[Libs-Or] Fwd: [District Dispatch] Emily Sheketoff gives statement during meeting on consumer safety act

[Diedre Conkling]

 Emily Sheketoff gives statement during meeting on consumer safety act
<http://www.wo.ala.org/districtdispatch/?p=3014> June 09th, 2009
http://www.wo.ala.org/districtdispatch/?p=3014

Emily Sheketoff, executive director of the American Library Association
(ALA) Washington Office, gave the following statement during a meeting held
at the Consumer Product Safety Commission office today regarding the
Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA):

“… We serve public, state, school, and academic libraries, plus specialized
libraries serving government, commerce, industry, the arts, the armed
services, and people in hospitals and institutions.  We share the concerns
for child safety that motivated Congress to pass the Consumer Product Safety
Improvement Act, or ‘CPSIA.’  We also share the concern that children
continue to have access to books, which are critical to child development
and education.

The CPSIA identifies new lead safety levels and corresponding testing
requirements on certain types of children’s products, which the Consumer
Product Safety Commission has interpreted to include books.  Currently, the
Commission is not imposing penalties under the new standards for most
books.  The Commission has been presented with evidence by the publishing
industry and others that so-called “ordinary books” as manufactured under
present standards do not contain lead.  This evidence has been provided so
that publishers and distributors of ordinary children’s books might be
granted an exemption from the testing requirements in the CPSIA.  Today’s
meeting is one in a series of sessions on this topic.

We appreciate that the Commission is carefully considering whether such a
testing exemption or other form of safe harbor is consistent with the
statute and consistent with children’s safety.  Such an exemption, if
warranted, would clarify the manufacturing and distribution process for
children’s books going forward.  In addition, an exemption could do a great
deal to reduce the uncertainty facing libraries, but only if such an
exemption included books already in their collections—that is, if the
exemption recognizes that manufacturing standards going back several decades
already ensure that books do not, as a rule, contain lead at more than
trace, unharmful levels.  In the event that such an exemption is not
granted, libraries would be assured that the books they receive from
manufacturers going forward are certified to be safe from lead; but
libraries would be in an untenable position as to children’s books already
on their shelves, which will not have been certified by manufacturers and
yet are almost certainly safe.

In other words, the principal concern for libraries actually relates to
those books already on our shelves.  We seek clarity from the Consumer
Product Safety Commission that the CPSIA does not impose any new obligations
on libraries with regard to current volumes, given the small risks involved
and the impractical burdens such retroactive obligations would impose on
libraries.  In relevant part, the CPSIA imposes new lead standards that
become progressively lower over time, and it imposes mandatory testing
requirements on certain children’s products, which the Commission has
interpreted to include books.  These two requirements go hand in hand, and
we seek confirmation that neither provision would apply to books already on
library shelves prior to the effective date of these provisions.

First, the CPSIA imposes the new lead levels on products ‘sold’ or
‘distributed’ under the meaning of the Consumer Product Safety Act.
Libraries aren’t in the business of ‘selling’ or ‘distributing’ books within
the meaning of the statute.  Moreover, a product that violates the lead
levels under the CPSIA is a ‘banned hazardous substance’ under the Federal
Hazardous Substances Act.  That law prohibits ‘banned hazardous substances’
from being introduced or received in interstate commerce.  Books already
sitting on library shelves are not in interstate commerce.  This stands in
contrast to a book in a distribution center or on a store shelf, which is
still to be offered for sale or otherwise distributed.  A book currently on
a library shelf reached its final destination prior to the law taking
effect.

It is therefore straightforward that the new federal standards do not extend
to library books on a retroactive basis.  Indeed, this is what we have
repeatedly been told by Members of Congress, who have assured us that the
CPSIA was never intended to disrupt and burden libraries.  And this is not
surprising, given that financially strapped libraries—public libraries,
school libraries, research libraries to name a few—have nowhere near the
resources necessary to conduct tests on all of their existing volumes of
books.  To repeat, libraries cannot afford to conduct tests, which may be
why the statute only contemplates testing by manufacturers.  The other
option for libraries would be to remove all existing children’s
volumes—millions of books nationwide—and start over with only
manufacturer-tested and certified books.  This is obviously unfathomable:
It would be wasteful, cost prohibitive, and certainly was not intended by
Congress.

There is no valid reason for libraries and their patrons to be placed in
this no-win situation.  There is little evidence that ordinary children’s
books would pose a risk for lead exposure.  The Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention agrees that there is a minimal risk posed by ordinary books
and a lead expert we consulted was very dismissive of any potential threat.
Libraries are extremely concerned about children’s safety, and we advise our
members to remove any items from the shelves that may pose any threat—due to
lead or any other reason.

In summation, we believe a general exemption for ordinary children’s books
is appropriate under the CPSIA, but we are not here principally to ask for
an exemption of any kind.  Rather, we merely seek assurances, as we have for
at least six months, that the Consumer Product Safety Commission reads the
CPSIA correctly, such that libraries have no independent liability with
regard to books on their shelves prior to the effective dates of the CPSIA’s
new lead standards, and no independent obligation to assure testing.  If it
does not, then the Commission should certainly use its regulatory authority
to avoid the no-win situation for libraries that I’ve described.

The American Library Association would be pleased to work with the
Commission and to provide additional information as would be helpful.  Thank
you.”






Best regards,
Jenni Terry
jterry at alawash.org




-- 
Diedre Conkling
Lincoln County Library District
P.O. Box 2027
Newport, OR  97365
Work phone & fax:  541-265-3066
Work email:  diedre at beachbooks.org
Home email:  diedre08 at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/libs-or/attachments/20090609/c8cbddc9/attachment.html>