Lead Testing of Children’s Products 2-02-09
CPSC Grants One-Year Stay on Lead-Testing Requirements
WASHINGTON, D.C. January 30, 2009 - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) voted unanimously (2-0) to issue a one year stay of enforcement for certain testing and certification requirements for manufacturers and importers of regulated products, including products intended for children 12 years old and younger.
The stay of enforcement provides some temporary, limited relief to the crafters, children’s garment manufacturers and toy makers who had been subject to the testing and certification required under the CPSIA. These businesses will not need to issue certificates based on testing of their products until additional decisions are issued by the Commission. However, all businesses, including, but not limited to, handmade toy and apparel makers, crafters and home-based small businesses, must still be sure that their products conform to all safety standards and similar requirements, including the lead and phthalates provisions of the CPSIA.
Handmade garment makers are cautioned to know whether the zippers, buttons and other fasteners they are using contain lead. Likewise, handmade toy manufacturers need to know whether their products, if using plastic or soft flexible vinyl, contain phthalates.
The decision by the Commission gives the staff more time to finalize four proposed rules (originally to take effect on February 10, 2009) which could relieve certain materials and products from lead testing and to issue more guidance on when testing is required and how it is to be conducted.
The stay will remain in effect until February 10, 2010, at which time a Commission vote will be taken to terminate the stay. For the complete news release, which includes information on what the stay does NOT apply to, read the news release here.
Editor’s note, March 25, 2009:
This remains a hot topic of discussion on the Web. To see how other crafters feel about this law, read the discussion threads on Etsy and also visit the blog site of The Domestic Diva for many comments on the CPSIA Stay of Enforcement disussed in the news release linked to above.
Update, April 1, 2009:
Here are some additional articles about what’s happening because of this new law:
* AMAZON Bans 2500 Products because of CPSIA Law - Many toy sellers have had their products removed from the Amazon Marketplace because they could not deliver certificates of compliance. A hard blow for craft sellers to lose such an important market, and only one example of the great economic impact this new law will have on the toy industry worldwide. Read these forum comments on the Amazon Seller Community forum.
* CPSIA has Already Cost U.S. Toy Businesses $2 Billion - Read article at Playthings.com.
* Children’s Books Published Before 1985 Now Banned by CPSIA - Prior to 1985, lead pigments were commonly used in inks, dyes and paints used in children’s books. That’s why children’s books published BEFORE 1985 are now considered unsafe and cannot be sold of distributed unless they have been tested and found to be lead-free. Read article on this topic at ProLiberty.com, which includes a very interesting discussion of what is happening in regard to children’s books in libraries.
Related Items:
If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment and subscribing to the feed to get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
I want to allow my readers to express their opinions, but Ernie’s comment will only needlessly frighten many sellers. I see nothing in the CPSC news release that says that selling untested products is “illegal.”
The CPSC simply states that crafters don’t have to issue certificates “based on their testing” but “are cautioned to know” if other items used in their products are lead free. What that says to me is that the CPSC has no way on earth to know whether any individual seller has tested a product or not, and they aren’t even discussing this topic because they know this is impossible to monitor.
Besides, they have stated that they are short-funded and understaffed to begin with, which is why all those lead-contaminated products from China got into the country in 2007. Making this ruling is one thing; policing it is another. Read a little more closely, and you will understand that, given their limited resources, the CPSC must put their focus not on mom and pop businesses, but major manufacturers and retailers in this industry.
Frankly, I don’t think anyone knows what’s going on here. Everyone and his brother is making blog posts on this topic, which probably accounts for the fact that a lot of people in high places are now trying to do something about the mess the CPSC caused by issuing this ruling before fully understanding its economic implications.
Here are a couple of new blog posts that will be encouraging to you:
Etsy Admin has advised its sellers that “Manufacturers and importers – large and small – of children’s products will not need to test or certify to these new requirements, but will need to meet the lead and phthalates limits, mandatory toy standards and other requirements.”
In his 1/30 blog post, Senator Jim Demint (SC) confirmed that there is massive confusion and uncertainty in the small and home business community. “The regulations are unclear and compliance will be practically impossible for many manufacturers. In an effort to keep the doors of these small businesses open, and protect the livelihood of many families, I will be introducing legislation early next week that will present much needed reform to the CPSIA.” I like his very practical ideas for how to fix this mess. Read the whole blog post here.
I’m not giving legal advice here, but simply stating my opinion. In view of the one-year stay on this ruling, I believe it would be economically foolish for any craft seller to pull their products from shows, fairs, or anywhere on the Web unless they have doubts about them being entirely lead-free.
[...] And here’s a post from Barbara Brabec’s new blog about the one year stay on the regulations taking effect: http://handmadeforprofit.com. [...]
Barbara
The one year stay is only on the testing requirement. It is still illegal to sell products that haven’t been tested. This is another example of political expediency that creates catch 22s.