Hooray! CPSC Agrees To Exempt Some Natural Items From Product Safety Act
Step back from the ledge, makers of lovingly hand-carved wooden dolls: the Consumer Product Safety Commission has lurched into action and tentatively agreed to exempt some materials and items from the lead-testing requirements in the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act.
We were unable to find the actual votes on the CPSC's site, but we assume they were on these four proposed exemptions (PDFs). According to the L.A. Times, the CPSC agreed to exempt:
- Items with lead parts that a child cannot access
- Clothing, toys and other goods made of natural materials such as cotton and wood; and
- Electronics that are impossible to make without lead
If your fears still aren't assuaged, take heart: the CPSC is underfunded and can't afford to come after your Etsy store:
Whether federal regulators will enforce the rules—which might entail inspections at thousands of secondhand stores and toy shops across the country—is another question."The CPSC is an agency with limited resources and tremendous responsibility to protect the safety of families," said Scott Wolfson, a CPSC spokesman. "Our focus will be on those areas we can have the biggest impact and address the most dangerous products."
Regulators Rethink Rules on Testing Children's Clothing and Toys for Lead [LA Times]
(Photo: jalexchasick)
PREVIOUSLY: Consumers Union Asks Nancy Nord, CPSC To Do A Better Job Explaining These New Toy Testing Rules
New Toy Safety Rule Has Collateral Damage: Handmade Toy Manufacturers
Post a comment
Comments:
My wood is always guaranteed lead free.
Close, now let's exempt thrift stores from this ridiculousness and we'll be there.
Yes could they please release a statement clarifying that USED clothes and toys at thrift stores, freecycle and garage sales are exempt. The panic about it is getting very old.
@friendlynerd: Exactamundo. If I want to buy a sweet, extremely sharp, lead-paint-filled, missile-launching, eye-losing, 70s-vintage Shogun Warrior from my local GoodWill store, I damn well better.
What about my favourite artisanal soap makers?
What about stuff thats currently on the shelves, are retailers going to have to pull all their stock and replace it with lead free stock?
Consumerist is making the same mistake the media is.
The proposed exemptions are only for UNdyed, UNfinished, UNpainted, etc. fabrics and wood.
So this gives NO meaningful relief to toymakers, crafters, thrift stores, etc. :(
That's a start.
The last proposal to exempt clothing was only for natural, untreated (meaning, undyed!) materials like cotton. Is that still the case?
Do all the little Schuylers in Park Slope have to switch to an all beige muslin wardrobe?
And what about BOOKS?
Will booksellers still be liable for testing? Especially used booksellers?
So that's undyed cottons and unpainted wood, I'm guessing? Sounds like tons of fun for the kids.
I still say that if a small manufacturer is using materials already tested and cleared for sale in the US to make their items, they should be completely and absolutely exempt. Lead won't magically occur in paint that lacked it once it touches another surface.
@brooksosheffield: Since the government has decided I'm an alchemist, I've decided to chew on all the child-themed products in my house in the hope that some of them yield gold!
This is why we need a law that funds the government by the number. Each agency, committee, etc., would be given a number. The military, including the VA, would be the only #1. All others would be funded by their number. If you think this is a good idea, please contact your officials. The states could do it this way too.
@m4ximusprim3: Unless you have high lead levels in the groundwater supplying the tree... Or mercury or most other contaminants.
But it's not really worth testing each of these for lead, since most likely any levels found would be minuscule.
The simple thing to do is just ban everything made in Red China.
My lead-based toys are 100% natural. Can I get them exempted, too?
Next target: the burgeoning used food reseller.
On a serious note, I'm glad they're taking steps to ensure our kids' toys are safe and while they may not enforce every single independent toy store (which is probably just as well), it will make importers think twice.
Ironically, our kids are much more likely to be harmed by vehicle accidents and diabetes brought on by junk food than ever see the lingering effects of a slightly leaded toy they played with for 6 days of their life (the average amount of time my kids ever play with any particular toy before it's dumped in the toy bin).
As the law is written right now. A person who knits baby hats and sells them at home, could sell undyed baby hats without having to get them tested. If she uses dyed yarn, she has to get each item tested (at the expense of hundreds of dollars)
So if she has one type of baby hat that she makes and sells for 12 dollars each lets say, she has to get the prototype tested, and then try to sell a dozen of those hats JUST TO BREAK EVEN WITH THE TESTING---and that can only be in the same color. If she wants to make that hat in several different colors, EACH color has to be tested. Even if she is using dyes that the manufacturer has certified to be lead free.
This doesn't make any sense.
@kateblack: I love the sentence "This basically seems to imply that somehow alchemy works. Non-lead containing item + non-lead containing item= LEAD!"
I giggled.
I can't believe this law applies retroactively.. to things like books too.
Amazon has contacted distributors and they will DESTROY millions of books (they have no choice) after February 10 if the manufacturer cannot provide a certification that their books (BOOKS OF ALL THINGS) aren't filled with lead.
@Oranges w/ Cheese: And even if books were filled with lead, if you've got a kid who's eating more books than s/he's reading... you've got bigger problems.
@Oranges w/ Cheese: It really is beyond nonsensical. I'd be laughing until I was sick if the consequences weren't as severe as they are.
Applying this to books might just be a first amendment issue.
Regulators will mindlessly regulate if left un-molested ... expecting them not to is like expecting a terminator to not try to terminate Sarah Conner.
When regulators and regulations get too thick, they both need to be pruned vigorously.
Whew! I'm going to start making toys from 100% all-natural lead. Is that okay?
Megan and Ben, can you certify this website as being 100% lead free? What with all the alchemy occurring that magically turns cotton into lead, I am concerned that your pixels may be shooting magical alchemical lead at my eyeballs.
amendment of the CPSIA is now an "idea for change" on change.org. so if this sort of thing concerns you, definitely go vote! http://www.change.org/ideas/view/save_handmade_toys_from_the_cpsia
exactly.
So for work-at-home-mom's on HyneaCart or Etsy who make cloth diapers (dyed cotton and/or velour/minkee/hemp/bamboo plus elastics, snaps or velcro) and custom childrens clothing (dyed cotton or bamboo knits plus buttons, facing, elastics, thread, zippers) - they are still 'teh screwed'.
@Eyebrows McGee: i doubt the consumerist would be subject to the same rules since it blatantly isn't for children ages 12 and under
1. Find out who voted for this bill. 2. Send one of those items to that person, either at home or at his/her office. Spend $2 to save yourself thousands. The greedy retailers don't want ANYONE but them to make money...and, that's what it's all about!!!
the problem is not whether agents can come after you. The problem is that a seller could "face civil and/or criminal penalties." Thus anyone buying your product could sue you. It's not a matter of being "detected".
It's a Christmas miracle!!