[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 21 (Friday, January 31, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5587-5589]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-01832]


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

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

16 CFR Parts 1219, 1220

[Docket No. CPSC-2010-0075]


Review of the Safety Standards for Full-Size Baby Cribs and Non-
Full-Size Baby Cribs

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission.

ACTION: Section 610 review and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Consumer Product Safety Commission (Commission or CPSC) is 
conducting a review of the safety standards for full-size baby cribs 
and non-full-size baby cribs under section 610 of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (RFA). That section requires the CPSC to review, within 
10 years after their issuance, mandatory standards that have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
The CPSC seeks comment to determine whether, consistent with the CPSC's 
statutory obligations, these standards should be maintained without 
change or modified to minimize significant impact of the rule on a 
substantial number of small entities.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by March 31, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CPSC-2010-
0075, by any of the following methods:
    Electronic Submissions: Submit electronic comments to the Federal 
eRulemaking Portal at: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments. CPSC does not accept comments 
submitted by electronic mail (email), except through 
www.regulations.gov. CPSC encourages you to submit electronic comments 
by using the Federal eRulemaking Portal, as described above.
    Mail/hand delivery/courier Submissions: Submit comments by mail/
hand delivery/courier to: Division of the Secretariat, Consumer Product 
Safety Commission, Room 820, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 
20814; telephone (301) 504-7923.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name 
and docket number for this notice. All comments received may be posted 
without change, including any personal identifiers, contact 
information, or other personal information provided, to: http://www.regulations.gov. Do not submit electronically confidential business 
information, trade secret information, or other sensitive or protected 
information that you do not want to be available to the public. If you 
wish to submit such information, please submit it according to the 
instructions for written submissions.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to: http://www.regulations.gov, and insert the 
docket number CPSC-2010-0075, into the ``Search'' box, and follow the 
prompts.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Proper, Directorate for Economic 
Analysis, Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, 
Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone: (301) 504-7628; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Section 104 of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act

    On December 28, 2010, the CPSC issued the Safety Standards for 
Full-Size Baby Cribs (16 CFR part 1219) and Non-Full-Size Baby Cribs 
(16 CFR part 1220) under section 104(c) of the Consumer Product Safety 
Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA), Public Law 110-314) (75 FR 81766). 
Section 104(c) of the CPSIA stated that the crib standards would apply 
to certain persons (such as those owning or operating child care 
facilities and places of public accommodation), in addition to persons 
usually subject to consumer product safety rules.\1\ In the initial 
rule, the Commission determined that both crib standards would have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities, including 
manufacturers, importers, small retailers, and child care centers (75 
FR 81782-86).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Under section 104(c) of the CPSIA, the initial crib 
standards applied to any person that
     (A) Manufactures, distributes in commerce, or contracts to sell 
cribs;
    (B) Based on the person's occupation, holds itself out as having 
knowledge of skill peculiar to cribs, including child care 
facilities and family child care homes;
    (C) Is in the business of contracting to sell or resell, lease, 
sublet, or otherwise place cribs in the stream of commerce; or
    (D) Owns or operates a place of accommodation affecting 
commerce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 12, 2011, in Public Law 112-28, Congress amended section 
104 and specifically addressed potential revisions of the crib 
standards, stating that any revision after their initial promulgation 
``shall apply only to a person that manufactures or imports cribs,'' 
unless the Commission determines that application to any others covered 
by the initial crib standards is ``necessary to protect against an 
unreasonable risk to health or safety.'' If the Commission applies a 
revised crib standard to additional persons, the statute requires the 
Commission to provide at least 12 months for those persons to come into 
compliance. The Commission has not expanded the applicability of the 
crib standards to any additional persons in subsequent revisions to the 
standards.\2\

B. The Crib Standards

    The full-size baby crib standard currently incorporates ASTM F1169-
19, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Full-Size Baby Cribs, 
approved on March 15, 2019, as the mandatory CPSC standard. ASTM F1169-
19 specifies performance requirements and test procedures to determine 
the structural integrity of full-size cribs. It also contains design 
requirements addressing entanglement on crib corner post extensions, 
and

[[Page 5588]]

requirements for warning labels and instructional material.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The full-size crib standard was revised on July 31, 2012 (77 
FR 45242), December 9, 2013 (78 FR 73692), and July 23, 2019 (84 FR 
35293); the non-full-size crib standard was revised on June 6, 2018 
(83 FR 26206) and October 23, 2019 (84 FR 56684).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The non-full-size baby crib standard currently incorporates ASTM 
F406-17, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Non-Full-Size Baby 
Cribs/Play Yards, approved on December 1, 2017, as the mandatory CPSC 
standard. ASTM 406-17 specifies the testing requirements for structural 
integrity and performance requirements for non-full-size cribs/play 
yards. It also provides requirements for labeling and instructional 
material.

C. Review Under Section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Section 610(a) of the RFA requires agencies to review regulations 
that have a significant impact on a substantial number of small 
entities within 10 years of the date of their publication. 5 U.S.C. 
610(a). Because the crib standards were promulgated in 2010, the 
Commission is now commencing its section 610 review. The purpose of the 
review is to determine whether such rule should be continued without 
change, or should be amended, consistent with the stated objectives of 
applicable statutes to minimize any significant impact of the rules on 
a substantial number of small entities. The RFA lists several factors 
that the agency shall consider when reviewing rules under section 610. 
These factors are:
     The continued need for the rule;
     The nature of complaints or comments received concerning 
the rule from the public;
     The complexity of the rule;
     The extent to which the rule overlaps, duplicates or 
conflicts with other Federal rules, and, to the extent feasible, with 
State and local governmental rules; and
     The length of time since the rule has been evaluated or 
the degree to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors 
have changed in the area affected by the rule.

5 U.S.C. 610(b)

    The need for the safety standards for full-size baby cribs and non-
full-size baby cribs has been established by statutory mandate under 
section 104 of the CPSIA. However, the Commission seeks comment to 
evaluate the other factors and to determine whether the ongoing impact 
of the rules is significant for a substantial number of small entities. 
An important step in the review process involves gathering and 
analyzing information from affected persons about their experience with 
the rules and any material changes in circumstances since issuance of 
the rules. The Commission requests written comments on the adequacy or 
inadequacy of the rules, their small business impacts, and other 
relevant issues. In addition to the specific questions below, the 
Commission welcomes comments on any other issues raised by section 610 
of the RFA.
Safety and Effectiveness
    1. Are there any recent technological developments that would 
improve the effectiveness of the full-size or non-full-size crib 
standards? Would any of these potential improvements have an impact on 
suppliers, and if so, would the impact be different for small suppliers 
and large suppliers?
    2. Are there any sections of the full-size and/or non-full-size 
crib standards that could be improved without reducing the stringency 
of the standards or reducing the safety of the resulting cribs? How 
would these changes affect suppliers, particularly small suppliers? 
Explain your response, and provide supporting data, if possible.
Costs and Impacts--Suppliers
    1. Are there any requirements of the full-size or non-full size 
crib standards that are especially or unnecessarily costly and/or 
burdensome, particularly to small suppliers? Which ones? Are any of the 
requirements disproportionately burdensome for small entities? How 
might the requirements of either standard be modified to reduce the 
costs or burdens on small suppliers without reducing the safety 
provided by the standards or making the standards less stringent? 
Please explain your response, and provide supporting data.
    2. What percent of the time and cost of crib construction does 
complying with the full-size and/or non-full-size crib standards 
represent? Do these percentages vary significantly depending on the 
geographical location, size of firm, or other factors? Which 
requirements in the full-size or non-full-size crib standards have the 
greatest impact on cost of production? The lowest impact on cost of 
production? We are primarily interested in small firms, but 
understanding how impact varies based on firm size would be helpful. 
Please explain your response, and provide supporting data, if possible.
    3. What modifications did manufacturers or others have to make to 
full-size and/or non-full-size crib models to comply with the 
requirements of CPSC's crib standards? What was the cost of these 
modifications in terms of labor, materials, and research and 
development? Are these costs ongoing, or were they one-time 
expenditures? Please explain, and provide supporting data, if possible. 
Are the costs comparable for large and small firms?
    4. Have any manufacturers or importers entered the market for full-
size and/or non-full-size cribs since the standards went into effect? 
Did the standards present any specific challenges for new entrants, 
particularly small suppliers?
    5. Have any manufacturers or importers reduced the number of models 
in their full-size and/or non-full-size crib product lines or dropped 
the product lines entirely because of the requirements of the crib 
rules? If so, which requirements were the most burdensome, and were 
they more, less, or equally burdensome for small firms? Why?
    6. Did the longer effective date for childcare facilities 
significantly reduce the impact? Please explain why or why not.
    7. Do the full-size and non-full-size crib standards affect any 
small entities not mentioned in the questions above? If so, what 
entities are affected and how? Please explain your response, and 
provide supporting data, if possible.
Recordkeeping and Third Party Testing
    1. What percent of the time and cost of complying with the full-
size and non-full-size crib standards does testing represent? How much 
of that testing is conducted by third parties, and how much is 
additional, internal testing? Do these percentages vary significantly 
depending on the type of crib, geographical location, size of firm, or 
other factors? Which requirements in the full-size and non-full-size 
crib standards have the greatest impact on testing costs? Which 
requirements have the lowest impact on testing costs? We are especially 
interested in any differential impact of the testing requirements on 
small businesses. Explain your response, and provide supporting data, 
if possible.
    2. Are the recordkeeping requirements associated with third party 
testing for conforming to the crib standards adequate, inadequate, or 
overly burdensome? If they are overly burdensome, are they more or less 
burdensome for small firms? Are there recordkeeping requirements that 
could be applied to cribs as a product class that would reduce the 
recordkeeping cost on suppliers, in particular small suppliers, without 
reducing safety? Please explain your response.
    3. How frequently do suppliers submit samples of their full-size 
and non-full-size cribs to third party conformity assessment bodies for 
testing to compliance with the full-size or non-full-size crib 
standards or other crib

[[Page 5589]]

standards? Do small suppliers submit them more, less, or with equal 
frequency as large suppliers? How many samples of each model are 
submitted for testing to maintain certification? Do the number of 
samples submitted vary depending on the size of the submitting 
supplier? What is the cost of the testing, and to what extent, if any, 
does cost vary, based on the size of the submitting firm? Did the cost 
of testing for conformance with standards (whether third party, 
internal, or both) increase after the rules became mandatory? If so, by 
how much, and did that increase vary, based on firm size?
    4. To what extent have the third party testing requirements 
replaced other testing that suppliers, particularly small suppliers, 
conducted, thereby not imposing any additional burden? Please explain 
your response.
    5. Have suppliers, particularly small suppliers, been able to make 
use of the flexibilities provided in the component part rule (16 CFR 
part 1109) to reduce their third party testing costs (e.g., relying 
upon third party testing provided by a supplier to certify products or 
relying on third party testing of a component used in more than one 
model for certification purposes)? If so, in what way? Can you provide 
estimates of the cost savings provided by the component part testing 
rule?
    6. Could changes be made in the third party testing procedures or 
the third party testing rules that would reduce the burden on crib 
suppliers, particularly small crib suppliers, and still be consistent 
with assuring compliance with the crib standards? If so, how?
Clarity and Duplication
    1. Is there any aspect of the full-size and/or non-full-size crib 
standards that is unclear, needlessly complex, or duplicative?
    2. Do any portions of the standards overlap, duplicate, or conflict 
with other federal, state, or local government rules?
Outreach and Advocacy
    1. Are the requirements in CPSC's full-size and non-full-size crib 
standards known to firms that manufacture or import cribs for the 
United States, particularly small firms and firms that build or import 
cribs infrequently or in small lots? How could the requirements of the 
standard be communicated more effectively to such firms?
    2. Are there any cribs at small child care facilities or places of 
public accommodation that do not meet the full-size or non-full-size 
crib standard? What can CPSC do to improve awareness of the standards' 
requirements among owners of these businesses? Please explain.

Alberta E. Mills,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission.
[FR Doc. 2020-01832 Filed 1-30-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6355-01-P