State lead limit for jewelry decried
Trade groups call proposed rules impossibly strict
The Retailers Association of Massachusetts and the Fashion Jewelry Trade Association are asking state leaders to delay the implementation of regulations that severely limit lead in children's jewelry, saying the new rules are impossible to meet and will force retailers to pull millions of pieces of jewelry from shelves.
The proposed regulations, approved in March by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, are supposed to go into effect next month and are the strictest in the nation, setting the lowest acceptable level of lead.
The new rules mandate stores to have proof from manufacturers that jewelry for children 13 years and younger does not have unsafe levels of lead. The Massachusetts rules require manufacturers to conduct two kinds of tests, including one that would subject products to an acid test and allow the equivalent of 15 micrograms of lead to leach out a day, a far more stringent limit than federal regulators recommend.
Jon Hurst, president of the retailers association, said there is insufficient time to conduct the necessary testing and the group is considering legal action, such as a preliminary injunction, if the state refuses to delay the regulations. If that fails, Hurst said, the retailers group may advise merchants to withdraw all fashion jewelry from shelves, causing a major disruption and costing retailers, wholesalers, and manufacturers millions of dollars.
"We're not biotech. We're not the film industry. We don't go out and look for special handouts. All we ask from the state government is to serve our customers and let us be competitive with the guy across the street, the guy in the next state, and the guy on the Internet," Hurst said. "We feel this regulation puts us at a disadvantage, and it comes at just a horrible economic time."
The Massachusetts regulations follow a series of high-profile child deaths and illnesses across the country caused by high levels of lead in jewelry. Exposure to lead can cause a host of health problems, including organ failure, and can lead to death. Jewelry containing lead is of particular concern for children who may put jewelry in their mouth, which can result in lead absorption at dangerous levels. An investigation last year by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health revealed that some children's jewelry on store shelves contained lead at levels as much as 1,800 times higher than is considered safe.
Suzanne Condon, director of the state's Bureau of Environmental Health, recognized that the Massachusetts regulations are the strictest in the nation and said the agency is proud of its record.
"Retailers may say the cost of achieving this standard is too high. We have to balance that with the cost of serious neurological damage that a child may suffer as a result of being exposed to higher levels of lead," she said.
Condon said the agency is willing to consider a short delay in implementation because there are insufficient laboratories identified that could perform the kind of testing required by the state. A six-month delay, however, is far too long to wait, Condon said.
"We are working fast and furious to identify more laboratories," she added.
Health officials and retail leaders are expected to meet on Monday to discuss concerns over the regulations and a potential delay.
Michael Gale, executive director of the Fashion Jewelry Trade Association, a national group based in North Kingstown, R.I., said the Massachusetts rules far exceed any state or national standard, including a major agreement reached several years ago among the retail industry, environmental groups, and California regulators that transformed the way manufacturers made jewelry and tested for lead. The California regulations applied to jewelry made for children age 6 and under, Gale said, and with separate bills passed in the US House and Senate, it makes more sense to wait for a national standard.
The trade groups said they would be comfortable with the California standard, which is similar to what has been proposed at the federal level.
Hurst said the retailers association was "too trusting" of the Massachusetts agency.
"They [the agency] made it sound like they wanted to work with us and listen to our suggestions and concerns," Hurst said. "Those concerns were not in any way addressed in the final regulations."
Jenn Abelson can be reached at abelson@globe.com.
