Safety Standard for Portable Hook-On Chairs, 38041-38050 [2015-16330]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules
specified in the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
DC8–57A102, dated February 12, 2008. Do all
corrective actions before further flight.
Thereafter, repeat the inspections at the
applicable intervals specified in paragraph
1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin DC8–57A102, dated February 12,
2008, until paragraph (j) of this AD is done.
external ETLF inspection at the applicable
intervals specified in 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of
Boeing Service Bulletin DC8–57–104, dated
August 18, 2014. If any cracking is found
during any ETLF inspection required by this
paragraph, before further flight, repair the
crack using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (m) of this AD.
(h) Retained Exception for Compliance Time
This paragraph restates the exception
specified in paragraph (g) of AD 2008–26–07,
Amendment 39–15773 (73 FR 78946,
December 24, 2008). Where Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin DC8–57A102, dated
February 12, 2008, specifies a compliance
time ‘‘after the date on this service bulletin,’’
this AD requires compliance within the
specified compliance time after January 28,
2009 (the effective date of AD 2008–26–07).
(l) Exception to the Compliance Time
Where Boeing Service Bulletin DC8–57–
104, dated August 18, 2014, specifies a
compliance time ‘‘after the original issue date
of this service bulletin,’’ this AD requires
compliance within the specified compliance
time after the effective date of this AD.
(i) Retained Exception for Corrective Action
This paragraph restates the exception
specified in paragraph (h) of AD 2008–26–07,
Amendment 39–15773 (73 FR 78946,
December 24, 2008): If any cracking is found
during any inspection required by paragraph
(g) of this AD, and Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin DC8–57A102, dated February 12,
2008, specifies to contact Boeing for
appropriate action: Before further flight,
repair the cracking using a method approved
in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (m) of this AD.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(j) New Inspections and Corrective Action
(1) For Groups 1–3, Configuration 1
Airplanes: At the applicable time specified in
paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing
Service Bulletin DC8–57–104, dated August
18, 2014, except as required in paragraph (l)
of this AD, do an inspection for any cracking,
and do all applicable corrective actions using
a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (m) of this
AD.
(2) For Groups 1–3, Configuration 2
Airplanes: At the applicable time specified in
paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing
Service Bulletin DC8–57–104, dated August
18, 2014, except as required in paragraph (l)
of this AD, do an eddy current high
frequency (ETHF) inspection for any cracking
of the fastener open holes common to the
lower skins, stringers, and splice fittings at
station Xw=408 and Xw=¥408 from stringer
51 to stringer 65, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Service Bulletin DC8–57–104, dated August
18, 2014. If any cracking is found, before
further flight, repair the crack using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (m) of this AD.
(k) New Doubler and Fastener Installation
and Eddy Current Low Frequency (ETLF)
Inspection of the External Doubler and
Corrective Action
If no crack is found during the inspection
required by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD: At the
applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E.,
‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin
DC8–57–104, dated August 18, 2014, install
external doublers and fasteners, and do an
external doubler ETLF inspection around the
fasteners for any cracking. Repeat the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:02 Jul 01, 2015
Jkt 235001
(m) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector
or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in
paragraph (n)(1) of this AD. Information may
be emailed to 9-ANM-LAACO-AMOCREQUESTS@faa.gov.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable
level of safety may be used for any repair
required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has
been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles
ACO, to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the
approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(4) AMOCs approved for AD 2008–26–07,
Amendment 39–15773 (73 FR 78946,
December 24, 2008), are approved as AMOCs
for the corresponding provisions of this AD.
(5) Except as required by paragraphs (j) and
(k) of this AD: For service information that
contains steps that are labeled as Required
for Compliance (RC), the provisions of
paragraphs (m)(5)(i) and (m)(5)(ii) apply.
(i) The steps labeled as RC, including
substeps under an RC step and any figures
identified in an RC step, must be done to
comply with the AD. An AMOC is required
for any deviations to RC steps, including
substeps and identified figures.
(ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in
accordance with the operator’s maintenance
or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the RC steps,
including substeps and identified figures, can
still be done as specified, and the airplane
can be put back in an airworthy condition.
(n) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Chandra Ramdoss, Aerospace
Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120L,
FAA, Los Angeles ACO, 3960 Paramount
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
38041
Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712–4137;
telephone: 562–627–5239; fax: 562–627–
5210; email: Chandraduth.Ramdos@faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, Boeing Commercial Airplanes,
Attention: Data & Services Management, 3855
Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800–0019, Long
Beach, CA 90846–0001; telephone 206–544–
5000, extension 2; fax 206–766–5683;
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You
may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 24,
2015.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2015–16154 Filed 7–1–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
COMMISSION
16 CFR Parts 1112 and 1233
[Docket No. CPSC–2015–0016]
Safety Standard for Portable Hook-On
Chairs
Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Danny Keysar Child
Product Safety Notification Act, section
104 of the Consumer Product Safety
Improvement Act of 2008 (‘‘CPSIA’’),
requires the United States Consumer
Product Safety Commission
(‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘CPSC’’) to
promulgate consumer product safety
standards for durable infant or toddler
products. These standards are to be
‘‘substantially the same as’’ applicable
voluntary standards or more stringent
than the voluntary standard if the
Commission concludes that more
stringent requirements would further
reduce the risk of injury associated with
the product. The Commission is
proposing a safety standard for portable
hook-on chairs (‘‘hook-on chairs’’) in
response to the direction under section
104(b) of the CPSIA. In addition, the
Commission is proposing an
amendment to include an additional
CFR part in the list of notice of
requirements (‘‘NORs’’) issued by the
Commission.
SUMMARY:
Submit comments by September
15, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Comments related to the
Paperwork Reduction Act aspects of the
marking, labeling, and instructional
literature requirements of the proposed
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
mandatory standard for hook-on chairs
should be directed to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, the
Office of Management and Budget, Attn:
CPSC Desk Officer, FAX: 202–395–6974,
or emailed to oira_submission@
omb.eop.gov.
Other comments, identified by Docket
No. CPSC–2015–0016, may be
submitted electronically or in writing:
Electronic Submissions: Submit
electronic comments to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
The Commission does not accept
comments submitted by electronic mail
(email), except through
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 by mail/hand delivery/
courier to: Office of the Secretary,
Consumer Product Safety Commission,
Room 820, 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 proposed
rulemaking. All comments received may
be posted without change, including
any personal identifiers, contact
information, or other personal
information provided, to: https://
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: https://
www.regulations.gov, and insert the
docket number, CPSC–2015–0016, into
the ‘‘Search’’ box, and follow the
prompts.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patricia L. Edwards, Project Manager,
Directorate for Engineering Sciences,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:02 Jul 01, 2015
Jkt 235001
U.S. Consumer Product Safety
Commission, 5 Research Place,
Rockville, MD 20850; telephone: 301–
987–2224; email: pedwards@cpsc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background and Statutory Authority
The CPSIA was enacted on August 14,
2008. Section 104(b) of the CPSIA, part
of the Danny Keysar Child Product
Safety Notification Act, 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. Standards issued under
section 104 are to be ‘‘substantially the
same as’’ the 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.’’
Section 104(f)(2)(C) of the CPSIA
specifically identifies ‘‘hook-on chairs’’
as a durable infant or toddler product.
Pursuant to section 104(b)(1)(A) of the
CPSIA, the Commission consulted with
manufacturers, retailers, trade
organizations, laboratories, consumer
advocacy groups, consultants, and
members of the public in the
development of this notice of proposed
rulemaking (‘‘NPR’’), largely through the
ASTM process. The NPR is based on the
most recent voluntary standard
developed by ASTM International
(formerly the American Society for
Testing and Materials), ASTM F1235–
15, Standard Consumer Safety
Specification for Portable Hook-On
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
Chairs (‘‘ASTM F1235–15’’), and
contains no modifications to the ASTM
standard.
The testing and certification
requirements of section 14(a) of the
Consumer Product Safety Act (‘‘CPSA’’)
apply to the standards promulgated
under section 104 of the CPSIA. Section
14(a)(3) of the CPSA requires the
Commission to publish an NOR for the
accreditation of third party conformity
assessment bodies (test laboratories) to
assess conformity with a children’s
product safety rule to which a children’s
product is subject. The proposed rule
for hook-on chairs, if issued as a final
rule, would be a children’s product
safety rule that requires the issuance of
an NOR. To meet the requirement that
the Commission issue an NOR for the
hook-on chairs standard, this NPR also
proposes to amend 16 CFR part 1112 to
include 16 CFR part 1233, the CFR
section where the hook-on chair
standard will be codified, if the
standard becomes final.
II. Product Description
A. Definition of ‘‘Hook-On Chair’’
The scope section of ASTM F1235–15
defines a ‘‘portable hook-on chair’’ as
‘‘[u]sually a legless seat constructed to
locate the occupant at a table in such a
position and elevation so that the
surface of the table can be used as the
feeding surface for the occupant * * *
[s]upported solely by the table on which
it is mounted.’’ The ASTM standard
specifies the appropriate ages and
weights for children using portable
hook-on chairs as ‘‘between the ages of
six months and three years and who
weigh no more than 37 lb (16.8 kg) (95th
percentile male at three years).’’
Typical hook-on chairs consist of
fabric over a lightweight frame, with a
device to mount the seat to a support
surface, such as a table or counter. Some
hook-on chairs fold for easy storage or
transport, and some include a
removable tray that can be used in
conjunction with a table.
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
EP02JY15.157
38042
38043
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules
B. Market Description
CPSC staff has identified 10 firms
supplying hook-on chairs to the U.S.
market, typically priced at $40 to $80
each. These 10 firms specialize in the
manufacture and/or distribution of
durable nursery products and represent
only a small segment of the juvenile
products industry. Nine of the 10
known firms are domestic (including 3
manufacturers and 6 importers). The
remaining firm is a foreign
manufacturer. Hook-on chairs represent
only a small proportion of each firm’s
overall product line; on average, each
firm supplies one hook-on chair model
to the U.S. market annually.
III. Incident Data
CPSC’s Directorate for Epidemiology,
Division of Hazard Analysis, is aware of
a total of 89 portable hook-on chairrelated incidents reported to the CPSC
that occurred between January 1, 2000
and October 31, 2014. These reports
include 50 incidents involving injury,
38 non-injury incidents, and one
fatality. Thirty-one of the incident
reports were received through the
National Electronic Injury Surveillance
System (‘‘NEISS’’). Only one of the
injured children (age 5 months) was
outside the ASTM recommended user
age range of 6 months to 3 years. One
injured adult is included among the 50
nonfatal injuries.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
A. Fatalities
The only known fatality occurred in
2002 when a 12-month-old child slid
down in his portable hook-on chair so
that his head and neck became wedged
between the seat and the table edge, and
the child was strangled. No restraints
were attached to the chair at the time of
the incident.
B. Nonfatalities
No hospitalizations occurred among
the 50 reported nonfatal injuries. Thirtyfive of the incidents were classified as
‘‘treated and released’’ from hospital
emergency rooms, and the remaining 15
incidents involved no medical
treatment. The reported injuries
included skull fractures, concussions,
broken or fractured bones, and
fingertips.
Five of the 50 nonfatal injuries
involved head or neck entrapment.
None of these entrapments resulted in
death because in each instance the child
was quickly released from the
entrapment by the caregiver. Most of the
injury cases involved some sort of fall,
namely a hook-on chair falling from the
counter or table to which it was
attached, or a child falling from or
slipping out of the hook-on chair.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:02 Jul 01, 2015
Jkt 235001
C. Hazard Pattern Identification
CPSC staff reviewed all 89 reported
incidents (1 fatality, 50 with injuries,
and 38 without injuries) to identify
hazard patterns associated with portable
hook-on chairs. Subsequently, CPSC
staff considered the hazard patterns
when reviewing the adequacy of ASTM
F1235.
Because the level of detail in the
analyzed NEISS data is sufficient only
for macro-level hazard assessment, staff
first grouped NEISS injury data and
non-NEISS data separately. Within
NEISS injury data, staff grouped the
incidents into three broad categories:
• Compromised attachment;
• child fall or slip out of the hook-on
chair; and
• fall of unknown type.
For non-NEISS incidents, staff
grouped the incidents into six broad
categories:
• Compromised attachment;
• restraint or containment issues;
• unintended release of seat fabric
fastenings;
• seat fabric separation due to
breaking or tearing components;
• broken structural components; and
• other.
Staff then further classified the
incidents within each category, as
indicated in Table 1 below.
In order of frequency of incident
reports within NEISS injury data and
non-NEISS data, the hazard patterns are
described below and summarized in
Table 1:
1. NEISS Injury Incidents (31 Incidents)
Compromised Attachment (45%):
Fourteen of the 31 incidents involved a
hook-on chair falling from the table or
counter to which it was attached. In
these incidents, the attachment to the
counter or table became compromised
in some manner.
Child Fall or Slip from hook-on Chair
(35%): Eleven of the 31 incidents
involved a child falling or slipping out
of the chair partially or completely.
These incidents most likely involved
issues with the restraints or other means
of containment. However, given the
limited information available, CPSC
staff cannot be sure that the chairs
remained securely attached to the table
or that other product-related issues did
not play a role. The only case in which
the fall was determined to be partial
rather than complete involved a child
who was found hanging by his neck,
caught in the chair.
Fall of Unknown Type (19%): Six of
the 31 incidents involved falls of an
unknown type. Although each of these
cases appears to be related to some kind
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
of fall affecting the child, the
descriptions are not sufficiently clear to
allow staff to determine the type of fall
that occurred.
TABLE 1—SUSPECTED NEISS HAZARD
PATTERNS ASSOCIATED WITH PORTABLE HOOK-ON CHAIRS
[Date of Treatment: January 1, 2000–October
2014]
Suspected
hazard pattern
Chair detached
and fell with
child ...............
Child fell or
slipped out of
chair ..............
Fall of unknown
type ...............
Total ..............
NEISS injury cases
Count
Percentage
14
45
11
35
6
31
19
100
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission’s NEISS epidemiological database.
Note: The percentages have been rounded
to the nearest integer and may not add up exactly to 100 percent.
2. Non-NEISS Incidents (58 Incidents)
Compromised Attachment (53%):
Thirty-one of the incidents involved
scenarios where the security of the
hook-on chair’s attachment to the table
was compromised in some way. In a
majority of these cases (17 out of 31),
the chair did not completely separate
from the table, either because the chair
remained partially secured to the table,
or because a parent took action before
the chair fully detached. In some of the
incidents in which the chair partially
detached, the seat may have rotated,
swung, pitched, or otherwise deviated
from its intended position. Four injury
incidents are included among the 17
incidents in which the chair did not
detach completely. The two most severe
of these injuries involved crushed or
severed fingertips caught between a part
of the chair and the clamp that was still
engaged with the table. Five injuries are
included among the 14 incidents in
which the chair fell completely from the
table, including one broken collarbone.
In total, attachment issues resulted in 9
injuries (47% of the 19 nonfatal injuries
reported by non-NEISS sources).
Restraint or Containment Issues
(19%): Eleven incidents involved chair
restraints or other containment issues.
These incidents include one fatality,
five nonfatal injury incidents, and five
non-injury incidents. The most common
scenario among these incidents was
children slipping and becoming
entrapped by the neck in the leg well or
between the table and the chair, as
occurred in seven incidents (1 fatal, 3
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
38044
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules
injuries, and 3 non-injuries). In another
incident, the child slipped partially, but
was caught by the shoulder by waist
straps. The remaining three incidents all
involved the child getting up or out over
the sides of the chair. In one such
incident, the child was able to escape
from his three-point harness and stand
up in the chair before being removed
entirely from the chair by his mother. In
the other two incidents, the children got
themselves up over the sides of the
chair and fell out. Only one of the two
was injured; a parent of the uninjured
child was able to catch the child’s legs,
preventing impact with the floor.
Unintended Release of Seat Fabric
Fastenings (10%): Six incidents
involved the chair seat fabric separating
from the chair due to the unintended
release of snaps or Velcro straps. These
chairs, assembled by consumers, relied
on snaps (1 incident) or Velcro straps (5
incidents) to hold the seat fabric onto
the attachment arms or chair frame.
Unintended release of these fastenings
allowed the seat fabric to deviate from
its intended position and therefore not
support the child as intended. Impacts
with the supporting table were the cause
of two of the injuries. The third injury
resulted when the child started to fall,
but his neck became caught against the
restraints.
Seat Fabric Separation Due to
Breaking or Tearing Components (5%):
Three incidents involved issues with
seat fabric separating from the chair,
including one injury. The injury
occurred when a child fell completely
out of the chair after the fabric ripped
at the seams.
Breaking Structural Components
(10%): Six incidents involved broken
chair components affecting the
structural integrity of the chair. Four of
the incidents involved locking pins
reported to have separated from the
chair; one of these locking pin incidents
involved injury, which resulted from an
adult scratching her knee on the sharp
protrusion of a locking pin. Two other
incidents were associated with a broken
release mechanism and a broken chair
base, respectively, neither resulting in
injuries.
Other (2%): One incident involved a
child creating enough motion to tip over
a small pedestal table to which the
parent had secured the chair.
TABLE 2—DISTRIBUTION OF NON-NEISS REPORTED PORTABLE HOOK-ON CHAIR INCIDENTS BY PRODUCT-RELATED
ISSUES OR HAZARD PATTERNS
[Date of Incident: January 1, 2000–October 2014]
Total reports
Reported injuries
Reported deaths
Product-related issues or hazard patterns
Count
Percentage
Count
Percentage
Count
Percentage
Attachment to Table Compromised .........................................................
(chair did not fall from table) ............................................................
(chair fell from table) .........................................................................
Restraints or Containment .......................................................................
(child slipped down, entrapping neck) ..............................................
(child slipped partially, but shoulder caught by waist straps) ..........
(child able to get up and possibly fall out of chair) ..........................
Seat Fabric Separation Due to Unintended Release of Snaps or Straps
(child slipped forward and head struck table after metal snaps
opened) .........................................................................................
(child slipped and neck became trapped after Velcro opened) .......
(child fell entirely out of chair after Velcro opened) .........................
(child remained seated despite Velcro opening) ..............................
Seat Fabric Separation Due to Torn or Broken Components .................
(child fell entirely out of chair after fabric seam ripped) ...................
(child remained seated despite broken clip or fabric) ......................
Miscellaneous Broken Components ........................................................
(locking pin) ......................................................................................
(release mechanism) ........................................................................
(base of chair) ...................................................................................
Other ........................................................................................................
(tip over of table hooked upon) ........................................................
31
(17)
(14)
11
(7)
(1)
(3)
6
53
9
(4)
(5)
5
(3)
(1)
(1)
3
47
....................
....................
26
....................
....................
....................
16
............
............
............
1
(1)
............
............
............
....................
....................
....................
100
....................
....................
....................
....................
(1)
(1)
(1)
............
1
(1)
............
1
(1)
............
............
0
............
....................
....................
....................
....................
5
....................
....................
5
....................
....................
....................
0
....................
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
Total ...........................................................................................
58
19
100
1
100
(1)
(1)
(2)
(2)
3
(1)
(2)
6
(4)
(1)
(1)
1
(1)
19
10
5
10
2
100
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission’s epidemiological databases CPSRMS, IPII, INDP, and DTHS.
Note: The percentages have been rounded to the nearest integer and shown for totals and subtotals only. Subtotals do not necessarily add to
heading totals.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
D. Product Recalls
Since January 1, 2000, two hook-on
chair recalls occurred involving two
different firms. The first recall was in
June 2001, and involved Inglesina USA
hook-on chairs. The product was
recalled after one report of a child who
fell from the chair because that model
chair did not incorporate a seat belt. The
recall involved 780 units.
The second recall was in August
2011, and involved phil&teds USA, Inc.,
‘‘metoo’’ clip-on chairs. This recall
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:02 Jul 01, 2015
Jkt 235001
involved multiple hazards. The first
hazard was related to missing or worn
clamp pads that allowed the chairs to
detach from a variety of different table
surfaces, posing a fall hazard. A second
hazard occurred when the chair
detached; children’s fingers were able to
be caught between the bar and clamping
mechanism, posing an amputation
hazard. In addition, user instructions for
the chairs were inadequate, increasing
the likelihood of consumer misuse.
CPSC is aware of 19 reports of the chairs
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
falling from different table surfaces,
including five reports of injuries. Two of
the five reports of injuries involved
children’s fingers being severely
pinched, lacerated, crushed or
amputated. The three other reports of
injury involved bruising after a chair
detached suddenly and the child fell
with the chair, striking the table or floor.
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules
IV. International Standards for HookOn Chairs and the ASTM Voluntary
Standard
CPSC is aware of one international
standard, EN1272–1998, Child Care
Articles—Table Mounted Chairs—Safety
Requirements and Test Methods, which
addresses hook-on chairs in a fashion
similar to ASTM F1235–15. CPSC staff
compared ASTM F1235–15
requirements that address chair-to-table
attachments and restraints and
containment features to the equivalent
EN1272–1998 provisions. The EN1272–
1998 standard has requirements for:
• Chemical and flammability material
properties;
• General construction, such as small
parts, sharp edges and openings;
• Structural integrity, including static
and dynamic tests;
• Restraints; and
• Labeling.
Although there are differences
between the two standards, based on
this comparison CPSC believes ASTM
F1235–15 to be a more stringent
standard, which will more completely
address the hazard patterns seen in
CPSC incident data. For example,
ASTM F1235–15 contains a number of
requirements that do not have an
equivalent in the European standard,
including the seat and seat back
disengagement test, the passive crotch
restraint requirement, and the
scissoring, shearing, and pinching
disengagement test. Additionally, in
instances where there is an equivalent
requirement in the European standard
(e.g., static load test and chair pull/push
test), ASTM requirements are as
stringent as or more stringent than the
comparable European standard
requirement.
V. Voluntary Standard—ASTM F1235
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
A. History of ASTM F1235
The voluntary standard for hook-on
chairs was first approved and published
in 1989, as ASTM 1235–89, Standard
Consumer Safety Specification for
Portable Hook-On Chairs. ASTM has
revised the voluntary standard seven
times since then. The current version,
ASTM F1235–15, was approved on May
1, 2015.
B. Description of the Current Voluntary
Standard—ASTM F1235–15
ASTM F1235–15 was published in
June 2015. Revisions include modified
and new requirements developed by
CPSC staff, in conjunction with
stakeholders on the ASTM
subcommittee task group, to address the
hazards associated with hook-on chairs.
ASTM F1235–15 includes the following
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:02 Jul 01, 2015
Jkt 235001
key provisions: scope, terminology,
general requirements, performance
requirements, test methods, marking
and labeling, and instructional
literature.
Scope. This section states the scope of
the standard, detailing what constitutes
a hook-on chair. As stated in section
II.A. of this preamble, the Scope section
defines a hook-on chair to be ‘‘[u]sually
a legless seat constructed to locate the
occupant at a table in such a position
and elevation so that the surface of the
table can be used as the feeding surface
for the occupant . . . [s]upported solely
by the table on which it is mounted.’’
The Scope section further specifies the
appropriate ages and weights for
children using portable hook-on chairs
as ‘‘between the ages of six months and
three years and who weigh no more
than 37 lb (16.8 kg) (95th percentile
male at three years).’’
Terminology. This section provides
definitions of terms specific to this
standard.
General Requirements. This section
addresses numerous hazards with
several general requirements, most of
which are also found in the other ASTM
juvenile product standards. The
following are the general requirements
contained in this section:
• Sharp points;
• Small parts;
• Lead in paint;
• Wood parts;
• Latching and locking mechanisms;
• Scissoring, shearing, and pinching
(including during detachment from
table support surface);
• Exposed coil springs;
• Openings;
• Labeling; and
• Protective components.
Performance Requirements and Test
Methods. These sections contain
performance requirements specific to
hook-on chairs, as well as test methods
that must be used to assess conformity
with such requirements. Below is a
discussion of each.
• Chair Drop Test: The hook-on chair
is dropped twice from a height of 36
inches on each of six different planes.
The purpose of this performance
requirement is to test that the hook-on
chair does not exhibit any mechanical
hazards (sharp points, sharp edges, or
small parts) after a drop test has been
performed.
• Static Load Test: The hook-on chair
must support a weight of 100 pounds on
both the maximum and minimum
thickness test surfaces. The purpose of
this performance requirement is to test
that the hook-on chair is strong enough
to support approximately three times
the weight of a child expected to be in
the seat.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
38045
• Seat and Seat Back Disengagement
Test: The seat and seat back must
remain fully attached to the frame of the
chair when various forces are applied.
The purpose of this performance
requirement is to test that the seat and
seat back are strong enough to withstand
the forces they will be subject to during
use.
• Chair Bounce Test: The chair must
remain attached to the standard test
surface and allow no movement greater
than 1 in (25 mm) when a force is
applied to the seat back and a weight is
dropped onto the seat 50 times. The
purpose of this test is to simulate a child
bouncing up and down in the hook-on
chair.
• Chair Pull/Push Test: A variety of
forces and weights are used to verify
that the hook-on chair does not detach
from the test surface. The purpose of
this test is to simulate a child’s actions
that might cause the chair to disengage
from the table.
• Restraint System Performance
Requirements and Tests: The standard
requires that an active restraint system,
such as a belt, be provided to secure a
child in the seated position in each of
the manufacturer-recommended use
positions. In addition, the restraint
system must include both a waist and a
crotch restraint designed to require the
crotch restraint to be used when the
active restraint system is used. The
restraint system must be attached to the
chair before shipment so the system
does not release during normal use. The
purpose of this performance
requirement is to test that the restraint
system and its closing means do not
break, separate, or permit removal of the
occupant when various forces are
applied.
• Openings and Passive Crotch
Restraint System: This section requires
the chair to be supplied with a passive
crotch restraint. In addition, to prevent
consumer mis-installation or noninstallation, the standard requires the
passive crotch restraint be installed on
the product at the time of shipment. The
leg openings must be tested, using a
wedge block, to assess whether the
passive crotch restraint is effective
under the load. The hook-on chair is
attached to a test surface and then the
tapered end of the wedge block is
inserted, and a 25 lb. (111 N) force is
applied to the wedge block to push (or
pull) the wedge block through the
opening. The wedge block is modeled
from the hip/torso dimensions of the
youngest expected user. In addition to
the leg openings, any side openings of
the seat, and openings in front of the
occupant (between the chair and the
supporting table structure), are also
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
38046
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
tested in a similar manner. To comply
with the requirement, the wedge block
must not pass completely through any
opening. The purpose of these
provisions is to reduce the likelihood of
children getting injured or dying as a
result of sliding through or becoming
entrapped in an opening.
• Scissoring, Shearing, and Pinching
Disengagement Test: This test is
intended to reduce the likelihood of
children becoming injured due to
motion caused by the rotation of a hookon chair when one side (clamp)
detaches from the table. One recall was
conducted in cooperation with the
CPSC for this issue. The firm reported
that two incidents resulted in a finger
amputation of the occupant in the hookon chair. In this test, the hook-on chair
is partially attached to the minimum
test surface with only one of the
attachment-fastening devices firmly
attached to the test surface; the other
fastening device is left loose. A CAMI
infant dummy is placed in the hook-on
chair with the restraints fastened. A
force is then applied to the chair/arm
frame in line with the loose fastening
device in a direction that results in the
rotation of the product on a horizontal
plane around the other (fully tightened)
attachment point. When the loose
attachment point is no longer supported
by the test surface, the force is
discontinued, and the product is
allowed to rotate vertically downward
from the test surface. Scissoring,
shearing, or pinching that may result in
injury is not permissible during the
entire test, including when the chair is
rotating downward.
Marking and Labeling. This section
contains various requirements relating
to warnings, labeling, and required
markings for hook-on chairs. This
section prescribes various substance,
format, and prominence requirements
for such information.
Instructional Literature. This sections
requires that instructions be provided
with hook-on chairs and be easy to read
and understand. Additionally, the
section contains requirements relating
to instructional literature contents and
format, as well as prominence of certain
language.
VI. Assessment of the Voluntary
Standard ASTM F1235–15
CPSC believes that the current
voluntary standard, ASTM F1235–15,
addresses the primary hazard patterns
identified in the incident data. The
following section discusses how each of
the identified product-related issues or
hazard patterns listed in section III.C. of
this preamble is addressed by the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:02 Jul 01, 2015
Jkt 235001
current voluntary standard, ASTM
F1235–15:
A. Chair’s Attachment
CPSC is aware of 45 incidents in
which the attachment of the hook-on
chair to the table was compromised.
ASTM F1235–15 contains two separate
requirements with the intended purpose
of reducing the likelihood of a hook-on
chair becoming detached from its
supporting surface: the chair bounce test
and the chair pull/push test.
Additionally, in response to CPSC staff’s
request, ASTM formed a task group to
address hazards associated with partial
detachment of a chair, which can result
in scissoring or shearing hazards. CPSC
staff worked with ASTM to develop
performance requirements to address
this hazard. Accordingly, the standard
includes a requirement (first introduced
in ASTM F1235–14a) to reduce injuries
in the event that a hook-on chair
partially detaches from the table support
surface: the scissoring, shearing, and
pinching test. CPSC believes these
requirements adequately address this
hazard pattern.
B. Restraint or Containment
CPSC is aware of 22 incidents
involving or likely involving issues with
the hook-on chair restraints or other
means of containment. In these
instances, children slipped and became
entrapped by the neck, or children were
able to stand up and fall out over the
sides of the chair. The only known
fatality in the incident data occurred
when a child’s head and neck became
wedged between the seat and table edge.
Similar non-fatal incidents were also
reported. Additionally, CPSC received
reports of children standing and then
slipping and becoming trapped between
the table and the hook-on chair.
In response to reported incidents,
CPSC staff worked with an ASTM task
group to create a provision that hook-on
chairs must contain a passive crotch
restraint—a ‘‘component that separates
the openings for the legs of the occupant
into two separate bounded openings and
requires no action on the part of the
caregiver to use except to position one
leg into each opening created by the
component.’’ Before the 2014 version of
the standard, ASTM F1235 did not
contain a passive crotch restraint
requirement.
Additionally, CPSC’s work with the
ASTM task group led to a related leg
openings performance requirement and
test method. Consequently, the current
standard contains an openings
requirement and associated test
methodologies that cover leg openings
and side openings. This requirement
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
also applies to completely bounded
openings in front of the occupant,
addressing entrapment between the
leading edge of the chair and the
supporting table surface.
ASTM F1235–15 requires that all
hook-on chairs contain a crotch and
waist belt restraint system. In addition,
the restraint system undergoes testing to
check that the system restrains the child
as intended. The leg openings, openings
around the side and in front of the seat,
and the area between the chair and the
supporting table are all tested to check
that an occupant cannot slide through or
become entrapped in the openings.
CPSC believes these recent additions to
the standard adequately address this
hazard pattern.
C. Fabric- and Component-Related
Incidents
CPSC is aware of 15 incidents in
which seat fabric, seat fabric fasteners,
or other chair components failed. ASTM
F1235–15 includes three different
performance tests to help address this
hazard pattern: the chair drop test, the
static load test, and the seat/seat back
disengagement test. Additionally,
warning and instructional literature
improvements included in the last
revision of the standard will help
prevent snaps or Velcro from
unintentionally detaching due to
foreseeable misuse and abuse. CPSC
believes that ASTM F1235–15
adequately addresses this hazard
pattern.
D. Other
ASTM F1235–15 includes revised
requirements for marking and labeling
and instructional literature. These
improvements are intended to help
reduce incidents of misuse, such as
attaching a hook-on chair to a table for
which it was not intended. CPSC
believes that the standard contains
adequate and clear warnings related to
known hazards associated with hook-on
chairs.
VII. Proposed CPSC Standard for HookOn Chairs
As explained in the previous section
of this preamble, the Commission
concludes that ASTM F1235–15
adequately addresses the hazards
associated with hook-on chairs. Thus,
the Commission proposes to incorporate
by reference ASTM F1235–15 without
any modifications.
VIII. Amendment to 16 CFR Part 1112
To Include NOR for Hook-On Chairs
Standard
The CPSA establishes certain
requirements for product certification
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules
and testing. 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). Certification of
children’s products subject to a
children’s product safety rule must be
based on testing conducted by a CPSCaccepted third party conformity
assessment body. Id. 2063(a)(2). The
Commission must publish an NOR for
the accreditation of third party
conformity assessment bodies to assess
conformity with a children’s product
safety rule to which a children’s product
is subject. Id. 2063(a)(3). Thus, the
proposed rule for 16 CFR part 1233,
Safety Standard for Portable Hook-On
Chairs, if issued as a final rule, would
be a children’s product safety rule that
requires the issuance of an NOR.
The Commission published a final
rule, Requirements Pertaining to Third
Party Conformity Assessment Bodies, 78
FR 15836 (March 12, 2013), codified at
16 CFR part 1112 (‘‘part 1112’’) and
effective on June 10, 2013, which
establishes requirements for
accreditation of third party conformity
assessment bodies to test for conformity
with a children’s product safety rule in
accordance with section 14(a)(2) of the
CPSA. Part 1112 also codifies all of the
NORs issued previously by the
Commission.
All new NORs for new children’s
product safety rules, such as the hookon chair standard, require an
amendment to part 1112. To meet the
requirement that the Commission issue
an NOR for the proposed hook-on chair
standard, as part of this NPR, the
Commission proposes to amend the
existing rule that codifies the list of all
NORs issued by the Commission to add
hook-on chairs to the list of children’s
product safety rules for which the CPSC
has issued an NOR.
Test laboratories applying for
acceptance as a CPSC-accepted third
party conformity assessment body to
test to the new standard for hook-on
chairs would be required to meet the
third party conformity assessment body
accreditation requirements in 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 1233, Safety Standard
for Portable Hook-On Chairs, included
in the laboratory’s scope of accreditation
of CPSC safety rules listed for the
laboratory on the CPSC Web site at:
www.cpsc.gov/labsearch.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:02 Jul 01, 2015
Jkt 235001
IX. Incorporation by Reference
XI. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Section 1233.2(a) of the proposed rule
incorporates by reference ASTM F1235–
15. The Office of the Federal Register
(‘‘OFR’’) has regulations concerning
incorporation by reference. 1 CFR part
51. The OFR recently revised these
regulations to require that, for a
proposed rule, agencies must discuss in
the preamble of the NPR ways that the
materials the agency proposes to
incorporate by reference are reasonably
available to interested persons or how
the agency worked to make the
materials reasonably available. In
addition, the preamble of the proposed
rule must summarize the material. 1
CFR 51.5(a).
In accordance with the OFR’s
requirements, section V.B. of this
preamble summarizes the provisions of
ASTM F1235–15 that the Commission
proposes to incorporate by reference.
ASTM F1235–15 is copyrighted. By
permission of ASTM, the standard can
be viewed as a read-only document
during the comment period on this NPR,
at: https://www.astm.org/cpsc.htm.
Interested persons may also purchase a
copy of ASTM F1235–15 from ASTM
International, 100 Bar Harbor Drive,
P.O. Box 0700, West Conshohocken, PA
19428; https://www.astm.org/cpsc.htm.
One may also inspect a copy at CPSC’s
Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer
Product Safety Commission, Room 820,
4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD
20814, telephone 301–504–7923.
38047
A. Introduction
X. 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). The Commission is
proposing an effective date of six
months after publication of the final
rule in the Federal Register. Without
evidence to the contrary, CPSC
generally considers six months to be
sufficient time for suppliers to come
into compliance with a new standard,
and a six-month effective date is typical
for other CPSIA section 104 rules. Six
months is also the period that the
Juvenile Products Manufacturers
Association (‘‘JPMA’’) typically allows
for products in the JPMA certification
program to transition to a new standard
once that standard is published.
We also propose a six-month effective
date for the amendment to part 1112.
We ask for comments on the proposed
six-month effective date.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
(‘‘RFA’’) requires that agencies review a
proposed rule for the rule’s potential
economic impact on small entities,
including small businesses. Section 603
of the RFA generally requires that
agencies prepare an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis (‘‘IRFA’’) and make
the analysis available to the public for
comment when the agency publishes an
NPR. 5 U.S.C. 603. Section 605 of the
RFA provides that an IRFA is not
required if the agency certifies that the
rule will not, if promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. As
explained in this section, the
Commission concludes that the
standard for hook-on chairs, if
promulgated as a final rule, will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. 5
U.S.C. 605(b).
B. Market Description
The Commission has identified 10
firms supplying hook-on chairs to the
U.S. market, typically priced at $40 to
$80 each. These firms specialize in the
manufacture and/or distribution of
durable nursery products and represent
only a small segment of the juvenile
products industry. All but two of these
firms are represented by the JPMA
which, according to its Web site,
represents 95 percent of the North
American industry or about 250
companies. Nine of the 10 known firms
are domestic (including 3 manufacturers
and 6 importers). The remaining firm is
a foreign manufacturer.
Hook-on chairs represent only a small
proportion of each firm’s overall
product line; on average, each firm
supplies one hook-on chair model to the
U.S. market annually. This reflects
hook-on chairs’ relative lack of
popularity when compared with
substitute products such as high chairs
and booster chairs. In 2013, the CPSC
conducted a Durable Nursery Product
Exposure Survey (‘‘DNPES’’) of U.S.
households with children under age 6.
Data from the DNPES indicate that there
are an estimated 2.04 million hook-on
chairs in U.S. households with children
under the age of 6. The number of high
chairs and booster chairs was each more
than four times higher with an
estimated 9.74 million and 8.91 million
in U.S. households with children under
age 6, respectively.
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38048
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules
C. Impact of Proposed 16 CFR Part 1233
on Small Businesses
We are aware of approximately 10
firms currently marketing portable
hook-on chairs in the United States, 9 of
which are domestic firms. Under U.S.
Small Business Administration (‘‘SBA’’)
guidelines, a manufacturer of hook-on
chairs is small if it has 500 or fewer
employees, and importers and
wholesalers are considered small if they
have 100 or fewer employees. We limit
our analysis to domestic firms because
SBA guidelines and definitions pertain
to U.S.-based entities. Based on these
guidelines, six of the nine domestic
suppliers are small—two domestic
manufacturers and four domestic
importers. Staff expects that the hook-on
chairs of nine of the 10 firms are
compliant with ASTM F1235 because
they are either: (1) Certified by the
JPMA (three firms); or (2) the supplier
claims compliance with the voluntary
standard (six firms). It is unknown at
this time whether the hook-on chairs
supplied by the remaining firm, the
foreign manufacturer, comply with the
ASTM voluntary standard.
The costs of compliance with the
proposed standard, if any, are expected
to be negligible for all known small
firms, all of which have hook-on chairs
compliant with the ASTM voluntary
standard currently in effect for testing
purposes (F1235–14). These firms are
expected to remain compliant with the
voluntary standard as it evolves,
because they follow (and most of these
firms actively participate in) the
standard development process.
Therefore, compliance with the
voluntary standard is part of an
established business practice. ASTM
F1235–15, the version of the voluntary
standard that the Commission proposes
to adopt without modification as the
mandatory hook-on chair standard, will
be in effect for testing purposes by the
time the mandatory standard becomes
final. These firms are likely to be in
compliance by the rule’s effective date,
based on their history.
Under section 14 of the CPSA, once
the new hook-on chair requirements
become effective, all manufacturers will
be subject to the third party testing and
certification requirements under the
testing rule, Testing and Labeling
Pertaining to Product Certification (16
CFR part 1107) (‘‘1107 rule’’). Importers
will also be subject to these
requirements if their supplying foreign
firm(s) does not perform third party
testing. Third party testing will include
any physical and mechanical test
requirements specified in the final
hook-on chairs rule. Manufacturers and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:02 Jul 01, 2015
Jkt 235001
importers of hook-on chairs should
already be conducting required lead or
phthalates testing for hook-on chairs.
Any costs associated with third party
testing are in addition to the direct costs
of meeting the hook-on chair standard.
Additional testing costs for
manufacturers are expected to be small
because all hook-on chairs in the U.S.
market are currently tested to verify
compliance with the ASTM standard,
though not necessarily via third party.
According to estimates from suppliers,
testing to the ASTM voluntary standard
typically costs about $600–$1,000 per
model sample. Based on an examination
of firm revenues from recent Dun &
Bradstreet or ReferenceUSAGov reports,
the impact of third party testing to
ASTM F1235–15 is unlikely to be
economically significant for small
manufacturers (i.e., testing costs will be
less than 1 percent of gross revenue).
Although it is unknown how many
samples will be needed to meet the
‘‘high degree of assurance’’ criterion
required in the 1107 rule, over 35 units
per model would be required to make
testing costs exceed one percent of gross
revenue for the small manufacturer with
the lowest gross revenue. Note that this
calculation assumes the rule would
generate additional testing costs in the
$600–$1,000 per model sample range.
Given that all firms are conducting some
testing already, this likely overestimates
the impact of the rule on testing costs.
Likewise, we expect the cost of third
party testing to the proposed rule to be
small for small importers. Again, all
hook-on chairs are currently tested to
verify compliance with the ASTM
standard. Discussions with one importer
indicate that this testing is currently
conducted by their foreign supplier.
Second, as with manufacturers, any
costs would be limited to the
incremental costs associated with third
party testing over the current testing
regime, to the extent there are any
additional costs.
Both the costs of compliance and the
incremental costs of testing due to the
1107 rule are not expected to be
economically significant for
manufacturers and importers of hook-on
chairs. However, even if the costs were
significant, the affected firms have
diverse product lines, only a minor part
consisting of hook-on chairs; an
economically feasible option is to
discontinue the product line and remain
in business.
The analysis above shows that there
are only a few small suppliers of hookon chairs, and these few firms represent
only a small segment of the juvenile
products industry. Moreover, this
product is only one of many in each
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
firm’s product line and is unlikely to be
of particular importance to a firm’s
overall market plan. All of the hook-on
chairs supplied by these firms comply
with the voluntary standard and are
expected to continue to do so.
Consequently, the costs of compliance,
if any, are expected to be negligible.
Third party testing costs are expected to
be very small and economically
insignificant (i.e., less than one percent
of gross revenue for affected firms),
given that all of the hook-on chairs
supplied by these firms are already
being tested to the ASTM voluntary
standard. For these reasons, the
Commission certifies that the proposed
hook-on chair rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
D. Impact of Proposed 16 CFR Part 1112
Amendment on Small Businesses
This proposed rule would also amend
part 1112 to add hook-on chairs to the
list of children’s products for which the
Commission has issued an NOR. As
required by the RFA, staff conducted a
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(‘‘FRFA’’) when the Commission issued
the part 1112 rule (78 FR 15836, 15855–
58). Briefly, the FRFA concluded that
the accreditation requirements would
not have a significant adverse impact on
a substantial number of small test
laboratories because no requirements
were imposed on test laboratories that
did not intend to provide third party
testing services. The only test
laboratories that were expected to
provide such services were those that
anticipated receiving sufficient revenue
from the mandated testing to justify
accepting the requirements as a business
decision. Moreover, a test laboratory
would only choose to provide such
services if it anticipated receiving
revenues sufficient to cover the costs of
the requirements.
Based on similar reasoning, amending
16 CFR part 1112 to include the NOR for
the hook-on chairs standard will not
have a significant adverse impact on
small test laboratories. Moreover, based
upon the number of test laboratories in
the United States that have applied for
CPSC acceptance of accreditation to test
for conformance to other mandatory
juvenile product standards, we expect
that only a few test laboratories will
seek CPSC acceptance of their
accreditation to test for conformance
with the hook-on chair standard. Most
of these test laboratories will have
already been accredited to test for
conformity to other mandatory juvenile
product standards, and the only costs to
them would be the cost of adding the
hook-on chairs standard to their scope
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules
of accreditation. For these reasons, the
Commission certifies that the NOR
amending 16 CFR part 1112 to include
the hook-on chairs standard will not
have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
XII. Environmental Considerations
The Commission’s regulations address
whether the agency is required to
prepare an environmental assessment or
an environmental impact statement.
Under these regulations, a rule that has
‘‘little or no potential for affecting the
human environment,’’ is categorically
exempt from this requirement. 16 CFR
1021.5(c)(1). The proposed rule falls
within the categorical exemption.
XIII. Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule contains
information collection requirements that
are subject to public comment and
review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
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.
38049
Title: Safety Standard for Portable
Hook-On Chairs
Description: The proposed rule would
require each hook-on chair to comply
with ASTM F1235–15, Standard
Consumer Safety Specification for
Portable Hook-On Chairs. Sections 8
and 9 of ASTM F1235–15 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 hook-on
chairs.
Estimated Burden: We estimate the
burden of this collection of information
as follows:
TABLE 3—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN
Number of
respondents
Frequency of
responses
Total annual
responses
Hours per
response
Total burden
hours
1233.2(a) ..............................................................................
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
16 CFR section
10
1
10
1
10
Our estimate is based on the
following:
Section 8.1 of ASTM F1235–15
requires that the name and the place of
business (city, state, and 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 8.2 of ASTM
F1235–15 requires a code mark or other
means that identifies the date (month
and year, as a minimum) of
manufacture.
Ten known entities supply hook-on
chairs to the U.S. market may need to
make some modifications to their
existing labels. We estimate that the
time required to make these
modifications is about 1 hour per
model. Based on an evaluation of
supplier product lines, each entity
supplies an average of one model of
hook-on chairs; 1 therefore, the
estimated burden associated with labels
is 1 hour per model × 10 entities × 1
models per entity = 10 hours. We
estimate the hourly compensation for
the time required to create and update
labels is $30.09 (U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics, ‘‘Employer Costs for
Employee Compensation,’’ Dec. 2014,
Table 9, total compensation for all sales
1 This number was derived during the market
research phase of the initial regulatory flexibility
analysis by dividing the total number of hook-on
chairs supplied by all hook-on chair suppliers by
the total number of hook-on chair suppliers.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:02 Jul 01, 2015
Jkt 235001
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 $300.90 ($30.09
per hour × 10 hours = $300.90). No
operating, maintenance, or capital costs
are associated with the collection.
Section 9.1 of ASTM F1235–15
requires instructions to be supplied
with the product. Hook-on chairs are
complicated products that generally
require use and assembly instructions.
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.’’ We are
unaware of hook-on chairs that
generally require use instructions but
lack such instructions. Therefore, we
tentatively estimate that no burden
hours are associated with section 9.1 of
ASTM F1235–15, because any burden
associated with supplying instructions
with hook-on chairs 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 hook-on chairs would
impose a burden to industry of 10 hours
at a cost of $313.20 annually.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 August 3, 2015, 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.
XIV. Preemption
Section 26(a) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C.
2075(a), provides that when a consumer
product safety standard is in effect and
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
38050
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules
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.’’ Therefore, the
preemption provision of section 26(a) of
the CPSA would apply to a rule issued
under section 104.
XV. Request for Comments
16 CFR Part 1233
Consumer protection, Imports,
Incorporation by reference, Infants and
children, Labeling, Law enforcement,
and Toys.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Commission proposes to
amend Title 16 of the Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 1112—REQUIREMENTS
PERTAINING TO THIRD PARTY
CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES
1. The authority citation for part 1112
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2063; Pub. L. 110–
314, section 3, 122 Stat. 3016, 3017 (2008).
2. Amend § 1112.15 by adding
paragraph (b)(40) to read as follows:
■
This NPR begins a rulemaking
proceeding under section 104(b) of the
CPSIA to issue a consumer product
safety standard for hook-on chairs, and
to amend part 1112 to add hook-on
chairs to the list of children’s product
safety rules for which the CPSC has
issued an NOR. We invite all interested
persons to submit comments on any
aspect of the proposed mandatory safety
standard for hook-on chairs and on the
proposed amendment to part 1112.
Specifically, the Commission requests
comments on the costs of compliance
with, and testing to, the proposed hookon chair safety standard, the proposed
six-month effective date for the new
mandatory hook-on chair safety
standard, and the proposed amendment
to part 1112. During the comment
period, the ASTM F1235–15, Standard
Consumer Safety Specification for
Portable Hook-On Chairs, is available as
a read-only document at: https://
www.astm.org/cpsc.htm.
Comments should be submitted in
accordance with the instructions in the
ADDRESSES section at the beginning of
this notice.
List of Subjects
16 CFR Part 1112
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Administrative practice and
procedure, Audit, Consumer protection,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Third party conformity
assessment body.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:02 Jul 01, 2015
Jkt 235001
§ 1112.15 When can a third party
conformity assessment body apply for
CPSC acceptance for a particular CPSC rule
and/or test method?
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(40) 16 CFR part 1233, Safety
Standard for Portable Hook-On Chairs.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Add part 1233 to read as follows:
PART 1233—SAFETY STANDARD FOR
PORTABLE HOOK–ON CHAIRS
Sec.
1233.1 Scope.
1233.2 Requirements for portable hook-on
chairs.
Authority: The Consumer Product Safety
Improvement Act of 2008, Pub. L. 110–314,
§ 104, 122 Stat. 3016 (August 14, 2008); Pub.
L. 112–28, 125 Stat. 273 (August 12, 2011).
§ 1233.1
Scope.
This part establishes a consumer
product safety standard for portable
hook-on chairs.
§ 1233.2 Requirements for portable hookon chairs.
Each portable hook-on chair must
comply with all applicable provisions of
ASTM F1235–15, Standard Consumer
Safety Specification for Portable HookOn Chairs, approved on May 1, 2015.
The Director of the Federal Register
approves this incorporation by reference
in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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/cpsc.htm. 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.
Dated: June 29, 2015.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
[FR Doc. 2015–16330 Filed 7–1–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
17 CFR Parts 275 and 279
[Release No. IA–4091; File No. S7–09–15]
RIN 3235–AL75
Amendments to Form ADV and
Investment Advisers Act Rules
Correction
In proposed rule document 2015–
12778, appearing on pages 33718–33838
in the issue of Friday, June 12, 2015,
make the following corrections:
On page 33728, in the third column,
below the last line, the text for footnote
92 should appear as follows:
‘‘92 The proposed definition of Legal
Entity Identifier is: A ‘‘legal entity
identifier’’ assigned or recognized by the
Global LEI Regulatory Oversight
Committee (ROC) or the Global LEI
Foundation (GLEIF). See Proposed Form
ADV: Glossary. In Item 1, we propose
removing outdated text referring to the
‘‘legal entity identifier’’ as being ‘‘in
development’’ in the first half of 2011.’’
On pages 33745–33838, the forms
should appear as follows:
BILLING CODE 1505–01–D
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 127 (Thursday, July 2, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38041-38050]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16330]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
16 CFR Parts 1112 and 1233
[Docket No. CPSC-2015-0016]
Safety Standard for Portable Hook-On Chairs
AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Danny Keysar Child Product Safety Notification Act,
section 104 of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008
(``CPSIA''), requires the United States Consumer Product Safety
Commission (``Commission'' or ``CPSC'') to promulgate consumer product
safety standards for durable infant or toddler products. These
standards are to be ``substantially the same as'' applicable voluntary
standards or more stringent than the voluntary standard if the
Commission concludes that more stringent requirements would further
reduce the risk of injury associated with the product. The Commission
is proposing a safety standard for portable hook-on chairs (``hook-on
chairs'') in response to the direction under section 104(b) of the
CPSIA. In addition, the Commission is proposing an amendment to include
an additional CFR part in the list of notice of requirements (``NORs'')
issued by the Commission.
DATES: Submit comments by September 15, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Comments related to the Paperwork Reduction Act aspects of
the marking, labeling, and instructional literature requirements of the
proposed
[[Page 38042]]
mandatory standard for hook-on chairs should be directed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, the Office of Management and
Budget, Attn: CPSC Desk Officer, FAX: 202-395-6974, or emailed to
oira_submission@omb.eop.gov.
Other comments, identified by Docket No. CPSC-2015-0016, may be
submitted electronically or in writing:
Electronic Submissions: Submit electronic comments to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments. The Commission does not accept
comments submitted by electronic mail (email), except through
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 by mail/hand
delivery/courier to: Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety
Commission, Room 820, 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 proposed rulemaking. All comments received
may be posted without change, including any personal identifiers,
contact information, or other personal information provided, to: https://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: https://www.regulations.gov, and insert the
docket number, CPSC-2015-0016, into the ``Search'' box, and follow the
prompts.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia L. Edwards, Project Manager,
Directorate for Engineering Sciences, U.S. Consumer Product Safety
Commission, 5 Research Place, Rockville, MD 20850; telephone: 301-987-
2224; email: pedwards@cpsc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background and Statutory Authority
The CPSIA was enacted on August 14, 2008. Section 104(b) of the
CPSIA, part of the Danny Keysar Child Product Safety Notification Act,
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. Standards issued
under section 104 are to be ``substantially the same as'' the
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.'' Section 104(f)(2)(C) of the CPSIA specifically
identifies ``hook-on chairs'' as a durable infant or toddler product.
Pursuant to section 104(b)(1)(A) of the CPSIA, the Commission
consulted with manufacturers, retailers, trade organizations,
laboratories, consumer advocacy groups, consultants, and members of the
public in the development of this notice of proposed rulemaking
(``NPR''), largely through the ASTM process. The NPR is based on the
most recent voluntary standard developed by ASTM International
(formerly the American Society for Testing and Materials), ASTM F1235-
15, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Portable Hook-On Chairs
(``ASTM F1235-15''), and contains no modifications to the ASTM
standard.
The testing and certification requirements of section 14(a) of the
Consumer Product Safety Act (``CPSA'') apply to the standards
promulgated under section 104 of the CPSIA. Section 14(a)(3) of the
CPSA requires the Commission to publish an NOR for the accreditation of
third party conformity assessment bodies (test laboratories) to assess
conformity with a children's product safety rule to which a children's
product is subject. The proposed rule for hook-on chairs, if issued as
a final rule, would be a children's product safety rule that requires
the issuance of an NOR. To meet the requirement that the Commission
issue an NOR for the hook-on chairs standard, this NPR also proposes to
amend 16 CFR part 1112 to include 16 CFR part 1233, the CFR section
where the hook-on chair standard will be codified, if the standard
becomes final.
II. Product Description
A. Definition of ``Hook-On Chair''
The scope section of ASTM F1235-15 defines a ``portable hook-on
chair'' as ``[u]sually a legless seat constructed to locate the
occupant at a table in such a position and elevation so that the
surface of the table can be used as the feeding surface for the
occupant * * * [s]upported solely by the table on which it is
mounted.'' The ASTM standard specifies the appropriate ages and weights
for children using portable hook-on chairs as ``between the ages of six
months and three years and who weigh no more than 37 lb (16.8 kg) (95th
percentile male at three years).''
Typical hook-on chairs consist of fabric over a lightweight frame,
with a device to mount the seat to a support surface, such as a table
or counter. Some hook-on chairs fold for easy storage or transport, and
some include a removable tray that can be used in conjunction with a
table.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02JY15.157
[[Page 38043]]
B. Market Description
CPSC staff has identified 10 firms supplying hook-on chairs to the
U.S. market, typically priced at $40 to $80 each. These 10 firms
specialize in the manufacture and/or distribution of durable nursery
products and represent only a small segment of the juvenile products
industry. Nine of the 10 known firms are domestic (including 3
manufacturers and 6 importers). The remaining firm is a foreign
manufacturer. Hook-on chairs represent only a small proportion of each
firm's overall product line; on average, each firm supplies one hook-on
chair model to the U.S. market annually.
III. Incident Data
CPSC's Directorate for Epidemiology, Division of Hazard Analysis,
is aware of a total of 89 portable hook-on chair-related incidents
reported to the CPSC that occurred between January 1, 2000 and October
31, 2014. These reports include 50 incidents involving injury, 38 non-
injury incidents, and one fatality. Thirty-one of the incident reports
were received through the National Electronic Injury Surveillance
System (``NEISS''). Only one of the injured children (age 5 months) was
outside the ASTM recommended user age range of 6 months to 3 years. One
injured adult is included among the 50 nonfatal injuries.
A. Fatalities
The only known fatality occurred in 2002 when a 12-month-old child
slid down in his portable hook-on chair so that his head and neck
became wedged between the seat and the table edge, and the child was
strangled. No restraints were attached to the chair at the time of the
incident.
B. Nonfatalities
No hospitalizations occurred among the 50 reported nonfatal
injuries. Thirty-five of the incidents were classified as ``treated and
released'' from hospital emergency rooms, and the remaining 15
incidents involved no medical treatment. The reported injuries included
skull fractures, concussions, broken or fractured bones, and
fingertips.
Five of the 50 nonfatal injuries involved head or neck entrapment.
None of these entrapments resulted in death because in each instance
the child was quickly released from the entrapment by the caregiver.
Most of the injury cases involved some sort of fall, namely a hook-on
chair falling from the counter or table to which it was attached, or a
child falling from or slipping out of the hook-on chair.
C. Hazard Pattern Identification
CPSC staff reviewed all 89 reported incidents (1 fatality, 50 with
injuries, and 38 without injuries) to identify hazard patterns
associated with portable hook-on chairs. Subsequently, CPSC staff
considered the hazard patterns when reviewing the adequacy of ASTM
F1235.
Because the level of detail in the analyzed NEISS data is
sufficient only for macro-level hazard assessment, staff first grouped
NEISS injury data and non-NEISS data separately. Within NEISS injury
data, staff grouped the incidents into three broad categories:
Compromised attachment;
child fall or slip out of the hook-on chair; and
fall of unknown type.
For non-NEISS incidents, staff grouped the incidents into six broad
categories:
Compromised attachment;
restraint or containment issues;
unintended release of seat fabric fastenings;
seat fabric separation due to breaking or tearing
components;
broken structural components; and
other.
Staff then further classified the incidents within each category,
as indicated in Table 1 below.
In order of frequency of incident reports within NEISS injury data
and non-NEISS data, the hazard patterns are described below and
summarized in Table 1:
1. NEISS Injury Incidents (31 Incidents)
Compromised Attachment (45%): Fourteen of the 31 incidents involved
a hook-on chair falling from the table or counter to which it was
attached. In these incidents, the attachment to the counter or table
became compromised in some manner.
Child Fall or Slip from hook-on Chair (35%): Eleven of the 31
incidents involved a child falling or slipping out of the chair
partially or completely. These incidents most likely involved issues
with the restraints or other means of containment. However, given the
limited information available, CPSC staff cannot be sure that the
chairs remained securely attached to the table or that other product-
related issues did not play a role. The only case in which the fall was
determined to be partial rather than complete involved a child who was
found hanging by his neck, caught in the chair.
Fall of Unknown Type (19%): Six of the 31 incidents involved falls
of an unknown type. Although each of these cases appears to be related
to some kind of fall affecting the child, the descriptions are not
sufficiently clear to allow staff to determine the type of fall that
occurred.
Table 1--Suspected NEISS Hazard Patterns Associated With Portable Hook-
On Chairs
[Date of Treatment: January 1, 2000-October 2014]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEISS injury cases
Suspected hazard pattern -------------------------
Count Percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chair detached and fell with child............ 14 45
Child fell or slipped out of chair............ 11 35
Fall of unknown type.......................... 6 19
Total....................................... 31 100
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission's NEISS epidemiological
database.
Note: The percentages have been rounded to the nearest integer and may
not add up exactly to 100 percent.
2. Non-NEISS Incidents (58 Incidents)
Compromised Attachment (53%): Thirty-one of the incidents involved
scenarios where the security of the hook-on chair's attachment to the
table was compromised in some way. In a majority of these cases (17 out
of 31), the chair did not completely separate from the table, either
because the chair remained partially secured to the table, or because a
parent took action before the chair fully detached. In some of the
incidents in which the chair partially detached, the seat may have
rotated, swung, pitched, or otherwise deviated from its intended
position. Four injury incidents are included among the 17 incidents in
which the chair did not detach completely. The two most severe of these
injuries involved crushed or severed fingertips caught between a part
of the chair and the clamp that was still engaged with the table. Five
injuries are included among the 14 incidents in which the chair fell
completely from the table, including one broken collarbone. In total,
attachment issues resulted in 9 injuries (47% of the 19 nonfatal
injuries reported by non-NEISS sources).
Restraint or Containment Issues (19%): Eleven incidents involved
chair restraints or other containment issues. These incidents include
one fatality, five nonfatal injury incidents, and five non-injury
incidents. The most common scenario among these incidents was children
slipping and becoming entrapped by the neck in the leg well or between
the table and the chair, as occurred in seven incidents (1 fatal, 3
[[Page 38044]]
injuries, and 3 non-injuries). In another incident, the child slipped
partially, but was caught by the shoulder by waist straps. The
remaining three incidents all involved the child getting up or out over
the sides of the chair. In one such incident, the child was able to
escape from his three-point harness and stand up in the chair before
being removed entirely from the chair by his mother. In the other two
incidents, the children got themselves up over the sides of the chair
and fell out. Only one of the two was injured; a parent of the
uninjured child was able to catch the child's legs, preventing impact
with the floor.
Unintended Release of Seat Fabric Fastenings (10%): Six incidents
involved the chair seat fabric separating from the chair due to the
unintended release of snaps or Velcro straps. These chairs, assembled
by consumers, relied on snaps (1 incident) or Velcro straps (5
incidents) to hold the seat fabric onto the attachment arms or chair
frame. Unintended release of these fastenings allowed the seat fabric
to deviate from its intended position and therefore not support the
child as intended. Impacts with the supporting table were the cause of
two of the injuries. The third injury resulted when the child started
to fall, but his neck became caught against the restraints.
Seat Fabric Separation Due to Breaking or Tearing Components (5%):
Three incidents involved issues with seat fabric separating from the
chair, including one injury. The injury occurred when a child fell
completely out of the chair after the fabric ripped at the seams.
Breaking Structural Components (10%): Six incidents involved broken
chair components affecting the structural integrity of the chair. Four
of the incidents involved locking pins reported to have separated from
the chair; one of these locking pin incidents involved injury, which
resulted from an adult scratching her knee on the sharp protrusion of a
locking pin. Two other incidents were associated with a broken release
mechanism and a broken chair base, respectively, neither resulting in
injuries.
Other (2%): One incident involved a child creating enough motion to
tip over a small pedestal table to which the parent had secured the
chair.
Table 2--Distribution of Non-NEISS Reported Portable Hook-On Chair Incidents By Product-Related Issues or Hazard
Patterns
[Date of Incident: January 1, 2000-October 2014]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total reports Reported injuries Reported deaths
Product-related issues or hazard patterns -----------------------------------------------------------------
Count Percentage Count Percentage Count Percentage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment to Table Compromised............... 31 53 9 47 ....... ...........
(chair did not fall from table)........... (17) (4) ........... ....... ...........
(chair fell from table)................... (14) (5) ........... ....... ...........
Restraints or Containment..................... 11 19 5 26 1 100
(child slipped down, entrapping neck)..... (7) (3) ........... (1) ...........
(child slipped partially, but shoulder (1) (1) ........... ....... ...........
caught by waist straps)..................
(child able to get up and possibly fall (3) (1) ........... ....... ...........
out of chair)............................
Seat Fabric Separation Due to Unintended 6 10 3 16 ....... ...........
Release of Snaps or Straps...................
(child slipped forward and head struck (1) (1) ........... ....... ...........
table after metal snaps opened)..........
(child slipped and neck became trapped (1) (1) ........... ....... ...........
after Velcro opened).....................
(child fell entirely out of chair after (2) (1) ........... ....... ...........
Velcro opened)...........................
(child remained seated despite Velcro (2) ....... ........... ....... ...........
opening).................................
Seat Fabric Separation Due to Torn or Broken 3 5 1 5 ....... ...........
Components...................................
(child fell entirely out of chair after (1) (1) ........... ....... ...........
fabric seam ripped)......................
(child remained seated despite broken clip (2) ....... ........... ....... ...........
or fabric)...............................
Miscellaneous Broken Components............... 6 10 1 5 ....... ...........
(locking pin)............................. (4) (1) ........... ....... ...........
(release mechanism)....................... (1) ....... ........... ....... ...........
(base of chair)........................... (1) ....... ........... ....... ...........
Other......................................... 1 2 0 0 ....... ...........
(tip over of table hooked upon)........... (1) ....... ........... ....... ...........
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................. 58 100 19 100 1 100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission's epidemiological databases CPSRMS, IPII, INDP, and DTHS.
Note: The percentages have been rounded to the nearest integer and shown for totals and subtotals only.
Subtotals do not necessarily add to heading totals.
D. Product Recalls
Since January 1, 2000, two hook-on chair recalls occurred involving
two different firms. The first recall was in June 2001, and involved
Inglesina USA hook-on chairs. The product was recalled after one report
of a child who fell from the chair because that model chair did not
incorporate a seat belt. The recall involved 780 units.
The second recall was in August 2011, and involved phil&teds USA,
Inc., ``metoo'' clip-on chairs. This recall involved multiple hazards.
The first hazard was related to missing or worn clamp pads that allowed
the chairs to detach from a variety of different table surfaces, posing
a fall hazard. A second hazard occurred when the chair detached;
children's fingers were able to be caught between the bar and clamping
mechanism, posing an amputation hazard. In addition, user instructions
for the chairs were inadequate, increasing the likelihood of consumer
misuse. CPSC is aware of 19 reports of the chairs falling from
different table surfaces, including five reports of injuries. Two of
the five reports of injuries involved children's fingers being severely
pinched, lacerated, crushed or amputated. The three other reports of
injury involved bruising after a chair detached suddenly and the child
fell with the chair, striking the table or floor.
[[Page 38045]]
IV. International Standards for Hook-On Chairs and the ASTM Voluntary
Standard
CPSC is aware of one international standard, EN1272-1998, Child
Care Articles--Table Mounted Chairs--Safety Requirements and Test
Methods, which addresses hook-on chairs in a fashion similar to ASTM
F1235-15. CPSC staff compared ASTM F1235-15 requirements that address
chair-to-table attachments and restraints and containment features to
the equivalent EN1272-1998 provisions. The EN1272-1998 standard has
requirements for:
Chemical and flammability material properties;
General construction, such as small parts, sharp edges and
openings;
Structural integrity, including static and dynamic tests;
Restraints; and
Labeling.
Although there are differences between the two standards, based on
this comparison CPSC believes ASTM F1235-15 to be a more stringent
standard, which will more completely address the hazard patterns seen
in CPSC incident data. For example, ASTM F1235-15 contains a number of
requirements that do not have an equivalent in the European standard,
including the seat and seat back disengagement test, the passive crotch
restraint requirement, and the scissoring, shearing, and pinching
disengagement test. Additionally, in instances where there is an
equivalent requirement in the European standard (e.g., static load test
and chair pull/push test), ASTM requirements are as stringent as or
more stringent than the comparable European standard requirement.
V. Voluntary Standard--ASTM F1235
A. History of ASTM F1235
The voluntary standard for hook-on chairs was first approved and
published in 1989, as ASTM 1235-89, Standard Consumer Safety
Specification for Portable Hook-On Chairs. ASTM has revised the
voluntary standard seven times since then. The current version, ASTM
F1235-15, was approved on May 1, 2015.
B. Description of the Current Voluntary Standard--ASTM F1235-15
ASTM F1235-15 was published in June 2015. Revisions include
modified and new requirements developed by CPSC staff, in conjunction
with stakeholders on the ASTM subcommittee task group, to address the
hazards associated with hook-on chairs. ASTM F1235-15 includes the
following key provisions: scope, terminology, general requirements,
performance requirements, test methods, marking and labeling, and
instructional literature.
Scope. This section states the scope of the standard, detailing
what constitutes a hook-on chair. As stated in section II.A. of this
preamble, the Scope section defines a hook-on chair to be ``[u]sually a
legless seat constructed to locate the occupant at a table in such a
position and elevation so that the surface of the table can be used as
the feeding surface for the occupant . . . [s]upported solely by the
table on which it is mounted.'' The Scope section further specifies the
appropriate ages and weights for children using portable hook-on chairs
as ``between the ages of six months and three years and who weigh no
more than 37 lb (16.8 kg) (95th percentile male at three years).''
Terminology. This section provides definitions of terms specific to
this standard.
General Requirements. This section addresses numerous hazards with
several general requirements, most of which are also found in the other
ASTM juvenile product standards. The following are the general
requirements contained in this section:
Sharp points;
Small parts;
Lead in paint;
Wood parts;
Latching and locking mechanisms;
Scissoring, shearing, and pinching (including during
detachment from table support surface);
Exposed coil springs;
Openings;
Labeling; and
Protective components.
Performance Requirements and Test Methods. These sections contain
performance requirements specific to hook-on chairs, as well as test
methods that must be used to assess conformity with such requirements.
Below is a discussion of each.
Chair Drop Test: The hook-on chair is dropped twice from a
height of 36 inches on each of six different planes. The purpose of
this performance requirement is to test that the hook-on chair does not
exhibit any mechanical hazards (sharp points, sharp edges, or small
parts) after a drop test has been performed.
Static Load Test: The hook-on chair must support a weight
of 100 pounds on both the maximum and minimum thickness test surfaces.
The purpose of this performance requirement is to test that the hook-on
chair is strong enough to support approximately three times the weight
of a child expected to be in the seat.
Seat and Seat Back Disengagement Test: The seat and seat
back must remain fully attached to the frame of the chair when various
forces are applied. The purpose of this performance requirement is to
test that the seat and seat back are strong enough to withstand the
forces they will be subject to during use.
Chair Bounce Test: The chair must remain attached to the
standard test surface and allow no movement greater than 1 in (25 mm)
when a force is applied to the seat back and a weight is dropped onto
the seat 50 times. The purpose of this test is to simulate a child
bouncing up and down in the hook-on chair.
Chair Pull/Push Test: A variety of forces and weights are
used to verify that the hook-on chair does not detach from the test
surface. The purpose of this test is to simulate a child's actions that
might cause the chair to disengage from the table.
Restraint System Performance Requirements and Tests: The
standard requires that an active restraint system, such as a belt, be
provided to secure a child in the seated position in each of the
manufacturer-recommended use positions. In addition, the restraint
system must include both a waist and a crotch restraint designed to
require the crotch restraint to be used when the active restraint
system is used. The restraint system must be attached to the chair
before shipment so the system does not release during normal use. The
purpose of this performance requirement is to test that the restraint
system and its closing means do not break, separate, or permit removal
of the occupant when various forces are applied.
Openings and Passive Crotch Restraint System: This section
requires the chair to be supplied with a passive crotch restraint. In
addition, to prevent consumer mis-installation or non-installation, the
standard requires the passive crotch restraint be installed on the
product at the time of shipment. The leg openings must be tested, using
a wedge block, to assess whether the passive crotch restraint is
effective under the load. The hook-on chair is attached to a test
surface and then the tapered end of the wedge block is inserted, and a
25 lb. (111 N) force is applied to the wedge block to push (or pull)
the wedge block through the opening. The wedge block is modeled from
the hip/torso dimensions of the youngest expected user. In addition to
the leg openings, any side openings of the seat, and openings in front
of the occupant (between the chair and the supporting table structure),
are also
[[Page 38046]]
tested in a similar manner. To comply with the requirement, the wedge
block must not pass completely through any opening. The purpose of
these provisions is to reduce the likelihood of children getting
injured or dying as a result of sliding through or becoming entrapped
in an opening.
Scissoring, Shearing, and Pinching Disengagement Test:
This test is intended to reduce the likelihood of children becoming
injured due to motion caused by the rotation of a hook-on chair when
one side (clamp) detaches from the table. One recall was conducted in
cooperation with the CPSC for this issue. The firm reported that two
incidents resulted in a finger amputation of the occupant in the hook-
on chair. In this test, the hook-on chair is partially attached to the
minimum test surface with only one of the attachment-fastening devices
firmly attached to the test surface; the other fastening device is left
loose. A CAMI infant dummy is placed in the hook-on chair with the
restraints fastened. A force is then applied to the chair/arm frame in
line with the loose fastening device in a direction that results in the
rotation of the product on a horizontal plane around the other (fully
tightened) attachment point. When the loose attachment point is no
longer supported by the test surface, the force is discontinued, and
the product is allowed to rotate vertically downward from the test
surface. Scissoring, shearing, or pinching that may result in injury is
not permissible during the entire test, including when the chair is
rotating downward.
Marking and Labeling. This section contains various requirements
relating to warnings, labeling, and required markings for hook-on
chairs. This section prescribes various substance, format, and
prominence requirements for such information.
Instructional Literature. This sections requires that instructions
be provided with hook-on chairs and be easy to read and understand.
Additionally, the section contains requirements relating to
instructional literature contents and format, as well as prominence of
certain language.
VI. Assessment of the Voluntary Standard ASTM F1235-15
CPSC believes that the current voluntary standard, ASTM F1235-15,
addresses the primary hazard patterns identified in the incident data.
The following section discusses how each of the identified product-
related issues or hazard patterns listed in section III.C. of this
preamble is addressed by the current voluntary standard, ASTM F1235-15:
A. Chair's Attachment
CPSC is aware of 45 incidents in which the attachment of the hook-
on chair to the table was compromised. ASTM F1235-15 contains two
separate requirements with the intended purpose of reducing the
likelihood of a hook-on chair becoming detached from its supporting
surface: the chair bounce test and the chair pull/push test.
Additionally, in response to CPSC staff's request, ASTM formed a task
group to address hazards associated with partial detachment of a chair,
which can result in scissoring or shearing hazards. CPSC staff worked
with ASTM to develop performance requirements to address this hazard.
Accordingly, the standard includes a requirement (first introduced in
ASTM F1235-14a) to reduce injuries in the event that a hook-on chair
partially detaches from the table support surface: the scissoring,
shearing, and pinching test. CPSC believes these requirements
adequately address this hazard pattern.
B. Restraint or Containment
CPSC is aware of 22 incidents involving or likely involving issues
with the hook-on chair restraints or other means of containment. In
these instances, children slipped and became entrapped by the neck, or
children were able to stand up and fall out over the sides of the
chair. The only known fatality in the incident data occurred when a
child's head and neck became wedged between the seat and table edge.
Similar non-fatal incidents were also reported. Additionally, CPSC
received reports of children standing and then slipping and becoming
trapped between the table and the hook-on chair.
In response to reported incidents, CPSC staff worked with an ASTM
task group to create a provision that hook-on chairs must contain a
passive crotch restraint--a ``component that separates the openings for
the legs of the occupant into two separate bounded openings and
requires no action on the part of the caregiver to use except to
position one leg into each opening created by the component.'' Before
the 2014 version of the standard, ASTM F1235 did not contain a passive
crotch restraint requirement.
Additionally, CPSC's work with the ASTM task group led to a related
leg openings performance requirement and test method. Consequently, the
current standard contains an openings requirement and associated test
methodologies that cover leg openings and side openings. This
requirement also applies to completely bounded openings in front of the
occupant, addressing entrapment between the leading edge of the chair
and the supporting table surface.
ASTM F1235-15 requires that all hook-on chairs contain a crotch and
waist belt restraint system. In addition, the restraint system
undergoes testing to check that the system restrains the child as
intended. The leg openings, openings around the side and in front of
the seat, and the area between the chair and the supporting table are
all tested to check that an occupant cannot slide through or become
entrapped in the openings. CPSC believes these recent additions to the
standard adequately address this hazard pattern.
C. Fabric- and Component-Related Incidents
CPSC is aware of 15 incidents in which seat fabric, seat fabric
fasteners, or other chair components failed. ASTM F1235-15 includes
three different performance tests to help address this hazard pattern:
the chair drop test, the static load test, and the seat/seat back
disengagement test. Additionally, warning and instructional literature
improvements included in the last revision of the standard will help
prevent snaps or Velcro from unintentionally detaching due to
foreseeable misuse and abuse. CPSC believes that ASTM F1235-15
adequately addresses this hazard pattern.
D. Other
ASTM F1235-15 includes revised requirements for marking and
labeling and instructional literature. These improvements are intended
to help reduce incidents of misuse, such as attaching a hook-on chair
to a table for which it was not intended. CPSC believes that the
standard contains adequate and clear warnings related to known hazards
associated with hook-on chairs.
VII. Proposed CPSC Standard for Hook-On Chairs
As explained in the previous section of this preamble, the
Commission concludes that ASTM F1235-15 adequately addresses the
hazards associated with hook-on chairs. Thus, the Commission proposes
to incorporate by reference ASTM F1235-15 without any modifications.
VIII. Amendment to 16 CFR Part 1112 To Include NOR for Hook-On Chairs
Standard
The CPSA establishes certain requirements for product certification
[[Page 38047]]
and testing. 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).
Certification of children's products subject to a children's product
safety rule must be based on testing conducted by a CPSC-accepted third
party conformity assessment body. Id. 2063(a)(2). The Commission must
publish an NOR for the accreditation of third party conformity
assessment bodies to assess conformity with a children's product safety
rule to which a children's product is subject. Id. 2063(a)(3). Thus,
the proposed rule for 16 CFR part 1233, Safety Standard for Portable
Hook-On Chairs, if issued as a final rule, would be a children's
product safety rule that requires the issuance of an NOR.
The Commission published a final rule, Requirements Pertaining to
Third Party Conformity Assessment Bodies, 78 FR 15836 (March 12, 2013),
codified at 16 CFR part 1112 (``part 1112'') and effective on June 10,
2013, which establishes requirements for accreditation of third party
conformity assessment bodies to test for conformity with a children's
product safety rule in accordance with section 14(a)(2) of the CPSA.
Part 1112 also codifies all of the NORs issued previously by the
Commission.
All new NORs for new children's product safety rules, such as the
hook-on chair standard, require an amendment to part 1112. To meet the
requirement that the Commission issue an NOR for the proposed hook-on
chair standard, as part of this NPR, the Commission proposes to amend
the existing rule that codifies the list of all NORs issued by the
Commission to add hook-on chairs to the list of children's product
safety rules for which the CPSC has issued an NOR.
Test laboratories applying for acceptance as a CPSC-accepted third
party conformity assessment body to test to the new standard for hook-
on chairs would be required to meet the third party conformity
assessment body accreditation requirements in 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 1233, Safety Standard for Portable Hook-On Chairs,
included in the laboratory's scope of accreditation of CPSC safety
rules listed for the laboratory on the CPSC Web site at: www.cpsc.gov/labsearch.
IX. Incorporation by Reference
Section 1233.2(a) of the proposed rule incorporates by reference
ASTM F1235-15. The Office of the Federal Register (``OFR'') has
regulations concerning incorporation by reference. 1 CFR part 51. The
OFR recently revised these regulations to require that, for a proposed
rule, agencies must discuss in the preamble of the NPR ways that the
materials the agency proposes to incorporate by reference are
reasonably available to interested persons or how the agency worked to
make the materials reasonably available. In addition, the preamble of
the proposed rule must summarize the material. 1 CFR 51.5(a).
In accordance with the OFR's requirements, section V.B. of this
preamble summarizes the provisions of ASTM F1235-15 that the Commission
proposes to incorporate by reference. ASTM F1235-15 is copyrighted. By
permission of ASTM, the standard can be viewed as a read-only document
during the comment period on this NPR, at: https://www.astm.org/cpsc.htm. Interested persons may also purchase a copy of ASTM F1235-15
from ASTM International, 100 Bar Harbor Drive, P.O. Box 0700, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428; https://www.astm.org/cpsc.htm. One may also
inspect a copy at CPSC's Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product
Safety Commission, Room 820, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD
20814, telephone 301-504-7923.
X. 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). The Commission is proposing an
effective date of six months after publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register. Without evidence to the contrary, CPSC generally
considers six months to be sufficient time for suppliers to come into
compliance with a new standard, and a six-month effective date is
typical for other CPSIA section 104 rules. Six months is also the
period that the Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association (``JPMA'')
typically allows for products in the JPMA certification program to
transition to a new standard once that standard is published.
We also propose a six-month effective date for the amendment to
part 1112. We ask for comments on the proposed six-month effective
date.
XI. Regulatory Flexibility Act
A. Introduction
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (``RFA'') requires that agencies
review a proposed rule for the rule's potential economic impact on
small entities, including small businesses. Section 603 of the RFA
generally requires that agencies prepare an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis (``IRFA'') and make the analysis available to the
public for comment when the agency publishes an NPR. 5 U.S.C. 603.
Section 605 of the RFA provides that an IRFA is not required if the
agency certifies that the rule will not, if promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
As explained in this section, the Commission concludes that the
standard for hook-on chairs, if promulgated as a final rule, will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
B. Market Description
The Commission has identified 10 firms supplying hook-on chairs to
the U.S. market, typically priced at $40 to $80 each. These firms
specialize in the manufacture and/or distribution of durable nursery
products and represent only a small segment of the juvenile products
industry. All but two of these firms are represented by the JPMA which,
according to its Web site, represents 95 percent of the North American
industry or about 250 companies. Nine of the 10 known firms are
domestic (including 3 manufacturers and 6 importers). The remaining
firm is a foreign manufacturer.
Hook-on chairs represent only a small proportion of each firm's
overall product line; on average, each firm supplies one hook-on chair
model to the U.S. market annually. This reflects hook-on chairs'
relative lack of popularity when compared with substitute products such
as high chairs and booster chairs. In 2013, the CPSC conducted a
Durable Nursery Product Exposure Survey (``DNPES'') of U.S. households
with children under age 6. Data from the DNPES indicate that there are
an estimated 2.04 million hook-on chairs in U.S. households with
children under the age of 6. The number of high chairs and booster
chairs was each more than four times higher with an estimated 9.74
million and 8.91 million in U.S. households with children under age 6,
respectively.
[[Page 38048]]
C. Impact of Proposed 16 CFR Part 1233 on Small Businesses
We are aware of approximately 10 firms currently marketing portable
hook-on chairs in the United States, 9 of which are domestic firms.
Under U.S. Small Business Administration (``SBA'') guidelines, a
manufacturer of hook-on chairs is small if it has 500 or fewer
employees, and importers and wholesalers are considered small if they
have 100 or fewer employees. We limit our analysis to domestic firms
because SBA guidelines and definitions pertain to U.S.-based entities.
Based on these guidelines, six of the nine domestic suppliers are
small--two domestic manufacturers and four domestic importers. Staff
expects that the hook-on chairs of nine of the 10 firms are compliant
with ASTM F1235 because they are either: (1) Certified by the JPMA
(three firms); or (2) the supplier claims compliance with the voluntary
standard (six firms). It is unknown at this time whether the hook-on
chairs supplied by the remaining firm, the foreign manufacturer, comply
with the ASTM voluntary standard.
The costs of compliance with the proposed standard, if any, are
expected to be negligible for all known small firms, all of which have
hook-on chairs compliant with the ASTM voluntary standard currently in
effect for testing purposes (F1235-14). These firms are expected to
remain compliant with the voluntary standard as it evolves, because
they follow (and most of these firms actively participate in) the
standard development process. Therefore, compliance with the voluntary
standard is part of an established business practice. ASTM F1235-15,
the version of the voluntary standard that the Commission proposes to
adopt without modification as the mandatory hook-on chair standard,
will be in effect for testing purposes by the time the mandatory
standard becomes final. These firms are likely to be in compliance by
the rule's effective date, based on their history.
Under section 14 of the CPSA, once the new hook-on chair
requirements become effective, all manufacturers will be subject to the
third party testing and certification requirements under the testing
rule, Testing and Labeling Pertaining to Product Certification (16 CFR
part 1107) (``1107 rule''). Importers will also be subject to these
requirements if their supplying foreign firm(s) does not perform third
party testing. Third party testing will include any physical and
mechanical test requirements specified in the final hook-on chairs
rule. Manufacturers and importers of hook-on chairs should already be
conducting required lead or phthalates testing for hook-on chairs. Any
costs associated with third party testing are in addition to the direct
costs of meeting the hook-on chair standard.
Additional testing costs for manufacturers are expected to be small
because all hook-on chairs in the U.S. market are currently tested to
verify compliance with the ASTM standard, though not necessarily via
third party. According to estimates from suppliers, testing to the ASTM
voluntary standard typically costs about $600-$1,000 per model sample.
Based on an examination of firm revenues from recent Dun & Bradstreet
or ReferenceUSAGov reports, the impact of third party testing to ASTM
F1235-15 is unlikely to be economically significant for small
manufacturers (i.e., testing costs will be less than 1 percent of gross
revenue). Although it is unknown how many samples will be needed to
meet the ``high degree of assurance'' criterion required in the 1107
rule, over 35 units per model would be required to make testing costs
exceed one percent of gross revenue for the small manufacturer with the
lowest gross revenue. Note that this calculation assumes the rule would
generate additional testing costs in the $600-$1,000 per model sample
range. Given that all firms are conducting some testing already, this
likely overestimates the impact of the rule on testing costs.
Likewise, we expect the cost of third party testing to the proposed
rule to be small for small importers. Again, all hook-on chairs are
currently tested to verify compliance with the ASTM standard.
Discussions with one importer indicate that this testing is currently
conducted by their foreign supplier. Second, as with manufacturers, any
costs would be limited to the incremental costs associated with third
party testing over the current testing regime, to the extent there are
any additional costs.
Both the costs of compliance and the incremental costs of testing
due to the 1107 rule are not expected to be economically significant
for manufacturers and importers of hook-on chairs. However, even if the
costs were significant, the affected firms have diverse product lines,
only a minor part consisting of hook-on chairs; an economically
feasible option is to discontinue the product line and remain in
business.
The analysis above shows that there are only a few small suppliers
of hook-on chairs, and these few firms represent only a small segment
of the juvenile products industry. Moreover, this product is only one
of many in each firm's product line and is unlikely to be of particular
importance to a firm's overall market plan. All of the hook-on chairs
supplied by these firms comply with the voluntary standard and are
expected to continue to do so. Consequently, the costs of compliance,
if any, are expected to be negligible. Third party testing costs are
expected to be very small and economically insignificant (i.e., less
than one percent of gross revenue for affected firms), given that all
of the hook-on chairs supplied by these firms are already being tested
to the ASTM voluntary standard. For these reasons, the Commission
certifies that the proposed hook-on chair rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
D. Impact of Proposed 16 CFR Part 1112 Amendment on Small Businesses
This proposed rule would also amend part 1112 to add hook-on chairs
to the list of children's products for which the Commission has issued
an NOR. As required by the RFA, staff conducted a Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (``FRFA'') when the Commission issued the part
1112 rule (78 FR 15836, 15855-58). Briefly, the FRFA concluded that the
accreditation requirements would not have a significant adverse impact
on a substantial number of small test laboratories because no
requirements were imposed on test laboratories that did not intend to
provide third party testing services. The only test laboratories that
were expected to provide such services were those that anticipated
receiving sufficient revenue from the mandated testing to justify
accepting the requirements as a business decision. Moreover, a test
laboratory would only choose to provide such services if it anticipated
receiving revenues sufficient to cover the costs of the requirements.
Based on similar reasoning, amending 16 CFR part 1112 to include
the NOR for the hook-on chairs standard will not have a significant
adverse impact on small test laboratories. Moreover, based upon the
number of test laboratories in the United States that have applied for
CPSC acceptance of accreditation to test for conformance to other
mandatory juvenile product standards, we expect that only a few test
laboratories will seek CPSC acceptance of their accreditation to test
for conformance with the hook-on chair standard. Most of these test
laboratories will have already been accredited to test for conformity
to other mandatory juvenile product standards, and the only costs to
them would be the cost of adding the hook-on chairs standard to their
scope
[[Page 38049]]
of accreditation. For these reasons, the Commission certifies that the
NOR amending 16 CFR part 1112 to include the hook-on chairs standard
will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
XII. Environmental Considerations
The Commission's regulations address whether the agency is required
to prepare an environmental assessment or an environmental impact
statement. Under these regulations, a rule that has ``little or no
potential for affecting the human environment,'' is categorically
exempt from this requirement. 16 CFR 1021.5(c)(1). The proposed rule
falls within the categorical exemption.
XIII. Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule contains information collection requirements
that are subject to public comment and review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). 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 Portable Hook-On Chairs
Description: The proposed rule would require each hook-on chair to
comply with ASTM F1235-15, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for
Portable Hook-On Chairs. Sections 8 and 9 of ASTM F1235-15 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 hook-
on chairs.
Estimated Burden: We estimate the burden of this collection of
information as follows:
Table 3--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Frequency of Total annual Hours per Total burden
16 CFR section respondents responses responses response hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1233.2(a).......................................................... 10 1 10 1 10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our estimate is based on the following:
Section 8.1 of ASTM F1235-15 requires that the name and the place
of business (city, state, and 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 8.2
of ASTM F1235-15 requires a code mark or other means that identifies
the date (month and year, as a minimum) of manufacture.
Ten known entities supply hook-on chairs to the U.S. market may
need to make some modifications to their existing labels. We estimate
that the time required to make these modifications is about 1 hour per
model. Based on an evaluation of supplier product lines, each entity
supplies an average of one model of hook-on chairs; \1\ therefore, the
estimated burden associated with labels is 1 hour per model x 10
entities x 1 models per entity = 10 hours. We estimate the hourly
compensation for the time required to create and update labels is
$30.09 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, ``Employer Costs for Employee
Compensation,'' Dec. 2014, 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 $300.90 ($30.09 per hour x
10 hours = $300.90). No operating, maintenance, or capital costs are
associated with the collection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This number was derived during the market research phase of
the initial regulatory flexibility analysis by dividing the total
number of hook-on chairs supplied by all hook-on chair suppliers by
the total number of hook-on chair suppliers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 9.1 of ASTM F1235-15 requires instructions to be supplied
with the product. Hook-on chairs are complicated products that
generally require use and assembly instructions. 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.'' We are unaware of hook-on chairs that
generally require use instructions but lack such instructions.
Therefore, we tentatively estimate that no burden hours are associated
with section 9.1 of ASTM F1235-15, because any burden associated with
supplying instructions with hook-on chairs 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 hook-on chairs
would impose a burden to industry of 10 hours at a cost of $313.20
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 August 3, 2015, 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.
XIV. Preemption
Section 26(a) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2075(a), provides that when a
consumer product safety standard is in effect and
[[Page 38050]]
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.'' Therefore, the preemption
provision of section 26(a) of the CPSA would apply to a rule issued
under section 104.
XV. Request for Comments
This NPR begins a rulemaking proceeding under section 104(b) of the
CPSIA to issue a consumer product safety standard for hook-on chairs,
and to amend part 1112 to add hook-on chairs to the list of children's
product safety rules for which the CPSC has issued an NOR. We invite
all interested persons to submit comments on any aspect of the proposed
mandatory safety standard for hook-on chairs and on the proposed
amendment to part 1112. Specifically, the Commission requests comments
on the costs of compliance with, and testing to, the proposed hook-on
chair safety standard, the proposed six-month effective date for the
new mandatory hook-on chair safety standard, and the proposed amendment
to part 1112. During the comment period, the ASTM F1235-15, Standard
Consumer Safety Specification for Portable Hook-On Chairs, is available
as a read-only document at: https://www.astm.org/cpsc.htm.
Comments should be submitted in accordance with the instructions in
the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this notice.
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 1233
Consumer protection, Imports, Incorporation by reference, Infants
and children, Labeling, Law enforcement, and Toys.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Commission proposes
to amend Title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations 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: 15 U.S.C. 2063; Pub. L. 110-314, section 3, 122 Stat.
3016, 3017 (2008).
0
2. Amend Sec. 1112.15 by adding paragraph (b)(40) 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) * * *
(40) 16 CFR part 1233, Safety Standard for Portable Hook-On Chairs.
* * * * *
0
3. Add part 1233 to read as follows:
PART 1233--SAFETY STANDARD FOR PORTABLE HOOK-ON CHAIRS
Sec.
1233.1 Scope.
1233.2 Requirements for portable hook-on chairs.
Authority: The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008,
Pub. L. 110-314, Sec. 104, 122 Stat. 3016 (August 14, 2008); Pub.
L. 112-28, 125 Stat. 273 (August 12, 2011).
Sec. 1233.1 Scope.
This part establishes a consumer product safety standard for
portable hook-on chairs.
Sec. 1233.2 Requirements for portable hook-on chairs.
Each portable hook-on chair must comply with all applicable
provisions of ASTM F1235-15, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for
Portable Hook-On Chairs, approved on May 1, 2015. 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/cpsc.htm. 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_federalregulations/ibr_locations.html.
Dated: June 29, 2015.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission.
[FR Doc. 2015-16330 Filed 7-1-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P