81766 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

1The Commission voted 5–0 to approve 

publication of this final rule. Chairman Inez M. 

Tenenbaum, Commissioner Thomas H. Moore, 

Commissioner Robert S. Adler, and Commissioner 

Anne M. Northup filed statements concerning this 

action which may be viewed on the Commission’s 

Web site at http://www.cpsc.gov/pr/statements.html 

or obtained from the Commission’s Office of the 

Secretary. 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

16 CFR Parts 1219, 1220, and 1500 

Safety Standards for Full-Size Baby 

Cribs and Non-Full-Size Baby Cribs; 

Final Rule 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Section 104(b) of the 

Consumer Product Safety Improvement 

Act of 2008 (‘‘CPSIA’’) requires the 

United States Consumer Product Safety 

Commission (‘‘CPSC,’’ ‘‘Commission,’’ or 

‘‘we’’) to promulgate consumer product 

safety standards for durable infant or 

toddler products. These standards are to 

be ‘‘substantially the same as’’ applicable 

voluntary standards or more stringent 

than the voluntary standard if the 

Commission concludes that more 

stringent requirements would further 

reduce the risk of injury associated with 

the product. The Commission is issuing 

safety standards for full-size and nonfull-size baby cribs in response to the 

direction under section 104(b) of the 

CPSIA.1 Section 104(c) of the CPSIA 

specifies that the crib standards will 

cover used as well as new cribs. The 

crib standards will apply to anyone who 

manufactures, distributes, or contracts 

to sell a crib; to child care facilities, 

family child care homes, and others 

holding themselves out to be 

knowledgeable about cribs; to anyone 

who leases, sublets, or otherwise places 

a crib in the stream of commerce; and 

to owners and operators of places of 

public accommodation affecting 

commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: The rule will 

become effective on June 28, 2011. The 

incorporation by reference of the 

publications listed in this rule is 

approved by the Director of the Federal 

Register as of June 28, 2011. 

Compliance Dates: Compliance with 

this rule with respect to the offer or 

provision for use of cribs by child care 

facilities, family child care homes, and 

places of public accommodation 

affecting commerce is required starting 

on December 28, 2012. For all other 

entities subject to the rule, compliance 

with this rule is required starting on 

June 28, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christopher Melchert, Office of 

Compliance and Field Operations, 

Consumer Product Safety Commission, 

4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 

20814; telephone (301) 504–7588; 

cmelchert@cpsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background and Statutory Authority 

1. Section 104(b) of the Consumer 

Product Safety Improvement Act 

The Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008 (‘‘CPSIA’’, 

Pub. L. 110–314) was enacted on August 

14, 2008. Section 104(b) of the CPSIA 

requires the Commission to promulgate 

consumer product safety standards for 

durable infant or toddler products. The 

law requires that these standards are to 

be ‘‘substantially the same as’’ applicable 

voluntary standards or more stringent 

than the voluntary standards if the 

Commission concludes that more 

stringent requirements would further 

reduce the risk of injury associated with 

the product. The Commission is issuing 

safety standards for full-size and nonfull-size cribs that are substantially the 

same as voluntary standards developed 

by ASTM International (formerly known 

as the American Society for Testing and 

Materials). The standard for full-size 

cribs is substantially the same as a 

voluntary standard developed by 

ASTM, ASTM F 1169–10, Standard 

Consumer Safety Specification for FullSize Baby Cribs, but with two 

modifications that strengthen the 

standard. The standard for non-full-size 

cribs is substantially the same as ASTM 

F 406–10a, Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Non-Full-Size Baby 

Cribs/Play Yards, but with four 

modifications that strengthen the 

standard. 

2. Section 104(c) of the CPSIA and the 

Proposed Rule 

The crib standards are different from 

standards for the other durable infant or 

toddler products that section 104 of the 

CPSIA directs the Commission to issue. 

Section 104(c)(1) of the CPSIA makes it 

a prohibited act under section 19(a)(1) 

of the Consumer Product Safety Act 

(‘‘CPSA’’) for any person to whom 

section 104(c) of the CPSIA applies to 

‘‘manufacture, sell, contract to sell or 

resell, lease, sublet, offer, provide for 

use, or otherwise place in the stream of 

commerce a crib that is not in 

compliance with a standard 

promulgated under subsection (b) [of 

the CPSIA].’’ Section 104(c)(3) of the 

CPSIA defines ‘‘crib’’ as including new 

and used cribs, full-size and non-fullsize cribs, portable cribs, and crib pens. 

Section 104(c)(2) of the CPSIA states 

that the section applies 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 or 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 public 

accommodation affecting commerce (as 

defined in section 4 of the Federal Fire 

Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 

U.S.C. 2203) applied without regard to the 

phrase ‘‘not owned by the Federal 

Government’’). 

Section 104(c)(2) of the CPSIA. 

Thus, the crib standards apply to 

owners and operators of child care 

facilities, family child care homes, and 

places of public accommodation such as 

hotels and motels, as well as to 

manufacturers, distributors, and 

retailers of cribs. Other durable infant or 

toddler product standards issued under 

section 104 of the CPSIA apply to 

products manufactured or imported on 

or after the effective date of the 

standard. However, under section 104(c) 

of the CPSIA, after the applicable date 

of compliance, it will be unlawful for 

any of the entities identified in section 

104(c)(2) of the CPSIA to sell, lease, or 

otherwise distribute or provide a crib for 

use that does not meet the new CPSC 

crib standards, regardless of the date on 

which the crib was manufactured. 

In the Federal Register of July 23, 

2010 (75 FR 43308), the Commission 

published a proposed rule that would 

establish standards for full-size and 

non-full-size cribs. The proposed rule 

would incorporate by reference the 

following ASTM standards with some 

modifications: ASTM F 1169–10, 

Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Full-Size Baby Cribs, 

and ASTM F 406–10, Standard 

Consumer Safety Specification for NonFull-Size Baby Cribs/Play Yards. 

3. Previous Commission Crib Standards 

(16 CFR Parts 1508 and 1509) 

The Commission first issued 

mandatory regulations for full-size cribs 

in 1973 (amended in 1982), which were 

codified at 16 CFR part 1508 under the 

Federal Hazardous Substances Act 

(‘‘FHSA’’). In 1976, the Commission 

issued similar regulations for non-fullsize cribs (also amended in 1982), 

which were codified at 16 CFR part 

1509. The requirements of 16 CFR parts 

1508 and 1509 have been included in 

ASTM F 1169–10 and F 406–10a, 

respectively. However, the 

recordkeeping requirements in the 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81767 

ASTM standards are expanded from the 

3-year retention period that was 

required in 16 CFR parts 1508 and 1509 

to a 6-year retention period, which is 

consistent with the consumer 

registration provision in section 104(d) 

of the CPSIA. 

Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal 

Register, we are revoking the CPSC 

regulations for full-size and non-fullsize cribs at 16 CFR parts 1508 and 

1509. The new crib standards in this 

final rule, which incorporate the 

applicable ASTM standards, include the 

requirements of 16 CFR parts 1508 and 

1509. Revoking 16 CFR parts 1508 and 

1509 will allow all the crib-related 

requirements to be together and will 

avoid confusion about which 

requirements apply to cribs. 

4. Previous Commission Activities 

Concerning Cribs 

As detailed in the preamble to the 

proposed rule (75 FR at 43309), we have 

taken numerous regulatory and 

nonregulatory actions concerning crib 

hazards. In 1996, the Commission 

published an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking (‘‘ANPR’’) under 

the FHSA to address the hazard of crib 

slat disengagement, 61 FR 65996 (Dec. 

16, 1996). When the Commission 

proposed the new crib standards under 

section 104 of the CPSIA, it published 

a notice terminating the rulemaking it 

had begun with the 1996 ANPR because 

the slat disengagement hazard is 

addressed by the new standards that the 

Commission is issuing. 75 FR 43107 

(July 23, 2010). 

The Commission’s Office of 

Compliance has been involved with 

numerous investigations and recalls of 

cribs. Since 2007, the CPSC has issued 

46 recalls of more than 11 million cribs. 

All but seven of these recalls were for 

product defects that created a 

substantial product hazard, and not for 

violations of the federal crib regulations. 

Other previous actions include: (1) An 

ANPR that the Commission published 

in the Federal Register on November 25, 

2008 (73 FR 71570) in preparation for 

this rulemaking, which discussed 

options to address the hazards that 

CPSC staff had identified in the reported 

crib incidents and recalls; and (2) a 

public roundtable meeting concerning 

crib safety that CPSC staff held on April 

22, 2009. Information about the crib 

roundtable and the presentations made 

by CPSC staff and others are on the 

Commission’s Web site at http:// 

www.cpsc.gov/info/cribs/ 

infantsleep.html. 

B. The Products and Their Market 

1. Definitions Under the CPSIA and the 

Crib Standards 

The Commission’s previous crib 

standards in 16 CFR 1508 and 1509 

contained definitions of ‘‘full-size crib’’ 

and ‘‘non-full-size crib.’’ According to 16 

CFR parts 1508 and 1509, what 

principally distinguishes full-size cribs 

from non-full-size cribs are the interior 

dimensions of the crib. Also, according 

to these standards, a full-size crib is 

intended for use in the home, and a 

non-full-size crib is intended for use ‘‘in 

or around the home, for travel and other 

purposes.’’ A full-size crib has interior 

dimensions of 28 ± 5⁄8 inches (71 ± 1.6 

centimeters) in width by 523⁄8 ± 5⁄8

inches (133 ± 1.6 centimeters) in length. 

A non-full-size crib may be either 

smaller or larger than these dimensions. 

Full-size and non-full-size cribs also 

differ in the height of the crib side or 

rail. Non-full-size cribs include 

oversized, specialty, undersized, and 

portable cribs. However, any products 

with mesh/net/screen siding, nonrigidly constructed cribs, cradles, car 

beds, baby baskets, and bassinets are 

excluded from the non-full-size crib 

requirements of 16 CFR part 1509. 

Essentially, these definitions are 

carried over to the new crib standards 

with some important differences due to 

section 104(c) of the CPSIA. Because 

section 104(c) of the CPSIA explicitly 

includes used cribs in the definition of 

‘‘crib,’’ the definitions of full-size and 

non-full-size crib in the CPSC standards 

also include used cribs. The definition 

of ‘‘full-size crib’’ in part 1508 was 

limited to cribs ‘‘intended for use in the 

home.’’ However, section 104(c) of the 

CPSIA explicitly includes full-size and 

non-full-size cribs in child care facilities 

(including family child care homes) and 

cribs in places of public accommodation 

affecting commerce. The CPSIA defines 

a ‘‘place of public accommodation 

affecting commerce’’ with reference to 

the Federal Fire Prevention and Control 

Act of 1974 (but without the phrase that 

excludes establishments owned by the 

Federal Government). Thus, the CPSIA 

defines ‘‘places of public 

accommodation’’ as: 

any inn, hotel, or other establishment 

* * * that provides lodging to transient 

guests, except that such term does not 

include an establishment treated as an 

apartment building for purposes of any State 

or local law or regulation or an establishment 

located within a building that contains not 

more than 5 rooms for rent or hire and that 

is actually occupied as a residence by the 

proprietor of such establishment. 

15 U.S.C. 2203(7). 

Therefore, the definitions of full-size 

and non-full-size crib in the CPSC 

standards include new and used cribs, 

cribs in child care facilities, family child 

care homes, and cribs in places of 

public accommodation. 

2. Full-Size Cribs 

A full-size crib has specific interior 

dimensions of 28 ± 5⁄8 inches (71 ± 1.6 

centimeters) in width and 523⁄8 ± 5⁄8

inches (133 ± 1.6 centimeters) in length 

and is designed to provide sleeping 

accommodations for an infant. 

CPSC staff estimates that there are 

currently 68 manufacturers or importers 

supplying full-size cribs to the U.S. 

market. Ten of these firms are domestic 

importers (15 percent); 42 are domestic 

manufacturers (62 percent); 7 are foreign 

manufacturers (10 percent); and 2 are 

foreign importers (3 percent). 

Insufficient information was available 

about the remaining firms to categorize 

them. 

Based on information from a 2005 

survey conducted by the American Baby 

Group, CPSC staff estimates annual 

sales of new cribs to be about 2.4 

million, of which approximately 2.1 

million are full-size cribs. (This number 

could be an underestimate if new 

mothers buy more than one crib.) CPSC 

staff estimates that there are currently 

approximately 591 models of full-size 

cribs compared to approximately 81 

models of non-full-size cribs. Thus, 

approximately 88 percent of crib models 

are full-size cribs. 

3. Non-Full-Size Cribs 

A non-full-size crib may be either 

smaller or larger than a full-size crib, or 

shaped differently than the usual 

rectangular crib. The category of nonfull-size cribs includes oversized, 

specialty, undersized, and portable 

cribs, but does not include any product 

with mesh/net/screen siding, nonrigidly constructed cribs, cradles, car 

beds, baby baskets, or bassinets. The 

CPSC standard for non-full-size cribs 

does not apply to play yards, which are 

mesh or fabric-sided products. 

CPSC staff estimates that there 

currently are at least 17 manufacturers 

or importers supplying non-full-size 

cribs to the U.S. market. Five of these 

firms are domestic importers and 10 are 

domestic manufacturers. Insufficient 

information is available to determine 

whether the remaining firms are 

manufacturers or importers. CPSC staff 

estimates that there are approximately 

2.4 million cribs sold to households 

annually. Of these, approximately 

293,000 are non-full-size cribs. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
81768 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

4. Retailers, Child Care Facilities, and 

Places of Public Accommodation 

CPSC staff is unable to estimate the 

number of retailers that may sell or 

provide cribs. We can estimate, 

however, that there are approximately 

24,985 retail firms in the United States 

(at least 5,292 of which sell used 

products). The number of retailers that 

sell or provide cribs would be some 

subset of that number. 

CPSC staff estimates that there are 

approximately 59,555 firms supplying 

child care services. We received 

comments from child care organizations 

about the cribs they use. According to 

these comments, the average child care 

center has between 4 and 45 cribs, so, 

assuming that the number of firms 

supplying child care services is the 

same as child care centers discussed in 

the comments, child care centers could 

have roughly 774,180 cribs total. We 

estimate that there are approximately 

43,303 firms providing public 

accommodation. We did not receive any 

comments from such firms and cannot 

estimate how many cribs may be in use 

in places of public accommodation. 

C. Incident Data 

The preamble to the proposed rule (74 

FR at 43310 through 43311) provided 

detailed information concerning 

incident data based on information from 

the CPSC’s Early Warning System 

(‘‘EWS’’), a pilot project to monitor 

incident reports related to cribs and 

other infant sleep products. We 

summarize important aspects of the 

incident data in this section, but refer 

interested parties to the preamble to the 

proposed rule for more complete details. 

Data from EWS is not meant to provide 

an estimate of all crib-related incidents 

that have occurred during any particular 

time period. We used the EWS data for 

this rulemaking because, due to the 

larger number of follow-up 

investigations assigned from EWS 

incident reports, the EWS incidents 

provided the best illustration of the 

hazard patterns associated with 

incidents involving cribs. 

Between November 1, 2007 and April 

11, 2010, the Commission received 

reports through EWS of 3,584 incidents 

related to cribs. The year of the incident 

associated with these reports ranged 

from 1986 through 2010. However, very 

few crib-related incidents that occurred 

before 2007 are reflected in the EWS. 

Of the 3,584 incidents reported 

through the EWS, CPSC staff identified 

2,395 incidents as clearly involving fullsize cribs; 64 incidents as clearly 

involving non-full-size cribs; and 1,125 

incidents as lacking sufficient data for 

CPSC staff to determine whether they 

involved full-size or non-full-size cribs. 

The prevalent hazards reported in these 

incidents are common to all cribs, 

regardless of size. Given the 

predominance of incident reports 

identified as involving full-size cribs, 

the 1,125 incidents in which the size of 

the crib could not be determined are 

grouped with the category of full-size 

cribs. 

1. Full-Size Cribs (Includes Cribs of 

Undetermined Size) 

This section discusses incident data 

in the 3,520 reports from the EWS 

involving full-size cribs and cribs of an 

undetermined size. Of these 3,520 

incident reports, there were 147 

fatalities, 1,675 nonfatal injuries, and 

1,698 noninjury incidents. (The 

noninjury incidents range from those 

that potentially could have resulted in 

injuries or fatalities to general 

complaints or comments from 

consumers). Because reporting is 

ongoing, the number of reported 

fatalities, nonfatal injuries, and noninjury incidents presented here may 

change in the future. 

a. Fatalities 

Between November 1, 2007 and April 

11, 2010, a total of 147 fatalities 

associated with full-size (and 

undetermined size) cribs were reported 

to the Commission. A majority of the 

deaths (107 out of 147, or almost 73 

percent) were not related to any 

structural failure or design flaw of the 

crib. There were 35 fatalities attributable 

to structural problems of the crib. 

Nearly all (34 of the 35) were due to 

head/neck/body entrapments. More 

than half of these (18 out of 35) were 

related to drop-side failures. Almost all 

of the crib failures—whether they 

occurred due to detachments, 

disengagements, or breakages—created 

openings in which the infant became 

entrapped. 

b. Nonfatal Injuries 

Of the 3,520 incident reports 

involving full-size (and undetermined 

size) cribs, 1,675 reported a crib-related 

injury. The vast majority (97 percent) of 

these injuries were not serious enough 

to require hospitalization. 

Approximately half of those that did 

require hospitalization involved limb or 

skull fractures and other head injuries 

resulting from falls from cribs. Most of 

the remaining injuries resulted from 

children getting their limbs caught 

between crib slats, falling inside the crib 

and hitting the crib structure, or getting 

stuck in gaps created by structural 

failures. 

c. Hazard Pattern Identification 

CPSC staff considered all 3,520 

incidents (includes fatalities, 

nonfatalities, and non-injury incidents) 

involving full-size cribs (including cribs 

of undetermined size) to identify hazard 

patterns related to these incidents. CPSC 

staff grouped these incidents into four 

broad categories: (1) Product-related; (2) 

non-product-related; (3) recall-related; 

and (4) miscellaneous. More detail is 

provided in the Epidemiology staff’s 

memorandum that was part of the CPSC 

staff’s briefing package for the proposed 

rule, available on the CPSC Web site at: 

http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia10/ 

brief/104cribs.pdf. 

Approximately 82 percent of the 

3,520 incidents reported some sort of 

failure or defect in the product itself. In 

order of frequency, the hazard patterns 

reported included: 

• Falls from cribs (approximately 23 

percent of the 3,520 incidents); 

• Crib drop-side-related problems 

(approximately 22 percent of the 

incidents and about 12 percent of all 

reported fatalities); 

• Infants getting their limbs caught 

between the crib slats (approximately 12 

percent of the incidents); 

• Wood-related issues, such as slat 

breakages and detachments 

(approximately 12 percent of the 

incidents); 

• Mattress support-related problems 

(approximately 5 percent of the 

incidents); 

• Mattress fit problems 

(approximately 3 percent of the 

incidents); 

• Paint-related issues (approximately 

2 percent of the EWS incidents); and 

• Miscellaneous problems with the 

crib structure (approximately 3 percent 

of incidents), including non-drop-side 

or drop gate failures, sharp catch-points, 

stability and/or other structural issues. 

2. Non-Full-Size Cribs 

This category includes portable cribs 

and other cribs that are either smaller or 

larger than the dimensions specified for 

full-size cribs. For its review of incident 

data, CPSC staff included in the 

category of non-full-size cribs only those 

cribs that it could positively identify as 

non-full-size cribs. CPSC staff is aware 

of 64 incidents related to non-full-size 

cribs that have been reported between 

November 1, 2007 and April 11, 2010. 

Among these incidents, there were 6 

fatalities, 28 injuries, and 30 noninjury 

incidents. Because reporting is ongoing, 

the number of reported fatalities, 

nonfatal injuries, and noninjury 

incidents presented here may change in 

the future. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81769 

a. Fatalities 

Of the six fatalities, three were 

attributed to the presence of a cushion/ 

pillow in the sleep area. One fatality 

was due to the prone positioning of the 

infant on the sleep surface. One fatality 

resulted from the infant getting 

entrapped in a gap opened up by loose/ 

missing screws. Very little information 

was available on the circumstances of 

the last fatality. 

b. Nonfatal Injuries 

Among the 28 nonfatal injuries 

reported, only 2 required any 

hospitalization. Most of the remaining 

injuries, which include fractures, 

bruises, and lacerations, resulted from 

children falling and hitting the crib 

structure while in the crib, falling or 

climbing out of the crib, and children 

getting their limbs caught in the crib 

slats. 

c. Hazard Pattern Identification 

CPSC staff considered all 64 incidents 

(including fatalities, nonfatalities, and 

non-injury incidents) involving nonfull-size cribs to identify hazard patterns 

related to these incidents. The hazard 

patterns are similar to those among fullsize cribs. In 72 percent of the incidents, 

product-related issues were reported. 

These primarily involved falls from 

cribs, limbs becoming caught between 

slats, issues related to drop-sides and 

non-drop-sides (such as detachments 

and operation/hardware issues), and 

wood-related issues (including three slat 

detachments). This category includes 

one fatality, which was related to nondrop-side hardware. 

D. Voluntary and International 

Standards 

As discussed in the preamble to the 

proposed rule (75 FR at 43311 through 

43312), CPSC staff reviewed 

requirements of existing voluntary and 

international standards related to cribs. 

The primary standards currently in 

effect are the ASTM standards for fullsize and non-full-size cribs, a Canadian 

standard, and a European standard. 

Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. (‘‘UL’’) 

has a crib standard, UL 2275. However, 

the UL standard was not followed by 

crib manufacturers and is no longer an 

active standard. 

1. The ASTM Standards 

ASTM first published its voluntary 

standard for full-size cribs, ASTM F 

1169, Standard Specification for FullSize Baby Crib, in 1988, and has revised 

it periodically since then. In 2009, 

ASTM revised the standard 

significantly, including a limitation on 

movable sides that effectively eliminates 

the traditional drop-side design in 

which the front side of the crib can be 

raised and lowered. On June 1, 2010, 

ASTM approved the current version of 

its full-size crib standard with a slight 

change to the name, ASTM F 1169–10, 

Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Full-Size Baby Cribs. 

In 1997, ASTM first published a 

standard for non-full-size cribs, ASTM F 

1822, Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Non-Full-Size Baby 

Cribs. In June 2002, in order to group 

products with similar uses, ASTM 

combined its non-full-size crib standard, 

ASTM F 1822–97, with its play yard 

standard (F 406–99, Standard Consumer 

Safety Specification for Play Yards) to 

create ASTM F 406–02, Standard 

Consumer Safety Specification for NonFull-Size Baby Cribs/Play Yards. ASTM 

revised ASTM F 406 several times 

subsequently. On June 1, 2010, ASTM 

approved the version of its non-full-size 

crib standard, ASTM F 406–10, upon 

which the CPSC’s proposed standard 

was based. After we published our 

proposed rule in the Federal Register on 

July 23, 2010, ASTM revised its nonfull-size crib standard again and 

approved ASTM F 406–10a on October 

15, 2010. ASTM F 406–10a includes 

many of the changes which the 

proposed rule would have made to 

ASTM F 406–10, rearranges the order of 

some provisions, and contains some 

other editorial changes. Consequently, 

the final rule’s non-full-size cribs 

standard is based on ASTM F 406–10a. 

We discuss differences between the 

proposed rule and ASTM F 406–10a in 

section F of this preamble. 

2. International Standards 

Several performance requirements in 

the crib standards derive from, or are 

similar to, requirements in Health 

Canada’s crib standard, SOR/86–969, 

and the European standard, EN 716. 

These include the cyclic side (shake) 

test and the mattress support system 

vertical impact test from the Canadian 

standard, and the slat/spindle strength 

test from EN 716 requirements. (For 

more details on how the crib standards 

are based upon or are more stringent 

than certain international standards, we 

refer interested parties to the preamble 

to the proposed rule (75 FR at 43312).) 

E. Response to Comments on the 

Proposed Rule 

In the Federal Register of July 23, 

2010 (75 FR 43308), the Commission 

published a proposed rule that would 

establish standards for full-size and 

non-full-size cribs. We received over 50 

comments. These included comments 

from child care organizations, the 

Juvenile Products Manufacturers 

Association (‘‘JPMA’’), public interest 

groups, and individual consumers. The 

comments and the CPSC’s responses are 

discussed below in section E.1 through 

E.31 of this document. To make it easier 

to identify comments and our responses, 

the word ‘‘Comment,’’ in parentheses, 

will appear before the comment’s 

description, and the word ‘‘Response,’’ 

in parentheses, will appear before our 

response. We also have numbered each 

comment to help distinguish between 

different comments. The number 

assigned to each comment is purely for 

organizational purposes and does not 

signify the comment’s value, 

importance, or the order in which it was 

received. 

1. Misplaced Focus on Drop-Sides 

(Comment 1)—One commenter stated 

that focusing on drop-side cribs was 

misplaced. Rather, she suggested, new 

crib standards should focus on the 

structure and hardware of cribs. 

(Response 1)—The CPSC agrees that 

the safety of the drop-side is just one 

issue and other issues, especially cribs’ 

structural integrity and hardware, are 

crucial to crib safety. Although the 

prohibition of traditional drop-side cribs 

has received a great deal of attention, 

the CPSC’s new crib standards have 

numerous provisions, particularly 

concerning crib hardware, which will 

improve the safety of cribs. See the 

discussion of the standards’ 

requirements in section G of this 

preamble. 

2. Applicability of Standards to Cribs in 

Child Care Centers 

(Comment 2)—Several commenters 

associated with child care organizations 

or child care centers said that the crib 

standards should not apply to cribs in 

child care centers. They gave reasons 

such as: Caregivers are present at all 

times when babies are in cribs at child 

care centers; cribs in child care centers 

are specialty cribs that do not have the 

same safety issues as home cribs; and 

state licensing and safety requirements 

safeguard babies in cribs in child care 

centers. Some commenters stated that 

the crib standards are unique because, 

unlike other standards that hold product 

manufacturers or distributors 

responsible, the crib standards hold 

child care centers (which are consumers 

buying the cribs from these 

manufacturers and distributors) 

responsible. 

(Response 2)—Section 104(c)(1) of the 

CPSIA states that it ‘‘shall be a violation 

of section 19(a)(1) of the Consumer 

Product Safety Act for any person to 

which this subsection applies to 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
81770 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

manufacture, sell, contract to sell or 

resell, lease, sublet, offer, provide for 

use, or otherwise place in the stream of 

commerce a crib that is not in 

compliance with a standard 

promulgated under’’ section 104(b) of 

the CPSIA. Section 104(c)(2) of the 

CPSIA identifies various entities that are 

subject to section 104(c) of the CPSIA, 

and it expressly mentions persons who 

‘‘based on the person’s occupation, 

holds itself out as having knowledge or 

skill peculiar to cribs, including child 

care facilities and family child care 

homes.’’ The fact that a child care center 

may be subject to state regulation and 

licensing, or that caregivers at such 

facilities may be required to supervise 

babies in cribs, does not alter the 

applicability of section 104(c) of the 

CPSIA to child care facilities and family 

child care homes. 

As for the commenter’s claim that 

cribs in child care centers are different 

from those used in homes, the 

information that the CPSC has indicates 

that cribs used in child care centers are 

often substantially the same as cribs 

used in homes. CPSC staff has reports of 

incidents involving cribs in child care 

centers; the hazard scenarios associated 

with these incidents are the same as 

those for incidents that occur in homes. 

3. Waiving Requirements for Child Care 

Centers 

(Comment 3)—One commenter 

suggested waiving any requirement to 

replace cribs in child care and Head 

Start programs that comply with state 

licensing or national accreditation 

requirements, which mandate that all 

sleeping infants be within sight or 

sound of a caregiver at all times; and 

another commenter suggested a waiver 

of enforcement for cribs that are used in 

child care programs that comply with 

state licensing standards that require 

sleeping infants to be within sight and 

sound of a caregiver at all times. Some 

commenters asked that older cribs in 

child care centers be exempted from the 

rule (or allowed an enforcement 

waiver), as long as the cribs had not 

been recalled, thus shifting the burden 

of replacement from child care centers 

to manufacturers. 

(Response 3)—We do not have the 

authority to exempt or waive 

requirements for cribs in child care 

centers or to allow older cribs to be 

replaced through recalls alone. As 

discussed in response to comments 

concerning the effective date at section 

G.10 of this document, we do have 

discretion to provide additional time for 

child care centers to come into 

compliance with the standards. 

4. Crib-Related Incidents in Child Care 

Centers 

(Comment 4)—One commenter 

recognized that there have been injuries 

and fatalities associated with drop-side 

cribs, but stated that banning drop-side 

cribs in child care settings would not 

address this threat to young children. 

The commenter stated that, because of 

the safety checks on cribs and 

monitoring of sleeping children in child 

care centers, issues with drop-side cribs 

do not occur in such programs as they 

might in other settings. 

(Response 4)—As stated in our 

response to comment 2 in section E.2 of 

this document, section 104(c) of the 

CPSIA expressly mentions child care 

facilities and family child care homes as 

entities subject to the crib standards. 

The statute does not authorize us to 

consider safety checks, or the 

monitoring of sleeping children in child 

care facilities, or the rate at which safety 

issues might arise, or to exempt child 

care facilities for such reasons. 

Additionally, our review of the 

incident data reported to the CPSC from 

November 1, 2007 through April 11, 

2010, shows that at least two reports of 

incidents in child care facilities were 

received. Each report involved the 

structural failure of multiple drop-side 

cribs. Although no injuries were 

reported in these incidents, they 

presented the potential for serious 

injury or fatality. 

(Comment 5)—Some comments noted 

that sleeping infants are not left 

unsupervised in drop-side or other 

types of cribs in child care centers and 

noted further that children in child care 

centers are in cribs only when they are 

sleeping. 

(Response 5)—The CPSC has received 

at least 11 reports of injuries involving 

cribs in child care facilities, in which 

the injured infant was treated in a 

hospital emergency department. These 

injuries, usually due to a fall from a crib 

or an impact with the crib, were 

sustained while the infant was being 

taken care of at a child care facility. 

Clearly, the infants were not sleeping if 

the injuries were due to infants falling 

or impacting the crib. 

5. Commercial vs. Noncommercial Cribs 

(Comment 6)— Several commenters 

suggested that the crib standards should 

distinguish between ‘‘commercial’’ and 

‘‘noncommercial’’ cribs. One commenter 

asked if there should be different crib 

standards for child care providers or 

other nonfamily situations, where cribs 

sustain more use, similar to the 

distinction between home and public 

playground equipment (the CPSC has 

separate guidelines for home and public 

playground equipment). 

(Response 6)—Section 104 of the 

CPSIA does not make a distinction 

between commercial and 

noncommercial cribs but, rather, 

requires that all cribs within the scope 

of section 104(c) of the CPSIA—which 

explicitly includes cribs provided for 

use in child care centers and places of 

public accommodation—meet the crib 

standards promulgated by the 

Commission under section 104(b) of the 

CPSIA. Although ASTM has a voluntary 

standard applicable to ‘‘commercial 

cribs’’ (ASTM F 2710–08), section 104 of 

the CPSIA does not make such a 

delineation. Furthermore, ASTM’s 

commercial crib standard requires 

commercial cribs to comply with either 

ASTM F 406 or ASTM F 1169, and this 

final rule adopts, with some 

modifications, both ASTM F 406 and 

ASTM F 1169. In its crib rulemaking, 

the Commission is following the 

specific statutory direction and 

definitions in the CPSIA. In contrast, 

when developing guidelines for public 

and home playgrounds, the Commission 

was not responding to a statutory 

mandate, and thus, it had the discretion 

to distinguish between public and home 

playground equipment. 

6. Mesh/Nonrigid Full-Size Cribs 

(Comment 7)— One commenter 

suggested that the full-size crib standard 

should apply to rigid cribs only, and not 

be applicable to full-size cribs that have 

sides or ends made from mesh, fabric, 

or another nonrigid material. The 

commenter referred to the scope of the 

proposed non-full-size crib standard, 

which is limited to rigid products only. 

(Response 7)—We are not aware of 

any full-size mesh/fabric cribs currently 

being sold. In contrast, there are 

numerous non-full-size mesh/fabric 

cribs (i.e., play yards) currently on the 

market. The CPSC agrees that for nonfull-size products, different 

requirements for rigid versus mesh 

products are necessary because the 

construction differences may make it 

impossible to test both the same way. 

The ASTM standard for non-full-size 

cribs includes both rigid and mesh/ 

fabric non-full-size cribs. Although 

there are requirements in the ASTM 

standard specifically intended for mesh/ 

fabric products, the scope of the CPSC’s 

standard for non-full-size cribs is 

limited to rigid products because 

section 104 of the CPSIA explicitly lists 

cribs and play yards as separate 

categories of products. Therefore, we 

plan to develop a separate standard for 

mesh/fabric non-full-size cribs (i.e., play 

yards). Currently, there is no voluntary 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81771 

standard or proposed regulation 

specifically for mesh/fabric full-size 

cribs. However, the CPSC’s standard for 

full-size cribs contains general, labeling, 

and some performance requirements 

that would be applicable to any full-size 

crib, whether it has rigid or mesh/fabric 

sides. Thus, excluding these products 

from the scope of the CPSC’s full-size 

crib standard, as suggested by the 

commenter, would leave such cribs 

unregulated. Absent a voluntary 

standard that covers mesh/fabric fullsize cribs, it is not advisable to exclude 

these products from the scope of a fullsize crib regulation. 

7. Play Yards 

(Comment 8)—Some commenters 

were concerned that the rule might 

result in child care centers or consumers 

using play yards instead of cribs. These 

commenters implied that play yards are 

not as safe as cribs for sleeping infants. 

One commenter, who is child care 

provider, stated that she uses only play 

yards, not cribs. 

(Response 8)—The final rule does not 

address any safety aspects of play yards. 

Play yards are a separate product 

category under section 104 of the 

CPSIA, and we intend to develop a 

separate standard for play yards in the 

future. 

(Comment 9)—Two commenters 

expressed concern about using play 

yards as an alternative to cribs in day 

care centers as a way of mitigating costs 

to child care providers. Both felt that 

this alternative might be perceived as 

advocating the use of play yards, which 

they felt would decrease the safety and 

quality of care. Some commenters noted 

that play yards are not an option for 

some child care centers due to state 

licensing laws. 

(Response 9)—Although the CPSC 

does not advocate the use of play yards 

instead of cribs in child care 

environments, issues regarding the 

possible use of play yards or other 

products (in place of cribs) and state 

laws are outside the scope of this 

rulemaking. This final rule establishes 

standards for full-size and non-full-size 

cribs. 

8. Economic Impact of CPSC’s Crib 

Standards on Child Care Centers 

(Comment 10)—Several commenters 

expressed concern that the proposed 

rule, if finalized, would place a large 

financial burden on child care centers, 

particularly given the tight budgets and 

lethargic economy. One commenter 

estimated that the total one-time cost to 

day care centers to replace their cribs 

could be as much as $600 million, with 

an additional $2.5 million required for 

disassembly, disposal, and assembly. 

The same commenter noted that the 

preamble to the proposed rule 

concluded that ‘‘the proposed changes to 

the voluntary standard should not 

significantly affect replacement costs’’ 

(75 FR at 43319). Generally, commenters 

objected to purchasing new cribs to 

replace recently-purchased cribs that 

had no safety issues. Several 

commenters were concerned that some 

child care centers might be driven out 

of business. 

(Response 10)—We recognize the 

potentially large impact the crib 

standards could have on child care 

providers. The Regulatory Flexibility 

Act discussion in the preamble to the 

proposed rule invited comment on the 

market for cribs and the amount of time 

manufacturers would need to meet 

current market demand and additional 

demand created by child care centers 

and other places where cribs are 

provided for use (75 FR at 43316). It also 

discussed the possible impact on small 

child care centers and stated that the 

impact ‘‘could be significant on some 

small child care centers if they had to 

replace their cribs all at once’’ and that 

some might decide to replace their nonfull-size cribs with play yards (Id. at 

43318). The initial regulatory flexibility 

analysis in the briefing package for the 

proposed rule assumed that most, if not 

all, child care centers use smaller, nonfull-size cribs; thus, staff did not expect 

a significant impact associated with fullsize cribs. (See Tabs F and G of the 

staff’s briefing package on the proposed 

rule at: http://www.cpsc.gov/library/

foia/foia10/brief/104cribs.pdf). In the 

initial regulatory flexibility analyses, all 

of the effects on child care centers were 

considered in the analysis for non-fullsize cribs. 

We have modified our Regulatory 

Flexibility Act discussion in the final 

rule. CPSC staff’s analysis using data 

provided by the Early Care and 

Education Consortium (ECEC), the 

National Association for Family Child 

Care (NAFCC), and the National Head 

Start Association (NHSA), yields onetime replacement costs of approximately 

$387 million. The discussion also has 

been modified to take into account 

specifically the possibility that child 

care centers might go out of business, as 

well as the impact of the final rule on 

families using child care. 

(Comment 11)—Several commenters 

expressed concern about the ability of 

child care providers to pass on costs to 

their clients to reduce the economic 

impact of the final rule. These 

commenters stated that they felt the 

analysis in the preamble to the proposal 

did not appreciate child care centers’ 

limited ability to pass on such costs. 

The commenters noted that most of 

their clients are struggling already to 

pay for child care. (The price range for 

child care cited by one commenter was 

from $4,550 to more than $18,000 per 

year.) The commenters added that most 

child care centers only have a few 

customers, so their ability to raise large 

sums of money by increasing the cost to 

clients to defray the cost of replacement 

cribs is limited. 

(Response 11)—The Regulatory 

Flexibility Act discussion in the 

preamble to the proposed rule did not 

suggest that all cost increases associated 

with the proposed rule would be passed 

on to consumers, only that some portion 

of those costs might be passed on, 

thereby mitigating the impact of the 

proposed rule on small child care 

centers (see 75 FR at 43318). We 

recognize that the economic impact on 

any given entity may vary, depending 

on a variety of factors, such as the size 

of the affected entity, the presence or 

absence of competitors that may affect 

an entity’s ability to raise prices or pass 

along costs to its customers, and the 

types of cribs purchased and an affected 

entity’s ability to comply with the 

standards. 

(Comment 12)—One commenter 

stated that, despite the high quality of 

the cribs used at its child care center 

and a lack of incidents there, the child 

care center had been informed that its 

cribs do not meet the proposed 

standard. The commenter expressed 

concern that ‘‘the standards could be 

eliminating a company that produces 

extremely high quality materials and is 

very safety conscious.’’ 

(Response 12)—The final rule may 

have the effect of eliminating particular 

crib models from the marketplace. 

However, these crib models likely will 

be replaced by modified versions that 

comply with the new standards. The 

final rule is unlikely to drive many 

manufacturers out of business, 

particularly those with otherwise high 

quality cribs that may require only 

minimal design modifications to come 

into compliance with the new 

standards. This is especially the case 

with manufacturers that supply many 

products other than just cribs to the 

market, including the company 

mentioned in the comment. 

9. Fixing or Retrofitting Cribs 

(Comment 13)—Three commenters 

(all of whom were child care providers) 

requested that the CPSC provide 

methods of checking whether their 

current cribs would meet the new 

standards. They also requested that the 

final rule include descriptions of how to 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
81772 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

fix cribs that fail a particular 

requirement (i.e., retrofit), as a way to 

limit the number of new cribs that must 

be purchased. These comments 

mentioned retrofits to handle drop-side 

cribs in particular. 

(Response 13)—Section 104(c) of the 

CPSIA requires child care centers to 

provide cribs that comply with the new 

crib standards once they are in effect. 

The standards not only prohibit 

traditional drop-sides, but they also 

have complex requirements, such as 

those for hardware, that make it difficult 

to determine whether an existing crib 

would meet the new standards without 

testing that individual crib. Because the 

crib would be destroyed in the process 

of testing, it is impossible to test each 

crib. Therefore, we cannot provide 

methods to check existing cribs for 

compliance with the CPSC’s new crib 

standards. We also note that retrofits 

that would be appropriate for a recall 

might not be sufficient to meet the 

requirements of the new standards. For 

example, manufacturers have offered 

immobilizers in the past to address 

drop-side hazards on recalled cribs. 

This retrofit would not be sufficient to 

meet the crib standards. An immobilizer 

merely covers up part of the drop-side 

hardware and makes the drop-side 

unusable while in place, but it would 

not prevent a user from removing the 

retrofit and using the drop-side again. 

10. Effective Date/Enforcement Policy 

(Comment 14)—Most commenters 

supported the proposed six-month 

effective date for manufacturers and 

distributors of cribs, except one 

commenter requested (without 

providing any explanation or support) 

one to two years for manufacturers and 

distributors of non-full-size cribs. Many 

commenters, however, requested a 

longer effective date for child care 

centers to allow them to spread the costs 

of compliance over a longer period of 

time and to ensure that there are a 

sufficient number of compliant cribs 

available for purchase. Most of these 

commenters suggested an additional six 

months for cribs in child care centers, 

and two commenters suggested a fiveyear effective date for child care centers. 

(Response 14)—We recognize that 

complying with the new crib standards 

may place a significant financial burden 

on child care centers. Nevertheless, 

section 104(c) of the CPSIA requires that 

child care centers provide cribs for use 

that meet the CPSC’s new crib standards 

when these standards are in effect. The 

Commission recognizes that child care 

facilities face unique circumstances. 

Collectively, child care centers purchase 

and provide for use hundreds of 

thousands of cribs. Having a sufficient 

number of cribs is essential to their 

business because, if they provide care 

for infants, they cannot operate without 

providing cribs for their customers’ use. 

Based on a 2005 U.S. Department of 

Education’s National Household 

Education Surveys Program (‘‘NHES’’) 

Early Childhood Program Survey, 

approximately 774,000 children under 

the age of one year old are in 

nonparental, nonrelative child care 

arrangements each week. We 

understand from commenters that the 

typical life cycle of a crib used in a 

child care center is 10 years. Thus, we 

estimate that, in any given year, child 

care providers replace approximately 

77,000 cribs. Assuming that one crib 

must be provided for each child under 

the age of one, at least 700,000 cribs— 

ten times more than the annual 

average—would be needed to replace 

noncompliant cribs when the new 

standards take effect. This demand 

would be added to the demand of 

private households for new compliant 

cribs and any cribs replaced by the 

53,000 places of public accommodation 

covered by section 104 of the CPSIA. 

The Commission has the discretion to 

set the effective date for the crib 

standards, and could set an effective 

date longer than six months for all 

entities that are subject to the standards, 

or could provide a longer period just for 

child care centers to comply with the 

new crib standards. Balancing all of the 

concerns expressed by the commenters, 

the final rule provides an additional 18 

months for child care facilities, family 

child care homes, and places of public 

accommodation to comply with the new 

standards. 

(Comment 15)—One commenter 

suggested that we establish an 

enforcement policy that would allow 

‘‘a practical phased effective date for 

hospitality and commercial facilities’’ 

(the latter being interpreted by the 

commenter as including child care 

providers) and distinguish between 

commercial- and noncommercial-use 

products. 

(Response 15)—Section 104(c) of the 

CPSIA does not distinguish between 

commercial and noncommercial cribs 

and does require cribs in child care 

centers and places of public 

accommodation to comply with the new 

crib regulations. As discussed in the 

previous response, the Commission has 

discretion to set effective and 

compliance dates for the new standards. 

Although the Commission received 

numerous comments from child care 

centers concerning their difficulties 

with meeting the new crib standards 

within six months, we did not receive 

any comments from hotels or similar 

places of public accommodation 

indicating the need for additional time 

to obtain complying cribs for such 

establishments. We did receive one 

comment from JPMA requesting 

additional time for ‘‘hospitality and 

commercial facilities,’’ noting that the 

need for these entities to ‘‘dispose of 

their inventories of non-compliant 

product and repurchase all new 

replacement products * * * will place 

a tremendous financial burden on those 

facilities, requiring an enormous capital 

investment as a result of the wholesale 

changes to inventory.’’ Although child 

care commenters provided detailed 

information about the number of cribs 

in child care centers, the normal rate of 

replacement, and the anticipated costs 

of complying with the new crib 

standards, we did not receive such 

information concerning places of public 

accommodation. However, places of 

public accommodation are similarly 

situated to child care centers in that 

they must purchase cribs and then 

provide them for their customers to use 

and will likely face the same difficulties 

as child care centers in complying with 

the new crib standard in a short period 

of time. Therefore, the Commission is 

providing a longer compliance period 

for places of public accommodation as 

well as child care centers. 

11. Effect on Places of Public 

Accommodation 

(Comment 16)—Two commenters, 

neither of which were places of public 

accommodation nor did they represent 

places of public accommodation, 

expressed concern about the potential 

cost impact on places of public 

accommodation. 

(Response 16)—The CPSC believes 

that while some providers of public 

accommodation may provide a few cribs 

for use by customers, the number of 

non-full-size cribs at any one 

establishment is likely to be low. Firms 

may opt to reduce the impact of the rule 

by ceasing to provide cribs to their 

customers, not replacing all of their 

cribs, or providing play yards instead. 

Therefore, it is unlikely that the crib 

standards will have a significant impact 

on a substantial number of firms 

providing public accommodation. 

However, we have to expect that some 

portion of the more than 53,000 places 

of public accommodation covered by 

the Act that provide cribs for their 

customers will replace their cribs to be 

in compliance with this rule. There 

could be as many as 160,000 cribs that 

might need to be replaced. As explained 

in the previous response, places of 

public accommodation and child care 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81773 

centers are similarly situated in some 

respects, and therefore, the Commission 

is providing a longer compliance period 

for places of public accommodation as 

well as child care facilities, and family 

child care homes. 

12. Expiration Date/Definition of Useful 

Life of Crib 

(Comment 17)—One commenter 

asked whether cribs should have an 

expiration date, given that many of the 

identified hazards appear to result from 

prolonged use. The same commenter 

asked how one would define the useful 

life of a crib. For example, would it be 

defined in terms of the product’s age in 

years, or, how often it had been used? 

The commenter also asked how the 

disassembly and reassembly of a crib 

would be considered, and what effect 

this would have on the crib’s 

components and hardware. 

(Response 17)—It would be extremely 

difficult to include a definition of useful 

life or to require that manufacturers 

provide an expiration date for cribs. As 

recognized by the commenter, the 

condition of a crib, including the 

security of components and hardware, 

can be affected by use. Moreover, each 

family uses a crib differently, depending 

on the activity level of each child, the 

length of time each child uses the crib, 

and the frequency of disassembling and 

reassembling the crib. Manufacturing 

differences and variations in materials 

among cribs, also might affect a crib’s 

useful life. Thus, even keeping the use 

conditions identical, two different cribs 

likely will show wear and tear at varied 

rates. 

13. Crib Mattress Standards/Regulations 

(Comment 18)—Some commenters 

expressed satisfaction that ASTM has 

begun developing a separate safety 

standard for mattress fit, and they stated 

their expectation that the CPSC would 

mandate the voluntary ASTM standard 

when it is finalized. One comment, 

submitted on behalf of several 

organizations and individuals, 

expressed concern about health and 

environmental risks that the 

commenters believed could be 

associated with the use of certain flame 

retardants or other potentially harmful 

chemical agents in the manufacture of 

crib mattresses. It suggested that the 

CPSC ‘‘ensure that a standard or 

regulation for crib mattresses address 

both health and environmental risks 

that potential hazardous chemicals 

could pose to infants.’’ 

(Response 18)—We already have 

regulations pertaining to the 

flammability of mattresses, mattress 

pads, and mattress sets (see 16 CFR 

parts 1632 and 1633). Issues regarding 

flame retardants and other chemicals 

that may be applied to mattresses are 

beyond the scope of this rulemaking. 

14. International Standards 

(Comment 19)—One commenter 

suggested that the CPSC use 

international standards, or the relevant 

parts of them, as a basis for our 

regulation. These include the relevant 

international standards or technical 

regulations, such as the Health Canada, 

EN (European Nation), or ISO 

(International Standards Organization) 

crib standards. 

(Response 19)—CPSC staff has 

reviewed, compared, and considered a 

variety of crib standards/regulations, 

including the three identified by the 

commenter. In addition, CPSC staff 

reviewed the Australian/New Zealand 

crib standard and three voluntary 

standards, one published by 

Underwriters Laboratories (which is no 

longer an active standard), and the two 

ASTM standards. The CPSIA 

specifically requires the Commission to 

promulgate a safety standard that is 

substantially the same as, or more 

stringent than, any voluntary standards. 

The Commission chose the appropriate 

ASTM voluntary standards for cribs to 

be the basis for the CPSC’s crib 

regulations. 

CPSC staff’s review of the 

international standards or regulations 

identified vast differences. Thus, 

assuming that the commenter sought 

internationally harmonized 

requirements, even if we were to adopt 

an international standard or regulation, 

the differences in the international 

standards and regulations would not 

have resulted in harmonization across 

multiple jurisdictions. The ASTM 

voluntary standard recently adopted one 

requirement (the slat/spindle strength 

requirement) that was based on a similar 

requirement in the EN standard and two 

requirements (the cycle test and the 

mattress support impact test) that are 

almost identical to ones found in the 

Health Canada regulation. Other 

requirements in the ASTM standards are 

equivalent to requirements in some of 

the other international regulations. 

Regardless, section 104(b) of the 

CPSIA requires us to promulgate 

regulations that are substantially the 

same as voluntary standards or more 

stringent than such voluntary standards 

if we determine that the more stringent 

standards would further reduce the risk 

of injury associated with durable 

nursery products. Section 104(b) of the 

CPSIA does not mention international 

harmonization of standards. We believe 

that the ASTM standards, with the 

specified modifications, are the most 

encompassing and robust crib standards 

and are thus ‘‘more stringent’’ than the 

ASTM standards alone. 

15. Concern About Continually 

Replacing Cribs 

(Comment 20)—Some commenters, 

consisting of child care centers, 

expressed concern that they would need 

to replace their stock of cribs every time 

that ASTM changes its full-size or nonfull-size crib standards. 

(Response 20)—Neither the CPSIA nor 

the CPSC’s crib standards would require 

replacement of cribs whenever ASTM 

revises F 406 or F 1169. The CPSIA does 

require that all cribs that are 

manufactured, offered for sale, provided 

for use, or otherwise placed in the 

stream of commerce meet the crib 

standards issued by the CPSC. The 

CPSC’s proposed crib standards 

reference ASTM F 406–10a and ASTM 

F 1169–10; however, the federal 

standards do not change automatically 

whenever ASTM revises its voluntary 

standards. Rather, to change the federal 

crib standards, we would need to engage 

in notice and comment rulemaking 

procedures and refer to a subsequent 

version of the ASTM standards. 

16. Continued Use of Cribs by 

Consumers 

(Comment 21)—One commenter 

suggested that we include in an 

Enforcement Policy a clarification that 

consumers can continue to use cribs 

that conform to ASTM standards in 

effect in 2010. 

(Response 21)—We intend to 

distribute information and education 

materials in connection with issuance of 

the crib standards and will consider 

such a clarification as part of those 

materials. Nothing in the CPSIA, or in 

the crib standards, requires consumers 

to replace their cribs with cribs that 

comply with the new crib standards. 

The CPSIA requires action by those who 

manufacture, sell, lease, or otherwise 

distribute cribs in commerce, and by 

child care centers and places of public 

accommodation. 

17. Miscellaneous Clarifications About 

Use of Certain Cribs/Play Yards 

(Comment 22)—A few commenters 

asked for clarification or made incorrect 

interpretations of the proposed rule or 

the CPSIA. These comments mostly 

dealt with the requirements as they 

would apply to child care centers. One 

commenter asked if she would no longer 

be able to use wooden cribs or play 

yards. Another commenter incorrectly 

understood that consumers would be 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
81774 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

required to replace their cribs, and she 

objected to this. 

(Response 22)—The CPSIA and the 

crib standards do not dictate the kind of 

sleeping environment—full-size crib, 

non-full-size crib, or play yard—that a 

child care center must provide. Further, 

the crib standards do not dictate the 

type of material from which a crib must 

be made (e.g., wooden, metal, or 

plastic). The CPSIA does require that 

any rigid crib, whatever it is made of, 

comply with either the full-size or nonfull-size crib standard. Finally, nothing 

in the CPSIA, or in CPSC’s crib 

standards, would require consumers to 

replace their cribs with cribs that 

comply with the new crib standards. 

18. Testing by Firewalled Labs 

(Comment 23)—Several consumer 

groups suggested that the Commission 

not accept any ‘‘firewalled labs’’ to do 

testing for compliance with the crib 

standards because cribs ‘‘should meet 

the highest safety standards.’’ 

(Response 23)—Section 102(a)(2) of 

the CPSIA generally requires that 

manufacturers and private labelers of 

children’s products (such as cribs) that 

are subject to a children’s product safety 

rule submit samples of their products 

for testing by a third party for 

compliance to applicable children’s 

product safety rules. Section 102(f)(2)(D) 

of the CPSIA allows the Commission to 

accredit a third party conformity 

assessment body (often referred to as a 

‘‘testing laboratory’’ or ‘‘lab’’) that is 

owned, managed, or controlled by a 

manufacturer or private labeler as a 

third party testing lab if it meets certain 

requirements. Such testing labs are 

known as ‘‘firewalled’’ labs. If a 

firewalled lab meets the necessary 

requirements, its testing should be 

equivalent to testing conducted by any 

other third party testing lab. Thus, 

section 102 of the CPSIA does not 

prohibit the use of firewalled labs. 

19. Formaldehyde Standards for Wood 

Products Act 

(Comment 24)—One commenter 

stated that composite woods used in 

cribs should comply with the 

Formaldehyde Standards for Wood 

Products Act (Pub. L. 111–199) and that 

the CPSC should require that all cribs 

using composite wood be tested for 

compliance to these standards. 

(Response 24)—The Formaldehyde 

Standards for Wood Products Act was 

enacted on July 7, 2010. It amends the 

Toxic Substances Control Act and 

establishes formaldehyde emission 

standards for hardwood, plywood, 

medium density fiberboard, and particle 

board that is sold, supplied, offered for 

sale, or manufactured in the United 

States. (The Act provides numerous 

exemptions from these standards.) The 

standards are to be administered by the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA). The law makes no specific 

mention of cribs. However, it appears 

that if cribs are made of the types of 

wood subject to this law, the 

formaldehyde emission standards 

would apply to them. If manufacturers 

have questions about the applicability of 

the emission standards to their cribs, 

they should contact the EPA. 

20. Soft Bedding 

(Comment 25)—One commenter 

supported the proposed crib standards 

and suggested that the Commission also 

look into regulating soft infant bedding 

products, such as bumper pads. 

(Response 25)—As noted in the staff’s 

briefing package that accompanied the 

proposed rule, extra bedding in cribs 

accounted for the majority of infant 

deaths in cribs or other sleeping 

products, but there are no performance 

requirements for cribs that can address 

this issue. (See page 12 of CPSC staff’s 

briefing package for the proposed rule 

at: http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/ 

foia10/brief/104cribs.pdf.) Education 

and information may be a more 

appropriate way to address the hazards 

associated with extra bedding. For 

instance, the recently released CPSC 

video on safe sleeping, (http:// 

www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/ 

prhtml11/11021.html.), is an example of 

an educational tool designed to bring 

more awareness to new parents of the 

dangers of extra or soft bedding. 

21. Slat Strength Test Changes for 

Folding Crib Sides 

(Comment 26)—One commenter 

noted that the spindle/slat testing 

procedure does not consider testing crib 

sides that fold either for access to the 

occupant or for storage and transport 

and that, as written in the proposed 

standard, the test method does not 

specify testing procedures for such 

segmented sides. The commenter 

suggested adding the following language 

for the full-size and non-full-size crib 

standards: ‘‘For cribs incorporating 

folding or moveable sides for purposes 

of easier access to the occupant, storage 

and/or transport, each side segment 

(portion of side separated by hinges for 

folding) shall be tested separately as 

described above.’’ 

(Response 26)—CPSC staff worked in 

cooperation with the ASTM task group, 

which created the language suggested by 

the commenter, to address this issue. 

Although the defined testing 

requirements in the proposed rule 

would work adequately for a crib side 

with no moving segments, it would not 

define clearly testing procedures for 

segmented sides. The intent of the slat 

strength test is to verify that the crib 

slats can withstand 80 lbf. If a crib side 

includes a hinge or other folding 

mechanism, the force applied to the slat 

could be transferred to the hinge and 

unintentionally test the structural 

integrity of the hinge and/or hinge 

attachment. We have not received 

reports of any incidents regarding crib 

sides with hinges or other folding 

mechanisms. The final rule includes 

new provisions in both the full-size and 

non-full-size crib standards, based on 

the language provided by the 

commenter, to clarify the spindle/slat 

testing procedure for cribs with folding 

or movable sides. 

22. Definition of Folding vs. Movable 

Sides 

(Comment 27)—One commenter 

asked about the difference between 

movable sides and folding sides as 

defined in the voluntary full-size crib 

standard, ASTM F 1169–10. 

(Response 27)—ASTM F 1169–10 

defines a folding side as a side or part 

of a side that folds or pivots in order to 

provide easier access to an occupant. An 

example of this is a crib with a dropgate design, where the top portion of 

one side folds over by use of a hinge or 

hinges. A movable side is also a side 

that is used to provide easier access to 

an occupant and is any design other 

than a folding side. 

23. Rocking Crib Test Procedure 

(Comment 28)—One commenter 

asked how we plan to apply the 

proposed crib standard to cribs that are 

built with rockers, a design that is not 

addressed explicitly by ASTM F 1169– 

10. The commenter noted that such a 

product could be a ‘‘super-sized’’ cradle 

or rocking bassinet, whose interior 

dimensions meet that of a full-size crib, 

or perhaps a glider-style crib. The 

commenter stated that it would make 

sense for the crib to be arrested during 

testing so that the crib does not rock, but 

the commenter felt that this was not 

clear in the proposed rule. 

(Response 28)—We find that the 

current language in the standard is 

sufficient and clearly states that, for 

each dynamic test requirement, the crib 

must be mounted rigidly prohibiting or 

arresting any movement of the crib 

during all phases of the test procedure. 

Furthermore, it would be intuitive for 

test laboratories that a rocking crib must 

be secured to arrest any motion in the 

vertical or horizontal direction. 

Manufacturers and test labs have been 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81775 

manufacturing and testing non-full-size 

rocking cribs for some time now, and we 

are not aware of any clarity requested or 

needed for testing existing non-full-size 

rocking cribs or potentially newlydesigned full-size rocking cribs. 

24. ASTM Provision Concerning 

Retightening Screws and Bolts 

(Comment 29)—Numerous 

commenters supported the proposed 

rule’s exclusion of the provision in 

ASTM F 1169–10 concerning 

retightening of screws between tests, 

noting that it will enhance crib safety. 

One commenter, however, disagreed 

with exclusion of the hardware 

retightening provision. The commenter 

stated that the dynamic tests, namely 

the shake test, vertical mattress support 

impact test, and the crib side rail impact 

test are designed to simulate and 

accelerate the use and abuse of the crib. 

The commenter noted that, ‘‘absent test 

data to support a contrary position, 

tightening of the screws is consistent 

with the ASTM requirements and 

CPSC’s own historic test practices.’’ One 

commenter stated that CPSC staff has 

not had the time to evaluate the efficacy 

of not removing the retightening 

allowance. 

(Response 29)—We strongly disagree 

with the commenter opposing exclusion 

of the hardware retightening provision. 

It is true that the purpose of accelerated 

life cycle tests is to accelerate the 

degradation rate of a product under 

known use conditions. However, the 

accelerated tests that are required in 

both the full-size and non-full-size crib 

standards are not overly stringent. The 

combination of the shake test (to 

simulate a child standing and shaking 

the top of a side rail), the vertical 

mattress support impact test (child 

jumping), the crib side rail impact test 

(child climbing outside of rail), and the 

slat/spindle strength test (child and/or 

sibling falling against or kicking slats) 

comprise a laboratory simulation of a 

lifetime of use. The shake test 

parameters are based on a lifetime of use 

of only 18 months, or use by just one 

child. The majority of cribs are used for 

two and three children, and some are in 

use for 15 years or longer. Furthermore, 

the accelerated life cycle tests include 

test parameters for foreseeable use of the 

product. Foreseeable use includes a 

child shaking the side rails, jumping on 

the mattress, climbing on the outside of 

the side rails, or falling or kicking the 

crib slats. 

As for the commenter’s statement that 

CPSC staff has not had the time to 

evaluate the efficacy of not removing the 

retightening allowance, we disagree. 

First, we conducted initial tests to verify 

the effects of the vertical mattress 

support impact and crib side rail impact 

tests on fasteners loosened during the 

cyclic side shake test. We intentionally 

backed out fasteners one-quarter and 

one-half turn, chosen at random on 

three full-size and two non-full-size 

cribs, prior to mattress support and side 

impact testing. In summary, the side rail 

impact test severely affected fasteners 

that lost their seated preload, 

approximately one-half turn and greater. 

Fasteners that were loosened less than 

one-half turn maintained sufficient 

preload to withstand the side impact 

test vibrations applied to the lower rail. 

If the fasteners that loosened after the 

crib side impact test had been 

retightened beforehand, a potentially 

dangerous condition, such as a 

hazardous gap created by loosened 

hardware, would have gone unnoticed. 

Second, we recently had the 

opportunity to evaluate each proposed 

performance requirement by 

participating in the testing of a full-size 

crib according to the full-size crib 

standard. Test results showed that the 

forces exerted on the crib sides during 

the shake test are not significantly 

detrimental to loosening hardware. 

After completion of the shake test on the 

test crib, two fasteners were noted to 

have backed out, one about one-eighth 

of a turn, and one close to one-half a 

turn. Neither fastener backed out 

enough to be considered noncompliant 

with the test requirement. In addition, 

these two fasteners did not back off any 

further after the mattress support and 

crib side impact testing. However, after 

the crib side impact test, another 

fastener, a wing nut securing the 

mattress support, backed off several 

turns, creating about a three millimeter 

separation, which is noncompliant with 

the requirement. Therefore, the crib 

ultimately failed due to a primary 

component attached by a screw that 

separated more than one millimeter. It 

is important to note that the assembly 

envelope around the wing nuts was 

confined severely by the proximity of 

the mattress support frame to the side 

slats. This made it difficult to ensure 

that adequate torque was applied during 

crib assembly. Results such as these 

reemphasize the importance of not 

allowing retightening of fasteners during 

testing, because it is foreseeable that a 

consumer will have similar difficulty 

tightening a fastener in a confined 

space. 

It is also important to note that ASTM 

F 1196–10 and F 406–10a include a new 

hardware and fasteners requirement, 

which requires that crib hardware 

include a locking device or method for 

impeding loosening. This will reduce 

further the need for the retightening 

allowance, especially with crib designs 

that utilize fasteners that are difficult to 

access. 

In summary, we strongly disagree 

with the request to allow retightening of 

fasteners. The majority of crib side rail 

corners are attached with one screw. 

Loosening just one screw can result in 

subsequent detachment of the side rail 

corner, creating a hazardous gap. There 

have been at least 10 fatalities where 

loose screws have contributed to the 

death of a child. After drop-sides, loose 

screws are the second highest cause of 

fatalities associated with the structural 

integrity of cribs. It is important that 

fasteners remain secure during the 

useful life of the crib. 

25. Captive Hardware 

(Comment 30)—Some commenters 

suggested that the hardware used for 

assembly remain captive in the key 

structural components when a crib is 

disassembled to reduce the chance of 

losing the hardware and of owners 

subsequently substituting inappropriate 

hardware for the hardware that was 

provided originally with the crib. 

(Response 30)—Captive hardware 

typically includes a threaded insert with 

a captive screw on the mating 

component. A few of the advantages of 

captive hardware include: Prevention of 

lost hardware, accurate and repeatable 

assembly of primary structural 

components, and ease of assembly. Crib 

designs using captive hardware, 

especially for primary components, 

such as side rails, could minimize the 

chance of screws loosening, allowing 

components to detach and create an 

entrapment hazard. In addition, captive 

hardware could: (1) Make assembly of 

cribs easier; (2) minimize the chance of 

a consumer replacing a lost screw with 

an incorrect or improper substitute; and 

(3) reduce the chance of a consumer 

misassembling the crib. 

Although, there appear to be many 

advantages to using captive hardware on 

cribs, there are several disadvantages as 

well. First, if a captive screw ever 

becomes damaged or is inadvertently 

bent or pulled from an external force 

while in the disassembled state, it may 

be difficult or impossible to reassemble 

the crib component with the damaged 

screw or to remove and reinstall a 

replacement captive screw. Second, 

requiring captive hardware to attach a 

mattress support could result in more 

complicated designs or extra hardware 

because one main component of a fullsize crib, the mattress support, typically 

is designed to be installed in different 

positions (levels). 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
81776 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Although the advantages of using 

captive hardware may seem to outweigh 

the disadvantages, we conclude that it is 

premature to mandate the use of captive 

hardware. We encourage manufacturers 

and ASTM to investigate the use of 

captive hardware systems on cribs and 

note that some manufacturers already 

are employing or considering using such 

designs. 

26. Test Mattress for Non-Full-Size Crib 

Mattress Support Test 

(Comment 31)—One commenter 

expressed concern about the 

requirement for non-full-size cribs to 

conduct the mattress support testing 

(dynamic impact) with a specific test 

mattress for each product, as opposed to 

conducting this test with the mattress 

supplied with each crib. The commenter 

was concerned that testing with such a 

mattress may be less stringent than 

testing with the mattress supplied with 

the product. The commenter also was 

concerned that the provision could 

require test labs to have multiple test 

mattresses to suit all different 

dimensions of non-full-size cribs. This, 

the commenter stated, could increase 

the time and costs of testing. 

The commenter recommended using 

the mattress supplied with the product 

in the dynamic testing. Alternatively, 

the commenter suggested: (1) stating in 

the final rule that a test mattress be large 

enough to accommodate the impactor to 

be used in the test, provided the test 

mattress does not shift in any way 

during testing or (2) specifying a smaller 

test mattress that would accommodate 

all non-full-size cribs currently for sale 

in commerce, with such dimensions as 

18’’ × 18’’ × 3.’’ 

(Response 31)—In some instances, it 

may be true that testing non-full-size 

cribs with a thicker test mattress may be 

less stringent than testing with the 

mattress supplied with the product. 

However, we feel it is more important 

to use a standard size test mattress for 

test repeatability between testing 

facilities. Crib mattresses, especially 

mattresses provided with non-full-size 

cribs, are typically entry-level price 

point mattresses. Foam and mattress 

stitch variability is inherently high 

throughout the mattress industry. 

Furthermore, the mattress thickness, 

foam density, and other mattress 

characteristics determine the amount of 

energy that is transferred to the mattress 

support system. If a standard test 

mattress is not required, it is foreseeable 

that the same non-full-size crib with a 

supplied one-inch mattress may pass at 

one test laboratory, but fail at another, 

due solely to the inherent variability in 

the mattress manufacturing process. 

As for the commenter’s concern 

regarding the potential delay in 

specifying and ordering a test mattress 

to correctly fit the non-full-size crib 

being tested, this issue could be 

addressed easily if the manufacturer 

includes a test mattress in the crib’s bill 

of materials at the design stage. This 

will ensure that all crib components, 

including the test mattress, are procured 

at the same time. Thereafter, the test 

mattress will be available for testing, 

when needed, eliminating any 

additional testing delays or increased 

costs by the test laboratories. 

As for the commenter’s concern 

regarding the use of a test mattress just 

large enough to accommodate the 

impactor used during the mattress 

impact test, in general, using any test 

mattress that is smaller than the interior 

surface area of the crib will be more 

stringent than using a mattress 

equivalent to the crib’s interior surface 

area. A smaller test mattress will 

transfer more energy into the mattress 

support system. Specifically, using the 

18 inches x 18 inches x 3 inches 

mattress pad as an example, the impact 

head, about 8 inches across, when 

positioned 2 inches from the sides in a 

corner will hit the test mattress such 

that it overlaps the midplane or 

geometric center of the test mattress. 

Therefore, the test mattress foam will 

sustain more damage than a larger 

mattress. Unless replaced for each test, 

it will soften, thereby transmitting more 

energy into the mattress support 

structure. CPSC staff believes that using 

an undersized mattress will mean less 

repeatability from lab to lab and 

different force distributions experienced 

on each crib. 

Once a crib mattress standard is 

developed, which would diminish the 

variability currently inherent in the 

mattress manufacturing process, testing 

non-full-size cribs with their supplied 

mattresses may be more workable. 

However, for the present, we feel that it 

is more important to ensure 

repeatability between test laboratories 

by requiring the same vertical mattress 

impact test for both full-size and nonfull-size cribs. 

27. Replacement Mattresses in Non-FullSize Cribs 

(Comment 32)—Several commenters 

argued for modifying the warning on 

non-full size cribs, which states, in part: 

‘‘Use ONLY mattress/pad provided by 

manufacturer * * *’’ and instead use 

language that does not specify the 

manufacturer of the replacement 

mattress, because some manufacturers 

make mattresses for other 

manufacturers’ products. One 

commenter supported an immediate 

change in the language in the warning, 

and other commenters supported a 

language change only after a separate 

mattress standard has been developed. 

(Response 32)—The non-full-size crib 

standard requires all non-full-size cribs 

to be sold with their own mattress. 

These comments only relate to a 

warning label about replacement 

mattresses, and do not suggest changing 

the requirement for the mattress 

supplied with the non-full-size crib. We 

agree that replacement mattresses made 

by manufacturers other than the 

supplier of the non-full-size crib can 

achieve a satisfactory fit, because there 

are many common sizes among non-fullsize cribs. Furthermore, we agree that, 

without alternatives, consumers may 

resort to homemade bedding surfaces 

when they need to replace a mattress. 

Pads that are ‘‘designed for’’ a given crib 

will simulate all dimensions (edge 

contours, overall area, density, and 

thickness) of the original mattress 

supplied by the manufacturer. A 

mattress with the dimensions necessary 

for eliminating hazardous gaps in the 

crib can be manufactured satisfactorily 

by anyone, not just the original 

manufacturer. We believe it would be 

better to address this issue after a 

mattress standard has been created. 

(Comment 33)—A commenter stated 

that, ‘‘If the CPSC mandates that 

consumers ‘use only the mattress/pad 

provided by the manufacturer’ then 

retailers will be inclined to stop offering 

alternative mattresses/pads.’’ 

(Response 33)—The final rule does 

not mandate what mattress a consumer 

can use, and it does not prohibit the sale 

of replacement mattress pads. The 

standard simply requires a warning 

label on the product. The label 

mentioned by the commenter has been 

part of the ASTM standard for non-fullsize cribs since 1997, and JPMAcertified non-full-size cribs have 

displayed that warning since that time. 

The commenter does not provide any 

data or evidence to support the 

contention that retailers will stop 

offering alternative mattresses/pads. 

Consequently, we will wait to revise 

this warning label until after a mattress 

standard has been created, as suggested 

by other commenters. 

28. Misassembly 

(Comment 34)—Several commenters 

suggested that products should be 

designed so that the consumerassembled parts cannot be 

misassembled. They suggested that all 

parts of a crib should fit only in the 

correct orientation, and that if 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81777 

misassembled, the crib would be 

unusable. 

(Response 33)—This suggestion 

originates from reports of fatal 

incidents, wherein a crib side was 

installed upside-down. We have 

considered such a requirement for the 

standard, but it would be difficult to 

implement. Any part of a product can be 

misassembled, and there are also certain 

parts of cribs that can be safely used in 

any orientation. Manufacturers could 

resort to more preassembly of crib 

components to meet this commenter’s 

suggestion, but due to the size of an 

assembled crib and its components, any 

preassembly would likely be very 

limited in nature and thus would not 

solve the problem. 

The requirement to make a crib 

unusable when a part is misassembled 

is not feasible because consumer 

modifications and misassemblies could 

be clever and forceful. Questions to 

consider include: Can the potential 

misassembly involve consumer use of 

hand tools and off-the-shelf fasteners? 

What if the misassembled part is 

redrilled to make it fit? How can a 

manufacturer make a part unusable if 

misassembled, when the test lab is 

allowed to ignore the manufacturer’s 

instructions? 

It would be difficult, perhaps 

impossible, to devise a reliable method 

for testing such a requirement. The 

testing permutations needed to prove 

the utility of some parts in all possible 

configurations would increase the 

number of tests that would have to be 

performed, because each part would 

have to be tested in every possible 

position. Although we agree that the 

principle of making parts oriented in 

only one direction is sound, the testing 

needed to prove the inability to use the 

part makes testing the requirement 

impractical. The requirement in the 

standard to clearly mark the 

manufacturer’s recommended 

installation orientation addresses the 

problem and highlights the design 

principle for manufacturers. 

29. Utility of Drop-Side Cribs 

(Comment 35)—One commenter 

claimed that drop-side cribs are 

necessary for some caregivers because 

some caregivers are shorter. The 

commenter also suggested that 

professional child care environments 

should be allowed to use drop-side cribs 

because infants are supervised 

constantly when they are in the crib, 

and the cribs are checked routinely for 

safety. 

(Response 35)—Although we agree 

that people who are shorter in stature 

may have more difficulty when placing 

infants into cribs than people who are 

taller, the standard does not prevent crib 

designers from making cribs that have 

sides that lower in some manner to help 

access the crib interior. Cribs with a gate 

that swings downward on a piano hinge 

commonly are available and meet the 

requirements of the standard. Other 

designs that raise and lower the side of 

the crib are possible. These alternative 

designs provide the same convenience 

as traditional drop-side cribs. 

As for the commenter’s argument 

regarding supervision of infants in 

professional care environments, we 

agree that professional child care 

environments generally have a higher 

level of supervision than the average 

residential child care environment. 

However, cribs are designed with the 

idea that children can be left in them 

unsupervised. With respect to routine 

safety checks, CPSC staff does not 

recommend relying on human behavior 

for safety, when a design change is 

available that can eliminate a hazard. 

Within the field of prevention science, 

behavioral solutions are always the last 

choice when designing for safety, 

because humans are fallible. 

30. Fall Hazards 

(Comment 36)—A few commenters 

expressed concern about hazards 

associated with falls from cribs. These 

commenters agreed that it is not 

appropriate to lower the age 

recommendation or increase the crib 

side heights. However, the commenters 

urged the Commission to research these 

issues and develop innovative solutions, 

including thorough public education 

efforts, to limit hazards when children 

climb out of cribs. Another commenter 

recommended that the CPSC and ASTM 

consider setting a maximum crib height, 

as measured from the top rail to the 

floor. 

(Response 36)—We acknowledge that 

injuries resulting from crib-related falls 

rank high in terms of the number of 

incidents. The new crib standards 

contain labeling requirements, but not 

any design or performance 

requirements, to address this hazard. 

When discussing height, some 

distinctions must be made. The side 

height of a crib is the height from the 

top of the mattress support (for full-size 

cribs) in its lowest position, to the 

lowest part of the top rail. This 

dimension has a minimum that is set by 

each crib standard. For instance, it is 26 

inches for full-size cribs. This minimum 

height is required to help prevent 

children from climbing out of the crib. 

One also can measure the crib height, 

which is measured from the floor to the 

lowest part of the top rail. Neither the 

CPSC nor ASTM set a requirement for 

this measurement (which is the 

measurement to which the commenter 

refers). 

Setting a maximum crib height will 

not reduce the number of incidents of 

children climbing and falling out of 

cribs (because that is dictated by the 

side height). Therefore, a maximum crib 

height will not prevent injuries. A 

maximum crib height could reduce, 

perhaps, the severity or number of 

injuries. Side height requirements for 

full-size cribs specify a minimum of 26 

inches between the top of the mattress 

support in its lowest position, and the 

top of the lowest rail. Thus, even if the 

mattress support was on the floor, the 

minimum fall distance would be 26 

inches, which still can result in an 

injury. No maximum crib height will 

eliminate injuries from falls, and setting 

an arbitrary number above 26 inches as 

a maximum height would be design 

restrictive. 

Many non-drop-side cribs have lower 

overall heights than the average 

traditional drop-side crib. We took 

measurements of 48 drop-side cribs and 

15 non-drop-side cribs and found the 

following: 

Crib type Crib height 

Drop-side cribs .......... 33′′ to 43′′. 

Non-drop-side cribs ... 32′′ to 39.75′′. 

Based on this sample, non-drop-side 

crib heights do not appear to be higher, 

but are at, or below, traditional dropside crib heights. A shorter crib height 

would require fewer construction 

materials and could result in lower crib 

weight (which could reduce associated 

shipping costs). Thus, crib 

manufacturers may be inclined to offer 

cribs with shorter heights. We believe 

that the availability of cribs with shorter 

heights may increase, because the 

clearance formerly needed under the 

crib for the operation of drop-sides no 

longer would be necessary. 

31. Crib Side Heights 

(Comment 37)—A commenter claimed 

that crib manufacturers now are using 

the bare minimum side heights and that, 

when drop-sides were allowed, many 

manufacturers exceeded the minimum 

side height, thereby preventing some 

falls. The commenter did not include 

data to support this assertion that crib 

manufacturers are reducing the side 

height now that they are no longer 

making drop-side cribs. 

(Response 37)—Measurements of 

various cribs taken by CPSC staff show 

that there are some drop-side cribs and 

some non-drop-side cribs that just meet 

the minimum side height requirement 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
81778 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

and there are some drop-side cribs and 

non-drop-side cribs that have greaterthan-minimum side heights. 

The minimum side height 

requirement in the crib standard was 

developed with an intended user in 

mind (a child under the height of 35 

inches). Even so, there always will be a 

certain population of children who will 

be capable of climbing out of a crib, 

even cribs with a side height greater 

than what is required by the crib 

standards. If the overall average side 

height of cribs decreased to the 

minimum side height required in the 

standard, and inadvertently resulted in 

a higher frequency of children climbing 

out, CPSC staff believes that the 

likelihood of serious injury is lessened 

by the reduction in the overall fall 

height due to shorter crib heights (based 

on the sample of cribs examined by 

CPSC staff). 

F. Changes to Proposed Rule 

1. Full-Size Crib Standard 

The Commission proposed 

incorporating ASTM F 1169–10 with 

one modification: Excluding the 

provision, section 6.12, that requires 

retightening of screws and bolts 

between the crib side latch test and the 

mattress support vertical impact test. 

Like the proposal, the final rule 

incorporates by reference ASTM 

F 1169–10 with the modification to 

exclude the hardware retightening 

provision. The final rule makes one 

additional modification to ASTM 

F 1169–10, modifying the spindle/slat 

testing provision in 7.7.1 of the ASTM 

standard in order to clarify how to test 

a crib with folding or movable sides. 

The final rule adds a sentence to the end 

of section 7.7.1 of ASTM F 1169–10, 

which states: ‘‘For cribs incorporating 

folding or moveable sides for purposes 

of easier access to the occupant, storage, 

and/or transport, each side segment 

(portion of side separated by hinges for 

folding) shall be tested separately.’’ This 

change responds to a comment that the 

CPSC received on the proposed rule (see 

section E of the preamble for discussion 

of the comment and further explanation 

of the need for this change). Also, 

ASTM recently voted to approve adding 

this language when it next revises 

ASTM F 1169. 

2. Non-Full-Size Crib Standard 

The Commission proposed 

incorporating ASTM F 406–10 with 

several modifications to address nonfull-size cribs. The proposed rule would 

make four modifications and two 

editorial changes to ASTM F 406–10. 

Most proposed changes were intended 

to make the non-full-size crib standard 

more consistent with the full-size crib 

standard. The proposed modifications 

were: (1) Replacing the mattress support 

performance requirement in ASTM 

F 406–10 with the requirement that is in 

the ASTM full-size crib standard; (2) 

changing the side impact test in ASTM 

F 406–10 to make it identical to the 

requirements in the ASTM full-size crib 

standard; (3) adding a requirement for 

movable side latches that is similar to a 

provision in previous versions of the 

ASTM F 406 standard; and (4) 

specifying the order for conducting 

structural tests, as in the full-size crib 

standard. The proposed editorial 

changes were: (1) Excluding provisions 

in ASTM F 406–10 that cover only play 

yards; and (2) moving the recordkeeping 

provision from the appendix of ASTM 

F 406–10 to the general requirements 

section. See 75 FR 43308 (July 23, 2010). 

The final rule incorporates ASTM 

F 406–10a by reference, with certain 

modifications. This subsequent version 

of the ASTM non-full-size crib standard, 

approved on October 15, 2010, and 

published in November 2010, includes 

most of the changes that were in the 

proposed rule. Specifically, ASTM 

F 406–10a contains the recordkeeping 

provision in the general requirements 

section (now in section 5.20); the 

mattress support impact performance 

requirement (now included in sections 

6.14, and 8.7); proposed changes to the 

side impact test (now included in 

sections 6.16, and 8.9); the provision for 

movable side latch testing (now 

included in section 6.13.1); and the 

order of testing (now in section 6.8). 

Some provisions in ASTM F 406–10a 

are worded slightly differently than the 

language in the proposed rule. These 

differences in wording are editorial. The 

proposed modifications that are not 

adopted in ASTM F 406–10a are those 

that excluded provisions specifically 

related to play yards. Thus, the final 

rule continues to exclude these play 

yard-specific provisions. 

In addition to the differences between 

ASTM F 406–10 and F 406–10a 

discussed in the preceding paragraph, 

there are a few other differences 

between the two versions (which 

therefore result in differences between 

the CPSC’s proposed non-full-size crib 

standard and the final standard). Most 

differences between the two versions are 

editorial; for example, the revised 

standard rearranges the order of some 

sections and makes minor wording 

changes to make the language more 

consistent with the full-size crib 

standard (ASTM F 1169–10). The CPSC 

has reviewed these changes and 

concludes that only one change is a 

substantive change that would reduce 

safety. ASTM F 406–10a adds the 

provision that was (and continues to be) 

in the ASTM standard for full-size cribs, 

which requires the retightening of 

screws and bolts between tests. The 

CPSC’s final rule for non-full-size cribs 

excludes this provision, just as the 

CPSC’s final rule for full-size cribs does. 

The final rule for non-full-size cribs 

also adds language concerning testing of 

cribs with folding sides as in the final 

rule for full-size cribs. The final rule for 

non-full-size cribs includes one other 

modification that was not in the 

proposal. This change modifies the 

language for a warning label that 

cautions against placing netting or other 

covers over the product. The current 

wording in ASTM F 406–10a mentions 

only ‘‘play yards.’’ The final rule 

substitutes the word ‘‘product’’ for ‘‘play 

yard,’’ thus making the warning label 

also applicable to non-full-size cribs. 

The Commission did not receive any 

comments on this labeling issue. 

However, it is related to the effort in the 

CPSC’s proposed and final non-full-size 

crib standards to exclude provisions 

that relate only to play yards. Recently, 

ASTM approved these two changes 

(concerning folding cribs and the 

warning label regarding netting and 

covers) for its next version of ASTM 

F 406, but they are not in ASTM F 406– 

10a. 

3. Effective Date 

The Commission proposed a 6-month 

effective date (as measured from the 

date of publication of a final rule in the 

Federal Register). The final rule 

maintains the 6-month effective date but 

establishes two compliance dates: 6 

months for all entities subject to the 

rule, except for child care facilities, 

family child care homes, and places of 

public accommodation which have a 24- 

month compliance date. As discussed in 

sections E.8 and 10 of this preamble, the 

Commission received several comments 

from child care providers describing the 

impact that the crib standards could 

have on them, and the Commission 

believes that places of public 

accommodation face similar issues. The 

final rule provides a longer compliance 

period for these entities to allow them 

additional time to purchase compliant 

cribs and to absorb the costs of meeting 

the standards. 

4. References in 16 CFR 1500.18 

When the Commission proposed the 

crib standards, it also proposed revising 

16 CFR 1500.18(a)(13) and (14), which 

state that full-size cribs that do not 

comply with 16 CFR part 1508 and nonfull-size cribs that do not comply with 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81779 

16 CFR part 1509 are banned hazardous 

substances under the FHSA. We 

proposed to replace the references to 16 

CFR parts 1508 and 1509 with 

references to the CPSC’s new crib 

standards which will be codified at 16 

CFR parts 1219 and 1220. As noted 

earlier in this preamble, elsewhere in 

this issue of the Federal Register, we are 

revoking the crib regulations that the 

Commission previously issued under 

the FHSA and are codified at 16 CFR 

parts 1508 and 1509. Given that section 

104(b) of the CPSIA changed the 

regulation of cribs (and other durable 

infant or toddler products) from the 

FHSA to the CPSA, we have determined 

that it will reduce confusion to remove 

the provisions in 16 CFR 1500.18(a)(13) 

and (14) altogether rather than changing 

the references. This is consistent with 

the revocation of 16 CFR parts 1508 and 

1509. 

G. Assessment of Voluntary Standards 

ASTM F 1169–10 and ASTM F 406–10a 

and Description of the Final Rule 

1. Section 104(b) of the CPSIA: 

Consultation and CPSC Staff Review 

Section 104(b) of the CPSIA requires 

the Commission to assess the 

effectiveness of the voluntary standard 

in consultation with representatives of 

consumer groups, juvenile product 

manufacturers, and other experts. This 

consultation process for the full-size 

and non-full-size crib standards has 

involved: An ANPR, a public crib 

roundtable, and in-depth involvement 

with ASTM. CPSC staff’s consultations 

with ASTM are ongoing. 

2. Description of the Final Standard for 

Full-Size Cribs, Including Changes to 

the Requirements of ASTM F 1169–10 

The Commission believes that the 

provisions of ASTM F 1169–10 are 

effective to reduce the risk of injury 

associated with full-size cribs. The 

modifications to ASTM F 1169–10 

strengthen the ASTM standard. The 

final rule incorporates by reference 

ASTM F 1169–10 with two 

modifications: 

• Exclusion of the provision in the 

voluntary standard concerning 

retightening of screws and bolts 

between the crib side latch test and the 

mattress support vertical impact test; 

and 

• Addition of language to the 

voluntary standard clarifying how to 

conduct the slat/spindle strength test on 

a crib with folding or movable sides. 

a. Scope, Compliance Dates, and 

Definitions (§ 1219.1) 

Like the proposal, the final rule states 

that this part establishes a consumer 

product safety standard for new and 

used full-size cribs. In accordance with 

section 104(c) of the CPSIA, this section 

states that the standard applies to the 

manufacture, sale, contract for sale or 

resale, lease, sublet, offer, provision for 

use, or other placement in the stream of 

commerce of a new or used full-size 

crib. This section provides a compliance 

date of 6 months (as measured from the 

date of publication of this final rule in 

the Federal Register) for all entities 

subject to the rule, except for child care 

facilities, family child care homes, and 

places of public accommodation which 

will have 24 months (as measured from 

the date of publication of this final rule 

in the Federal Register) to provide cribs 

for use that comply with the standard. 

As discussed in section H of this 

preamble, due to the number of 

compliant cribs that child care centers 

and places of public accommodation 

will need to provide for use, the final 

rule provides an additional 18 months 

for them to meet the full-size crib 

standard. 

Section 1219.1(c) defines full-size 

baby crib as defined in ASTM F 1169– 

10 as a bed, with certain interior 

dimensions, that is designed to provide 

sleeping accommodations for an infant. 

In accordance with section 104(c) of the 

CPSIA, the definition includes cribs in 

child care facilities and places of public 

accommodation affecting commerce. 

This section also provides the definition 

of ‘‘place of public accommodation 

affecting commerce’’ specified in section 

104(c) of the CPSIA. 

b. Requirements for Full-Size Cribs 

(§ 1219.2) 

Incorporation by reference. Like the 

proposal, the final rule incorporates by 

reference ASTM F 1169–10, Standard 

Consumer Safety Specification for FullSize Baby Cribs. The final rule requires 

compliance with the requirements of 

ASTM F 1169–10, with two 

modifications. 

Modifications to the ASTM standard. 

The final rule for full-size cribs excludes 

the provision in section 6.12 of the 

ASTM standard that requires 

retightening of screws and bolts 

between the crib side latch test and the 

mattress support vertical impact test 

(§ 1219.2(b)(1) of the CPSC’s standard). 

This is identical to the proposed rule. 

As discussed in the preamble to the 

proposal (75 FR at 43314 through 

43315), exclusion of this retightening 

provision strengthens the standard. 

Conducting the tests without retightening the hardware better 

represents the real use of a crib. 

Retightening fasteners would sever the 

chain of accumulated conditioning 

effects that the crib undergoes during 

the sequence of tests. Most of the 

comments that the CPSC received 

concerning this issue supported the 

CPSC’s exclusion of this provision. 

Further discussion of the rationale for 

excluding the hardware retightening 

provision is provided in section E.24 of 

this preamble. 

The final rule adds one provision for 

full-size cribs that was not contained in 

the proposed rule. The final rule adds 

a sentence to section 7.7.1 of ASTM 

F 1169–10 to clarify how to conduct the 

spindle/slat static force test with a crib 

that has folding or movable sides 

(§ 1219.2(b)(2) of the CPSC’s standard). 

The slat strength test is intended to 

verify that cribs slats can withstand 80 

lbf. Without the clarification, 

conducting the test on a crib that has a 

hinge or other folding mechanism could 

result in testing the structural integrity 

of the hinge rather than the strength of 

the slats. Thus, the final rule adds the 

following sentence: ‘‘For cribs 

incorporating foldable or moveable 

sides for purposes of easier access to the 

occupant, storage, and/or transport, 

each side segment (portion of side 

separated by hinges for folding) shall be 

tested separately.’’ The addition of this 

language strengthens the ASTM 

standard, because it eliminates an 

ambiguity about testing this type of crib. 

Requirements of ASTM F 1169–10. 

The final rule incorporates the other 

requirements of ASTM F 1169–10 

without change. These requirements 

establish a comprehensive standard for 

the safety of full-size cribs. ASTM 

F 1169–10 includes definitions; general 

requirements; performance 

requirements; specific test methods; and 

requirements for marking, labeling, and 

instructional literature. The key 

provisions of both ASTM standards are 

outlined in section G.4. of this 

preamble. 

3. Description of the Final Standard for 

Non-Full-Size Cribs, Including Changes 

to the Requirements of ASTM F 406–10a 

The Commission believes that the 

provisions of ASTM F 406–10a, with the 

specified modifications, are effective to 

reduce the risk of injury associated with 

non-full-size cribs. The final rule 

incorporates a version of ASTM F 406 

that ASTM approved after the 

Commission had published its proposed 

rule and includes most of the 

modifications that the Commission 

proposed. These changes make ASTM 

F 406–10a more consistent with the 

ASTM standard for full-size cribs, 

rendering the standard more protective 

than the previous version. The 

modifications in the CPSC’s final rule 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
81780 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

further strengthen the standard. The 

final rule incorporates by reference 

ASTM F 406–10a with four 

modifications that: 

• Exclude the hardware retightening 

provision; 

• Add language clarifying how to 

conduct the slat/spindle test on cribs 

with folding or movable sides; 

• Revise a warning concerning 

netting or other covers so that it 

includes non-full-size cribs; and 

• Exclude provisions that apply only 

to play yards. 

a. Scope, Compliance Dates, and 

Definitions (§ 1220.1) 

Like the proposal, the final rule states 

that this part establishes a consumer 

product safety standard for new and 

used non-full-size cribs. In accordance 

with section 104(c) of the CPSIA, this 

section states that the standard applies 

to the manufacture, sale, contract for 

sale or resale, lease, sublet, offer, 

provision for use, or other placement in 

the stream of commerce of a new or 

used non-full-size crib. This section 

provides a compliance date of 6 months 

for all entities subject to the rule (as 

measured from the date of publication 

of this final rule in the Federal 

Register), except for child care facilities, 

family child care homes, and places of 

public accommodation which will have 

24 months (as measured from the date 

of publication of this final rule in the 

Federal Register) to provide cribs that 

comply with the standard. As discussed 

in section H of this preamble, due to the 

number of compliant cribs that these 

entities will need to provide for use, the 

final rule provides an additional 18 

months for them to meet the non-fullsize crib standard. 

Section 1220.1(c) defines non-full-size 

baby crib as defined in ASTM F 406– 

10a and explicitly excludes play yards. 

(A play yard is defined as ‘‘a framed 

enclosure that includes a floor and has 

mesh- or fabric-sided panels primarily 

intended to provide a play or sleeping 

environment for children. It may fold 

for storage or travel.’’) A non-full-size 

crib is essentially a crib that has 

dimensions other than those of a fullsize crib, as defined in the full-size crib 

standard. In accordance with section 

104(c) of the CPSIA, the definition 

includes cribs in child care facilities 

and places of public accommodation 

affecting commerce. This section 

provides the definition of ‘‘place of 

public accommodation affecting 

commerce’’ specified in section 104(c) of 

the CPSIA. It also provides definitions 

of terms relevant to the definition of 

non-full-size crib, such as ‘‘portable 

crib’’ and ‘‘play yard.’’ 

b. Requirements for Non-Full-Size Cribs 

(§ 1220.2) 

Incorporation by reference. The final 

rule incorporates by reference ASTM 

F 406–10a, Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Non-Full-Size Baby 

Cribs/Play Yards. The final rule requires 

compliance with the requirements of 

ASTM F 406–10a, with four 

modifications. 

Modifications to the ASTM standard. 

The final rule for non-full-size cribs 

excludes the provision in section 6.10 in 

the ASTM standard that requires 

retightening of screws and bolts 

between the crib side latch test and the 

mattress support vertical impact test 

(§ 1220.2(b)(3) of the CPSC standard). 

This exclusion was not in the proposed 

rule for the non-full-size crib standard 

because the proposal referenced ASTM 

F 406–10, which did not contain the 

hardware retightening provision. 

Excluding this provision is consistent 

with the CPSC’s standard for full-size 

cribs. The same reasons for that 

exclusion (see part E.24 of this 

preamble) apply with regard to non-fullsize cribs. 

The second modification to ASTM 

F 406–10a adds a sentence to clarify the 

testing of cribs with folding or movable 

sides. This modification was not in the 

proposed rule, but responds to 

comments on the proposal and is 

identical to the change in the full-size 

crib standard. This provision adds a 

sentence to section 8.10.1 of ASTM 

F 406–10a to clarify how to conduct the 

spindle/slat static force test with a crib 

that has folding or movable sides 

(§ 1220.2(b)(5) of the CPSC’s standard). 

Addition of this language strengthens 

the ASTM standard because it 

eliminates an ambiguity about testing 

this type of crib. 

The third modification to ASTM 

F 406–10a revises a warning in section 

9.4.2.6 of the ASTM standard that 

cautions against using netting or other 

covers (§ 1220.2(b)(12) of the CPSC’s 

standard). The modification replaces the 

words ‘‘play yard’’ with the word 

‘‘product’’ because the hazard posed by 

such covers exists for non-full-size cribs 

as well as play yards. 

The final modifications to ASTM 

F 406–10a remove the provisions that 

relate only to play yards (§ 1220.2(b)(1), 

(2), (4), and (6) through (11) of the CPSC 

standard). Section 104(c) of the CPSIA 

distinguishes cribs (both full-size and 

non-full-size) from other durable infant 

or toddler products. This different 

treatment of cribs necessitates that the 

CPSC establish separate standards for 

non-full-size cribs and for play yards. In 

the future, we intend to issue a standard 

for play yards under section 104(b) of 

the CPSIA. 

Requirements of ASTM F 406–10a. 

The final rule incorporates the other 

requirements of ASTM F 406–10a 

without change. The requirements 

establish a comprehensive standard for 

the safety of non-full-size cribs. Like the 

ASTM standard for full-size cribs, 

ASTM F 406–10a includes definitions; 

general requirements; performance 

requirements; specific test methods; and 

requirements for marking, labeling, and 

instructional literature. These 

requirements are essentially the same as 

the requirements ASTM F 1169–10 

establishes for full-size cribs. The key 

requirements of both ASTM standards 

are outlined in the following section of 

this preamble. 

4. Principal Requirements of Both 

ASTM Crib Standards 

Both the full-size and non-full-size 

crib standards incorporate by reference 

the relevant ASTM crib standards, with 

certain modifications explained above. 

The principal requirements are the same 

in both ASTM standards. These are: 

• Dynamic impact testing of the 

mattress support system—intended to 

address incidents involving collapse or 

failure of mattress support systems. The 

2010 standards updated the tests to 

address fatigue of mattress support 

brackets, support hardware, and 

mattress support due to children 

jumping in cribs. 

• Impact testing of side rails and slat 

strength/integrity testing—intended to 

prevent slats and spindles from breaking 

and/or detaching during use. The 

requirements were made more stringent 

for the 2010 standards. The 

modification was intended to prevent 

entrapments by reducing the likelihood 

of slat/spindle breakage and the gaps 

that accompany them. 

• Mattress support system testing— 

intended to ensure that the mattress 

support does not become detached from 

the frame, potentially resulting in a fall. 

• Latching mechanism tests— 

intended to ensure that latching and 

locking mechanisms work as intended, 

preventing unintended folding while in 

use. Also requires that they be used 

with drop gates and movable sides. 

• Crib side configurations—intended, 

in part, to limit movable (drop) sides. 

Addresses the numerous incidents 

related to drop-side failures. 

• Label requirements—the required 

warnings were reordered in the 2010 

full-size crib standard to emphasize fall 

hazards. 

• Openings requirement for mattress 

support systems—a new requirement for 

the full-size crib 2010 standard that 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81781 

addresses gaps in the mattress support 

system to minimize the possibility of 

entrapment. 

• Requirements for wood screws and 

other fasteners—a new requirement for 

the 2010 standards that addresses 

hazards that exist when wood screws 

are the primary method of attachment. 

Also includes other fastener 

requirements to address incidents 

related to loose hardware and poor 

structural integrity. 

• Cyclic testing—a new requirement 

for the 2010 standards that addresses 

incidents involving failures of nondrop-side hardware and poor structural 

integrity. This requirement was taken 

from the Canadian standard and 

simulates long-term shaking of the 

product by a child. 

• Misassembly issues—a new 

requirement for the 2010 standards 

where it must either be impossible to 

misassemble key elements or those 

elements must have markings that make 

it obvious when they have been 

misassembled. 

• Test requirement for accessories—a 

new requirement for the 2010 standards 

that is intended to address any cribs that 

may now, or in the future, include 

accessories, such as bassinets or 

changing tables. 

• Crib interior dimensions—a new 

requirement for the 2010 standards that 

is taken directly from the CPSC’s 

mandatory regulation and is intended to 

ensure that all full-size cribs have the 

same interior dimensions. 

• Component spacing—a new 

requirement for the 2010 standards that 

is taken directly from the CPSC’s 

mandatory regulation and is intended to 

prevent child entrapment between both 

uniformly and non-uniformly-spaced 

components, such as slats. 

5. The Final Crib Standards Address the 

Principal Hazards Related to Cribs 

This section summarizes how the 

standards for full-size and non-full-size 

cribs address the principal crib-related 

hazards that the CPSC has identified 

through its review of incidents 

involving cribs. 

The crib standards address structural 

failures of cribs that are related to dropside failures through a requirement that 

the sides of a crib be fixed in place and 

have no movable sections less than 20 

inches from the top of the mattress 

support (effectively eliminating drop 

sides). The standards address problems 

with non-drop-side hardware and poor 

structural integrity through 

requirements for screw fasteners, 

locking components, and the cyclic side 

(shake) test. Loosening of wood screws 

and other fasteners also has led to crib 

incidents. The standards address these 

hazards through the wood screw 

requirements of 16 CFR parts 1508 and 

1509 (which are now in ASTM F 1169– 

10 and ASTM F 406–10a), restricting the 

use of wood screws as primary 

fasteners; prohibiting use of wood 

screws in structural elements that a 

consumer would need to assemble; and 

imposing stricter requirements for the 

use of threaded metal inserts and other 

metal-threaded fasteners. Problems with 

the structural integrity of cribs and 

hardware issues (such as loosened 

joints, detached sides and overall poor 

structural integrity) are addressed by the 

cyclic side (shake) test, which simulates 

a child’s lifetime shaking of the crib. 

The test applies a cyclic force (9,000 

vertical and then 9,000 horizontal load 

cycles using 27 lbf) at the midpoint of 

each top rail, end, and side of the crib. 

To address mattress-related issues (such 

as, entrapments between a mattress 

support and a crib structure, and 

mattress support structural failures), the 

crib standards include a mattress impact 

cyclic test that consists of dropping a 

45-pound mass (20 kg) repeatedly every 

4 seconds onto a polyurethane foam test 

mattress covered in vinyl and supported 

by the mattress support system. The crib 

standards address crib slat 

disengagement (which can result in 

entrapment) by specifying that any crib 

side with slats must be tested 

(previously the number of sides was not 

specified and manufacturers could test 

just one side). The crib standards 

address broken or dislocated slats, 

which can cause a gap of approximately 

5 inches, by making the slat/spindle 

strength test more stringent, requiring a 

set number of slats to withstand an 80- 

pound load. The crib standards address 

misassembly issues by including a 

requirement which states: ‘‘Crib designs 

shall only allow assembly of key 

structural elements in the 

manufacturer’s recommended use 

position or have markings that indicate 

their proper orientation. The markings 

must be conspicuous in the 

misassembled state.’’ 

H. Effective Date 

The Administrative Procedure Act 

(‘‘APA’’) generally requires that the 

effective date of a rule be at least 30 

days after publication of the final rule. 

5 U.S.C. 553(d). The Commission 

proposed that the standard would 

become effective six months after 

publication of a final rule. The 

Commission invited comments 

regarding the sufficiency of a 6-month 

effective date for the crib standards, 

which are discussed in section E.10 of 

this preamble. 

Based on review of the comments, the 

final rule provides a 6-month effective 

date (as measured from the date of 

publication of this final rule in the 

Federal Register) with two compliance 

dates: a 6-month compliance date for all 

entities subject to the rule, except for 

child care facilities, family child care 

homes, and places of public 

accommodation, which have 24 months 

(as measured from the date of 

publication of this final rule in the 

Federal Register) to provide cribs that 

comply with the standards. This 

approach alleviates concerns that there 

may not be a sufficient supply of cribs 

that meet the new standards for these 

entities to provide compliant cribs 

within a 6-month effective date. 

Providing this additional period of time 

for these entities addresses their 

concerns about the costs of compliance 

by allowing additional time for them to 

locate funding and to absorb the costs of 

the rule. This approach still requires 

manufacturers and retailers (as well as 

other entities selling, leasing or 

otherwise providing cribs) to supply 

compliant cribs within 6 months just as 

the Commission had proposed. 

Providing tiered compliance dates 

should allow for an orderly process of 

supply, so that cribs are first 

manufactured and made available for 

sale before child care facilities, family 

child care homes, and places of public 

accommodation, which must purchase 

compliant cribs, are required to comply 

with the standards. This approach also 

will not delay the availability of cribs in 

stores for individual consumers to 

purchase, which would have been the 

case if the rule established a longer 

uniform effective date to accommodate 

the impact on child care facilities, 

family child care homes, and places of 

public accommodation. By setting a 

compliance date of 24 months from the 

date of publication of this final rule in 

the Federal Register, the Commission 

intends that any such entity that comes 

into being after the compliance date 

must comply with this rule when it 

begins operating. 

An additional reason underlies the 

Commission’s decision to create a 

separate compliance date for child care 

facilities, family child care homes, and 

places of public accommodation. It is 

unprecedented for the Commission to 

promulgate a rule containing a 

mandatory standard that not only sets 

product performance requirements but 

also places responsibility for 

compliance with the rule, in part, on 

users or providers of the product in an 

occupational setting. We are required to 

do so in this case, however, because 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
81782 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Congress singled out cribs for special 

treatment in the CPSIA. 

Even though certain of the other 

durable infant products on which we 

will be promulgating mandatory 

standards may also be found in child 

care or other settings covered by section 

104 of the CPSIA, it is only cribs failing 

to meet the mandatory standard that are 

required to be replaced by certain 

statutorily defined users and providers 

by a date to be determined by the 

Commission. 

Of course, manufacturers of products 

are accustomed to meeting performance 

standards. Our understanding is that 

most crib manufacturers have been 

following this rulemaking and the 

attendant ASTM voluntary standards 

proceedings very closely, if not 

participating in them directly. Their 

numbers, though, are relatively few. In 

comparison, there are an estimated 

59,000 child care and family home care 

providers and an estimated 53,000 

public accommodations covered by this 

rule, many of whom may be wholly 

unaware of its consequences. 

During this rulemaking, the issues 

that have been raised as part of the 

record by child care providers apply, in 

our view, to all users or providers of 

cribs described in sections 104(c)(2)(B) 

and (D) of the CPSIA. While we had no 

comments from operators of public 

accommodations, they likely will face 

the same difficulties as child care 

providers in complying in a timely 

manner with the new crib standard. 

For instance, the number of 

complying cribs that will have to be 

manufactured to meet the new standard, 

just for those cribs needed in the child 

care setting, is, in our estimation, at 

least ten times more than those facilities 

usually buy in one year (cribs, on 

average, are normally on a 10-year 

replacement cycle). This surge in 

demand is in addition to the cribs that 

will, upon this rule becoming effective, 

need to be replaced by owners or 

operators of public accommodations, 

who would have otherwise not 

necessarily done so during that period. 

Whether enough complying cribs can be 

made in just one year’s time to meet this 

increased need, on top of the normal 

annual number of cribs required by 

parents, is uncertain. All crib users and 

providers will be buying from the same 

finite pool of new complying cribs, but 

certain of those purchasers will be doing 

so pursuant to the added 

responsibilities placed upon them by 

this rule, as required by the CPSIA. The 

expense of replacing all of their noncomplying cribs will weigh more 

heavily on the less affluent providers, 

whether they are child care facilities or 

public accommodation facilities. 

Given these realities, and the 

Commission’s strong desire to ensure 

implementation of the rule is consistent 

with the statute’s goal of providing safer 

sleep environments for those children 

using cribs, the Commission believes it 

is prudent to take all reasonable steps to 

try to provide adequate time for there to 

be a sufficient supply of complying 

cribs to meet demand, and for child care 

facilities, family child care homes, and 

places of public accommodation to 

obtain complying cribs before the 

penalties that could be imposed on 

them for failure to do so become 

effective. Therefore, the Commission is 

establishing a compliance date for those 

persons of 24 months (as measured from 

the date of publication of this final rule 

in the Federal Register) for them to 

provide compliant cribs. This gives 

affected persons an additional 18 

months beyond the effective date that 

was suggested in the proposed rule to 

replace their noncomplying cribs. The 

Commission will also use this time to 

attempt to educate all those individuals 

and entities affected of their 

responsibilities under the law so they 

can plan for the replacement of their 

cribs in an orderly and timely fashion. 

The Commission strongly encourages 

all child care facilities, family child care 

homes and public accommodation 

facilities to begin replacing their cribs 

with compliant cribs as quickly as the 

market allows, starting with the oldest 

ones first, as our experience has shown 

that the longer cribs are used, the more 

hazards they present to the children 

placed in them. Every day that a child 

is in an unsafe crib, or any unsafe sleep 

environment for that matter, puts that 

child at risk of serious injury or death. 

Every person who provides cribs in a 

child care setting or as part of the 

furnishings in a public accommodation 

has a responsibility to provide the safest 

possible environment for the children 

using those cribs. 

I. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(‘‘RFA’’) generally requires that agencies 

review proposed rules for their potential 

economic impact on small entities, 

including small businesses, and prepare 

an initial regulatory flexibility analysis. 

5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA further requires 

that agencies consider comments they 

receive on the initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis and prepare a final 

regulatory flexibility analysis describing 

the impact of the final rule on small 

entities and identifying alternatives that 

could reduce that impact. Id. 604. This 

section summarizes the staff’s final 

regulatory flexibility analyses for the 

full-size and non-full-size crib 

standards, which is provided at Tabs A 

and B of the staff’s briefing package. 

1. Full-Size Cribs 

a. The Market for Full-Size Cribs 

As mentioned in section B.2 of this 

preamble, CPSC staff estimates that 

there are currently 68 manufacturers or 

importers supplying full-size cribs to 

the U.S. market. Of those that could be 

categorized, 10 are domestic importers; 

42 are domestic manufacturers; 7 are 

foreign manufacturers; and 2 are foreign 

importers. CPSC staff estimates annual 

sales of new cribs to be about 2.4 

million (could be an underestimate if 

new mothers buy more than one crib). 

CPSC staff estimates that there are 

currently approximately 591 models of 

full-size cribs compared to 

approximately 81 models of non-fullsize cribs. Thus, approximately 88 

percent of crib models are full-size 

cribs. Applying this percentage to the 

number of cribs sold annually results in 

a rough estimate of 2.1 million full-size 

cribs sold each year. 

JPMA, the major U.S. trade 

association representing juvenile 

product manufacturers and importers, 

runs a voluntary certification program 

for several juvenile products. 

Approximately 30 firms (44 percent) 

supply full-size cribs to the U.S. market 

that have been certified by JPMA as 

compliant with the ASTM voluntary 

standard F 1169–09. Additionally, 15 

firms claim compliance, although their 

products have not been certified by 

JPMA. The regulatory flexibility 

analysis assumes that the 45 firms that 

provide cribs that are certified to, or 

claim to be compliant with, earlier 

ASTM standards, will remain compliant 

with ASTM standard F 1169–10. 

As noted previously, section 104 of 

the CPSIA operates such that when the 

Commission’s crib standards take effect, 

they will apply to retailers of both new 

and used full-size cribs and to child care 

facilities and places of public 

accommodation, such as hotels, which 

provide full-size cribs to their patrons. 

Based on public comments received 

from child care centers in response to 

the proposed rule, it appears that child 

care centers typically use a mix of fullsize and non-full-size cribs, but 

primarily non-full-size cribs. However, 

CPSC staff still assumes that places of 

public accommodation tend to provide 

non-full-size cribs to their customers, as 

opposed to the more unwieldy full-size 

cribs. The number of firms that may be 

selling or providing full-size cribs is 

unknown, but may be drawn from 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81783 

approximately 24,985 retail firms (at 

least 5,292 of which sell used products); 

59,555 firms supplying child care 

services; and 53,021 locations offering 

public accommodations to the public 

that may be supplying new or used fullsize cribs. 

b. Impact on Small Businesses 

There are approximately 68 firms 

currently known to be producing or 

selling full-size cribs in the United 

States. Based on Small Business 

Administration (SBA) guidelines, which 

consider a manufacturer to be small if 

it has 500 or fewer employees and an 

importer to be small if it has 100 or 

fewer employees, 48 of these firms (36 

domestic manufacturers, 10 domestic 

importers, and 2 firms with unknown 

sources of supply) are small. There are 

probably additional unknown small 

manufacturers and importers operating 

in the U.S. market. 

According to SBA guidelines, retailers 

and service providers, such as child care 

centers and places of public 

accommodation, are considered small if 

they have $7 million or less in annual 

receipts. Approximately 93 percent of 

all retailers have receipts of less than $5 

million, with an additional 3 percent 

having receipts between $5 million and 

$9.99 million. Excluding firms with 

receipts of between $5 million and $7 

million, yields an estimated 23,236 

small retail firms. Some portion of these 

retail firms would be affected by the 

final rule because only a small 

percentage of these small firms actually 

sell full-size cribs. Thus, the number of 

small retail firms affected will be far 

fewer than 23,236. Among child care 

service providers, approximately 98 

percent have receipts of less than $5 

million, with an additional 0.9 percent 

having receipts between $5 million and 

$9.99 million. This suggests that 

roughly 58,364 small child care firms (of 

59,555) could be affected. 

i. Small Manufacturers 

The impact of the standard for fullsize cribs on small manufacturers will 

differ based on whether their products 

comply with ASTM standard F 1169– 

10. Of the 36 small domestic 

manufacturers, 24 produce cribs that are 

certified by JPMA or that they claim are 

in compliance with the voluntary 

standard. The impact on the 24 

compliant firms is not expected to be 

significant. It seems unlikely that any of 

these products will require modification 

to meet the CPSC standard. Should any 

modifications be necessary, the 

modification would likely be minor 

(such as more effective screws or screw 

combinations). 

The CPSC standard could have a 

significant impact on one or more of the 

12 firms that are not compliant with the 

voluntary standard, because their 

products might require substantial 

modifications. The costs associated with 

these modifications could include costs 

for product design, development and 

marketing staff time, and product 

testing. There may also be increased 

production costs, particularly if 

additional materials are required. The 

actual cost of such an effort is unknown, 

but could be significant, especially for 

the two firms that rely primarily or 

entirely on the production and sale of 

full-size cribs and related products, 

such as accompanying furniture and 

bedding, and for a third firm that 

produces only one other product. 

However, the impact of these costs may 

be diminished if they are treated as new 

product expenses that can be amortized. 

The scenario described above assumes 

that only those firms that produce cribs 

that are certified by JPMA or that claim 

ASTM compliance will pass the 

voluntary standard’s requirements. This 

is not necessarily the case. CPSC staff 

has identified many cases in which 

products that are not certified by JPMA 

actually are compliant with the relevant 

ASTM standard. To the extent that this 

is true, the impact of the CPSC standard 

will be less significant than described. 

ii. Small Importers 

While 4 of the 10 small importers are 

not compliant with the voluntary 

standard, all would need to find an 

alternate source of full-size cribs if their 

existing supplier does not come into 

compliance with the new requirements 

of the CPSC standard. The cost to 

importers may increase, and they, in 

turn, may pass on some of those 

increased costs to their customers. Some 

importers may respond to the rule by 

ceasing to import cribs that do not 

comply. However, the impact of such a 

decision may be lessened by replacing 

the noncompliant crib(s) with 

complying products or other juvenile 

products. Deciding to import an 

alternative product would be a 

reasonable and realistic way to offset 

any lost revenue, given that most small 

importers import a variety of products. 

iii. Small Retailers and Child Care 

Centers 

The CPSIA requires that all full-size 

cribs sold (or leased) by retailers or 

provided by child care centers to their 

customers comply with the CPSC’s fullsize crib rule. This means that retailers, 

most of whom are small, will need to 

verify that any full-size cribs in their 

inventory (that they intend to sell or 

lease after the effective date), and any 

that they purchase in the future, comply 

with the regulation prior to offering the 

cribs for sale. CPSC staff believes that 

most retailers, particularly small 

retailers, do not keep large inventories 

of cribs. With an effective date six 

months after publication of the final 

rule, retailers of new products should 

have sufficient notification and time to 

make this adjustment with little 

difficulty. The situation for retailers of 

used cribs is more complicated, 

however, because they may not always 

be able to determine whether the fullsize cribs they receive comply with the 

new CPSC standard. For these affected 

retailers, it may be simpler to 

discontinue the sale of used full-size 

cribs. If cribs represent a small portion 

of the products they sell, then the 

impact of the rule on these firms may be 

limited. 

Child care centers, family child care 

homes, and places of public 

accommodation must provide compliant 

cribs for their customers. The rule 

provides a 6-month effective date with 

an additional 18-month compliance 

period for these entities to meet the 

standards. This longer period to comply 

gives them additional time to purchase 

and replace their cribs that do not 

comply with the final rule. Without a 

longer period for compliance, the 

impact on these entities would be 

greater, particularly for those that would 

have to replace all of their cribs at once. 

Based on data provided by the 

comments, it appears that the average 

child care center has between 4 and 45 

cribs, fewer than half of which are likely 

to be full-size. Each crib costs 

approximately $500. Therefore, if 25 

percent of the cribs that must be 

replaced are full-size cribs, then 

replacement for an individual child care 

center could run from $500 to as high 

as $5,500. The total one-time cost to 

child care centers, the majority of which 

are small, of replacing all of their fullsize cribs is estimated to be 

approximately $97 million nationwide. 

Providing child care centers, family 

child care homes, and places of public 

accommodation with 24 months to 

comply with the new crib standards will 

reduce the impact on these entities. 

There are additional considerations 

concerning the one-time costs child care 

providers face. Some costs may be 

passed on to customers through small 

increases in the rates child care 

providers charge. Child care providers 

would recoup these costs over an 

extended period, while the initial outlay 

for new cribs would be much more 

immediate. Additionally, as several 

commenters noted, child care centers 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
81784 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

are limited in how much of the costs 

can be passed on to their customers. For 

example, one commenter stated that 

approximately 35 percent of the 

children in their care—more than 

150,000—receive some form of state 

subsidy, and another provider stated 

that approximately one-third of the 

children in their care receive some 

subsidy. Raising rates above what 

customers can bear has the potential to 

deprive families of child care or force 

them into alternative child care 

arrangements that may not be subject to 

the final rule. The latter possibility has 

the potential for safety risks in excess of 

those that currently exist in child care 

centers. 

Some centers could opt to replace 

their full-size cribs with play yards, 

which are less expensive to purchase 

(typically $100–$200) than full-size 

cribs, thereby spreading replacement 

costs over a longer period. While this 

would reduce the impact of the final 

rule, the alternative of providing play 

yards may be limited due to state 

licensing laws. The CPSC does not 

advocate the use of play yards over 

cribs, but acknowledges that the choice 

of play yards instead of cribs may be an 

option for some child care providers. 

iv. Alternatives 

Under section 104 of the CPSIA, one 

alternative that could reduce the impact 

on small entities would be to make the 

voluntary standard mandatory without 

any modifications. Adopting the current 

full-size crib voluntary standard without 

any changes potentially could reduce 

costs for 12 of the 36 small 

manufacturers and 4 of the 10 small 

importers that are not compliant already 

with the voluntary standard. However, 

these firms still will require substantial 

product changes in order to meet the 

voluntary standard. Because the CPSC’s 

changes add little to the overall burden 

of the rule, adopting the voluntary 

standard without any changes will not 

offset significantly the burden that is 

expected for these firms. 

Another way to reduce the impact on 

small firms would be to allow more time 

for such entities to comply with the 

final rule by providing a longer effective 

date for all entities. This would allow 

additional time for small manufacturers 

and small importers of non-compliant 

cribs. It could also alleviate inventory 

issues for small retailers. 

A third alternative that could reduce 

the impact on small firms would be to 

provide an even longer compliance 

period for child care centers, family 

child care homes, and places of public 

accommodation. Although this would 

reduce the impact on the smaller of 

these entities, it would not have any 

impact on small manufacturers or 

importers. 

2. Non-Full-Size Cribs 

a. The Market for Non-Full-Size Cribs 

CPSC staff estimates that there are 

currently at least 17 manufacturers or 

importers supplying non-full-size cribs 

to the U.S. market. Five of these firms 

are domestic importers and 10 are 

domestic manufacturers. Insufficient 

information is available to determine 

whether the remaining firms are 

manufacturers or importers. 

Five firms supply non-full-size cribs 

to the U.S. market that have been JPMAcertified as compliant with the ASTM 

voluntary standard. Additionally, two 

firms claim compliance, although their 

products have not been certified by 

JPMA. Therefore, including the firms 

that claim compliance with the ASTM 

standard, five manufacturers and one 

importer have products that are ASTM 

compliant. Additionally, one of the 

firms with an unknown source of 

supply also claims compliance with the 

ASTM standard. This analysis assumes 

that firms that are certified or claim to 

be compliant with earlier ASTM 

standards will remain compliant with 

ASTM standard F 406–10a. 

As explained in the analysis 

concerning full-size cribs (section I.1.b. 

of this preamble), CPSC staff estimates 

annual sales to households to be about 

2.4 million cribs. CPSC staff estimates 

that there are approximately 81 nonfull-size crib models currently being 

supplied (versus 591 full-size crib 

models). Therefore, approximately 12 

percent of the crib models on the U.S. 

market are non-full-sized. Applying this 

to the number of cribs sold annually 

yields a rough estimate of 293,000 nonfull-size cribs sold each year. 

As previously noted, section 104 of 

the CPSIA explicitly makes the crib 

standards applicable to retailers of both 

new and used non-full-size cribs and to 

child care facilities and places of public 

accommodation, such as hotels that 

supply non-full-size cribs to their 

patrons. Based on comments received 

from child care centers in response to 

the proposed rule, it appears that child 

care centers typically use a mix of fullsize and non-full-size cribs, with a bias 

in favor of non-full-size cribs. CPSC staff 

still assumes that places of public 

accommodation tend to provide their 

customers with non-full-size cribs as 

opposed to full-size cribs. The number 

of firms that may be selling or providing 

non-full-size cribs is unknown, but may 

be drawn from the approximately 

24,985 retail firms (at least 5,292 of 

which sell used products), the 59,555 

firms supplying child care services, and 

the 53,021 locations providing public 

accommodations. Each of these groups 

may be supplying new or used non-fullsize cribs to the public. 

b. Impact on Small Businesses 

There are approximately 17 firms 

currently known to be producing or 

selling non-full-size cribs in the United 

States. Based on the SBA’s guidelines, 

which consider a manufacturer to be 

small if it has 500 or fewer employees 

and an importer to be small if it has 100 

or fewer employees, 14 suppliers are 

small firms (9 domestic manufacturers 

and 5 importers). The size of the 

remaining firms—two with unknown 

supply sources and one domestic 

manufacturer—could not be 

determined. There are probably 

additional unknown small 

manufacturers and importers operating 

in the U.S. market. 

As explained in the analysis of the 

impact of the full-size crib standard, 

CPSC staff estimates that 23,236 retail 

firms would be considered small 

according to SBA’s guidelines. Not all of 

these small firms sell non-full-size cribs. 

Thus, the number of small retail firms 

affected will be fewer than 23,236. CPSC 

staff estimates that using SBA’s 

guidelines, there are approximately 

58,364 small child care firms (of 59,555) 

and 42,437 small hotel firms (of 53,021 

locations providing public 

accommodations) that could be affected 

by the crib standards. 

i. Small Manufacturers 

The impact of the CPSC’s non-fullsize crib standard on small 

manufacturers will differ based on 

whether their products are expected to 

be compliant with ASTM standard F 

406–10. Of the nine small domestic 

manufacturers, five are in compliance 

with the voluntary standard. The impact 

on the five compliant firms is not 

expected to be significant. It seems 

unlikely that any of these products will 

require modification to meet the final 

standard. Should any modifications be 

necessary, they would be most likely 

minor (such as more effective screws or 

screw combinations). 

The CPSC’s final standard for nonfull-size cribs could have a significant 

impact on one or more of the four firms 

that are not compliant with the 

voluntary standard, because their 

products might require substantial 

modifications. The costs associated with 

these modifications could include 

product design, development and 

marketing staff time, and product 

testing. There may also be increased 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81785 

production costs, particularly if 

additional materials are required. The 

actual cost of such an effort is unknown, 

but could be significant, especially for 

the one firm that relies on the 

production and sale of non-full-size 

cribs and related products, such as 

accompanying furniture and bedding. 

However, the impact of these costs may 

be diminished if they are treated as new 

product expenses that can be amortized. 

The scenario described above assumes 

that only those firms that produce cribs 

certified by JPMA or claim ASTM 

compliance will pass the requirements 

of ASTM F 406–10a. This is not 

necessarily the case. CPSC staff has 

identified many cases in which 

products not certified by JPMA actually 

are compliant with the relevant ASTM 

standard. To the extent that this is true, 

the impact of the final rule will be less 

significant than described. 

ii. Small Importers 

Although four of the five small 

importers are not compliant with the 

voluntary standard, all would need to 

find an alternate source of non-full-size 

cribs if their existing supplier does not 

come into compliance with the new 

requirements of the final standard. The 

cost to importers may increase and they, 

in turn, may pass on some of those 

increased costs to their customers. Some 

importers may address the rule 

requirements by ceasing to import cribs 

that do not comply with the new 

standard. However, the impact of such 

a decision may be diminished by 

replacing the noncompliant cribs with 

complying products or other juvenile 

products. Deciding to import an 

alternative product would be a 

reasonable and realistic way to offset 

any lost revenue, given that most small 

importers import a variety of products. 

iii. Small Retailers and Child Care 

Centers 

The CPSIA requires that all cribs sold 

(or leased) by retailers or provided by 

child care centers to their customers 

comply with the CPSC’s new crib 

standards. Thus, retailers will need to 

verify that any non-full-size cribs in 

their inventory (that they intend to sell 

or lease after the effective date), and that 

any they purchase in the future, comply 

with the regulation prior to offering the 

cribs for sale. CPSC staff believes that 

most retailers, particularly small 

retailers, do not keep large inventories 

of cribs. With an effective date six 

months after publication of the rule, 

retailers of new products should have 

sufficient notification and time to make 

this adjustment with little difficulty. 

Retailers of used cribs may have 

difficulty determining whether the cribs 

they receive comply with the new CPSC 

standard, and therefore, may 

discontinue the sale of used non-fullsize cribs. If cribs represent a small 

portion of the products they sell, then 

the impact of the rule on these firms 

may be limited. 

Child care centers, family child care 

homes, and places of public 

accommodation must provide compliant 

non-full-size cribs for their customers. 

The rule provides a 6-month effective 

date (as measured from the date of 

publication of this final rule in the 

Federal Register) with an additional 

18 months compliance period for these 

entities to meet the standards. This 

longer period of time to comply with the 

standards could reduce the impact on 

small firms. Based on data provided 

through public comments, it appears 

that the average child care center has 

between 4 and 45 cribs, more than half 

of which are likely to be non-full-size. 

Each crib costs approximately $500. 

Therefore, if 75 percent of the cribs that 

must be replaced are non-full-size cribs, 

then replacement for an individual 

child care center could run from $1,500 

to as high as $16,500. The total one-time 

cost to child care centers, the majority 

of which are small, of replacing all of 

their non-full-size cribs is estimated to 

be approximately $290 million 

nationwide. Providing child care 

centers, family child care homes, and 

places of public accommodation with 

24 months (as measured from the date 

of publication of this final rule in the 

Federal Register) to comply with the 

new crib standards will reduce the 

impact on them. According to 2007 U.S. 

Census data, there are 53,021 

establishments providing public 

accommodations. Assuming that all of 

these establishments provide an average 

of about three non-full-size cribs for use 

by their clientele, as many as 160,000 

cribs might need to be replaced at a cost 

of about $500 per crib, or approximately 

$80 million. This may be an 

overestimate as not all places of public 

accommodation provide cribs to their 

customers, but some portion of those 

that do will replace those cribs when 

the rule becomes effective. 

As discussed in the analysis of the 

full-size crib standard, there are 

additional considerations concerning 

the one-time costs for child care 

providers. Some costs may be passed on 

to customers through small increases in 

the rates child care providers charge 

(although the expenditure for new cribs 

would be far more immediate). Child 

care centers may have limited ability to 

pass these costs on to their customers, 

particularly in light of the number of 

children in child care who received 

some form of state subsidy. Although 

some child care centers could replace 

their non-full-size cribs with less 

expensive play yards (typically $100– 

$200), this alternative may not be 

available to some child care centers if 

state licensing laws require use of cribs 

rather than play yards. 

Some hotels may provide a few nonfull-size cribs for their customers. The 

number of cribs at any one 

establishment is likely to be low, 

especially because of the likelihood that 

parents traveling with young children 

will bring along sleep products, such as 

play yards or portable cribs, for their 

children. As with child care centers, 

this is a one-time cost for firms that, 

over time, likely can be passed on to 

customers. Firms, particularly smaller 

ones, may opt to reduce the replacement 

costs by ceasing to provide cribs to their 

customers, replacing only some cribs, or 

providing play yards instead of non-fullsize cribs. Therefore, it is unlikely that 

the rule will have a significant impact 

on a substantial number of firms that 

provide these cribs in places of public 

accommodation. The Commission 

believes that because places of public 

accommodation, like child care centers, 

will need to purchase compliant cribs to 

provide to their customers, the rule 

establishes a 24 month compliance date 

(as measured from the date of 

publication of this final rule in the 

Federal Register) for them to provide 

compliant cribs as well. 

iv. Alternatives 

The same alternatives for reducing the 

impact of the full-size crib standard also 

apply to reducing the impact of the nonfull-size crib standard. One alternative 

is to make the voluntary standard 

mandatory with no modifications. 

Adopting the current voluntary standard 

without any changes potentially could 

reduce costs for four of the nine small 

manufacturers and four of the five small 

importers who are not already 

compliant with the voluntary standard. 

However, these firms still will require 

substantial product changes in order to 

meet the voluntary standard. Since the 

changes add little to the overall burden 

of the rule on small manufacturers, 

adopting the voluntary standard with no 

changes will not offset significantly the 

burden that is expected for these firms. 

Adopting the voluntary standard with 

no modifications could reduce the 

impact on small retailers and some 

child care providers. 

Another alternative that could reduce 

the impact on small firms would be to 

allow more time for such entities to 

comply with the final rule by providing 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
81786 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

a longer effective date for all entities 

that are subject to the rule. This would 

allow additional time for small 

manufacturers and small importers of 

non-compliant cribs. It could also 

alleviate inventory issues for small 

retailers. A third alternative that could 

reduce the impact on small firms would 

be to provide an even longer compliance 

period for child care centers, family 

child care homes, and places of public 

accommodation. Although this would 

reduce the impact on the smaller of 

these entities, it would not have any 

impact on small manufacturers or 

importers. 

J. 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 

because they ‘‘have little or no potential 

for affecting the human environment.’’ 

16 CFR 1021.5(c)(2). This rule falls 

within the categorical exclusion. 

K. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule contains information 

collection requirements under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). Therefore, the 

preamble to the proposed rule (75 FR at 

43319 through 43321) discussed the 

information collection burden of the 

proposed rule and specifically requested 

comments on the accuracy of our 

estimates. We did not receive any 

comments concerning the information 

collection burden of the proposal, and 

the final rule does not make any 

changes to that burden. We have 

applied to the U.S. Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for a 

control number for this information 

collection, and we will publish a notice 

in the Federal Register providing the 

number when the agency receives 

approval from OMB. 

L. Preemption 

Section 26(a) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 

2075(a), provides that where a 

‘‘consumer product safety standard 

under [the CPSA]’’ is in effect and 

applies to a product, no state or political 

subdivision of a state may either 

establish or continue in effect a 

requirement dealing with the same risk 

of injury unless the State requirement is 

identical to the federal standard. 

(Section 26(c) of the CPSA also provides 

that states or political subdivisions of 

states may apply to the Commission for 

an exemption from this preemption 

under certain circumstances.) Section 

104(b) of the CPSIA refers to the rules 

to be issued under that section as 

‘‘consumer product safety rules,’’ thus 

implying that the preemptive effect of 

section 26(a) of the CPSA would apply. 

Therefore, a rule issued under section 

104 of the CPSIA will invoke the 

preemptive effect of section 26(a) of the 

CPSA when it becomes effective. 

M. Certification 

Section 14(a) of the CPSA imposes the 

requirement that products subject to a 

consumer product safety rule under the 

CPSA, or to a similar rule, ban, 

standard, or regulation under any other 

act enforced by the Commission, be 

certified as complying with all 

applicable CPSC requirements. 15 

U.S.C. 2063(a). Such certification must 

be based on a test of each product, or 

on a reasonable testing program or, for 

children’s products, on tests on a 

sufficient number of samples by a third 

party conformity assessment body 

accredited by the Commission to test 

according to the applicable 

requirements. Section 104(b)(1)(B) of the 

CPSIA refers to standards issued under 

that section as ‘‘consumer product safety 

standards.’’ By the same reasoning, such 

standards also would be subject to 

section 14 of the CPSA. Therefore, any 

such standard would be considered a 

consumer product safety rule, to which 

products subject to the rule must be 

certified. 

Because full-size cribs and non-fullsize cribs are children’s products, they 

must be tested by a third party 

conformity assessment body whose 

accreditation has been accepted by the 

Commission. Elsewhere in this issue of 

the Federal Register, we have issued a 

notice of requirements to explain how 

laboratories can become accredited as 

third party conformity assessment 

bodies to test to the new crib standards. 

The Commission previously issued a 

notice of requirements for accreditation 

to test to the existing crib standards (16 

CFR parts 1508 and 1509) in the Federal 

Register of October 22, 2008 (73 FR 

62965). (Baby cribs also must comply 

with all other applicable CPSC 

requirements, such as the lead content 

requirements of section 101 of the 

CPSIA, the phthalate content 

requirements in section 108 of the 

CPSIA, the tracking label requirement in 

section 14(a)(5) of the CPSA, and the 

consumer registration form 

requirements in section 104 of the 

CPSIA). 

List of Subjects 

16 CFR Part 1219 

Consumer protection, Incorporation 

by reference, Imports, Infants and 

children, Labeling, Law enforcement, 

Reporting and recordkeeping, Toys. 

16 CFR Part 1220 

Consumer protection, Incorporation 

by reference, Imports, Infants and 

children, Labeling, Law enforcement, 

Reporting and recordkeeping, Toys. 

16 CFR Part 1500 

Consumer protection, Hazardous 

substances, Imports, Infants and 

children, Labeling, Law enforcement, 

Reporting and recordkeeping, Toys. 

■ Therefore, the Commission amends 

Title 16 CFR chapter II as follows: 

■ 1. Add part 1219 to read as follows: 

PART 1219—SAFETY STANDARD FOR 

FULL-SIZE BABY CRIBS 

Sec. 

1219.1 Scope, compliance dates, and 

definitions. 

1219.2 Requirements for full-size baby 

cribs. 

Authority: The Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008, Pub. L. 110–314, 

§ 104, 122 Stat. 3016 (August 14, 2008). 

§ 1219.1 Scope, compliance dates, and 

definitions. 

(a) Scope. This part establishes a 

consumer product safety standard for 

new and used full-size baby cribs. 

(b) Compliance dates. (1) Except as 

provided in paragraph (b)(2) of this 

section, compliance with this part 1219 

shall be required on June 28, 2011, and 

applies to the manufacture, sale, 

contract for sale or resale, lease, sublet, 

offer, provision for use, or other 

placement in the stream of commerce of 

a new or used full-size baby crib on or 

after that date. 

(2) Child care facilities, family child 

care homes, and places of public 

accommodation affecting commerce 

shall be required to comply with this 

part on December 28, 2012, but this 

provision applies only to the offer or 

provision for use of cribs by child care 

facilities, family child care homes, and 

places of public accommodation 

affecting commerce and not the sale, 

resale, or other placement in the stream 

of commerce of cribs by these entities. 

(c) Definitions. (1) Full-size baby crib 

means a bed that is: 

(i) Designed to provide sleeping 

accommodations for an infant; 

(ii) Intended for use in the home, in 

a child care facility, a family child care 

home, or place of public 

accommodation affecting commerce; 

and 

(iii) Within a range of ± 5.1 cm (± 2 

in.) of the following interior 

dimensions: The interior dimensions 

shall be 71 ± 1.6 cm (28 ± 5⁄8 in.) wide 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81787 

as measured between the innermost 

surfaces of the crib sides and 133 ± 1.6 

cm (523⁄8 ± 5⁄8 in.) long as measured 

between the innermost surfaces of the 

crib end panels, slats, rods, or spindles. 

Both measurements are to be made at 

the level of the mattress support spring 

in each of its adjustable positions and 

no more than 5 cm (2 in.) from the crib 

corner posts or from the first spindle to 

the corresponding point of the first 

spindle at the other end of the crib. If 

a crib has contoured or decorative 

spindles, in either or both of the sides 

or ends, the measurement shall be 

determined from the largest diameter of 

the first turned spindle within a range 

of 10 cm (4 in.) above the mattress 

support spring in each of its adjustable 

positions, to a corresponding point on 

the first spindle or innermost surface of 

the opposite side of the crib. 

(2) Place of public accommodation 

affecting commerce means any inn, 

hotel, or other establishment that 

provides lodging to transient guests, 

except that such term does not include 

an establishment treated as an 

apartment building for purposes of any 

State or local law or regulation or an 

establishment located within a building 

that contains not more than five rooms 

for rent or hire and that is actually 

occupied as a residence by the 

proprietor of such establishment. 

§ 1219.2 Requirements for full-size baby 

cribs. 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 

(b) of this section, each full-size baby 

crib shall comply with all applicable 

provisions of ASTM F 1169–10, 

Standard Consumer Safety Specification 

for Full-Size Baby Cribs, approved June 

1, 2010. 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; 

telephone 610–832–9585; 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: http://www.archives.gov/

federal_register/code_of_federal_

regulations/ibr_locations.html. 

(b) Comply with the ASTM F 1169– 

10 standard with the following 

additions or exclusions: 

(1) Do not comply with section 6.12 

of ASTM F 1169–10. 

(2) Instead of complying with section 

7.7.1 of ASTM F 1169–10, comply with 

the following: 

(i) The spindle/slat static force test 

shall be performed with the spindle/slat 

assemblies removed from the crib and 

rigidly supported within 3 in. of each 

end of the upper and lower horizontal 

rails in a manner that shall not interfere 

with a spindle/slat deflecting under the 

applied force. For cribs incorporating 

foldable or moveable sides for purposes 

of easier access to the occupant, storage 

and/or transport, each side segment 

(portion of side separated by hinges for 

folding) shall be tested separately. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

■ 2. Add part 1220 to read as follows: 

PART 1220—SAFETY STANDARD FOR 

NON-FULL-SIZE BABY CRIBS 

Sec. 

1220.1 Scope, compliance dates, and 

definitions. 

1220.2 Requirements for non-full-size baby 

cribs. 

Authority: The Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008, Pub. L. 110–314, 

§ 104, 122 Stat. 3016 (August 14, 2008). 

§ 1220.1 Scope, compliance dates, and 

definitions. 

(a) Scope. This part establishes a 

consumer product safety standard for 

new and used non-full-size baby cribs. 

(b) Compliance dates. (1) Except as 

provided in paragraph (b)(2) of this 

section, compliance with this part 1220 

shall be required on June 28, 2011, and 

applies to the manufacture, sale, 

contract for sale or resale, lease, sublet, 

offer, provision for use, or other 

placement in the stream of commerce of 

a new or used non-full-size baby crib on 

or after that date. 

(2) Child care facilities, family child 

care homes, and places of public 

accommodation affecting commerce 

shall be required to comply with this 

part on December 28, 2012, but this 

provision applies only to the offer or 

provision for use of cribs by child care 

facilities, family child care homes, and 

places of public accommodation 

affecting commerce and not the sale, 

resale, or other placement in the stream 

of commerce of cribs by these entities. 

(c) Definitions. (1) Non-full-size baby 

crib means a bed that is: 

(i) Designed to provide sleeping 

accommodations for an infant; 

(ii) Intended for use in or around the 

home, for travel, in a child care facility, 

in a family child care home, in a place 

of public accommodation affecting 

commerce and other purposes; 

(iii) Has an interior length dimension 

either greater than 139.7 cm (55 in.) or 

smaller than 126.3 cm (49 3⁄4 in.), or, an 

interior width dimension either greater 

than 77.7 cm (305⁄8 in.) or smaller than 

64.3 cm (253⁄8 in.), or both; 

(iv) Includes, but is not limited to, the 

following: 

(A) Portable crib—a non-full-size baby 

crib designed so that it may be folded 

or collapsed, without disassembly, to 

occupy a volume substantially less than 

the volume it occupies when it is used. 

(B) Crib pen—a non-full-size baby crib 

with rigid sides the legs of which may 

be removed or adjusted to provide a 

play pen or play yard for a child. 

(C) Specialty crib—an 

unconventionally shaped (circular, 

hexagonal, etc.) non-full-size baby crib 

incorporating a special mattress or other 

unconventional components. 

(D) Undersize crib—a non-full-size 

baby crib with an interior length 

dimension smaller than 126.3 cm (493⁄4

in.), or an interior width dimension 

smaller than 64.3 cm (253⁄8 in.), or both. 

(E) Oversize crib—a non-full-size baby 

crib with an interior length dimension 

greater than 139.7 cm (55 in.), or an 

interior width dimension greater than 

77.7 cm (305⁄8 in.), or both. 

(v) Does not include mesh/net/screen 

cribs, nonrigidly constructed baby cribs, 

cradles (both rocker and pendulum 

types), car beds, baby baskets, and 

bassinets (also known as junior cribs). 

(2) Play yard means a framed 

enclosure that includes a floor and has 

mesh or fabric sided panels primarily 

intended to provide a play or sleeping 

environment for children. It may fold 

for storage or travel. 

(3) Place of public accommodation 

affecting commerce means any inn, 

hotel, or other establishment that 

provides lodging to transient guests, 

except that such term does not include 

an establishment treated as an 

apartment building for purposes of any 

State or local law or regulation or an 

establishment located within a building 

that contains not more than five rooms 

for rent or hire and that is actually 

occupied as a residence by the 

proprietor of such establishment. 

§ 1220.2 Requirements for non-full-size 

baby cribs. 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 

(b) of this section, each non-full-size 

baby crib shall comply with all 

applicable provisions of ASTM F 406– 

10a, Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Non-Full-Size Baby 

Cribs/Play Yards, approved October 15, 

2010. 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, PO Box 0700, 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
81788 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

West Conshohocken, PA 19428; 

telephone 610–832–9585; 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: http://www.archives.gov/ 

federal_register/ 

code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

(b) Comply with the ASTM F 406–10a 

standard with the following additions or 

exclusions: 

(1) Do not comply with sections 5.6.2 

through 5.6.2.4 of ASTM F 406–10a. 

(2) Do not comply with section 5.16.2 

of ASTM F 406–10a. 

(3) Do not comply with section 6.10 

of ASTM F 406–10a. 

(4) Do not comply with section 7, 

Performance Requirements for Mesh/ 

Fabric Products, of ASTM F 406–10a. 

(5) Instead of complying with section 

8.10.1 of ASTM F 406–10a, comply with 

the following: 

(i) The spindle/slat static force test 

shall be performed with the spindle/slat 

assemblies removed from the crib and 

rigidly supported within 3 in. of each 

end of the upper and lower horizontal 

rails in a manner that shall not interfere 

with a spindle/slat deflecting under the 

applied force. For cribs incorporating 

foldable or moveable sides for purposes 

of easier access to the occupant, storage 

and/or transport, each side segment 

(portion of side separated by hinges for 

folding) shall be tested separately. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(6) Do not comply with sections 8.11 

through 8.11.2.4 of ASTM F 406–10a. 

(7) Do not comply with sections 8.12 

through 8.12.2.2 of ASTM F 406–10a. 

(8) Do not comply with section 8.14 

through 8.14.2 of ASTM F 406–10a. 

(9) Do not comply with sections 8.15 

through 8.15.3.3 of ASTM F 406–10a. 

(10) Do not comply with sections 8.16 

through 8.16.3 of ASTM F 406–10a. 

(11) Do not comply with section 9.3.2 

through 9.3.2.4 of ASTM F 406–10a. 

(12) Instead of complying with section 

9.4.2.6 of ASTM F 406–10a, comply 

with the following warning 

requirement: 

(i) Child can become entrapped and 

die when improvised netting or covers 

are placed on top of product. Never add 

such items to confine child in product. 

(ii) [Reserved]. 

PART 1500 [AMENDED] 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 1500 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1261–1278, 122 Stat. 

3016; the Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008, Pub. L. 110–314, 

§ 104, 122 Stat. 3016 (August 14, 2008). 

■ 4. In § 1500.18 remove paragraphs 

(a)(13) and (14). 

Dated: December 17, 2010. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32178 Filed 12–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

16 CFR Parts 1508 and 1509 

Revocation of Requirements for FullSize Baby Cribs and Non-Full-Size 

Baby Cribs 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Section 104(b) of the 

Consumer Product Safety Improvement 

Act of 2008 (‘‘CPSIA’’) requires the U.S. 

Consumer Product Safety Commission 

(‘‘CPSC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) to 

promulgate consumer product safety 

standards for durable infant or toddler 

products. These standards are to be 

‘‘substantially the same as’’ applicable 

voluntary standards or more stringent 

than the voluntary standard if the 

Commission concludes that more 

stringent requirements would further 

reduce the risk of injury associated with 

the product. The Commission is issuing 

this rule to revoke its existing 

regulations pertaining to full-size and 

non-full-size cribs because, elsewhere in 

this issue of the Federal Register, the 

Commission is issuing consumer 

product safety standards for cribs that 

will further reduce the risk of injury 

associated with these products under 

section 104 of the CPSIA. The new 

consumer product safety standards for 

cribs will include the requirements that 

have been in 16 CFR parts 1508 and 

1509 for full-size and non-full-size cribs. 

To eliminate duplication, the 

Commission is removing 16 CFR parts 

1508 and 1509 entirely. 

DATES: Effective June 28, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christopher Melchert, Division of 

Regulatory Enforcement, Office of 

Compliance, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, 4330 East West Highway, 

Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone (301) 

504–7588; cmelchert@cpsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. What regulations is the CPSC 

revoking? 

The CPSC first published the full-size 

crib regulation, 16 CFR part 1508, in 

1973 (38 FR 32129 (Nov. 21, 1973)) and 

amended it in 1982. The CPSC 

published the regulation for non-fullsize cribs, 16 CFR part 1509, in 1976 (41 

FR 6240 (Feb. 12, 1976)), and amended 

it in 1982. Both standards contain 

requirements pertaining to dimensions, 

spacing of components, hardware, 

construction and finishing, assembly 

instructions, cutouts, identifying marks, 

warning statements, and compliance 

declarations. In addition, 16 CFR part 

1509 contains a requirement regarding 

mattresses. 

B. Why is the CPSC revoking the 

regulations pertaining to cribs? 

The Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008, Public Law 

110–314 (‘‘CPSIA’’), was enacted on 

August 14, 2008. Section 104(b) of the 

CPSIA requires the Commission to 

promulgate consumer product safety 

standards for durable infant or toddler 

products. These standards are to be 

‘‘substantially the same as’’ applicable 

voluntary standards or more stringent 

than the voluntary standard if the 

Commission concludes that more 

stringent requirements would further 

reduce the risk of injury associated with 

the product. Elsewhere in this issue of 

the Federal Register, the Commission is 

issuing safety standards for full-size and 

non-full-size cribs under the authority 

of section 104 of the CPSIA. These new 

standards adopt the voluntary standards 

developed by ASTM International 

(formerly known as the American 

Society for Testing and Materials), 

which are more stringent in some 

respects than the current applicable 

standards, and include ASTM F 1169– 

10, ‘‘Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Full-Size Baby Cribs,’’ 

and ASTM F 406–10a, ‘‘Standard 

Consumer Safety Specification for NonFull-Size Baby Cribs/Play Yards.’’ 

The crib standards that the CPSC is 

publishing elsewhere in this issue of the 

Federal Register incorporate all of the 

requirements currently found in 16 CFR 

parts 1508 and 1509. Consequently, the 

requirements found at 16 CFR parts 

1508 and 1509 have become redundant. 

The Commission, therefore, is revoking 

16 CFR parts 1508 and 1509 in their 

entirety. 

The Commission emphasizes that the 

revocation of 16 CFR parts 1508 and 

1509 would have no substantive effect 

on crib safety. The requirements from 16 

CFR parts 1508 and 1509 still apply to 

full-size and non-full-size cribs, but are 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2