Posts Tagged ‘Children’s Products’

CPSC Fines Children’s Product Importer $2 Million and Prohibits Its U.S. Sales

Wednesday, March 3rd, 2010

Recalled Wooden Toy Imported by Daiso

Toy and children’s product importer, Daiso, was issued a $2 million fine and cannot import or sell children’s products in the United States until the company meets a long list of safety requirements set out in a decree issued yesterday. The company had five recalls since 2008 and imported illegal products that the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) examined and stopped at the ports before they could be sold.

“This landmark agreement for an injunction sets a precedent for any firm attempting to distribute hazardous products to our nation’s children” said CPSC Chairman Inez Tenenbaum. “We are committed to the safety of children’s products and we will use the full force of our enforcement powers to prevent the sale of harmful products.”

Toys”R”Us Offers Discount for Turning in Old, Unsafe Baby Products

Thursday, February 4th, 2010

Image of a Recalled Play Yard

Unsafe and recalled children’s products are, unfortunately, a big problem for today’s parents.  WeMakeItSafer research estimates that 214 million potentially dangerous children’s products have been recalled and remain in circulation and could be in use currently.  (See the Children’s Products Recall Report for more recall statistics.)  To offer parents some relief, from now until February 20, Toys”R”Us, Inc. is promoting its “Great Trade-In” event to help replace unsafe baby products with new ones.

Bring used baby products to Babies”R”Us and Toys”R”Us locations nationwide and, in exchange, get 25% savings on the purchase of a new item from select manufacturers.  Toys”R”Us, Inc. spokeswoman Katie Reczek said the company disposes of the used items it receives.  This ensures that products cannot be put back into circulation.  Toys”R”Us consulted with product safety organizations, who gave the company this advice regarding disposal.

Stores are accepting these used items:

  • Cribs
  • Car seats
  • Bassinets
  • Strollers
  • Travel systems
  • Play yards
  • High chairs
  • Toddler beds

Because all used items are going to be destroyed, Toys”R”Us is not prepared to help you determine if your used item has been recalled. With each recall, however, various remedies are provided.  Use our Product Recall Search to find photos of recalled products and search easily by the brand name of the product you own.  Our recall product page will tell you, for example, whether you should contact the company for a free repair kit or whether you could return it to the store where you bought it.

CPSC Stay on Testing and Certification Requirements: What Does it Mean to Manufacturers and Retailers?

Saturday, January 31st, 2009

As news broke Friday afternoon that the CPSC has granted a one year stay on certain product testing and certification requirements, manufacturers breathed a collective sigh of relief.  But what does the stay really mean?  How much relief can manufacturers expect?  And, what about the retailers, will this stay hurt more than help?  Let’s take a look at some of the key issues and how they are affected by the stay.

General Conformity Certificates (GCC):

Before the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA), GCCs were required for products with mandatory standards in place, including bike helmets, automatic garage door openers, lawnmowers, swimming pool slides, mattresses, candles with metal core
wicks
and lighters.  The CPSIA expanded the requirement of GCCs to include all products subject to any consumer product safety “rules, bans, standards and regulations.”  As before, the GCCs called for under the CPSIA require that, for each product, manufacturers and importers must list all of the applicable rules, and certify by means of reasonable testing that the product complies with each.

According to the CPSIA, GCCs must include certification of compliance with any new, applicable rules imposed by the CPSIA by November 12, 2008, or by the time an applicable rule goes into effect. 

The stay granted Friday effectively reverts US Code Title 15, Section 2063, as it pertains to GCCs, back to the pre-CPSIA state for one year. 

Third-Party Testing for Certification of Children’s Products:

The CPSIA imposed a new rule stating that GCCs alone are not enough for products intended for children aged twelve and under, and that third-party testing would be required for certification.  For children's products, certificates of compliance by accredited third-party testing facilities are required for each applicable rule.  Because accreditation guidelines for testing facilities are to be rolled out over the course of a year from the time the CPSIA was enacted, manufacturers and importers must continually update their testing and certificates to include new rules as the accreditation guidelines become available.

With the stay in place, certificates of compliance by third-party testing facilities are not required until February 10, 2010, but it only applies to rules for which the Commission has not already established third-party accreditation guidelines.  Accordingly, under Section 2063, as amended by the CPSIA, manufacturers and importers of children’s products are still expected to certify by accredited third-party testing that products comply with rules for lead paint and surface coatings, full size and portable cribs, pacifiers, small parts, and lead content of metal jewelry.*

What it Means:

For manufacturers of products not intended for children aged twelve and under, and that were not previously required to provide General Conformity Certificates (GCC), GCCs will not be required until at least February 10, 2010. 

For manufacturers of children's products, the stay means that neither GCCs nor third party testing certificates will be required to prove compliance with new laws regarding baby bouncers, walkers, lead content, phthalates or any other children’s product safety rule for which third-party accreditation requirements have not yet been published, for at least one more year, until February 10, 2010. 

Importantly, although manufacturers and importers may not be required to certify that their products comply with these “rules, bans, standards and regulations,” they are still required to be certain that they do, in fact, comply.  In other words, it is still against the law to violate any rule, ban, standard or regulation imposed by the CPSIA or otherwise, and doing so will result in civil and criminal penalties, which were dramatically increased by the CPSIA.  Therefore, the question remains, how does one know for certain that a product complies with laws, especially hazardous substance bans, without testing?

Some products, such as items made of fabric or printed paper like books, are likely inherently free of lead and phthalates, and those manufacturers will probably take their chances and continue to make and sell products after the bans go into effect on February 10th, 2009.  However, for makers of products that require metal components, for example, the risk of selling a product with lead content exceeding the new limits is much higher.  Those manufacturers will still need to either test products or product-components themselves, or request certification from their suppliers.

Furthermore, retailers, especially large retailers with significant buying power, are unlikely to accept products from any manufacturer, large or small, without some sort of certification that the products are in compliance, regardless of what proof is required by the law.  In addition, many retailers may holdup future orders until manufacturers certify the retailer’s current inventories, produced before February 10, 2009, are also in compliance.  For the same reasons, we can expect to see small retailers joining forces to pressure manufacturers into providing proof of compliance.  In both cases, retailers will incur some costs in both labor and delayed orders while working with manufacturers to solve the problem.  Of course, retailer costs will be much higher if manufacturers are unwilling or unable to cooperate, forcing retailers to either test on their own or simply not sell current inventories.  (More on the effect of the lead ban on retailers here.)

Overall, for small manufacturers and crafters who make and sell products directly to the public – and those products are not painted, are not cribs, are not pacifiers, do not contain small parts and are not metal jewelry – the stay lifts a huge burden for at least one year.  For most other manufacturers, whether because their products fall into one of the categories unaffected by the stay, or because retailers are unwilling to sell their products without them, certificates of some sort are still going to be a requirement.

*New rules regarding ATVs, Pool and Spa Safety and voluntary guarantees under the Flammable Products Act, also are not included the stay.

Full Text of CPSC Stay Announcement

Lead, Phthalates and Sellers of Children’s Products – What’s All the Fuss? An Explanatory Overview for Consumers

Friday, January 30th, 2009
Girl playing with PB blocks
 

While retailers struggle to comply with new laws imposed by the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA), consumers struggle to understand what all the fuss is about.  “They need to simply stop selling products with lead in them,” one person commented.  It sounds easy enough, but determining which products can and cannot be sold under the new laws is far from simple.

The following overview was drafted with consumers in mind to help explain why retailers, even those who support the new laws, are particularly worried about complying with the new lead limits – more so than other new laws, including those limiting phthalates, which are often lumped in with lead when discussing banned substances in children’s products.

UPDATE 02/05/09:  As of today, new rulings will cause phthalates to be treated the same as lead with regard to inventory.  This article has been edited accordingly.

Background –Summary of the Lead and Phthalate Bans

Lead Paint Ban: Paint or surface coatings, as well as paint on furniture and children’s products, cannot exceed 90ppm (parts per million) as of August 14, 2009. (previous limits were 600ppm)

Lead Content Ban: Products intended for children twelve and under cannot contain lead (in paint or otherwise) in excess of 600ppm as of Feb 10, 2009, 300ppm as of August 14, 2009 and 100ppm as of August 14, 2011.

Permanent Phthalates Ban:  Toys for children twelve and under, and child care articles (feeding, sleeping, sucking and teething aids) for children three and under, cannot contain certain phthalates (DEHP, DBP, BBP) in amounts over 0.1 percent as of February 10, 2009. 

Interim Phthalate Ban (until further research): Toys for children twelve and under that can be put in a child’s mouth (sucked or chewed), and child care articles (feeding, sleeping, sucking and teething aids) for children three and under, cannot contain certain phthalates (DINP, DIDP, DnOP) in amounts over 0.1 percent as of February 10, 2009.

Banned Hazardous Substance vs. Safety Standard:  Lead is considered a banned hazardous substance and is governed by the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA).  Under the FHSA, once a substance is effectively banned it can no longer be manufactured, imported or sold in the US.  Phthalates are banned via a Safety Standard. Safety Standards are governed by the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA).  Under the CPSA, Safety Standards only apply to products manufactured after the standard goes into effect. 

Therefore, as of February 10, 2009 it is against the law to manufacture or sell any children’s product over the then-current lead or phalate limits.  However, phthalate bans apply only to products manufactured on or after February 10, 2009.  Products containing the banned phthalates can still be sold if they were manufactured before February 10, 2009http://cpsc.gov/library/foia/advisory/320.pdf

UPDATE 02/05/09:  In a recent lawsuit filed against the CPSC, the Court ruled that the CPSC's interpretation of the CPSIA with regard to phthalates was incorrect and that, even with the above distinction between banned hazardous substances and safety standards, there was a clear intent by Congress to prohibit the sale of products containing the banned phthalates as of Februrary 10, 2009, not just the manufacturer and import of such products. More information about the phthalates ruling here.

Why retailers, even those who support the lead ban, are worried:

Typically, unless products are made to order, there is a lag between when a product is manufactured and when it is sold to the consumer.  This lag can be significant, with products remaining in the distribution channel up to several months or even several years.  Consider a product that is manufactured outside the US.  After the product is imported, the importer may provide the product to a distributor, who then sells the product to a retailer, who may then hold the product in inventory before placing it on the store shelf.  The product then sits on the shelf until a consumer decides to purchase it.  If the product is seasonal, such as a holiday item, the retailer may put unsold items back into storage until the following year.

In the case of phthalates products that are only regulated by safety standards, the new laws stop the manufacture and import of products on February 10, 2009, but allow the items already in the distribution channel to continue through the sales cycle.   In the case of lead and phthalates, the entire system freezes on February 10th; products already in the channel are not allowed to move forward.  Hence, retailers who purchase inventory before February 10, 2009 are prohibited from selling those items unless they are certain the products do not contain lead or the prohibited phthalates.

The problem is, retailers have no way to be certain that children’s products manufactured or imported before February 10, 2009 do not contain lead or phthalates unless they 1) test each product themselves, which is time-consuming and often cost-prohibitive, or 2) ask manufacturers to certify that the products do not contain lead the banned substances, which manufacturers are only required by law to do for products manufactured or imported on or after February 10th, 2009, and are not required to do so until at least Februrary 10, 2010.*

Large retailers with significant power in their manufacturer relationships will likely not have a problem demanding that manufacturers certify products produced before February 10, 2009 meet the new laws.  Smaller retailers, however, are finding manufacturers to be less willing (or able) to test older products.  Retailers are therefore left with inventory that they are afraid sell even if they believe the products are unlikely to contain lead because they cannot be absolutely sure.  Selling a relavent product that is later found to contain lead or phthalates above the designated limits carries hefty civil and criminal penalties.

*CPSC General Counsel recently clarified that General Conformity Certificates, which require only “reasonable testing” rather than third-party testing, will be allowed until third party accreditation guidelines go into effect in August.

*UPDATE 01/30/08:  CPSC Grants one year stay, until February 10, 2010, on certain certification and third party testing requirements.  A summary of the stay and what it means to manufacturers and retailers can be found here.