Showing posts with label children's product. Show all posts
Showing posts with label children's product. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 17, 2013

“Can I Get Caught Too?” Er… Yes You Can!


People ask me all the time, “Do you really think I could get caught selling a product that is in violation of a U.S. law?  I’m such a small company, could I really be on anyone’s radar?”


My answer inevitably is “Yes,” that you don’t need to be a “big fish” to get hit with big penalties resulting from multiple violations (they rarely hit you with one).

Moreover, if you are importing violative products, you could end up being penalized by not just one federal agency but two (think tens-of-thousands-of-dollars…)

Taking children’s wearing apparel as an example, in the last 30 days there have been 7 recalls by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, including 1 announced just yesterday! 

They were recalled for either: 
-  failing to meet the federal flammability standard,
-       - posing a choking hazard, or
-       - posing a strangulation hazard.

Specifically, the product recalls were as follows:

1) Children’s Pajamas, recalled by the Bailey Boys – Flammability (sold at children’s boutique stores nationwide)

2) Wearever Girl’s Hooded Jacket Sets, recalled by David’s Place – Strangulation (sold exclusively at Burlington Coat Factory stores)

3) Girls’ BCG Hooded Windsuits, recalled by Academy Sports + Outdoors – Strangulation (sold exclusively at Academy Sports + Outdoors stores and its website)

4) Girls’ Pink Leopard Jackets, recalled by Ram’s Imports – Strangulation (sold exclusively at Burlington Coat Factory stores)

5) Yoki Girls Faux Leather Jackets with Drawstrings, recalled by Mirage Fashions – Stangulation (sold exclusively at Burlington Coat Factory stores)

6) Infant Sandals, recalled by American Boy and Girl – Choking Hazard (sold exclusively at Meijer stores)

7) Hooded Sweatshirts, recalled by Little Willy’s – Strangulation (sold exclusively at Zullily.com and Gilt.com stores)

Consumers should immediately take the recalled product away from children and return them to the store they purchased it from for a full refund.

As for the seller, not only does getting caught typically mean heavy penalties, but a product recall is disruptive to business (stay tuned for a future article on this as changes to the rules are being considered), can hurt your business relationships, and can tarnish your reputation.

And who wants that to happen?  Not you, and not me either.

Questions/comments?  Post below or email me at clark.deanna@gmail.com

Keep Up With Me:

On Twitter @fashcompliance

On Facebook  www.facebook.com/FashionCompliance (*like* the page to get our updates)

On YouTube  www.youtube.com/FashionCompliance

Monday, November 21, 2011

CPSC Compliance and Consumer Products Not Intended for Children

Importers and the government can often take radically opposite positions when it comes to what is considered a children’s product. Given the myriad of extra regulations surrounding goods for children, it is no wonder that so many importers try to steer clear of having what they consider to not be children's product, identified as such.

The difficulty arises however, when dealing with an article that could be considered attractive to a child. A 3-inch sized colorfully painted object, intended to be merely a decorative household item, could ultimately be considered a toy or children’s product by a government agency. The same holds for a decorative plush good that had not been intended for sale to children but could easily double as a children’s plush toy.

While some imports are an obvious decorative housewares product, such as a large wall plaque with a beer logo on it, with such attachments for hanging already affixed to it, and is therefore, clearly identifiable as not being intended for a child, others simply do not hold water when it comes to the government’s determination as to it not being a children’s article.

With regards to compliance, any imported article with paint or some other surface coating would be subject to Consumer Product Safety Commission’s (CPSC) rules and require lead paint testing if it is considered a “children’s product” by the government.

In addition to the surface coating issue, when children’s products are involved, there are also lead testing (separate from the lead paint issue), tracking label and other possible rules, such as that regarding small parts which must be adhered to.

Once the testing is complete, then there is the general certificate of conformity requirement that must accompany the shipment attesting to its compliance with the various CPSC rules. This certificate would need to be retained in accordance with Customs record keeping rules and be furnished upon request by Customs and retailers and distributors here in the US.

In addition, if you are planning to have goods shipped into California, or if you have reason to know that they might end up there, it should be noted that the state typically has more stringent rules than those at the national level.

For more information about importation of children’s products, go to www.cpsc.gov.

Questions comments? Post below or email me at clark.deanna@gmail.com



Thursday, August 5, 2010

Consumer Safety Product Commission (CPSC) and Children's Products

Last week I received an inquiry from a self-described “rookie” apparel importer regarding the use of a bonded warehouse for certain importations. Along with the inquiry came links to a couple of websites that showcased the women’s wear (very cute btw) at issue.

I thought about the myriad of U.S. Customs issues raised by his inquiry alone, and since it dealt with apparel, my mind wandered over to the Flammable Fabrics Act (and Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) oversight of compliance with that statute), and I wondered to what extent he was familiar with other government agency laws.

The relevance of this awareness as an importer, is that since U.S. Customs enforces U.S. laws at the border on behalf of other federal agencies, importers must be knowledgeable about - and in compliance with - these laws.

While there are numerous CPSC regulations covering many specific products, from baby bouncers and walkers, to felt-tip marking devices, to mattresses, there are certain CPSC rules that cover broad product categories, such as those regarding children’s products, including the regulation of lead paint, lead content, small parts, and children’s metal jewelry. Some currently applicable details behind each of these rules are as follows:

Lead paint on children’s products (16 CFR Part 1303)
Maximum Allowable Limit: 90 ppm
Must be Certified as Compliant if Product Made on/after This Date: 8/14/09
What Needs to be Tested: Any type of surface coating
Current Stay of Enforcement of Testing and Certification Requirement?
NO - SUBJECT TO ENFORCEMENT

Small parts (16 CFR Part 1501)
(only pertains to products intended for use by children under 3 y.o.)
Maximum Allowable Limit: n/a
Must be Certified as Compliant if Product Made on/after This Date: 2/15/09
What Needs to be Tested: Size of small components
Current Stay of Enforcement of Testing and Certification Requirement?
NO - SUBJECT TO ENFORCEMENT

Lead in metal components of children’s metal jewelry (CPSIA §101)
Maximum Allowable Limit:
300 ppm
Must be Certified as Compliant if Product Made on/after This Date: 8/14/09
What Needs to be Tested:
Testing of accessible parts
Current Stay of Enforcement of Testing and Certification Requirement?
NO – SUBJECT TO ENFORCEMENT

Total lead content in metal children’s products and in non-metal children’s products (CPSIA §101)
Maximum Allowable Limit: 300 ppm [scheduled for reduction to 100 ppm on Aug. 14, 2011]
Must be Certified as Compliant if Product Made on/after This Date: Feb. 10, 2011
What Needs to be Tested: Testing of accessible components (RULE SUBJECT TO CHANGE)
Current Stay of Enforcement of Testing and Certification Requirement?
YES – THROUGH FEB. 9, 2011

One oddball aspect to administrative law, i.e., where a federal agency promulgates (i.e., creates) regulations interpreting a statute (law), is that in order to get a final regulation, the proposed rule must undergo a “notice and comment” period. As these new children’s product rules came out of a 2008 law – the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA) – the creation of regulations is still ongoing, causing confusion in the trade community as to what ought to be followed.

For example, the CPSC is in the process of coming up with an “interpretive rule” on the meaning of the term “children’s product.” In other words, compliance is being sought across products for which no finalized definition exists, which begs the question – how can importers know how to be compliant? And how does U.S. Customs actually know what to enforce?

Lastly, if it weren’t confusing enough, the rules keep changing as we await a final rule. For example, this last category of each section above, “Stay of Enforcement of Testing and Certification Requirement” refers to the following.

There is a “stay” with regards to lead content in children’s metal consumer products (with the exception of metal jewelry) and non-metal consumer products. This means that while children’s products must be in compliance with CPSC lead content rules, the enforcement against non-compliance with the lead content rule for children’s consumer products is not currently in effect because it is “stayed.”

To keep track of CPSIA updates, click here.

Questions/comments? Post below or email me at clark.deanna@gmail.com

Citations:

74 FR 68593, (12/28/09).

“The Commission plans to keep the stay in effect for total lead content in metal children’s products and in nonmetal children’s products tested pursuant to CPSC–CH–E1001–08, Standard Operating Procedure for Determining Total Lead (Pb) in Children’s Metal Products or CPSC–CH– E1002–08, Standard Operating Procedure for Determining Total Lead (Pb) in Non-Metal Children’s Products, (section 101 of the CPSIA) until February 10, 2011. With regard to lead content, the Commission has determined that testing of children’s products for lead content by a recognized third party testing laboratory and certification based upon that testing should begin on products manufactured after February 10, 2011 to allow component testing to form the basis for certifications for lead content and permit the staff to complete an interpretative rule on the meaning of the term ‘‘children’s product.’’ 74 FR 68588, pg. 68591 (12/28/09).