[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 118 (Tuesday, June 19, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28358-28370]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12938]


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

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

16 CFR Parts 1112 and 1231

[Docket No. CPSC-2015-0031]


Safety Standard for High Chairs

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA) 
directs the Commission to issue standards for durable infant or toddler 
products. To comply with section 104 of the CPSIA, CPSC is issuing a 
safety standard for high chairs. This rule incorporates by reference 
ASTM F404-18, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for High Chairs 
(ASTM F404-18). In addition, this rule amends the regulations regarding 
third party conformity assessment bodies to include the safety standard 
for high chairs in the list of Notices of Requirements (NORs).

DATES: The rule will become effective on June 19, 2019. The 
incorporation by reference of the publication listed in this rule is 
approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of June 19, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keysha Walker, Office of Compliance 
and Field Operations, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission; 4330 
East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; email: [email protected]; 
telephone: (301) 504-6820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background and Statutory Authority

    Congress enacted the CPSIA (Pub. L. 110-314, 122 Stat. 3016), as 
part of the Danny Keysar Child Product Safety Notification Act, on 
August 14, 2008. Section 104(b) of the CPSIA requires CPSC 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 or 
toddler products. Any standard CPSC adopts under this mandate must be 
substantially the same as the applicable voluntary standard, or more 
stringent than the voluntary standard if CPSC determines that more 
stringent requirements would further reduce the risk of injury 
associated with the product. Section 104(f)(1) of the CPSIA defines the 
term ``durable infant or toddler product'' as ``a durable product 
intended for use, or that may be reasonably expected to be used, by 
children under the age of 5 years,'' and section 104(f)(2)(C) 
specifically identifies high chairs as a durable infant or toddler 
product.
    On November 9, 2015, the Commission issued a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPR), proposing to incorporate by reference the then-
current voluntary standard for high chairs, ASTM F404-15, with more 
stringent requirements for rearward stability and warnings on labels 
and in instructional literature. 80 FR 69144; 81 FR 3354 (January 21, 
2016) (correcting an error in the NPR). After the Commission issued the 
NPR, ASTM revised the voluntary standard several times, as discussed in 
section V of this preamble, and published the current version of the 
standard, ASTM F404-18, in March 2018.
    In this final rule, the Commission is incorporating by reference 
ASTM F404-18, with no modifications, as the mandatory safety standard 
for high chairs. As section 104(b)(1)(A) of the CPSIA requires, CPSC 
staff consulted with manufacturers, retailers, trade organizations, 
laboratories, consumer advocacy groups, consultants, and the public to 
develop this standard, largely through the ASTM standard-development 
process. In addition, this final rule amends the list of NORs in 16 CFR 
part 1112 to include the standard for high chairs.

II. Product Description

    ASTM F404-18 defines a ``high chair'' as ``a free standing chair 
for a child up to 3 years of age which has a seating surface more than 
15 in. above the floor and elevates the child normally for the purposes 
of feeding or eating.'' The ASTM standard further specifies that a high 
chair may be sold with or without a tray, have adjustable heights, or 
recline for infants.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ After the Commission issued the NPR, staff learned of a 
reclined infant seat accessory for a high chair product that is 
intended for young infants. The product consists of a high chair 
base that is sold separately from, but accommodates, several seat 
accessories that are appropriate for different ages and sizes of 
children. One of the seat accessories is a reclined seat that, when 
placed on the high chair base, allows infants to be raised to the 
height of a dining table. Based on the characteristics of the infant 
seat accessory, its intended use, and marketing materials, CPSC 
staff believes that these products also meet the definition of a 
high chair.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    High chairs are available in various designs, including four-legged 
A-frame styles, single-leg pedestals, Z-frame styles, and restaurant-
style. Construction materials often include a plastic, wood, or metal 
frame, and a padded fabric seat. Some designs include a tray or mounted 
toy accessories, fold for storage and transport, or convert for 
continued use as a child grows. ASTM F404-18 requires high chairs to 
have a passive crotch restraint (i.e., two separate bounded openings 
for the occupant's legs) and a three-point restraint system; some 
designs also include a rigid front torso support or a five-point 
restraint system with shoulder harnesses.

III. Market Description

    CPSC staff has identified 59 domestic firms that currently supply 
high chairs to the U.S. market. Thirty-three of these firms manufacture 
high chairs and the remaining 26 firms are importers. Forty-three of 
the firms (26 manufacturers and 17 importers) are small, according to 
the U.S. Small Business Administration's (SBA) standards,\2\ and the 
remaining 16 (7 manufacturers and 9 importers) are large. Of the 59 
domestic firms, 43 market their high chairs only to consumers, and 4 
sell their high chairs to both consumers and restaurants. In addition, 
staff identified 9 foreign firms that supply high chairs to the U.S. 
market, including 8 manufacturers and 1 importer. Staff also identified 
numerous high chairs that are manufactured outside the United States 
and bought domestically through online sales.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Under SBA size standards, a high chair manufacturer is 
``small'' if it has 500 or fewer employees, and an importer is 
``small'' if it has 100 or fewer employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the time CPSC staff assessed the high chairs market, 13 of the 
26 small domestic manufacturers, and 9 of the 17 small domestic 
importers, reported that they complied with the ASTM standard for high 
chairs.

IV. Incident Data

    CPSC receives data regarding product-related injuries from several 
sources.

[[Page 28359]]

One source is the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System 
(NEISS), from which CPSC can estimate, based on a probability sample, 
the number of injuries that are treated in U.S. hospital emergency 
departments (U.S. EDs) nationwide that are associated with specific 
consumer products. Other sources include reports from consumers and 
others through the Consumer Product Safety Risk Management System 
(which also includes some NEISS data) and reports from retailers and 
manufacturers through CPSC's Retailer Reporting System--CPSC refers to 
these sources collectively as Consumer Product Safety Risk Management 
System data (CPSRMS).
    The preamble to the NPR summarized reports of high chair-related 
incidents that occurred between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2014, 
which CPSC received through CPSRMS sources. For the final rule, CPSC 
staff has updated this information to reflect newly reported high chair 
incidents that occurred between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2014, 
as well as new incidents that occurred between January 1, 2015 and 
September 30, 2017. In total, CPSC has received 1,842 reports of high-
chair related incidents that occurred between January 1, 2011 and 
September 30, 2017. These incidents involved 2 fatalities and 271 
reported injuries.\3\ Of the incidents that reported the age of the 
child involved, the majority of incidents involved children between 7 
and 18 months old.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The NPR indicated that CPSC had received 1,296 reports of 
high chair-related incidents that occurred between January 1, 2011 
and December 31, 2014, of which 1 was fatal and 138 reported 
injuries. Since the NPR, CPSC received an additional 546 reports of 
high-chair related incidents that occurred between January 1, 2011 
and September 30, 2017, of which 1 was fatal and 133 reported 
injuries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The preamble to the NPR also summarized NEISS estimates for high 
chair-related incidents that occurred between January 1, 2011 and 
December 31, 2014. After the Commission issued the NPR, complete injury 
data became available for 2015 and 2016, and CPSC staff has updated 
this information for the final rule. Including this new data and 
extrapolating from the probability sample, CPSC staff estimates that 
there were 49,900 high chair-related injuries treated in U.S. EDs 
between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2016. There were no deaths 
reported through NEISS for this period. There was no statistically 
significant increase or decrease in the estimated injuries from year-
to-year between 2011 and 2016, and there was no statistically 
significant trend in the data over this period. Similarly to the CPSRMS 
data, of the incidents that reported the age of the child involved, 
most incidents involved children between 7 and 23 months old.

A. Fatalities

    CPSC is aware of two fatal incidents that occurred between January 
1, 2011 and September 30, 2017. As the NPR stated, CPSC staff has been 
unable to collect detailed information about the fatal incident that 
was reported in 2014. CPSC received another report of a high chair-
related fatality in 2016; this incident involved strangulation, but 
CPSC staff was unable to obtain additional details about the incident.

B. Nonfatal Injuries

    Of the total 271 nonfatal injuries reported to CPSC through CPSRMS 
sources that occurred between January 1, 2011 and September 30, 2017, 1 
involved a child who was admitted to the hospital with a skull fracture 
and retinal hemorrhage; 15 were treated in U.S. EDs for injuries 
including a puncture wound to the forehead, a broken collarbone, a 
compound fracture of the finger, lacerations, and contusions; and 1 
reported a head injury and broken wrist, but did not indicate the 
treatment the child received. The remaining injuries primarily 
consisted of contusions, abrasions, and lacerations, resulting from 
falls or entrapment of limbs or extremities.
    The injuries and treatments reported through NEISS for 2015 and 
2016 were consistent with those for 2011 through 2014, described in the 
NPR. In most cases, the patient was treated in the U.S. ED and released 
(94 percent for 2011-2014, and 95 percent for 2015-2016). The most 
commonly injured body parts were the head (65 percent for 2011-2016) 
and face (17 percent for 2011-2016). The most common types of injuries 
were injuries to internal organs (48 percent for 2011-2014, and 51 
percent for 2015-2016), contusions and abrasions (22 percent for 2011-
2014, and 16 percent for 2015-2016), and lacerations (11 percent for 
2011-2014, and 16 percent for 2015-2016).
    CPSC staff also assessed NEISS data to determine the hazards 
associated with high chairs in restaurants. There were an estimated 
1,600 injuries treated in U.S. EDs between 2011 and 2016, which were 
related to high chairs in restaurant settings. Most incidents involved 
users falling from the high chair. Of the reports that indicated the 
cause of the fall, it commonly occurred when a child attempted to climb 
into or out of the high chair; the high chair tipped over; or consumers 
did not use restraints or the restraints failed or were defeated.

C. Hazard Patterns

    The hazards reported in the new incidents are consistent with the 
hazard patterns staff identified in the incidents presented in the NPR. 
The hazard in nearly all reported incidents, both those discussed in 
the NPR (96 percent) and in the new incidents (95 percent), involved 
issues with specific components of the high chair, including the frame, 
seat, restraint system, armrest, tray, toy accessories, and footrest. 
Design, stability, and other general product issues accounted for 4 
percent of incidents discussed in the NPR and 3 percent of the new 
incidents.
    Most of the NEISS incidents reported for 2015 and 2016 involved 
falls from high chairs, often when a child attempted to climb into or 
out of the high chair; when the chair tipped over when a child pushed 
back or rocked while in the high chair; or when a component of the high 
chair (e.g., restraint, tray, lock) failed or disengaged.

V. ASTM F404-18

    In this final rule, the Commission incorporates by reference ASTM 
F404-18. The Commission is incorporating by reference ASTM F404-18 
because it includes provisions that are the same as, or consistent 
with, the requirements proposed in the NPR, and CPSC staff believes 
that the standard addresses the hazards associated with high chairs.

A. History of ASTM F404

    ASTM F404, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for High Chairs, 
is the voluntary standard that addresses the hazard patterns associated 
with the use of high chairs. ASTM first approved and published the 
standard in 1975, as ASTM F404-75. ASTM has revised the standard 
numerous times since then. In the NPR, the Commission proposed to 
incorporate by reference ASTM F404-15, with modifications.
    After the Commission issued the NPR, ASTM revised ASTM F404 five 
times. CPSC staff worked with representatives of manufacturers, 
consumer groups, retailers, and other industry members and groups on 
the ASTM subcommittee on high chairs to develop requirements to address 
the hazards associated with high chairs, including issues and 
requirements raised in the NPR, concerns raised by members of the ASTM 
subcommittee, and comments on the NPR. CPSC staff also participated in 
the ASTM Ad Hoc Committee on Standardized Wording for Juvenile Product 
Standards (Ad Hoc TG) to finalize recommendations for warning labels, 
entitled, ``Recommended

[[Page 28360]]

Language Approved by Ad Hoc Task Group, Revision C'' (November 10, 
2017), to provide consistent and effective warnings for juvenile 
product standards. The most recent version of the standard, ASTM F404-
18, reflects the work of these groups. ASTM approved ASTM F404-18 on 
February 15, 2018, and published it in March 2018.

B. ASTM F404-18: Comparison With the NPR and Assessment of Requirements

    In the NPR, the Commission proposed to incorporate by reference 
ASTM F404-15, which addressed many of the hazard patterns associated 
with high chairs, with modifications to three areas of the standard. 
The Commission proposed more stringent requirements than those in ASTM 
F404-15 for rearward stability, warnings on labels, and instructional 
literature. Specifically, the Commission proposed:
     More stringent rearward stability requirements, including 
test procedures, a formula for determining a ``rearward stability 
index'' (RSI), and a requirement that high chairs have an RSI of at 
least 50;
     more stringent warning content, format, and placement 
requirements than those in ASTM F404-15; and
     warning content in instructional literature that aligned 
with the modified warning labels, as well as formatting requirements 
for warnings in instructions.
    The requirements in ASTM F404-18 are largely the same as those the 
Commission proposed in the NPR. ASTM F404-18 includes the same scope, 
definitions, general requirements (e.g., threaded fasteners; latching 
and locking mechanisms), performance requirements, and test methods 
that the Commission proposed to incorporate by reference from ASTM 
F404-15. In addition, ASTM F404-18 includes modifications to reflect 
the more stringent requirements the Commission proposed in the NPR, to 
address comments filed in response to the NPR, and to provide 
additional detail and clarity. The following discussion compares the 
areas in which the NPR and ASTM F404-18 differ, and describes CPSC 
staff's assessment of the ASTM F404-18 provisions.
1. Stability Requirements
    In the NPR, the Commission proposed to require the forward and 
sideways stability requirements in ASTM F404-15 and more stringent 
rearward stability requirements, consisting of a test method and 
formula for determining the RSI for a high chair, and a minimum RSI of 
50. ASTM F404-18 includes these requirements, with some additional 
details and minor changes for clarification. First, ASTM F404-18 
includes additional details about how to perform stability testing 
(e.g., using a low stretch cord), and, in particular, how to perform 
stability testing when product features vary (e.g., reclining seat 
backs; high chairs without trays; when test weights cannot be centered 
on the seat). Second, ASTM F404-18 includes minor wording changes to 
provide clarity, such as describing the point at which a high chair 
becomes unstable (for purposes of calculating the RSI) as the point 
where it ``begins to tip over,'' instead of the point at which it is on 
``the verge of tipping over.'' This wording maintains the meaning in 
the NPR, but adds clarity, in response to comments requesting 
clarification.
    CPSC staff in the Division of Mechanical and Combustion Engineering 
has reviewed the stability requirements in ASTM F404-18 and believes 
that they adequately address the stability issues associated with high 
chairs. The stability requirements in ASTM F404-18 are largely the same 
as the more-stringent stability requirements the Commission proposed in 
the NPR (maintaining the same test method, formula, and RSI limit), 
which staff believes are effective, and the minor modifications added 
to ASTM F404-18 add clarity and detail.
2. Warning Label Requirements
    In the NPR, the Commission proposed more stringent warning label 
content, format, and placement requirements than those in ASTM F404-15. 
ASTM F404-18 also includes more stringent warning label requirements 
than those in ASTM F404-15, but the requirements are not identical to 
those in the NPR.
    Content. The content of the warnings in ASTM F404-18 are nearly 
identical to those the Commission proposed in the NPR, with minor 
changes to some wording. For example, ASTM F404-18 requires the phrase 
``Fall Hazard'' to appear before the warning statement. In addition, 
one of the NPR warnings stated: ``children have suffered skull 
fractures after falling from high chairs''; in contrast, ASTM F404-18 
states: ``children have suffered severe head injuries including skull 
fractures when falling from high chairs.'' ASTM F404-18 also includes 
some changes to how warnings are phrased, but conveys the same 
information as the wording in the NPR (e.g., ``falls can happen 
quickly,'' versus ``falls can happen suddenly'').
    CPSC staff in the Division of Human Factors (HF) has reviewed the 
warning label content requirements in ASTM F404-18 and believes that 
the warning content is largely consistent with that in the NPR, 
addressing the same general information, and staff concludes that the 
changes do not undermine the effectiveness of the warnings. Staff 
believes that warning of severe head injuries, coupled with citing 
skull fractures as one possible example of such an injury, is an 
effective way to warn users about the potential consequences of the 
fall hazard. Moreover, staff believes that this warning avoids the 
impression that the NPR language may have given, which is that skull 
fractures are the only type of potential injury. In addition, staff 
believes that the phrase, ``Fall Hazard,'' is unnecessary, but is not 
problematic.
    Format. The NPR and ASTM F404-18 include the same requirements for 
size and organization of warning labels, but handle some other 
formatting requirements differently. After the Commission issued the 
NPR, the Ad Hoc TG finalized its recommendations for warning labels, 
which address warning format. The goal of the Ad Hoc TG recommendations 
is to provide consistent and effective warnings for juvenile products 
by addressing warning format issues that impact consumer attention, 
readability, hazard perception, and avoidance behaviors.
    The Ad Hoc TG recommendations are based largely on the requirements 
of ANSI Z535.4, American National Standard for Product Safety Signs and 
Labels (ANSI Z535.4), with additional content to account for the wide 
range and unique nature of durable nursery products, the concerns of 
industry representatives, and CPSC staff's recommendations. ANSI Z535.4 
addresses format topics, such as safety alert symbols, signal words, 
panel format, color, and letter style; and additional Ad Hoc TG 
recommendations address text size, alignment, and organization.
    The warning format requirements in ASTM F404-18 align with the Ad 
Hoc TG recommendations. The warning format requirements in the NPR 
differ from ASTM F404-18 in the following ways:
     Where the NPR proposed a specific typeface and required 
certain words to be in bold, ASTM F404-18 only recommends avoiding 
certain kinds of typeface (e.g., narrow); and
     where the NPR detailed specific requirements for colors, 
borders, typeface, and referred to ANSI Z535.4 for optional additional 
guidance, ASTM F404-18 simply requires conformance to ANSI Z535.4, 
which includes provisions on these topics.
    HF staff has reviewed the warning label format requirements in ASTM

[[Page 28361]]

F404-18 and believes that they are appropriate. The warning format 
requirements in ASTM F404-18 are largely consistent with the provisions 
in the NPR, because the NPR discussed the same format topics and 
referenced ANSI Z535.4; and the requirements resolve many of the 
comments filed in response to the NPR by clarifying conflicting or 
unclear provisions. Because the requirements align with the Ad Hoc TG 
recommendations, staff believes they are effective.
    Placement. The NPR proposed requiring all warning content to appear 
on one label that was visible both when putting a child in the high 
chair and once a child was in the high chair. ASTM F404-18 allows the 
warning content to appear on two labels. One label, addressing fall 
injuries and restraints, must be visible when putting a child in the 
high chair; the second label, addressing attendance, must be visible 
when a child is in the high chair.
    HF staff has reviewed the warning label placement requirements in 
ASTM F404-18 and believes that they are sufficient. In response to the 
NPR, commenters identified challenges the placement requirements in the 
NPR posed. For example, commenters noted that it would be difficult for 
high chair models with design or size limitations to meet the placement 
requirements proposed in the NPR because the proposal required a single 
label with more content that was visible during all stages of use. 
After considering these comments, staff agrees that the two warning 
labels ASTM F404-18 requires are justified. Staff believes that the 
placement requirements in ASTM F404-18 are adequate because they 
require each of the warnings to be visible at the time the information 
is most relevant.
    First, ASTM F404-18 requires the fall-related warnings to be 
visible to caregivers when putting a child into the high chair. Warning 
caregivers of the hazard, potential injuries, and how to avoid the 
hazard is most relevant when they are placing the child into the high 
chair, because it informs them of the risks from the outset of use, and 
may motivate them to use restraints appropriately. Thus, it is likely 
more important to include these warnings on a label that is visible 
when placing a child in the high chair, than on a label that is visible 
during use. Second, ASTM F404-18 requires the warning to ``stay near 
and watch child during use'' to be visible when the child is in the 
high chair. Reminding caregivers to supervise children is most relevant 
when a child is already in the high chair, and the caregiver may become 
distracted or leave the child unattended. Accordingly, it is likely 
more important to include this warning on a label that is visible 
during use, rather than on a label that is visible when initially 
putting a child into the high chair. Thus, although staff believes it 
would be ideal to convey all warning information in a place that is 
visible during all stages of use, given design and space limitations, 
the placement requirements in ASTM F404-18 are appropriate.
3. Instructional Literature Requirements
    In the NPR, the Commission proposed more stringent content and 
design requirements for warnings in instructional literature than those 
in ASTM F404-15. ASTM F404-18 also requires more stringent 
instructional literature requirements than ASTM F404-15, although the 
design requirements are not identical to those in the NPR.
    The warning content requirements for instructional literature in 
ASTM F404-18 are consistent with those in the NPR. Both the NPR and 
ASTM F404-18 required instructional literature to contain the warning 
statements specified for on-product warning labels, by referencing the 
applicable sections regarding on-product warning labels (i.e., Section 
8).
    With respect to the design of warnings in instructional literature, 
the NPR proposed highly contrasting colors and referenced ANSI Z535.6, 
Product Safety Information in Product Manuals, Instructions, and 
Collateral Materials (ANSI Z535.6), for optional design guidance. Like 
the NPR, ASTM F404-18 references ANSI Z535.6, but also includes more-
detailed requirements regarding text size, alignment, and organization, 
and requires conformance with ANSI Z535.4 (with some exceptions for 
areas that are not critical for instructions). These requirements 
eliminate some areas of confusion commenters noted regarding the 
requirements proposed in the NPR.
    HF staff has reviewed the instructional literature requirements in 
ASTM F404-18 and believes they are effective. The requirements in ASTM 
F404-18 are consistent with the types of formatting and content 
provisions proposed in the NPR and are based on the Ad Hoc TG 
recommendations, which staff believes are effective and resolve areas 
of confusion raised in the NPR comments.
4. Restaurant-Style High Chairs
    The NPR discussed whether a mandatory standard should apply to 
restaurant-style high chairs (i.e., high chairs intended for use in 
restaurants, also known as ``food service high chairs'') or whether the 
hazards, environment, and product features useful in a restaurant, as 
well as compliance costs, justified fully or partially exempting 
restaurant-style high chairs from the final rule or creating different 
requirements for them. The ASTM standard does not distinguish 
restaurant-style high chairs from those intended for home use, and 
applies to all high chairs.
    CPSC has determined that restaurant-style high chairs should remain 
within the scope of the final rule, consistent with ASTM F404-18. NEISS 
data indicate that an estimated 1,600 incidents related to high chairs 
occurred in restaurants and were treated in U.S. EDs between 2011 and 
2016. The hazard patterns in these incidents appear similar to those in 
homes, primarily involving children falling from high chairs due to 
issues with restraints, tip overs, or when a child was climbing into or 
out of the high chair. In addition, CPSC staff identified four firms 
that sell restaurant-style high chairs to both restaurants and 
consumers. Finally, section 104 of the CPSIA requires the Commission to 
adopt a mandatory standard that is substantially the same as the 
voluntary standard, or more stringent than the voluntary standard. 
Because the voluntary standard for high chairs applies to all high 
chairs, including those used in restaurants, excluding them from the 
final rule or applying less stringent requirements for restaurant-style 
high chairs would be inconsistent with the CPSIA.

C. Incorporation by Reference

    The Office of the Federal Register (OFR) has regulations concerning 
incorporation by reference. 1 CFR part 51. These regulations require 
the preamble to a final rule to summarize the material and discuss the 
ways in which the material the agency incorporates by reference is 
reasonably available to interested persons, and how interested parties 
can obtain the material. 1 CFR 51.5(b). In accordance with the OFR 
regulations, this section summarizes ASTM F404-18, and describes how 
interested parties may obtain a copy of the standard.
    ASTM F404-18 contains requirements concerning:
     Threaded fasteners;
     sharp edges and points;
     small parts;
     wood parts;
     latching or locking mechanisms;
     permanency of labels;
     openings;
     lead in paint;

[[Page 28362]]

     forward, sideways, and rearward stability;
     exposed coil springs;
     scissoring, shearing, and pinching;
     restraint systems;
     structural integrity;
     tray latch release mechanisms;
     side containment;
     protrusions;
     protective components;
     tray or front torso support;
     static loads on the seat, step, footrest, and tray;
     bounded openings;
     warnings and labels; and
     instructional literature.

    The standard also includes test methods to assess conformance with 
these requirements.
    Interested parties may obtain a copy of ASTM F404-18 from ASTM, 
through its website (http://www.astm.org), or by mail from ASTM 
International, 100 Bar Harbor Drive, P.O. Box 0700, West Conshohocken, 
PA 19428. Alternatively, interested parties may inspect a copy of the 
standard at CPSC's Office of the Secretary.

VI. Comments Filed in Response to the NPR

    CPSC received 16 comments in response to the NPR. The comments are 
available in the docket for this rulemaking, CPSC-2015-0031, at: 
www.regulations.gov. A summary of the comments, grouped by topic, and 
CPSC staff's responses are below.

A. Effective Date

    Comment: CPSC received a comment from four consumer advocate groups 
that supported the proposed 6-month effective date. Another commenter, 
representing juvenile product manufacturers, requested a 1-year 
effective date, stating that additional time would be necessary to 
change products to meet the new requirements, particularly for warning 
labels and instructional literature.
    Response: The warning label and instructional literature 
requirements in the final rule should require less-burdensome product 
changes than the proposed rule, particularly because the final rule 
allows for two separate labels with distinct placement requirements. 
This reduces the need for a longer effective date. However, some firms 
will need to modify their products to meet the final rule. For 49 
percent of small firms, CPSC staff cannot rule out the possibility that 
the final rule will have a significant economic impact. In addition, 
staff believes that some firms may not be aware of the ASTM standard or 
that CPSC is issuing a rule on high chairs. A longer effective date 
would reduce this impact. Accordingly, the Commission is providing a 
longer effective date for the final rule than proposed. The rule will 
take effect 12 months after publication of this final rule.

B. Passive Crotch Restraint

    Comment: One commenter stated that the ASTM requirement that 
passive crotch restraints must be permanently attached to a high chair 
or tray before shipment (section 6.9.1.5) should not apply to high 
chairs for which consumers assemble every component, with instructions.
    Response: CPSC believes that this exception would be inappropriate 
for two reasons. First, CPSC staff believes that it is important for 
passive restraints to be attached permanently to a high chair or tray 
before shipment, because it helps ensure that users do not 
intentionally or inadvertently assemble or use a high chair without the 
passive restraint. This requirement is intended to reduce the 
likelihood of death from positional asphyxia. Second, section 104 of 
the CPSIA does not permit CPSC to create such an exception. Section 104 
requires the Commission to adopt a mandatory standard for high chairs 
that is ``substantially the same as'' or ``more stringent than'' the 
voluntary standard. Because ASTM F404 requires permanent attachment of 
passive restraints (and has since 2015), creating an exception to this 
requirement would be less stringent than the voluntary standard.

C. Rearward Stability

    Two commenters raised issues regarding the clarity and 
repeatability of the proposed rearward stability requirements.
    Comment: One commenter pointed out that Sec.  1231.2(b) of the 
proposed rule, which the Commission proposed to replace section 6.5 of 
ASTM F404-15, would have required compliance with sections 7.7.2.4 to 
7.7.2.4.6 of ASTM F404, instead of all of section 7.7.
    Response: Some section references were mistakenly omitted from the 
ASTM standard when ASTM revised the stability requirements in the 
standard. Correspondingly, the NPR included incomplete section 
references. ASTM corrected this error in later revisions to ASTM F404. 
Section 6.5 of ASTM F404-18, which the Commission incorporates by 
reference in this final rule, now properly references all of section 
7.7.
    Comment: One commenter stated that the phrase ``verge of tipping 
over,'' used to determine the RSI, is subjective, and will cause 
variation in measurements of tipping distance.
    Response: ASTM revised this language in ASTM F404-18 to add 
clarity, and the provision now states: ``the point that [the high 
chair] becomes unstable and begins to tip over,'' which CPSC staff 
believes addresses this issue.
    Comment: One commenter stated that the rearward tipping force load 
application ``must be reached in at least 5 seconds'' and suggested 
that the load force varies, depending on how quickly or slowly a 
particular tester applies this load, leading to variation in the RSI of 
about 4 points.
    Response: ASTM F404-15, which was in effect at the time the 
Commission issued the NPR, stated: ``Gradually apply the force over a 
period of 5 s.'' In the NPR, the Commission proposed to modify this 
language to state: ``Gradually increase the horizontal force over a 
period of at least 5 seconds.'' ASTM F404-18 includes the language 
proposed in the NPR, which makes it clear that 5 seconds is a minimum, 
not a maximum, timeframe, and to emphasize that testers should apply 
the load slowly and steadily. As in other ASTM standards that include 
stability requirements, the 5-second reference is not meant to be an 
upper time limit during which testers must hurriedly apply force. If 
testers apply force sufficiently slowly, negligible dynamic force 
should factor into the equation and maximum tip-over force readings 
will be consistent.
    Comment: One commenter stated that the wording, diagram, and 
calculation formula for rearward stability in the NPR are confusing and 
flawed, including confusing identifiers, crossed out words, and 
multiple definitions of ``F.''
    Response: ASTM revised the diagram in ASTM F404-18 to resolve these 
issues, removing crossed out words and defining the forces more 
clearly, by designating F1 and F2 as unique and clearly identified 
forces. Likewise, the RSI calculation in ASTM F404-18 includes the 
maximum F2 force, rather than the original, ambiguous force F. The new 
diagram is in ASTM F404-18 Figure 10, and the RSI formula is in section 
7.7.2.6(4).

D. Warning Labels

1. Content
    CPSC received five comments that discussed issues related to 
warning content. One commenter supported the Commission's proposed 
warning content, particularly the statement: ``Falls can happen quickly 
if child is not restrained properly.'' Another

[[Page 28363]]

commenter supported the warning content in ASTM F404-15, rather than 
the NPR, but did not provide specific reasons for preferring the ASTM 
content. The remaining three comments discussed the following issues.
    Comment: Two commenters were concerned about the increased length 
of the proposed warning, and one of the two was concerned with the 
proposed requirement that all warning information appear on a single 
label.
    Response: These comments address two related issues--spreading 
warning content across multiple labels, and the length of warning 
content. With respect to the first issue, the NPR proposed to require 
all warnings to appear on a single label. The NPR and staff's 
supporting briefing package explained the reasons for that proposed 
requirement. As an example, in ASTM F404-15, the warning: ``Never leave 
child unattended,'' did not appear on the same label that described the 
fall hazard and potential consequences. However, never leaving a child 
unattended is one behavior consumers can use to avoid the fall hazard. 
Consequently, staff believed that the warning would be more effective 
if the mitigating behavior appeared on the same label as the 
information about the hazard and consequences. Unlike the NPR, ASTM 
F404-18 spreads the required warnings across two labels. As section V 
of this notice discusses, HF staff believes that spreading the warnings 
across two labels is acceptable.
    With respect to the length of warning content, the warnings the 
Commission proposed in the NPR were longer than the warnings in ASTM 
F404-15. ASTM F404-18 includes revised warning content that is 
consistent with the NPR. CPSC staff worked with ASTM to ensure that 
ASTM F404-18 includes the essentials of the warnings the NPR proposed, 
but also addresses comments submitted in response to the NPR, and ASTM 
subcommittee members' concerns. This final rule incorporates by 
reference ASTM F404-18, without modifications. CPSC staff maintains 
that the additional warning content proposed in the NPR, and the 
analogous content in ASTM F404-18, is appropriate, because it addresses 
deficiencies in the warning content in ASTM F404-15. For example, the 
description of injuries that could be sustained from high chair 
incidents in ASTM F404-15 (i.e., ``serious injury or death'') was 
vague. Research suggests that more explicit descriptions improve 
consumer compliance with recommended hazard-avoidance behaviors. 
Similarly, the warning in ASTM F404-15 did not describe the speed with 
which incidents can occur. This information is important because 
consumers have reported that they may not use restraints on high chairs 
because they think they can notice and stop emerging incidents in time. 
In addition, the warning did not state that a tray is not intended to 
restrain a child. This information is necessary because consumers have 
reported that they consider the tray, functionally, to be part of a 
high chair's restraint system, and some incidents suggest that 
consumers rely on the tray alone to restrain the child. Finally, the 
warning lacked a statement about properly adjusting the restraint 
system. There have been fall-related incidents where children were 
restrained, but the restraint system was loose or otherwise allowed the 
child to wriggle out.
    Staff acknowledges that consumers are more likely to fully read 
short warnings than longer ones. However, brevity is only one factor to 
consider when designing a warning. A short warning is unlikely to be 
effective if it does not convey all key information about the hazards, 
and carefully selected additional content can enhance consumer 
compliance with warnings. In addition, staff does not consider the 
warnings in the NPR and ASTM F404-18 to be unusually long, or so long 
that they would dissuade consumers from reading the full content.
    Comment: Two commenters stated that referring to serious injuries 
broadly, such as ``serious injury or death,'' is likely to be more 
effective than a specific and limited reference to ``skull fractures.'' 
One of these commenters stated that referring to skull fractures alone, 
may cause caregivers to ignore other, more frequent risks.
    Response: ASTM F404-18 includes broader language (i.e., ``severe 
head injuries'') than the Commission proposed in the NPR, in addition 
to the specific injuries (i.e., ``skull fractures'') referenced in the 
NPR warning. Staff believes that including the broader language avoids 
the perception that skull fractures are the only type of serious 
injuries that occur. Staff believes that coupling the broad and 
specific injuries, rather than stating only the broader injury, is 
important to improve consumer compliance with the recommended hazard-
avoidance behavior because research shows that more explicit or 
detailed information in a warning increases warning effectiveness, and 
vividness increases the salience of the message, which triggers the 
reader's motivation to act.
    Comment: Two commenters noted that CPSC should not require the 
warning statement about trays (i.e., ``Tray is not designed to hold 
child in chair'') for high chairs that do not have trays.
    Response: CPSC agrees with this comment. ASTM F404-18 requires the 
same warning regarding trays as the Commission proposed in the NPR, but 
only requires this warning for high chairs that are designed to be used 
with a tray.
2. Format
    CPSC received several comments regarding the warning format 
requirements proposed in the NPR. A summary of the comments, and 
staff's responses, are below. First, however, is a general discussion 
of the changes to warning format requirements in the ASTM standard 
since the NPR. These changes are the result of the Ad Hoc TG's efforts 
and address comments CPSC received about warning format.
    After the Commission issued the NPR, there were several 
developments related to warning format and design. In short, the Ad Hoc 
TG finalized and published recommendations for warning format, and ASTM 
revised the warning requirements in ASTM F404-18 to be consistent with 
the Ad Hoc TG recommendations.
    The Ad Hoc TG was formed to develop standardized language across 
ASTM juvenile products standards, and was developing recommendations 
for warning format when the Commission issued the high chairs NPR. HF 
staff serves on the Ad Hoc TG, as well as the ANSI Z535 Committee on 
Safety Signs and Colors. In this capacity, staff collaborated with the 
other members of the Ad Hoc TG to develop the finalized recommendations 
for warning format.
    With the goal of providing consistent formatting requirements for 
all juvenile-product standards and addressing warning format issues 
that impact the effectiveness of warnings, the Ad Hoc TG 
recommendations require warning content to be ``easy to read and 
understand''; not contradict information elsewhere on the product; be 
in English (at a minimum); and meet various formatting requirements. 
The formatting requirements include minimum text size; text alignment; 
bullet, lists, outline, and paragraph forms for hazard-avoidance 
statements; and compliance with sections of ASNI Z535.4--specifically, 
sections 6.1 to 6.4 (which include requirements for safety alert 
symbols, signal words, and warning panel format, arrangement, and 
shape), 7.2 to 7.6.3 (which include color requirements), and 8.1 (which 
addresses letter style). The Ad Hoc TG recommendations also include

[[Page 28364]]

recommended requirements for general labeling issues, such as labeling 
permanency, and content related to manufacturer contact information and 
date of manufacture.
    The Ad Hoc TG recommendations and the resulting changes to ASTM 
F404-18 address many of the comments filed in response to the proposed 
warning format requirements in the NPR. Below are the comments CPSC 
received on that topic, and staff's responses.
    Comment: Four commenters objected to the NPR proposal to require 
``key words'' to appear in boldface, because the phrase is open to 
interpretation. One commenter also noted that because the NPR proposed 
to require warnings to ``address'' the specified warning content, 
rather than state it exactly as phrased in the standard, a rule could 
not designate specific words as ``key words.''
    Response: The commenter is correct that the standard does not 
define ``key words'' and requires warning statements to ``address'' the 
specified warning content, rather than state it exactly as it is worded 
in the standard. ASTM F404-18 does not include this proposed 
requirement.
    Comment: Three commenters stated that there is no clear definition 
or understanding of ``non-condensed'' sans serif typeface, and this 
provision may be misinterpreted or confusing. One commenter also stated 
that some compressed and narrow typefaces are easy to read, and 
therefore, the rule should not preclude them.
    Response: There is no formal definition of ``non-condensed 
typeface,'' and some condensed typefaces could be adequately legible. 
ASTM F404-18 does not include the proposed provision or prohibit the 
use of condensed type, but it does include a note that recommends 
avoiding typefaces with ``large height-to-width ratios, which are 
commonly identified as `condensed,' `compressed,' `narrow,' or 
similar.''
    Comment: Two commenters stated that the proposed note, referring 
readers to ANSI Z535.4 for ``optional additional guidance,'' may not be 
clear to manufacturers or test laboratories.
    Response: ASTM F404-18 does not include the proposed note; instead, 
the standard includes specific warning format requirements and requires 
conformance to the 2011 version of ANSI Z535.4.
    Comment: Two commenters stated that the reference to 
``instructions'' in section 8.4.2 of the NPR is inappropriate because 
section 8 of the standard addresses warnings, not instructions (which 
are addressed in section 9).
    Response: ASTM F404-18 corrects this inconsistency, referring to 
``marking or labeling'' rather than ``labels or written instructions.''
    Comment: One commenter stated that the NPR proposal that warning 
message text must be black on a white background conflicts with the NPR 
proposal that warning statements be in ``highly contrasting colors.''
    Response: ASTM F404-18 does not include the proposed requirements 
as they were stated in the NPR. Instead, ASTM F404-18 requires 
conformance with ANSI Z535.4-2011, section 7.3, which requires message 
panel text to be black lettering on a white background or white 
lettering on a black background. These color requirements apply unless 
special circumstances preclude the use of these colors (section 7.6.3), 
in which case the warning text must contrast with the background.
    Comment: One commenter stated that the proposed warning 
requirements should apply only to the warnings that the standard 
requires, and not to additional warnings that are not requirements.
    Response: Since the Commission issued the NPR, CPSC staff has 
continued to work with the Ad Hoc TG to develop final warning format 
recommendations, which ASTM F404-18 includes. Consistent with the Ad 
Hoc TG recommendations, ASTM F404-18 requires all warnings to meet the 
format requirements in the standard. CPSC staff believes that all 
warning statements should meet these format requirements because they 
are important to capture consumer attention, improve readability, and 
increase hazard perception and avoidance behavior.
    Comment: Two commenters recommended that CPSC wait to issue a 
mandatory standard for warnings until the Ad Hoc TG completes its work 
on general warning format requirements.
    Response: The Ad Hoc TG has completed and published its 
recommendations, and ASTM F404-18 includes updates to reflect those 
recommendations.
3. Placement
    Comment: Four commenters discussed warning placement. One commenter 
supported the proposed placement requirements (i.e., that the warning 
be visible while placing the child in the high chair and while the 
child is seated in the high chair) and the remaining three commenters 
did not. These three commenters raised general concerns about limited 
space on some high chairs, especially models with low seatbacks. The 
commenters stated that it would be difficult, and perhaps impossible, 
to meet the proposed placement requirements on those models, suggesting 
that manufacturers would have to redesign or discontinue the models. 
The commenters emphasized the need for flexibility. One commenter 
stated that there is no clear evidence that a label that is visible 
when a child is in a high chair, or a secondary label if the seatback 
is not high enough, will actually change caregivers' behaviors.
    Response: Consistent with these comments, ASTM F404-18 includes 
modified warning placement requirements, which provide greater 
flexibility than the requirements proposed in the NPR. ASTM F404-18 
requires two labels, each with respective placement requirements, which 
CPSC staff believes are sufficient. ASTM F404-18 requires that fall-
related warnings be visible to a caregiver only when placing a child 
into the high chair. CPSC staff believes this is sufficient because 
this allows caregivers to see the warning about the hazard, its 
consequences, and the key actions to avoid the hazard, immediately 
before this information is relevant. Although the warning may not be 
visible once a child is in the high chair, the warning likely would be 
visible when the high chair is not in use, exposing consumers to the 
message at other times, such as when cleaning or moving the high chair.
    ASTM F404-18 also requires a second warning statement (which may 
appear on a separate label), instructing caregivers to ``stay near and 
watch child during use.'' This warning must be ``conspicuous'' (i.e., 
visible to a person standing near the high chair when a child is in the 
high chair, but not necessarily visible from all positions). Commenters 
and ASTM high chair subcommittee members have pointed out that this 
warning statement also applies to hazards other than falls, such as 
choking hazards. CPSC staff agrees and believes that this warning, in a 
conspicuous location, separate from the fall-related warning, will 
serve as a general reminder to remain with a child who is in the high 
chair. Because the warning statement must be visible when the child is 
still seated in the high chair, caregivers will be more likely to see 
the warning when they are about to leave the seated child than if the 
warning statement were included as part of the warning that must be 
visible while placing the child into the high chair.
4. Miscellaneous Comments About Warning Labels
    Comment: Three commenters stated that there is no justification to 
revise the ASTM F404-15 warning requirements.

[[Page 28365]]

Two of these commenters noted that ASTM F404-15 had only recently been 
adopted, so there is no evidence that the warning requirements are 
ineffective.
    Response: In accordance with the statutory language in the CPSIA, 
when assessing an ASTM standard for rulemaking under section 104, CPSC 
staff considers whether more stringent requirements would further 
reduce the risk of injury associated with the product. Accordingly, for 
this rulemaking, staff considered whether more stringent warning 
requirements for high chairs would further reduce the risk of injury, 
were appropriate, and were supported by scientific and technical 
literature. Based on staff's assessment, the NPR proposed more 
stringent warning requirements, many of which ASTM F404-18 includes.
    Comment: One commenter stated that large warning labels would be 
sufficient to address the hazards associated with high chairs.
    Response: Staff does not believe that warnings, alone, are 
sufficient to address the demonstrated hazards. Literature on safety 
and warnings consistently identifies a hierarchy of approaches to 
controlling hazards. In this hierarchy, warnings are less effective at 
eliminating or reducing exposure to hazards than designing the hazard 
out of a product or guarding consumers from the hazard. Warnings are 
less effective than these other approaches because they do not prevent 
consumer exposure to the hazard. Rather, warnings rely on educating 
consumers about the hazard and then persuading them to alter their 
behavior to avoid the hazard. For warnings to be effective, consumers 
need to behave consistently, which may not be the case when situational 
factors, such as fatigue, stress, or social influences, impact 
precautionary behavior. As a result, warnings should supplement, rather 
than replace, design standards or provisions that attempt to guard 
consumers from a hazard, unless those alternatives are not possible.
    Comment: One commenter recommended adding pictograms to the warning 
provisions in the standard to convey the hazard effectively and reduce 
language barriers.
    Response: Well-designed graphics may be useful to convey the fall 
hazard associated with high chairs. However, designing effective 
graphics can be difficult. Some seemingly obvious graphics can be 
misinterpreted. Consequently, CPSC staff believes that it is 
appropriate to permit supporting graphics in high chair warnings, but 
not require them.
    Comment: One commenter noted that the NPR included warning 
requirements for high chairs that have seats that are also used as 
seats in strollers, but does not address high chairs with seats that 
also function as booster seats.
    Response: A product with a seat that functions as a seat for a high 
chair and a booster seat must meet the requirements in both the high 
chair and booster seat standards. CPSC staff believes that 
manufacturers are capable of meeting the requirements of both 
standards, and therefore, staff does not believe that revisions to the 
requirements are necessary.

E. Instructional Literature

    Comment: Three commenters expressed confusion about the proposed 
color requirements for instructional literature in the NPR. Two 
commenters stated that the requirements were contradictory, and another 
commenter stated that the proposed color requirements take away the 
flexibility to use other colors.
    Response: CPSC agrees that the proposed color requirements for 
instructional literature may be unclear and that manufacturers should 
have some flexibility in choosing colors for instructional literature. 
After the Commission issued the NPR, the Ad Hoc TG published 
recommendations for the format of warnings in instructional literature. 
The instructional literature requirements in ASTM F404-18 are based on 
those recommendations, and CPSC believes that the requirements are 
appropriate and address commenters' concerns. ASTM F404-18, section 
9.3, clarifies that instructional literature is not required to meet 
the same color requirements as on-product labels. Instead, section 9.4 
of ASTM F404-18 provides flexibility, stating that warnings must stand 
out within instructional literature, by requiring ``the signal word and 
safety alert symbol [to] contrast with the background of the signal 
word panel, and the warnings [to] contrast with the background of the 
instructional literature.''
    Comment: Two commenters stated that the sentence ``Additional 
warnings similar to the statements included in this section shall also 
be included,'' which was in proposed Sec.  1231.2(e)(1) in the NPR, was 
unclear.
    Response: The ASTM high chairs subcommittee replaced this statement 
in ASTM F404-18 with a new section 9.3, which states: ``The 
instructions shall address the following additional warnings.'' This 
modification should resolve any confusion.
    Comment: Two commenters stated that the note proposed in the NPR, 
referring readers to ANSI Z535.6 for ``optional additional guidance,'' 
may not be clear to manufacturers or test laboratories.
    Response: ASTM standards regularly use ``notes'' to make 
suggestions that are not mandatory requirements. Because other ASTM 
standards include notes, manufacturers and test laboratories understand 
their meaning and know that they are not requirements. In addition, the 
Ad Hoc TG recommendations, which were developed in collaboration with 
industry members, reference ANSI Z535.6 for additional guidance on the 
design of warnings in instructional literature. In accordance with that 
recommendation, ASTM F404-18 includes the note referring to ANSI 
Z535.6.

F. Restaurant-Style High Chairs

    Comment: CPSC received three comments about restaurant-style high 
chairs. Commenters suggested that stability or warning and 
instructional requirements, alone, would be adequate for restaurant-
style high chairs; that there should be a separate commercial high 
chair standard; or that no standard is necessary for these products. 
Commenters cited several reasons to create a different standard for 
restaurant-style high chairs. For example, commenters noted that 
restaurant settings make particular features useful in a high chair, 
such as large seats, trayless designs, and the ability to stack 
multiple high chairs. In addition, consumer behavior, such as more-
attentive supervision of children, may occur in restaurant settings. 
Moreover, commenters stated, injury data do not indicate a need to 
regulate these products. One manufacturer noted receiving complaints 
about a restaurant-style high chair that conformed to ASTM F404. The 
complaints stated that it was difficult for children to get in and out 
of the chair, the chair did not accommodate children wearing bulky 
clothing, and the chair did not accommodate children over one-year old. 
One commenter noted that some restaurant-style high chairs are only 
available through commercial portals, while another commenter noted 
that restaurant-style high chairs are sold to the public for home use. 
Commenters suggested using educational efforts, such as affixing labels 
or instructions to restaurant-style high chairs to inform consumers and 
restaurant staff about proper use, the intended setting, and hazards; 
or providing similar information on packaging, product websites, and at 
points of sale.

[[Page 28366]]

    Response: CPSC understands that there may be differences in the 
useful features and level of supervision in restaurant settings and 
homes. It is possible that requiring restaurant-style high chairs to 
meet ASTM F404-18 would interfere with design features that make high 
chairs useful in a restaurant setting, such as large leg openings. In 
addition, it is possible that design features that meet ASTM F404-18 
could contribute to injuries in a restaurant setting. For example, 
small leg openings could make it more difficult to remove children from 
a high chair when they are wearing bulky outerwear or shoes; or 
consumers may opt for potentially hazardous alternatives to a high 
chair if the high chair is inconvenient to use, such as placing 
children on an unsecured and elevated chair. However, CPSC staff does 
not have evidence that these possibilities will occur.
    To the contrary, CPSC has several reasons to believe that the final 
rule should apply to all high chairs, including restaurant-style high 
chairs. First, after issuing the NPR, CPSC staff further examined 
incident data to determine the extent to which high chair-related 
injuries occur in restaurant settings. Staff found that between 2011 
and 2016, there were an estimated 1,600 injuries treated in U.S. EDs 
that involved high chairs in restaurant settings. Most incidents 
involved children falling from high chairs, commonly when climbing into 
or out of the high chair, when the high chair tipped over, or when 
restraints were not used, failed, or were defeated. These hazard 
patterns are consistent with high chair incidents in homes. As a 
result, CPSC believes that there is no safety justification to exclude 
restaurant-style high chairs from the final rule.
    Second, although only a small number of firms sell restaurant-style 
high chairs directly to consumers for use in their homes, these sales 
indicate that the features and settings for restaurant-style high 
chairs do not provide a basis for distinguishing them from home-use 
high chairs. CPSC staff identified four firms that supply high chairs 
to the U.S. market that sell their high chairs to both consumers and 
restaurants.
    Third, CPSIA section 104 requires the Commission to adopt a 
mandatory standard that is substantially the same as the voluntary 
standard, or more stringent than the voluntary standard. Because ASTM 
F404 applies to all high chairs, excluding restaurant-style products 
from the mandatory standard would make the mandatory standard less 
stringent than the voluntary standard, contrary to the CPSIA 
requirement.

VII. Final Rule

    Section 1231.2(a) of the final rule requires high chairs to comply 
with ASTM F404-18 and incorporates the standard by reference. Section V 
of this preamble describes the OFR requirements for incorporating 
material by reference. In accordance with those requirements, section V 
summarizes ASTM F404-18, explains how the standard is reasonably 
available to interested parties, and how interested parties may obtain 
a copy of the standard.
    The final rule also amends 16 CFR part 1112 to add a new Sec.  
1112.15(b)(44) that lists 16 CFR part 1231, Safety Standard for High 
Chairs, as a children's product safety rule for which the CPSC has 
issued an NOR. Section XIII of this preamble provides additional 
information about certifications and NORs.

VIII. Effective Date

    The Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551-559) generally 
requires that agencies set an effective date for a final rule that is 
at least 30 days after the Federal Register publishes the final rule. 5 
U.S.C. 553(d). The NPR proposed that the final rule for high chairs, 
and the amendment to part 1112, would take effect 6 months after 
publication. CPSC received comments requesting an implementation date 
of 1 year, asserting that additional time would be necessary for firms 
to modify products to meet the standard. CPSC believes that 1 year is 
sufficient for firms to modify their products to meet the new standard. 
Therefore, this rule will take effect 1 year after publication in the 
Federal Register, and will apply to products manufactured or imported 
on or after that date.

IX. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule contains information collection requirements that are 
subject to public comment and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
review under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA; 44 U.S.C. 3501-
3521). Under the PRA, CPSC must estimate the ``burden'' associated with 
each ``collection of information.'' 44 U.S.C. 3506(c).
    In this rule, section 8 of ASTM F404-18 contains labeling 
requirements that meet the definition of ``collection of information'' 
in the PRA. 44 U.S.C. 3502(3). In addition, section 9 of ASTM F404-18 
requires instructions to be provided with high chairs; however, CPSC 
believes this requirement can be excluded from the PRA burden estimate. 
OMB allows agencies to exclude from the PRA burden estimate any ``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,'' if the disclosure activities required to comply 
are ``usual and customary.'' 5 CFR 1320.3(b)(2). Because high chairs 
generally require use and assembly instructions, and CPSC staff is not 
aware of high chairs that generally require instructions but lack them, 
CPSC believes that providing instructions with high chairs is ``usual 
and customary.'' For this reason, CPSC's burden estimate includes only 
the labeling requirements.
    The preamble to the NPR discussed the information collection burden 
of the proposed rule and requested comments on the accuracy of CPSC's 
estimates. 80 FR 69158 to 69159. CPSC did not receive any comments 
about the information collection burden of the proposed rule. However, 
the information collection burden has changed since the NPR because 
CPSC staff has identified 68 high chair suppliers (59 domestic firms 
and 9 foreign firms), rather than the 62 firms identified in the NPR, 
that it estimates will be subject to the information collection burden. 
Accordingly, the estimated burden of this collection of information is 
as follows:

                                                       Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        Number of       Frequency of     Total annual      Hours per       Total burden
                           16 CFR section                              respondents       responses        responses         response          hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1231.2.............................................................              68                2              136                1              136
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 28367]]

    The estimated reporting burden is based on CPSC staff's expectation 
that all 68 high chair suppliers will need to modify their labels to 
comply with the final rule. CPSC staff estimates that it will take 
about 1 hour per model to make these modifications and, based on 
staff's evaluation of product lines, that each supplier has an average 
of 2 models of high chairs. As a result, CPSC estimates that the burden 
associated with the labeling requirements is: 68 entities x 1 hour per 
model x 2 models per entity = 136 hours. CPSC staff estimates that the 
hourly compensation for the time required to create and update labels 
is $34.21 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, ``Employer Costs for 
Employee Compensation,'' Sept. 2017, Table 9, total compensation for 
all sales and office workers in goods-producing private industries: 
http://www.bls.gov/ncs/). Therefore, the estimated annual cost 
associated with the labeling requirements is: $34.21 per hour x 136 
hours = $4,652.56. CPSC does not expect there to be operating, 
maintenance, or capital costs associated with this information 
collection.
    As the PRA requires, CPSC has submitted the information collection 
requirements of this final rule to OMB. 44 U.S.C. 3507(d). OMB has 
assigned control number 3041-0173 to this information collection.

X. Regulatory Flexibility Act

A. Introduction

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601-612) requires 
agencies to consider the potential economic impact of a proposed and 
final rule on small entities, including small businesses. Section 604 
of the RFA requires agencies to prepare and publish a final regulatory 
flexibility analysis (FRFA) when they issue a final rule, unless the 
head of the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The FRFA 
must discuss:
     The need for and objectives of the rule;
     significant issues raised in public comments about the 
initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA), a response to comments 
from the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA, the agency's assessment 
of the comments, and any changes made to the rule as a result of the 
comments;
     the description and estimated number of small entities 
that will be subject to the rule;
     the reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance 
requirements of the rule, as well as the small entities that would be 
subject to those requirements, and the types of skills necessary to 
prepare the reports or records;
     steps the agency took to minimize the significant economic 
impact on small entities; and
     the factual, policy, and legal reasons the agency selected 
the alternative in the final rule, and why it rejected other 
significant alternatives.

5 U.S.C. 604

    Based on an assessment by staff from CPSC's Directorate for 
Economic Analysis, CPSC cannot certify that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
As a result, staff has prepared a FRFA. This section summarizes the 
FRFA for this final rule. The complete FRFA is available as part of the 
CPSC staff's briefing package at: https://cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/Final%20Rule%20-%20Safety%20Standard%20for%20High%20Chairs%20-%20May%2030%202018.pdf?mBuoGQbhxpGcMFyO6it0gNeBOOFZrTA9.

B. Reason for Agency Action

    Section 104 of the CPSIA requires the Commission to issue a 
mandatory standard for high chairs that is substantially the same as 
the voluntary standard, or more stringent than the voluntary standard. 
In this final rule, the Commission incorporates by reference the 
voluntary standard, ASTM F404-18, as the mandatory safety standard for 
high chairs. This rule aims to address the safety hazards associated 
with high chairs that are demonstrated in incident data.

C. Comments Relevant to the FRFA

    CPSC did not received any comments specifically addressing the IRFA 
that accompanied the proposed rule or from the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of SBA. However, CPSC received comments about the effective 
date of the final rule and restaurant-style high chairs, which are 
relevant to the FRFA insofar as they impact the costs associated with 
the rule.
1. Effective Date
    In the NPR, the Commission proposed that the rule would take effect 
6 months after publication in the Federal Register. One comment, from 
four consumer advocate groups, expressed support for the proposed 6-
month effective date. Another comment, filed on behalf of juvenile 
product manufacturers, requested a 1-year effective date, to provide 
time for firms to change their products to meet the new standard.
    After considering these comments, and the potential economic impact 
of the rule on small firms, the Commission is extending the effective 
date for the final rule to 1 year. CPSC staff believes that this longer 
effective date will reduce the economic impact of the rule on firms, 
some of which may not be aware of the ASTM standard or the rulemaking, 
by reducing the potential for a lapse in production or imports while 
bringing products into compliance with the rule, and spreading the 
costs of compliance over a longer time period.
2. Restaurant-Style High Chairs
    CPSC received three comments about restaurant-style high chairs. 
Section VI of this preamble detailed these comments. To summarize, 
commenters noted that it may be appropriate to apply only some 
requirements, no requirements, or to create new requirements for 
restaurant-style high chairs. Commenters noted that restaurant settings 
make certain features useful on a high chair, which may not comply with 
the standard, and that safety features may be less necessary in 
restaurants, where caregivers are likely to be near children and 
supervising them when they are in a high chair.
    CPSC has considered this information and believes that it is 
appropriate to apply the final rule to all high chairs, including 
restaurant-style high chairs. The final rule may particularly impact 
firms that supply restaurant-style high chairs, because they have 
features intended to accommodate restaurant settings and these features 
may be difficult to retain while complying with the standard, thereby 
requiring more extensive changes than home-use models. Nevertheless, 
consumer safety, home-use of these products, and statutory limitations 
justify applying the rule to all high chairs. The rationale for 
including restaurant-style high chairs in the rule is discussed 
elsewhere in this notice.

D. Description of Small Entities Subject to the Rule

    CPSC staff identified 68 firms that supply high chairs to the U.S. 
market, of which 59 are domestic, and 9 are foreign. Of the 59 domestic 
firms, 33 manufacture high chairs, and 26 of those 33 manufacturers are 
small, according to SBA's standards. The remaining 26 domestic firms 
import high chairs, and 17 of those 26 importers are small, according 
to SBA's standards. Of the 59 domestic firms, 43 market their high 
chairs only to consumers, and 4 sell their high chairs to both 
consumers and restaurants. It is

[[Page 28368]]

possible that there are additional high chair suppliers in the U.S. 
market that staff has not identified.

E. Description of the Final Rule

    Sections V and VII of this preamble describe the requirements in 
the final rule, which incorporates by reference ASTM F404-18. In 
addition, the final rule amends the regulations regarding third party 
conformity assessment bodies to include the safety standard for high 
chairs in the list of NORs.

F. Impact on Small Businesses

    For the FRFA, staff limited its analysis to the 59 domestic firms 
staff identified as supplying high chairs to the U.S. market because 
SBA guidelines and definitions apply to domestic entities. In assessing 
whether a rule will have a significant economic impact on small 
entities, staff generally considers impacts ``significant'' if they 
exceed 1 percent of a firm's revenue.
1. Small Manufacturers
    At the time staff prepared the FRFA, 13 of the 26 small 
manufacturers reported that their high chairs complied with the ASTM 
standard that was in effect for testing purposes. Staff believes that 
firms that report complying with the voluntary standard will continue 
to comply with the standard as it evolves, as part of an established 
business practice. Of these 13 firms, 2 manufacture compact high chairs 
with limited space for warning labels. In the IRFA, staff predicted 
that the proposed rule could have a significant impact on these two 
firms because the NPR required a single warning label to be visible 
when placing a child in the high chair and when the child was seated in 
the high chair. However, the final rule does not include this 
requirement, instead dividing the warning information over two labels, 
each with different placement requirements. This change reduces the 
burden on firms to modify their products to accommodate labeling 
requirements. Therefore, staff does not expect the final rule to have a 
significant economic impact on any of these 13 firms and third party 
testing costs are expected to be minimal because these firms already 
test their products for compliance with the voluntary standard.
    The remaining 13 small manufacturers produce high chairs that do 
not comply with the voluntary standard. Seven of these firms 
manufacture high chairs for home use, and six produce restaurant-style 
high chairs. For the seven firms that manufacture high chairs for home 
use, the final rule could have a significant economic impact. The cost 
of redesigning their products to meet ASTM F404-18 could exceed 1 
percent of each firm's respective revenue. In addition, these firms do 
not have extensive product lines; one of these firms produces only high 
chairs. For the six firms that manufacture high chairs for restaurant 
settings, the final rule could also have a significant economic impact. 
In particular, two of these firms make plastic high chairs, which could 
require them to create new molds for their products to comply with the 
rule. Staff believes that third party testing costs could potentially 
have a significant economic impact on some of these firms, but these 
costs would be small, relative to the overall impact of the rule.
2. Small Importers
    At the time staff prepared the FRFA, 9 of the 17 small importers 
reported that their high chairs complied with the ASTM standard that 
was in effect for testing purposes. In the IRFA, staff anticipated that 
the proposed rule could have a significant economic impact on four of 
these firms because they imported compact high chairs that might have 
needed to be redesigned to create space for a label that met the 
proposed label placement requirements. Because the final rule does not 
include this requirement, allowing greater flexibility, staff does not 
expect that these firms will have to redesign their products. One 
importer supplies a relatively new type of high chair that includes a 
reclining seat insert, but preliminary staff testing indicates that the 
product meets the requirements in the final rule. In addition, staff 
believes that any third party testing costs these importers may incur 
would be limited to the incremental costs associated with third party 
testing over their current testing regimes. Therefore, staff does not 
expect the final rule to have a significant economic impact on any of 
these nine firms.
    The remaining eight small importers supply high chairs that do not 
comply with the voluntary standard. Staff does not have sufficient 
information to conclude that the rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on these firms. The economic impact of the rule on 
importers depends on the extent of the changes needed for their 
products to comply with the rule and the response of their suppliers. 
Staff generally cannot determine this information for importers that do 
not already comply with the voluntary standard. Nevertheless, staff 
expects that the final rule will have a smaller economic impact than 
the proposed rule, because the final rule includes less-burdensome 
warning placement requirements than the NPR.
    Suppliers are more likely to pass on the costs of producing or 
redesigning products to comply with the final rule to importers with 
whom they do not have direct ties. Six of the eight small importers of 
noncompliant high chairs do not have direct ties with their suppliers. 
To avoid these costs, the six importers may replace their suppliers, 
select alternative products, or stop supplying high chairs if they have 
diverse product lines. For the remaining two importers that have direct 
ties to their suppliers, finding an alternative supply source likely is 
not a viable alternative. However, these firms' foreign suppliers may 
absorb some of the costs to maintain a presence in the U.S. market. 
Alternatively, these two importers could stop supplying high chairs, 
although this may be unlikely because both firms have only a few 
products in their product lines.
    In addition, staff believes that third party testing could result 
in significant costs for two of the firms that import noncompliant high 
chairs. For one of these firms, testing costs could exceed 1 percent of 
its gross revenue if it tests as few as two units per model. The second 
firm would need to test about three units per model before testing 
costs would exceed 1 percent of its gross revenue. For two additional 
small importers of noncompliant high chairs, each of which supply only 
one high chair model, staff could not obtain revenue data to determine 
the potential impact of third party testing.
3. Accreditation Requirements for Testing Laboratories
    Section 14 of the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA; 15 U.S.C. 
2051-2089) requires all children's products that are subject to a 
children's product safety rule to be tested by a third party conformity 
assessment body (i.e., testing laboratory) that has been accredited by 
CPSC. Testing laboratories that want to conduct this testing must meet 
the NOR for third party conformity testing. The final rule amends 16 
CFR part 1112 to establish an NOR for testing laboratories to test for 
compliance with the high chair rule.
    In the IRFA for this rule, staff anticipated that the accreditation 
requirements would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small laboratories because: (1) The rule imposed 
requirements only on laboratories that intended to provide third party 
testing services; (2) laboratories would assume the costs only if they 
anticipated receiving sufficient revenue from the

[[Page 28369]]

testing to justify accepting the requirements as a business decision; 
and (3) most laboratories would already have accreditation to test for 
conformance to other juvenile product standards, thereby limiting the 
costs to adding the high chair standard to their scope of 
accreditation. CPSC has not received any information to date that 
contradicts this assessment. Therefore, staff believes that the NOR for 
the high chair standard will not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities.

G. Alternatives and Steps To Minimize Economic Impacts

    In the NPR, the Commission discussed several alternatives to the 
proposed rule that would reduce the economic impact of the rule on 
small entities. In effect, the Commission has incorporated two of these 
alternatives into the final rule.
    One option the Commission discussed in the NPR involved modifying 
the rule to require compliance with the ASTM standard, without the 
additional more stringent requirements proposed in the NPR, or at least 
without the more stringent label placement requirements in the NPR. 
This alternative would allow the Commission to meet the mandate in 
CPSIA section 104 to adopt a rule that is substantially the same as the 
voluntary standard, but reduce the economic impact of the rule by 
reducing the changes needed to conform to the rule.
    ASTM F404-18 includes the more stringent requirements proposed in 
the NPR, except for the label placement requirements, which remain 
consistent with ASTM F404-15. Under the final rule, firms will not have 
to meet additional, more stringent requirements than those in the 
voluntary standard. Moreover, the warning label placement requirements 
in the final rule provide more flexibility than the NPR--allowing for 
two separate labels, each of which is subject to only one visibility 
requirement, rather than two--thereby requiring less-burdensome product 
changes than the proposed rule. Therefore, in effect, the Commission 
has adopted this alternative, by incorporating by reference ASTM F404-
18 without additional, more stringent requirements, and eliminating the 
more stringent label placement requirements proposed in the NPR.
    Another alternative CPSC considered was extending the effective 
date of the rule. In the NPR, the Commission proposed a 6-month 
effective date for the final rule, consistent with other durable infant 
and toddler product rules. CPSC received comments about the effective 
date, suggesting that firms need 1 year to modify products to meet the 
standard, as some firms will need to redesign their products, test new 
products, and modify their production processes. Based on this 
information, CPSC believes that 1 year is a reasonable amount of time 
to account for needed changes, and is extending the effective date of 
the rule to 1 year. This should reduce the economic costs of the rule 
for small entities. Setting a later effective date reduces the 
likelihood of a lapse in production or imports if firms cannot comply 
with the standard or obtain third party testing within the time 
provided. In addition, a later effective date spreads the costs of 
compliance over a longer period, reducing annual costs and the present 
value of total costs.
    Finally, CPSC considered partially or fully excluding restaurant-
style high chairs from the final rule, or adopting more-limited 
requirements for these products. The requirements could be particularly 
costly for manufacturers and importers of restaurant-style high chairs 
because this style of chair has features intended to accommodate 
restaurant settings that would be difficult to retain while complying 
with the standard. As discussed previously in this preamble, although 
excluding restaurant-style high chairs from the final rule would reduce 
the economic impact on several small entities, CPSC believes that this 
alternative would not be appropriate given incident data, home use of 
these products, and the mandate in CPSIA section 104.

XI. Environmental Considerations

    CPSC's regulations list categories of agency actions that 
``normally have little or no potential for affecting the human 
environment.'' 16 CFR 1021.5(c). Such actions qualify as ``categorical 
exclusions'' under the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 
4321-4370m-12), which do not require an environmental assessment or 
environmental impact statement. One categorical exclusion listed in 
CPSC's regulations is for rules or safety standards that ``provide 
design or performance requirements for products.'' 16 CFR 1021.5(c)(1). 
Because the final rule for high chairs creates design or performance 
requirements, the rule falls within the categorical exclusion.

XII. Preemption

    Under section 26(a) of the CPSA, no state or political subdivision 
of a state may establish or continue in effect a requirement dealing 
with the same risk of injury as a federal consumer product safety 
standard under the CPSA unless the state requirement is identical to 
the federal standard. 15 U.S.C. 2075(a). However, states or political 
subdivisions of states may apply to CPSC for an exemption, allowing 
them to establish or continue such a requirement if the state 
requirement ``provides a significantly higher degree of protection from 
[the] risk of injury'' and ``does not unduly burden interstate 
commerce.'' Id. 2075(c).
    One of the functions of the CPSIA was to amend the CPSA, adding 
several provisions to the CPSA, including CPSIA section 104 in 15 
U.S.C. 2056a. As such, consumer product safety standards that the 
Commission creates under CPSIA section 104 are covered by the 
preemption provision in the CPSA. As a result, the preemption provision 
in section 26 of the CPSA applies to the mandatory safety standard for 
high chairs.

XIII. Testing, Certification, and Notification of Requirements

    Section 14(a) of the CPSA requires the manufacturer or private 
labeler of a children's product that is subject to a children's product 
safety rule to certify that, based on a third party conformity 
assessment body's testing, the product complies with the applicable 
children's product safety rule. 15 U.S.C. 2063(a)(2)(A), 2063(a)(2)(B). 
Section 14(a) also requires CPSC to publish an NOR for a third party 
conformity assessment body (i.e., testing laboratory) to obtain 
accreditation to assess conformity with a children's product safety 
rule. 15 U.S.C. 2063(a)(3)(A). Because this safety standard for high 
chairs is a children's product safety rule, it requires CPSC to issue 
an NOR.
    On March 12, 2013, the Commission published a final rule in the 
Federal Register, entitled Requirements Pertaining to Third Party 
Conformity Assessment Bodies, establishing 16 CFR part 1112, which sets 
out the general requirements and criteria concerning testing 
laboratories. 78 FR 15836. Part 1112 includes procedures for CPSC to 
accept a testing laboratory's accreditation and lists the children's 
product safety rules for which CPSC has published NORs. When CPSC 
issues a new NOR, it must amend part 1112 to include that NOR. 
Accordingly, the Commission is amending part 1112 to include the high 
chairs standard.
    Testing laboratories that apply for CPSC acceptance to test high 
chairs for compliance with the new high chair rule would have to meet 
the requirements in part 1112. When a laboratory meets the requirements 
of a CPSC-accepted third party conformity

[[Page 28370]]

assessment body, the laboratory can apply to CPSC to include 16 CFR 
part 1231, Safety Standard for High Chairs, in the laboratory's scope 
of accreditation of CPSC safety rules listed on the CPSC website at: 
www.cpsc.gov/labsearch.
    As the RFA requires, CPSC staff conducted a FRFA for the rulemaking 
in which the Commission adopted part 1112. 78 FR 15836, 15855-58. To 
summarize, the FRFA concluded that the accreditation requirements would 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
laboratories because no requirements were imposed on laboratories that 
did not intend to provide third party testing services. The only 
laboratories CPSC 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.
    By the same reasoning, adding an NOR for the high chair standard to 
part 1112 will not have a significant economic impact on small test 
laboratories. A relatively small number of laboratories in the United 
States have applied for accreditation to test for conformance to 
existing juvenile product standards. Accordingly, CPSC expects that 
only a few laboratories will seek accreditation to test for compliance 
with the high chair standard. Of those that seek accreditation, CPSC 
expects that most will have already been accredited to test for 
conformance to other juvenile product standards. The only costs to 
those laboratories will be the cost of adding the high chair standard 
to their scopes of accreditation. For these reasons, CPSC certifies 
that amending 16 CFR part 1112 to include an NOR for the high chairs 
standard will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.

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 1231

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Commission amends 16 
CFR chapter II as follows:

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

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

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

0
2. Amend Sec.  1112.15 by adding paragraph (b)(44) to read as follows:


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

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (44) 16 CFR part 1231, Safety Standard for High Chairs.
* * * * *

0
3. Add part 1231 to read as follows:

PART 1231--SAFETY STANDARD FOR HIGH CHAIRS

Sec.
1231.1 Scope.
1231.2 Requirements for high chairs.

    Authority:  Sec. 104, Pub. L. 110-314, 122 Stat. 3016 (August 
14, 2008); Pub. L. 112-28, 125 Stat. 273 (August 12, 2011).


Sec.  1231.1  Scope.

    This part establishes a consumer product safety standard for high 
chairs.


Sec.  1231.2  Requirements for high chairs.

    (a) Each high chair shall comply with all applicable provisions of 
ASTM F404-18, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for High Chairs, 
approved on February 15, 2018. The Director of the Federal Register 
approves this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may obtain a copy from ASTM 
International, 100 Bar Harbor Drive, P.O. Box 0700, West Conshohocken, 
PA 19428; http://www.astm.org. 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/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    (b) [Reserved]

Alberta E. Mills,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission.
[FR Doc. 2018-12938 Filed 6-18-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6355-01-P