[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 148 (Friday, July 31, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46000-46002]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16137]


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

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

[Docket No. CPSC-2012-0068]

16 CFR Part 1225


Safety Standard for Hand-Held Infant Carriers

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: On May 20, 2020, the Consumer Product Safety Commission 
(Commission, or CPSC) issued a direct final rule revising the CPSC's 
mandatory standard for hand-held infant carriers to incorporate by 
reference the most recent version of the applicable ASTM standard. We 
are publishing this final rule to delay the effective date of the 
CPSC's mandatory standard for hand-held infant carriers, due to the 
COVID-19 pandemic.

DATES: The effective date for the direct final rule published on May 
20, 2020, at 85 FR 30605, is delayed from August 3, 2020, until January 
1, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keysha L. Walker, Compliance Officer, 
Office of Compliance and Field Operations, Consumer Product Safety 
Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814-4408; telephone: 
301-504-6820; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

    On May 20, 2020, the Commission published a direct final rule 
(DFR), revising 16 CFR part 1225, the CPSC's mandatory standard for 
hand-held infant carriers, to incorporate by reference the most recent 
version of the applicable ASTM standard, ASTM F2050-19, Standard 
Consumer Safety Specification for Hand-Held Infant Carriers. See 85 FR 
30605. The DFR was originally set to become effective by operation of 
law on August 3, 2020, unless the Commission received a significant 
adverse comment by June 19, 2020.
    Since Commission approval of the DFR in April 2020, Executive Order 
(E.O.) 13924, ``Regulatory Relief to Support Economic Recovery,'' was 
issued on May 19, 2020. 85 FR 31385. E.O. 13924 encourages federal 
agencies to address the economic consequences of COVID-19 ``by 
rescinding, modifying, waiving, or providing exemptions from 
regulations and other requirements that may inhibit economic recovery, 
consistent with applicable law and with protection of the public health 
and safety.''

B. Delaying the Effective Date of the Rule

    CPSC received two comments in response to the DFR notice. Neither 
comment is considered to be a ``significant adverse comment.'' \1\ 
However, one commenter, who was anonymous, noted that in the last few 
months, the pandemic has ``caused drastic changes in consumer behavior 
and manufacturing capabilities, including reduced sales and otherwise 
unforeseen production stoppages.'' The commenter stated: ``As a 
consequence, inventory levels of some previously ordered components 
have been extended further into the year than typical. Lead times for 
new material have also increased as manufacturers struggle to return to 
pre-pandemic production output capabilities.'' The commenter recommends 
the effective date should be pushed back, ``perhaps as far as to the 
end of the calendar year, to allow manufacturers more time to use up 
existing inventory before implementing the required changes.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Commission considers a significant adverse comment to be 
``one where the commenter explains why the rule would be 
inappropriate,'' including an assertion challenging ``the rule's 
underlying premise or approach,'' or a claim that the rule would be 
``ineffective or unacceptable without change.'' 60 FR 43108, 43111. 
One commenter asserted that the incorporation by reference process 
does not allow the public free access to the law without paying for 
the incorporated voluntary standard. CPSC did not consider that 
comment to be a significant adverse comment because a copy of the 
standard can be inspected at the National Archives and Records 
Administration, or at the CPSC, and a read-only copy of the standard 
will be available for viewing on the ASTM website at www.astm.org/READINGLIBRARY.

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

[[Page 46001]]

    This comment is not a considered a significant adverse comment 
because it does not challenge the premise or purpose of the underlying 
rule. Nevertheless, the Commission recognizes that as a result of the 
COVID-19 pandemic, disruptions in the U.S. economy may limit 
manufacturers' ability to comply with the new labeling requirements of 
ASTM F2050-19.
    CPSC staff conducted a review of the safety impact of delaying the 
effective date for the revised hand-held infant carriers' standard. As 
detailed in the staff briefing package for the DFR,\2\ staff determined 
that the changes made by ASTM F2050-19 were either neutral or improved 
the safety for hand-held infant carriers. Based on staff's findings, 
the Commission allowed the revised voluntary standard to become the 
consumer product safety standard for hand-held infant carriers. The 
substantive changes adopted by the Commission include:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ https://cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/ASTM%27s%20Revisions%20to%20Safety%20Standard%20for%20Hand-Held%20Infant%20Carriers.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Exempting hand-held bassinets/cradles from the requirement 
to display a ``NEVER leave child unattended'' warning message;
     Changing the definition of ``hand-held'' infant carriers 
to include ``semi-rigid'' infant carriers within the scope of the 
standard; and
     Including a new warning icon and warning statement 
regarding the fall hazard with shopping cart use to be included in 
instructional literature.
    Staff's review of the impact on safety of delaying the effective 
date indicates that the above changes to the standard could be delayed 
until the end of the calendar year, consistent with the protection of 
public health and safety. Continuing to display a ``NEVER leave child 
unattended'' warning message would not adversely impact safety. 
Delaying the expansion of the definition of ``hand-held'' infant 
carrier in the voluntary standard does not reduce safety because 
``semi-rigid'' infant carriers are already included in CPSC's mandatory 
standard, 16 CFR 1225(b)(1); the effect of the change to the voluntary 
standard is to match the current mandatory standard's definition. 
Finally, although the requirement for including the new shopping cart 
fall hazard warning in instructional literature would be delayed, 
shopping carts that meet ASTM F2372-15, Standard Consumer Safety 
Performance Specification for Shopping Carts, will still be required to 
display the on-product warning, often on the seat flap, providing an 
important safety message addressing the same hazard as the new hazard 
warning in the voluntary standard.
    Based on staff's safety assessment that indicates delaying the 
effective date will not adversely impact safety, and the direction in 
E.O. 13294 to address the economic consequences of COVID-19, the 
Commission is delaying the effective date of the hand-held carriers' 
standard until January 1, 2021. The delayed effective date should 
provide manufacturers that are not already compliant with the new 
standard the necessary time to comply with the new labeling requirement 
of the revised hand-held carriers' standard without negatively 
impacting the safety of hand-held infant carriers.

C. The APA and Good Cause Finding

    The Commission is issuing this final rule without an additional 
opportunity for public comment. Pursuant to section 553(b)(3)(B) of the 
Administrative Procedure Act (APA), general notice and the opportunity 
for public comment are not required with respect to a rulemaking when 
an ``agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the finding and a 
brief statement of reasons therefor in the rules issued) that notice 
and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or 
contrary to the public interest.'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of this rule, the DFR published by the Commission on 
May 20, 2020, which revised the Commission's standard for hand-held 
infant carriers, will not be reflected in the Code of Federal 
Regulations until January 1, 2021. The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted 
economic activity in the United States. E.O. 13294 urges federal 
agencies to take actions to reduce regulatory burdens that arise as a 
result of the pandemic ``consistent with applicable law and with 
protection of the public health and safety.'' As previously discussed 
in section B of the preamble, manufacturers may be handicapped in their 
ability to comply with the new labeling requirements of the revised 
hand-held carriers' standard by the August 3, 2020 effective date set 
in the DFR. Therefore, the Commission has determined that delaying the 
effective date until January 1, 2021 is warranted, because delaying the 
effective date will not have an adverse impact on public health and 
safety, and as encouraged by E.O. 13924, it will help reduce regulatory 
burdens exacerbated by the pandemic. Delaying the effective date until 
January 1, 2021 will allow manufacturers to come into compliance with 
the new labeling requirements in the hand-held carriers' standard while 
providing regulatory relief to manufacturers impacted by the COVID-19 
pandemic. Because of the short time frame until the original August 3, 
2020 effective date is scheduled to go into effect, and for the reasons 
discussed above, the Commission finds that there is good cause 
consistent with the public interest to issue the rule without advance 
notice and comment.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B); 553(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The APA generally requires a 30-day delayed effective date for 
final rules, except for: (1) Substantive rules which grant or recognize 
an exemption or relieve a restriction; (2) interpretative rules and 
statements of policy; or (3) as otherwise provided by the agency for 
good cause.\5\ The Commission believes that the public interest is best 
served by having this final rule become effective immediately upon 
publication in the Federal Register, instead of the usual 30-day 
delayed effective date normally required by the APA. Therefore, the 
Commission finds that there is good cause to delay the effective date 
of the previously approved change to 16 CFR part 1225 of the 
Commission's standard, for the reasons noted above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 5 U.S.C. 553(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires that 
agencies review proposed and final rules for their potential economic 
impact on small entities, including small businesses, and prepare 
regulatory flexibility analyses. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. The RFA applies 
to any rule that is subject to notice and comment procedures under 
section 553 of the APA. Id. As discussed previously, consistent with 
section 553(b)(B) of the APA, the Commission has determined for good 
cause that general notice and opportunity for public comment is 
unnecessary. Thus, the RFA's requirements relating to initial and final 
regulatory flexibility analysis do not apply.
    However, the Commission is extending the effective date because 
economic disruptions affecting inventory levels could potentially 
affect a subset of manufacturers, although the exact number is not 
known. Although the cost to firms of having to dispose of an inventory 
of out-of-date printed instructions is probably low as a percent of 
their total costs or their total revenue, extending the effective date 
of the rule may provide some relief to manufacturers who may face 
delays in having new materials printed due to backlogs in print shops 
or because of

[[Page 46002]]

local stay-at-home restrictions or other delays related to the COVID-19 
pandemic. The additional time will allow manufacturers to come into 
compliance with the new requirements as they deplete their inventory of 
non-compliant materials.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The standard for hand-held infant carriers contains information-
collection requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 
U.S.C. 3501-3520). The revisions made no changes to that section of the 
standard. Thus, the revisions will have no effect on the information-
collection requirements related to the standard.

F. Environmental Considerations

    The Commission's regulations provide a categorical exclusion for 
the Commission's rules from any requirement to prepare an environmental 
assessment or an environmental impact statement where they ``have 
little or no potential for affecting the human environment.'' 16 CFR 
1021.5(c)(2). This rule falls within the categorical exclusion, so no 
environmental assessment or environmental impact statement is required.

G. Preemption

    Section 26(a) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2075(a), provides that where a 
consumer product safety standard is in effect and applies to a product, 
no state or political subdivision of a state may either establish or 
continue in effect a requirement dealing with the same risk of injury 
unless the state requirement is identical to the federal standard. 
Section 26(c) of the CPSA also provides that states or political 
subdivisions of states may apply to the CPSC for an exemption from this 
preemption under certain circumstances. Section 104(b) of the CPSIA 
deems rules issued under that provision ``consumer product safety 
rules.'' Therefore, once a rule issued under section 104 of the CPSIA 
takes effect, it will preempt in accordance with section 26(a) of the 
CPSA.

H. The Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act (CRA; 5 U.S.C. 801-808) states that, 
before a rule may take effect, the agency issuing the rule must submit 
the rule, and certain related information, to each House of Congress 
and the Comptroller General. 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1). The submission must 
indicate whether the rule is a ``major rule.'' The CRA states that the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) determines whether 
a rule qualifies as a ``major rule.'' Pursuant to the CRA, this rule 
does not qualify as a ``major rule,'' as defined in 5 U.S.C. 804(2). To 
comply with the CRA, the Office of the General Counsel will submit the 
required information to each House of Congress and the Comptroller 
General.

Alberta E. Mills,
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.

[FR Doc. 2020-16137 Filed 7-30-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P