20 September 2011
Safety Standard for Play Yards
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 182 (Tuesday, September 20, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58167-58175]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24101]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 1221
[CPSC Docket No. CPSC-2011-0064]
RIN 3041-AC92
Safety Standard for Play Yards
AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Section 104(b) of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act
of 2008 (``CPSIA'') requires the United States Consumer Product Safety
Commission (``Commission,'' ``CPSC,'' or ``we'') 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 play yards in response to the
direction under Section 104(b) of the CPSIA.
DATES: Submit comments by December 5, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Comments related to the Paperwork Reduction Act aspects of
the marking, labeling, and instructional literature of the proposed
rule 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-2011-0064, may be
submitted electronically or in writing:
Electronic Submissions: Submit electronic comments to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at: 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), except through http://www.
regulations.gov. The Commission encourages you to submit electronic
comments by using the Federal eRulemaking Portal, as described above.
Written Submissions: Submit written submissions in the following
way: Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for paper, disk, or CD-ROM
submissions), preferably in five copies, to: Office of the Secretary,
Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 502, 4330 East West Highway,
Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone (301) 504-7923.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number for this rulemaking. All comments received may be
posted without change, including any personal identifiers, contact
information, or other personal information provided, to http://www.
regulations.gov. Do not submit confidential business information,
trade secret information, or other sensitive or protected information
that you do not want to be available to the public. If furnished at
all, such information should be submitted in writing.
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 2011-0064, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory K. Rea, Project Manager,
Directorate for Laboratory Sciences, Consumer Product Safety
Commission, 5 Research Place, Rockville, MD 20850; e-mail
GRea@cpsc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background and Statutory Authority
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 and 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)(1) 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. Play yards are one of
the products specifically identified in section 104(f)(2)(F) as a
durable infant or toddler product.
In this document, the Commission proposes a safety standard for
play yards. The proposed standard is based on the voluntary standard
developed by ASTM International (formerly the American Society for
Testing and Materials), ASTM F 406-11, ``Standard Consumer Safety
Specification for Non-Full-Size Baby Cribs/Play Yards'' (``ASTM F 406-
11''). 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.
B. The Product
1. Definition
ASTM F 406-11 defines a ``play yard'' as a ``framed enclosure that
includes a floor and has mesh or fabric sided panels primarily intended
to provide a play or sleeping environment for children. It may fold for
storage or travel.'' Play yards are intended for children who are less
than 35 inches tall who cannot climb out of the product. Play yards are
convenient because they usually fold for storage or travel. Some play
yards include accessory items that attach to the product, including
mobiles, toy bars, canopies, bassinets, and changing tables. The
accessory item(s) usually attaches to the side rails or corner brackets
of the play yard.
2. The Market
Based on a 2005 survey conducted by American Baby Group titled,
``2006 Baby Products Tracking Study,'' we estimate that approximately
2.9 million
[[Page 58168]]
play yards are sold in the United States each year. We estimate that
there are 23 manufacturers or importers supplying play yards to the
U.S. market. Eleven firms are domestic manufacturers, and 10 firms are
domestic importers. Two firms are foreign importers.
Play yards from 11 of the 23 firms have been certified as compliant
with the ASTM voluntary play yard standard by the Juvenile Products
Manufacturers Association (``JPMA''), the major U.S. trade association
that represents juvenile product manufacturers and importers. In
addition, three other firms claim compliance with the ASTM voluntary
play yard standard and, in some cases, provide test results publicly.
C. Incident Data
The CPSC's Directorate for Epidemiology reports that there have
been 2,128 incidents reported to the Commission regarding play yards
from early November 2007 until early April 2011. Of the 2,128 reported
incidents, there were 49 fatalities, 165 nonfatal injuries, and 1,914
noninjury incidents. The data is drawn from the CPSC's ``Early Warning
System'' (``EWS''), a database created in late 2007, which allows the
Commission to monitor incoming incident data closely. Once an incident
report is entered into EWS, it is carefully reviewed by a subject
matter expert. Thus, EWS contains the best data to support the play
yard regulatory work.
1. Fatalities
From early November 2007 through early April 2011, there were 49
fatalities associated with play yards. Twenty-seven deaths are
attributable to unsafe sleep environments within the play yard, such as
the presence of soft or extra bedding, or unsafe sleep practices, such
as putting infants to sleep on their stomach instead of their back.
Ten suffocation deaths were caused by unsafe environments around
the play yard. Examples of hazardous surroundings include: window blind
cords or computer cords that fell into the play yard where the cords
formed dangerous loops and resulted in strangulation fatalities. Other
deaths were caused when items were placed on top of the play yard to
prevent the child from climbing out. These items, such as wood, mesh
gates, or crib tents, caused suffocation deaths when children tried to
crawl out of the product and became stuck between the side rail and the
item placed on top of the play yard.
The remainder of the fatal incidents include:
Two children were killed in separate incidents when they
were able to climb out of a play yard and gain access to a pool. Both
children drowned in the pool.
Two toddlers were killed in separate incidents while
standing up in a play yard. It is believed that they leaned forward
against the side rail (possibly to reach an object that the child had
thrown outside the play yard), lost consciousness, and suffocated when
the pressure from the side rail compressed the airway.
One toddler was killed when the play yard collapsed
unexpectedly. The child was trapped and suffocated.
One death was caused by a looped strap hanging from a
changing table accessory. The changing table was supported by the side
rails of the play yard. The looped strap fell into the play yard space
occupied by the child and resulted in the child's strangulation.
One death was caused by an assembly error that occurred
when the mattress pad was not secured completely to the bottom of the
play yard. The child suffocated in the pocket created between the
unsecured mattress pad and the floor of the play yard.
Five other deaths are associated with play yards, but
there was insufficient information to determine the cause.
2. Nonfatal Injuries
From early November 2007 through early April 2011, there were 2,079
nonfatal incident reports. Of those, 165 incidents involved an injury,
and four of those required hospitalization. Although the remaining
1,914 nonfatal incident reports did not result in an injury, many of
the descriptions indicate the potential for serious injury or death.
The largest number of nonfatal incident reports were attributable
to the unexpected collapse of the side rail of a play yard. Of the
2,079 nonfatal incident reports, 1,902 involved the collapse of one or
more sides of a play yard. Of the 165 incidents involving an injury,
124 were the result of a play yard side rail collapse. Of the 124
injuries, there was one hospitalization for a concussion that was
caused by the collapse of a side rail.
The remainder of the nonfatal injury incidents included:
Eight injuries caused by broken or detached component
parts, such as loose wheels or loose hardware, which resulted in
instability or collapse of the product.
Eight injuries caused by various product-related problems,
including sharp surfaces.
Five injuries related to the mesh or fabric sides of the
play yard, such as stitching that unraveled, tears in the fabric, mesh
holes that were too large, and mesh material that was too abrasive.
Five injuries related to the mattress pad or the floor of
the play yard. Examples of injuries in this category included:
Mattresses or pads that were insufficiently fastened to the play yard
floor, resulting in toddlers becoming trapped under the mattress or
pad.
Five injures related to toddlers climbing out or falling
out of the play yard. This category included one toddler who was
hospitalized for a serious head injury after climbing or falling out of
the play yard.
Four injuries resulted when children were standing in the
play yard, lost their balance, and fell.
Two injuries caused by broken or hazardous accessories,
such as dangling straps from changing tables. Other examples of
hazardous accessories included: broken or detached components from
music boxes, trays, mirrors, and toy holders.
Two injuries related to assembly errors, including one
child who was hospitalized with a severe finger laceration after
getting his or her finger caught in the play yard as it was being
assembled.
One injury that resulted in a hospitalization was caused
by the presence of soft bedding in the play yard. This was a severe
injury to a 7-week-old infant who suffered brain damage.
One other injury is associated with play yards, but there
was insufficient information to determine the cause.
D. Play Yard International Standards and the ASTM Voluntary Standard
Section 104(b)(1)(A) of the CPSIA requires the Commission to
consult representatives of ``consumer groups, juvenile product
manufacturers, and independent child product engineers and experts'' to
``examine and assess the effectiveness of any voluntary consumer
product safety standards for durable infant or toddler products.''
Through the ASTM process, we consulted with manufacturers, retailers,
trade organizations, laboratories, consumer advocacy groups,
consultants, and members of the public. Most of the consultation
involved assessing and reviewing the ASTM standard, which is the
primary play yard standard in effect in the United States.
Significantly, in 2010, in consultation with ASTM, we identified three
hazards that were not addressed in the ASTM play yard standard. Those
three hazards are now addressed in ASTM 406-11 and include
[[Page 58169]]
new requirements to address side rails that collapse into a dangerous
V-shape (discussed in section E.5 below); new requirements to address
structural failures related to corner brackets (discussed in section
E.8 below); and new requirements to address mattress displacement
(discussed in section E.10 below).
In addition to reviewing the ASTM standard, we reviewed several
international standards.
1. International Standards
We reviewed several international standards when working with ASTM
to create ASTM 406-11, including:
The European Standard, BS EN 12227-1 & 2: 2010, ``Playpens
for domestic use'';
the Australian and New Zealand Standard, AS/NZ S2195:
2010, ``Folding cots--Safety Requirements''; and
the Canadian standard, C.R.C., c. 932, ``Playpen
Regulations.''
We considered the Australian and New Zealand Standard when we, in
consultation with ASTM, devised the performance requirement and test
method to address V-shape side rail collapses. Ultimately however, CPSC
and ASTM chose to use a test method meant to prevent neck entrapment in
expansion gates that exists in ASTM F 1004-09, ``Standard Consumer
Safety Specification for Expansion Gates and Expandable Enclosures.''
We considered the European Standard when we, in consultation with
ASTM, devised the performance requirement and test method to address
structural failures in corner brackets. Ultimately, the test method
found in the European Standard was rejected because its main purpose is
to test latch durability, rather than corner post durability. The
requirements currently found in ASTM F 406-11 to address this hazard
were developed by CPSC staff and are better suited than the
requirements in the European Standard to test corner post durability.
We also considered the European Standard when we, in consultation
with ASTM, created the mattress displacement performance requirement
and test method. While the requirements in ASTM F 406-11 are similar to
those in the European Standard, we, in consultation with ASTM staff,
made changes that will result in more reliable and repeatable results.
2. The ASTM Voluntary Standard
ASTM F 406 was first approved and published in 1977. ASTM has
revised the standard several times since then, with the most current
version, ASTM F 406-11, published on May 15, 2011. Historically, one of
the most significant changes occurred in ASTM F 406-02, published in
June 2002, when the standard for non-full-size cribs merged with the
play yard standard to group products with similar uses, and took on its
current name, ``Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Non-Full-
Size Baby Cribs/Play Yards.''
The proposed rule would only pertain to play yards. In the Federal
Register of December 28, 2010 (75 FR 81766), we issued a final rule on
safety standards for non-full-size cribs. Thus, the proposed rule would
exclude provisions of ASTM F406-11 that apply to non-full-size cribs.
The proposed rule would exclude from the play yard standard sections
5.17, 5.19, 5.20, the entirety of section 6, section 8.1 through
8.10.5, and section 10.1.1.1 of ASTM F 406-11. In addition, for section
9.4.2.10 of ASTM F 406-11, we propose to include only the first
section, which is a labeling requirement meant to inform consumers that
only the mattress or pad provided by the manufacturer should be used.
The remainder of section 9.4.2.10 of ASTM F 406-11 is applicable to
non-full-size cribs and would be excluded from the play yard standard.
Many play yards include accessory items, such as bassinets or
changing tables that attach to the side of the play yard rails. While
ASTM F 406-11 contains requirements to address entrapment of children
in accessories, such as requirements designed to prevent changing table
straps from forming loops that enter the play yard space and could
cause strangulation, the specific requirements for accessories will be
addressed in separate rulemakings. For example, ASTM F 406-11 addresses
possible entrapment in bassinet attachments, but the performance
requirements, test methods, and warning provisions for the bassinet
itself will be handled in a separate rulemaking.
The key provisions of the current ASTM play yard standard include:
Definitions; general requirements; performance requirements; specific
test methods; and requirements for marking, labeling, and instructional
literature.
Definitions. The definition of ``play yard (aka playpen)'' is a
``framed enclosure that includes a floor and has mesh or fabric- sided
panels, primarily intended to provide a play or sleeping environment
for children. It may fold for storage or travel.''
General Requirements and Specific Test Methods. The play yard
standard contains general requirements that the product must meet, as
well as mandated test methods that must be used to ensure that the
product meets those requirements, including:
Requirements for corner posts;
Restrictions on sharp points and edges (as well as their
protective caps), small parts, lead paint, and flammable solids;
Specifications to prevent scissoring, shearing, and
pinching;
Requirements for toy accessory items;
Specifications on latching and locking mechanisms;
Specifications on openings (intended to prevent finger and
toe entrapment), labeling (intended to prevent labels from being
removed and ingested or aspirated on), coil springs and protrusions;
Requirements that the play yard be stable;
Requirements meant to protect a child from entrapment in
accessory items, such as a bassinet or changing table, as well as
requirements to protect a child from being strangled in a cord or strap
that accompanies the product or an accessory item (such as the
restraint straps on a changing table); and
Specifications for the mattress in a play yard.
Performance Requirements and Specific Test Methods. The play yard
standard provides performance requirements that the product must meet,
as well as mandated test methods that must be used to ensure that the
product meets the performance requirements, including:
A side height requirement (the side of the play yard must
be, at least, 20 inches from the top of the noncompressed mattress pad
to the top of the side rail);
Side deflection and strength requirements (the play yard
must be able to withstand testing without collapsing, and the hinge and
latch mechanisms must remain operational);
Floor strength requirements;
Requirements to address the material that covers the top
rail, as well as specifications for the mesh or fabric used in play
yards;
Requirements addressing mattress displacement;
Requirements to eliminate the risk that the side rails
will form a dangerous V-shape when collapsed; and
Requirements addressing corner bracket failures.
Order of Testing. ASTM F 406-11 also addresses the order of
testing. ASTM F 406-11 clarifies that the general requirements, such as
restrictions on corner posts, must be met both before and after the
performance requirement test methods have been completed.
Additionally, ASTM F 406-11 indicates that the tests to determine
[[Page 58170]]
compliance with the performance requirements must be conducted in the
order specified in the standard because the testing sequence can
influence the test results. Therefore, the standard lists tests in a
way such that the most potentially destructive tests are performed
last.
Marking, Labeling, and Instructional Literature. ASTM F 406-11 has
requirements for marking, labeling, and instructions that must
accompany a play yard, including warnings regarding proper use of
accessory attachment items, and warnings regarding suffocation hazards
that may arise if soft bedding is added to the product.
E. Assessment of Voluntary Standard ASTM F 406-11
We considered the fatalities, injuries, and noninjury incidents
associated with play yards, and we evaluated the voluntary standard to
determine whether ASTM F 406-11 addresses the incident or whether more
stringent standards are required that would further reduce the risk of
injury associated with the products. We discuss our assessment in this
section, but our assessment does not include deaths and injuries
associated with play yards where there was insufficient evidence to
determine the cause.
1. Unsafe Sleep Environment and Unsafe Sleep Practices
Unsafe sleep environments, such as sleep environments that contain
additional or soft bedding, and unsafe sleep practices, such as placing
infants to sleep on their stomach instead of their back, resulted in 27
fatalities and one very serious injury that required hospitalization
and resulted in brain damage to the child. Unsafe sleep environments
and unsafe sleep practices are not attributable to the design or
construction of play yards. ASTM F 406-11 includes product warnings
that address the hazards of soft bedding and the hazards associated
with placing a child to sleep on their stomach. We do not believe that
there are additional requirements that can be put in place in the
standard to address unsafe sleep environments and unsafe sleep
practices.
2. Hazardous Surroundings
Ten suffocation deaths were attributable to unsafe environments
around the play yard. Examples of hazardous surroundings include:
Window blind cords and computer cords that fall into a play yard,
forming a loop, and causing strangulations. Other deaths were caused
when caregivers placed an object on top of the play yard to keep the
child in the play yard, and fatalities resulted when children tried to
climb out of the play yard and became trapped between the cover and the
side rail. Risks due to hazardous surroundings are not attributable to
the design or construction of play yards. ASTM F 406-11 includes
product warnings that address the dangers of placing a product near
windows where cords can cause strangulation. ASTM F 406-11 also
includes a warning about the dangers of using improvised netting or
covers over play yards. We do not believe that there are additional
requirements that can be put in place in the standard to address this
issue.
3. Risks Associated With Children Climbing Out or Falling Out of a Play
Yard
Two children were killed when they were able to climb out or they
fell out of their play yard and accessed a pool. Both children drowned.
Additionally, five children were injured after climbing or falling out
of their play yard, including one injury that resulted in a serious
head injury and required hospitalization.
We considered alternatives that might make it less likely that a
child could climb or fall out of a play yard. For example, play yards
could be mandated to have higher sides, or manufacturers could provide
a ``lid'' or cover to the play yard. However, in both cases, we felt
that these solutions might create additional hazards. Higher sides
might make it more difficult for a caregiver to put the child inside
the play yard and might increase the chance that caregivers will find
alternative, but less safe, sleep environments (such as allowing
infants to sleep in adult beds). Requiring a lid or cover increases the
chances that the lid or cover will fail in some way, allowing children
to attempt to climb out of the product, only to become stuck between
the lid and the side rail, which could cause suffocation.
Therefore, we determined that warnings are the most appropriate way
to address climb-out and fall-out hazards. ASTM F 406-11 includes
product warnings indicating that play yards are designed for children
who are not able to climb out of the play yard. There are additional
warning requirements regarding removing any object that can serve as a
step that would enable a child to climb out of the play yard. We do not
believe that there are additional requirements that can be put in place
in the standard to address this issue.
4. Standing/Choking Deaths
Two toddlers were killed in a similar, but currently unexplained,
manner. In both situations, the toddler stood up in the play yard and
placed his or her neck against the side rail. In both situations, it is
believed that they leaned forward against the side rail (possibly to
reach an object that the child had thrown outside the play yard), lost
consciousness, and suffocated when the pressure from the side rail
compressed the airway. We have investigated both deaths and believe
that further review by CPSC staff is warranted to determine if the
design or construction of the play yard contributed to the deaths. If
we conclude that the design or construction of the play yard did
contribute to these deaths, we will determine whether additional
requirements are necessary. Because the causation of these incidents is
unclear, we are not proposing additional requirements in the standard
to address the possibility of standing/choking deaths at this time.
5. Side Rail Collapse
One child was killed when a play yard's side rails collapsed,
trapping the child and resulting in suffocation. Additionally, 124 of
the 165 nonfatal injury reports are attributable to side rail collapse.
One injury required hospitalization for a concussion. The largest
number of nonfatal incident reports (1,902 out of 2,079 reports) are
attributable to play yard side rail collapse. We reviewed these
incidents and have determined that the majority are caused by failure
of the side rail latch that keeps the side rail locked and in place.
Side collapse issues were addressed significantly in 1997, in ASTM
F 406-97, which required the side rails of play yards to have a locking
device in order to prevent the center hinge from collapsing and causing
the side rail to fall. In 1999, ASTM added a test method that required
the locking mechanism on the side rail hinges to withstand a force of
100 pounds, applied diagonally, without breaking or disengaging.
In August 2009, after a significant number of recalls involving
side collapse issues, ASTM published ASTM F 406-09, which included, for
the first time, a false latch test in the ASTM play yard standard. The
addition of the false latch test was designed to ensure that the top
rail does not give the appearance of being locked, when, in fact, the
locking device is not engaged completely.
The recalls related to side collapse, which prompted the change in
the 2009 ASTM standard include:
[[Page 58171]]
A January 2009 recall of 200,000 play yards. The CPSC
press release can be found here:
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml09/09098.html.
An April 2009 recall of 25,000 play yards. The CPSC press
release can be found here:
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml09/09187.html.
A July 2009 recall of about 1 million play yards. The CPSC
press release can be found here:
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml09/09265.html.
Additionally, ASTM F 406-11 includes a performance requirement and
test method that addresses a side rail collapse issue that was a
problem in the past but was never adequately addressed in past editions
of the ASTM play yard standard. In brief, when folding play yards were
relatively new products in the 1990s, some products did not include
features designed to prevent unintentional collapse of the side rails.
Some play yards collapsed into a V-shape. If a child's neck is caught
in the V-shape, the child could suffocate. Most producers of play yards
chose to stop designing products that could form a V-shape when the
side rails collapsed. The ASTM standard, however, was not revised to
ban this design. According to a CPSC press release, originally issued
on August 21, 1998, and last revised on May 10, 2004, 13 children died
from suffocation in play yards where the side rail collapsed into a V-
shape. (These fatalities are not included in the list of incident data
referenced throughout this document because they pre-date the creation
of the Early Warning System database [the database used to support the
regulatory work here]). The press release also mentioned that more than
1.5 million play yards with this dangerous design flaw have been
recalled in past years. The press release can be found at:
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml98/98156.html.
Thus, after a review of the incidents, as well as an assessment of
the locking and latching provisions, the false latch provision, and the
new provisions meant to prevent a side collapse that results in a V-
shape, we determined that these performance requirements and test
methods are sufficient to address play yard side rail collapse issues.
Thus, we are not proposing additional requirements at this time.
6. Hazards Related to Accessories
Play yards often are sold with accessory items, such as changing
tables and bassinets, which are meant to attach to the side rails of
the play yard. One child was killed when a dangling strap from a
changing table accessory formed a loop inside the occupant area of the
play yard, resulting in the child's strangulation. The play yard
involved in the fatality prompted a recall of 425,000 play yards. That
recall was issued on September 27, 2007. The CPSC press release for the
recall can be viewed at:
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml07/07315.html.
Additionally, there were two injuries caused by broken or hazardous
accessories.
In 2005, ASTM published ASTM F 406-05a, which included a section to
address entrapment in accessories. The requirement and the accompanying
test method were designed to ensure that accessories cannot create
openings that can entrap a child's head. In 2008, ASTM published ASTM F
406-08, which included a provision that prohibits the use on an
accessory of cords and straps that are capable of forming a loop that
could strangle a child. The 2008 ASTM standard also added requirements
for toy attachments intended to address incidents related to broken or
detached components from music boxes, mirrors, and toy holders.
We believe that these requirements are sufficient to address these
hazards, and we are not proposing additional requirements at this time.
7. Assembly Errors
One fatality and two injuries are attributable to assembly errors.
The death occurred when the mattress pad of the play yard was not
completely secured to the floor of the play yard. The child suffocated
in the pocket created between the unsecured pad and the floor of the
product.
An assembly error was the cause of one very serious injury, which
required a hospitalization and occurred when a child got his or her
finger caught in the gap between the corner bracket and the side rail
of the play yard as it was being assembled. The child suffered a severe
laceration that required medical attention.
ASTM F 406-11 contains provisions requiring clear, easy-to-read
assembly instructions. We believe that these requirements are
sufficient to address these hazards, and we are not proposing
additional requirements at this time.
8. Broken or Detached Component Parts Leading to Structural Failures
Eight injuries, including bruises and cuts, were caused by broken
or detached component parts, such as loose wheels or loose hardware,
which led lead to the product becoming unstable or collapsing. Most
incidents involved structural failure at the corner brackets of the
play yard, resulting in rivets pulling through the corner brackets,
cracking of the plastic under the rivets' heads, and rivets and plastic
pieces falling out of the corner bracket. This causes the play yard to
collapse.
We believe corner post failures are caused by repeated loading of
the side rails by one of the following methods:
Caregivers inadvertently and repeatedly leaning on the
side rails to reach the child or to use the bassinet or changing table
accessory;
Children who use the side rails for support while
standing; and/or
Accessories that are attached to and removed repeatedly
from the side rails and corner posts.
In 2010, CPSC staff recommended a new performance requirement and
test method to address this hazard, which was included for the first
time in ASTM F 406-11. We believe that these requirements are
sufficient to address these hazards, and we are not proposing
additional requirements at this time.
9. Mesh and Fabric Sides
Five injuries are related to the mesh or fabric sides of the play
yard, such as stitching that unraveled, tears in the fabric, mesh holes
that were too large and caught an infant's tooth, and mesh material
that was too abrasive.
ASTM F 406-11 contains several performance requirements and test
methods to address hazards caused by mesh or fabric. We believe that
these requirements are sufficient to address the associated hazards,
and we are not proposing additional requirements at this time.
10. Mattress Pad or Play Yard Floor Hazards
Five injuries are attributable to problems with the mattress pad or
floor of the play yard. Most of these incidents are related to mattress
displacement, which occurs when children are able to pull up the
mattress and become trapped between the floor of the play yard and the
mattress. The mattress of most play yards is attached to the product by
hook and loop straps, commonly referred to as ``Velcro'' straps. The
other commonly used method is a ``Velcro'' patch.
ASTM F 406-11 includes a performance requirement and a test method
that would require a play yard mattress to be able to withstand a
certain amount of force before it can be lifted high enough to allow a
child to become trapped between the mattress and the play yard floor.
We believe that these requirements are sufficient to address these
hazards, and we are not proposing additional requirements at this time.
[[Page 58172]]
11. Impact on Play Yard
There were four injuries that occurred in play yards because
children were standing up in a play yard, lost their balance, and fell.
ASTM F 406-11 does include product warnings that address the need to
provide supervision, as necessary, when the child is in the product,
particularly when the child is playing in the play yard. We believe
that these requirements are sufficient, and we are not proposing
additional requirements at this time.
12. Other Product-Related Concerns
Eight injuries were caused by other product-related problems, such
as sharp surfaces. For the incidents where we could determine the
problem's cause, we believe that the current requirements are
sufficient to address these hazards, and we are not proposing
additional requirements at this time.
F. Description of Proposed Changes to ASTM Standard
The proposed rule would create a new part 1221 titled, ``Safety
Standard for Play Yards.'' The proposal would establish ASTM F 406-11,
``Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Non-Full-Size Baby Cribs/
Play Yards,'' as a consumer product safety standard, but with certain
changes. We are proposing three changes to ASTM F 406-11, as it applies
to play yards. The provisions of ASTM 406-11 that apply to non-full-
size cribs have been excluded because those products are addressed in a
separate rulemaking.
Two of the three proposed changes would clarify the existing
provisions. Clarification will reduce potential misinterpretations that
could result in improper testing. Thus, these clarifications will
strengthen the standard and reduce the risk of injury by ensuring that
play yard testing is performed properly.
The last proposed change would affect the test method for
determining the strength of corner brackets. The method in ASTM F406-11
currently requires the tester to use a specific size clamp. The
proposed change would allow the tester some flexibility, within a
carefully selected range, in choosing the clamp to account for play
yards with hinges that vary in size. By allowing the tester to choose
the most appropriate clamp, we are strengthening the standard and
reducing the risk of injury by ensuring that the appropriate testing
equipment is used. Using the most appropriate testing equipment will
ensure that the test is performed properly and that only the safest
play yards will pass laboratory testing and enter the market.
We describe these proposed changes immediately below:
1. Clarifying the Equipment Needed To Perform the Floor Strength Test
(Section 8.12.1)
Currently, ASTM F 406-11 contains a performance standard to measure
the floor strength of a play yard. Section 8.12.1 of ASTM F 406-11
specifies the use of a ``Wood block, 6 by 6 in. (150 by 150 mm).''
However, the test method in ASTM F 406-11 requires the use of two wood
blocks to test the floor strength of the play yard. The proposed rule,
therefore, would clarify that ``2 Wood blocks'' are needed.
2. Clarifying the Floor Strength Test Method (Section 8.12.2.1)
The current text of the test method for measuring the floor
strength of play yards states that the tester must ``(p)lace a 50-lb
(23-kg) and a 30-lb (14-kg) weight each onto a 6 by 6-in. (150 by 150-
mm) wood block spaced 6 +/- \1/2\ in. (150 +\-13 mm) apart and maintain
for 60s.'' The proposed rule would simplify this sentence by dividing
it into three sentences by replacing it with the following: ``Place the
wood blocks 6 +/-\1/2\ inch (150 mm +/-13 mm) apart. Place 50-lb (23-
kg) weight on one wood block and a 30 lb (24 kg) weight on the other
wood block. Maintain for 60 s.'' This revision also clarifies that the
wood blocks should be put into position before the weight is applied.
3. The Shape and Area of the Clamping Surface for the ``Top Rail to
Corner Post Attachment Test'' (Section 8.30.3.1)
Currently, ASTM F 406-11 contains a performance standard to address
the structural failure of corner brackets of play yards. The test
method directs the tester to use clamps to apply a twisting motion to
the rail, which strains the corner brackets. The product will fail the
test if, for example, there is cracking of the corner brackets. The
current test method specifies the shape and area of the clamping
surfaces (2 by 2 in.). The proposed rule would allow the tester to
choose the shape and area of the clamping surface, within a specified
range (1-square-inch to 4 square inches) to accommodate the variety of
hinge latching devices in different models of play yards.
4. Exclusion of ASTM F 406-11 Sections That Are Applicable to Non-Rull-
Size Cribs
The proposed rule would pertain only to play yards. In the Federal
Register of December 28, 2010 (75 FR 81766), we issued a final rule on
safety standards for non-full-size cribs. Thus, the proposed rule would
exclude the provisions of ASTM F406-11 that apply to non-full-size
cribs. Specifically, the proposal would exclude sections 5.17, 5.19,
5.20, the entirety of section 6, section 8.1 through 8.10.5, and
section 10.1.1.1 of ASTM F 406-11. In addition, for section 9.4.2.10 of
ASTM F 406-11, the proposal would include only the first section, which
is a labeling requirement meant to inform consumers that only the
mattress or pad provided by the manufacturer should be used. The
remainder of section 9.4.2.10 of ASTM F 406-11 is applicable to non-
full-size cribs, and it would be excluded from the play yard standard.
G. Effective Date
The Administrative Procedure Act (``APA'') generally requires that
the effective date of the rule be at least 30 days after publication of
the final rule. 5 U.S.C. 553(d). To allow time for play yards to come
into compliance, we intend for the standard to become effective 6
months after the publication of the final rule in the Federal Register.
We invite comment on how long it will take play yard manufacturers to
come into compliance.
H. Regulatory Flexibility Act
1. Introduction
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 we prepare an initial regulatory flexibility analysis and make it
available to the public for comment when the 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:
A description of, and where feasible, an estimate of the
number of small entities to which the proposed rule will apply;
A description of the reasons why action by the agency is
being considered;
A succinct statement of the objectives of, and legal basis
for, the proposed rule;
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
[[Page 58173]]
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
and, at the same time, reduce the economic impact on small businesses.
2. The Market
Based on a 2005 survey conducted by American Baby Group titled,
``2006 Baby Products Tracking Study'' and Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention birth data, we estimate that approximately 2.9 million
play yards are sold in the United States each year. We estimate that
there are at least 23 manufacturers or importers supplying play yards
to the United States market. Eleven of these firms are domestic
manufacturers, and 10 of these firms are domestic importers. Two of the
firms are foreign importers.
Under the U.S. Small Business Administration (``SBA'') guidelines,
a manufacturer of play yards is small if it has 500 or fewer employees,
and an importer is considered small if it has 100 or fewer employees.
Based on these guidelines, 10 domestic manufacturers and all 10 of the
domestic importers known to supply play yards to the U.S. market are
small businesses. The remaining entities include a large domestic
manufacturer and two foreign importers. There may be additional unknown
small manufacturers and importers operating in the U.S. market.
The Juvenile Product Manufacturers Association (``JPMA'') runs a
voluntary certification program for juvenile products. Certification
under the JPMA program is based on the ASTM voluntary play yard
standard. Eleven of the 23 manufacturers or importers have been
certified as compliant with the ASTM voluntary play yard standard by
the JPMA. Three additional manufacturers or importers claim to comply
with the ASTM voluntary play yard standard, but they do not participate
in the JPMA certification program. In some cases, these three
manufacturers or importers may provide test results on-line. Seven
small domestic manufacturers supplying play yards to the U.S. market
claim to comply with the ASTM voluntary play yard standard. Of the
importers, six claim to comply with the ASTM voluntary play yard
standard.
3. Impact of the Proposal on Small Business
Section 104 of the CPSIA requires the CPSC to promulgate standards
for durable infant or toddler products, including play yards. The
impact of this rulemaking, if finalized, could have a significant
impact on several small manufacturers and importers whose play yards
are not ASTM-compliant. The impact of the proposed standard on small
manufacturers and importers will differ, based on whether their
products are already in compliance with the ASTM voluntary play yard
standard.
Of the 10 small domestic manufacturers, seven produce play yards
that are certified as compliant by JPMA or claim to be in compliance
with the voluntary standard. There will be little or no impact on these
firms. The three noncompliant manufacturers may need to modify their
product substantially to meet the ASTM standard. The costs associated
with these modifications might include product redesign. The redesign
could be minor if, for example, the manufacturer needs to use
additional or different fabric or mesh. However, the changes could be
more significant if a redesign of the product frame is required. The
impact of these costs may be mitigated if they are treated as new
product expenses and amortized.
Of the 10 small domestic importers, six import play yards that are
certified as compliant by JPMA or claim to be in compliance with the
voluntary standard. The four noncompliant importers may need to find an
alternative source if their existing supplier does not modify their
play yards to comply with the standard. However, the impact of that
decision could be mitigated by replacing the noncompliant product with
a compliant product made by a different manufacturer. Deciding to
import an alternative product would be a reasonable and realistic way
to offset any lost revenue.
Two of the noncompliant importers import products from a specific
foreign country. For these entities, finding an alternative supply
source may not be an option. However, they could stop importing
noncompliant play yards and replace them with other juvenile products.
The information in this section assumes that three domestic
manufacturers and four domestic importers do not comply with the
voluntary standard. This may not be the case. We have identified many
cases where products that are not certified by JPMA, or do not
otherwise claim compliance with the voluntary standard, actually meet
the relevant standard. To the extent that this is true, the impact of
the proposed rule will be less significant than described.
4. Alternatives
For the 13 small domestic entities that already comply with the
voluntary standard, there are few or no costs associated with the three
minor changes being proposed. For the seven small domestic entities
that are not compliant (or where it is unknown if they are compliant)
the adoption of the voluntary standard as a mandatory consumer product
safety standard could result in substantial costs.
For these entities, setting an effective date longer than 6 months
could reduce the impact. This would allow small manufacturers
additional time to make necessary changes to their product, and it
would allow small importers to find alternative sources. It would also
allow entities to spread costs over a longer period of time.
5. Conclusion of Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
It is possible that the proposed standard, if finalized, could have
a significant impact on some small businesses whose play yards are not
ASTM-compliant. The extent of these costs is unknown. For manufacturers
of noncompliant play yards, product redesign might be necessary, and it
is possible that the costs could be large for some entities. Importers
may need to find alternative sources of play yards. Additionally, all
manufacturers and importers will eventually be subject to third party
testing and certification requirements, as discussed in section L
below.
We invite comments describing the possible impact of this rule on
manufacturers and importers, as well as comments containing other
information describing how this rule will affect small businesses.
I. Environmental Considerations
The Commission's regulations address whether we are required to
prepare an environmental assessment or an environmental impact
statement. If our rule has ``little or no potential for affecting the
human environment'' it will be categorically exempted from this
requirement. 16 CFR 1021.5(c)(1). The proposed rule falls within the
categorical exemption.
J. Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule contains information collection requirements
that are subject to public comment and
[[Page 58174]]
review by the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). In this
document, pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D), we set forth:
A title for the collection of information;
A summary of the collection of information;
A brief description of the need for the information and
the proposed use of the information;
A description of the likely respondents and proposed
frequency of response to the collection of information;
An estimate of the burden that shall result from the
collection of information; and
Notice that comments may be submitted to the OMB.
Title: Safety Standard for Play Yards.
Description: The proposed rule would require each play yard to
comply with ASTM F 406-11, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for
Non-Full-Size Baby Cribs/Play Yards. Sections 9 and 10 of ASTM F 406-11
contain requirements for marking, labeling, and instructional
literature. These requirements fall within the definition of
``collection of information,'' as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3).
Description of Respondents: Persons who manufacture or import play
yards.
Estimated Burden: 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
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1221.2(a).......................................................... 9 3 27 1 27
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our estimates are based on the following:
Section 9.1.1.1 of ASTM F 406-11 requires that the name and the
place of business (city, state, mailing address, including zip code, or
telephone number) of the manufacturer, distributor, or seller be marked
clearly and legibly on each product and its retail package. Section
9.1.1.2 of ASTM F 406-11 requires a code mark or other means that
identifies the date (month and year, as a minimum) of manufacture.
There are 23 known entities supplying play yards to the U.S.
market. Fourteen entities produce labels that comply with the standard.
Thus, there would be no additional burden on these entities. Under the
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 required to comply are
``usual and customary.'' Therefore, because these 14 entities already
produce labels that comply with the standard, we tentatively estimate
that there are no burden hours associated with Sections 9.1.1.1 and
9.1.1.2 of ASTM F 406-11 because any burden associated with supplying
these labels would be ``usual and customary'' and not within the
definition of ``burden'' under the OMB's regulations.
We assume that the remaining nine entities use labels on their
products and their packaging but might need to modify their existing
labels. The estimated time required to make these modifications is
about 1 hour per model. Each entity supplies an average of three
different models of play yards; therefore, the estimated burden hours
associated with labels is 1 hour per model x 9 entities x 3 models per
entity = 27 hours.
We estimate that the hourly compensation for the time required to
create and update labels is $27.98. This is based on data from March
2011, provided by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The information
is available at: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec/pdf in Table
9, under the heading ``all workers, goods-producing industries'' and
the subheading ``sales and office.'' Therefore, the estimated annual
cost to industry associated with the proposed labeling requirements is
$755.46 ($27.98 per hour x 27 hours = $755.46).
Section 10.1 of ASTM F 406-11 requires instructions to be supplied
with the product. Play yards are products that generally require
assembly, and products sold without such information would not be able
to compete successfully with products supplying this information. Under
the 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 required to comply are
``usual and customary.'' Therefore, because we are unaware of play
yards that generally require some installation, but lack any
instructions to the user about such installation, we tentatively
estimate that there are no burden hours associated with section 10.1 of
ASTM F 406-11 because any burden associated with supplying instructions
with play yards would be ``usual and customary'' and not within the
definition of ``burden'' under the OMB's regulations.
Based on this analysis, the proposed standard for play yards would
impose a burden to industry of 27 hours at a cost of $755.46 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 the OMB for review. Interested persons are requested to
submit comments regarding information collection by October 20, 2011,
to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB (see the
ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this notice).
Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), we invite comments on:
Whether the collection of information is necessary for the
proper performance of the CPSC's functions, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
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;
Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected;
Ways to reduce the burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques,
when appropriate, and other forms of information technology; and
the estimated burden hours associated with label
modification, including any alternative estimates.
K. Preemption
Section 26(a) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2075(a), provides that where a
consumer product safety standard is in effect and applies to a product,
no state or political subdivision of a state may either
[[Page 58175]]
establish or continue in effect a requirement dealing with the same
risk of injury unless the state requirement is identical to the federal
standard. Section 26(c) of the CPSA also provides that states or
political subdivisions of states may apply to the Commission for an
exemption from this preemption under certain circumstances. Section
104(b) of the CPSIA refers to the rules to be issued under that section
as ``consumer product safety rules,'' thus implying that the preemptive
effect of section 26(a) of the CPSA would apply. Therefore, a rule
issued under section 104 of the CPSIA will invoke the preemptive effect
of section 26(a) of the CPSA when it becomes effective.
L. Certification
Section 14(a) of the 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 in section A of this preamble, section 104(b)(1)(B) of the
CPSIA refers to standards issued under this section as ``consumer
product safety standards.'' Similarly, such standards also would be
subject to section 14 of the CPSA. Therefore, any such standard would
be considered a ``consumer product safety rule'' to which products
subject to the rule must be certified.
Because play yards are children's products, they must be tested by
a third party conformity assessment body whose accreditation is
accepted by the Commission. In the future, the Commission will issue a
notice of requirements to explain how laboratories can become
accredited as third party conformity assessment bodies to test play
yards to the new safety standard. (Play yards also must comply with all
other applicable CPSC requirements, such as the lead content and
phthalate content requirements in section 101 and 108 of CPSIA
respectively; the tracking label requirement in section 14(a)(5) of the
CPSA; and the consumer registration form requirements in section 104 of
the CPSIA.)
M. Request for Comments
This proposed rule begins a rulemaking proceeding under section
104(b) of the CPSIA to issue a consumer product safety standard for
play yards. We invite all interested persons to submit comments 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.
List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 1221
Consumer protection, Imports, Incorporation by reference, Infants
and Children, Labeling, Law enforcement, and Toys.
Therefore, the Commission proposes to amend Title 16 of the Code of
Federal Regulations by adding a new part 1221 to read as follows:
PART 1221--SAFETY STANDARD FOR PLAY YARDS
Sec.
1221.1 Scope.
1221.2 Requirements for play yards.
Authority: The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008,
Pub. L. 110-314, Sec. 104, 122 Stat. 3016 (August 14, 2008).
Sec. 1221.1 Scope.
This part establishes a consumer product safety standard for play
yards.
Sec. 1221.2 Requirements for Play Yards.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each play
yard must comply with all applicable provisions of ASTM F 406-11,
Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Non-Full-Size Baby Cribs/
Play Yards, approved on May 15, 2011. 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 from ASTM
International, 100 Bar Harbor Drive, P.O. Box 0700, West Conshohocken,
PA 19428; http://www.astm.org/cpsc.htm. You may inspect a copy at the
Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room
502, 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 the ASTM F 406-11 standard with the following
additions or exclusions:
(1) Do not comply with section 5.17 of ASTM F 406-11.
(2) Do not comply with section 5.19 of ASTM F 406-11.
(3) Do not comply with section 5.20 of ASTM F 406-11.
(4) Do not comply with section 6, Performance Requirements for
Rigid Sided Products, of ASTM F 406-11, in its entirety.
(5) Do not comply with sections 8.1 through 8.10.5 of ASTM F 406-
11.
(6) Instead of complying with section 8.12.1 of ASTM F 406-11,
comply with the following:
(i) 8.12.1 Equipment - 2 Wood blocks, 6 by 6 in. (150 by 150 mm).
(7) Instead of complying with section 8.12.2.1 of ASTM F 406-11,
comply with the following:
(i) 8.12.2.1 Remove cushions that are not part of the floor or
mattress support. Place the wood blocks 6 +/- \1/2\ inch (150 mm +/- 13
mm) apart. Place 50-lb (23-kg) weight on one wood block and a 30- lb
(24 kg) weight on the other wood block. Maintain for 60 s. Perform the
test in those locations deemed to be the weakest or the most likely to
fail. Remove the load and check for structural failure.
(8) Instead of complying with section 8.30.3.1 of ASTM F 406-11,
comply with the following:
(i) 8.30.3.1 Mount a rigid and substantially horizontal moment arm
weighing less than 5 lb (2.2 kg) to the hinge/latching device at the
longitudinal center of the top rail through two clamping surfaces, each
1 in\2\-4 in\2\ (6.5 cm\2\-26 cm\2\) designed to firmly grasp the hinge
latching device. The moment arm shall be at least 24 in (603 mm) long
and extend towards the outside of the play yard.
(9) Instead of complying with section 9.4.2.10 of ASTM F 406-11,
comply with only the following:
(i) 9.4.2.10 For products that have a separate mattress that is not
permanently fixed in place:
Use ONLY mattress/pad provided by manufacturer.
(10) Do not comply with section 10.1.1.1 of ASTM F 406-11.
Dated: September 15, 2011.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission.
[FR Doc. 2011-24101 Filed 9-19-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
|
