We have expanded services to include certified home and property lead inspections, risk assessments, HUD inspections and Renovation, Repair & Painting (RRP) Inspections.

We have provided services to toy wholesalers, retailers and manufacturers.  We have done testing for county health departments, state and federal agencies.  We have helped real estate professionals sell homes, and assisted remodelers, home inspectors and other housing professionals.  We work with families of autistic children and can help anyone or any business know what is in their environment.

Recently, I was out performing an in-home inspection and found lead in wall paper.  This was a new experience for me and after further testing, I was able to identify that the back side of the wall paper was made of Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC).  The lead and other heavy metals found when testing the wall paper was most likely from the PVC and the back side of the wallpaper not the painted surface.

Contractors, remodelers and homeowners should be aware that there is a potential for lead to exist in wallpaper.  Older homes that contain wallpaper with a PVC or film backing should be aware that lead and other heavy metals may be present.  Creating dusts from this substrate could be potentially harmful. 

In addition, contractors should be aware that tile may contain harmful levels of certain heavy metals including lead.  If you are doing remodeling, renovation or painting that disturbs a painted surface or tile, use caution and be aware that the dust you create could be potentially harmful to you, your workers and the people or children in the home.

Other interesting finds and subjects of upcoming or past blogs include lead and other heavy metals found in:

Bounce Homes
Protein Drinks
Field Turf
Bumbo Seats
Facial Creams and other personal care items

Know what is in your environment!

Share

Typical household consumables

Most people would think that the “products” you and your children use every day in your daily routine are “consumer products”, you know the things we cook, eat and drink with.  Most people would think that “products” put in your mouth, given to us or used on us by a hospital while we are patients, are tested for lead and other harmful chemicals.  Most people would think that the regulating agencies are fully protecting us and inspecting all “products.”  Most people would be wrong!

A “consumer product” is regulated by the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and their definition of a consumer product is:

any article, or component part thereof, produced or distributed (i) for sale to a consumer for use in or around a permanent or temporary household or residence, a school, in recreation, or otherwise, or (ii) for the personal use, consumption or enjoyment of a consumer in or around a permanent or temporary household or residence, a school, in recreation, or otherwise;

There are some exemptions that we will get to in a moment. 

According to the CPSC, they are “charged with protecting the public from unreasonable risks of serious injury or death from thousands of consumer products and they are committed to protecting consumers and families from products that pose a fire, electrical, chemical, or mechanical hazard or can injure children.”  Essentially, the CPSC is working to ensure the safety of consumer products from harming the public.

Why are some “products” that consumer’s use on a regular basis not considered “consumer products”?  Why are these “products” not regulated or tested for heavy metals and chemicals as a children’s product would be?  Why are these “products” regulated by different governmental agencies?  And why do those agencies have different ways of testing and regulating for lead? 

Simply put, why do we permit lead and other harmful elements and chemicals into our “consumer” and “non-consumer products”? 

Why does the FDA, which regulates all food surface contact points, have a different testing regulation for lead than a child’s product?  Doesn’t a child eat off of a typical dinner plate, and drink hot chocolate out of a standard coffee cup?  Why is a product that we all put into our mouth, not tested for lead?

Because these “products” are not considered “consumer products” and ultimately not “children’s products” which means that they are not required to be tested for lead or phthalates.  You may want to ask your legislator!

Here are a few examples of items that you may think are “consumer products” but in fact are not considered “consumer products” and thus not regulated by the CPSC.  These “products” can all be used by children, all have a potential for direct epidermal contact or direct ingestion potential. In each case, these products are regulated by the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) and some have regulations for lead and others do not, but none are regulated for “total content” of lead and thus are all permitted to have more than 300ppm of lead (the legal amount of lead in a toy “children’s product”).

1. Toothbrushes
2. Toothpicks
3. Dental Floss
4. Band Aides
5. Bulb Syringes
6. Surgical Tubing
7. Flatware (Knives, forks, baby spoons, serving utensils, etc…)
8. Ceramics (plates, cups, bowls, etc)
9. Cutting boards
10. Pots, pans and other cooking utensils.

There whole crux of this is that there is no real definition of a “consumer product.”  Most people would think that a toothbrush is a consumer product and since children use toothbrushes, they would be inspected for lead.  Most people would be wrong!

Toothbrushes and other patented early intervention dental products which are designed or intended for children 12 years of age or younger are in fact, not “consumer products” and because these products are not “consumer products” they do not fall within the definition of children’s products that require third-party testing.  Thus the lead limits in the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) do not apply to this product. 

Have you considered what is in your plates, dishes or your coffee cups?  Do you know that FDA regulates the food contact surface of a coffee cup and the CPSC regulates the exterior, non-food contact surface?

How is this protecting the public?  

Environmental Services & Solutions Corporation (Essco Safety Check) is here to help bring awareness and share information about environmental concerns.  Feel free to visit our website for more information www.essco-safetycheck.com 

Keep you eyes out for “Part 2″ of this story, more specific information on State and Federal regulations.

Share

Are you aware that many OTC consumer products aren’t tested for heavy metals because they’re not considered consumer products?
Think toothbrushes, dental floss and other oral hygiene products.  Would you believe that they are not considered consumer products?  These items are considered medical devices and even thought they are designed or used by children, they do not fall within the definition of children’s products that require third-party testing for heavy metals as defined by the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA). 
 
Pregnant women & children absorb the same percentage of the toxins that they ingest.  Don’t you think that the products pregnant women use be regulated the same as a child’s product?
 “Pregnant women use all different types of consumer products, including medical devices.  Children and pregnant women absorb 30-50% of the lead they ingest while adults absorb only about 10% – this is because lead substitutes for calcium and the growing body needs more calcium.  One of the many reasons kids are more sensitive to lead exposure.”[1]

Contamination continues in the kitchen; do you know what is in your kitchen cabinets?
In my experience, the typical kitchen contains the most number of potentially harmful metals and toxins.  Lead and other heavy metals have been found in cutting boards, plates, coffee cups, serving utensils, pots and pans and other typical kitchen items.  If a ceramic has a chip or crack in the glaze, there is the potential that toxins could be leaching into the food or beverage that you ingest. 

                                                 ———————

My name is Seth Goldberg and I own an environmental testing and software company, Environmental Services & Solutions Corporation (Essco Safety Check).  We specialize in using X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) analyzers and our own proprietary software to identify and analyze potentially harmful and regulated heavy metals (elements like lead, cadmium, mercury, arsenic and others) in consumer products, housing and various other materials.  Our clients include moms and dads, homeowners, businesses, industries and governments who want to “know what is in their environment.”  We have been providing these services since 2007 and have been involved in three national recalls, including taking part in an AP investigation about cadmium in children’s jewelry in January 2010. 

The recent recall in children’s OTC products, spurred my concerns that some typical consumer products which are purchased OTC and are routinely used by all consumers, including children and pregnant women, are not considered consumer products and thus are not subject to particular regulations that implore safety and mitigate harm.  I can supply specific data and links to all information mentioned above.

You can learn more about our company at www.essco-safetycheck.com 

Please let me know if you have any questions.

[1]  Steven Gilbert, PhD, DABT

Share

In October 2009, Essco Safety Check participated in the Northwest Children’s Environmental Health Forum by presenting data on heavy metals found in children’s products.  This data was analyzed for specific elements (cadmium and lead) and then the results were shared with Associated Press reporter Justin Pritchard over November and December of 2009.  Here is a link to our typical findings from an in-home inspection.

On January 10th, 2010, Justin Pritchard wrote an article “AP: Feds probe cadmium in kids’ jewelry from China.”  Apparently, the Associated Press conducted their own independent testing (based on initial data supplied from Essco Safety Check and HealthyStuff.org) of children’s jewelry purchased in New York, Ohio, Texas and California.  Their testing was conducted by chemistry professor Jeff Weidenhamer of Ashland University of Ohio, who has worked with the CPSC in the past. The results found cadmium in children’s jewelry at a level of 100,000 PPM (10%) or greater in 12 percent of the 103 items tested. 

Children's jewelry recalled for cadmium 1/29/10

On January 29th, 2010, the US Consumer Product Safety Commission announced a voluntary recall of children’s metal necklaces because of high levels of cadmium.  In corporation with F.A.F. of Greenville, R.I. about 55,000 units were recalled. The products recalled are shaped as a frog pendant or metal crown on a metal chain necklace.  The model #’s are 4616-4187 & 4616-4190 with UPC #’s 72783367144 & 72783367147.  These items were sold exclusively at Wal-Mart Stores nationwide from November 2009 to January 2010 for approximately $5.
Yesterday, April 26th, 2010 Wal-Mart issued a statement on cadmium and new testing standards that all Wal-Mart suppliers will have to comply with.  These standards are more stringent than the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA), and all toys, child care articles, children’s costume jewelry and children’s jewelry craft making kits tested on or after April 9th, 2010 are now required to meet Wal-Mart’s new voluntary standards.

The new testing standards will be modeled similarly to the European Union, EN 71-3:1995 “Safety of toys – Part 3: Migration of Certain Elements” but will not affect what is currently on the store shelves.

In short, this means that the world’s largest retailer, Wal-Mart, is now imposing new testing standards to help protect consumers from cadmium; this is a very good thing.  These new standards are taking affect immediately and will help prevent toxic toys, jewelry and other children’s products from reaching the marketplace.  There is a feeling of “wow and awe” that a small environmental testing company (Essco Safety Check) who shared data about children’s products and the heavy metals we found in them, can impact the largest retailer in the world.  The data shared lead to an investigation by the Associated Press and now, today, Wal-Mart has issued new testing standards that all suppliers must meet.

Do you know what is in your environment?  Know what is in your environment and mitigate harm.

Share

Say it isn't so Yoda! Cadmium and Lead found in Star Wars Figurines

Owning an environmental testing company, I am fairly numb as to where I find certain heavy metals like lead.  However, today I must say I’m saddened to find lead and cadmium in toys I use to play with as a child and know that many of these toys are still around today, in homes with children.

Over the weekend, I was contacted by a concerned mother of two beautiful boys; she wanted to make sure that the toys and items they would play with are free from environmental toxicants.   This morning she visited our office (Essco Safety Check) to have me test some items from lead using X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) analyzers, however, I found more than just lead, I found cadmium too.

The problem with today’s test is much like every other day, the randomness as to where I find, what I find.  Why does one figurine have lead or cadmium and another doesn’t?  It could be the coloring agents, or it could be involved in the making of plastic, or just a random element mixed in to the item during production.  But regardless, it is present and was found in some fairly high quantities.  

Today I tested approximately 30 Star Wars figurines and found approximately half to contain lead or cadmium.  You should note that these Star Wars figurines I tested and found with lead or cadmium are from 1977, 1979 & 1980 (marked on each figurine), they are fairly old and were manufactured before particular regulations regarding lead.  But regardless of when they were manufactured, some of these figurines contain harmful heavy metals, making them toxic toys.

Yoda contains approximately 1,800 PPM of cadmium, along with a Luke Skywalker figurine and Boba Fet figurine, while Lando Calrissian appears to have over 1% lead (over 10,000 PPM) in his vinyl cape.  Many other figurines had levels of cadmium ranging from 250 PPM to over 600 PPM. 

What does all of this mean?  You should be aware that your children could have “hand-me-down” toys that could be considered toxic toys. 

Have you given your children toys from your childhood to play with?

Share

Gib Mullan, Assistant Executive Director, Office of Compliance and Field Operations for the U.S. CPSC gave the presentation as a “flow chart” and a “guide to help” webinar attendees understand which requirements apply to their products.

Essco Safety Check did not submit any specific questions for this webinar, but is constantly fielding questions about the CPSIA from small businesses.  It is our goal as a company to help businesses know what their products are made of using X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) Analyzers.

Here are some highlights to what the CPSC presented and where to find the specific information as well as some questions asked.
——————————————————————————————————————————————

The first basic question is do you make a children’s product? 

A “children’s product” means a consumer product designed or intended primarily for children 12 years of age or younger. In determining whether a consumer product is primarily intended for a child 12 years of age or younger, the following factors will be considered:

• A statement by the manufacturer about the intended use of the product, including a label on the product if such statement is reasonable.
• Whether the product is represented in its packaging, display, promotion or advertising as appropriate for use by children 12 years of age or younger.
• Whether the product is commonly recognized by consumers as being intended for use by a child 12 years of age or younger.

Requirements include:

CPSIA Section 101. Children’s Products Containing Lead; Lead Paint Rule http

CPSIA Section 102. Mandatory Third Party Testing for Certain Children’s Products 

CPSIA Section 103. Tracking Labels for Children’s Products 

Statement of Policy: Testing and Certification of Lead Content in Children’s Products

Section 101 of the CPSIA says that products designed or intended primarily for children 12 years old and younger (“children’s products”) cannot contain more than 300 parts per million (ppm) of lead in any accessible part, this is the “lead content limit.”  In addition to the 300 ppm content limit, there is a 90 ppm limit on lead in paint used on certain products such as furniture and children’s toys.

The CPSC issued guidance in August, 2009 to determine accessible parts.  

There have been determinations to identify materials whole lead content will not exceed 100 ppm and they include natural products, dyed and un-dyed textiles, cotton, wool, wood, paper, precious and semi precious stones.

But they do not include metal or plastic fasteners such as buttons, screws, grommets or sippers used in apparel or elsewhere.

Section 102 – Mandatory third party testing for certain children’s products.

Children’s products must be certified based on testing by a recognized third party test laboratory.  These requirements are being phased in over time.

Lead limits on most children’s products do not have to be certified until 2/10/2011 However, children’s jewelry must be certified to the 300 ppm lead content limit if that product was manufactured after 8/14/09 and any painted product would need to meet 90 ppm lead content limit.

Third-Party Testing of Children’s Products

The new legislation imposes an additional third-party testing requirement for all consumer products primarily intended for children twelve years of age or younger. Every manufacturer (including an importer) or private labeler of a children’s product must have its product tested by an accredited independent testing lab and, based on the testing, must issue a certificate that the product meets all applicable CPSC requirements.

CPSC is given authority either to accredit laboratories (“third party conformity assessment bodies”) for doing the required testing of children’s products or to designate independent accrediting organizations to accredit the testing laboratories, with one exception. The Commission itself must accredit laboratories that are controlled by the manufacturer of the children’s product in question. To assure their impartiality, government labs must also meet strict standards of independence. The CPSC must maintain an up-to-date list of accredited labs on its web site. CPSC has authority to suspend or terminate a laboratory’s accreditation in appropriate circumstances.

The third-party testing and certification requirements for children’s products are phased in on a rolling schedule. The statute requires the CPSC to issue laboratory accreditation regimes for different categories of children’s products. Once the CPSC issues the laboratory accreditation requirement for that category of children’s products, each children’s product in that category that is manufactured more than ninety days after that date must be tested and certified to the applicable requirements. The schedule for CPSC to issue the laboratory accreditation requirements and the certification schedule is set forth on the timeline shown in the chart below.

To find a recognized lab for the specific scope of inspection you are looking for please visit http://www.cpsc.gov/cgi-bin/labapplist.aspx, make sure that the lab is certified for your specific test requirements.  Not all labs are certified for all testing procedures.

Section 103 Tracking labels for children’s products

Section 103(a) of the new law requires manufacturers to have a tracking label or other distinguishing permanent mark on any consumer product primarily intended for children twelve and younger. The tracking label must contain certain basic information, including the source of the product, the date of manufacture and more detailed information on the manufacturing process such as a batch or run number. The scope of this provision is quite broad in that it applies to all children’s products, including, but not limited to, items such as clothing or shoes not just toys and other regulated products. Congress modified the requirement for tracking labels with the phrase “to the extent practicable” recognizing that it may not be practical for permanent distinguishing marks to be printed on small toys and other small products that are manufactured and shipped without individual packaging.

The Commission has the authority to issue a rule further defining the detail required in the tracking labels. Moreover, the Commission also has the ability to require in the future that the additional information contained on tracking labels for children’s products be expanded to cover all consumer products.

Section 103(c) of the new law also addresses the types of claims a manufacturer can make regarding its compliance with mandatory or voluntary safety rules. After October 12, 2008, no product packaging, advertisements or labels can refer to any safety standard unless the product complies with that standard.

Effective Date: 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.

Here is the Statement of Policy: Interpretation and Enforcement Of Section 103(a) of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act

Which requirements apply?
Is your product a children’s article or furniture that bear paint or similar surface coating?
Is your product intended for under 36 months?
Is it a child care article for children under 4?
Durable nursery product for children under 5?
Is your product a toy?
Is it clothing or children’s sleepwear?
The paint limit standard under the CPSIA, Section 101 is 90 ppm and took effect on 8/14/09.   It applies the same to items as previsouly sold under the 600 ppm limit

Children’s products manufactured after 8/14/09 must be certified to the 90 ppm limit if they bear paint or similar surface coatings.

“Small parts” ban for all items that are intended for children under 36 months of age.

Small parts are “as received” or under “use and abuse” testing.  Basically you can have little parts when you open a package or if it is tested for example using a pull test or drop test, small parts can’t be the result from the test.
 Small parts are those fitting ht a small part cylinder (it is close to the size of a toilet paper roll, but a little smaller)

Here is the regulatory summary for small parts regulations, toys and products intended for use by children under 3 years old

Here is the regulatory summary for lead contain paint

Here is the regulatory summary for children’s sleepwear

Here is the regulatory summary for clothing textiles

Other regulatory summaries can be found here

Phthalates

Section 108. Products Containing Certain Phthalates

Good news!  Phthalate testing is for plasticized components only.  The limit is 1000 ppm for the 6 phthalates.

There was brief mention of:

Section 104. Standards and Consumer Registration of Durable Nursery Products

and

Section 106. Mandatory Toy Safety Standards

Some questions included:

When does a choke hazard warning need to be used?
If you make an item for children under 3 years old, small parts are banned.  Toy or games for children 3 to 6 years old, but not all products, some craft products are not thought of as toys or games and thus a choke warning is not needed.

Tracking labels, what does ascertain mean? 
Ascertain means information about the product doesn’t’t need it to be on the product as long as the consumer has the ability to get to the information 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.  No phone numbers unless that phone is manned 24 hours a day.  A web solution is the best choice if you don’t want to put this information on your product.

Children’s jewelry, is it the same definition as California? And are hair accessories considered jewelry? 
Hair accessories are not considered jewelry by the CPSC, the they are considered accessories by California.

Screen printing?  There is not just one type of screen printing.  The key to regulation is to the process and if that process creates a surface coating? 
If that process creates a surface coating than that would require a lead test.  Many if not most create a coating and subject to the 90 ppm lead limit.  If the process/ink/dye sinks in to the fabric than you are subject to the 300 ppm limit.  If you have dye, you can do determinations and take advantage of these rules and say a dye is ok.  You must be confident and knowledgeable about the products.

This was just some highlights from today’s webinar.  The CPSC will be posting a link to the video, when they make it available, I will post a link to it here.

If you have any questions, please contact us at info@essco-safetycheck.com

Share

Essco Safety Check

Promote Your Page Too

***************************************************

Below are the results of our survey of small batch children’s product manufacturers and retailers which we conducted this past weekend. 223 business owners participated in the survey, 135 of whom are HTA members. That means that we achieved a 95% confidence rate with a +/- 4.9% confidence interval for the purposes of describing the entire population of 420 businesses who are members of the HTA.

We’re sharing this report with congress and the CPSC in hopes that it will help guide their legislation and rulemaking. One thing this survey makes clear is that there are a lot of very low volume toymakers and children’s products manufacturers in this country who should not be overlooked.

Handmade Toy Alliance CPSIA Survey Results

Note: Revenue data was also collected and shared with congress and the CPSC but was omitted from this public version of the report for privacy reasons.

In short, this survey of business found that 49.8% are internet based retailers and 43.9% are home based manufacturers.   39.0% have been in business for 1-3 years (the CPSIA was signed into law in August 2008).  83.4% employ either the owner or 1-2 employees maximum and 66% of all these business make or sell less than 5000 total units per year.

Expect to see more details as to the potential economic impact for these business in the coming days.  In the meantime, Essco Safety Check did write up an ecomonic impact of the CPSIA, you can see that blog here.

Share