Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act requirements

[Alex R]

[Pamela]

Here is the full bill. I did a search for cloth and clothing and there is not one mention of the word "cloth" or "clothing" in the entire bill for those who do clothing.

http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc110/h4040_enr.xml

Pam

[Esther]

Certified labs for lead testing:

http://cpsc.gov/about/cpsia/accredited.html#leadpaint

The bill is not clothing specific. The problem is the wording of the bill. It refers to ALL products that are for children or to be used by children 12 years and younger. Clothing would certainly be one of those products. Further the bill mentions enforcement of all regulated products with the addition of whatever safety regulation they feel is necessary without any oversight.

The lead requirement is not enforced until December 2009.

The stupid things is the chance of finding lead in fabric is unlikely because lead causes fabric to deteriorate quickly.

[edited to fix the lead paint deadline. I misread it and it appears to be in December.]

[Alex R]

The real kicker is that this is not even specific to children's products.

Section 102 (a) 1 of the CPSIA mandates that ALL manufacturers, importers or private labelers of ANY consumer product must prepare a General Conformity Certificate that is to be furnished to downstream retailers and distributors with EVERY shipment. And issuing the certificate requires testing.

Scary stuff... The blog post I have written will explain in much further detail.

Pam: the bill itself won't mention specific items like clothing, nor the standards that apply. It specifies how to apply the existing product safety regulations. Apparel is mostly subject to the Federal Flammable Fabrics Act, however any adhesives, resins, paints, or chemical dyes may fall under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act.

Please note that outside of children's products, the standards remain largely the same, however your reporting requirements have changed.

[Kathleen F.]

The article Alex wrote has [url=//fashion-incubator.com/archive/new-product-safety-regulations-that-affect-all-manufacturers/]been posted[/url].

Thanks Alex, you're punchy. Edits were very minor, mostly for format. Hope they are okay. Look it over in case I missed something.

[SarahM]

Thank you for your informative post Alex.
However, it is really stressing me out.

[Anne]

I do infant and toddler wear, and my main question is: if all my fabrics are certified organic, and all my snaps/zippers lead and nickel-free, can I get my product tested by a government-approved lab just once, to ensure this, instead of every single production run? I'm not even sure which "bans" or safety requirements would apply to my line -- it sounds like just that it conforms to sleepwear and lead requirements. Flat (non-nap) 100% cotton fabrics are not required to be flame-tested, and that's all I use. So it's really just my zippers and snaps.

If we have to pay to have everything tested every single production run, that would be absurd. GRR!!!

[lisa versaci]

I got this from the gov website.

The requirement for tracking labels is effective one year after the date of enactment or August 14, 2009. The requirements prohibiting advertising claims are effective 60 days after enactment or October 13, 2008.

So, is Aug 14th 2009 the date or what?

-Lisa

[Anne]

It sounds from below like the product can be tested once, and then only "periodically" as long as there have been no changes in suppliers:

a children’s product tested for compliance with an applicable children’s product safety rule is subject to testing periodically and when there has been a material change in the product’s design or manufacturing process, including the sourcing of component parts;

(A) submit sufficient samples of the children’s product, or samples that are identical in all material respects to the product, to a third party conformity assessment body accredited under paragraph (3) to be tested for compliance with such children’s product safety rule

[lisa versaci]

Any idea which third party certifications will pass for acceptable? Certified Organic, Oeko-Tex 100, ISO 1400, GOTS for dying or any others? Are these alone enough to prove you are working toward meeting the criteria?

[Alex R]

[Lara S]

Keep in mind that a General Conformity Certificate is only required for products manufactured on or after November 12, 2008. Any current stock is not included in these new regulations.

[Pamela]

So when will this certificate be required to be shown for importers? At customs entry? Would you think that import agents are aware of this new law?

As an importer whose fabrics are changing with each collection it sounds like I can take a sample of 5 or so cotton fabrics to a lab here, have them tested, and use that information in my certificate for at least a year or so. Do I have this right?

Thanks,
Pam

[Alex R]

[Alex R]

Getting Fabric Test Results From Your Suppliers

If you are NOT making children's products, you are permitted to use testing of raw materials, provided they are not substantially altered during assembly. Here's the thing... If you are dealing with a large, reputable mill or agency for fabric, and they do a lot of business in the U.S., they may have already done the required testing. The Fabric Flammability Act regulations haven't changed. The fabric has had to comply with the FFA since the '70s, and a reputable company should be testing to ensure compliance. The only change on Nov. 13th is that you need to certify compliance.

So ask your supplier if they have any testing to prove compliance! If they can provide you with a copy of the test results, then you're 90% done. Tests are the expensive part, and it's all just paperwork after that.

There is a catch... (There's always a catch ;)

When you prepare a General Conformity Certificate, you are absolutely responsible for the contents. If you receive incorrect test data and certify based on it, you are still responsible. Again, it comes down to trust with your suppliers. Here's where the warm hug of an ISO or ANSI certification will make you feel better. I would think that if, in good faith, you based a certification on test data supplied by an externally certified company, that should be considered "reasonable" under the act, even if there was a problem.