28 April 2010
Also, Safety Standards for Bassinets and Cradles:
http://cryptome.org/0001/cpsc042810.htm
[Federal Register: April 28, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 81)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 22291-22303]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28ap10-21]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
[[Page 22291]]
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 1217
[No. CPSC-2010-0022]
RIN 3041-AC79
Safety Standard for Toddler Beds
AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Section 104(b) of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act
of 2008 (``CPSIA'') requires the United States Consumer Product Safety
Commission (``Commission,'' ``CPSC'') to promulgate consumer product
safety standards for durable infant or toddler products. These
standards are to be ``substantially the same as'' applicable voluntary
standards or more stringent than the voluntary standard if the
Commission concludes that more stringent requirements would further
reduce the risk of injury associated with the product. The Commission
is proposing a safety standard for toddler beds in response to the
direction under section 104(b) of the CPSIA. The proposed safety
standard would address entrapment in bed end structures, entrapment
between the guardrail and side rail, entrapment in the mattress support
system, and component failures of the bed support system and
guardrails. The proposed standard also addresses corner post extensions
that can catch items worn by a child.
DATES: Submit comments by July 12, 2010.
Submit comments relating to the instructional literature and bed
and carton marking required by the proposed rule, as these materials
relate to the Paperwork Reduction Act, by May 28, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Comments relating to the instructional literature and bed
and carton marking required by the proposed rule relating to the
Paperwork Reduction Act should be directed to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: CPSC Desk Officer, FAX: 202-395-
6974, or e-mailed to oira_submission@omb.eop.gov.
Other comments, identified by Docket No. CPSC-2010-0022, may be
submitted by any of the following methods:
1. Electronic Submissions. Submit electronic comments to the
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments. (To ensure timely processing of
comments, the Commission is no longer directly accepting comments
submitted by electronic mail (e-mail). The Commission encourages you to
submit electronic comments by using the Federal eRulemaking Portal, as
described above.)
2. Written Submissions. Submit written submissions in the following
ways:
a. Fax: 301-504-0127.
b. Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for paper, disk, or CD-ROM
submissions): Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety
Commission, Room 820, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number for this rulemaking. All comments received, including
any personal information provided, may be posted without change to
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/
leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.html&log=linklog&to=http://
www.regulations.gov. Accordingly, we recommend that you not submit
confidential business information, trade secret information, or other
sensitive information that you do not want to be available to the
public.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number, CPSC 2010-0022, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Technical information: Celestine Kiss,
Division of Human Factors, Directorate for Engineering Sciences,
Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda,
MD 20814; telephone (301)504-7739, e-mail ckiss@cpsc.gov. Legal
information: Harleigh Ewell, Office of the General Counsel, Consumer
Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814;
telephone (301)504-7683; e-mail hewell@cpsc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background--The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act as Applied
to Durable Infant or Toddler Products
The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (``CPSIA,''
Pub. L. 110-314) was enacted on August 14, 2008. Section 104(b) of the
CPSIA requires the Commission to promulgate consumer product safety
standards for durable infant or toddler products. These standards are
to be ``substantially the same as'' applicable voluntary standards or
more stringent than the voluntary standard if the Commission concludes
that more stringent requirements would further reduce the risk of
injury associated with the product. The term ``durable infant or
toddler product'' is defined in section 104(f) of the CPSIA as a
durable product intended for use, or that may be reasonably expected to
be used, by children under the age of 5 years. Toddler beds are one of
the products specifically identified in section 104(f)(2) of the CPSIA
as a durable infant or toddler product.
In this document, the Commission proposes a safety standard for
toddler beds. The proposed standard is largely the same as a voluntary
standard developed by ASTM International (formerly the American Society
for Testing and Materials), ASTM F 1821-09 Standard Consumer Safety
Specification for Toddler Beds, but with several modifications that
strengthen the standard. The ASTM standard is copyrighted, but can be
viewed as a read-only document, only during the comment period on this
proposal, at http://www.astm.org/cpsc.htm, by permission of ASTM.
Documents that support statements in this notice are identified by
[Ref. ], where is the number of the reference
document as listed below in section M of this notice.
B. The Product
The ASTM voluntary standard defines a toddler bed as any bed sized
to accommodate a full-size crib mattress having minimum dimensions of
51\5/8\ inches in length and 27\1/4\ inches in width and that is
intended to provide free access and egress to a child not less
[[Page 22292]]
than 15 months of age and weighing no more than 50 pounds.
C. Incident Data [Ref. 2]
1. Introduction. CPSC databases did not have a dedicated product
code for identifying incidents before 2005 that involved toddler beds.
Accordingly, the data discussed below begins with the year 2005. The
data come from two databases: (1) Actual injuries and fatalities of
which the Commission is aware; and (2) estimates derived from reports
of emergency-room treatment in a statistical sample of hospitals that
makes up the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System
(``NEISS''). The CPSC staff is aware of 4 fatalities and 81 nonfatal
incidents (with and without injuries) related to toddler beds that were
reported to have occurred since 2005.
2. Fatalities. Of the four fatalities reported to CPSC staff, two
resulted from entrapments. The first death was the result of a 6-month-
old infant getting entrapped in the footboard while sleeping on a
toddler bed. The second death involved a 13-month-old getting entrapped
in the side rail of a flipped-over toddler bed while playing with an
older sibling. The third death was due to asphyxiation when a 10-month-
old was napping in an inflatable children's bed. (Although an
inflatable children's bed does not meet the definition of a toddler bed
that is in ASTM F 1821-09, this incident was coded as associated with a
toddler bed.) The last fatality was a strangulation death of a 3-year-
old on the cord of mini blinds located over his toddler bed. (The ASTM
F 1821-09 standard addresses this hazard with a warning label. The
Commission does not have information indicating whether the toddler bed
involved in this death bore such a warning label.) It is notable that
three of the four reported fatalities involved victims under the age of
15 months, which is recommended in the current ASTM voluntary standard
as the minimum age for use of a toddler bed. The ASTM standard requires
a label warning against using the bed with children under 15 months.
3. Nonfatal Incidents. Of the 81 nonfatal incidents known to the
CPSC staff that were associated with a child on a toddler bed, 26
involved injuries. Three of the injuries were fractures of limbs. The
vast majority of the injuries were bumps and bruises. Sprains, scrapes,
and lacerations were some of the other reported injuries associated
with toddler beds.
Listed below are the hazard patterns identified among the reports
of nonfatal incidents:
Entrapment was the most commonly reported hazard.
Approximately 31 percent of the incidents involved entrapment of a
limb. The associated injuries, if any, ranged from fractures to sprains
to bruises. More serious, potentially fatal, entrapments of head or
body in the side rails, in the mesh covering of the side rails, or
between the mattress-support rails were reported in 14 percent of the
incidents.
Broken, loose, or detached components of the bed, such as
the guardrail, hardware, or other accessories, were the next most
commonly reported problems. However, only two injuries--one laceration
and one ingestion--resulted from these problems.
Product integrity issues, mostly integrity of the
mattress-support, were the next most commonly encountered hazard. These
often resulted in the collapse of the bed, causing the child to fall
through.
Inadequate mattress-fit issues were the next most common
hazard. A few children suffered sprains and broken limbs from being
caught in the gap between the mattress and the bed frame.
Finally, there were some complaints of paint/coating
issues, bed height/clearance issues, and inadequacy of guardrails,
assembly instructions, and recalls.
Among the nonfatal incidents that reported the child's age (67 out
of 81), the age ranged between 11 months to 6 years. Nearly 66 percent
of these incidents reported the age to be between 15 and 24 months.
About 16 percent of the incidents involved children less than 15 months
of age. However, it was not always clear that the reported age
pertained to the child who was the regular user of the toddler bed.
Three of the 81 nonfatal incident reports involved inflatable
children's beds, which do not conform to the ASTM definition of toddler
beds and are not included within the scope of the proposed standard.
4. National Injury Estimates. There were an estimated 1,380
injuries related to toddler beds that were treated in hospital
emergency departments in the United States over the 4-year period from
2005 to 2008. The injury estimates for individual years are not
reportable because the numbers each year fail to meet NEISS's
publication criteria. There was no statistically significant increase
or decrease observed in the estimated injuries from one year to the
next, and there was no statistically significant trend observed over
the 2005-2008 period. No deaths were reported through NEISS. For the
emergency department-treated injuries related to toddler beds, the
following characteristics occurred most frequently:
Hazard--falls out of the toddler bed to a lower level
(87%).
Injured body part--head (30%) and face (24%).
Injury type--lacerations (26%) and contusions/abrasions
(20%).
Disposition--treated and released (nearly 100%).
The age of patients in these injuries ranged between 4 months and 6
years, with nearly 53 percent between 18 months and 2 years. It was not
always clear whether the patient injured was the usual user of the
toddler bed.
D. The ASTM Voluntary Standard
The ASTM F 1821-09 voluntary standard contains requirements
addressing a number of hazards. The requirements include:
1. Toddler beds must comply with CPSC's regulations at 16 CFR part
1303 (ban of lead in paint), 1500.48 (sharp points), 1500.49 (sharp
edges), 1500.50 through 1500.53 (use and abuse tests), and part 1501
(small parts that present choking, aspiration, or ingestion hazards),
both before and after the product is tested according to the standard.
2. Toddler beds must not present scissoring, shearing, or pinching
hazards.
3. Openings must meet specified dimensions in order to prevent
finger entrapment.
4. Openings that will permit passage of a specified block with a
wedge on one end are prohibited in order to protect against torso
entrapment.
5. The distance that corner posts may extend above the upper edge
of an end or side panel is limited.
6. Protective components shall not be removable with a specified
force after torque and tension tests.
7. There are requirements for marking and labeling each bed and its
retail carton, and for warning statements on the bed. There are
requirements for the permanency of labels and warnings.
8. The mattress shall be supported and contained so that it does
not move horizontally to cause a horizontal opening that will allow the
passage of the wedge block when tested.
9. There are tests for the physical integrity of the mattress
support system and its attachments and the side rails.
10. There are wedge block tests for openings in the guardrails and
end structures that could cause entrapment.
11. There is a probe test to protect against entrapment in
partially-bounded openings in the bed.
[[Page 22293]]
12. Instructions must be provided with the bed.
13. Warning statements are required on the bed to address
entrapment and strangulation hazards.
E. Description of the Proposed Rule and Its Changes to the ASTM
Standard
Due to the significant number of incidents reported regarding
component failures of bed support systems and guardrails, the
Commission's staff has recommended additional testing requirements to
address those types of incidents. Accordingly, the Commission proposes
a new 16 CFR 1217 that, if finalized, would adopt the ASTM standard F
1821-09 by reference, but with some changes and additions that would
strengthen the ASTM standard's provisions.
1. Scope, Application, and Effective Date (Proposed Sec. 1217.1)
Proposed Sec. 1217.1 would state that part 1217 establishes a
consumer product safety standard for toddler beds manufactured or
imported after a date that would be 6 months after the publication date
of a final rule in the Federal Register.
2. Requirements for Toddler Beds (Proposed Sec. 1217.2)
a. The Applicable ASTM Standard (Proposed Sec. 1217.2(a))
Proposed Sec. 1217.2(a) would explain that, except as provided in
Sec. 1217.2(b), each toddler bed as defined in ASTM F 1821-09,
``Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Toddler Beds,'' must
comply with all applicable provisions in ASTM F 1821-09. The proposal
also would explain how interested parties may obtain a copy of the ASTM
standard or inspect a copy at the CPSC.
b. Minimum Height for the Upper Edge of Guardrails (Proposed Sec.
1217.2(b)(1) Through (3))
Proposed Sec. 1217.2(b)(1) through (3) would revise the ASTM
standard to require that guardrails be a minimum height of 5 inches
above the manufacturer's recommended sleeping surface. This is intended
to help prevent falls. Although the proposed standard does not require
guardrails, persons who choose to have guardrails on their toddler beds
should be able to rely on the guardrail performing the function of
helping to prevent falls. The 5-inch minimum height is widely adopted
by industry as a minimum height for guardrails in bunk beds [Ref. 3].
c. Structural Integrity of Guardrails (Proposed Sec. 1217.2(b)(4) and
1217.2(b)(6))
In addition to the already existing test for guardrail openings,
the Commission, at proposed Sec. 1217.2(b)(4) and 1217.2(b)(6), would
add a test for the overall stability of guardrails using a 50-lb force
while the bed is firmly secured. The force is to be applied in the
center along the length of the guardrail and then repeated with the
force applied directly over each of the outermost legs of the
guardrail. This additional test is intended to prevent children from
falling out of bed; it is also calculated to ensure that the guardrails
remain intact when children lean against them or attempt to use them to
climb into bed. The 50-lb force was chosen because that is the maximum
weight of a child that should use a toddler bed [Ref. 3]. After testing
in accordance with 7.9, the guardrail shall not be broken or detached
or create a condition that would present any of the hazards described
in section 5. The guardrail also shall not be deformed or displaced so
as to create a hazard addressed by the performance requirements of
section 6.
d. Slat/Spindle Testing for Guardrails, Side Rails, and End Structures
(Proposed Sec. 1217.2(b)(5) and 1217.2(b)(7))
Currently, the torso wedge is used in combination with a 25-pound
force (``lbf'') on guardrails and end structures in the most adverse
orientation to assure that the slats or spindles (hereafter referred to
collectively as ``slats'') do not break and allow an opening in which a
child could become entrapped. Proposed Sec. 1217.2(b)(5) and
1217.2(b)(7) would modify the existing ASTM test requirements in the
following ways.
First, 25 percent of all slats, rather than just those of the end
structures and guardrails, would be tested using 80 lbf instead of 25
lbf. The slats that present the least resistance to bending shall make
up the 25 percent, except that when a slat is selected for testing with
80 lbf, neither of its adjacent slats shall be tested at that force.
The 80 lbf is chosen on the basis of tests performed by the
Commission's staff on 18 cribs or toddler beds that were involved in
actual breakage incidents in the field (``incident beds'') and on two
samples of a model of a crib that has been widely sold to consumers and
has not been reported to have been involved in a breakage incident
(``the non-incident crib'') [Ref. 3].
There is very little anthropometric data available to help
determine the forces a child can apply to a bed slat. The tests of the
slats of the non-incident crib produced failures of the slats at forces
ranging from 85 lb to 123.5 lb [Ref. 3]. Since there have not been any
incidents reported for this model crib despite its wide distribution,
it is reasonable to conclude that the occupants of this crib can exert
a force on the slats that is somewhat less than the minimum failure
force of 85 lb obtained for this crib. The 18 incident beds tested had
minimum failure forces ranging from 28.8 lb to 78.8 lb [Ref. 3]. Taken
together, these two sets of failure forces support setting a maximum
test force of 80 lb.
However, when testing the non-incident crib model, the Commission's
staff observed that testing adjacent slats significantly compromised
the integrity of the bed rails [Ref. 3]. This occurred even at the
lower end of the range of failure forces, i.e., 85 to 90 lb. Therefore,
it is plausible that testing all slats to 80 lbf would have a similar
effect and be too stringent a test. Accordingly, the Commission is
proposing that 25 percent of the slats be tested to 80 lbf so that
adjacent slats would not have to be tested at that force. The
Commission proposes that the remaining 75 percent of slats be tested at
60 lbf. This reduction in force is intended to compensate for any
damage to the bed rail caused by testing an adjacent slat to 80 lbf and
is a much higher force than the 25 lbf specified in the current ASTM
standard. The Commission concludes that the force of 60 lb is adequate
for these remaining slats since the slats with geometry that is most
likely to bend (and thus break) will have been tested to the full 80
lbf.
e. Improved Warning Label (Proposed Sec. 1217.2(b)(8)) [Ref. 4]
ASTM F 1821-09 is intended to minimize entrapments in bed end
structures, between the guardrail and side rail, and in the mattress
support system. Entrapment of a child's head or neck can result in
asphyxiation. Section 8.4 of ASTM F 1821-09 specifies warning
statements to be included on toddler beds. Section 8.4.3 of ASTM F
1821-09 states that the warnings shall include the following label,
exactly as stated:
[[Page 22294]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AP10.000
Section 8.4.4 of ASTM F 1821-09 specifies additional required
warning statements that address the following:
1. The minimum mattress dimensions for use on the bed;
2. The use of provided guardrails to avoid the formation of gaps
that could pose an entrapment hazard;
3. The placement of the bed relative to cords from blinds or
drapes;
4. The placement of strings, cords, or similar objects around a
child's neck; and
5. The suspension of strings over the bed.
Like the warning label specified in section 8.4.3 of ASTM F 1821-
09, all of these additional warning statements appear to be intended to
address entrapment and strangulation hazards. Proposed Sec.
1217.2(b)(6) would revise these warning requirements to reduce the risk
of injury associated with the use of toddler beds.
The Commission's Human Factors staff believes that the warnings
section of ASTM F 1821-09 is confusing as it is currently organized,
with explicit warning language for only certain information,
``additional'' warning statements that leave the applicable hazards
open to interpretation, and redundancies between these two sets of
required warning information [Ref. 4]. The additional warning
statements specified in section 8.4.4 of ASTM F 1821-09 apparently
address the same hazards addressed by the warning label specified in
section 8.4.3 of ASTM F 1821-09. (Section 8.4.4.3 of ASTM F 1821-09
requires an additional warning statement about placing the bed near the
cords of blinds and drapes, yet this issue is already addressed
explicitly in the warning label specified in 8.4.3 of ASTM F 1821-09.)
In addition, the warning label specified in section 8.4.3 of ASTM F
1821-09 merges two distinct hazards into a single label, making it
difficult to tell what warning information is associated with each
hazard. To address these issues, the Human Factors staff suggested that
all of the required warnings specified in section 8.4 of ASTM F 1821-09
be presented as two separate warnings, one addressing the entrapment
hazard and the other addressing the strangulation hazard, and proposed
Sec. 1217.2(b)(8) reflects the two warnings.
(i) Entrapment warning.
ASTM F 1821-09 specifies different warning requirements for toddler
beds that employ a removable guardrail as the mattress containment
means. Specifically, section 8.4.4.2 of ASTM F 1821-09 states that
toddler beds that employ a removable guardrail for this purpose shall
include a warning statement telling consumers that the guardrail must
be used to avoid the formation of a gap between the mattress and the
bed that could cause entrapment. However, this warning statement would
not be needed for toddler beds that did not present an entrapment
hazard with the guardrail removed. Thus, the Commission proposes that
this warning statement would not be required for toddler beds that meet
the performance requirements of sections 5.8.2 (torso entrapment), 6.1
(mattress retention), 6.2 (mattress support system integrity), 6.3
(mattress support system attachment to end structures), 6.4 (mattress
support system openings), 6.6 (end structure openings), and 6.7
(partially bounded openings) of ASTM F 1821-09 with the guardrails
removed. With this in mind, the Commission proposes two alternative
labels that address the entrapment hazard: One for toddler beds with
removable guardrails that will not meet these performance requirements
with the guardrail removed and one for all other toddler beds.
The entrapment warning for beds with removable guardrails where the
beds present an entrapment hazard when the guardrails are removed would
read as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AP10.001
The entrapment warning for all other beds would read as follows:
[[Page 22295]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AP10.002
These warnings would use the type-size requirements described in
the standard, and the safety alert symbol design is consistent with the
latest version of ANSI Z535.4 (2007), American National Standard for
Product Safety Signs and Labels. The primary differences between these
proposed warnings and the relevant portions of the current ASTM
warnings are the following:
1. The proposed warnings do not state ``ENTRAPMENT HAZARD,'' which
would be analogous to the original ``ENTRAPMENT/STRANGULATION HAZARD''
statement in the original warning;
2. The proposed warning places greater emphasis on the
subpopulation most at risk and the hazard consequences;
3. The proposed warning includes a more explicit description of the
mechanism that creates the entrapment hazard; and
4. The proposed warning omits the statement in the label in the
voluntary standard concerning the possibility of serious injury or
death from not following the warnings.
To the CPSC staff's knowledge, the minimum age recommendation of 15
months for toddler beds is based largely on the increased entrapment
potential for children younger than this. Thus, the statement that
``[i]nfants have died in toddler beds from entrapment and
strangulation,'' which appears in the original warning, has been
carried over, with deletion of the reference to the strangulation
hazard, to the proposed entrapment warning label as, ``Infants have
died in toddler beds from entrapment.'' Given that this statement
already explicitly references ``entrapment,'' the CPSC staff concluded
that including an initial ``ENTRAPMENT HAZARD'' statement would
introduce unnecessary redundancy. Furthermore, omitting this statement
from the warning allows greater emphasis on the consequences of the
hazard (death, in this case) and the subpopulation most at risk of
dying from exposure to the hazard. This greater emphasis on the
consequences of the hazard is done by: (1) Moving the statement,
``Infants have died in toddler beds from entrapment,'' toward the
beginning of the warning message; and (2) reformatting this statement
in all-uppercase, boldface type. The ASTM F 1821 subcommittee has
pointed out that there continue to be incidents with toddler beds
involving children younger than the intended age for these products, so
emphasizing the at-risk population is important [Ref. 4]. In addition,
warnings and persuasion research has found that the degree of
seriousness of a perceived threat plays a significant role in whether
one complies with a warning, so emphasizing the potential for death
would tend to increase the efficacy of a warning [Ref. 4].
The statement in the original warning, ``Failure to follow these
warnings * * * could result in serious injury or death,'' is unlikely
to have a substantial impact on injuries or warning compliance. The
warning already communicates the safety importance of its content via a
safety alert symbol, the word ``WARNING,'' and a description of the
hazard and its consequences, so telling consumers that not following
the warning could result in serious injury or death is redundant at
best. In contrast, explicit hazard information in a warning has been
found to lead to higher levels of perceived hazardousness and greater
intent to comply with the warning. The original warning message did not
specify the source of entrapment or how entrapment might lead to death,
and it is unclear whether many consumers could readily and correctly
infer this information. The sentence, ``Openings in and between bed
parts can entrap head and neck of a small child,'' is intended to
remedy this situation by providing a more explicit description of the
mechanism that creates the hazard. The Commission also is keeping the
warning to follow the assembly instructions because consumer
misassembly has been a problem with similar products, such as cribs,
and could lead to entrapment.
Section 8.4.4.1 of ASTM F 1821-09 states that additional warning
statements shall address the minimum mattress size. The language of
this section implies that the precise mattress dimensions should be
provided, both in English and metric units. Section 8.3.2 of ASTM F
1821-09, however, already specifies that both the bed and its retail
carton shall be clearly and legibly marked with the intended mattress
for the bed, including the precise dimensions in both English and
metric units. The Human Factors staff, therefore, concluded that
repeating precise dimensions within the warning is unnecessary and may,
by making the warning longer, discourage some consumers from reading
it. Therefore, proposed Sec. 1217.2(b)(8) would have the warning label
include the statement ``ONLY use full-size crib mattress of the
recommended size'' instead of repeating the dimensions of the
recommended mattress.
(ii) Strangulation warning.
To address the strangulation hazard, the Commission, at proposed
Sec. 1217.2(b)(8), is proposing the following warning label for all
toddler beds:
[[Page 22296]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AP10.003
Like the proposed entrapment warning labels, this warning would use
the type-size requirements described in the standard, and the safety
alert symbol design is consistent with ANSI Z535.4-2007, American
National Standard for Product Safety Signs and Labels. This warning
largely reflects all of the information relevant to hazards that was
required in the original warnings. A warning statement about not
placing items with a string, cord, or ribbon around a child's neck
would be more effective with an additional clarifying sentence, ``These
items may catch on bed parts.'' Without this sentence, consumers may
find it difficult to infer how the presence of a cord around a child's
neck is relevant to the toddler bed or how the cord and bed interact to
create the potential for strangulation. Concern has been raised about
the label statement warning that a string, cord, or ribbon around a
child's neck may catch on bed parts. The concern is that the label
statement does not point out that strings, cords, or ribbons around a
child's neck can catch on many other items as well and that the
Commission recommends against the use of such items for children. The
Commission invites comments regarding this concern.
F. Effective Date
The Administrative Procedure Act (``APA'') generally requires that
the effective date of a rule be at least 30 days after publication of
the final rule. 5 U.S.C. 553(d). To allow time for toddler beds to come
into compliance after the final rule is issued, the Commission proposes
that the standard would become effective 6 months after publication of
a final rule as to products manufactured or imported on or after that
date. The Commission invites comments on how long it would take
manufacturers of toddler beds to come into compliance with the rule.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule contains information collection requirements
that are subject to public comment and review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). We describe the provisions in this section of
the document with an estimate of the annual reporting burden. Our
estimate includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing each collection of information.
We particularly invite comments on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the CPSC's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the CPSC's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.
Title: Safety Standard for Toddler Beds.
Description: The proposed rule would require each toddler bed and
convertible crib to comply with ASTM F 1821-09, ``Standard Consumer
Safety Specification for Toddler Beds.'' Sections 8 and 9 of ASTM F
1821-09 contain requirements for marking and instructional literature.
Description of Respondents: Persons who manufacture or import
toddler beds.
We estimate the burden of this collection of information as
follows:
Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Frequency of Total Annual Hours per Total burden
16 CFR Section respondents responses responses response hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1217.2(a)................................................ 44 10 440 0.5 220
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs
associated with this collection of information.
Our estimates are based on the following:
Proposed Sec. 1217.2(a) would require each toddler bed and
convertible crib to comply with ASTM F 1821-09. Sections 8 and 9 of
ASTM F 1821-09 contain requirements for marking and instructional
literature that are disclosure requirements, thus falling within the
definition of ``collections of information'' at 5 CFR 1320.3(c).
Section 8.1.1 of ASTM F 1821-09 requires that the name and place of
business (city, state, mailing address, including zip code and
telephone number) of the manufacturer, importer, distributor, of the
manufacturer, distributor, or seller be clearly and legibly marked on
each bed and its retail carton. Section 8.1.2 of ASTM F 1821-09
requires that each bed and its retail carton be clearly and legibly
marked with the model number, stock number, catalog number, item
number, or other symbol expressed numerically or otherwise, such that
only articles of identical construction, composition and dimensions
bear identical markings and requires the manufacturer to change the
model number whenever a significant structural or design modification
is made that affects its conformance with this consumer safety
specification.
[[Page 22297]]
Section 8.1.3 of ASTM F 1821-09 requires a code mark or other means
that identifies the date (month and year as a minimum) of manufacture
and permits future identification of any given model and that such mark
be clearly and legibly marked on each bed and its retail carton.
There are 73 known firms supplying toddler beds to the United
States market. Twenty-nine of the 48 firms are known to already produce
labels that comply with sections 8.1.1, 8.1.2, and 8.1.3 of the
standard, so there would be no additional burden on these firms. The
remaining 44 firms are assumed to already use labels on both their
products and their packaging, but would need to make some modifications
to their existing labels. The estimated time required to make these
modification is about 30 minutes per model. Assuming that, on average,
each of these firms supplies 10 different models of toddler beds or
convertible cribs, the estimated burden hours associated with labels is
30 minutes x 44 firms x 10 models per firm = 13,200 minutes or 220
annual hours.
The Commission estimates that hourly compensation for the time
required to create and update labels is $27.78 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, September 2009, all workers, goods-producing industries,
Sales and office, Table 9). Therefore, the estimated annual cost
associated with the Commission's proposed labeling requirements is
approximately $6,112 ($27.78 per hour x 220 hours = $6,111.60, which we
have rounded up to $6,112).
Section 9.1 of ASTM F 1821-09 requires instructions, where
applicable, for assembly, maintenance, cleaning, folding, and warning
information to be supplied with the bed. Toddler beds and convertible
cribs are products that generally require some assembly and
maintenance, and products sold without such information would not be
able to successfully compete with products supplying this information.
Under OMB's regulations (5 CFR 1320.3(b)(2)), the time, effort, and
financial resources necessary to comply with a collection of
information that would be incurred by persons in the ``normal course of
their activities'' are excluded from a burden estimate where an agency
demonstrates that the disclosure activities needed to comply are
``usual and customary.'' Therefore, because the CPSC is unaware of
toddler beds or convertible cribs that: (a) Generally require some
assembly and maintenance, but (b) lack any instructions to the user
about these topics, we tentatively estimate that there are no burden
hours associated with the instruction requirement in section 9.1 of
ASTM F 1821-09. This is because any burden associated with supplying
instructions with a toddler bed or convertible crib would be ``usual
and customary'' and not within the definition of ``burden'' under OMB's
regulations.
Based on this analysis, the requirements of the proposed toddler
bed rule would impose a burden to industry of 220 hours at a cost of
$6,112 annually.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3507(d)), we have submitted the information collection requirements of
this rule to OMB for review. Interested persons are requested to fax
comments regarding this information collection by May 28, 2010, to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB (see ADDRESSES).
I. Certification
Section 14(a) of the Consumer Product Safety Act (``CPSA'') imposes
the requirement that products subject to a consumer product safety rule
under the CPSA, or to a similar rule, ban, standard, or regulation
under any other act enforced by the Commission, must be certified as
complying with all applicable CPSC-enforced requirements. 15 U.S.C.
2063(a). Such certification must be based on a test of each product or
on a reasonable testing program or, for children's products, on tests
on a sufficient number of samples by a third party conformity
assessment body accredited by the Commission to test according to the
applicable requirements. As discussed above in section H, section
104(b)(1)(B) of the CPSIA refers to standards issued under that
section, such as the rule for toddler beds being proposed in this
notice, as ``consumer product safety standards.'' Furthermore, the
designation as consumer product safety standards subjects such
standards to certain sections of the CPSA, such as section 26(a)
regarding preemption. By the same reasoning, such standards would also
be subject to section 14 of the CPSA. Therefore, any such standard
would be considered to be a consumer product safety rule to which
products subject to the rule must be certified.
In addition, the CPSIA is another act enforced by the Commission,
and the standards issued under section 104(b)(1)(B) of the CPSIA are
similar to consumer product safety rules. For this reason also, toddler
beds will need to be tested and certified as complying with the safety
standard when it becomes effective. Because toddler beds are children's
products, they must be tested by a third-party conformity assessment
body accredited by the Commission. In the future, the Commission will
issue a notice of requirements to explain how laboratories can become
accredited as a third party conformity assessment bodies to test to the
new safety standard. (Toddler beds also must comply with all other
applicable CPSC requirements, such as the lead content and phthalate
content requirements in sections 101 and 108 of the CPSIA, the tracking
label requirement in section 14(a)(5) of the CPSA, and the consumer
registration form requirements in section 104 of the CPSIA.) The
Commission seeks comment on what it may cost to comply with all of the
CPSC requirements outlined above, including the proposed modifications
in section E, and how these costs will impact toddler bed
manufacturers.
J. Environmental Considerations
The Commission's environmental review regulation at 16 CFR Part
1021 has established categories of actions that normally have little or
no potential to affect the human environment and therefore do not
require either an environmental assessment or an environmental impact
statement. The proposed rule is within the scope of the Commission's
regulation, at 16 CFR 1021.5(c)(1), which provides a categorical
exclusion for rules to provide design or performance requirements for
products. Thus, no environmental assessment or environmental impact
statement for this rule is required.
K. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, requires
agencies to consider the impact of proposed rules on small entities,
including small businesses. Section 603 of the RFA requires that CPSC
staff prepare an initial regulatory flexibility analysis and make it
available to the public for comment when the general notice of proposed
rulemaking is published. The initial regulatory flexibility analysis
must describe the impact of the proposed rule on small entities and
identify any alternatives that may reduce the impact. Specifically, the
initial regulatory flexibility analysis must contain:
1. A description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number
of small entities to which the proposed rule will apply;
2. A description of the reasons why action by the agency is being
considered;
[[Page 22298]]
3. A succinct statement of the objectives of, and legal basis for,
the proposed rule;
4. A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and
other compliance requirements of the proposed rule, including an
estimate of the classes of small entities subject to the requirements
and the type of professional skills necessary for the preparation of
reports or records; and
5. An identification, to the extent possible, of all relevant
federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the
proposed rule.
In addition, the initial regulatory flexibility analysis must
contain a description of any significant alternatives to the proposed
rule that would accomplish the stated objectives of the proposed rule
while minimizing the economic impact on small entities.
Toddler beds and convertible cribs are typically produced or
marketed by juvenile product manufacturers and distributors or by
furniture manufacturers and distributors, some of which have separate
divisions for juvenile products. The CPSC's staff believes that there
are currently at least 73 known manufacturers or importers that supply
toddler beds and/or convertible cribs to the United States market.
Approximately 48 suppliers are domestic manufacturers (66 percent), 13
are domestic importers (18 percent), 11 are foreign manufacturers (15
percent), and the remaining firm is a foreign supplier who imports from
other countries and exports to the United States. (For sources of
information used in this initial regulatory flexibility analysis, see
Ref. 5.)
Under Small Business Administration (SBA) guidelines, a
manufacturer of toddler beds or convertible cribs is small if it has
500 or fewer employees and an importer is small if it has 100 or fewer
employees. Based on these guidelines, 11 of the domestic importers and
34 domestic manufacturers known to be supplying the United States
market are small. (Six of these small domestic manufacturers have
between 100 and 500 employees.) There are an additional eight domestic
manufacturers of unknown size, most of which are likely to be small as
well. (In fact, there was sufficient information to include seven of
these firms as small in the analysis that follows.) However, there are
probably additional unknown small manufacturers and importers operating
in the United States market as well.
The Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association (JPMA), the major
United States trade association that represents juvenile product
manufacturers and importers, runs a voluntary Certification Program for
several juvenile products. Approximately 29 firms that supply toddler
beds and/or convertible cribs to the United States market are compliant
with the current ASTM voluntary standard (40 percent). (Twenty-six of
these firms are JPMA-certified as compliant, while an additional three
firms claim compliance. Of the small domestic businesses, 11
manufacturers (27 percent) and 6 importers (55 percent) are JPMA-
certified as ASTM-compliant. Additionally, there are two small
manufacturers that claim compliance with the ASTM standard that are not
part of JPMA's Certification Program.
The most recent United States birth data shows that there are
approximately 4.3 million births per year. The vast majority of these
babies eventually use cribs for sleeping purposes, although there is
some evidence that play yards are becoming a common substitute. In
fact, according to a 2005 survey conducted by the American Baby Group
(2006 Baby Products Tracking Study), 22 percent of new mothers own
convertible cribs. Approximately 16 percent of convertible cribs were
handed down or purchased second-hand.\1\ If these rates hold, this
suggests annual convertible crib sales of about 795,000 (0.22 x 0.84 x
4.3 million births per year). Of those consumers with non-convertible
cribs, some proportion of them will eventually use toddler beds when
their children get older. However, consumers may choose to use a twin
or larger bed and use portable bed rails rather than use a separate
toddler bed. Assuming that approximately 50 percent elect to use
toddler beds and that approximately 50 percent of those buy them new,
this would mean that around 839,000 toddler beds are sold per year
(0.78 non-convertible cribs x 4.3 million births x 0.5 use toddler beds
x 0.5 buy them new).\2\ Adding this to the estimate of convertible
cribs yields a total of approximately 1.6 million units (convertible
cribs and toddler beds) sold per year that might be affected by the
proposed toddler bed standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The data on second-hand products for new mothers was not
available. Instead, data for new mothers and expectant mothers was
combined and broken into first-time mothers and experienced mothers.
Data for first-time mothers and experienced mothers was averaged to
calculate the approximate percentage that was handed down or
purchased second-hand.
\2\ Any per-year estimate for toddler beds will be approximate
since when parents make such a purchase for their child is likely to
vary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reason for Agency Action and Legal Basis for the Proposed Rule.
Section 104 of the CPSIA requires the CPSC to promulgate a mandatory
standard for toddler beds that is substantially the same as, or more
stringent than, the voluntary standard. The Commission is proposing
four additional requirements to the current ASTM standard. The first
would assure more structurally sound guardrails. The second is intended
to reduce the likelihood of entrapments due to broken slats/spindles.
The third would improve the safety of guardrails by adding height
requirements. The fourth, modified warnings, is intended to emphasize
that deaths in toddler beds have occurred due to entrapments and
strangulation. The Commission concludes that the more stringent
standard would reduce the risk of future injuries and deaths associated
with toddler beds and convertible cribs.
Compliance Requirements of the Proposed Rule. The Commission
proposes adopting the voluntary ASTM standard for toddler beds with
four additions. Key components of ASTM F 1821--09 include:
Mattress retention requirements intended to control the
horizontal position of the mattress and prevent torso entrapments, as
well as assure that the mattress does not fall too far below the
mattress support when used by a child of the maximum recommended weight
(50 lbs);
Mattress support systems requirements intended to prevent
disengagement which might result in a sharp edge or an opening in which
a child might become entrapped;
Requirements for mattress support systems attached to end
structures intended to assure that the mattress support system remains
attached to the end structures and does not create a hazard, such as
sharp edges or openings in which a child might become entrapped;
Requirements for guardrails intended to prevent openings
in guardrails in which children might be trapped; and
End structures intended to prevent openings in end
structures in which children might be trapped.
The voluntary standard also includes: (1) Requirements for several
features to prevent entrapment and cuts (minimum and maximum opening
size, hazardous sharp points or edges, and edges that can scissor,
shear, or pinch); (2) torque and tension tests to assure that
components cannot be removed; (3) requirements for partially bounded
openings; (4) marking and labeling requirements; (5) requirements for
the permanency and adhesion of labels; (6) requirements for
instructional literature; and (7) requirements to address corner post
extensions, which may catch various children's items and pose a choking
hazard.
[[Page 22299]]
Based on CPSC staff recommendations, the Commission proposes to
modify the existing ASTM standard by revising the entrapment/
strangulation warnings, and adding three new requirements for guardrail
height, slat/spindle strength, and structural integrity for guardrails:
Guardrail height. The proposed rule would require that
guardrails be a minimum height of 5 inches above the manufacturer's
recommended sleeping surface. This will help prevent falls.
Slat/spindle strength. The proposed rule adds a new
requirement to test the strength of spindles and slats in guardrails,
side rails, and end structures using an 80-lb force.
Structural integrity for guardrails. In addition to the
existing test for guardrail openings, the proposed rule would add a
test for the overall stability of guardrails using a 50-lb force while
the bed is firmly secured. This additional test is intended to help
prevent children from falling out of bed; it is also calculated to
ensure that the guardrails remain intact when children lean against
them or attempt to use them to climb into bed.
Entrapment/strangulation warnings. The proposed rule would
modify the existing warnings by adding a more detailed description of
mechanisms creating the hazard and separating the entrapment and
strangulation messages into two warning labels. This is intended to
increase the efficacy of the warning by emphasizing the potential for
death for each of the two different mechanisms.
As explained earlier in section F of this preamble, toddler beds
and convertible cribs entering commerce would need to meet the new
requirements if they are manufactured or imported after 6 months from
the date of publication of the final rule. In other words, the
standard, if finalized, would not apply retroactively.
The recommended slat/spindle strength requirement may help prevent
incidents where slats break and children are either cut, fall through
the opening, or become entrapped. This proposed modification to the
current voluntary standard could potentially add significant costs to
toddler bed and convertible crib suppliers. Preliminary testing
indicates that some toddler beds and convertible cribs currently on the
market would meet this requirement with no further modifications, while
others would not.
Plastic toddler beds would be exempt from the slat/spindle
requirement, because they do not have wooden slats/spindles and have
not been associated with the hazards addressed by this requirement.
Therefore, we believe that some products will need to be modified to
meet the slat/spindle requirement, which is likely to affect at least a
few firms.
Suppliers may also need to make product modifications to meet the
revised structural integrity requirement and new height requirement for
guardrails. No testing has been performed so far that would indicate
how many products currently on the market would meet these
requirements, but it appears that at least some products will be able
to meet the guardrail height requirements. It is possible for firms to
eliminate guardrails from their products entirely as a way to address
the proposed guardrails requirements if they can comply with the other
requirements of the proposed standard without the guardrail in place
(guardrails themselves are not required). However, it would be
unreasonable to assume that all of the firms whose products may require
modifications can or will take this approach. Therefore, it is expected
that at least some products will require modifications to meet these
guardrail requirements and that at least a few firms will be affected.
In meeting the slat/spindle strength and guardrail structural
integrity requirements, it is possible that firms may improve the
quality of materials used to make the slats/spindles or guardrails.
(Plastic toddler beds and convertible cribs would not need to make such
modifications since they have not been associated with the identified
risks from these parts.) For wooden toddler beds and convertible cribs,
switching to a stronger material is unlikely to exceed more than a few
dollars per unit. For example, using white ash rather than western
white pine improves average strength properties by an average of 74
percent (http://www.woodbin.com/ref/wood/strength_table.htm) while
increasing the price of the material by an average of 26 percent
(http://www.willardbrothers.net/ORDER%20FORM.htm) for a maximum of
$1.55 more for the largest quantity listed. These cost differentials
are based on raw lumber costs which would affect firms differently,
depending upon how much wood was used in their particular product.
Metal toddler beds/convertible cribs are less common than products made
from wood or plastic, but material changes should not be substantially
more expensive than for wooden products. Alternatively, firms could
undertake product redevelopment to develop compliant toddler beds,
which would likely be more expensive than using alternate materials.
Therefore, it is likely that at least some firms would select the less
expensive option.
Increasing the height of guardrails may help prevent children from
falling from the bed. As discussed above, the proposed rule would not
require guardrails to be included with toddler beds or convertible
cribs, so firms with noncompliant products have the option of
eliminating guardrails entirely if their products will comply with the
other requirements of the proposed standard with the guardrails
removed. Alternatively, they could redesign their product (or the
guardrail portion of their product) to make their guardrails higher. If
the second option is taken, there will likely be some cost associated
with product redevelopment, as well as some increased costs for
additional materials.
The remaining requirements, entrapment and strangulation warnings,
are expected to have only a minimal impact on current suppliers of
toddler beds or convertible cribs. The revised warnings would be only a
minor modification for firms currently complying with the ASTM
standard. Even for those firms supplying toddler beds without such a
warning or with a warning that differs from the one outlined in the
current voluntary standard, the costs associated with printing a
revised warning or a completely new warning would be low.
Other Federal Rules. CPSC staff has not identified any federal or
state rule that either overlaps or conflicts with the staff's draft
proposed rule.
Impact on Small Businesses. There are 73 firms currently known to
be marketing toddler beds and/or convertible cribs in the United
States. Six are large domestic manufacturers, 1 is a domestic
manufacturer of unknown size, 2 are large domestic importers, and 12
are foreign firms. The impact on the remaining 52 small firms--34 firms
known to be small domestic manufacturers, 7 firms that are presumed to
be small domestic manufacturers, and 11 small domestic importers--is
the focus of the remainder of this analysis.
Small Domestic Manufacturers. For the most part, the impact of the
proposed standard on small manufacturers will differ based on whether
they currently comply with the voluntary ASTM standard. If they do not,
as is the case with 28 firms, the impact could be significant. These
firms would likely have to undergo product redevelopment. As explained
below, the cost of such an effort for toddler beds and convertible
cribs is unknown, but could be substantial for some firms.
Product development costs include product design, development and
[[Page 22300]]
marketing staff time, product testing, and focus group expenses. These
costs can be very high, particularly when there are multiple products,
but they can be treated as new product expenses and amortized over
time. If a firm deals with multiple products subject to the proposed
standard, there may be some economies of scale for some of these
development stages that would reduce the marginal costs for each new
product being redeveloped. Other one-time costs include the retooling
of manufacturing equipment, which could be gradually recouped over the
sales of numerous units. There are also expected to be increased costs
of production. Producing toddler beds and convertible cribs that have
greater structural integrity, stronger slats/spindles, and higher
guardrails may require additional raw materials or possibly heavier
materials. In addition to increasing the costs of production, this
could increase shipping costs as well.
Even if these firms are able to pass their increased costs on to
consumers, the impact could still be considerable. This is because
firms manufacturing toddler beds and convertible cribs are not simply
competing against other producers of toddler beds and convertible
cribs. They also compete against producers of substitute products,
firms whose products would not be subject to the proposed standard.
Toddler bed producers must compete with producers of twin (or possibly
larger) beds that can be used with portable guardrails, while
convertible cribs must compete with these same products for larger
children and with standard cribs for smaller children.
There is expected to be less of an impact on the 13 firms that are
known to comply with the current voluntary standard. At least some of
these firms should be able to comply with the new requirements without
product modifications other than labeling. The remaining firms may opt
to redesign their products as well, which, again, would result in some
one-time costs and a possible increase in production costs. It is also
possible, however, that they may be able to select a potentially less
expensive option to address some of the recommended requirements. A
modification in the materials used may be sufficient for many products,
and the associated cost is not expected to exceed a few dollars per
unit.
There are two manufacturers that do not comply with the current
voluntary ASTM standard that would be affected differently by the
proposed standard. These firms take already manufactured toddler beds
and convertible cribs, decorate them (often with original artwork), and
then sell them as a final product. Because these firms do not make the
underlying toddler beds and convertible cribs, the impact of the
proposed standard on these firms will be the same as that of an
importer. These firms would need to find a new supplier of compliant
products if their current supplier does not make the necessary
modifications. The new products would presumably be of higher quality,
as well as more expensive since some of the original manufacturer's
production costs (and possibly redevelopment costs) are likely to be
passed on to these firms.
The scenario described above assumes that only those firms that are
JPMA-certified or claim ASTM compliance will pass the voluntary
standard's requirements. This is not necessarily the case. CPSC staff
has identified many cases where products not certified by JPMA actually
comply with the relevant ASTM standard; however, there is insufficient
evidence of this for toddler beds and convertible cribs to quantify
this impact. Additionally, the effect of the new and modified
requirements may be less substantial than outlined above to the extent
that some products may already comply with foreign standards with some
more rigorous requirements. However, there is insufficient information
to quantify this effect. Therefore, the Commission invites comments
from small businesses affected by this proposal explaining the economic
impact it will impose on them.
Small Domestic Importers. The majority of small domestic importers
(six out of 11) comply with the current voluntary standard. At least
some of these firms should not need to make any product modifications
(other than labeling) to meet the proposed standard. However, those
whose products do require modifications will need to find an alternate
supplier if their existing one does not come into compliance. The new
products will presumably be of higher quality, as well as more
expensive. However, the actual price increase is unknown and likely to
vary based upon the degree of modification required. All of the
remaining five firms not now in compliance with the ASTM voluntary
standard would need to either require their current supplier to make
the modifications necessary to comply with the standard or find other
suppliers that did comply. Depending on the degree to which their
toddler beds and convertible cribs are out of compliance with the
voluntary standard, the price increase (as well as the increases in
quality and safety) could be relatively high. To the extent that some
of these firms may actually comply with the current voluntary standard
or one or more of the new/modified requirements in the proposed
standard, the impact of the proposed rule would be lower.
For the most part, the impact of the proposed rule on importers
should be smaller than that on manufacturers. Even if importers respond
to the rule by discontinuing the import of noncomplying toddler beds
and convertible cribs, either by replacing them with a complying
product or another juvenile product, deciding to import an alternative
product would be a reasonable and realistic way to offset any lost
revenue. The one exception would be firms for which convertible cribs
or toddler beds and their associated products (i.e., matching
furniture) form the core of their product line. For these firms, a
substantial price increase could possibly drive them out of business or
require them to rebuild their business based on alternative products.
Alternatives. Under section 104 of the CPSIA, the primary
alternative that would reduce the impact on small entities is to make
the voluntary standard mandatory with no modifications. (This option
may not be feasible, given the CPSIA's direction for the Commission to
issue more stringent standards if that would further reduce the risk of
injury associated with durable nursery products.) For small domestic
manufacturers that already meet the requirements of the voluntary
standard, adopting the standard without modifications may reduce their
costs relative to the proposed rule, but only marginally. Similarly,
limiting the requirements of a final rule to those now in the voluntary
standard would probably have little beneficial impact on small
manufacturers that do not currently meet the requirements of the
voluntary standard. This is because, for these firms, most of the cost
increases would be associated with meeting the requirements of the
current voluntary standard, rather than the changes associated with the
proposed rule. The difference for importers, whether compliant with the
voluntary standard or not, is also likely to be minimal.
Conclusion. The proposed rule could have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Even if all the small firms that
are JPMA-certified as compliant with ASTM's voluntary standard did not
require any changes other than labeling to comply with the proposed
standard, there would still be 63 percent (33 out of 52 firms) that
would probably need to redevelop their products to comply.
[[Page 22301]]
This would typically need to be done for multiple products for each
firm. (To the extent that some of the products not certified by JPMA
may still comply, the impact will be reduced.) Firms supplying products
that already comply with the voluntary standard may not need to make
any product modifications (other than labeling) to meet the proposed
rule, but this applies to only 42 percent of the known small firms.
Some of these firms, and basically all of the other small firms, will
need to make at least some modifications to their toddler beds and
convertible cribs to comply with the proposed rule. The extent of these
costs is unknown, but since product redevelopment would likely be
necessary in many cases, it is possible that the costs could be large
and have the potential to reduce firms' ability to compete with
substitute products.
Nineteen small businesses are believed to have product lines
consisting entirely or primarily of toddler beds, convertible cribs,
and related products (such as accompanying furniture). These firms may
be affected disproportionately by the proposed rule. If the cost of
developing (or importing) a compliant product proves to be a barrier
for these firms, the loss of toddler beds and convertible cribs as a
product category could be significant and may not be easily mitigated
by the sale of other juvenile products.
L. Request for Comments
All interested persons are invited to submit their comments to the
Commission on any aspect of the proposed rule. Comments should be
submitted in accordance with the instructions in the ADDRESSES section
at the beginning of this notice.
M. References
1. CPSC staff memorandum, from Celestine T. Kiss, Project Manager,
Division of Human Factors, Directorate for Engineering Sciences, and
Robert J. Howell, Assistant Executive Director, Office of Hazard
Identification and Reduction, ``Staff's Draft Proposed Rule for toddler
Beds,'' March 3, 2010, with Tabs A-D.
2. CPSC staff memorandum, from Risana T. Chowdhury, Division of
Hazard Analysis, to Celestine T. Kiss, Division of Human Factors,
Directorate for Engineering Sciences, ``Toddler Beds-Related Deaths,
Injuries and Potential Injuries, and NEISS Injury Estimates; 2005-
Present,'' January 28, 2010 (Tab A to Ref. 1).
3. CPSC staff memorandum, from Jacob J. Miller, Division of
Mechanical Engineering, Directorate for Engineering Sciences, to
Celestine T. Kiss, Project Manager, Division of Human Factors,
Directorate for Engineering Sciences, ``Proposed Changes to ASTM F
1821-09, Standard consumer Safety Specification for Toddler Beds, for
Incorporation in Staff's Draft Proposed Rule,'' February 23, 2010 (Tab
B to Ref. 1).
4. CPSC staff memorandum, from Timothy P. Smith, Engineering
Psychologist, Division of Human Factors, Directorate for engineering
Sciences, to Celestine T. Kiss, Project Manager, Division of Human
Factors, Directorate for Engineering Sciences, ``Warning Statements for
Toddler Beds (CPSIA Section 104),'' March 3, 2010 (Tab C to Ref. 1).
5. CPSC staff memorandum, from Jill L. Jenkins, Ph.D., Economist,
Directorate for Economic Analysis, to Celestine T. Kiss, Project
Manager for Toddler Beds, Division of Human Factors, Directorate for
Engineering Sciences, ``Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis of
Proposed Standard for Toddler Beds,'' February 18, 2010 (Tab D to Ref.
1).
List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 1217
Consumer protection, Infants and children, Incorporation by
reference, Law enforcement, Safety, Toddler beds.
For the reasons stated above, and under the authority of 5 U.S.C.
553, and sections 3 and 104 of Public Law 110-314, 122 Stat. 3016
(August 14, 2008), the Consumer Product Safety Commission proposes to
add a new 16 CFR part 1217 as follows:
PART 1217--SAFETY STANDARD FOR TODDLER BEDS
Sec.
1217.1 Scope, application, and effective date.
1217.2 Requirements for toddler beds.
Authority: Sections 3 and 104 of Pub. L. 110-314, 122 Stat. 3016
(August 14, 2008).
Sec. 1217.1 Scope, application, and effective date.
This part 1217 establishes a consumer product safety standard for
toddler beds manufactured or imported after 6 months after publication
of the final rule in the Federal Register.
Sec. 1217.2 Requirements for toddler beds.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each
toddler bed as defined in ASTM F 1821-09, Standard Consumer Safety
Specification for Toddler Beds, approved April 1, 2009, shall comply
with all applicable provisions of ASTM F 1821-09, as that standard is
amended by this part 1217. The Director of the Federal Register
approves this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may obtain a copy of this ASTM standard
from ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959 USA, phone: 610-832-9585; http://
www.astm.org/. You may inspect copies at the Office of the Secretary,
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 820, 4330 East West
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, telephone 301-504-7923, or at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal
regulations/ibr_locations.html.
(b) Comply with ASTM 1821-09 with the following additions or
exclusions.
(1) Instead of the section number of section 6.5 and its
introductory heading ``Guardrails--'' comply with the following:
(i) 6.5.1
(ii) Reserved.
(2) In addition to section 6.4 of ASTM F 1821-09, comply with the
following:
(i) 6.5 Guardrails:
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) In addition to complying with the provisions of paragraphs
(b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section, comply with the following:
(i) 6.5.2 The upper edge of the guardrails shall be at least 5 in.
(130 mm) above the sleeping surface when a mattress of a thickness that
is the maximum specified by the manufacturer's instructions is used.
(ii) [Reserved]
(4) In addition to section 6.4 of ASTM 1821-09 comply with the
following:
(i) 6.8 Structural Integrity of Guardrails--After testing in
accordance with 7.9, there shall be none of the hazardous conditions
described in Section 5.
(ii) [Reserved.]
(5) In addition to the changes to ASTM 1821-09 in paragraphs (b)
(1), (2) and (3) of this section comply with the following:
(i) 6.9 Slat/Spindle Strength--Toddler beds that contain wooden or
metal slats or spindles shall meet the performance requirements
outlined in section 6.9.1.
(A) 6.9.1 After testing in accordance with the procedure in 7.10,
there shall be no slat or spindle breakage or separation of a slat or
spindle from the guardrails, side rails, or end structures.
(B) [Reserved]
(ii) [Reserved]
(6) In addition to section 7.8 of ASTM 1821-09 comply with the
following:
(i) 7.9 Test Method for Guardrail Structural Integrity:
[[Page 22302]]
(A) 7.9.1 Firmly secure the toddler bed on a stationary flat
surface using clamps. Gradually apply 50 lbf to the uppermost
horizontal part of the mattress side of the guardrail in a direction
perpendicular to the plane of the rail. The force should be applied in
the center along the length of the rail and then repeated with the
force applied directly over each of the outermost legs of the
guardrail. The force should be applied in the direction away from the
mattress within a period of 5 s and maintained for an additional 10 s.
(B) [Reserved]
(ii) [Reserved]
(7) In addition to the changes to ASTM 1821-09 in paragraph (b)(5)
of this section comply with the following:
(i) 7.10 Slat/Spindle Testing for Guardrails, Side Rails, and End
Structures:
(A) 7.10.1 The spindle/slat static load test shall be performed for
all slats and spindles with the spindle/slat assemblies removed from
the bed and supported only on the rail corners through a contact area
not more than 3 square inches when measured parallel to the
longitudinal axis of the end of the rail. Besides the corners, the
upper and lower horizontal rails of both linear and contoured shall be
free to deflect under the applied force.
(B) 7.10.2 Gradually, over a period of not less than 2 s or greater
than 5 s, apply the force specified in 7.10.3 or 7.10.4 at the midpoint
between the top and bottom of the spindle/slat being tested. This force
shall be applied through a contact area large enough to not cause
visible indentation or cutting of the spindle/slat, but not wider than
1 in. (2.54 cm) when measured parallel to the longitudinal axis of the
spindle/slat. This weight shall be maintained for 30 seconds.
(C) 7.10.3 Test, according to 7.10.2, 25% (or the next highest
percentage if 4 does not divide evenly into the total number) of all
spindles/slats with a force of 80 lb. Spindles/slats that offer the
least resistance to bending based upon their geometry shall be selected
to be tested within this grouping of 25%, except that adjacent
spindles/slats shall not be tested per 7.10.2. Place an identifying
mark on all tested spindles/slats.
(D) 7.10.4 Upon completion of the test described in 7.10.2 and
7.10.3, gradually apply, over a period of not less than 2 s or greater
than 5 s, 60 lbf (266.9 N) at the midpoint between the top and bottom
of all spindles/slats not previously tested under 7.10.2 and 7.10.3.
This force shall be applied through a contact area large enough to not
cause visible indentation or cutting of the spindle/slat, but not wider
than 1 in. (2.54 cm) when measured parallel to the longitudinal axis of
the spindle/slat. This force shall be maintained for 30 s.
(E) 7.10.5 End vertical rails that are joined between the slat
assembly top and bottom rails are not considered slats and do not
require testing under 7.10.
(ii) [Reserved]
(8) Comply with ASTM 1821-09 section 8.4. Instead of complying with
section 8.4.3, including the warning label, and sections 8.4.4 through
8.4.5 of ASTM 1821-09, use the following:
(i) 8.4.3 Toddler beds that meet the performance requirements of
sections 5.8.2 (torso entrapment), 6.1 (mattress retention), 6.2
(mattress support system integrity), 6.3 (mattress support system
attachment to end structures), 6.4 (mattress support system openings),
6.6 (end structure openings), and 6.7 (partially bounded openings) with
the guardrails removed may bear the following label, exactly as
depicted, instead of the label required by section 8.4.4:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AP10.004
(ii) 8.4.4 All toddler beds that do not bear the label allowed for
certain toddler beds by section 8.4.3, shall bear the following label,
exactly as depicted:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AP10.005
(iii) 8.4.5 In addition to the label allowed by section 8.4.3 or
required by section 8.4.4, all toddler beds shall bear the following
label, exactly as depicted:
[[Page 22303]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AP10.006
Dated: March 24, 2010
Todd Stevenson,
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-6947 Filed 4-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
|