73354 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

persons to submit comments on any 

aspect of the proposed rule. Comments 

should be submitted in accordance with 

the instructions in the ADDRESSES

section at the beginning of this notice. 

List of Subjects 

16 CFR Part 1112 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Audit, Consumer protection, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Third party conformity 

assessment body. 

16 CFR Part 1222 

Consumer protection, Imports, 

Incorporation by reference, Infants and 

children, Labeling, Law enforcement, 

and Toys. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Commission proposes to 

amend Title 16 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations as follows: 

PART 1112—REQUIREMENTS 

PERTAINING TO THIRD PARTY 

CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES 

1. The authority citation for part 1112 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Pub. L. 110–314, section 3, 122 

Stat. 3016, 3017 (2008); 15 U.S.C. 2063. 

2. Amend Part 1112.15 by adding 

paragraph (b)(34) to read as follows: 

§ 1112.15 When can a third party 

conformity assessment body apply for 

CPSC acceptance for a particular CPSC rule 

and/or test method? 

* * * * * 

(b) The CPSC has published 

previously, or in the cases of 16 CFR 

parts 1221, 1223, and 1224, and ASTM 

F 963–11 for the first time, the 

requirements for accreditation for third 

party conformity assessment bodies to 

assess conformity with the following 

CPSC rules and/or test methods: 

* * * * * 

(34) 16 CFR part 1222, Safety 

Standard for Bedside Sleepers. 

3. Add part 1222 to read as follows: 

PART 1222—SAFETY STANDARD FOR 

BEDSIDE SLEEPERS 

Sec. 

1222.1 Scope. 

1222.2 Requirements for Bedside Sleepers. 

Authority: The Consumer Product Safety 

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

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

L. 112–28, 125 Stat. 273 (August 12, 2011). 

§ 1222.1 Scope. 

This part establishes a consumer 

product safety standard for bedside 

sleepers. 

§ 1222.2 Requirements for Bedside 

Sleepers. 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 

(b) of this section, each bedside sleeper 

must comply with all applicable 

provisions of ASTM F2906–12, 

Standard Consumer Safety Specification 

for Bedside Sleepers, approved on June 

1, 2012. The Director of the Federal 

Register approves this incorporation by 

reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may 

obtain a copy from ASTM International, 

100 Bar Harbor Drive, P.O. Box 0700, 

West Conshohocken, PA 19428; http:// 

www.astm.org/cpsc.htm. You may 

inspect a copy at the Office of the 

Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product 

Safety Commission, Room 820, 4330 

East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 

20814, telephone 301–504–7923, or at 

the National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, 

or go to: http://www.archives.gov/ 

federal_register/ 

code_of_federalregulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

(b) Comply with the ASTM F2906–12 

standard with the following additions: 

(1) In addition to complying with 

section 3.1.7 of ASTM F2906–12, 

comply with the following: 

(i) 3.1.8 ‘‘bedside sleeper accessory, 

n—an elevated sleep surface that 

attaches to a non-full-size crib or play 

yard, designed to convert the product 

into a bedside sleeper intended to have 

a horizontal sleep surface while in a rest 

(non-rocking) position.’’ 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(2) In addition to complying with 

section 5.6 of ASTM F2906–12, comply 

with the following: 

(i) 5.7 Bedside Sleeper Accessory 

Fabric-Sided Enclosed Openings—A 

bedside sleeper accessory shall meet the 

F2194 performance requirement, 

‘‘Fabric-Sided Enclosed Openings.’’ 

(A) 5.7.1 Bedside sleeper accessories 

are exempt from this requirement if 

either of the following two conditions is 

met after disengaging all fasteners 

between the accessory and the non-fullsize crib or play yard base to which it 

is assembled: 

(B) 5.7.1.1 The bedside sleeper 

accessory collapses under its own 

weight, such that any part of the 

mattress pad contacts the bottom floor 

of the non-full-size crib or play yard. 

(C) 5.7.1.2 The bedside sleeper 

accessory’s sleep surface tilts by more 

than 30 degrees. 

(ii) 5.8 Bedside Sleeper Play Yard 

Accessories Missing Key Structural 

Elements: A bedside sleeper accessory 

shall meet the F406 general requirement 

‘‘Bassinet/Cradle Accessories Missing 

Key Structural Elements.’’ 

Dated: December 3, 2012. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission . 

[FR Doc. 2012–29583 Filed 12–7–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

16 CFR Parts 1112 and 1225 

[CPSC Docket No. CPSC–2012–0068] 

RIN 3041–AD16 

Safety Standard for Hand-Held Infant 

Carriers 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Danny Keysar Child 

Product Safety Notification Act, Section 

104(b) of the Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA) 

requires the United States Consumer 

Product Safety Commission 

(Commission, CPSC, 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 

proposing a safety standard for 

handheld infant carriers in response to 

the direction under Section 104(b) of the 

CPSIA. The proposed rule would 

incorporate ASTM F2050–12 by 

reference, with two modifications. 

DATES: Submit comments by February 

25, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Comments related to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act aspects of the 

marking, labeling, and instructional 

literature of the proposed rule should be 

directed to the Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: CPSC 

Desk Officer, Fax: 202–395–6974, or 

emailed to mailed to: 

oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. 

Other comments, identified by Docket 

No. CPSC-2012-0068, may be submitted 

electronically or in writing: 

Electronic Submissions: Submit 

electronic comments to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

To ensure timely processing of 

comments, the Commission is no longer 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 73355 

1 JPMAs typically allows 6 months for products 

in their certification program to shift to a new 

standard once it is published. ASTM F2050–12, The 

voluntary standard upon which the proposed 

standard is based, will become effective for JPMA 

certification purposes in approximately March 

2013. Firms that supply JPMA-certified strollers are 

expected to ensure that all of their attachments, 

Continued 

directly accepting comments submitted 

by electronic mail (email), except 

through www.regulations.gov. The 

Commission encourages you to submit 

electronic comments by using the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal, as 

described above. 

Written Submissions: Submit written 

submissions in the following way: Mail/ 

Hand delivery/Courier (for paper, disk, 

or CD–ROM submissions), preferably in 

five copies, to: Office of the Secretary, 

Consumer Product Safety Commission, 

Room 820, 4330 East West Highway, 

Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone (301) 

504–7923. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number for this rulemaking. All 

comments received may be posted 

without change, including any personal 

identifiers, contact information, or other 

personal information provided, to: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Do not 

submit confidential business 

information, trade secret information, or 

other sensitive or protected information 

that you do not want to be available to 

the public. If furnished at all, such 

information should be submitted in 

writing. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to: http:// 

www.regulations.gov, and insert the 

docket number, CPSC 2012–0068, into 

the ‘‘Search’’ box, and follow the 

prompts. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patricia L. Edwards, Project Manager, 

Directorate for Engineering Sciences, 

U.S. Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, 5 Research Place, 

Rockville, MD 20850; email: 

pedwards@cpsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background and Statutory Authority 

The CPSIA was enacted on August 14, 

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

of the Danny Keysar Child Product 

Safety Notification Act, requires the 

Commission to 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 term 

‘‘durable infant or toddler product’’ is 

defined in section 104(f)(1) of the CPSIA 

as a durable product intended for use, 

or that may be reasonably expected to be 

used, by children under the age of 5 

years. Infant carriers are one of the 

products specifically identified in 

section 104(f)(2)(F) as a durable infant 

or toddler product. At this time, the 

Commission has identified four types of 

products that could fall within the 

infant carrier product category, 

including: Frame backpack carriers, soft 

infant and toddler carriers, slings, and 

handheld infant carriers. This rule 

addresses hazards associated only with 

hand held infant carriers. Hazards 

associated with other types of carriers 

would be addressed in separate 

rulemaking proceedings. 

In this document, the Commission 

proposes a safety standard for hand held 

infant carriers. The proposed standard is 

based on the voluntary standard 

developed by ASTM International 

(formerly the American Society for 

Testing and Materials), ASTM F2050– 

12, ‘‘Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Hand-Held Infant 

Carriers.’’ The ASTM standard is 

copyrighted. However, by permission of 

ASTM, the standard can be viewed as a 

read-only document during the 

comment period on this proposal, at: 

http://www.astm.org. 

II. The Product 

A. Definition 

ASTM F2050–12 defines a ‘‘hand held 

infant carrier’’ as a ‘‘freestanding, rigidsided product intended to carry an 

occupant whose torso is completely 

supported by the product to facilitate 

transportation by a caregiver by means 

of hand-holds or handles.’’ The current 

ASTM voluntary standard references 

two types of hand held infant carriers: 

hand-held bassinets/cradles that incline 

10 degrees or less from horizontal and 

sit directly on the floor, and hand-held 

carrier seats that incline more than 10 

degrees from horizontal and are often 

also used as attachments to serve as 

infant car seats, strollers, or high chairs. 

The current ASTM voluntary standard 

defines ‘‘hand-held carrier seat’’ as a 

‘‘hand-held infant carrier having a seat 

back that is intended to be in a reclined 

position (more than 10° from 

horizontal),’’ and ‘‘hand-held bassinet/ 

cradle’’ is defined as ‘‘ freestanding 

product, with a rest/support surface to 

facilitate sleep (intended to be flat or up 

to 10° from horizontal), that sits directly 

on the floor, without legs or a stand, and 

has hand-holds or handle(s) intended to 

allow carrying an occupant whose torso 

is completely supported by the 

product.’’ Some of the requirements in 

F2050–12 are different for hand-held 

bassinets/cradles and hand-held infant 

carriers because the intended position of 

the occupant (lying supine vs. sitting 

reclined) and the product designs used 

to accommodate the occupant can create 

different hazards. A Moses basket is 

considered to be a freestanding product 

with a rest/support surface to facilitate 

sleep and typically has hand-holds or 

handle(s) intended to allow carrying an 

occupant. Moses baskets typically have 

semi-rigid sides. The Commission seeks 

comments on whether Moses baskets are 

or should be covered by this safety 

standard. The Commission specifically 

seeks comments on (1) whether the 

definition of ‘‘hand-held bassinet/ 

cradle’’ in ASTM F2050–12 includes 

Moses baskets, and (2) if Moses baskets 

are not covered by the safety standard 

but should be, how the present 

definition should be amended to more 

clearly cover Moses baskets. 

B. The Market 

Based on the 2005 survey conducted 

by American Baby Group titled, ‘‘2006 

Baby Products Tracking Study,’’ and 

annual birth data from the Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 

we estimate that approximately 2.1 

million infant car seats are sold in the 

United States each year. We do not 

know how many hand-held bassinets/ 

cradles are sold annually. Hand-held 

carrier seats and hand-held bassinets/ 

cradles are typically produced and/or 

marketed by juvenile product 

manufacturers and distributors, except 

for Moses baskets, a unique type of 

hand-held bassinet/cradle that is often 

marketed by bedding manufacturers and 

distributors. We estimate there are 

currently at least 43 suppliers of both 

types of hand-held infant carriers to the 

U.S. market, 11 of which are domestic 

manufacturers and 10 of which are 

domestic importers. We estimate that 20 

firms supply Moses basket-style handheld bassinets/cradles only, but the 

source of these carriers is unknown. 

There are also two foreign firms—a 

foreign manufacturer and an importer 

that import products from foreign 

companies and distributes them in the 

United States. 

The products of 13 of the 43 handheld infant carrier suppliers will likely 

be compliant with ASTM F2050–12 (6 

are Juvenile Products Manufacturers 

Association (JPMA) certified to F2050– 

09; 3 claim compliance with F2050; and 

4 have JPMA-certified strollers with 

hand-held infant carrier attachments).1

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

73356 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

including hand-held infant carriers, comply with all 

applicable ASTM standards as well. 

Of the remaining 30 firms supplying 

noncompliant hand-held infant carriers, 

the majority (25 firms) supply products 

that are newly covered due to the 

expanded scope of ASTM F2050–12 (20 

supply Moses baskets; 3 supply bassinet 

attachments for strollers; and 2 supply 

other types of bassinet-style carriers) to 

include hand-held bassinets/cradles. 

III. Incident Data 

The CPSC’s Directorate for 

Epidemiology notes that there have been 

242 incidents, occurring between 

January 1, 2007 and June 7, 2012, 

reported to the Commission regarding 

hand-held infant carriers. Of the 242 

incidents, there were 36 fatalities, 60 

nonfatal injuries, and 146 incidents 

where no injury occurred or was 

reported. 

A. Fatalities 

From January 1, 2007 through early 

June, 2012, there were 36 fatalities 

associated with hand-held infant 

carriers. The majority of the fatalities are 

attributed to the improper use or nonuse of the carrier’s restraint system. 

Five of the fatalities were caused by 

the infant carrier being placed in a 

hazardous environment, and therefore, 

these fatalities are considered to be nonproduct related. Two of these fatalities 

occurred when the infant carrier was 

placed atop a stove, which subsequently 

was ignited accidently. Another fatality 

was attributed to hyperthermia after an 

infant was left unattended in a carrier 

for an extended period of time, wrapped 

in multiple blankets, and left in a room 

with temperatures exceeding 90 degrees. 

In another of these five deaths, an infant 

in a carrier that was placed cross-wise 

inside a bassinet was able to tip the 

carrier into a reclined position, resulting 

in an asphyxiation death. The last of 

these five fatalities was the result of an 

infant suffocating on a blanket that was 

placed over his head while in the 

carrier. For an additional two fatalities, 

the evidence is insufficient to determine 

if there was any product involvement or 

the presence of any hazardous external 

circumstances. 

The remainder of the fatal incidents 

includes: 

• Nine children were strangled by the 

carrier’s harness chest clips or strap. In 

most of these incidents the infant was 

partially restrained in the seat with only 

the shoulder straps in place, with the 

crotch strap left unsecured, which 

allowed the infant to slide forward in 

the seat far enough to get caught at the 

throat by the chest clip that connects the 

two shoulder straps. 

• In one incident, the restraint straps 

were too tight and impaired the infant’s 

breathing, although no information 

regarding the placement of the straps 

was provided. 

• Seven children were left 

unrestrained in the carrier and found in 

a prone position, face down on the seat, 

or on a blanket, covers, and/or pillow. 

• Two children who had been left 

unrestrained in the carrier were found 

prone on the seat of the carrier, which 

had also tipped over. 

• Three children were reported to 

have been trapped in an overturned 

seat, although no information was 

provided about the use of the restraints 

or how the seat overturned in these 

incidents. 

• One fatality resulted from a fall 

from a carrier that was on a shopping 

cart but not equipped to attach to the 

cart. 

• Six additional deaths were 

associated with hand-held carriers, but 

there was insufficient information to 

determine the circumstances. 

B. Nonfatal Injuries 

From January 1, 2007 through early 

June 2012, 206 nonfatal incidents were 

reported. Of those, 60 incidents 

involved an injury, and 2 of those 

required hospitalization due to serious 

head injuries suffered from a fall from 

a carrier that was on top of a shopping 

cart. Bumps, bruises, abrasions, 

lacerations, allergic reactions and nearchoking episodes are the most common 

injuries reported in the remaining 58 

injury reports. No age was reported for 

28 percent of the injury incidents. For 

incidents where the age was reported, 1 

child was reported to be 13 months old, 

1 was reported to be 23 months old, and 

the rest were 12 months or younger. The 

remaining 146 incident reports indicate 

that no injury occurred or they fail to 

provide any information regarding 

injuries to the carrier occupant. 

However, many of the descriptions of 

the incidents suggest the potential for 

serious injury or death. 

C. Recalls 

There have been a total of three 

consumer-level recalls involving handheld carriers from January 1, 2007 

through June 7, 2012. 

One recall, involving 450,000 car 

seats/carriers manufactured from 

December 2004 through September 

2006, pertained to the carrier seat 

handle. The carrier handle could release 

unexpectedly, causing the seat to rotate 

forward in a manner that could result in 

the occupant of the carrier falling to the 

ground and suffering serious injuries. 

There were 679 incidents of the handle 

releasing unexpectedly, resulting in 160 

injuries reported to the CPSC and the 

manufacturer. The recall notice 

instructed consumers not to use the seat 

as a carrier until the repair kit offered 

by the manufacturer had been obtained 

and installed. (The modifications to the 

handle auto-lock test discussed in 

Section VI would address this hazard.) 

Another recall, conducted on 

December 18, 2009, involving 447,000 

infant car seat/carriers manufactured 

from January 6, 2008 to April 6, 2009, 

also pertained to the carrier handle. The 

seat handle could loosen and fall off, 

posing a fall hazard to the infant 

occupant of the seat. There were 77 

incidents of the child restraint handle 

fully or partially detaching from the car 

seat/carrier, resulting in three injuries, 

reported to the CPSC and the 

manufacturer. Consumers were 

instructed not to use the seat as a carrier 

until they had obtained and installed 

the repair kit offered by the 

manufacturer. (The carrying handle 

integrity test included in ASTM F2050– 

12, addresses this hazard). 

The third recall was conducted on 

November 4, 2010, and it involved 

23,000 infant car seats/carriers 

manufactured between April 2009 and 

May 2010. The harness chest clips could 

break, posing a fall hazard, and the 

broken pieces were small enough for an 

infant to swallow, which posed a 

choking hazard. There were four 

incidents of the chest clip breaking, 

resulting in three injuries reported to 

the CPSC and the manufacturer. The 

injuries that resulted from the clip 

breaking were minor lacerations and 

scratches to arms and a finger, and one 

report involved an infant placing the 

broken clip in his mouth. The recall 

notice instructed consumers to contact 

the manufacturer to request a free repair 

kit. (The restraint system test included 

in ASTM F2050–12 addresses this 

hazard.) 

IV. Hand-Held Carrier International 

Standards and the ASTM Voluntary 

Standard 

Section 104(b)(1)(A) of the CPSIA 

requires the Commission to consult 

representatives of ‘‘consumer groups, 

juvenile product manufacturers, and 

independent child product engineers 

and experts’’ to ‘‘examine and assess the 

effectiveness of any voluntary consumer 

product safety standards for durable 

infant or toddler products.’’ As a result 

of incidents and recalls of hand-held 

infant carriers in the 1990s, CPSC staff 

requested ASTM to develop voluntary 

requirements to address the hazards 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 73357 

related to handle breakage and handle 

lock failures. Through the ASTM 

process, we consulted with 

manufacturers, retailers, trade 

organizations, laboratories, consumer 

advocacy groups, consultants, and 

members of the public. The voluntary 

standard for hand-held infant carriers 

was first approved and published in 

August 2000, as ASTM F2050–00, 

Standard Consumer Safety Performance 

Specification for Hand-Held Infant 

Carriers. It has been revised five times 

since then. The current version, ASTM 

F2050–12, was approved on July 1, 

2012. 

In addition to reviewing the ASTM 

standard, we reviewed several 

international standards. 

A. International Standards 

We identified one international 

standard, EN 12790, European/British 

Standard for Child Care Articles— 

Reclined Cradles, which addresses 

hand-held infant carriers in a manner 

similar to ASTM F2050–12. However, 

reclined cradles are designed and 

intended for unattended sleep, and the 

European standard includes 

requirements that also pertain to that 

use pattern. One difference between EN 

12790 and ASTM F2050–12 is 

entrapment dimensions for holes and 

slot openings. The European standard 

permits dimensions for slot openings to 

be between 7 mm and 12 mm, while 

ASTM F–2050–12 allows dimensions of 

5 mm to 9.5 mm. We have concluded 

that the existing dimensions in the 

ASTM standard are anthropometrically 

appropriate and that there are no hazard 

patterns that would warrant 

modification of these dimensions. In 

addition, we concluded that the hazard 

patterns noted in the incidents do not 

warrant modification of the ASTM 

standard to address the requirements for 

flammability, surface chemicals, cords/ 

ribbons, cradle angles, and cradle 

strength/durability that appear in EN 

12790. Finally, we note that EN 12790 

includes requirements for folding 

cradles, which is a use pattern outside 

the scope of ASTM F2050–12. 

We reviewed several other 

international standards and a National 

Highway Safety Transportation 

Administration (NHTSA) standard that 

address requirements for restraint 

systems of products when used in motor 

vehicles, and we concluded that these 

standards do not address the incident 

hazard patterns associated with handheld infant carriers. These standards 

are: ECE 44 (European Provision for 

Restraining Devices for Child Occupants 

of Power-Driven Vehicles, JIS D 0401 

(Japanese Standard for Automotive 

Accessories—Child Restraints), AS/NZS 

1754:2010 (Australian/New Zealand 

Standard for Child Restraint Systems for 

Use in Motor Vehicles), and FMVSS No. 

213 (NHSTA Requirements for Child 

Restraint Systems Used in Motor 

Vehicles and Aircraft). 

B. The ASTM Voluntary Standard 

In response to incidents and recalls of 

hand-held infant carriers in the 1990s 

related to handle breakage and handle 

lock failures, CPSC requested ASTM to 

develop voluntary requirements to 

address the hazards. CPSC staff 

participated in ASTM subcommittee 

meetings and testing protocols in 

developing draft requirements. ASTM F 

2050, Standard Consumer Safety 

Performance Specification for HandHeld Infant Carriers was first approved 

and published in August 2000. ASTM 

has revised the standard four times 

since then, with the most current 

version ASTM F 2050–12, approved on 

July 1, 2012. Details regarding the 

changes in the voluntary standard 

through revisions in October, 2001, 

November, 2003, December, 2008, and 

October 2009, are provided at pages 30 

and 31 of the November 7, 2012, Staff 

Briefing Package. 

ASTM F2050–12 addresses many of 

the general hazards associated with 

durable nursery products, such as lead 

in paints, sharp edges/sharp points, 

small parts, wood part splinters, 

scissoring/shearing/pinching, openings/ 

entrapments, and toys. Specific 

requirements for labeling, handle 

integrity, handle auto-locking, and 

restraint systems are also included. 

The key provisions of the current 

ASTM hand-held infant carrier standard 

include: Definitions; general 

requirements; performance 

requirements; specific test methods; and 

requirements for marking, labeling, and 

instructional literature. 

Definitions. ASTM F2050–12 defines 

‘‘hand-held infant carrier’’ as a ‘‘free 

standing, rigid-sided product intended 

to carry an occupant whose torso is 

completely supported by the product to 

facilitate transportation by a caregiver 

by means of hand-holds or handles.’’ 

The definition of ‘‘hand-held infant 

carrier seat’’ is ‘‘a hand-held infant 

carrier having a seat back that is 

intended to be in a reclined position 

(more than 10° from horizontal).’’ The 

definition of ‘‘hand-held bassinet/ 

cradle’’ is a ‘‘freestanding product, with 

a horizontal rest/support surface to 

facilitate sleep (intended to be flat or up 

to 10 from horizontal), which sits 

directly on the floor, without legs or a 

stand, and has hand-holds or handle(s) 

intended to allow carrying an occupant 

whose torso is completely supported by 

the product.’’ 

General Requirements. ASTM F2050– 

12 contains general requirements that 

the product must meet, as well as 

mandated test methods that must be 

used to ensure that the product meets 

those requirements, including: 

• Restrictions on sharp points, small 

parts, lead paint, and wood parts; 

• Specifications to prevent scissoring, 

shearing, and pinching; 

• Requirements for toy accessory 

items, and the non-removal of protective 

components; 

• Specifications on openings 

(intended to prevent finger and toe 

entrapment), labeling (intended to 

prevent labels from being removed and 

ingested or aspirated on), and coil 

springs; and 

• Torque and tension tests for 

protective components. 

Performance Requirements and 

Specific Test Methods. ASTM F2050–12 

provides performance requirements that 

the product must meet, as well as 

mandated test methods that must be 

used to ensure that the product meets 

the performance requirement, including: 

• A carry handle auto-locking 

requirement (the carry handle must 

move unaided into the designated carry 

position or move unaided into a 

position that is obvious to the caregiver 

that the carry handle is not in the 

designated carry position); 

• A carry handle integrity 

requirement (a rigid carry handle that 

rotates in head-to-foot and foot-to-head 

directions must not break or unlatch on 

either or both sides when subject to the 

handle endurance test); 

• A restraint system requirement 

(hand held carrier seats not intended for 

use in motor vehicles must have a waist 

and crotch restraint while hand-held 

bassinets/cradles may not contain a 

restraint system); 

• Slip-resistance requirements; 

Marking, Labeling, and Instructional 

Literature. ASTM F2050–12 sets forth 

requirements for marking, labeling, and 

instructions that must accompany a 

hand-held carrier, including warnings 

regarding proper use of restraint straps, 

placement of the carrier on soft or 

elevated surfaces, and suffocation and 

strangulation hazards that may arise if 

restraint straps are not used properly 

and suffocation hazards that can arise 

when the carrier is placed on a soft 

surface. The warning label also advises 

caregivers never to leave a child 

unattended in the carrier. The standard 

also includes requirements and tests for 

the permanency of labels and warnings. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

73358 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

V. Assessment of Voluntary Standard 

ASTM F2050–12 

We considered the fatalities, injuries, 

and noninjury incidents associated with 

hand-held carriers, and we evaluated 

the voluntary standard to determine 

whether ASTM F2050–12 addresses the 

incidents or whether more stringent 

standards are required that would 

further reduce the risk of injury 

associated with these products. We 

discuss our assessment in this section, 

but our assessment does not include 

deaths and injuries associated with 

hand-held carriers where there was 

insufficient evidence to determine the 

circumstances. 

1. Hazardous Surroundings 

Five of the 36 fatalities reported, and 

12 of the 242 incidents reported 

involving a hand-held carrier were 

attributable to unsafe environments 

around the carrier. Two of the five 

fatalities resulted when the carrier was 

placed on top of a stove that later was 

ignited. In another of the fatalities, the 

infant died from hyperthermia after 

being left unattended in a carrier, 

wrapped in blankets, in a room where 

temperatures exceeded 90 degrees. In 

another fatality, the infant was placed in 

the carrier cross-wise inside a bassinet 

and asphyxiated when the carrier was 

tipped into a reclined position trapping 

the infant between the carrier and the 

interior of the bassinet. The fifth fatality 

was attributable to a suffocation in 

which a blanket was placed over the 

infants head while in the carrier. Risks 

due to hazardous surroundings are not 

attributable to the design or 

construction of the hand-held carriers. 

ASTM F 2050–12 includes product 

warnings that address the dangers of 

placing the product near the edges of 

counter tops or on elevated surfaces, 

and the warnings direct caregivers never 

to leave a child unattended in a carrier. 

We do not believe there are additional 

requirements that can be put into place 

in the standard to address this issue. 

2. Hazards Related to Accessories 

Issues related to accessories, such as 

toys, canopies, carrier seat covers, and 

head and body support devices were 

reported in 28 of the 242 (12 percent) 

reported incidents. In 27 of these 

incidents, the accessory was not 

supplied with the carrier, but was 

purchased separately by a caregiver. In 

the remaining incident, the accessory 

was an attached canopy. While there 

were no fatalities involving accessories, 

the incidents reported included: 

Choking on a device designed to attach 

a toy to the carrier handle; jamming an 

arm into the side of toy; breathing 

obstruction from canopy drooping onto 

childs face; and breaking and detaching 

small pieces from a pacifier and a 

pacifier holder. The current standard 

precludes hazardous sharp edges or 

points, as defined in 16 CFR 1500.48 

and 1500.49 before and after testing to 

the standard, and prohibits small parts, 

as defined in 16 CFR part 1501, before 

testing or liberated as a result of testing 

to the standard. The standard also 

requires that any toy accessories 

attached to, removable from, or sold 

with, an infant carrier, as well as their 

means of attachment must meet the 

applicable requirements of ASTM 

Consumer Safety Specification F963 

(now CPSC’s mandatory toy standard). 

We believe that these requirements are 

sufficient to address these hazards, and 

therefore we are not proposing any 

additional requirements at this time. 

3. Design Issues 

Twenty-eight of the 242 incident 

reports (12 percent) are attributed to the 

design of the carrier. Three of the 

incidents reported in this category were 

fatalities. Design issues are related to 

instability, sharp surfaces, unsafe infant 

posture when seated, and structural 

integrity. Although the three reported 

fatalities involve a child becoming 

trapped under an overturned seat, 

insufficient information was provided 

in these reports to determine what 

caused the seat to overturn. It is possible 

these tip overs could be related to the 

stability of the carrier when placed on 

tables, sofas, or chairs. However, there 

is insufficient incident data to support 

a conclusion that design issues were the 

cause of the fatalities or other incidents. 

Additionally, many carriers are 

designed to meet NHTSA requirements 

for occupant crashworthiness, and 

modification of the carrier to improve 

stability when used outside the vehicle 

might affect how the carrier integrates 

into the carrier base in the vehicle. For 

these reasons, we are not proposing any 

changes to address stability-related 

design issues at this time. 

In addition to stability, this hazard 

pattern includes occupant-positioning 

incidents. Six consumer complaints 

involve infant head slumping. However, 

we received no reports of fatalities or 

injuries resulting from infant head 

slumping. Because we are aware of no 

injuries resulting from this hazard, and 

because a revision of the standard to 

address angle of seat incline may 

implicate issues within NHTSA’s 

jurisdiction, we are not proposing any 

changes to address angle of seat incline 

at this time. 

Three consumer complaints state that 

mothers do not always pay appropriate 

attention to the way they swing carriers 

while an infant is in the seat. The 

complaints suggest that this movement 

may place the infant at risk for shaken 

baby syndrome. Because there are no 

injuries reported in connection with this 

scenario, and because no revision of the 

standard would likely address any 

potential risk of injury arising from the 

way a caregiver swings the carrier, we 

are not proposing any changes to 

address this issue at this time. 

4. Falls From Shopping Carts 

Incidents included one reported 

fatality and two reported injuries 

involving children who fell from 

shopping carts on which the carriers 

had been placed. The two injured 

children required hospitalization for 

serious head injuries suffered when they 

fell to the floor from a carrier that had 

been placed on a shopping cart. The risk 

associated with placing a child in a 

hand-held carrier on a shopping cart is 

addressed by ASTM 2372–11a, 

Standard for Consumer Safety 

Performance Specification for Shopping 

Carts, which was developed to address 

injuries to children associated with falls 

from shopping carts. This standard 

requires each shopping cart to have 

warning statements instructing the user 

not to use a personal infant carrier but 

instead to use the seat in the cart and 

to fasten the child securely into the seat. 

In addition, the standard requires 

retailers to provide additional safety 

information in the form of warning 

posters at the point of use. The warning 

label pertaining to safe use recently was 

revised and includes a pictogram 

concerning the use of hand-held carriers 

in the cart. This new label is included 

in this latest version, which was 

approved in January 2012. We do not 

believe that there are additional 

requirements that can be put in place in 

either ASTM 2372–11a or ASTM 

F2050–12 to address this issue. 

5. Fabric Issues 

In 15 of the 242 (6 percent) reported 

incidents, the injury related to the 

carrier fabric or padding. Incidents 

related to fabric include: allergic 

reactions to padding or items attached 

to padding; bruising from fabric 

stitching; and ingesting padding foam. 

This hazard pattern is not specific to 

this product. Because similar incidents 

occur with other durable products and 

are expected with any product with 

fabric or padding, we are not proposing 

any additional requirements to address 

fabric issues at this time. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 73359 

6. Other Product-Related Concerns 

In 10 of the 242 (4 percent) reported 

incidents, we were unable to identify a 

specific hazard pattern because 

insufficient information regarding the 

circumstances of the incident was 

provided. Six of these incidents resulted 

in fatalities. Most of these reports 

indicate possible improper use of the 

carrier or another contributing factor, 

such as soft bedding. For example, one 

case involves an infant sleeping in the 

carrier with a blanket or covering that 

may have resulted in suffocation. 

However, because we are unable to 

identify a specific hazard pattern in 

incidents with insufficient information, 

we are not proposing additional 

requirements at this time. 

7. Other Unknown Issues 

Two fatalities could not be attributed 

to design or performance of the handheld carrier. We are in the process of 

investigating both deaths, and once 

these investigations are complete, 

further review by CPSC staff will be 

warranted to determine if the design or 

construction of the hand-held carrier 

contributed to the deaths. If we 

conclude that the design or construction 

of the hand-held carrier contributed to 

either of these deaths, we will 

determine whether additional 

requirements are necessary. Because the 

involvement of the product in these 

incidents is unclear, we cannot propose 

additional requirements in the absence 

of information supporting the 

conclusion that these two incidents 

were attributed to the design or 

performance of the hand-held carrier. 

VI. Description of Proposed Changes to 

ASTM Standard 

The proposed rule would create a new 

part 1225 titled, ‘‘Safety Standard for 

Hand Held Carriers.’’ The proposed rule 

would establish ASTM F2050–12, 

‘‘Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Hand-Held Infant 

Carriers,’’ as a consumer product safety 

standard, but with certain changes. We 

are proposing two changes to ASTM 

F2050–12. One change would add a 

strangulation warning label to be affixed 

to the outer surface of the cushion or 

padding of a hand-held carrier seat in or 

adjacent to the area where the childs 

head would rest. The warning label for 

hand-held carrier seats that are intended 

to be used as restraints in motor 

vehicles would include a pictogram, 

while the warning label for hand-held 

carrier seats not intended to be used as 

restraints in motor vehicles would not 

include the pictogram because these 

seats do not have the chest clips 

depicted in the pictogram. 

The other change would affect the test 

method for ensuring that the carrier will 

not rotate and spill an unrestrained 

infant when a caregiver picks up the 

carrier and the handle is not locked in 

the carry position. The test method in 

ASTM F2050–12 requires the tester to 

use a standard CAMI, Mark II 6-month 

infant dummy as an infant surrogate. 

The proposed change would require the 

tester to use an aluminum cylinder 

designed as a surrogate for a 6-month 

old infant, in lieu of the CAMI dummy, 

because the CAMI dummy could be 

wedged into the seat padding or 

otherwise manipulated, such that it 

does not fall out during the lift test 

when it otherwise should fall. Further, 

the ability to pass or fail the test based 

on friction or placement of the CAMI 

affects the consistency and repeatability 

of the test results. 

We describe these proposed changes 

in the following section. 

A. Improper Restraint Usage 

Incorrect use or nonuse of the harness 

straps were involved in 81 of the 242 

reported incidents and resulted in 19 of 

the 36 fatalities related to hand-held 

carriers from January 1, 2007 to early 

June 2012. Among these 19 fatalities, 

nine strangulation incidents occurred 

due to loose or partially buckled harness 

straps. In six of the fatalities involving 

nonuse or improper use of harness 

straps, the child strangled on the chest 

clips, while in two incidents children 

strangled on loose straps. In seven 

incidents, children who were not 

restrained in the carrier moved 

themselves into a compromising 

position, resulting in asphyxia. Two 

fatalities occurred when unrestrained 

infants became trapped under an 

overturned carrier. In one fatality, straps 

that were too tight impaired the child’s 

breathing while in the other, it is 

unclear how the harness strap 

contributed to the child’s death. 

ASTM F2050–12 includes product 

warnings that address the dangers of 

leaving a child unattended in the 

carrier, leaving a child in a carrier with 

loose or unfastened harness straps, and 

putting the carrier on a soft surface 

where it can roll over and suffocate a 

child. The warnings are required to be 

‘conspicuous,’ i.e., visible when the 

carrier is in the recommended use 

position to a person standing near the 

infant carrier in any one position 

around the carrier but not necessarily 

visible from all positions. This warning 

statement attempts to address 

suffocation, strangulation, and fall 

hazards. However, a caregiver may not 

encounter the label during regular use of 

the carrier. 

We propose a new strangulation 

warning label, placed where a caregiver 

is expected to notice it during regular 

interaction with the carrier and the 

infant, which includes a pictogram 

depicting proper and improper harness 

use and that states: ‘WARNING– 

Children have STRANGLED in loose or 

partially buckled harness straps. Fully 

restrain the child even when carrier is 

used outside the vehicle.’ An ASTM 

task group, with the assistance of CPSC 

staff, developed several different 

pictorial symbols that were presented to 

an audience of 159 people. More than 

95 percent of the participants who 

reviewed the recommended pictogram 

interpreted it correctly. We believe the 

warning label with the pictogram will 

improve noticeability and 

comprehension of the risk. 

B. Handle Issues 

Handles breaking, detaching, or 

failing to lock in the carry position were 

reported in 55 of the 242 incidents. 

Some of these incidents resulted in 

injuries, such as a lacerated lip, bruises, 

and a cranial hemorrhage, when the 

carrier and/or the child fell to the 

ground. We believe that many of the 

incidents attributable to the failure of 

the handle to lock are the result of the 

handle appearing to be in a locked 

position when the caregiver lifts the 

carrier. We believe that the incidents in 

which the handle itself breaks or 

detaches from the carrier are attributable 

to manufacturing or assembly errors. 

The current voluntary standard 

contains a handle preconditioning cycle 

test, followed by a static hang test, to 

assess handle lock stability and 

integrity. The handle lock impact test is 

designed to test the handle and handle 

lock integrity to reduce the number of 

fall injuries. This test is conducted at 

the conclusion of the static hang test 

and consists of dropping a hanging 

weight at the end of the carrier. The 

hanging weight simulates dynamic 

loads placed on the handle and handle 

lock while a caregiver walks with an 

infant in the carrier. 

The handle auto-lock test helps 

ensure that when a caregiver picks up 

the carrier with the handle out of the 

locked position, the carrier will not 

rotate and spill an unrestrained infant. 

This is accomplished by requiring the 

carrier handle to have an auto-lock 

feature, or, when not locked in the carry 

position, to fall to a position so it is 

obvious to the caregiver that the handle 

is not in the carry position. If neither 

condition is met, then the handle must 

lock into the carry position or another 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

73360 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

2U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 

National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital 

Statistics System, ‘‘Births: Final Data for 2009,’’ 

National Vital Statistics Reports Volume 60, 

Number 1 (November 2011): Table I. Number of 

births in 2009 is rounded from 4,130,665. 

position, such that when the carrier is 

lifted by the handle, the infant will not 

fall out. 

The existing handle auto-lock test 

uses a standard CAMI, Mark II 6-month 

infant dummy during the lift test. When 

we tested one carrier, the CAMI became 

wedged into the seat padding in such a 

way that the CAMI did not fall out 

during the lift test when an unrestrained 

infant in this position likely would fall 

from the carrier. We also found that 

CAMI placement in the carrier could be 

manipulated to achieve the desired 

results. For example, placing a CAMI 

with its back high in the seat makes the 

carrier more likely to pass the test, 

while placing a CAMI lower in the seat 

may make the carrier more likely to fail. 

Thus, friction or the placement of the 

CAMI affects the consistency and 

repeatability of the test. 

To resolve these CAMI-related test 

issues, we conducted the auto-lock test 

using an aluminum cylinder designed as 

a surrogate for a 6-month-old infant in 

lieu of the CAMI dummy. This change 

resulted in consistent test results 

because the cylinder does not wedge 

into the carrier padding like the CAMI 

dummy, and placement of the cylinder 

is less likely to affect the outcome of the 

test. 

We propose modifying ASTM F2050 

to require conducting the auto-lock test 

with the surrogate cylinder instead of 

the infant CAMI dummy. The surrogate 

cylinder is modeled from the torso of a 

6-month-old child, and it is also used in 

the bassinet segmented mattress test we 

recently proposed in the NPR for 

bassinets and cradles. 77 FR 64055. 

Further, EN 12790 European/British 

Standard for Child Care Articles— 

Reclined Cradles, uses a similar 

cylinder to conduct their tip test for the 

same products. 

VII. 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). To allow time for handheld carriers to come into compliance, 

we propose that the standard become 

effective 6 months after publication of 

the final rule in the Federal Register. We 

invite comment on how long it will take 

manufacturers to come into compliance. 

VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

A. Introduction 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 

5 U.S.C. 601-612, requires agencies to 

consider the impact of proposed rules 

on small entities, including small 

businesses. Section 603 of the RFA 

requires that the Commission prepare an 

initial regulatory flexibility analysis and 

make it available to the public for 

comment when the notice of proposed 

rulemaking is published. The initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) 

must describe the impact of the 

proposed rule on small entities and 

identify any alternatives that may 

reduce the impact. Specifically, the 

IRFA must contain: 

• A description of, and where 

feasible, an estimate of the number of 

small entities to which the proposed 

rule will apply; 

• A description of the reasons why 

action by the agency is being 

considered; 

• A succinct statement of the 

objectives of, and legal basis for, the 

proposed rule; 

• A description of the projected 

reporting, recordkeeping, and other 

compliance requirements of the 

proposed rule, including an estimate of 

the classes of small entities subject to 

the requirements, and the type of 

professional skills necessary for the 

preparation of reports or records; and 

• An identification, to the extent 

possible, of all relevant federal rules 

that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict 

with the proposed rule. 

B. The Market 

The majority of hand-held infant 

carriers are produced and/or marketed 

by juvenile product manufacturers and 

distributors. A potential exception is the 

Moses basket (whose inclusion in the 

scope as a type of hand-held bassinet or 

cradle is under consideration by the 

Commission), which are often marketed 

by bedding manufacturers and 

distributors. The Commission estimates 

that currently, there are at least 43 

suppliers of hand-held infant carriers to 

the U.S. market. Eleven are domestic 

manufacturers, and 10 are domestic 

importers. There are also two foreign 

firms—a foreign manufacturer and an 

importer that imports products from 

foreign companies and distributes them 

from outside of the United States. An 

additional 20 domestic firms supply 

Moses basket bedding, along with Moses 

baskets, whose source is unknown. 

Hand-held infant carriers from six of 

the 43 firms have been certified as 

compliant with ASTM F2050 by the 

JPMA, the major U.S. trade association 

that represents juvenile product 

manufacturers and importers. Three 

firms claim compliance with F2050; and 

four have JPMA-certified strollers with 

hand-held infant carrier attachments. It 

is assumed that the hand-held infant 

carriers supplied by all 13 of these firms 

will be in compliance with the 

voluntary standard. Of the remaining 30 

firms supplying noncompliant handheld infant carriers, the majority (25 

firms) supply products that are newly 

covered due to the expanded scope of 

ASTM F2050-12 (20 supply Moses 

baskets, 3 supply bassinet attachments 

for strollers, and 2 supply other types of 

bassinet-style carriers). 

The market data available is limited to 

infant car seats, which represented 

nearly the entire hand-held infant 

carrier market under prior versions of 

ASTM F2050. According to a 2005 

survey conducted by the American Baby 

Group (2006 Baby Products Tracking 

Study), 68 percent of new mothers own 

infant car seats. Approximately 25 

percent of infant car seats were handed 

down or purchased secondhand. Thus, 

about 75 percent of infant car seats were 

acquired new. This suggests annual 

sales of about 2.1 million infant car 

seats (.68 × .75 × 4.1 million births per 

year).2 These 2.1 million infant car seats 

represent the minimum number of units 

sold per year that might be affected by 

the proposed handheld infant carrier 

standard. It is unknown how many 

Moses baskets and other bassinet/ 

cradle-style carriers are sold annually. 

C. Reason for Agency Action and Legal 

Basis for Proposed Rule 

The Danny Keysar Child Product 

Safety Notification Act, section 104 of 

the CPSIA, requires the CPSC to 

promulgate a mandatory standard for 

hand-held infant carriers that is 

substantially the same as, or more 

stringent than, the voluntary standard. 

CPSC worked closely with ASTM to 

develop the new requirements and test 

procedures that have been added to the 

voluntary standard since 2010. These 

new requirements address several 

known hazard patterns and will help to 

reduce injuries and deaths in hand-held 

carriers, and they have resulted in the 

current voluntary standard, F2050-12, 

upon which the proposed rule is based. 

However, the Commission proposes 

adding one new requirement to F2050- 

12, as well as modifying the 

methodology for the existing handle 

auto-lock test. The new requirement 

would mandate a new warning label, as 

described in Section VI (A), which 

addresses strangulation and suffocation 

hazards that have occurred as a result of 

incorrect or nonuse of harness straps. 

The modification proposed by the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 73361 

Commission is that an aluminum 

cylinder, designed as a surrogate for a 6- 

month old infant, be used in lieu of the 

CAMI dummy in the handle auto-lock 

test. This proposed change would result 

in consistent test results because the 

cylinder does not wedge into the carrier 

padding like the CAMI dummy, and 

placement of the cylinder is less likely 

to affect the outcome of the test. 

D. Requirements of the Proposed Rule 

The Commission proposes adopting 

the voluntary ASTM standard for handheld infant carriers (F2050-12), with a 

new warning label requirement, and a 

modification of the handle auto-lock 

test. Some of the more significant 

requirements of the current voluntary 

standard for hand-held infant carriers 

(ASTM F2050-12) are listed below: 

• Carry handle integrity—a series of 

endurance and durability tests are 

intended to ensure that rigid, adjustable 

handles do not break or unlock during 

use. 

• Carry handle auto-locking— 

intended to address incidents that have 

occurred when the rigid, adjustable 

handles switched positions 

unexpectedly. 

• Restraints—intended to minimize 

the fall hazard associated with inclined 

hand-held carriers while simultaneously 

minimizing the potential for injury or 

death in flat bassinet/cradle products 

where restraints can pose a 

strangulation hazard. 

• Slip resistance—intended to 

prevent slipping when the hand-held 

infant carrier is placed on a slightly 

inclined surface (10 degrees). 

The voluntary standard also includes: 

(1) Torque and tension tests to ensure 

that components cannot be removed; (2) 

requirements for several hand-held 

infant carrier features to prevent 

entrapment and cuts (minimum and 

maximum opening size, coverage of 

exposed coil springs, small parts, 

hazardous sharp edges or points, 

smoothness of wood parts, and edges 

that can scissor, shear, or pinch); (3) 

marking and labeling requirements; (4) 

requirements for the permanency and 

adhesion of labels; (5) requirements for 

instructional literature; and (6) toy 

accessory requirements. ASTM F2050– 

12 includes no reporting or 

recordkeeping requirements. The 

Commission proposes adding a new 

warning label content and placement 

requirement and using the more 

appropriate cylinder surrogate for the 

handle auto-lock testing. 

The carry handle auto-locking 

requirement applies only to hand-held 

infant carriers that are rigid, adjustable, 

rotate about a singular axis, and lock 

into the manufacturer’s designated carry 

position; therefore, many suppliers, 

most notably Moses basket suppliers, 

would not be affected. Several models of 

hand-held infant carriers with these 

types of handles would be able to pass 

the revised test without modifying their 

product(s). The simplest and most 

effective way to meet the requirement is 

to add auto-lock positions close to the 

one intended for use. This would 

prevent the handle from moving so far 

out of position and spilling the child 

from the carrier. While redesign would 

probably not be necessary, the hard 

tools used to manufacture the handle’s 

lock positions would need to be 

modified. These hard tools are usually 

modified by an outside firm, which 

means that production would cease and, 

unless the firm maintains an alternating 

production schedule, could result in 

significant downtime for the firm’s 

production process. 

The revised warning would change 

the size, location, wording, and 

presentation to highlight better the 

dangers associated with only partially 

buckling children into hand-held 

carriers. A pictogram is included as part 

of the modified warning for hand-held 

carrier seats intended to be used as 

restraints in motor vehicles. The 

warning would be required on the 

product itself, as well as within the 

product’s instructional literature. 

Changes to warning labels are not 

expected to have a significant impact on 

suppliers. Typically, warning labels that 

are placed on fabric, such as the revised 

strangulation warning, are less costly 

than those used on plastic or metal. 

E. Other Federal or State Rules 

The Commission is in the process of 

implementing sections 14(a)(2) and 

14(i)(2) of the Consumer Product Safety 

Act (CPSA), as amended by the CPSIA. 

Section 14(a)(2) of the CPSA requires 

every manufacturer of a children’s 

product that is subject to a children’s 

product safety rule to certify, based on 

third party testing, that the product 

complies with all applicable safety 

rules. Section 14(i)(2) of the CPSA 

requires the Commission to establish 

protocols and standards (i) for ensuring 

that a children’s product is tested 

periodically and when there has been a 

material change in the product, (ii) for 

the testing of representative samples to 

ensure continued compliance, (iii) for 

verifying that a product tested by a 

conformity assessment body complies 

with applicable safety rules, and (iv) for 

safeguarding against the exercise of 

undue influence on a conformity 

assessment body by a manufacturer or 

private labeler. 

Because hand-held infant carriers will 

be subject to a mandatory standard, they 

will also be subject to the third party 

testing requirements of section 14(a)(2) 

of the CPSA when the mandatory 

standard and the notice of requirements 

become effective. 

F. Impact of the Proposal on Small 

Business 

There are approximately 43 firms 

currently known to be marketing handheld infant carriers in the United States. 

Under U.S. Small Business 

Administration (SBA) guidelines, a 

manufacturer of hand-held infant 

carriers is small if it has 500 or fewer 

employees, and importers and 

wholesalers are considered small if they 

have 100 or fewer employees. Based on 

these guidelines, 29 are small firms—6 

domestic manufacturers, 4 domestic 

importers, and 19 firms supplying 

Moses baskets whose supply source is 

unknown. The remaining firms are five 

large domestic manufacturers, six large 

domestic importers, one foreign 

manufacturer, one foreign importer, and 

one large firm supplying Moses baskets 

from an unknown source. There may be 

additional unknown small hand-held 

infant carrier suppliers operating in the 

U.S. market. 

Small Manufacturers. The expected 

impact on small manufacturers of the 

proposed standard will differ based on 

whether their hand-held infant carriers 

are already compliant with F2050-09. 

Firms whose hand-held infant carriers 

meet the requirements of F2050–09 are 

likely to continue to comply with the 

voluntary standard as new versions are 

published. In addition, they are likely to 

meet any new standard within 6 months 

of approval because this is the amount 

of time JPMA allows for products in 

their certification program to shift to a 

new standard. Many of these firms are 

active in the ASTM standard 

development process, and compliance 

with the voluntary standard is part of an 

established business practice. Therefore, 

it is likely that firms supplying handheld infant carriers that comply with 

ASTM F2050–09 (which went into 

effect for JPMA certification purposes in 

April 2010) would also likely comply 

with F2050–12 by March 2013, even in 

the absence of a mandatory standard. It 

should be noted, however, that because 

the scope of F2050-09 is more limited 

than the scope of F2050–12, only firms 

supplying infant car seats would be 

expected to have developed a pattern of 

compliance. However, staff believes that 

firms that manufacture JPMA-certified 

strollers with attachments that can be 

used separately as hand-held carriers 

will also meet ASTM F2050–12 by 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

73362 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

3Hand-held infant carrier suppliers already must 

third party test their products to the lead and 

phthalate requirements. Therefore, these costs are 

left out of the analysis above. 

March 2013; having developed a pattern 

of compliance for strollers, they would 

likely choose to meet any related ASTM 

standards as well. 

Given these considerations, it is 

unlikely that the direct impact on 

manufacturers whose products are 

likely to meet the requirements of 

ASTM F2050–12 (four of six small 

domestic manufacturers) will be 

significant. Modifying warning labels 

and updating instructional literature is 

a small cost for most firms. It is possible 

that one or more firms might have to 

modify their carry handles to continue 

to pass the auto-locking test, but this 

would most likely result in modifying 

their hard tools to add locking positions, 

rather than a complete product redesign. 

Meeting ASTM F2050–12’s 

requirements could necessitate product 

redesign for at least some hand-held 

infant carriers not believed to be 

compliant with F2050–09 (two of six 

small domestic manufacturers), 

regardless of the proposed 

modifications. A redesign would be 

minor if most of the changes involve 

adding straps and fasteners or using 

different mesh or fabric, but the costs 

could be more significant if changes to 

the frame are required, including 

changes to the handles. Some firms have 

estimated product redesigns, including 

engineering time, prototype 

development, tooling, and other 

incidental costs to reach approximately 

$500,000. Consequently, the proposed 

rule could potentially have a significant 

direct impact on small manufacturers 

whose products do not conform to 

F2050–09. However, because most 

products would probably not need to be 

completely redesigned, actual costs are 

likely to be lower than the $500,000 

level, and any direct impact may be 

mitigated if costs are treated as new 

product expenses that can be amortized. 

It is possible that one or both of the 

firms whose hand-held infant carriers 

are neither certified as compliant, nor 

claim compliance with F2050–09, in 

fact, are compliant with the standard. 

The Commission has identified many 

such cases with other products. To the 

extent that some of these firms may 

supply compliant hand-held infant 

carriers and have developed a pattern of 

compliance with the voluntary 

standard, the direct impact of the 

proposed standard will be less 

significant than described above. 

In addition to the direct impact of the 

proposed standard described above, 

there are indirect impacts. These 

impacts are considered indirect because 

they do not arise directly as a 

consequence of the hand-held infant 

carrier rule’s requirements. Nonetheless, 

they could be significant. Once the rule 

becomes final and the notice of 

requirements is in effect, all 

manufacturers will be subject to the 

additional costs associated with the 

third party testing and certification 

requirements. This will include any 

physical and mechanical test 

requirements specified in the final rule; 

lead and phthalates testing is already 

required, and hence, it is not included 

here.3

Based on durable nursery product 

industry input and confidential 

business information supplied for the 

development of the third party testing 

rule, testing to the ASTM voluntary 

standard could cost $500–$1,000 per 

model sample. Testing overseas could 

potentially reduce some testing costs, 

but that may not always be practical. 

On average, each small domestic 

manufacturer supplies two different 

models of hand-held infant carriers to 

the U.S. market annually. Therefore, if 

third party testing were conducted every 

year on a single sample for each model, 

third party testing costs for each 

manufacturer would be about $1,000– 

$2,000 annually. Based on a review of 

firm revenues, the impact of third party 

testing to ASTM F2050–12 is unlikely to 

be significant if only one hand-held 

infant carrier sample per model is 

required. However, if more than one 

sample would be needed to meet the 

testing requirements, it is possible that 

third party testing costs could have a 

significant impact on one or more of the 

small manufacturers. 

Small Importers. Importers of handheld infant carriers would need to find 

an alternate source if their existing 

supplier does not come into compliance 

with the requirements of the proposed 

rule, which may be the case with all 

four small importers of hand-held infant 

carriers, none of which is believed to be 

in compliance with F2050–09. Some 

could respond to the rule by 

discontinuing the import of their 

noncomplying hand-held infant carriers, 

possibly discontinuing the product line 

altogether. However, the impact of such 

a decision could be mitigated by 

replacing the noncompliant hand-held 

infant carriers with a compliant 

alternative. Deciding to import an 

alternative product would be a 

reasonable and realistic way to offset 

any lost revenue. 

As is the case with manufacturers, all 

importers will be subject to third party 

testing and certification requirements, 

and consequently, will experience costs 

similar to those for manufacturers if 

their supplying foreign firm(s) does not 

perform third party testing. The 

resulting costs could have a significant 

impact on a few small importers that 

must perform the testing themselves if 

more than one sample per model is 

required. 

Moses Basket Suppliers. There are 19 

small firms supplying Moses baskets to 

the U.S. market. Most of these firms also 

supply bedding; some of them 

manufacture the bedding, while others 

act as importers. The Commission has 

been unable to determine the source of 

the Moses baskets themselves, although 

it is likely that most sellers purchase 

them from other suppliers, either 

foreign or domestic. Because these 

products are recent potential additions 

to the scope of ASTM F2050, it is 

unlikely that any of them has been 

designed to comply with this standard. 

However, it is possible that many might 

be able to comply with the standard 

with minimal modifications. Moses 

baskets generally do not use restraints, 

so the biggest changes might be the 

addition of warnings and instructional 

literature. Alternatively, Moses basket 

suppliers could remove themselves from 

the scope of the proposed rule by 

removing the handles from their 

products. Because most Moses baskets 

come with warnings against carrying an 

infant in the basket, this would be a 

reasonable change for suppliers to make. 

As with manufacturers and importers, 

all Moses basket suppliers within the 

scope of the proposed rule will be 

subject to third party testing and 

certification requirements, and 

consequently, they could experience 

testing costs if their supplying firm(s) 

does not perform third party testing. 

Because Moses baskets would not be 

subject to most of the mechanical tests 

in the proposed standard, it is expected 

that third party testing costs, at most, 

will be half that of other types of handheld infant carriers, or approximately 

$250–$500 per model sample. The 

resulting costs could have a significant 

impact on a few small firms that must 

perform the testing themselves, even if 

only one sample per model is required. 

G. Alternatives 

Under the Danny Keysar Child 

Product Safety Notification Act, one 

alternative that would reduce the 

impact on small entities is to make the 

voluntary standard mandatory with no 

modifications. Doing so would 

eliminate the impact on the four small 

manufacturers with compliant products. 

However, because of the number and 

severity of the incidents associated with 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 73363 

falls and restraints, staff does not 

recommend this alternative. 

A second alternative would be to set 

an effective date later than the proposed 

6 months, which is generally considered 

sufficient time for suppliers to come 

into compliance with a proposed rule. 

Setting a later effective date would 

allow suppliers additional time to 

modify and/or develop compliant handheld infant carriers and spread the 

associated costs over a longer period of 

time. 

The Commission invites comments 

describing the possible impact of this 

rule on manufacturers and importers, as 

well as comments containing other 

information describing how this rule 

will affect small businesses. 

IX. Environmental Considerations 

The Commission’s regulations address 

whether we are required to prepare an 

environmental assessment or an 

environmental impact statement. These 

regulations provide a categorical 

exclusion for certain CPSC actions that 

normally have ‘‘little or no potential for 

affecting the human environment.’’ 

Among those actions are rules or safety 

standards for consumer products. 16 

CFR 1021.5(c)(1). The proposed rule 

falls within the categorical exclusion. 

X. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This proposed rule contains 

information collection requirements that 

are subject to public comment and 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 

3501–3521). In this document, pursuant 

to 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D), we set forth: 

• A title for the collection of 

information; 

• A summary of the collection of 

information; 

• A brief description of the need for 

the information and the proposed use of 

the information; 

• A description of the likely 

respondents and proposed frequency of 

response to the collection of 

information; 

• An estimate of the burden that shall 

result from the collection of 

information; and 

• Notice that comments may be 

submitted to the OMB. 

Title: Safety Standard for Hand-Held 

Infant Carriers. 

Description: The proposed rule would 

require each hand-held infant carrier to 

comply with ASTM F2050–12, Standard 

Consumer Safety Specification for 

Hand-Held Infant Carriers. Sections of 

ASTM F2050–12 contain requirements 

for marking, labeling, and instructional 

literature. These requirements fall 

within the definition of ‘‘collection of 

information,’’ as defined in 44 U.S.C. 

3502(3). 

Description of Respondents: Persons 

who manufacture or import hand-held 

infant carriers. 

Estimated Burden: We estimate the 

burden of this collection of information 

as follows: 

TABLE 1—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN

16 CFR Section Number of 

respondents 

Frequency of 

responses 

Total annual 

responses 

Hours per 

response 

Total burden 

hours 

1221 ..................................................................................... 43 4 172 1 172 

Our estimates are based on the 

following: 

Section 8.1 of ASTM F 2050–12 

requires that the name of the 

manufacturer, distributor, or seller, and 

either the place of business (city, state, 

and mailing address, including zip 

code) or telephone number, or both, to 

be marked clearly and legibly on each 

product and its retail package. Section 

8.2 of ASTM F 2050–12 requires a code 

mark or other means that identifies the 

date (month and year, as a minimum) of 

manufacture. 

There are 43 known entities 

supplying hand-held infant carriers to 

the U.S. market. All 43 firms are 

assumed to use labels already on both 

their products and their packaging, but 

they might need to make some 

modifications to their existing labels. 

The estimated time required to make 

these modifications is about 1 hour per 

model. Each entity supplies an average 

of four different models of hand-held 

infant carriers; therefore, the estimated 

burden associated with labels is 1 hour 

per model × 43 entities × 4 models per 

entity = 172 hours. We estimate the 

hourly compensation for the time 

required to create and update labels is 

$27.55 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 

‘‘Employer Costs for Employee 

Compensation,’’ March 2012, Table 9, 

total compensation for all sales and 

office workers in goods-producing 

private industries: http://www.bls.gov/ 

ncs/). Therefore, the estimated annual 

cost to industry associated with the 

labeling requirements is $4,738.60 

($27.55 per hour × 172 hours = 

$4,738.60). There are no operating, 

maintenance, or capital costs associated 

with the collection. 

Section 9.1 of ASTM F2050–12 

requires instructions to be supplied 

with the product. Hand-held infant 

carriers are products that generally 

require installation or assembly, and 

products sold without such information 

would not be able to compete 

successfully with products supplying 

this information. Under the OMB’s 

regulations (5 CFR 1320.3(b)(2)), the 

time, effort, and financial resources 

necessary to comply with a collection of 

information that would be incurred by 

persons in the ‘‘normal course of their 

activities’’ are excluded from a burden 

estimate, where an agency demonstrates 

that the disclosure activities required to 

comply are ‘‘usual and customary.’’ 

Therefore, because we are unaware of 

hand-held infant carriers that generally 

require installation or some assembly 

but lack any instructions to the user 

about such installation or assembly, we 

estimate tentatively that there are no 

burden hours associated with section 

9.1 of ASTM F 2050–12 because any 

burden associated with supplying 

instructions with hand-held infant 

carriers would be ‘‘usual and 

customary’’ and not within the 

definition of ‘‘burden’’ under the OMB’s 

regulations. 

Based on this analysis, the proposed 

standard for hand-held infant carriers 

would impose a burden to industry of 

172 hours at a cost of $4,728.60 

annually. 

In compliance with the PRA (44 

U.S.C. 3507(d)), we have submitted the 

information collection requirements of 

this rule to the OMB for review. 

Interested persons are requested to 

submit comments regarding information 

collection by January 9, 2013, to the 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, OMB (see the ADDRESSES section 

at the beginning of this notice). 

Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), 

we invite comments on: 

• Whether the collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the CPSC’s functions, 

including whether the information will 

have practical utility; 

• The accuracy of the CPSC’s estimate 

of the burden of the proposed collection 

of information, including the validity of 

the methodology and assumptions used; 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

73364 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

• Ways to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; 

• Ways to reduce the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents, including the use of 

automated collection techniques, when 

appropriate, and other forms of 

information technology; and 

• The estimated burden hours 

associated with label modification, 

including any alternative estimates. 

XI. Preemption 

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

2075(a), provides that where a consumer 

product safety standard is in effect and 

applies to a product, no state or political 

subdivision of a state may either 

establish or continue in effect a 

requirement dealing with the same risk 

of injury unless the state requirement is 

identical to the federal standard. Section 

26(c) of the CPSA also provides that 

states or political subdivisions of states 

may apply to the 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. 

XII. Certification and Notice of 

Requirements (NOR) 

Section 14(a)(2) of the CPSA imposes 

the requirement that children’s products 

subject to a children’s product safety 

rule under the CPSA, or to a similar 

rule, ban, standard, or regulation under 

any other act enforced by the 

Commission, must be certified as 

complying with all applicable CPSCenforced requirements. 15 U.S.C. 

2063(a)(2). For children’s products, such 

certification must be based 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. As discussed in section I 

of this preamble, section 104(b)(1)(B) of 

the CPSIA refers to standards issued 

under this section as ‘‘consumer 

product safety standards.’’ Accordingly, 

a safety standard for hand-held infant 

carriers issued under section 104 of the 

CPSA is a consumer product safety rule 

that is subject to the testing and 

certification requirements of section 14 

of the CPSA. Because hand-held infant 

carriers are children’s products, they 

must be tested by a third party 

conformity assessment body whose 

accreditation has been accepted by the 

CPSC. Notices of requirements (NORs) 

provide the criteria and process for our 

acceptance of accreditation of third 

party conformity assessment bodies. 

On May 24, 2012, the Commission 

published in the Federal Register the 

proposed rule, Requirements Pertaining 

to Third Party Conformity Assessment 

Bodies, 77 FR 331086, which, when 

finalized, would establish the general 

requirements and criteria concerning 

testing laboratories. These include the 

requirements and procedures for CPSC 

acceptance of the accreditation of a 

laboratory to test children’s products in 

support of the certification required by 

section 14(a)(2) of the CPSA. The 

proposed rule, at 16 CFR part 1112, 

Requirements Pertaining to Third Party 

Conformity Assessment Bodies, lists the 

children’s product safety rules for 

which the CPSC has published NORs for 

laboratories. In this document, the 

Commission is proposing to amend the 

list in 16 CFR part 1112, once that rule 

becomes final, to include the hand-held 

infant carrier standard, once finalized, 

along with the other children’s product 

safety rules for which the CPSC has 

issued NORs. 

Laboratories applying for acceptance 

as a CPSC-accepted third party 

conformity assessment body to test to 

the new standard for hand-held infant 

carriers would be required to meet the 

third party conformity assessment body 

accreditation requirements in 16 CFR 

part 1112, Requirements Pertaining to 

Third Party Conformity Assessment 

Bodies, once that rule becomes final. 

When a laboratory meets the 

requirements as a CPSC-accepted third 

party conformity assessment body, it 

can apply to the CPSC to have 16 CFR 

part 1225, Safety Standard for HandHeld Infant Carriers included in its 

scope of accreditation of CPSC safety 

rules listed for the laboratory on the 

CPSC Web site at: http://www.cpsc.gov/ 

labsearch. 

The final NOR will base the CPSC 

laboratory accreditation requirements 

on the performance standard set forth in 

the final rule for the safety standard for 

hand-held infant carriers and the test 

methods incorporated within that 

standard. The Commission may 

recognize limited circumstances in 

which the Commission will accept 

certification based on product testing 

conducted before the Commission’s 

acceptance of accreditation of 

laboratories for testing hand-held infant 

carriers (also known as retrospective 

testing) in the final NOR. The 

Commission seeks comments on any 

issues regarding the testing 

requirements of the proposed rule for 

hand-held infant carriers and the 

accompanying proposed NOR. 

XIII. Request for Comments 

This proposed rule begins a 

rulemaking proceeding under section 

104(b) of the CPSIA to issue a consumer 

product safety standard for hand-held 

carriers. We invite all interested persons 

to submit comments on any aspect of 

the proposed rule. Comments should be 

submitted in accordance with the 

instructions in the ADDRESSES section at 

the beginning of this notice. 

We specifically seek comments from 

the public on whether Moses baskets 

should be included in this safety 

standard. If Moses baskets should be 

included in this safety standard, does 

the present definition cover Moses 

baskets? And if the present definition 

does not cover Moses baskets, how 

should it be amended to cover them? 

We also seek comment concerning the 

surrogate used in the handle autolocking test. Specifically, the 

Commission asks if the test cylinder 

described in this preamble and in the 

proposed rule is an appropriate 

surrogate for a six-month old infant. Is 

there another surrogate—in particular, 

the infant hinge gauge—that is as likely 

or more likely to identify those handheld infant carriers that pose the 

hazards identified in the handle lock 

test? 

List of Subjects 

16 CFR Part 1112 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Audit, Consumer protection, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Third party conformity 

assessment body. 

16 CFR Part 1225 

Consumer protection, Imports, 

Incorporation by reference, Infants and 

children, Labeling, Law enforcement, 

and Toys. 

Therefore, the Commission proposes 

to amend Title 16 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations to read as follows: 

PART 1112—REQUIREMENTS 

PERTAINING TO THIRD PARTY 

CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES 

1. The authority citation for part 1112 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Pub. L. 110–314, section 3, 122 

Stat. 3016, 3017 (2008); 15 U.S.C. 2063. 

2. Amend § 1112.15 by adding 

paragraph (b)(35) to read as follows: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 73365 

§ 1112.15 When can a third party 

conformity assessment body apply for 

CPSC acceptance for a particular CPSC rule 

and/or test method? 

* * * * * 

(b) 

(35) 16 CFR part 1225, Safety 

Standard for Hand-Held Infant Carriers. 

3. Add part 1225 to read as follows: 

PART 1225—SAFETY STANDARD FOR 

HAND-HELD INFANT CARRIERS 

Sec. 

1225.1 Scope. 

1225.2 Requirements for hand-held infant 

carriers. 

Authority: The Consumer Product Safety 

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

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

§ 1225.1 Scope. 

This part establishes a consumer 

product safety standard for hand-held 

infant carriers. 

§ 1225.2 Requirements for hand-held 

infant carriers. 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 

(b) of this section, each hand-held infant 

carrier must comply with all applicable 

provisions of ASTM F 2050–12, 

Standard Consumer Safety Specification 

for Hand-Held Infant Carriers, approved 

on July 1, 2012. The Director of the 

Federal Register approves this 

incorporation by reference in 

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 

CFR part 51. You may obtain a copy 

from ASTM International, 100 Bar 

Harbor Drive, P.O. Box 0700, West 

Conshohocken, PA 19428; http:// 

www.astm.org. You may inspect a copy 

at the Office of the Secretary, U.S. 

Consumer Product Safety Commission, 

Room 820, 4330 East West Highway, 

Bethesda, MD 20814, telephone 301– 

504–7923, or at the National Archives 

and Records Administration (NARA). 

For information on the availability of 

this material at NARA, call 202–741– 

6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/ 

federal_register/code_of_federal 

regulations/ibr_locations.html. 

(b) Comply with the ASTM F2050–12 

standard with the following additions or 

exclusions: 

(1) In addition to complying with 

section 2.3 Other References, comply 

with the following: 

(i) 2.3 Other References: Test 

Cylinder A (see Fig. X) 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(2) Instead of complying with section 

6.1.3 of ASTM F2050–12, comply with 

the following: 

(i) 6.1.3 The carry handle shall lock 

in a position forward or rearward of the 

manufacturer’s designated carry 

position such that an unrestrained Test 

Cylinder A (see Figure X) does not fall 

out of the carrier when tested in 

accordance with 7.1.2 through 7.1.4. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(3) Instead of complying with section 

7.1.1 of ASTM F2050–12, comply with 

the following: 

(i) 7.1.1 Without a dummy in the 

carrier, secure the harness according to 

the manufacturer’s instructions, and 

adjusting so that the harness along its 

entire exposed length contacts the 

seating surface. Position Test Cylinder A 

centrally against the backrest of the 

carrier in such a way that the bottom 

edge is in contact with the seat/back 

junction line (see Figure Y). 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(4) Instead of complying with Section 

8.3.2 of ASTM F2050–12, comply with 

the following: 

(i) 8.3.2 The warning statements 

shall address the following except as 

otherwise noted. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(5) Instead of complying with section 

8.3.2.3 of ASTM F2050–12, comply with 

the following: 

(i) 8.3.2.3 Strangulation Hazard: 

(ii) 8.3.2.3.1 Carriers intended for 

use as infant restraint devices in motor 

vehicles shall contain the following 

warning label. This label requires exact 

language (including the use of bold font 

and uppercase characters as depicted) 

and a specific location: 

(iii) 8.3.2.3.2 The area of the 

pictogram is to be at least 1.09 in2 (706 

mm2) while not exceeding the size of 

the airbag warning pictogram in the 

label required under FMVSS No. 213. 

The message area in the label shall be 

no less than 4.65 in2 (30 cm2), while not 

exceeding the size of the airbag warning 

message area in the label required under 

FMVSS No. 213. The pictogram shall be 

black with a red circle and slash on a 

white background and green check 

mark. The heading area shall be yellow 

with the word ‘‘warning’’ and the alert 

symbol in black. The warning label shall 

be a separate and independent label 

from the airbag warning label required 

in FMVSS No. 213. The warning label 

shall be permanently affixed to the outer 

surface of the cushion or padding in or 

adjacent to the area where a child’s head 

would rest, so that the label is plainly 

visible and easily readable. 

(iv) 8.3.2.3.3 The following warning 

is required only for carriers not 

intended for use in a motor vehicle and 

are not hand-held bassinets/cradles. 

This warning requires exact language 

(including the use of bold font and 

uppercase characters as depicted): 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with EP10DE12.005</GPH> EP10DE12.006</GPH>
73366 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

(6) Instead of complying with section 

9.1.1 of ASTM F2050–12, comply with 

the following: 

(i) 9.1.1 The instructions shall 

contain statements, which address the 

warning statements in 8.3.2. For carriers 

intended for use as infant restraint 

devices in motor vehicles, the warning 

statement contained in the warning 

label depicted in 8.3.2.3 must also be 

included. In addition, the instructions 

shall include the following statements: 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(7) In addition to Figure 2, use the 

following: 

Dated: December 3, 2012. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2012–29584 Filed 12–7–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

38 CFR Part 3 

RIN 2900–AN89 

Secondary Service Connection for 

Diagnosable Illnesses Associated With 

Traumatic Brain Injury 

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) is amending its 

adjudication regulations concerning 

service-connection. This amendment is 

necessary to act upon a report of the 

National Academy of Sciences, Institute 

of Medicine (IOM), Gulf War and 

Health, Volume 7: Long-Term 

Consequences of Traumatic Brain 

Injury, regarding the association 

between traumatic brain injury (TBI) 

and five diagnosable illnesses. The 

intended effect of this amendment is to 

establish that if a veteran who has a 

service-connected TBI also has one of 

these diagnosable illnesses, then that 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with EP10DE12.007</GPH> EP10DE12.008</GPH>