Controversial Garage-Door Legislation Tossed by Congress

by Lauren Vasquez

It’s back to the drawing board for garage-door manufacturers and
dealers seeking clarification and revision of UL 325.

The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 was signed into law in August by President Bush without the contentious garage-door opener safety provision. Controversy surrounded the amendment which – depending
on whom you asked – sought to clarify UL 325 or shut out certain companies’ newly introduced safety technologies.

The CPSC Act originally popped up in Washington, D.C., last November. The proposed Garage Door Opener Standard section included in that bill came under scrutiny by some manufacturers for its original language – particularly: “…all automatic garage door openers that directly drive the door in the closing direction that are manufactured more than six months after the date of enactment of this Act shall include an external secondary entrapment protection device that does not require contact with a person or object for the garage door to reverse.” The amendment would go through several revisions, but the intent remained the same: to outlaw the use of “touch” technologies as the only safety system in garage-door openers.

The bill incited fervor in Neil Giarratana, president and CEO of Gurney, Ill.-based Marantec Inc. In an exclusive interview with PDD in March 2008, Giarratana expressed his offense to the legislation: “The bill [would] essentially take any product that carries inherent secondary entrapment off the market.” Marantec, which manufactures garage-door opener systems, was a leading opponent of the bill because the company backs a force-sensing safety technology system introduced by Salt Lake City-based Martin Door in April 2007. Marantec also contended that Chamberlain – the major manufacturer which lobbied for the bill – was trying to shut out Martin's new product from the U.S. marketplace.

Officials from Chamberlain, based in Elmhurst, Ill., maintained that their efforts had always been safety focused and not financially motivated. Mark Karasek, executive vice president of engineering and chief technology officer for the manufacturer of residential garage door openers, contended in March that Chamberlain, “was one of the prime companies in the original movement to have an external secondary-reversal system required in addition to the force-reversal system that’s within the operator.”

For now, manufacturers and dealers who want to see UL 325 revised will have to work out another solution. But the news is considered a win for Ken Martin, president of Martin Door, and Giarratana, who said they opposed the idea of having Congress step in to mandate a safety standard for the industry.

Karasek had said that if the bill does not pass, Chamberlain would continue to persist in getting the UL standard refined by any means necessary – including continuing to use legislation if DASMA and UL cannot come up with an acceptable standard. “We at Chamberlain do not believe the industry, through DASMA, is capable of making a recommendation to UL for clarifying the rules.”