I think I found something!!!!

[Former_Member]

OK I may have found something on the Mandatory Third Party Testing for Certain Children's Products. I've read it over and over again. And although I am no lawyer, the wording here explicitly says testing is required before importing. It's clear as day and although we may be manufacturer, we do not import materials. The only thing I import is silk and I don't use it for children's items. I have included the actual passage from the online pdf of the law. here is my source. http://www.cpsc.gov/cpsia.pdf
It can be found under section 102 paragraph (2)

(2) Effective on the dates provided (further down) in paragraph (3), before IMPORTING for consumption for warehousing or distributing in commerce any children’s product that is subject to a children’s product safety rule, every manufacturer of such children’s product (and private labeler of such children’s product if such children’s product bears a private label) shall……

As for Tracking Labels for Childrens Products, here's What I Found. The law states

“EFFECTIVE 1 YEAR AFTER the date of enactment of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008, the manufacturer of a children’s product shall place permanent, distinguishing marks on the product and its packaging, TO THE EXTENT PRACTICABLE , that will enable…”

Pay special attention to the bold print. We are required to label to the extent practicable. Diaper pins arent individually labeled, nor do I think that they will be. In al the research I have done, I did find a document that exludes those types of items that are too small to actually contain labels. So if it is not possible to label your product itself properly, then the packaging and all advertisements must be. Textiles are one thing, and I think there are a variety of ways we can do it. We'll just have to put our heads together.

I hope that this helps alleviate some of the stress we have all been feeling.

I do have to say that there are labeling standards already in effect and many small private retailers are already not conforming to those standards. It has not effected our business thus far, why should it now?

Bobbi

[Former_Member]

interesting!

[Former_Member]

interesting, indeed!

[Former_Member]

You are right - in the original law as passed by Congress (and not in the regulations written by CPSC) the emphasis is on IMPORTS and the wording was made purposely vague. But when CPSC got hold of this they applied it to everything - import and domestic. This is one reason many members of Congress are in the dark about what the problems are.

[Former_Member]

Well the document I got it from is the Consumer Product Saftey Inprovement Act of 2008. So for now I'll be going with that for the time being. But will keep looking for any contrary information. Which is what I did with the labeling laws previously.

Bobbi

[Former_Member]

I think your right. In section 102
‘‘(2) THIRD PARTY TESTING REQUIREMENT.—Effective on the
dates provided in paragraph (3), BEFORE IMPORTING for consumption
or warehousing or distributing in commerce any children’s
product that is subject to a children’s product safety rule,


It sounds like the testing is only required for imports.

[Former_Member]

hmmmm

[Former_Member]

I would love for this to be the case - but if the answer was this simple why would the controversy have gotten this far when the simplest of responses from CPSC and Congress would be - if it is not an import it is not included?

[Former_Member]

Another definition of import is to introduce. Which one would be doing if shipping something to a warehouse or distribution center for distributing in commerce.

[Former_Member]

Correct. And even the new and clarifications that have been published, While domestic manufacturers are required to certify that their products are lead free, they are not given the specifics as to how we are to certify that. So if you have all the proper docs certifying that there has been no lead added to your product you should still be fine.

Just remember there are still labeling laws and safety warning laws that have been in effect for some time.

Bobbi

[Former_Member]

Interesting, marking so I can read more later.

[softandscrubby]

Aren't we all more interested in what the actual law says rather than what the cpsc says it says? If I get sited and need to contact a lawyer, they are going to look at the law.

The cpsc still needs to get it right, but I'm taking this to mean I will be doing nothing illegal come Feb, or August. And won't have to discontinue my diapering products. It clears my conscience, anyway.

[Former_Member]

Yes, but you're talking about components, and I hate to say it, those aren't made for children under 12, so it's a whole different thing. CPSIA refers to the product as a finished manufactured product.

[TheFairiesNest]

Hmm...very interesting!
It says product not components, right?

[Former_Member]

Pussdaddy, the common meaning of import referrs to goods being transported from one country to another and while introducing is a synonym that could be interchangeable, I think its a stretch make the association that we are importing goods if we ship to another location in the same country. Again I'm not a lawyer, but I'd totally use that as an arguement and would probly do all I could to prove the fact.

Bobbi

[Former_Member]

Softandscrubby, I agree with you, if in the unlikely event that I would be in court about my product, the actual law and not the CPSC's interpretation of the law, They are just people like us, not any more capable of understanding the big wording than we are. After all we are self startes and enterpreneurs. Let's not underestimate ourselves.

Fariesnes, I didn't read anything about components versus product but when I find it I will post it.

Bobbi

[RentParty]

I don't know if this is helpful at all, but it seems like it might put some minds at ease:

On November 12 the CPSC issued a press release titled
CPSC Clarifies Certification Requirements
Agency Staff to Focus on Compliance with Safety Rules

in it they say

"Finally, the agency intends to focus its enforcement efforts on a product’s compliance with our safety requirements. While the Commission recognizes that every company is expected to make its best efforts to comply promptly with the new certificate requirements, the agency intends initially to focus more on compliance with the safety rules underlying the certificate, rather than on the certificate or form of the certificate itself. For addition information and a copy of the rule, go to www.cpsc.gov"

http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml09/09042.html

[Former_Member]

I am still only seeing reference to imported goods. I think we should leave it at that. The people that import or reimport goods are larger manufacturers that mass produce goods.

I stand by my initial idea for now. But I will keep looking.

Bobbi

[Former_Member]

Well, the government doesn't always use the common sense approach, lol.

[Former_Member]

True True.

[RentParty]

Mybb,

I'm really sorry, but you are not correct, I know it stinks but this law applies to you the same way it applies to toys-r-us or walmart or where ever, that is why it is bad, it has no concessions for small business or good business... it is about the end product not where it was made.

I'm really sorry.

:)

[2kute]

marking

[Former_Member]

marking

[Former_Member]

It is just that I was in the military and am familiar with how they can twist things, refer to, gum up, and leave open to interpretation things that will give them the upper hand.

[Former_Member]

It's all about evidence and proof. I only have a small percentage of children's goods anyway. I'm really just trying to help others research because it means an end to their livelihood if they don't get help. I sure don't want to pay a lawer 50 dollars an hour to do the same research I can do for free. And at least the points I have made can be brought to the attention of a lawyer as a starting point. I still have yet to find any wording that says I have to test my product. I do not import and the law that was posted in August 2008 which is when this technically became an issue clearly states "before Importing...." I'm not sure how that could be misunderstood.