Safety Standard for Hand-Held Infant Carriers, 73415-73424 [2013-29061]

Agencies

• Consumer Product Safety Commission

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 235 (Friday, December 6, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 73415-73424]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29061]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

16 CFR Parts 1112 and 1225

[CPSC Docket No. CPSC-2012-0068]


Safety Standard for Hand-Held Infant Carriers

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Danny Keysar Child Product Safety Notification Act, 
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 issuing a safety 
standard for hand-held infant carriers in response to the direction 
under section 104(b) of the CPSIA. The rule would incorporate ASTM 
F2050-13a by reference, with one modification.

DATES: The rule will become effective on June 6, 2014. The 
incorporation by reference of the publication listed in this rule is 
approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of June 6, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julio Alvarado, Compliance Officer, 
Office of Compliance and Field Operations, U.S. Consumer Product Safety 
Commission, 4330 East-West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; email: 
jalvarado@cpsc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background and Statutory Authority

    The CPSIA (Pub. L. 110-314) was enacted on August 14, 2008. Section 
104(b) of the CPSIA requires the Commission to: (1) Examine and assess 
the effectiveness of voluntary consumer product safety standards for 
durable infant or toddler products, in consultation with 
representatives of consumer groups, juvenile product manufacturers, and 
independent child product engineers and experts; and (2) 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. Infant carriers are one of the products specifically 
identified in section 104(f)(2)(H) as a durable infant or toddler 
product. The Commission has identified four types of products that 
could fall within the infant carrier product category, including: Frame 
backpack carriers, soft infant and toddler carriers, slings, and hand-
held infant carriers. This rule addresses hazards associated only with 
hand-held infant carriers. Hazards associated with other types of 
carriers would be

[[Page 73416]]

addressed in separate rulemaking proceedings.
    On December 10, 2012, the Commission issued a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPR) for hand-held infant carriers. 77 FR 73354. The NPR 
proposed to incorporate by reference the then current voluntary 
standard, ASTM F2050-12, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for 
Hand-Held Infant Carriers, with certain modifications to strengthen the 
ASTM standard. One proposed modification provided for a change in the 
warning label to better address suffocation and restraint-related 
hazards. The other proposed modification addressed the testing 
procedures for the carry handle auto-locking requirement and specified 
using an aluminum cylinder as the surrogate for the occupant of the 
carrier rather than a CAMI Mark II 6-month infant dummy (CAMI dummy).
    Since the Commission published the NPR, ASTM has revised ASTM F2050 
twice. On July 1, 2013, ASTM approved an updated version of the 
voluntary standard, ASTM F2050-13, which includes the warning label 
modification proposed in the NPR. On September 1, 2013, ASTM approved 
another revision of the voluntary standard, ASTM F2050-13a, which 
includes a carry handle auto-locking performance requirement that is 
different than the requirement proposed in the NPR. As explained in 
section VII of this preamble, the Commission agrees with the auto-
locking requirement in ASTM F2050-13a. The draft final rule 
incorporates by reference the most recent version of the ASTM standard, 
ASTM F2050-13a, with one modification--a clarification of the 
definition of ``hand-held infant carrier,'' to include a specific 
reference to both ``rigid-sided'' and ``semi-rigid-sided'' products.

II. The Product

    ASTM F2050-13a defines a ``hand held infant carrier'' as a 
``freestanding, rigid-sided product intended to carry an occupant whose 
torso is completely supported by the product to facilitate 
transportation by a caregiver by means of hand-holds or handles.'' The 
ASTM voluntary standard published in August 2012, for the first time 
referenced two types of hand-held infant carriers: Hand-held bassinets/
cradles and hand-held carrier seats. The current ASTM voluntary 
standard defines ``hand-held carrier seat'' as a ``hand-held infant 
carrier having a seat back that is intended to be in a reclined 
position (more than 10[deg] from horizontal),'' and ``hand-held 
bassinet/cradle'' is defined as ``a freestanding product, with a rest/
support surface to facilitate sleep (intended to be flat or up to 
10[deg] from horizontal), that sits directly on the floor, without legs 
or a stand, and has hand-holds or handle(s) intended to allow carrying 
an occupant whose torso is completely supported by the product.'' Hand-
held carrier seats often are used as infant car seats, or as 
attachments to strollers or high chairs bases. Some of the requirements 
in F2050-13a are different for hand-held bassinets/cradles and hand-
held infant carriers because the intended position of the occupant 
(lying supine vs. sitting reclined) and the product designs used to 
accommodate the occupant can create different hazards.
    A Moses basket is a freestanding product with a rest/support 
surface to facilitate sleep and has hand-holds or handles intended to 
allow carrying an occupant. Some Moses baskets are rigid-sided, but 
most have semi rigid sides. In the NPR, the Commission sought comment 
on whether Moses baskets are or should be covered by this safety 
standard. The Commission also asked: (1) If Moses baskets should be 
included in this safety standard, does the present definition cover 
Moses baskets, and (2) if the present definition does not cover Moses 
baskets, how should the standard be amended to cover Moses baskets? The 
Commission received no comments in response to these questions and will 
clarify the definition of ``hand-held infant carrier'' in the rule to 
specify that the definition includes both ``rigid-sided'' and ``semi-
rigid-sided'' products.

III. Incident Data

    The preamble to the NPR summarized incident data involving 
bassinets and cradles reported to the Commission as of June 8, 2012. 77 
FR 73354 (December 10, 2012). The NPR stated that, according to reports 
to the CPSC, 242 incidents involving hand-held infant carriers occurred 
between January 1, 2007 and June 7, 2012. Of the 242 incidents, there 
were 36 fatalities, 60 nonfatal injuries, and 146 incidents where no 
injury occurred or was reported. Staff attributed the majority of the 
fatalities to the improper use or nonuse of the carrier's restraint 
system.
    CPSC's Directorate for Epidemiology, Division of Hazard Analysis 
has updated this information to include hand-held infant carrier-
related incident data reported to the Commission from June 8, 2012 
through June 21, 2013. A search of the CPSC epidemiological databases 
showed that there were 10 new incidents related to hand-held infant 
carriers reported during this time frame. Seven of the 10 were fatal, 
and three were nonfatal. None of the nonfatal incidents involved 
injuries. All of the new incidents reportedly occurred in late 2011 and 
2012. Reporting is ongoing, however, so the incident totals are subject 
to change.

A. Fatalities Reported Since the NPR

    Most of the more recently reported seven fatalities involved a 
product-related issue. The ages of the decedents ranged from one month 
to 15 months. Staff attributes the majority of the fatalities to the 
improper use or nonuse of the carrier's restraint system. The incident 
reports indicate the following circumstances in these fatalities:
     Infant was unrestrained and found in a prone position with 
the seat tipped over;
     infant was unrestrained and found with its face pressed 
into the side of the seat;
     infant strangled to death when restrained by the shoulder 
straps only and moved forward in the seat and was caught in the throat 
by the chest clip that connects the shoulder straps;
     infant was strapped into a hand-held infant carrier that 
was placed on a bed and overturned;
     infant was reported to have become entrapped in the 
carrier by other unsupervised children; although information on the 
exact manner of entrapment was unavailable;
     insufficient information to identify conclusively a hazard 
pattern but may have been the result of misuse of the product;
     insufficient information to identify hazard pattern.

B. Nonfatal Incidents Reported Since the NPR

    There were three hand-held carrier-related nonfatal incidents 
reported to the Commission from June 8, 2012 through June 21, 2013. All 
of the incidents occurred in 2012; none of these involved an injury. 
Two of the incident reports stated that the carrier handle broke. The 
third report was a complaint about the poor quality and design of a 
Moses basket carrier.

C. Hazard Pattern Identification

    Staff did not identify any new hazard patterns among the 10 
incident reports that CPSC staff received since the Commission 
published the hand-held infant carrier NPR. In order of frequency of 
incident reports, staff grouped the hazard patterns of the incidents 
reported since the NPR into the following categories:
    1. Restraint issues: Three of the incidents--all fatalities--were 
associated with the incorrect use or nonuse of the harness straps. In 
two of

[[Page 73417]]

these fatal incidents, the decedent was not restrained in the carrier 
at all. The decedents were found later to have turned over to a prone 
position, face down on a soft surface. One death resulted when the 
infant was left in the seat with only the shoulder straps connected, 
but unrestrained at the crotch strap, which allowed the infant to slide 
forward in the seat, just enough to get caught at the throat by the 
chest clip and become strangled.
    2. Handle problems: Two incident reports state that the handle 
broke. One of these incidents involved a product that was already 
recalled for handle problems. There were no injuries reported in these 
incidents.
    3. Issues with carrier design: There was one fatality in this 
category, which resulted when the occupied carrier was left on a soft 
surface (i.e., a bed), tipped upside down, and trapped the infant. In 
addition, one noninjury report complained about the poor and unsafe 
design of a Moses basket carrier.
    4. Hazardous environment: One fatality resulted from an infant 
becoming trapped in the hand-held carrier by other unsupervised 
children. Details of the manner in which the entrapment occurred were 
unavailable.
    5. Other product-related issue: One fatality report indicated that 
misuse of the product may have contributed to the incident; however, 
not enough information was available for CPSC staff to identify 
conclusively the hazard pattern involved.
    6. Other/unknown issue: One fatality was reported with an 
undetermined official cause of death. There was insufficient evidence 
of any product involvement or the presence of any hazardous external 
circumstances.

IV. Overview of ASTM F2050

    ASTM F2050, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Hand-Held 
Infant Carriers, establishes safety performance requirements, test 
methods, and labeling requirements to minimize the identified hazard 
patterns associated with the use of hand-held infant carriers. The 
voluntary standard for hand-held infant carriers was first approved and 
published in August 2000, as ASTM F2050-00, Standard Consumer Safety 
Performance Specification for Hand-Held Infant Carriers. ASTM has 
revised the standard six times since then. ASTM F2050-13 was approved 
on July 1, 2013, and the current version, ASTM F2050-13a, was approved 
on September 1, 2013. The more significant requirements of ASTM F2050 
include:
     Scope--describes the types of products intended to be 
covered under the standard.
     Testing of the handle auto-locking mechanism--is intended 
to prevent unintentional rotation of the carrier and resulting 
expulsion of the child when the caregiver picks up the carrier by the 
handle and the handle is not in a locked position.
     Testing of the integrity of the handle--is intended to 
prevent unintentional separation of the handle from the carrier while 
in use.
     Occupant restraints--are intended to prevent incidents in 
which improper use of restraints has resulted in the entrapment and 
strangulation of children.
     Slip-resistance requirement--is intended to prevent the 
carrier from sliding when placed on a slightly inclined surface.
     Warning label--is intended to address: (1) Improper use of 
restraints (to prevent strangulation and other injuries), and (2) 
improper placement of the carrier on an elevated surface (to prevent 
fall injuries).
    The voluntary standard also includes: (1) Torque and tension tests 
to prevent components from being removed; (2) requirements to prevent 
entrapment and cuts (minimum and maximum opening size, small parts, 
hazardous sharp edges or points, and edges that can scissor, shear, or 
pinch); (3) requirements for the permanency and adhesion of labels; and 
(4) requirements for instructional literature.

V. The NPR and ASTM 2050-12

    The NPR proposed to incorporate by reference ASTM F2050-12 as a 
consumer product safety standard, with two modifications:
    1. Warning Label: The NPR proposed requiring a strangulation 
warning label to be affixed to the outer surface of the cushion or 
padding of a hand-held carrier seat in or adjacent to the area where 
the child's head would rest. Under the proposal, the warning label for 
hand-held carrier seats that are intended to be used as restraints in 
motor vehicles would include a pictogram, while the warning label for 
hand-held carrier seats not intended to be used as restraints in motor 
vehicles would not include the pictogram because these seats do not 
have the chest clips depicted in the pictogram.
    2. Handle Auto-Lock Test: The NPR proposed a modification of the 
test method for preventing the carrier from rotating and spilling an 
unrestrained infant when a caregiver picks up the carrier and the 
handle is not locked in the carry position. The test method in ASTM 
F2050-12 required the tester to use a standard CAMI dummy as an infant 
surrogate. The NPR proposed a change that would require the tester to 
use an aluminum cylinder designed as a surrogate for a 6-month-old 
infant, in lieu of the CAMI dummy, because testing had revealed that 
the CAMI dummy could be wedged into the seat padding or otherwise 
manipulated, so that the CAMI dummy did not fall out during the lift 
test when the CAMI dummy otherwise should fall. Furthermore, the 
Commission was concerned that the ability to pass or fail the test 
based on friction or placement of the CAMI would affect the consistency 
and repeatability of the test results.
    The NPR also asked for comments regarding whether Moses baskets 
should be included in this safety standard, and if so, whether we 
should revise the definition of ``hand-held infant carrier'' to cover 
Moses baskets.

VI. ASTM F2050-13a

    ASTM approved the current voluntary standard for hand-held infant 
carriers, ASTM F2050-13a, on September 1, 2013. ASTM balloted the NPR's 
provisions concerning the warning label requirement in 2013, and the 
provisions are now included in the latest revision of the voluntary 
standard, ASTM 2050-13a.
    Several comments received in response to the NPR suggested that the 
aluminum cylinder was not an appropriate surrogate for use in the 
handle auto-lock test and maintained that other surrogates, including 
the CAMI dummy, would produce more repeatable and consistent test 
results if properly placed in the carrier. After considering these 
comments and the results of additional testing performed since the 
Commission published the NPR, Commission staff determined that using 
the CAMI dummy, with certain modifications to the test procedure, would 
produce more repeatable and consistent test results. ASTM F2050-13a 
retains the use of the CAMI dummy as the surrogate occupant and 
clarifies how the dummy should be situated in the seat during testing. 
The revised requirement also:
     Specifies using webbing instead of hooks for lifting the 
carrier during the test;
     specifies that a pneumatic cylinder be used to provide the 
force needed for the lift; and
     narrows the lift speed range.

VII. Responses to Comments

    The Commission received five comments on the NPR, including: one

[[Page 73418]]

from a consumer's group (Consumers Union); one from the Juvenile 
Products Manufacturers Association (JPMA); and three from hand-held 
infant carrier manufacturers. The comments raised several issues, which 
resulted in ASTM changing the handle auto-lock test procedures and 
including guidance for the placement of the CAMI dummy in the seat 
during the handle-auto lock test in ASTM F2050-13a. Several commenters 
made general statements supporting the overall purpose of the proposed 
rule. All of the comments can be viewed at: www.regulations.gov, by 
searching under the docket number of the rulemaking, CPSC-2012-0068. 
Following is a summary of, and responses to, the comments.

Handle Auto-Locking Test--CAMI Dummy v. Aluminum Cylinder

    Comment: Two commenters supported the proposal to use the aluminum 
cylinder surrogate instead of the CAMI dummy during the handle auto-
locking test. The other three commenters opposed using the aluminum 
cylinder surrogate. Specific concerns with the cylinder included: (1) 
The cylinder is not the same shape as a child and can roll from side to 
side during testing; (2) the weight distribution and center of gravity 
of the cylinder are different for a child, and the cylinder can tip 
forward in an unrealistic manner during testing; and (3) testing with 
the cylinder can be dangerous because the cylinder can fall out of the 
carrier during testing and potentially injure a tester. The three 
commenters who raised concerns about using the cylinder as a surrogate 
in the handle auto-locking test preferred using the CAMI dummy as the 
surrogate for this test. One commenter suggested that whichever 
surrogate was specified, more detail be provided for placing the 
surrogate into the carrier before the lift test. One commenter 
suggested that CPSC should allow ASTM additional time to develop a test 
procedure that will provide more repeatable results.
    Response: Since publication of the NPR, Commission staff has 
reviewed the comments, witnessed additional testing, and participated 
in discussions at ASTM hand-held infant carrier subcommittee and task 
group meetings. Based on this additional work, the Commission agrees 
with the three commenters who stated that using the cylinder during 
testing would produce unrepeatable results for some carriers. The 
Commission believes that most of the issues presented by use of the 
CAMI dummy can be addressed with clarifications and modifications to 
the ASTM test procedure set forth in ASTM F2050-12 so that the test 
produces more repeatable and reliable results. ASTM revised the 
requirement in the most recent version of F2050, and staff believes the 
revision, as now stated in ASTM F2050-13a, is adequate to address the 
hazards associated with unlocked carry handles. Therefore, the final 
rule does not does not require any changes to the carry handle auto-
locking requirement but incorporates by reference the latest version of 
the standard, ASTM F2050-13a.

Fall Hazard Warning

    Comment: One commenter recommended that the Commission strengthen 
the warning regarding the fall hazard to discourage more strongly 
caregivers placing the carrier on elevated surfaces. The language in 
ASTM F2050-12 (the version in effect at the time of the NPR) stated: 
``Fall Hazard: Child's movement can slide carrier. NEVER place carrier 
near edges of counter tops, tables, or other elevated surfaces.''
    Response: The Commission agrees with the commenter that the fall 
hazard warning stated in ASTM F2050-12 was not sufficiently strong. 
Leaving hand-held carriers on elevated surfaces is a foreseeable 
behavior, and the warning language should highlight the importance of 
not leaving the carriers on elevated surfaces. ASTM F2050-13a revises 
this warning. The warning language in ASTM's `13a version is presented 
below:
    8.3.2.5 Fall Hazard: Child's activity can move carrier. Never place 
carrier on counter tops, tables, or any other elevated surfaces.

The Commission agrees with the change in the ASTM standard, and thus, 
no further modifications are necessary in response to this comment.

Location of the Strangulation Warning Label

    Comment: One commenter expressed concern that the requirement that 
the label be placed ``in or adjacent to the area where the child's head 
would rest'' does not specify sufficiently the proper placement of the 
label, and therefore, the label could be obscured when a child is in 
the seat. The commenter suggested requiring the label to be placed 
``adjacent to where the infant's head or torso would rest with or 
without the child installed in the seat.'' The commenter explained that 
this change would permit the caregiver to see the warning label at all 
times and allow the manufacturer the space and flexibility to place the 
label in a location that is effective, without impacting NHTSA's airbag 
warning label.
    Response: The requirement in ASTM F2050-13a specifying the location 
for the warning label mirrors NHTSA's airbag warning label requirement. 
The Commission believes the warning label location requirement clearly 
describes the proper location of the label and further believes that 
adopting the commenter's suggestion may create confusion regarding the 
placement of the label and may reduce the warning's effectiveness if a 
manufacturer decides to locate the label toward the lower end of the 
infant carrier. The Commission agrees with the current language in ASTM 
F2050-13a and believes that the warning label is more likely to be seen 
if placed on the outer surface of the cushion or padding, in or 
adjacent to where child's head rests, and also believes that there is 
sufficient area in that part of the seat to accommodate both NHTSA's 
and ASTM's labels independently. Therefore, the Commission declines to 
make the change suggested by the commenter.

Alert Mechanism

    Comment: One commenter suggested that the Commission look for 
feasible means to bolster the protection against the hazards posed by 
improper use of the harness restraint system, by requiring an alert 
mechanism that would clearly signal or indicate whether a harness 
restraint system is properly secured.
    Response: Although alerting the user to the existence of improperly 
secured or unsecured harnesses would be beneficial, the Commission is 
uncertain how to accomplish this. Visual indicators are unlikely to get 
the attention of the user, and an auditory signal (similar to vehicle 
seat belt reminders) would require a power source that would energize 
the alert mechanism when the carrier is inside and outside of a 
vehicle. Adding a power source to the child restraint would require a 
redesign that may fall under NHTSA's jurisdiction.

Effective Date

    Comment: One commenter supported the proposed six-month effective 
date. Another commenter requested an 18-month effective date, assuming 
that the final rule would reference the use of the cylinder as the 
surrogate for the carry handle auto-locking test. The commenter seeking 
an 18-month effective date expressed concern that requiring the 
cylinder might necessitate substantial design changes.
    Response: Because the Commission has determined that the CAMI dummy 
will be used as a surrogate in the carry handle auto-locking test, the

[[Page 73419]]

commenter's basis for requesting an 18-month effective date no longer 
exists. A six-month effective date should be sufficient for 
manufacturers of hand-held infant carriers to comply with the rule.

Moses Baskets

    We did not receive any comments concerning Moses baskets. Despite 
the lack of comments, the Commission has determined that a revision to 
the definition of ``hand-held infant carrier'' is warranted to clarify 
that Moses baskets are subject to the standard. The final rule modifies 
the definition of ``hand-held infant carrier'' as follows (underline 
represents additional wording): ``Hand-held infant carrier--a 
freestanding, rigid- or semi-rigid-sided product intended to carry an 
occupant whose torso is completely supported by the product to 
facilitate transportation by a caregiver by means of hand-holds or 
handles.''

VIII. Assessment of Voluntary Standard ASTM F2050-13a and Description 
of Final Rule

    Consistent with section 104(b) of the CPSIA, this rule establishes 
new 16 CFR part 1225, ``Safety Standard for Hand-Held Infant 
Carriers.'' The new part incorporates by reference the requirements for 
hand-held infant carriers in ASTM F2050-13a, with one modification to 
clarify that semi-rigid sided products, such as Moses baskets, are 
included in the scope of the rule. The following discussion describes 
the final rule, the changes, and the additions to the ASTM 
requirements.

A. Scope (Sec.  1225.1)

    The final rule states that part 1225 establishes a consumer product 
safety standard for hand-held infant carriers manufactured or imported 
on or after the date that is six months after the date of publication 
of a final rule in the Federal Register.

B. Incorporation by Reference (Sec.  1225.2)

    Section 1225.2(a) explains that, except as provided in Sec.  
1225.2(b), each hand-held infant carrier must comply with all 
applicable provisions of ASTM F2050-13a, ``Standard Consumer Safety 
Specification for Hand-Held Infant Carriers,'' which is incorporated by 
reference. Section 1225.2(a) also provides information on how to obtain 
a copy of the ASTM standard or to inspect a copy of the standard at the 
CPSC. The Commission received no comments on this provision in the NPR, 
but the Commission is changing the language in the incorporation in the 
final rule to refer to ASTM F2050-13a, the current version of the ASTM 
standard.

C. Changes to Requirements of ASTM F2050-13a

    The final rule modifies the definition of ``hand-held infant 
carrier'' to clarify that the definition includes products with semi 
rigid sides, as well as products that are rigid-sided. ASTM revised the 
hand-held infant carrier standard in 2012, to include a separate 
definition for ``hand-held bassinets/cradles.'' A Moses basket meets 
the definition of a ``hand-held bassinet'' because a Moses basket is a 
freestanding product with a rest/support surface that is no more than 
10[deg] from horizontal, that sits directly on the floor, without legs 
or a stand, and has handles or hand-holds intended to allow carrying an 
occupant whose torso is completely supported by the product. However, 
because hand-held infant carriers (of which hand-held bassinets/cradles 
are a subset) are defined in part as ``a rigid-sided product'' and many 
Moses baskets have flexible sides, some manufacturers and importers may 
have interpreted the standard as excluding semi-rigid-sided products 
such as Moses baskets. Because Moses baskets meet the definition of 
``hand-held bassinet/cradle,'' and Moses baskets are not subject to any 
other durable children's product standard (specifically ASTM F2194-13, 
Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Bassinets and Cradles), the 
Commission has determined that Moses baskets are within the scope of 
the rule. The modification of the definition of ``hand-held infant 
carrier'' to include semi rigid-sided products clarifies that Moses 
baskets are covered by the rule.

IX. 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 hand-held carriers to 
come into compliance, the final rule provides that the standard will 
become effective 6 months after publication in the Federal Register for 
products manufactured or imported after that date.

X. Regulatory Flexibility Act

A. Introduction

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, requires 
agencies to consider the impact of rules on small entities, including 
small businesses. Section 604 of the RFA requires that agencies prepare 
a final regulatory flexibility analysis when the agency promulgates a 
final rule, unless the head of the agency certifies that the rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The final regulatory flexibility analysis must describe the 
impact of the rule on small entities and identify any alternatives that 
may reduce the impact. Specifically, the final regulatory analysis must 
contain:
     A succinct statement of the objectives of, and legal basis 
for, the rule;
     a summary of the significant issues raised by public 
comments in response to the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, a 
summary of the assessment of the agency of such issues, and a statement 
of any changes made in the proposed rule as a result of such comments;
     a description of, and, where feasible, an estimate of, the 
number of small entities to which the rule will apply;
     a description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, 
and other compliance requirements of the 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
     a description of the steps the agency has taken to reduce 
the significant economic impact on small entities, consistent with the 
stated objectives of applicable statutes, including a statement of the 
factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the alternative 
adopted in the rule, and why each one of the other significant 
alternatives to the rule considered by the agency, which affect the 
impact on small entities, was rejected.

B. The Market

    The majority of hand-held infant carriers are produced and/or 
marketed by juvenile product manufacturers and distributors. A 
potential exception is the Moses basket, which is often marketed by 
bedding manufacturers and distributors. The Commission estimates that 
currently, there are at least 47 suppliers of hand-held infant carriers 
to the U.S. market. Fifteen are domestic manufacturers, 22 are domestic 
importers, and 1 is a domestic firm with an unknown supply source. In 
addition, eight foreign firms distribute products from outside of the 
United States (four manufacturers, two importers, one retailer, and one 
firm with an unknown supply source). One firm, about which the staff 
has little information, sells hand-held infant carriers through an 
online marketplace. An additional 24 domestic firms supply Moses basket

[[Page 73420]]

bedding, along with Moses baskets. Staff does not know the source of 
the Moses baskets supplied by these 24 firms.
    We expect that the products of 29 of the 47 hand-held infant 
carrier suppliers will be compliant with ASTM F2050-13a (7 are JPMA 
certified to F2050; 6 claim compliance with F2050; and 16 have ASTM-
compliant strollers with hand-held infant carrier attachments). We do 
not believe that any of the Moses baskets currently on the market 
comply with the voluntary standard; however, the requirements that 
apply to Moses baskets involve slip resistance, adding warnings, and 
instructional literature. Staff believes that the majority of Moses 
baskets on the market would not require adjustments to meet the slip 
resistance requirement, and that adding warnings and instructional 
literature would not be costly.
    The product ownership data available is limited to infant car 
seats, which represented nearly the entire hand-held infant carrier 
market prior to the publication of ASTM F2050-12, which expanded the 
scope of the standard to include hand-held bassinets and cradles. 
According to a 2005 survey conducted by the American Baby Group (2006 
Baby Products Tracking Study), 68 percent of new mothers own infant car 
seats. Approximately 25 percent of infant car seats were handed down or 
purchased secondhand. Thus, about 75 percent of infant car seats were 
acquired new. This suggests annual sales of about 2.1 million infant 
car seats (.68 x .75 x 4 million births per year). (U.S. Department of 
Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
(CDC), National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics 
System, ``Births: Final Data for 2010,'' National Vital Statistics 
Reports Volume 61, Number 1 (August 28, 2012): Table I. Number of 
births in 2010 is rounded from 3,999,386.) These 2 million infant car 
seats represent the minimum number of units sold per year that might be 
affected by the hand-held infant carrier standard. We do not know how 
many Moses baskets and other bassinet/cradle-style carriers are sold 
annually.

C. Reason for Agency Action and Legal Basis for Rule

    The Danny Keysar Child Product Safety Notification Act, section 104 
of the CPSIA, requires the CPSC to promulgate a mandatory standard for 
hand-held infant carriers that is substantially the same as, or more 
stringent than, the voluntary standard. CPSC worked closely with ASTM 
to develop the new requirements and test procedures that have been 
added to the voluntary standard since 2010. These new requirements 
address several known hazard patterns and will help to reduce injuries 
and deaths in hand-held carriers, and they have resulted in the current 
voluntary standard, F2050-13a, upon which the rule is based.
    The final rule modifies the definition of ``hand-held infant 
carrier'' in ASTM F2050-13a to clarify that the standard includes 
products with semi rigid sides, as well as products that are rigid-
sided. This modification resulted from the Commission receiving no 
comments in response to the NPR's question whether Moses baskets should 
be included within the scope of this rule and the Commission's 
determination that Moses baskets (which typically have semi rigid as 
opposed to rigid sides) should be covered by the rule.

D. Requirements of the Rule

    The final rule adopts the voluntary ASTM standard for hand-held 
infant carriers (ASTM F2050-13a), with a modification of the definition 
of ``hand-held infant carrier,'' as discussed above. Some of the more 
significant requirements of the current voluntary standard for hand-
held infant carriers are listed below:
     Carry handle integrity--a series of endurance and 
durability tests is intended to prevent rigid, adjustable handles from 
breaking or unlocking during use.
     Carry handle auto-locking--intended to address incidents 
that have occurred when the rigid, adjustable handles switched 
positions unexpectedly.
     Restraints-- intended to minimize the fall hazard 
associated with inclined hand-held carriers, while simultaneously 
minimizing the potential for injury or death in flat bassinet/cradle 
products where restraints can pose a strangulation hazard.
     Slip resistance--intended to prevent slipping when the 
hand-held infant carrier is placed on a slightly inclined surface (10 
degrees).
     Marking and labeling requirements--intended to provide 
tracking information, as well as hazard warnings.
    The voluntary standard also includes: (1) Torque and tension tests 
to prevent components from being removed; (2) requirements for several 
hand-held infant carrier features to prevent entrapment and cuts 
(minimum and maximum opening size, coverage of exposed coil springs, 
small parts, hazardous sharp edges or points, smoothness of wood parts, 
and edges that can scissor, shear, or pinch); (3) marking and labeling 
requirements; (4) requirements for the permanency and adhesion of 
labels; (5) requirements for instructional literature; and (6) toy 
accessory requirements. ASTM F2050-13a includes no reporting or 
recordkeeping requirements.
    The final rule does not alter ASTM F2050-13a, except to clarify 
that the definition of ``hand-held infant carrier'' includes products 
with semi rigid sides, as well as products that are rigid-sided. We do 
not expect this modification to the final rule to have a negative 
economic impact on firms because it is a clarification of the intended 
scope, rather than a change. In the 2012 version of the hand-held 
carrier standard (F2050-12), ASTM changed the standard to include a 
separate definition for ``bassinet-style carriers,'' which may have 
been interpreted by some manufacturers to include Moses baskets. The 
Commission proposed the same scope in the NPR but requested comments on 
including Moses baskets. In the absence of comments, the Commission 
determined that Moses baskets were intended to and should be included 
in the scope and that the definition of a ``hand-held infant carrier'' 
should be modified to include ``semi rigid-sided,'' as well as ``rigid-
sided'' products, consistent with the scope's intent.

E. Other Federal or State Rules

    Two federal rules would interact with the hand-held infant carrier 
mandatory standard: (1) 16 CFR part 1107, Testing and Labeling 
Pertaining to Product Certification (1107 rule or testing rule); and 
(2) 16 CFR part 1112, Requirements Pertaining to Third Party Conformity 
Assessment Bodies (1112 rule).
    The 1107 rule implementing sections 14(a)(2) and 14(i)(2) of the 
Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA), as amended by the CPSIA, became 
effective on February 13, 2013. Section 14(a)(2) of the CPSA requires 
every manufacturer of a children's product that is subject to a product 
safety rule to certify, based on third party testing, that the product 
complies with all applicable safety rules. Section 14(i)(2) of the CPSA 
requires the Commission to establish protocols and standards: (i) For 
ensuring that a children's product is tested periodically and when 
there has been a material change in the product; (ii) for the testing 
of representative samples to ensure continued compliance; (iii) for 
verifying that a product tested by a conformity assessment body 
complies with applicable safety rules; and (iv) for safeguarding 
against the exercise of undue influence on a conformity

[[Page 73421]]

assessment body by a manufacturer or private labeler.
    Because hand-held infant carriers will be subject to a mandatory 
children's product safety rule, the product will also be subject to the 
third party testing requirements of section 14(a)(2) of the CPSA and 
the 1107 rule when the hand-held infant carrier mandatory standard and 
the notice of requirements (NORs) become effective.
    The 1112 rule, which became effective on June 10, 2013, established 
requirements for the accreditation of third party conformity assessment 
bodies to test for conformance with a children's product safety rule in 
accordance with section 14(a)(2) of the CPSA. The final rule also 
codified all of the NORs that the CPSC had published, to date. However, 
any new NORs require an amendment to this rule. Therefore, this rule 
amends 16 CFR part 1112 to establish the requirements for accepting the 
accreditation of a conformity assessment body to test for compliance 
with the hand-held infant carrier final rule.

F. Impact of the Rule on Small Business

    There are at least 47 firms currently known to be marketing hand-
held infant carriers in the United States, as well as 24 firms 
supplying Moses basket bedding and Moses baskets whose source is 
unknown. Under U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) guidelines, a 
manufacturer of hand-held infant carriers is small if the firm has 500 
or fewer employees, and importers and wholesalers are considered small, 
if they have 100 or fewer employees. Based on these guidelines, about 
50 of the firms known to be marketing hand-held infant carriers in the 
United States are small firms--10 domestic manufacturers, 17 domestic 
importers, 1 domestic firm with an unknown supply source, and 22 firms 
supplying Moses basket/bedding suppliers. There may also be additional 
small hand-held infant carrier suppliers operating in the U.S. market.
Small Manufacturers
Direct Costs From the Rule
    The expected impact on small manufacturers of the standard will 
differ based on whether the firm's hand-held infant carriers already 
comply with F2050-12. Firms whose hand-held infant carriers meet the 
requirements of F2050-12 are likely to continue to comply with the 
voluntary standard as ASTM publishes new versions of the ASTM standard. 
In addition, firms currently in compliance are likely to meet any new 
standard within six months after approval because six months is the 
established amount of time that JPMA allows for products in JPMA's 
certification program to shift to a new standard. Compliance with the 
voluntary standard in the six-month time frame is part of an 
established business practice. Additionally, modifying warning labels 
and updating instructional literature should not result in significant 
expenditures for most firms. As a result, the direct impact of the rule 
on manufacturers whose products are likely to meet the requirements of 
ASTM F2050-13a (eight of ten small domestic manufacturers) is not 
likely to be significant. One or more firms might have to modify their 
carry handles to continue to pass the auto-locking test, but staff 
believes that a complete product redesign should not be necessary. 
Thus, for manufacturers whose products are likely to meet the 
requirements of ASTM F2050-13a (eight of ten firms), staff estimates 
little or no incremental impact on the costs of producing hand-held 
infant carriers.
    For either or both of the hand-held infant carrier suppliers staff 
believes do not comply with the current version of the voluntary 
standard, however, meeting ASTM F2050-13a's requirements could 
necessitate product redesign. A redesign would be minor if most of the 
changes involve adding straps and fasteners or using different mesh or 
fabric; but could be more significant if changes to the frame are 
required, including changes to the handles. Some firms have estimated 
product redesigns, including engineering time, prototype development, 
tooling, and other incidental costs, to cost approximately $500,000. 
Consequently, the final rule could potentially have a significant 
direct impact on small manufacturers whose products currently do not 
conform to the voluntary standard, depending on the scope of the 
redesign that ultimately is necessary. Where the products need not be 
completely redesigned, actual costs are likely to be lower than the 
$500,000 level.
    Even though the hand-held infant carriers sold by two firms are 
neither certified as compliant, nor claim compliance with F2050-12, the 
products may, in fact, comply with the current standard. Staff has 
identified many such cases with other products. To the extent that some 
of these firms may supply compliant hand-held infant carriers and have 
developed a pattern of compliance with the voluntary standard, the 
direct impact of the standard will be less significant than described 
above.
Indirect Costs From Testing and Certification
    In addition to the direct impact of the standard described above, 
the rule will have indirect impacts. These impacts are considered 
indirect because they do not arise directly as a consequence of the 
hand-held infant carrier rule's requirements. Nonetheless, they could 
be significant. Once the rule becomes final and the NOR is in effect, 
all manufacturers will be subject to the additional costs associated 
with the third party testing and certification requirements. These 
costs will include any physical and mechanical test requirements 
specified in the final rule; lead and phthalates testing is already 
required, and hence, related costs are not included here.
    Based on durable nursery product industry input and confidential 
business information supplied for the development of the third party 
testing rule, testing to the ASTM voluntary standard could cost $500-
$1,000 per model sample. Testing overseas could potentially reduce some 
testing costs, but such testing may not always be practical.
    On average, each small domestic manufacturer supplies two different 
models of hand-held infant carriers to the U.S. market annually. 
Therefore, if third party testing were conducted every year on a single 
sample for each model, third party testing costs for each manufacturer 
would be about $1,000-$2,000 annually. Based on a review of firm 
revenues, the impact of third party testing to ASTM F2050-13a is 
unlikely to be significant if only one hand-held infant carrier sample 
per model is necessary to comply with the third party testing 
requirements. However, if more than one sample would be needed to meet 
the testing requirements, that third party testing costs potentially 
could have a significant impact on one or more of the small 
manufacturers.
Small Importers
    As with manufacturers of compliant hand-held infant carriers, we do 
not believe that the eight small importers of hand-held infant carriers 
currently in compliance with F2050-12 will experience significant 
direct impacts as a result of the final rule. In the absence of 
regulation, these importing firms would likely continue to their 
established practice of complying with the voluntary standard as the 
standard evolves.
    Importers of hand-held infant carriers would need to find an 
alternate supply source if their existing supplier does not comply with 
the requirements of the

[[Page 73422]]

rule, which may be the case with all four small importers of hand-held 
infant carriers, whom we believe do not comply with F2050-12. Some of 
these importers could react to the rule by discontinuing the import of 
noncomplying hand-held infant carriers, possibly discontinuing the 
product line altogether. However, the impact of such a decision could 
be mitigated by replacing the noncompliant hand-held infant carriers 
with compliant hand-held infant carriers. Deciding to import an 
alternative product would be a reasonable and realistic way to offset 
any lost revenue. However, for some importers, switching suppliers 
might not be an option.
    As is the case with manufacturers, all importers will be subject to 
third party testing and certification requirements, and consequently, 
importers will incur costs similar to those for manufacturers if their 
supplying foreign firm(s) does not perform third party testing. The 
resulting costs could have a significant impact on a few small 
importers who must perform the testing themselves, if more than one 
sample per model is required.
Moses Basket Suppliers
    Staff also assessed the potential impact of the rule on firms that 
supply Moses baskets. There are 22 known small firms supplying Moses 
baskets to the U.S. market. Most of these firms also supply bedding; 
some of them manufacture the bedding, and others act as importers. 
Because a separate definition for ``hand-held bassinets'' was added to 
the standard relatively recently in 2012, and some manufacturers may be 
uncertain whether Moses baskets (a type of hand-held bassinet) are 
covered by the standard because they are not rigid-sided, Moses baskets 
currently on the market may not have been designed to comply with this 
standard.
    Many Moses baskets on the market, however, might be able to comply 
with the standard with minimal modifications. For example, although 
Moses baskets would not be subject to most of the hand-held carrier 
standard's performance requirements, Moses baskets would likely have to 
meet the slip-resistance requirement. Because typical Moses baskets are 
fabricated from textured materials, we believe that these products 
likely would not require modifications to meet the slip-resistance 
requirement (that the product does not slip on surface 10 degrees from 
horizontal while facing forward, sideways, and to the rear). Therefore, 
the biggest changes might be to add warnings and instructional 
literature, actions that the staff expects would not be costly.
    Alternatively, Moses basket suppliers could remove themselves from 
the scope of the final rule by eliminating the handles from their 
products. Because most Moses baskets come with warnings against 
carrying an infant in the basket, eliminating handles would conform to 
those instructions.
    All Moses basket manufacturers within the scope of the rule will be 
subject to third party testing and certification requirements. 
Importers of Moses baskets could experience testing costs if their 
supplying firm does not perform third party testing. Because Moses 
baskets would not be subject to most of the mechanical tests in the 
standard, we expect that third party testing costs, at most, will be 
half the amount of other types of hand-held infant carriers, or 
approximately $250-$500 per model sample. Review of each firm's product 
line reveals that most firms use only one model of Moses basket for 
their bedding; although some firms have up to four variations of Moses 
baskets. The resulting costs are unlikely to have a significant impact 
on firms that must perform the testing themselves.

G. Alternatives

    An alternative to the rule would be to set an effective date later 
than six months, which is generally considered sufficient time for 
suppliers to come into compliance with a rule. Setting a later 
effective date would allow suppliers additional time to develop 
compliant hand-held infant carriers and spread the associated costs 
over a longer period of time.

XI. Environmental Considerations

    The Commission's regulations address whether we are required to 
prepare an environmental assessment or an environmental impact 
statement. These regulations provide a categorical exclusion for 
certain CPSC actions that normally have ``little or no potential for 
affecting the human environment.'' Among those actions are rules or 
safety standards for consumer products. 16 CFR 1021.5(c)(1). The rule 
falls within the categorical exclusion.

XII. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This 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 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 
3501-3521). The preamble to the proposed rule (77 FR at 73363 through 
73364) discussed the information collection burden of the proposed rule 
and specifically requested comments on the accuracy of our estimates. 
Briefly, sections 8 and 9 of ASTM F2050-13a 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).
    In compliance with the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), we have submitted 
the information collection requirements of this rule to the OMB for 
review. OMB has assigned control number 3041-0158 to this information 
collection. The Commission did not receive any comments regarding the 
information collection burden of this proposal. However, the final rule 
makes modifications regarding the information collection burden because 
the number of estimated suppliers subject to the information collection 
burden is now estimated to be 71 firms, rather than the 43 firms 
initially estimated in the proposed rule.
    Accordingly, the estimated burden of this collection of information 
is modified 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...............................................................              71                2              142                1              142
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our estimates are based on the following:
    Section 8.1 of ASTM F 2050-13a requires that the name of the 
manufacturer, distributor, or seller, and either the place of business 
(city, state, and mailing address, including zip code) or telephone 
number, or both, be

[[Page 73423]]

marked clearly and legibly on each product and its retail package. 
Section 8.2 of ASTM F 2050-13a requires a code mark or other means that 
identifies the date (month and year, as a minimum) of manufacture.
    There are 71 known entities supplying hand-held infant carriers to 
the U.S. market. All 71 firms are assumed to use labels already on both 
their products and their packaging, but they might need to modify 
existing labels. The estimated time required to make these 
modifications is about 1 hour per model. Each entity supplies an 
average of two different models of hand-held infant carriers; 
therefore, the estimated burden associated with labels is 1 hour per 
model x 71 entities x 2 models per entity = 142 hours. We estimate the 
hourly compensation for the time required to create and update labels 
is $27.44 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, ``Employer Costs for 
Employee Compensation,'' March 2013, Table 9, total compensation for 
all sales and office workers in goods-producing private industries: 
https://www.bls.gov/ncs/). Therefore, the estimated annual cost to 
industry associated with the labeling requirements is $3,896.48 ($27.54 
per hour x 142 hours = $3,896.48). There are no operating, maintenance, 
or capital costs associated with the collection of information.
    Section 9.1 of ASTM F2050-12 requires the supply of instructions 
with the product. Hand-held infant carriers often require installation 
or assembly, and products sold without such information would not be as 
attractive to consumers as 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 hand-held 
infant carriers that generally require installation or some assembly 
but lack any instructions to the user about such installation or 
assembly, we estimate that there are no burden hours associated with 
section 9.1 of ASTM F 2050-12 because any burden associated with 
supplying instructions with hand-held infant carriers would be ``usual 
and customary'' and not within the definition of ``burden'' under the 
OMB's regulations.

XIII. 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 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 the rule becomes effective.

XIV. Certification and Notice of Requirements (NOR)

    Section 14(a)(2) of the CPSA requires that children's products 
subject to a children's 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)(2). For children's 
products, such certification must be based 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 I of this preamble, section 
104(b)(1)(B) of the CPSIA refers to standards issued under this section 
as ``consumer product safety standards.'' Accordingly, a safety 
standard for hand-held infant carriers issued under section 104 of the 
CPSA is a consumer product safety rule that is subject to the testing 
and certification requirements of section 14 of the CPSA. Because hand-
held infant carriers are children's products, they must be tested by a 
third party conformity assessment body whose accreditation has been 
accepted by the CPSC. Notices of requirements (NORs) provide the 
criteria and process for our acceptance of accreditation of third party 
conformity assessment bodies.
    The Commission published a final rule, Requirements Pertaining to 
Third Party Conformity Assessment Bodies, 78 FR 15836 (March 12, 2013), 
which is codified at 16 CFR part 1112 (referred to here as part 1112). 
This rule became effective on June 10, 2013. Part 1112 establishes 
requirements for accreditation of third party conformity assessment 
bodies (or laboratories) to test for conformance with a children's 
product safety rule in accordance with Section14(a)(2) of the CPSA. 
Part 1112 also codifies a list of all of the NORs that the CPSC had 
published at the time part 1112 was issued. All NORs issued after the 
Commission published part 1112, such as the hand-held infant carrier 
standard, require the Commission to amend part 1112. Accordingly, this 
rule amends part 1112 to include the hand-held infant carrier standard 
in the list with the other children's product safety rules for which 
the CPSC has issued NORs.
    Laboratories applying for acceptance as a CPSC-accepted third party 
conformity assessment body to test to the new standard for hand-held 
infant carriers are required to meet the third party conformity 
assessment body accreditation requirements in 16 CFR part 1112. When a 
laboratory meets the requirements as a CPSC-accepted third party 
conformity assessment body, the laboratory can apply to the CPSC to 
have 16 CFR part 1225, Safety Standard for Hand-Held Infant Carriers 
included in the scope of accreditation of CPSC safety rules listed for 
the laboratory on the CPSC Web site at: www.cpsc.gov/labsearch.
    In connection with the part 1112 rulemaking, CPSC staff conducted 
an analysis of the potential impacts on small entities of the rule 
establishing accreditation requirements, 78 FR 15836, 15855-58 (March 
12, 2013), as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act and prepared a 
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA). Briefly, the FRFA 
concluded that the requirements would not have a significant adverse 
impact on a substantial number of small laboratories because no 
requirements are imposed on laboratories that do not intend to provide 
third party testing services under section 14(a)(2) of the CPSA. The 
only laboratories that are expected to provide such services are those 
that anticipate receiving sufficient revenue from providing the 
mandated testing to justify accepting the requirements as a business 
decision. Laboratories that do not expect to receive sufficient revenue 
from these services to justify accepting these requirements would not 
likely pursue accreditation for this purpose. Similarly, amending the 
part 1112 rule to include the NOR for the hand-held infant carrier 
standard would not have a significant adverse impact on small 
laboratories. Most of these laboratories will have already been 
accredited to test for conformance to other juvenile product standards, 
and the only costs to them would be the cost of adding the hand-held 
infant carrier standard to their scope of accreditation. As a 
consequence, the Commission certifies

[[Page 73424]]

that the NOR for the hand-held infant carrier standard will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    To ease the transition to new third party testing requirements for 
hand-held infant carriers subject to the standard and to avoid a 
``bottlenecking'' of products at laboratories at or near the effective 
date of required third party testing for hand-held infant carriers, the 
Commission, under certain circumstances, will accept certifications 
based on testing that occurred before the effective date for third 
party testing.
    The Commission will accept retrospective testing for 16 CFR part 
1225, safety standard for hand-held infant carriers, if the following 
conditions are met:
     The children's product was tested by a third party 
conformity assessment body accredited to ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E) by a 
signatory to the ILAC-MRA at the time of the test. The scope of the 
third party conformity body accreditation must include testing in 
accordance with 16 CFR part 1225. For firewalled third party conformity 
assessment bodies, the firewalled third party conformity assessment 
body must be one that the Commission, by order, has accredited on or 
before the time that the children's product was tested, even if the 
order did not include the tests contained in the safety standard for 
hand-held infant carriers at the time of initial Commission acceptance. 
For governmental third party conformity assessment bodies, 
accreditation of the body must be accepted by the Commission, even if 
the scope of accreditation did not include the tests contained in the 
safety standard for hand-held infant carriers at the time of initial 
CPSC acceptance.
     The test results show compliance with 16 CFR part 1225.
     The hand-held infant carrier was tested on or after the 
date of publication in the Federal Register of the final rule for 16 
CFR part 1225 and before June 6, 2014.
     The laboratory's accreditation remains in effect through 
June 6, 2014.

List of Subjects

16 CFR Part 1112

    Administrative practice and procedure, Audit, Consumer protection, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Third party conformity 
assessment body.

16 CFR Part 1225

    Consumer protection, Imports, Incorporation by reference, Infants 
and children, Labeling, Law enforcement, and Toys.

    Therefore, the Commission amends Title 16 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations by amending part 1112 and adding a new part 1225 to read as 
follows:

PART 1112--REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO THIRD PARTY CONFORMITY 
ASSESSMENT BODIES

0
1. The authority citation for part 1112 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Pub. L. 110-314, section 3, 122 Stat. 3016, 3017 
(2008); 15 U.S.C. 2063.

0
2. Amend Sec.  1112.15 by adding paragraph (b)(34) to read as follows:


Sec.  1112.15  When can a third party conformity assessment body apply 
for CPSC acceptance for a particular CPSC rule and/or test method?

* * * * *
    (b)
    (34) 16 CFR part 1225, Safety Standard for Hand-Held Infant 
Carriers.
* * * * *

0
3. Add part 1225 to read as follows:

PART 1225--SAFETY STANDARD FOR HAND-HELD INFANT CARRIERS

Sec.
1225.1 Scope.
1225.2 Requirements for hand-held infant carriers.

    Authority:  Pub. L. 110-314, sec. 104, 122 Stat. 3016 (August 
14, 2008).


Sec.  1225.1  Scope.

    This part establishes a consumer product safety standard for hand-
held infant carriers.


Sec.  1225.2  Requirements for hand-held infant carriers.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each hand-
held infant carrier must comply with all applicable provisions of ASTM 
F 2050-13a, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Hand-Held Infant 
Carriers, approved on September 1, 2013. 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; https://www.astm.org. You may inspect a copy 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: https://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    (b) Instead of complying with section 3.1.3 of ASTM F2050-13a, 
comply with the following:
    (1) 3.1.3 hand-held infant carrier, n--a freestanding, rigid- or 
semirigid-sided product intended to carry an occupant whose torso is 
completely supported by the product to facilitate transportation by a 
caregiver by means of hand-holds or handles.
    (2) [Reserved]

    Dated: December 2, 2013.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission.
[FR Doc. 2013-29061 Filed 12-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P