Discussion: There are approximately 30 countries around the world that restrict imports of second hand textiles. Some of these countries ban such imports outright while others have adopted punitive tariffs and/or non-tariff barriers to trade. SMART opposes restrictions on trade of second hand textiles because we believe that: 1) global commerce is facilitated with open borders; 3) restrictions limit consumer choice; and 3) black markets can flourish when restrictions are in place

SMART Position: SMART supports countries that accept exports of second hand clothing and actively seeks opportunities in which the U.S. government – as well as any government outside the U.S. in which our members operate – can place pressure on foreign countries to remove restrictions on imports of second hand textiles.

Last month I reported that SMART sent a letter to the California General Assembly seeking an amendment to legislation (AB 2610) that was introduced by Assemblyman Mike Davis (D-Los Angeles) and contained provisions that would prohibit for-profit entities from operating collection boxes for 2nd hand clothing.

I am now pleased to report that SMART’s concerns were recognized, and AB 2610 was amended by the General Assembly’s Judiciary Committee on April 22 such that all of the language regarding “recognized charitable organizations” has been removed.

SMART has received word that the Technical Management Board (TMB) for the International Standards Organization (ISO) has approved a new work item and agreed to form a project committee to begin work on the development of one or more standards regarding 2nd hand goods. SMARTTalk readers may recall that a draft outline for this project was circulated in 2006 and included a long list of 2nd hand products that could potentially be included in the standarddevelopment exercise, and that textiles and apparel were included in that preliminary draft.

In two separate actions from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last week, EPA highlighted the industrial laundry industry directly and indirectly. EPA’s indirect reference came in the form of a new regulation that defines solid waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).

The direct reference comes as a press release announcing nearly a half-million dollars in fines that EPA levied against G&K Services – a major industrial launderer – for “numerous” hazardous waste violations committed by two of the company’s facilities in California.

A recent article in the business section of the Baltimore Sun by Robert M. Hathaway and Edward Gresser was entitled "A Trade-First Pakistan Policy".  The article notes that "Instead of more aid increases the U.S. should drop high tariffs on clothing, leather and textile industries."

A country of 165 million and nuclear armed, a democratic Pakistan has been recognized as crucial to combating terrorism and radicalism throughout the world. The key to achieving this goal, it is asserted, is a strong economy and good jobs.

By Jessica Franken, Government Affairs Consultant

The November 2003 proposed wiper rule focuses on the management of disposable and laundered solvent contaminated industrial wiping products under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the principal federal law governing the handling and disposal of solid and hazardous wastes. That proposal, among other things, would establish “dueling exemptions”-- one set of conditions that disposable wipes would have to meet to be excluded from the definition of hazardous waste, and a separate, less demanding set of conditions that laundered wipes would have to meet in order to be excluded from the definition of solid waste.  The distinction matters because hazardous wastes are regulated much more heavily than solid wastes.

Make Plans to attend SMART's 2009 Annual Convention at the Park Hyatt Toronto, July 11-15, 2009. SMART members can register for the 2009 Convention in advance or on site.  To ensure a room among other SMART members, please register as soon as possible.