Those who read this blog regularly, know that I generally post the facts with little added commentary. However, a few of the Commissioners’ statements with regard to their votes on whether to exclude crystal and glass beads from lead limits left me quite confused over the stand the CPSC is taking, and will take, with regard to enforcing the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA of 2008) under its new leadership.
At the end of her explanation for denying the Fashion Jewelry Trade Association (FJTA) exemption request, Tenenbaum states:
“There is a wide range of children’s products that contain crystal and glass beads that are subject to the 101(a) lead limits and, as the Commission staff recognized, many of these products do not present an immediate danger of harmful lead exposure to children. Consequently, we will focus our enforcement activities on crystal and glass bead products designed and intended primarily for children six years of age and younger, the population most at risk of mouthing and swallowing small objects.”
What, exactly, is she saying – although you will still be breaking the law if you make or sell products that have crystal or glass, lead-containing beads for children aged seven to twelve, we will look the other way?
She goes on to state, “While this approach does not provide the exact relief that the FJTA seeks through this request, I urge manufactures and retailers of crystal and glass beads to remember that, especially during the implementation period of the CPSIA, the agency’s primary enforcement focus will remain on noncomplying lead products that present serious health risks to children.”
Huh? So there is some relief being provided. Again, is that because the CPSC will not enforce the law, or because they will grant an exclusion for these products if they are intended for children aged seven to twelve? Although the latter could make sense given that, under normal use and abuse, older children are less likely to put the beads in their mouth, the statements left me confused – if I make or sell children's products, can I or cannot I use crystal and glass beads that contain lead above the legal limits in items intended for children under 12?
Moore’s statement may be even more confusing. “I am voting today to direct our enforcement staff to focus their activities on these products [intended for children six and under].”
Um, was that up for a vote? Clearly, I’m missing something. I understand the CPSC has and always has had limited resources, forcing it to focus its attention on the most pressing dangers, but to me, these statements send a very mixed message. Will the rules change when the CPSC does have the funds to enforce the law?
Whether or not I agree with Nord’s vote to stay the lead limit restrictions for crystal and glass jewelry, she makes a statement that is more in line with my understanding of the law:
“The CPSIA does not recognize that risks impact children of different ages in different ways and instead takes a “one size fits all” approach. This is unfortunate, yet this is reality.”
In other words, the CPSC does not have the power to split the CPSIA in half, applying it to only some the children for which the laws were written, regardless of whether it would be "common sense" to do so. Again,what are we to make of these statements on enforcement? Is this not like saying, “The speed limit is 60 mph, but don’t worry, we don’t have enough police officers to enforce it.”
I am officially joining the ranks of the bewildered on this one.
Comments