CPSC Proposes New Safety Standard for Table Saws

The Consumer Product Safety Commission is proposing a new mandatory safety standard for table saws, it said (here). The proposed standard would require active injury mitigation technology on all new table saws, and would mandate that manufacturers test their saws to ensure that the blade cuts only to a depth of 3.5 mm when contacted by a surrogate for a human finger or other body part. Currently, only SawStop, which filed the petition requesting the new safety standard, produces saws that meet the requirement. The proposed standard would take effect three years after it is finalized, because “it is likely that table saw manufacturers will have to develop new technology or redesign virtually all table saw models, retool production facilities, and enter into licensing arrangements” with SawStop, the ITC said.

The proposed rule defines a table saw as “a woodworking tool that has a motor-driven circular saw blade, which protrudes through the surface of a table. Table saws include bench saws, contractor saws, and cabinet saws,” it says. The proposal would set a performance requirement “such that table saws, when powered on, must limit the depth of cut to 3.5 mm when a test probe, acting as a surrogate for a human body/finger, contacts a spinning blade at a radial approach of 1.0 m/s.” The proposed rule would also “require a test probe to act as surrogate for the human body/finger contact with the saw blade and to allow accurate measurement of the depth of cut.”

At the request of SawStop, the ITC recently issued an exclusion order banning importation of the only other table saw on the market with active injury mitigation technology, made by Bosch, finding they violate SawStop’s patents in violation of Section 337 (see 1702010015). However, the proposed rule does not mandate the type of active injury mitigation technology that must be used, so manufacturers would be free to develop mechanisms that would not infringe SawStop’s patents, CPSC said. If any new designs are not developed or are found to infringe SawStop’s patents, manufacturers and importers would likely have to work with SawStop or Bosch to license the technologies, the commission said, noting the Bosch exclusion order is currently under appeal. “The level at which the royalty payments are set will play a significant role in determining the economic impacts the CPSC’s rule would have on table saw manufacturers,” the commission said.

(Federal Register 05/12/17)