Government Regulations

[Tom Winship]

I went to a Country Peddler Show yesterday with my wife. Migrated quickly to the woodwork. Visiting with one of the vendors, he told me that there is a law that becomes effective in Feb 2010, which requires him to have his wooden toys (that could be in the hands of 12 year olds down to infants) certified as not containing lead. He has gone ahead and done this. A 6 piece train that he sells for $100 cost $350 to certify.

The ridiculous part is that once he has it certified, he doesn't have to recertify it unless he changes the design (which I assume includes the materials or finish).

Someone told me one time that we have plenty of laws already, just need to enforce the ones we have.

[Bill Orbine]

Lead was once a serious problem and the has been many areas in which the government has stepped in to eliminate lead. That's a good thing.

What bother me about this is this fella making toy trains in the US isn't likely able to buy and use lead paints in the US. And here this fella is doing his duty to have his toy trains certified all the while lead laden wood toys are being imported in the US and nothing is done about it until these imported toys are discovered. Usually some watch dog group finds out and most of the US citizens have no idea that their children are playing with poison.

[Frank Drew]

I believe that the connection between lead ingestion and brain damage (particularly among children) is pretty well established, thus the ban on lead-based paints, unleaded gasoline, etc. I don't know the exact specifics of any laws or regulations, though.

Within the last year or so, there have been several reports of toys coming from China that had impermissible levels of lead in their manufacture or finish. That might explain any new regulations that the fellow told you about.

Personally, I don't see the problem; why wouldn't a consumer want to know that a product is safe, or at least that an effort has been made to assure its safety? Dairy farms, meat packing plants, restaurants, etc., are supposed to be inspected with some frequency; is that too much government meddling?

[Ken Fitzgerald]

If a person can't buy lead based paints in this country and he only uses paints that are manufactured and sold in this country, why should it have to be certified?

If the above case is true, it more than tripled the price of a toy.

Are you willing to pay 3 times the amount for a product that the paint manufacturer is already prevented from producing and selling in this country?

I think it is too much regulation.

If, on the other hand, you can import paint from another country that is lead based, then I can see the need for the regulation.

[Howard Acheson]

This issue was discussed at lenght about a year ago. It is a regulation of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. It's primary driver was toys that were manufactured in China for Mattel and other US toy companies and marketed by large chain retailers. These toys were found to have had a significant lead content.

As the regulation was written, it swept up all toys for children whether made wholly in the US or by amateur, craft-fair selling woodworkers.

[Frank Drew]

Ken

The original poster mentioned that the $350 certification cost would apply to all the similar $100 train sets that person or manufacturer made, and while obviously that fee would matter more to a small operator than some factory giant, in any case it wouldn't triple the cost of the toy if any number of multiples were made. I assume that if someone sets up a booth at a fair he's got more than one toy to sell.

And if someone can save some money by importing (tainted) vitamins, prescription drugs, dog food, toys, and whatnot from non-compliant countries, why not paints and finishes, as you note?

[Tom Winship]

Guys, I really didn't get my point across initially (or maybe I did). I realize the hazards of lead and agree totally that it should be banned. We have laws against it; let's prosecute those that get caught to the fullest extent of the law.
If I am going to be on the wrong side of the law, I send in a good sample, get it certified, have my papers, etc., then continue to make them with lead based paints.
My point was that having once piece certified does not insure compliance forever. Why not spend the money on random inspections of many pieces rather than requiring wallpaper pertaining to one piece?

[Mike Cutler]

Why not spend the money on random inspections of many pieces rather than requiring wallpaper pertaining to one piece?

The cost to test a product for lead paint, or lead present on the surface is < $4.00, when not purchased in quanity. Even a home kit is about $10-12 bucks. A lead detection pencil/swab is really cheap. I use them all the time. I guess the cert paperwork cost the balance of the $350.00

PS. Don't use one on some bread wrappers, you might not like the results.:eek:

[Mike Henderson]

Guys, I really didn't get my point across initially (or maybe I did). I realize the hazards of lead and agree totally that it should be banned. We have laws against it; let's prosecute those that get caught to the fullest extent of the law.
If I am going to be on the wrong side of the law, I send in a good sample, get it certified, have my papers, etc., then continue to make them with lead based paints.
My point was that having once piece certified does not insure compliance forever. Why not spend the money on random inspections of many pieces rather than requiring wallpaper pertaining to one piece?
The problem I see with not requiring the certification is that a very honest person trying to do the right thing can unknowingly buy a batch of tainted paint from some disreputable place. If they have to certify their product, they'll find out it's tainted at that time, and before it gets in the hands of children.

Another way to approach the problem is to require that the raw materials be certified, rather than the final product. There may be too many problems with that approach, however.

But I'm generally in favor of laws and certifications that protect children. On the balance scale of protecting children and protecting the craftsman making toys for children, it will tilt heavily in favor of protecting children.

Mike

[John Coloccia]

Another way to approach the problem is to require that the raw materials be certified, rather than the final product. There may be too many problems with that approach, however.

Makes sense to me, though. If I use wood and shellac to make a toy, it seems sensible that it should not have to be certified at all.

What will we do for custom toys? Build two of everything, and charge a $350 premium on a $50 toy? This particular regulation may be well intentioned, but its implementation appears quite seriously flawed.

[Rick Fisher]

On the banks, I respectfully and partially disagree.. I believe that people should be responsible and not borrow money they cant pay back. Banks are going under, due to there own bad decisions, but also because there customers are "ripping them off".

I have no ill will towards Corporate America at all. I beleive that the Auto Companies should have been allowed to fail and the benefactors should have been companies like Totyota and Ford, who ran properly.. If you where a cabinet maker and had a competitor who ran his business poorly until he went broke, and the city came along and bailed him out... you wouldnt be happy..


**

On the paint thing.. I cant agree with making a wooden toy guy get certified.. It reminds me of the joke about the speed limit on the bridge being 50 miles per hour.. some kids race accross and wipe out at 100 miles an hour.. so the city lowers the speed limit to 30 miles an hour on the same bridge..

[Mike Henderson]

Makes sense to me, though. If I use wood and shellac to make a toy, it seems sensible that it should not have to be certified at all.

What will we do for custom toys? Build two of everything, and charge a $350 premium on a $50 toy? This particular regulation may be well intentioned, but its implementation appears quite seriously flawed.
Yeah, I agree with you. Maybe it should be that if you do less than $x per year you don't have to get certified. That would allow hobby people to make toys and sell a few. If they aren't careful and use dangerous substances, they could get sued for everything they own. That would encourage them to be careful about what they use.

I don't have the ideal answer either.

Mike

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Folks,

Politcal comments violate the TOSs.

Please refrain from making political comments.

[Dave Lehnert]

A case of "be careful what you wish for".

When the lead paint thing was a big deal on tv with toys EVERYONE was all for more testing/regulation.
Now it is a case of "I agree but... should not apply to me. "

[Rick Fisher]

Dave is right, but is the cure worse than the disease?

Accross North America there are people selling crafts at fair's and flea markets.. Is the risk so serious ??

When a man goes to the yard, buys some pine and makes a toy truck, can he not sell it to his neighbour? Can he give it to his grandson ?

It seems like life just got real complicated?

[Joel Goodman]

I think the root of the problem is that lead paint is common in China and ends up in goods imported into the USA. I don't know why we don't require testing of everything that comes from countries with a bad track record. I thought I read that there was an exemption for wood toys made here with a limited number of "ingredients" ie wood and certain finishes. Did anyone else see that or am I dreaming?

[Mike Cruz]

[QUOTE=Frank Drew;1212767]I believe that the connection between lead ingestion and brain damage (particularly among children) is pretty well established, thus the ban on lead-based paints, unleaded gasoline, etc. I don't know the exact specifics of any laws or regulations, though.


If lead has been banned for so long, why are SO many kids SO brain damaged?

Sorry, I don't mean to offend anyone with a child that has a medical condition, just appauled at todays youth. :mad:

[Mike Henderson]

[QUOTE=Frank Drew;1212767]I believe that the connection between lead ingestion and brain damage (particularly among children) is pretty well established, thus the ban on lead-based paints, unleaded gasoline, etc. I don't know the exact specifics of any laws or regulations, though.


If lead has been banned for so long, why are SO many kids SO brain damaged?

Sorry, I don't mean to offend anyone with a child that has a medical condition, just appauled at todays youth. :mad:
The older generation has been complaining about the younger generation for millennium. There's some famous quote from Greek or Roman sources saying essentially the same thing you said. But the new generation always muddles through, just like we did. And they'll complain about the younger generation one day.

Mike

[Mike Cruz]

So maybe it isn't the lead? Hmmm wouldn't it be nice to see those BRIGHT colors that we see in exotic places right here at home? It ain't easy...

[Myk Rian]

Does anyone really expect the government to enforce this law? I don't.
There is no way they will be sending someone to all the craft shows, or even one show.

[Mitchell Andrus]

If a person can't buy lead based paints in this country and he only uses paints that are manufactured and sold in this country, why should it have to be certified?

If the above case is true, it more than tripled the price of a toy.



No, Ken. I think the $350.00 fee is to certify the entire production run of the toy.

But, if he sells only 25 units, the cost is $14.00 each. Still way too high.
.

[Brad Wood]

Does anyone really expect the government to enforce this law? I don't.
There is no way they will be sending someone to all the craft shows, or even one show.



I agree, and personally, I think I'd just move forward business as usual. I might consider having a flyer available for the parent showing exactly what materials were used, and even have one of those little test sticks handy for anyone that might be concerned.... maybe a little sign that says "this product was made by me and i care about your children, not my stockholders bottom line"

This sort of thing happens regularly. It is meant to keep big business in line and the letter of the law affects the ma and pa outfits. I think this is a spirit of the law issue and our enforcement agencies don't have the time to meddle in affairs going on at local craft sales/shows

[John Coloccia]

Maybe it's only one certification for a product now but wait until "certified" toys start showing up with lead in them. What makes anyone think that China isn't above sending lead free toys for certification, and then go back to using lead for production? I don't know why they would suddenly start respecting this particular regulation.

I hate to single out China but that's the only country these tainted toys are coming from as far as I know. I wish we just dealt with that instead of whacking everyone, including folks on this board.

There must be a lawyer in our ranks that can read through the actual language of the regulation and detail the real ramifications for us.

[James White]

Does anyone really expect the government to enforce this law? I don't.
There is no way they will be sending someone to all the craft shows, or even one show.

I agree, and personally, I think I'd just move forward business as usual. I might consider having a flyer available for the parent showing exactly what materials were used, and even have one of those little test sticks handy for anyone that might be concerned.... maybe a little sign that says "this product was made by me and i care about your children, not my stockholders bottom line"

This sort of thing happens regularly. It is meant to keep big business in line and the letter of the law affects the ma and pa outfits. I think this is a spirit of the law issue and our enforcement agencies don't have the time to meddle in affairs going on at local craft sales/shows

The problem with this is that, it means that Ma and Pa are now criminals for not complying with the law. So if Ma and Pa's competition would like to muscle in on there business. All they need do is point out that they are law breakers.

James

[Ken Fitzgerald]

No, Ken. I think the $350.00 fee is to certify the entire production run of the toy.

But, if he sells only 25 units, the cost is $14.00 each. Still way too high.
.

Yeah....but if you are only making one of a kind.....it could triple the cost.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

I guess here's my problem with these kinds of regulations....



Let's say only country "A" is using lead paint.

Why make the citizen's of country "B" pay the penalty for country "A"'s problem?

A better way to handle it IMHO.......Enforce two regulations... (1) Make it illegal to import paint with lead in it. All imported paints have to be certified. (2) All imported painted items from country "A" have to be certified.

[Alan Trout]

I was a licensed lead risk assessor and lead inspector for several years. I let my license laps after about 5 years because there just was not that much business to be had and was not very profitable and a very expensive license to keep.

Just to make a couple of corrections. Lead base paints are still used every day in the United States. They are industrial coatings used in industrial situations for industrial purposes. Lead has not been outlawed and is still used every day for appropriate purposes. Where it does not belong is in our residences which has been illegal to sell lead base paints and varnishes for residential or household purposes since 1979.

As a former lead inspector I can tell you that the paint swabs are not an appropriate or accurate test for lead levels. I have seen them test negative and that not be the case. What must be done is the use of a radio fluoroscope to read the L and K shell of the lead atom. That is the only way to know levels of lead and that is also the reason for the high cost of testing.

Some of the worst things I have seen for lead are from Mexico. Saltillo Tiles have had some of the highest reading I have ever seen and many of the glazes that are used in their pottery have very high levels of lead and mercury.

I understand the reason the CPSC has implemented this regulation but I also feel that it is unfortunate and not needed for our crafts people making their toys. It has not only effected our crafts people but also the motorcycle industry and other industries that it was not intended to effect. I know the motorcycle dealers were trying to get an exemption for vehicles for use by children. They were not allowed to sell their small vehicles for several month's because of this law. Every motorcycle has lead that is used somewhere during it manufacturing but is not an issue for a kid using the vehicle.

Alan

[Thomas Williams]

http://www.cpsc.gov/businfo/frnotices/fr09/leaddeterminationsfinalrule-draft.pdf
The above link is to the final rule determination by the Acting Secretary of the CPSC.
It is not what you would call a "good read" but it is interesting, and provides answers to some areas of concern.

[Brad Wood]

The problem with this is that, it means that Ma and Pa are now criminals for not complying with the law. So if Ma and Pa's competition would like to muscle in on there business. All they need do is point out that they are law breakers.

James

while true, I don't think people running operations out of craft shows are at risk - or at least it is a level of risk I would be willing to take. Every individual needs to assess their own level of risk they are willing to accept.

[Nathan Callender]

while true, I don't think people running operations out of craft shows are at risk - or at least it is a level of risk I would be willing to take. Every individual needs to assess their own level of risk they are willing to accept.

The problem is that the federal government has the propensity to make an example out of people. It only takes one agent to make some ma and pa's operation a living nightmare, and sometimes the government is heavy handed like that. Why risk getting harassed and possibly fined and jailed for making toys for kids? It pushes people to just do something else or try to live with the bureaucracy.

Why can't the government make a law that says that you can't sell or distribute an item containing lead based whatever that would be considered for residential consumption? It could be a 5 page bill. :-) And it covers everything. Importers who import junk, shady companies here in the US, etc. That way everyone is on the same playing field and the American consumer is responsible for policing the market place (ie, there would be an investigation team, but only staffed so as most of the leads would come from concerned citizens)....

It seems to me like this would be the best solution for the country, but I bet that the law was lobbied by testing companies and that is the reason it is such today.

Just my 0.02 on this one.

[Brian Jarnell]

It seems like life just got real complicated?
Not just got complicated,the little men who govern our lives have ever made it so.

[Bill ThompsonNM]

After reading the linked document.. I'll summarize. It's not true that every toy will have to be tested. The commission produces a list of substances, such as wood, that are exempt from testing as unlikely to have any lead content over the max of 100 ppm. Paints, are not exempted, though it appears that there will be some dyes and finishes such as mineral oil and shellac that are exempted. If you make toys, you'll have to sit down with the documents or find a magazine article that interprets them so you'll know what kinds of things you can use without seeking certification, etc. It seems like a workable rule..:)

[Karl Brogger]

This lead ban has effected the motorcycle industry. I don't know if it has been amended, or if anything has changed, but you could not get a bike built for a younger kid because of this lead ban BS. Solder is the only thing I could think of that would have lead in it on a small motorcycle.

More control means less freedom.

[Rod Sheridan]

This lead ban has effected the motorcycle industry. I don't know if it has been amended, or if anything has changed, but you could not get a bike built for a younger kid because of this lead ban BS. Solder is the only thing I could think of that would have lead in it on a small motorcycle.

More control means less freedom.

Hi Karl, it was the exposed lead battery post that attracted the scrutiny...Rod.

P.S. In 36 years of riding, I've never chewed on a battery yet, maybe I'm missing something?:D

[John Harden]

This lead ban has effected the motorcycle industry. I don't know if it has been amended, or if anything has changed, but you could not get a bike built for a younger kid because of this lead ban BS. Solder is the only thing I could think of that would have lead in it on a small motorcycle.

More control means less freedom.

This is correct, but to the best of my knowledge, they have put a stay on enforcement while they review it. They are selling them again, but the unintended consequence as I understand it, is the stay doesn't extend to importing new ones. So, you can sell inventory, but not import any more.

My 4.5 y/o son is just on the cusp of outgrowing his electric four wheeler, so I'm watching this with interest.

Regards,

John

[Karl Brogger]

What about models that don't have a battery though? XR-50's don't have one, I don't think the PW-50's do either.

[Rich Engelhardt]

Hello,

The problem with this is that, it means that Ma and Pa are now criminals for not complying with the law.
I strongly suspect Ma and Pa are already "criminals" for not reporting income & collecting sales tax.
IMNSHO, this new law is aimed square at Ma and Pa, not the "big guys".

[Paul Atkins]

Just let the consumer paint the stuff himself. A sheet of instructions would be cheaper too.

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

Enforcement of laws such as this will not be undertaken by state and local entities.

That leaves the Fed.
I have a some what difficult time picturing squads of federal officers descending on county fairs and flea markets. I would guess that one would need to do something to bring one to the attention of the Fed in order for a federal prosecution to arise as to the Onsey Twosey ma and pa shops..

Now if you are earning a couple hundred grand a year on line selling toys (or are trying to) that's a whole different sack of tomatoes.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Enforcement of laws such as this will not be undertaken by state and local authorities.

squads of federal officers descending on county fairs and flea markets.

I'd pay to watch that show!:rolleyes:

[Curt Harms]

I guess here's my problem with these kinds of regulations....



Let's say only country "A" is using lead paint.

Why make the citizen's of country "B" pay the penalty for country "A"'s problem?

A better way to handle it IMHO.......Enforce two regulations... (1) Make it illegal to import paint with lead in it. All imported paints have to be certified. (2) All imported painted items from country "A" have to be certified.

Country "A" will go crying to the WTO or some similar international trade organization crying unfair practices or discrimination.

On another note, I wonder what someone like Will Rodgers would have to say about the current crop of Pols and lead paint as children:D.

[Brad Wood]

Hello,

IMNSHO, this new law is aimed square at Ma and Pa, not the "big guys".

what makes you think this is the case?

[Rich Engelhardt]

Hello,
The "big guys" just absorb the cost (& the costs of any fines) and pass them along to the end consumer.

IMNSHO, it's a backdoor method for going after the little guy.



I'd pay to watch that show!:rolleyes:
Trust me - you'll pay.
You may not get a chance to watch the show, but you'll sure as heck foot a lot of the tab for it.

I've seen first hand the three ring circus a bank robbery in progress turns into when the FBI is called in. Dozens of agents - dozens of catering trucks...

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

I'd pay to watch that show!:rolleyes:

Ya gotta be able to say "Hut Hut Hut" with rhythm

[Brad Wood]

Hello,
The "big guys" just absorb the cost (& the costs of any fines) and pass them along to the end consumer.

IMNSHO, it's a backdoor method for going after the little guy.




you still didn't answer my question as to why you think this is the case. You are certainly within your rights to have a "not so humble opinion", but I'd like to know the reasoning behind that opinion.

thanks

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

IMNSHO

And I thought I was the only person who used that.

[Rich Engelhardt]

Hello Brad,
Well, I've just seen far too many cases in the last 50 years where our elected officials resort to indirect methods to advance their agenda.