So Cityview’s calling it an Amendment, but it’s really just a clarification by the CPSC. It’s the clarification from last week, which you can find here: http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml09/09086.html
What it is saying is that resellers of secondhand and/or used children’s items do not have to test each of their items before selling it. They are still on the hook (and can be fined $10,000 per incident or face jail time) if they sell items above the lead limit. (how are they supposed to know if they don’t test?)
Prudent owners of secondhand stores will be educating themselves about what items are likely to contain lead – and avoid them.
But this doesn’t help me at all, since I am a manufacturer, not a reseller. Even if I were to slap each of my dipes on my kids, wash them, and sell them as secondhand or used (a scenario I had actually considered when this law was first passes and it was unclear whether it included used items), I’m still not a reseller.
Cityview is incorrect in saying that it will save all the businesses. It will help save secondhand stores. Which is a darn good thing because once the cost of testing gets factored into the cost of clothes, a lot of people won’t be able to afford new clothes for their kids.
To their credit, Cityview did not say the law was a “ban” on lead, as I have seen elsewhere.
Something else you might find interesting, Laurie, and others who are Hana Andersson fans. HA clothes (many of them) are certified to Okeo-Tex Standards already. They are already in compliance with the limits. But they are not in compliance with the law unless they are certified by an approved lab to be below the lead limits. See the stupid redundancy here??