and attach your name to their opposition message.
CSPC Comment Page (Click “Comment Now”)
CSPC Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (You can also comment from here)
Power Tool Institute Opposition Page
Jonathan
I rarely take the time to chime in on Govt issues , but I think they safety mechanisms should be mandatory in OSHA settings but liberty of choice when purchased for personal use (or for self-employed). Much as with PPE, I think a table saw can impact quality of life, with loss of digits yet rarely result in loss of life, and other tools are far more dangerous i.e. chainsaw’s -,anti kickback chains Mandatory OSHA, liberty for personal use and chain brakes, mandatory for all , much like lawn mowers with a engine stop bail (or BBC), I do think that the chain brake, should have an additonal kill switch like a mercury switch for kickbacks.
Tim
Nope.
Doesn’t work that way.
OSHA cannot govern individual tools. Only jobsite use of the protective items on them.
RC Ward
I would love it if all table saws had this safety feature if this is what it takes for that to happen then I’m all for it
Jeff
Something of note in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is the following:
“When compared to all other workshop products, table saws accounted for an estimated 52.4 percent of all amputations related to workshop products in 2015. The estimated mean age for table saw blade-contact injuries is 55.6; whereas, all other workshop product-related injuries have an estimated mean age of 42.7. This
approximate 13-year difference in the mean age of injuries is a statistically significant difference (p-value < 0.0001), indicating that table saw blade-contact
injuries involve older victims in comparison to injuries related to all other workshop products. "
And later:
"Although CPSC staff does not know if older consumers have greater exposure to
these products, adult aging is associated with declines in many perceptual, cognitive, and physical abilities, as discussed in TAB E of the staff briefing package. Some of these age-related deficits likely contribute to blade contact incidents with table saws."
So, just food for thought on this, the people involved are likely far more experienced in using these and other tools than we all likely thought or stated in comments on the prior article. The people using table saws and getting seriously injured are likely not young and inexperienced, never been around tools, etc.
Graham Howe
In the DIY area I would certainly expect table saw owners to be older, just because these are not the sort of tools that would be in the ‘basic’ homeowner tool bag. It is likely that most people would buy a table saw only when they became more ‘in to’ their hobby, or took on a larger project, had more disposable income and more space. For most of us this is not going to be the case at a young age unfortunately.
I would say though that age is not the same as experience and whenever someone gets their first table saw there will be a learning curve just like with any other tool. Also the first time you try to cut a large sheet, the first time you try to cut wet wood, the first time you encounter wood with significant stresses etc etc, are all opportunities for problems.
As with many on here, I have been using table saws and other tools for a long time, but still I can get surprised from time to time. I have no particular preference one way or another and most likely will be building my next table saw anyway. But I find it hard to argue that table saws are not one of the most inherently dangerous tools we use and so if legislation is coming it certainly doesn’t surprise me that this is where it’s directed.
Kurt Greiner
As long as the people behind Saw Stop won’t allow competition, I’m against the mandatory implementation of this technology, as it enriches one company, artificially keeps prices high, and in the end, slows down the acceptance of this safety device by the public. I posted a comment on the CPSC site explaining my views.
pencil neck
Stop Saw has shown they are against a free and open market. Any required safety function or feature should become “public domain” (I’m sure there is a better term for what I’m trying to say).
fred
The only time that I know of that patent rights have been waived has been in times of national emergency like WWII. Even then – the patent had to be deemed of importance to the war effort.
Patent holders can put their inventions into the public domain, but they can instead choose to try to make money off of their invention. Its easy to feign altruism in the abstract. But if any of us were the inventor of the patented technology – would we really give it away without compensation?
Tim
Saw Stop is doing free/open market very well.
Ensuring your patents and copyrights stay uninfringed is free market as insures they are allowed to make unregulated money off of their innovation.
Regulating the market and saying a patented innovation should be public domain is the exact opposite of free market… that’s some sort of weird government regulated market socialism…
Tim
Letting other companies come up with dissimilar tech to achieve their own end goal of doing the same thing is free market.
Telling them they can use tech nearly identical to sawstop without paying for it is bad.
fred
I have found some of the railings against Mr. Gass and Sawstop to be rather disingenuous. Americans like the freedoms guaranteed in our Constitution and amendments – but sometimes become rather selective in how they would have the constitution applied. Our founding fathers recognized the desirability of granting a limited term monopoly to inventors to reward them – and by extension – encourage others to invent. To quote: “The Congress shall have Power … To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” Various acts of Congress have done just that. We, as Americans, could decide (IMO foolishly) that granting patents is a bad idea. Then we might start a movement to amend the Constitution. Or we might ask that Congress rescind the provisions of the various patent acts that have been in force starting in 1790 and see how that works out.
Corey
Commented.
Lacking an intrinsic, solely purposed, and factually unavoidable harm causing mechanism within modern tool design, this measure flies in the face of the free market and should it be enacted will leave only the legacy of successfully profiteering off end users through litigation. Consumable components to the safety mechanism will realistically not be getting replaced, likely early in the life of the tool, or as soon as it’s not fiscally feasible, and user error will continue to prevail as it has for millennia. This is simply put, a money gouging sham masquerading under a noble pretense. Let the patent holders put forth their noble new tech in a free market and the public (which is presently inundated in borderline obstructive safety culture) will provide the answer to this discussion, free of charge. Thank you.
Very interested to see the outcome. Appreciate the links, Stuart!
Addison Pettis
I completely agree! Well said.
Mike47
I don’ think the government should protect people from their own stupidity in their own shop environment. Workplace safety is a different matter entirely, and whenever technology can be applied to protecting the worker from hazards, that’s a good thing. Just keep Uncle Sam out of my garage.
erik
Much like ABS braking technology in cars are required by law today, this tech should be required by law tomorrow.
SawStop proved that the formula works, and there are not really any drawbacks from this technology other than that prices are, for now, high. If all table saws are required to have this tech installed prices would even out very quickly and many injuries will be avoided.
I’m all for this legislation.
jtr165
A fair comparison, but the automotive industry as a whole has very different economics when it comes to cost absorption and competition…namely in the sense of multiple products that already used their own developed version of the safety requirements, and used car sales.
The ABS/TCS mandatory regulation very much DID increase the base end user costs for cheaper economy sized cars. Those things were already made and sold with extremely thin per unit margins, but with hopefully high sales to compensate. The updated tech for a new car didn’t help that, and it’s been documented plenty on how the ‘cheapest’ new car from each manufacturer went up much more than it had year over year before. On cars that already offered the tech standard, or even as an option, the impact was much less.
The difference though is that the used car market exploded around then for more reasons than just the regulations. Depreciation rates, availability, etc.,…Power tools don’t have nearly the same amount of ownership changes as cars and trucks, especially small job site saws…
tl;dr…Job site table saws WILL go significantly up in price with this tech included…a market focused current modern, and small, TS’s may open up for a while more so than currently, but not enough to give everyone an option at the right price (as it was with cars). Big expensive cabinet saws, it won’t impact nearly as much.
Chris
So this rulin aims to force table saw manufacturers to incorporate sawstop type technonolgy into their table saws?
mattd
I don’t care either way as many people will just turn it off to prevent costly accidental firings (a saw has to be able to disable the feature or wet wood will set it off), but I am curious how this tech would effect the cost of the saws. I don’t see how even the cheapest saw’s price won’t go up by at least $100. Another thing to consider would be the non standardization of the firing cartridges. so say HD only carries the ryobi/ridgid/dewalt cartridges and HD is only store near you then you will probably steer clear of other brands as not having an extra cartridge can severely hamper productivity.
Joe D
My understanding is that you can’t just flip a switch to keep it off. Rather, you must go through the steps to disable it every time it is turned off, if you want to have it off. For me, the high cost of a false trigger is enough to make me avoid the technology.
I am particular opposed to the government requiring any patented technology. They need to either wait until the patent expires, or the owner of the patent turns it over to the public domain before the government starts mandating it.
Dust
I’m sure there are plenty of men that would give this a things up…if they hadn’t lost it to a table saw.
I’m for it, but getting the patent holder to play ball is another thing.
Farid
I recently toured a brand new innovation center at a local college. The center is both a tech incubator for both startup and established companies working on new ideas, as well as for use by students and perhaps at some point community users. The center has a wood fabrication shop, metal fabrication machinery, paint, 3D printing, welding, …etc. Pretty anything you need to start prototyping your ideas.
They had Sawstop table-saws. I asked the director about it, since there has been a lot of talk about the topic here in Toolguyed in the last few months. The director informed me that it was no brainier decision. The insurance costs would have been much higher without it and that it is becoming the standard for use in trade schools.
Some might be surprised to know that some companies welcome this kinds of rulings and often lobby behind the scenes to implement them or even initiate them – the federal register is full of examples. Yes some initially fight it, as did car makers with seat belts for a long time, but once the writing is on the wall, they start featuring those same technologies as an advantage. By the time this ruling gets implemented and phased in, the patent would have run out on Sawstop. And even if the patent is extended, companies would find new techniques or ways around the patent by then.
Why would competitors companies welcome this? A safety director at a manufacturing plant once told me while people do really stupid things, it does not prevent them from suing. If the company can show they have met a minimum standard or a widely adopted practice, it becomes that much easier to defend themselves against costly lawsuits.
I missed commenting, and I hardly use my table saw. Still, had I had a choice years ago between a safer saw and the one I bought , I would have gladly paid the extra money. Once my son is old enough to start working on projects, I will probably swap out my saw. Certain things are worth it.