Skip navigation
Subscribe to Kids Today
RSS
Email

Share this on
Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
Most Commented On

Consumer Products Safety Improvement Act: Part IV: Textiles

January 8, 2009

Textiles in particular seem to be facing utterly unnecessary testing requirements as a direct result of the Consumer Products Safety Improvement Act.  From what I’ve read, manufacturers of textiles that might be purchased for an individual under 12 years of age are required to have testing certificates for each sku for which they are responsible.  

That means that if a small specialty clothing manufacturer offers a total of 10 outfits in 6 sizes each, they are going to have to pay for 60 different tests.  Let’s go one step further.  If the line only has 8 outfits but offers each outfit in 3 colors and in 6 sizes, they are going to be required to have 144 different tests.  It is my understanding that these tests cost about $1000 each.  That means that the company with 8 outfits in 3 colors will have to shell out $144,00!  So, the work-at-home mom who has been making boutique clothing for years is going to have to come out of pocket with ridiculous amounts of money in order to keep her business.  Whats more is that this is happening in a time of financial tension and recession!  Where is Suzy Homemaker’s bailout?!?

Let’s apply the same formula to a different scenario.  Take a small crib bedding manufacturer, for instance.  They may only have 5 collections in their line.  Each collection, though, will have a crib bumper, a sheet, a dust ruffle, a blanket, a window valance, and a mobile.  This company will be looking at spending $30,000 to insure that there is no lead in their bedding.  What?!?  This is going to put many a vendor out of business, rest assured.

And what of custom bedding?  Well, unless something is done in regards to textile testing, it will be going the way of the dodo.  As a parent, would you pay an additional $1000 per piece to have certified lead-free custom crib bedding?  Americans are going to lose jobs with custom bedding manufacturers over this.  And will specialized crib bedding become a black-market specialty?  I can hear the whispers now.

I’ve read the wonderful protest idea that people nationwide are already using in regards to the CPSIA.  Small companies, primarily with hand-crafted products for children, are sending samples of these "hazardous" materials to the law makers responsible for the Consumer Products Safety Improvement Act.  I have my own idea, though.  How about we label all of our textiles "Not intended for use by children age 12 and younger."  It might be ridiculous but it beats the heck out of testing cotton threads for lead contamination.  

Thoughts?

Posted by Kelly Nelson on January 8, 2009 | Comments (8)

January 28, 2009
In response to: Consumer Products Safety Improvement Act: Part IV: Textiles
Kelly Nelson commented:

It is my understanding that the CPSC is working tirelessly to clarify the products and materials that should become exempt, including most textiles. They are working on a standard budget, a rediculous deadline, and an absurd amount of information through which they must carefully consider. They have the same goals as the rest of us... to keep kids safe. I'll blog more on this later.


January 25, 2009
In response to: Consumer Products Safety Improvement Act: Part IV: Textiles
cici commented:

As far as any retail goes-boutique, big box, etsy, ebay, or second hand shops-any thing sold with lead amounts over the limit as of Feb. 10 are considered a "hazardous substance" and therefore unlawful to sell. As a retailer, we are requiring the GCC with any order shipped-per our purchase order. Better to err on the side of caution. While I don't think many will be caught, they will be looking to make an example of someone imo. The CPSC forums on fashionincubator.com have been extremely helpful to us in our research.


January 22, 2009
In response to: Consumer Products Safety Improvement Act: Part IV: Textiles
momo commented:

I make paper with fibers from plants in my garden, from cotton lint, from ripped blue jeans, etc. Then I make books and or photo albums. There is no lead in the natural product, so what would be a source of lead in my products? I also use semi-precious gems, silver and gold, and the occasional copper. After February 10, I will have to put a label saying these are not intended for kids under 12. Does this not defeat me as an artist/artisan? And, if we truly want to introduce children to all art forms which can later become a small business, are we limiting them in impossible ways. Someone forgot that small businesses do more for the US economy than many large companies. Perhaps that is justifying killing us.


January 21, 2009
In response to: Consumer Products Safety Improvement Act: Part IV: Textiles
Kelly Nelson commented:

My hope is that eventually all textiles will fall under exemptions for testing. Who knows, though.


January 15, 2009
In response to: Consumer Products Safety Improvement Act: Part IV: Textiles
Mark Riffey commented:

Kelly, Testing prices for XRF testing are considerably lower than $1000 each, but the combinations still add up to real money. At least one tester who is also a green products expert and an attorney is offering $5 per test or $100 per hour for testing. I suspect there are others, BUT the type of testing your product needs varies so no random quote is guaranteed to be accurate.


January 14, 2009
In response to: Consumer Products Safety Improvement Act: Part IV: Textiles
Cecilia commented:

First and for most let me thank you for all that you do, and all the information you put out there for us to read. As a small business owner this is really stressing me out. I'm manufacturer and designer of a small crib bedding line, total of 7 different designs, this new law will be devistating. There is no way for us to be able to pay that kind of money for testing and still continue our business. Seriously..lead in bedding??? Your idea about putting "not intended for use by children under 12 years of age", sounds like a fantastic idea to me. Doesn't sound more ridiculous to me than testing textiles for lead.


January 14, 2009
In response to: Consumer Products Safety Improvement Act: Part IV: Textiles
Kelly Nelson commented:

There is minimal information available on second-hand sales. I believe that the CPSC is reviewing way too much information right now and I just don't know how any of this will be clear by the February 10th deadline. I'll keep everyone posted as information becomes available.


January 8, 2009
In response to: Consumer Products Safety Improvement Act: Part IV: Textiles
Lisa Casinger commented:

It is very, very confusing and I can't imagine testing textiles for lead. Another question--what about selling second-hand merchandise? Consignment shops? Are they now just gone? I'm digging around trying to find the answers to these and many other questions but so far there are no clear cut answers.

POST A COMMENT
Display Name
captcha

Before submitting this form, please type the characters displayed above. Note the letters are case sensitive:

Advertisement
KT-MM-2010stars
Advertisement
onlinetechconf-MMad
NEWSLETTERS
eletter_callout_box_KT


About Us   |   Advertising Info   |   Site Map   |   Contact Us   |   FREE Subscriptions   |   Industry Links   |   RSS
© 2010 Sandow Media LLC.All rights reserved.
Use of this website is subject to its Terms of Use | Privacy Policy