Country Girl Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 I e-mailed a small company that sells educational curriculum and books (I'm not going to say which one) to ask how the CPSIA would impact them and their sales. Their response was that the act only applies to products that contain lead and that their books don't even come close to the lowest allowable limit. For some reason this just doesn't make sense to me but maybe it is a loophole that I didn't see before? Doesn't saying that the CPSIA only applies to products that have lead in them kind of go against the idea of having to test for lead to make sure that products don't have lead in them? Sorry, I know that sentence doesn't really make sense but I'm hoping someone will figure out what I'm trying to say and answer my question:D. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Don't know. I would be curious how said company can say they've proven it. Due to the way the law is written, the burden of proof is on them. This is my beef. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoughCollie Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 So far, testing of new materials is required. Enforcement is the issue. The risk is if a business gets caught selling new materials that exceed the lead limit. Printed materials probably don't, so it is not much of a risk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lighthouseacademy Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I e-mailed a small company that sells educational curriculum and books (I'm not going to say which one) to ask how the CPSIA would impact them and their sales. Their response was that the act only applies to products that contain lead and that their books don't even come close to the lowest allowable limit. For some reason this just doesn't make sense to me but maybe it is a loophole that I didn't see before? Doesn't saying that the CPSIA only applies to products that have lead in them kind of go against the idea of having to test for lead to make sure that products don't have lead in them? Sorry, I know that sentence doesn't really make sense but I'm hoping someone will figure out what I'm trying to say and answer my question:D. Thanks! http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/advisory/323.pdf has the answer you are looking for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovedtodeath Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 HSLDA is very optimistic: http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/20091130.asp How does the new law affect homeschoolers who sell used textbooks and other educational materials to other individuals, including those who sell through the online HSLDA Curriculum Market? How does it affect vendors at homeschool conventions? These transactions are subject to the restrictions of the federal law under CPSIA. However, it is likely that most of these materials contain no lead or phthalates, are not banned hazardous materials, and have not been recalled by the manufacturer. And sellers are not required to test or certify any of these products, new or used. That’s the responsibility of manufacturers and importers. Sellers are simply prohibited from knowingly selling products that fail to meet federal standards. The CPSC is in the process of proposing rules intended to provide further guidance on the federal standards for consumer products. More information can be found at its website. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Country Girl Posted January 15, 2009 Author Share Posted January 15, 2009 Thanks for the links. I haven't had time to read it all completely, but from a quick skim it looks like "regular" books are free from testing requirements. There is a lot of legalese and it will take me some time to try to figure it all out (if I even can) but things look hopeful. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tree House Academy Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 I thought the legal letter was contradictory in and of itself. It says something about how "normal books that aren't intended for only children" not being included. Then goes on to say something about how the ink becomes part of the paper and this is inconclusive as to whether it can be exempt or not. I hate legalese. Anyone read that letter and make more sense of it than I did (in the 3 minutes I had to skim it)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vansolkema1996 Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 I am kind of up in the air about all of this but don't have the money rite now to stock up to much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.