Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 73221 

1The Commission voted 4–0 to approve this rule. 

(5) Inadvertent Pretensioner Actuation 

(a) The probability of inadvertent 

pretensioner actuation must be shown 

to be extremely remote (i.e., average 

probability per flight hour of less than 

10¥7. 

(b) The system must be shown not to 

be susceptible to inadvertent 

pretensioner actuation as a result of 

wear and tear, nor inertia loads resulting 

from in-flight or ground maneuvers 

likely to be experienced in service. 

(c) The seated occupant must not be 

seriously injured as a result of 

inadvertent pretensioner actuation. 

(d) Inadvertent pretensioner actuation 

must not cause a hazard to the airplane, 

nor cause serious injury to anyone who 

may be positioned close to the retractor 

or belt (e.g., seated in an adjacent seat 

or standing adjacent to the seat). 

(6) Availability of the Pretensioner 

Function Prior to Flight 

The design must provide means for a 

crewmember to verify the availability of 

the pretensioner function prior to each 

flight, or the probability of failure of the 

pretensioner function must be 

demonstrated to be extremely remote 

(i.e., average probability per flight hour 

of less than 10¥7) between inspection 

intervals. 

(7) Incorrect Seat Belt Orientation 

The system design must ensure that 

any incorrect orientation (twisting) of 

the seat belt does not compromise the 

pretensioner protection function. 

(8) Contamination Protection 

The pretensioner mechanisms and 

controls must be protected from external 

contamination associated with that 

which could occur on or around 

passenger seating. 

(9) Prevention of Hazards 

The pretensioner system must not 

induce a hazard to passengers in case of 

fire, nor create a fire hazard, if activated. 

(10) Functionality After Loss of Power 

The system must function properly 

after loss of normal airplane electrical 

power and after a transverse separation 

in the fuselage at the most critical 

location. A separation at the location of 

the system does not have to be 

considered. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

October 19, 2023. 

Patrick R. Mullen, 

Manager, Technical Policy Branch, Policy and 

Standards Division, Aircraft Certification 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2023–23519 Filed 10–24–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

16 CFR Part 1610 

[Docket No. CPSC–2019–0008] 

Standard for the Flammability of 

Clothing Textiles 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Consumer Product 

Safety Commission (Commission or 

CPSC) is amending the Standard for the 

Flammability of Clothing Textiles. The 

revisions clarify existing provisions, 

expand permissible equipment and 

materials for testing, and update 

equipment requirements that are 

outdated. The Commission issues this 

amendment under the authority of the 

Flammable Fabrics Act. 

DATES: This rule is effective on April 22, 

2024. The incorporation by reference of 

the publication listed in this rule is 

approved by the Director of the Federal 

Register as of April 22, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Will 

Cusey, Small Business Ombudsman, 

U.S. Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, 4330 East-West Highway, 

Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone (301) 

504–7945 or (888) 531–9070; email: 

sbo@cpsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On September 14, 2022, the 

Commission published a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPR), proposing 

to amend the Standard for the 

Flammability of Clothing Textiles at 16 

CFR part 1610 (Standard). 87 FR 56289. 

The Standard was codified under the 

Flammable Fabrics Act (FFA; 15 U.S.C. 

1191–1204). The purpose of the FFA is 

to prohibit the importation, manufacture 

for sale, or sale in commerce of any 

fabric or article of wearing apparel that 

is ‘‘so highly flammable as to be 

dangerous when worn by individuals.’’ 

Public Law 83–88, 67 Stat. 111 (June 30, 

1953). The Standard accomplishes this 

by providing a national standard for 

testing and rating the flammability of 

textiles and textile products used for 

clothing. The Standard specifies test 

equipment, materials, and procedures 

for testing the flammability of clothing 

textiles and prohibits the use of highly 

flammable textiles in clothing. 

The amendments proposed in the 

NPR and adopted in this final rule 1 aim 

to clarify existing provisions in the 

Standard and update the specifications 

for materials and equipment that have 

become outdated. The amendments do 

not alter the testing or criteria in the 

Standard for determining the 

flammability of a fabric or whether it is 

permissible for use in clothing; rather, 

they facilitate accurate testing and 

classifications by clarifying existing 

requirements and updating material and 

equipment specifications to reflect 

currently available materials, 

equipment, and technologies. 

The amendments proposed in the 

NPR and adopted in this final rule 

address three areas of the Standard. 

First, they aim to clarify and streamline 

the provisions regarding test result 

codes (i.e., burn codes), which help 

determine the classification of a textile 

and whether it may be used for clothing. 

The amendments remove an 

unnecessary code and revise wording in 

the provisions to clarify the existing 

requirements. Second, the amendments 

revise the stop thread specification, 

which indicates the thread that must be 

used in flammability testing. The 

description has become unclear, as 

threads matching the description in the 

Standard are no longer readily available. 

Third, amendments revise the 

refurbishing requirements in the 

Standard, which address dry cleaning 

and laundering specimens during the 

testing process. In recent years, there 

have been increasing restrictions on the 

use of the dry cleaning solvent specified 

in the Standard, and washing machines 

that meet the specifications required in 

the Standard are no longer made. 

The NPR and CPSC staff’s briefing 

package supporting it included detailed 

information about the need for the 

amendments, the rationale for the 

revisions, and test results illustrating 

the comparability of the flammability 

classifications under the existing 

Standard and amendments. The NPR 

also included detailed information 

about 16 CFR 1610.40 of the Standard, 

which permits the use of alternative 

apparatus, procedures, or criteria for 

tests for guaranty purposes. This 

allowance permits the continued use of 

the dry cleaning solvent and laundering 

methods in the current Standard by 

relying on CPSC’s test results 

demonstrating the comparability of test 

results under the current Standard and 

the amendments. 

This final rule adopts the 

amendments proposed in the NPR, with 

only minor modifications. Therefore, 

this notice focuses on comments 

received in response to the NPR and the 

minor modifications in the final rule. 

For detailed information about the 

amendments, the rationale for them, the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
73222 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

2The NPR is available at 87 FR 56289 (Sep. 14, 

2022). The briefing package supporting the NPR is 

available at: https://www.federalregister.gov/ 

documents/2022/09/14/2022-19505/standard-forthe-flammability-of-clothing-textiles-notice-ofproposed-rulemaking#:∼:text=The%20purpose%20

of%20the%20Standard%20is%20to%20reduce,

procedures%20for%20testing%20the%20

flammability%20of%20clothing%20textiles. 

3For detailed information about the risk of injury, 

see Tab A of staff’s briefing package supporting this 

document, available at: https://www.cpsc.gov/s3fspublic/Final-Rule-to-Amend-the-Standard-for-theFlammability-of-Clothing-Textiles-16-CFR-part1610.pdf?VersionId=387WEbeX45Rw24bthoq

IaxkMAExYy5eB. 

4Other regulations governing the flammability of 

children’s sleepwear, in 16 CFR parts 1615 and 

1616, are more stringent than the general wearing 

apparel flammability standard in 16 CFR part 1610. 

The amendments in this document would not affect 

the children’s sleepwear standards. 

5Excluded products include certain hats, gloves, 

footwear, interlining fabrics, plain surface fabrics 

meeting specified criteria, and fabrics made from 

certain fibers that, from years of testing, have been 

shown to consistently yield acceptable results when 

tested in accordance with the Standard. 16 CFR 

1610.1(c), (d). 

6NEISS uses a probability sample of hospitals in 

the United States that represent all U.S. hospitals 

with emergency departments to identify and 

generate national estimates of nonfatal injuries 

treated in emergency departments. 

comparability of flammability test 

results under the amendments, and the 

allowance in 16 CFR 1610.40, see the 

NPR and the briefing package 

supporting it.2

II. Statutory Requirements for Revising 

the Standard 

The FFA specifies the requirements 

for the Commission to issue or amend 

a flammability standard. To issue a final 

rule, the Commission must make certain 

findings and publish a final regulatory 

analysis. 15 U.S.C. 1193(b), (j)(1), (j)(2). 

The Commission must find that each 

regulation or amendment: 

• is needed to adequately protect the 

public from unreasonable risk of the 

occurrence of fire leading to death, 

injury, or significant property damage; 

• is reasonable, technologically 

practicable, and appropriate; 

• is limited to fabrics, related 

materials, or products that present such 

unreasonable risks; and 

• is stated in objective terms. 

Id. 1193(b). In addition, to promulgate 

a regulation, the Commission must 

make the following findings and include 

them in the rule: 

• if a voluntary standard addressing 

the risk of injury has been adopted and 

implemented, that either compliance 

with the voluntary standard is not likely 

to result in the elimination or adequate 

reduction of the risk or injury, or it is 

unlikely that there will be substantial 

compliance with the voluntary 

standard; 

• that the benefits expected from the 

rule bear a reasonable relationship to its 

costs; and 

• that the rule imposes the least 

burdensome requirement that prevents 

or adequately reduces the risk of injury. 

Id. 1193(j)(2). 

When issuing a final rule, the 

Commission must publish a final 

regulatory analysis with the regulation, 

which includes: 

• a description of the potential 

benefits and costs of the rule, including 

benefits and costs that cannot be 

quantified, and who is likely to receive 

the benefits and bear the costs; 

• a description of reasonable 

alternatives the Commission considered, 

their potential costs and benefits, and 

the reasons the Commission did not 

choose the alternatives; and 

• a summary of significant issues 

raised by commenters in response to the 

preliminary regulatory analysis and the 

Commission’s assessment of them. 

Id. 1193(j)(1). 

III. The Product and Risk of Injury 3

The Standard applies to all items of 

clothing and fabrics intended to be used 

for clothing (i.e., articles of wearing 

apparel), whether for adults or children, 

for daywear or nightwear,4 with certain 

listed exclusions.5

Between January 1, 2017, and 

December 31, 2021 (the most recent 

years for which data are available), there 

were an average of 85.8 deaths annually 

in the United States that involved 

ignition of clothing. An average of 2.6 of 

these fatalities involved ignition or 

melting of nightwear, and an average of 

83.2 of these fatalities involved ignition 

or melting of other clothing. Between 

2000 and 2021, the number of clothing 

fire deaths declined, overall. In 

addition, using CPSC’s National 

Electronic Injury Surveillance System 

(NEISS),6 staff estimates that between 

January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2022 

(the most recent year for which data are 

complete), an average of 5,500 nonfatal 

injuries per year were associated with 

clothing ignition and treated in U.S. 

hospital emergency departments. 

IV. Comments on the NPR 

In response to the NPR, CPSC 

received comments from four 

commenters: American Apparel and 

Footwear Association (AAFA), China 

WTO/TBT National Notification and 

Inquiry Center (China), a George 

Washington University student 

(student), and Consumer Safety 

Consultancy (CSC). Commenters 

generally supported updating the 

Standard and the amendments proposed 

in the NPR. This section summarizes the 

comments and responds to them; for a 

more detailed review of the comments, 

see Tab B in CPSC staff’s briefing 

package supporting this rule. 

A. Test Results Codes 

Background: Table 1 to section 1610.4 

of the Standard states, among other 

things, that a raised surface textile fabric 

is Class 1 if ‘‘burn time is 0–7 seconds 

with no base burns (SFBB).’’ In the NPR, 

the Commission proposed to replace the 

wording ‘‘with no base burns (SFBB)’’ in 

this description with ‘‘with no SFBB 

burn code.’’ The purpose of the 

proposed revision was to clarify the 

existing criteria for classifications of 

raised surface textile fabrics by 

referencing burn code SFBB more 

clearly, because two similar codes 

(SFBB poi and SFBB poi*) do not meet 

the criteria stated in the table. 

Comment: CSC expressed confusion 

with the proposed revision, asserting 

that the description for Class 1 raised 

surface textile fabrics should state, 

‘‘Average Burn time is 0–7 seconds with 

surface flash only;’’ that Table 1 is the 

general criteria for classification; and 

that the full discussion of how to 

classify is in section 1610.7. 

Response: As explained in the NPR, 

the Class 1 description for raised surface 

textile fabrics in Table 1 indicates that 

if a fabric has a burn time between 0 and 

7 seconds, it can only be Class 1 if it 

exhibits rapid surface flash only, and no 

base burns. Although there are three 

burn codes that indicate that a base burn 

occurred—SFBB, SFBB poi, and SFBB 

poi*—only SFBB is relevant to this 

determination because it applies when 

the base burn occurs as a result of the 

surface flash. In contrast, SFBB poi and 

SFBB poi* only have a base burn due 

to the flame that impinges on the fabric, 

not from the intensity of the surface of 

the fabric itself burning. As such, only 

fabrics with burn code SFBB, and not 

SFBB poi and SFBB poi*, are excluded 

from being Class 1. As the definition of 

‘‘base burn’’ in section 1610.2(a) 

indicates, SFBB poi and SFBB poi* are 

not considered in determining a Class 3 

fabric. However, staff is aware that some 

testers are confused by these provisions 

and incorrectly use SFBB poi and SFBB 

poi* as ‘‘base burn’’ codes for 

determining Class 3 fabrics. As such, the 

amendment clarifies the specific burn 

code—SFBB—being referenced. In 

addition, although CSC is correct that 

the regulatory text in the Standard 

provides a full discussion of 

classification, Table 1 to section 1610.4 

provides a useful summary. 

Background: In the NPR, the 

Commission proposed to add a note to 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 73223 

7The Tex system is commonly used to define 

thread size. ‘‘Tex’’ is defined as the weight, in 

grams, of 1,000 meters of yarn and is determined 

by measuring and weighing cotton threads and 

calculating linear density. 

8Note that, as proposed in the NPR, the burn code 

‘‘_._sec.’’ is being removed from the list of burn 

codes for raised surface textile fabrics. 

Table 1 to section 1610.4, stating that 

burn codes SFBB poi and SFBB poi* are 

not considered a base burn for purposes 

of determining Class 2 and 3 fabrics. 

Class 2 and 3 descriptions for raised 

surface textile fabrics in the table 

specify that fabrics in these classes 

exhibit base burns (SFBB). Only fabrics 

with a burn code of SFBB, and not SFBB 

poi and SFBB poi*, have a base burn 

that occurs as a result of the surface 

flash rather than from the point of 

impingement of the burner. Although 

Table 1 already references burn code 

SFBB for the Class 2 and 3 descriptions, 

the purpose of the added note is to make 

clear that SFBB refers only to that 

specific code, and not the other two 

base burn codes. 

Comment: In reference to this 

proposed revision, CSC stated that Table 

1 is only a summary of the requirements 

for classification and it is confusing to 

put partial information in the table. CSC 

asserted that the information for 

evaluating SFBB poi and SFBB poi* for 

determining classifications should be in 

section 1610.7. 

Response: As noted above, staff is 

aware that some testers incorrectly use 

SFBB poi and SFBB poi* as ‘‘base burn’’ 

codes, resulting in classifying fabrics as 

Class 3 when they should be designated 

as Class 1. The added note in Table 1 

will make clear that SFBB poi and SFBB 

poi* are not used to determine Class 3 

fabrics. Again, although CSC is correct 

that the regulatory text in the Standard 

provides a full discussion of 

classification, Table 1 provides a useful 

summary. 

Background: In the NPR, the 

Commission proposed to streamline 

section 1610.8, which lists the burn 

codes and requirements relevant to 

them, by consolidating similar codes. 

The Commission proposed to combine 

burn codes SF uc, SF pw, and SF poi 

into a single new burn code, SF ntr (no 

time recorded, does not break stop 

thread). The three existing codes all 

describe burning behavior that does not 

have enough intensity to break the stop 

thread and, accordingly, have no burn 

time and all result in a fabric being 

Class 1. As the NPR explained, the 

rationale for the proposed change was 

that the purpose of burn codes is to 

determine the classification of fabrics, 

making it unnecessary to have all three 

of these codes, which do not result in 

different classifications. 

Comment: CSC objected to this 

proposed change, noting that the codes 

reflect observations about the intensity 

of burning, which can indicate to testers 

or manufacturers characteristics of the 

fabric or that additional testing may be 

useful. 

Response: CPSC agrees that the 

different burn codes can be helpful to 

indicate the flammability of a fabric, 

whether additional testing may be 

useful, and whether a fabric should be 

used. Accordingly, the Commission is 

not adopting the amendment proposed 

in the NPR to consolidate the three burn 

codes into a single code, SF ntr. Instead, 

the Commission is retaining burn codes 

SF poi, SF pw and SF uc as separate 

codes. However, to streamline the burn 

codes for raised surface textile fabrics, 

the Commission is revising the order of 

the burn codes for raised surface textile 

fabrics in section 1610.8(b)(2). See the 

discussion of the final rule 

amendments, below, for further 

explanation. 

B. Stop Thread Specification 

Comment: All four commenters 

agreed that the stop thread description 

needs to be updated. In support of the 

proposed amendment, AAFA noted that 

laboratories had reported difficulty in 

sourcing threads and agreed that a range 

of Tex 7 sizes was a good option. Two 

commenters (China and CSC) 

questioned whether additional testing 

should be done to identify an 

appropriate stop thread, specifically 

suggesting testing with raised surface 

textile fabrics and Class 3 fabrics (i.e., 

dangerously flammable fabrics), 

respectively. 

Response: As explained in the NPR, 

staff conducted testing to identify a 

thread specification that would yield 

comparable flammability results to the 

thread currently specified in the 

Standard, while providing greater 

clarity about the thread required and 

using a description that is readily 

available on the market. Staff did not 

use raised surface textile fabrics or Class 

3 fabrics in the thread comparison 

study. The objective of the study was to 

examine the effect of different stop 

threads on the burn times under the 

Standard, so staff aimed to keep as 

many parameters constant as possible to 

observe burn time changes that resulted 

from changing only the stop thread. 

Staff used plain surface textile fabric, 

rather than raised surface textile fabric, 

because it typically has less variation in 

burn behavior between specimens. Staff 

did not use Class 3 fabric because it 

would be more difficult to observe the 

effect of the thread type on burn times 

if the burn times were all clustered close 

to 0 seconds. 

C. Refurbishing Specifications 

AAFA, China, and the student 

commenter all expressed support for 

updating the refurbishing procedures; 

CSC did not offer comments on this 

topic. 

V. Final Rule Amendments 

As noted above, the final rule adopts 

the amendments proposed in the NPR 

with only minor modifications. For a 

detailed explanation of the 

amendments, the rationale for them, and 

the testing and information supporting 

them, see the NPR and briefing package 

supporting it. This section describes the 

modifications to the amendments 

proposed in the NPR that the 

Commission is adopting in this final 

rule. 

A. Test Results Codes 

Currently, section 1610.8(b)(2) of the 

Standard provides eight possible burn 

codes for raised surface textile fabrics, 

which help determine the classification 

of a fabric. In the NPR, the Commission 

proposed to update the list of burn 

codes for raised surface textile fabrics to 

consolidate redundant codes, eliminate 

unnecessary and unclear codes, and 

improve clarity. One such revision 

proposed to combine three burn codes— 

SF uc, SF pw, and SF poi—into a single 

new burn code, SF ntr (no time 

recorded, does not break stop thread). 

The rationale was that these three codes 

all describe burning behavior that does 

not have enough intensity to break the 

stop thread and, accordingly, have no 

burn time and all result in a fabric being 

Class 1. Consolidating the three codes 

would result in the same classifications, 

but would streamline the regulation. 

However, as noted above, CSC 

pointed out that these three codes can 

be useful because they indicate different 

burn behaviors, which can provide 

information about the characteristics or 

flammability of the fabric or result in 

testers or manufacturers opting to 

conduct further testing. As such, it is 

helpful to retain the three separate 

codes, as currently written in the 

regulations. Accordingly, the 

Commission is retaining the three 

separate codes. However, to accomplish 

the objective of streamlining the burn 

code list to make them easier to follow, 

the Commission is revising the order of 

the burn codes in section 1610.8(b)(2), 

as follows: 8 SFBB; SFBB poi; SFBB 

poi*; SF only; SF poi; SF uc; SF pw. 

This order puts the codes used for 

identifying more flammable and 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
73224 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

9The NPR is available at 87 FR 56289 (Sep. 14, 

2022). The briefing package supporting the NPR is 

available at: https://www.federalregister.gov/ 

documents/2022/09/14/2022-19505/standard-forthe-flammability-of-clothing-textiles-notice-ofproposed-rulemaking#:∼:text=The%20purpose%20

of%20the%20Standard%20is%20to%20reduce,

procedures%20for%20testing%20

the%20flammability%20of%20clothing%20textiles. 

10The NPR is available at 87 FR 56289 (Sep. 14, 

2022). The briefing package supporting the NPR is 

available at: https://www.federalregister.gov/ 

documents/2022/09/14/2022-19505/standard-forthe-flammability-of-clothing-textiles-notice-ofproposed-rulemaking#:∼:text=The%20purpose%20

of%20the%20Standard%20is%20to%20

reduce,procedures%20for%20testing%20

the%20flammability%20of%20clothing%20textiles. 

dangerous fabrics (i.e., Class 2 and 3) at 

the top of the list. Burn code SFBB is 

first in the list because this code, along 

with burn time, identifies the most 

flammable and hazardous fabrics—Class 

2 and 3. The next codes—SFBB poi and 

SFBB poi*—also involve the flame 

burning through the base of the 

specimen, but are not considered base 

burns. The next code, SF only, is the 

next most hazardous because it involves 

the flame traveling the length of the 

specimen, although the flame does not 

burn through the base. The remaining 

codes—SF poi, SF uc, and SF pw— 

describe burning behavior that poses the 

least risk, as these all indicate Class 1 

fabrics that do not have a burn time and 

merely describe burn behavior. This 

revision accomplishes the streamlining 

of burn codes proposed in the NPR, by 

allowing testers to identify the most 

hazardous fabrics first and, thereby, 

potentially eliminates the need for 

further testing. However, this revision 

does not substantively alter the burn 

codes or their criteria and the resulting 

classifications. 

B. Stop Thread Specification 

In the NPR, the Commission proposed 

to amend the description of stop thread 

in section 1610.2(p) and section 

1610.5(a)(2)(ii) of the Standard to state 

that it consists of a spool of ‘‘3-ply, 

white, mercerized, 100% cotton sewing 

thread, with a Tex size of 35 to 45 Tex.’’ 

In this final rule, the Commission 

adopts that proposed amendment, but 

revises ‘‘Tex size of 35 to 45 Tex’’ to 

state, ‘‘a Tex size of 40 ±5.’’ This is 

substantively the same as the NPR and 

provides the same Tex range as 

proposed in the NPR, but stating the 

range with an absolute value is more 

consistent with other ranges stated in 

the Standard and, therefore, provides 

greater clarity and consistency. 

C. Refurbishing Specifications 

The amendments to the refurbishing 

specifications proposed in the NPR are 

adopted in this final rule, without 

revisions. 

VI. Section 1610.40—Use of Alternate 

Apparatus, Procedures, or Criteria for 

Tests for Guaranty Purposes 

As explained in the NPR, section 

1610.40 of the Standard permits the use 

of alternative apparatus, procedures, or 

criteria for tests for guaranty purposes. 

The FFA states that no person will be 

subject to prosecution for failing to 

comply with flammability requirements 

if that person has a guaranty, meeting 

specific requirements, that indicates 

that reasonable and representative tests 

confirmed compliance with 

flammability requirements issued under 

the statute. 15 U.S.C. 1197. For purposes 

of supporting guaranties, section 

1610.40(c) of the Standard states that 

‘‘reasonable and representative tests’’ 

could be either the flammability tests 

required in the Standard or ‘‘alternate 

tests which utilize apparatus or 

procedures other than those’’ in the 

Standard. The Standard specifies that 

for persons or firms issuing guaranties 

to use an alternative apparatus or 

procedure, the alternative must be ‘‘as 

stringent as, or more stringent than’’ the 

test in the Standard, which the 

Commission will consider met ‘‘if, when 

testing identical specimens, the 

alternative test yields failing results as 

often as, or more often than,’’ the test in 

the Standard. 

Section 1610.40 sets out conditions 

for using this allowance. A person or 

firm using the allowance ‘‘must have 

data or information to demonstrate that 

the alternative test is as stringent as, or 

more stringent than,’’ the test in the 

Standard, and retain that information 

while using the alternative and for one 

year after. 16 CFR 1610.40(d)(1), (2), (3), 

and (f). Section 1610.40 specifies that 

the Commission will test fabrics in 

accordance with the Standard and will 

consider any failing results evidence of 

non-compliance and a false guaranty. Id. 

1610.40(e), (g). 

As proposed in the NPR, this final 

rule updates the washing machine 

specifications in the Standard. However, 

as explained in the NPR, for purposes of 

16 CFR 1610.40, the Commission also 

concludes that the testing CPSC staff 

conducted that is discussed in the NPR 

and in full detail in Tabs D and E of the 

briefing package supporting the NPR9

constitutes information demonstrating 

that the washing procedure specified in 

the current Standard, as stated below, is 

as stringent as the washing procedure in 

AATCC LP1–2021, Laboratory 

Procedure for Home Laundering: 

Machine Washing, 2021 (AATCC LP1– 

2021) that is required in this 

amendment. The washing procedure in 

the current Standard is: 

• in compliance with sections 8.2.2, 

8.2.3 and 8.3.1(A) of AATCC Test 

Method 124–2006, Appearance of 

Fabrics after Repeated Home 

Laundering (AATCC TM124–2006), 

• using AATCC 1993 Standard 

Reference Detergent, powder, 

• with wash water temperature (IV) 

(120° ±5 °F; 49° ±3 °C) specified in Table 

II of AATCC TM124–2006, 

• using water level, agitation speed, 

washing time, spin speed and final spin 

cycle for ‘‘Normal/Cotton Sturdy’’ in 

Table III of AATCC TM124–2006, and 

• with a maximum wash load of 8 

pounds (3.63 kg) and consisting of any 

combination of test samples and dummy 

pieces. 

If firms rely on this information and 

conform to the other requirements in 

section 1610.40, this will provide an 

option for them to continue to use 

washing machines that comply with the 

provisions in AATCC TM124–2006 in 

the current Standard. 

Likewise, this final rule updates the 

drying machine specifications in the 

Standard. However, as with the washing 

machine specification, for purposes of 

16 CFR 1610.40 the Commission 

concludes that the testing CPSC staff 

conducted that is provided in the NPR 

and in full detail in Tabs D and E of the 

briefing package supporting the NPR10

constitutes information demonstrating 

that the drying procedure specified in 

the current Standard, as stated below, is 

as stringent as the drying procedure in 

AATCC LP1–2021 that is required in 

this amendment. The drying procedure 

in the current Standard is: 

• in compliance with section 

8.3.1(A), Tumble Dry, of AATCC 

TM124–2006, 

• using the exhaust temperature (150° 

±10 °F; 66° ±5 °C) specified in Table IV, 

‘‘Durable Press,’’ of AATCC TM124– 

2006, and 

• with a cool down time of 10 

minutes specified Table IV, ‘‘Durable 

Press,’’ of AATCC TM124–2006. 

If firms rely on this information and 

conform to the other requirements in 

section 1610.40, this will provide an 

option for them to continue to use 

dryers that comply with the provisions 

in AATCC TM124–2006 in the current 

Standard. 

VII. Relevant Existing Standards 

CPSC staff reviewed and assessed 

several voluntary and international 

standards that are relevant to clothing 

flammability: 

• AATCC TM124; 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 73225 

11Staff’s briefing package supporting this 

document is available at: https://www.cpsc.gov/ 

s3fs-public/Final-Rule-to-Amend-the-Standard-forthe-Flammability-of-Clothing-Textiles-16-CFR-part1610.pdf?VersionId=387WEbeX45Rw24b

thoqIaxkMAExYy5eB. 

• AATCC LP1–2021; 

• ASTM D1230–22, Standard Test 

Method for Flammability of Apparel 

Textiles; and 

• Canadian General Standards Board 

Standard CAN/CGSB–4.2 No. 27.5, 

Textile Test Method Flame Resistance— 

45° Angle Test—One-Second Flame 

Impingement. 

As explained in the NPR, AATCC 

TM124–2006 is currently incorporated 

by reference into the Standard as part of 

the laundering requirements, but 

washing machines that meet this 

specification are no longer available on 

the market. The current version, AATCC 

TM124–2018, includes washing and 

drying specifications that are the same 

as AATCC LP1–2021. However, AATCC 

TM124 is not a flammability standard; 

rather, it is intended to evaluate the 

smoothness appearance of fabrics after 

repeated home laundering. As such, it 

contains provisions that are not relevant 

to flammability testing and lacks 

provisions that are necessary for 

flammability testing. 

Similarly, the Commission is 

incorporating by reference portions of 

AATCC LP1–2021, but this standard 

also does not include full flammability 

testing and classification requirements 

because it is intended as a stand-alone 

laundering protocol, for use with other 

test methods. As such, it also contains 

provisions that are not relevant to 

flammability testing and lacks 

provisions that are necessary for 

flammability testing. 

ASTM D1230 is similar to the 

Standard but contains similar issues to 

those this rule aims to address (e.g., 

same unclear stop thread description as 

the Standard), and it contains different 

laundering specifications, terminology, 

and burn codes. As such, the 

Commission is not adopting provisions 

from ASTM D1230 because it would not 

provide the needed clarity that the 

amendments in this notice provide and 

would unnecessarily alter provisions in 

the Standard. 

The Canadian standard also is similar 

to the Standard, but includes several 

differences from longstanding 

provisions in the Standard, such as stop 

thread specifications. Accordingly, 

adopting provisions from the Canadian 

standard would unnecessarily alter the 

Standard when the purpose of the 

amendments in this rule is to minimize 

changes to flammability test results 

while improving the clarity and 

usability of the Standard. 

VIII. Final Regulatory Analysis 

The Commission is issuing this 

amendment under the FFA, which 

requires that a final rule include a final 

regulatory analysis. 15 U.S.C. 1193(j). 

The following discussion is based on 

staff’s final regulatory analysis, available 

in Tab C of the final rule briefing 

package.11

A. Description of Potential Costs and 

Benefits of the Amended Rule 

The final regulatory analysis must 

include a description of the potential 

benefits and costs of the rule, including 

unquantifiable benefits and costs. 

1. Potential Benefits 

The primary benefit of the 

amendments is a reduction of burdens 

for testing laboratories by clarifying 

existing requirements and updating the 

specifications for stop thread, dry 

cleaning, and laundering to include 

options that are identifiable, permissible 

for use, and currently available. In 

addition, the amendments should 

improve consumer safety because the 

amendments provide comparable 

flammability results to the current 

Standard but would improve testing 

laboratories’ abilities to conduct testing 

and obtain consistent and reliable 

results. This should improve consumer 

safety by ensuring that textiles intended 

for use in clothing are properly tested 

and classified so that dangerously 

flammable textiles are not used in 

clothing. Staff is unable to quantify 

these potential benefits but estimates 

that these benefits are likely to be small. 

Burn Codes. The amendments to burn 

codes clarify and streamline these 

provisions of the Standard, which staff 

expects will improve the consistency 

and reliability of flammability testing 

results and classifications. More 

consistent and reliable test results, in 

turn, may provide some safety benefit to 

consumers, while reducing testing 

burdens for testing laboratories. Because 

these amendments are intended to 

clarify existing provisions and do not 

change current requirements for testing 

or classification, staff expects that they 

will provide a small amount of 

unquantifiable benefits. 

Stop Thread. The amendments to the 

stop thread specification in the 

Standard clarify the type of thread 

required by using the Tex system, which 

is commonly used and understood by 

the industry, to define the thread size. 

The amendments also expand the range 

of threads permissible for use under the 

Standard by providing a range of 

permissible Tex sizes, rather than 

specifying a single thread specification, 

as the current Standard does. As such, 

the amendments clarify the 

requirements, which may have 

consumer safety benefits by yielding 

more consistent and reliable test results 

so that the flammability of fabrics are 

accurately identified. However, these 

benefits are expected to be small since 

the amendments provide comparable 

test results and classifications to the 

current Standard. The amendments also 

may ease burdens on testing 

laboratories, by making it easier to 

identify compliant thread and by 

making more threads permissible for 

use. Therefore, staff expects that these 

amendments will provide a small 

amount of unquantifiable benefits. 

Dry Cleaning Specification. The 

amendments to the dry cleaning 

specification continue to allow use of 

perchloroethylene solvent, but add an 

additional specification, as an 

alternative, to accommodate testing 

laboratories that are unable to use the 

solvent currently specified in the 

Standard. The alternative specification, 

using hydrocarbon solvent, provides 

comparable flammability results to the 

perchloroethylene solvent specified in 

the Standard. CPSC staff assesses that 

the hydrocarbon solvent is comparable 

(or lower) in cost than other 

alternatives. Therefore, staff expects the 

amendments to reduce burdens on 

testing laboratories by providing an 

additional alternative for laboratories 

that are subject to restrictions on the use 

of perchloroethylene. 

Laundering Specification. The 

amendments to the washing 

specifications provide a specification 

that can be met by machines that are 

currently on the market. Staff expects 

that this will reduce burdens on testing 

laboratories because it will eliminate the 

need to maintain and repair older 

machines and allow those testing 

laboratories that can no longer maintain 

or obtain washing machines that comply 

with the current Standard to continue to 

test to the Standard. Staff expects the 

amendments to the drying specifications 

will provide benefits as well. By 

requiring the use of the same standard 

for both washing and drying, these 

amendments streamline the 

requirements for testing laboratories, 

making it less cumbersome and less 

costly than obtaining and following two 

standards. Moreover, AATCC LP1–2021 

is already familiar to many testing 

laboratories since it is used for other 

standards as well; as such, using this 

standard should be clear and low cost. 

In addition, requiring the use of a single 

standard (rather than referencing two 

standards) that is widely familiar to 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
73226 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

industry members should reduce the 

risk of confusion or testing errors, which 

may have some safety benefits for 

consumers by yielding consistent and 

reliable test results and classifications. 

2. Potential Costs 

Burn Codes. The amendments 

regarding burn codes clarify and 

streamline existing requirements, and 

do not change any testing, flammability 

results, or classification criteria. As 

such, staff does not expect these 

amendments to have any notable costs. 

Stop Thread. The amendments 

regarding the stop thread specification 

clarify and expand the range of 

permissible threads. They do not change 

any testing, flammability results, or 

classification criteria. As staff’s testing 

indicates, thread that meets the current 

specification in the Standard would 

comply with the amendments, and the 

amendments would allow for the use of 

a wider range of threads than the 

current Standard. This will allow testing 

laboratories to continue to use their 

existing thread or more easily obtain 

compliant thread by providing a wider 

range of options. Therefore, staff does 

not expect these amendments to have 

any notable costs. 

Dry Cleaning Specification. The 

amendments to the dry cleaning 

specification allow for the continued 

use of perchloroethylene solvent, but 

also provide an additional alternative 

specification using hydrocarbon solvent. 

The amendments do not change any 

testing requirements or criteria and, as 

staff’s testing demonstrates, the 

hydrocarbon alternative provides 

comparable flammability results and 

classifications to the perchloroethylene 

specification. As such, testing 

laboratories could continue to use the 

existing specification, but will also have 

an additional option for complying with 

the Standard. Therefore, staff does not 

expect these amendments to have any 

notable costs. 

Laundering Specification. The 

amendments regarding the washing 

specification will require different 

washing machines than those that 

currently comply with the Standard, 

because those machines are no longer 

available on the market. However, firms 

have the option to continue using 

machines that comply with the current 

Standard under 16 CFR 1610.40, thereby 

avoiding the need to obtain new 

washing machines. As explained in the 

NPR and in this notice, the Commission 

concludes that, for purposes of 16 CFR 

1610.40, the testing CPSC staff 

conducted that was provided in the NPR 

and in full detail in Tabs D and E of the 

briefing package supporting the NPR 

constitutes information demonstrating 

that the washing procedure specified in 

the current Standard is as stringent as 

the washing procedure in AATCC LP1– 

2021 that is adopted in this notice. 

Therefore, if firms rely on this 

information and conform to the other 

requirements in section 1610.40, this 

will provide an option for them to 

continue to use washing machines that 

comply with the provisions in AATCC 

TM124–2006 in the current Standard. 

This alternative would impose no costs, 

as testing laboratories could continue to 

use their existing compliant machines. 

Although staff does not expect the 

amendments to the washing 

specifications to impose any costs, staff 

examined potential costs associated 

with obtaining machines that comply 

with the amendments to assess the costs 

to firms that choose to do so, rather than 

continuing to use existing machines in 

accordance with the allowance in 16 

CFR 1610.40. The primary cost to firms 

that choose to obtain new machines 

would be the cost of new washing 

machines that comply with AATCC 

LP1–2021. Staff estimates that these 

machines cost an average of $4,300. 

However, this cost would be offset by 

the reduced costs of no longer needing 

to repair or maintain existing, outdated 

machines. Staff estimates that the cost of 

maintaining and repairing the outdated 

machines is $300 annually and assumes 

that if a laboratory chooses to upgrade 

machines, it expects to receive benefits 

from the upgrade that outweigh the 

acquisition costs. Firms that choose to 

obtain new machines might also incur 

the cost of buying a copy of AATCC 

LP1–2021, which is approximately $50 

for AATCC members and $70 for nonmembers. Staff does not consider this a 

significant cost and firms will not incur 

this cost if they already have AATCC 

LP1–2021 to comply with other 

standards. Moreover, a read-only copy 

of AATCC LP1–2021 will be available 

for viewing on the AATCC website 

when this rule takes effect. 

Staff was unable to determine the 

number of testing laboratories that test 

to the Standard and that would, 

therefore, by subject to the amendments. 

At a minimum, currently there are more 

than 300 testing laboratories that are 

CPSC-accepted third party laboratories 

that test to the Standard for purposes of 

children’s product certifications. 

However, that is an underestimate of the 

number of firms impacted by the rule 

because testing laboratories need not be 

CPSC-accepted third party laboratories 

to test to the Standard for non-children’s 

products. At a maximum, there are a 

total of 7,389 testing laboratories in the 

United States, according to the Census 

Bureau. However, this is an 

overestimate of the number of firms in 

the United States impacted by the rule 

because this number includes testing 

laboratories that do not test to the 

Standard. Staff estimates that each 

testing laboratory that tests to the 

Standard has three washing machines 

that do not meet AATCC LP1–2021. 

The amendments regarding the drying 

specification are unlikely to require 

different dryers than those that 

currently comply with the Standard 

because most dryers can comply with 

both specifications. However, to the 

extent that dryers that meet the current 

Standard do not meet the amendments, 

firms would again have the option to 

continue to use their existing compliant 

dryers in accordance with 16 CFR 

1610.40. Therefore, this alternative 

would eliminate any potential costs 

associated with the amendments. 

Moreover, because most dryers comply 

with both the current Standard and 

AATCC LP1–2021, staff does not expect 

that most firms will need to replace 

their dryers even if they chose to 

comply with AATCC LP1–2021, instead 

of using 16 CFR 1610.40 to continue to 

comply with AATCC TM124–2006. 

B. Alternatives to the Rule 

A final regulatory analysis must 

describe reasonable alternatives to the 

rule, their potential costs and benefits, 

and a brief explanation of the reasons 

the alternatives were not chosen. 15 

U.S.C. 1193(j). CPSC considered several 

alternatives to the rule. 

Burn Codes. CPSC considered 

retaining the current burn code 

provisions in the Standard, rather than 

updating them. This alternative would 

not create any costs, but also would not 

provide any benefits. In comparison, the 

amendments do not create any costs, but 

have benefits by providing needed 

clarifications. 

Stop Thread Specification. CPSC 

considered updating the stop thread 

specification to require the use of a stop 

thread with the specific Tex size of the 

thread currently required in the 

Standard. This would not create any 

costs since thread that meets the current 

Standard would meet this alternative. 

However, this alternative would be 

more restrictive than the final rule by 

providing fewer options of stop threads. 

Because staff determined that the range 

of Tex sizes in the rule would provide 

comparable flammability results to the 

Standard, while providing a broader 

range of options, CPSC did not select 

this alternative. 

Another alternative CPSC considered 

is to allow a wider range of Tex sizes, 

such as the full range staff assessed 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 73227 

12See Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

Control No. 3041–0024. 

during flammability testing and found 

to yield comparable flammability results 

to the Standard. This would further 

reduce burdens on testing laboratories 

by providing even more options. 

However, staff concluded that it is more 

appropriate to limit the range of Tex 

sizes to those of cotton threads that 

yielded comparable flammability results 

to the Standard because some polyester 

threads are designed to be flame 

resistant. 

Dry Cleaning Specification. In 

addition to the hydrocarbon alternative 

adopted in this amendment, CPSC 

considered two additional dry cleaning 

specifications—silicone and butylal. As 

staff’s testing indicates, both of these 

alternatives also yield comparable 

flammability results to the current 

Standard and, therefore, are likely to 

offer similar benefits to the hydrocarbon 

specification. Staff identified estimated 

costs of the four dry cleaning solvent 

specifications using comparisons 

provided by the Toxic Use Reduction 

Institute (TURI). These comparisons 

estimate that dry cleaning with 

perchloroethylene involves equipment 

costs between $40,000 and $65,000 and 

solvent costs of $17 per gallon; dry 

cleaning with hydrocarbon involves 

equipment costs between $38,000 and 

$75,000 and solvent costs of $14 to $17 

per gallon; dry cleaning with silicone 

involves equipment costs between 

$30,500 and $55,000 and solvent costs 

of $22 to $28 per gallon; and dry 

cleaning with butylal involves 

equipment costs between $50,000 and 

$100,000 and solvent costs of $28 to $34 

per gallon. CPSC selected hydrocarbon 

rather than the silicone or butylal 

alternatives because butylal yielded 

classifications consistent with the 

current Standard slightly less often 

during comparison testing; hydrocarbon 

is the most commonly used alternative 

to perchloroethylene; hydrocarbon has a 

long history of use; and several 

companies manufacture hydrocarbon 

solvents for dry cleaning, whereas 

silicone and butylal are newer 

technologies and patented, making their 

availability more limited. 

CPSC also considered requiring the 

use of only the hydrocarbon 

specification, rather than continuing to 

allow the use of the perchloroethylene 

specification in the current Standard. 

However, this alternative could increase 

costs by requiring all testing laboratories 

to change their dry cleaning 

specifications. CPSC did not select this 

option because, although 

perchloroethylene is being restricted in 

some locations, it is still available and 

widely used in the dry cleaning 

industry. 

Laundering Specification. In addition 

to the AATCC LP1–2021 alternative 

adopted in this amendment, CPSC 

considered an alternative of continuing 

to require compliance with the 

laundering specification in AATCC 

TM124–2006, but with a reduced 

agitation speed. As staff’s testing 

indicates, this alternative yields 

flammability results comparable to the 

current Standard and, therefore, would 

likely offer similar benefits to the 

AATCC LP1–2021 specification 

adopted. However, this alternative may 

have higher costs than the amendment 

because laboratory-grade washing 

machines are not sold pre-programmed 

to the reduced agitation speed settings, 

but they are sold pre-programmed with 

the AATCC LP1–2021 settings. 

Consequently, additional time and 

skilled labor resources would be 

necessary to program machines to meet 

the reduced agitation speed alternative, 

and there would be the potential for 

testing errors. CPSC did not select this 

option because testing laboratories are 

likely to already have and be familiar 

with AATCC LP1–2021 and have 

machines that comply with it since it is 

required for other standards and there 

are more washing machines on the 

market that meet the specifications in 

LP1–2021 than the reduced agitation 

speed parameters. 

CPSC also considered amending the 

Standard to allow the use of either the 

AATCC LP1–2021 specifications or the 

AATCC TM124–2006 specifications. 

Similarly, CPSC considered amending 

the Standard to include the 

specifications in AATCC LP1–2021, 

while allowing for the continued use of 

AATCC TM124–2006 for a limited 

phase-out period. These alternatives 

would have minimal, if any, costs 

because they would allow testing 

laboratories to continue to use existing 

machines, while providing an option to 

obtain machines that are available on 

the market. CPSC did not select these 

options because they both would leave 

CPSC unable to test for compliance in 

accordance with one of the procedures 

in the Standard when CPSC’s machines 

that comply with AATCC TM124–2006 

reach the end of their useful lives; this 

would retain in the Standard an 

outdated and obsolete specification that 

is no longer possible to meet with 

products available on the market; and 

staff does not have information about an 

appropriate phase-out period for 

machines that comply with AATCC 

TM124–2006. Although CPSC did not 

select either of these alternatives, firms 

would still be able to continue to use 

machines that comply with AATCC 

TM124–2006, instead of machines that 

comply with AATCC LP1–2021, under 

the provisions in 16 CFR 1610.40. 

For dryers, CPSC considered retaining 

the current provisions in the Standard, 

which reference AATCC TM124–2006, 

because dryers that meet this standard 

are still available on the market. This 

alternative would eliminate any costs 

associated with the amendment to dryer 

specifications. CPSC did not select this 

option because requiring the use of a 

single standard ensures compatible 

washing and drying requirements and 

reduces confusion and costs associated 

with obtaining and following two 

separate standards. In addition, because 

the dryer specifications in AATCC 

TM124–2006 and AATCC LP1–2021 are 

nearly identical, testing laboratories are 

unlikely to need to replace their dryers 

to meet the amendments and, for those 

that do, the allowance in 16 CFR 

1610.40 would mitigate or eliminate 

that need. 

C. Significant Issues Raised by 

Commenters 

A final regulatory analysis must 

include a summary of significant issues 

raised by commenters in response to the 

preliminary regulatory analysis and 

CPSC’s assessment of those comments. 

15 U.S.C. 1193(j). CPSC did not receive 

any comments regarding the 

preliminary regulatory analysis in the 

NPR or any comments regarding costs, 

benefits, or alternatives, generally. 

IX. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule does not involve any new 

information collection requirements 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3521). The 

Standard does contain recordkeeping 

provisions, but this rule would not alter 

the estimated burden hours to establish 

or maintain associated records from the 

information collection approved 

previously.12

X. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis 

When an agency is required to 

publish a proposed rule, the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612) 

requires that the agency prepare an 

initial regulatory flexibility analysis 

(IRFA) at the NPR stage and a final 

regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) at 

the final rule stage. An IRFA and FRFA 

must contain specific content that 

describes the impact that the rule would 

have on small businesses and other 

entities. 5 U.S.C. 603, 604. However, an 

IRFA and FRFA are not required if the 

head of the agency certifies that the rule 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
73228 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

13For additional details regarding certifications, 

see A Guide for Government Agencies: How to 

Comply with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, SBA 

Office of Advocacy (Aug. 2017), available at: 

https://advocacy.sba.gov/2017/08/31/a-guide-forgovernment-agencies-how-to-comply-with-theregulatory-flexibility-act/. 

14The CPSA defines a ‘‘manufacturer’’ as ‘‘any 

person who manufactures or imports a consumer 

product.’’ 15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(11). 

15See 75 FR 51016 (Aug. 18, 2010), amended at 

76 FR 22608 (Apr. 22, 2011); 78 FR 15836 (Mar. 12, 

2013). 

‘‘will not, if promulgated, have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities.’’ 

Id. 605(b). The agency must publish the 

certification in the Federal Register 

along with the NPR or final rule, 

include the factual basis for the 

certification, and provide the 

certification and statement to the Chief 

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration. Id.13

In the NPR, the Commission certified 

that the proposed amendments, if 

adopted, would not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. As support for 

the certification, the Commission noted 

that there are little to no estimated costs 

associated with the rule because the 

amendments reduce burdens on 

industry, maintain or expand existing 

requirements, or firms may rely on the 

allowance in 16 CFR 1610.40 to 

continue to use equipment that is being 

updated in the amendments. The factual 

basis for the certification is in Tab F of 

the NPR briefing package and Tab C of 

the final rule briefing package, but the 

NPR provided an overview, including 

information about the small entities to 

which the rule would apply; the 

potential economic impact of the rule 

on small entities; the criteria CPSC used 

for a ‘‘significant economic impact’’ and 

a ‘‘substantial number’’; assumptions 

and uncertainties; and a request for 

comments. 

CPSC did not receive any comments 

regarding the certification or the 

economic analysis in the NPR, or any 

new cost, market, or other information 

or data that would change the economic 

impact assessments in the NPR. 

Therefore, because the amendments in 

this rule are consistent with those 

proposed in the NPR, the Commission 

certifies that the amendments will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities, 

for the reasons stated in the NPR. 

XI. Incorporation by Reference 

This rule incorporates by reference 

AATCC LP1–2021. The Office of the 

Federal Register (OFR) has regulations 

regarding incorporation by reference. 1 

CFR part 51. Under these regulations, in 

the preamble, an agency must 

summarize the incorporated material, 

and discuss the ways in which the 

material is reasonably available to 

interested parties or how the agency 

worked to make the materials 

reasonably available. 1 CFR 51.5(a). In 

accordance with the OFR requirements, 

this preamble summarizes the 

provisions of AATCC LP1–2021 that the 

Commission incorporates by reference. 

The standard is reasonably available 

to interested parties and interested 

parties can purchase a copy of AATCC 

LP1–2021 from the American 

Association of Textile Chemists and 

Colorists, P.O. Box 12215, Research 

Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709; 

telephone (919) 549–8141; 

www.aatcc.org. Once this rule takes 

effect, a read-only copy of the standard 

will be available for viewing on the 

AATCC website. Interested parties can 

also schedule an appointment to inspect 

a copy of the standard at CPSC’s Office 

of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product 

Safety Commission, 4330 East West 

Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, 

telephone: 301–504–7479; email: cpscos@cpsc.gov. 

XII. Testing, Certification, and Notice of 

Requirements 

Because the Standard applies to 

clothing and textiles intended to be 

used for clothing, it applies to both nonchildren’s products and children’s 

products. Section 14(a) of the Consumer 

Product Safety Act (CPSA; 15 U.S.C. 

2051–2089) includes requirements for 

testing and certifying that nonchildren’s products and children’s 

products comply with applicable 

mandatory standards issued under any 

statute the Commission administers, 

including the FFA. 15 U.S.C. 2063(a). 

The Commission’s regulations on 

certificates of compliance are codified at 

16 CFR part 1110. 

Section 14(a)(1) addresses required 

testing and certifications for nonchildren’s products and requires every 

manufacturer of a non-children’s 

product, which includes the importer,14

that is subject to a rule enforced by the 

Commission and imported for 

consumption or warehousing or 

distributed in commerce, to issue a 

certificate. The manufacturer must 

certify, based on a test of each product 

or upon a reasonable testing program, 

that the product complies with all rules, 

bans, standards, or regulations 

applicable to the product under statutes 

enforced by the Commission. The 

certificate must specify each such rule, 

ban, standard, or regulation that applies 

to the product. 15 U.S.C. 2063(a)(1). 

Sections 14(a)(2) and (a)(3) address 

testing and certification requirements 

specific to children’s products. A 

‘‘children’s product’’ is a consumer 

product that is ‘‘designed or intended 

primarily for children 12 years of age or 

younger.’’ 15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(2). The 

CPSA and CPSC’s regulations provide 

factors to consider when determining 

whether a product is a children’s 

product. 15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(2); 16 CFR 

1200.2. An accredited third party 

conformity assessment body (third-party 

lab) must test any product that is subject 

to a children’s product safety rule for 

compliance with the applicable rule. 15 

U.S.C. 2063(a)(2)(A); see 77 FR 31086, 

31105 (May 24, 2012). After this testing, 

the manufacturer or private labeler of 

the product must certify that, based on 

the third-party lab’s testing, the product 

complies with the children’s product 

safety rule. 15 U.S.C. 2063(a)(2)(B). 

The Commission must publish a 

notice of requirements (NOR) for thirdparty labs to obtain accreditation to 

assess conformity with a children’s 

product safety rule. 15 U.S.C. 

2063(a)(3)(A). The Commission must 

publish an NOR for new or revised 

children’s products standards not later 

than 90 days before such rules or 

revisions take effect. Id. 

2063(a)(3)(B)(vi). The Commission 

previously published an NOR for the 

Standard.15 The NOR provided the 

criteria and process for CPSC to accept 

accreditation of third-party labs for 

testing products to 16 CFR part 1610. 

Part 1112 provides requirements for 

third-party labs to obtain accreditation 

to test for conformance with a children’s 

product safety rule, including the 

Standard. 16 CFR 1112.15(b)(20). 

The rule does not require third-party 

labs to change the way they test 

products for compliance with the 

Standard. The amendments to burn 

codes do not alter test protocols; they 

merely clarify existing requirements. 

The amendments regarding stop thread 

and dry cleaning specifications continue 

to allow the use of specifications 

consistent with the current Standard. 

Although the amendments regarding 

laundering specifications differ from the 

current Standard, 16 CFR 1610.40 

provides an allowance for the continued 

use of laundering specifications under 

the current Standard. Accordingly, the 

existing accreditations that the 

Commission has accepted for testing to 

the Standard will cover testing to the 

revised Standard, and CPSC-accepted 

third party conformity assessment 

bodies are expected to update the scope 

of their accreditations to reflect the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 73229 

revised Standard in the normal course 

of renewing their accreditations. 

XIII. Environmental Considerations 

The Commission’s regulations address 

whether CPSC is required to prepare an 

environmental assessment (EA) or an 

environmental impact statement (EIS). 

16 CFR 1021.5. Those regulations list 

CPSC actions that ‘‘normally have little 

or no potential for affecting the human 

environment,’’ and, therefore, fall 

within a ‘‘categorical exclusion’’ under 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370h) and the 

regulations implementing it (40 CFR 

parts 1500 through 1508) and do not 

require an EA or EIS. 16 CFR 1021.5(c). 

Among those actions are rules that 

provide design or performance 

requirements for products, or revisions 

to such rules. Id. 1021.5(c)(1). Because 

this rule makes minimal revisions to the 

equipment and materials used for 

flammability testing in the Standard, 

and makes minor revisions for clarity, 

the rule falls within the categorical 

exclusion, and thus, no EA or EIS is 

required. 

XIV. Preemption 

In accordance with Executive Order 

(E.O.) 12988, Civil Justice Reform, CPSC 

states the preemptive effect of the rule, 

as follows. 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996). 

Section 16 of the FFA provides that 

when a flammability standard or other 

regulation for a fabric, related material, 

or product is in effect under the FFA, no 

state or political subdivision may 

establish or continue in effect a 

flammability standard for such fabric, 

related material or product if it is 

designed to protect against the same risk 

as the standard under the FFA unless 

the state or political subdivision 

standard is identical to the Federal 

standard. 15 U.S.C. 1203(a). The federal 

government, or a state or local 

government, may establish or continue 

in effect a non-identical requirement for 

its own use that is designed to protect 

against the same risk as the CPSC 

standard if the federal, state, or local 

requirement provides a higher degree of 

protection than the CPSC requirement. 

Id. 1203(b). In addition, states or 

political subdivisions of a state may 

apply for an exemption from 

preemption regarding a flammability 

standard or other regulation applicable 

to a fabric, related material, or product 

subject to a standard or other regulation 

in effect under the FFA. Upon such 

application, the Commission may issue 

a rule granting the exemption if it finds 

that: (1) compliance with the state or 

local standard would not cause the 

fabric, related material, or product to 

violate the federal standard; (2) the state 

or local standard provides a 

significantly higher degree of protection 

from the risk of occurrence of fire than 

the CPSC standard; and (3) the state or 

local standard does not unduly burden 

interstate commerce. Id. 1203(c). 

XV. Effective Date 

Section 4(b) of the FFA specifies that 

an amendment to a flammability 

standard shall take effect 12 months 

after the date the amendment is 

promulgated unless the Commission 

finds, for good cause shown, that an 

earlier or later effective date is in the 

public interest and publishes the 

reasons for that finding. 15 U.S.C. 

1193(b). 

The amendments to the Standard 

adopted in this notice take effect six 

months after publication of the final 

rule in the Federal Register. The 

Commission finds that this earlier 

effective date is in the public interest 

because the Standard provides an 

important safety benefit and the 

amendments provide some 

improvement to those benefits, with 

little to no costs. Moreover, a shorter 

effective date is justified given that the 

amendments should have minimal 

impacts, improve clarity, and relieve 

burdens; the prohibition on the use of 

perchloroethylene in dry cleaning in 

California took effect in January 2023; 

and washing machines that meet the 

Standard are no longer available. 

Section 4(b) of the FFA also requires 

that an amendment of a flammability 

standard exempt fabrics, related 

materials, and products ‘‘in inventory or 

with the trade’’ on the date the 

amendment becomes effective, unless 

the Commission prescribes, limits, or 

withdraws that exemption because it 

finds that the product is ‘‘so highly 

flammable as to be dangerous when 

used by consumers for the purpose for 

which it is intended.’’ Because the 

amendments adopted in this notice are 

intended to have minimal impacts, the 

Commission concludes that products in 

inventory or with the trade on the date 

the amendment becomes effective are 

exempt from the amended Standard. 

XVI. Findings 

As discussed in section II. Statutory 

Requirements for Revising the Standard, 

above, the FFA requires the Commission 

to make certain findings when it issues 

or amends a flammability standard. 15 

U.S.C. 1193(b), (j)(2). This section 

discusses the support for those findings. 

The amendments are needed to 

adequately protect the public against 

unreasonable risk of fire leading to 

death, injury, or significant property 

damage. Since the requirements in the 

Standard were promulgated in 1953, 

industry practices, equipment, 

materials, and procedures have evolved, 

making some parts of the Standard 

outdated or unclear. Because the 

Standard determines whether a fabric is 

safe for use in clothing, it is necessary 

to replace requirements for outdated 

and unavailable equipment, materials, 

and procedures and clarify unclear 

provisions, to ensure that flammability 

testing can be performed and that the 

results of the testing yield consistent, 

reliable, and accurate flammability 

classifications so that dangerously 

flammable fabrics are not used in 

clothing. 

The amendments are reasonable, 

technologically practicable, and 

appropriate, and are stated in objective 

terms. The amendments streamline 

existing requirements and update 

specifications for outdated equipment, 

materials, and procedures. The 

amendments reflect changes 

recommended by industry members, 

and allow for the use of equipment, 

materials, and procedures that are 

commonly used by industry members, 

recognized in standards developed by 

industry, are readily available, and 

stated in objective terms. 

The amendments are limited to 

fabrics, related materials, and products 

that present an unreasonable risk. The 

amendments do not alter the textiles or 

products that are subject to the 

Standard, which addresses products 

that present an unreasonable risk. 

Voluntary standards. CPSC identified 

four relevant voluntary standards. 

AATCC Test Method 124–2018, 

Appearance of Fabrics after Repeated 

Home Laundering, includes provisions 

that are relevant to flammability testing 

and is similar to portions of the 

Standard, but is not a flammability 

standard. Rather, it is intended to 

evaluate the smoothness appearance of 

fabrics after repeated home laundering. 

As such, it contains provisions that are 

not relevant to flammability testing and 

lacks provisions that are necessary for 

flammability testing. AATCC’s 

Laboratory Procedure 1–2021, Home 

Laundering: Machine Washing, also 

includes provisions that are relevant to 

flammability testing and is similar to 

portions of the Standard but is not a 

flammability standard. Rather, it is 

intended as a stand-alone laundering 

protocol, for use with other test 

methods, such as a flammability 

standard. Therefore, it contains 

provisions that are not relevant to 

flammability testing and lacks 

provisions that are necessary for 

flammability testing. ASTM D1230–22, 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
73230 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

Standard Test Method for Flammability 

of Apparel Textiles, is similar to the 

Standard, but contains different 

laundering specifications, terminology, 

and burn codes, and it does not address 

issues identified in this rule, such as 

clarification of the stop thread 

specification. Canadian General 

Standards Board Standard CAN/CGSB– 

4.2 No. 27.5, Textile Test Method Flame 

Resistance—45° Angle Test—OneSecond Flame Impingement, also is 

similar to the Standard, but includes 

several differences from longstanding 

provisions in the Standard, such as stop 

thread specifications. As such, adopting 

provisions in the Canadian standard 

would unnecessarily alter the Standard 

when the purpose of the amendments in 

this rule is to minimize changes to 

flammability test results while 

improving the clarity and usability of 

the Standard. Compliance with these 

voluntary standards is not likely to 

result in the elimination or adequate 

reduction of the risk of injury identified 

by the Commission. The amendments 

will better address the risk of injury 

than these voluntary standards by 

retaining the longstanding provisions in 

the Standard that have been 

demonstrated to effectively address the 

flammability hazard, while making 

minimal revisions to ensure the 

accuracy of flammability classifications 

by improving the clarity of the 

requirements and updating outdated 

equipment and materials. 

Relationship of benefits to costs. 

Because the amendments reflect current 

industry practices and provide needed 

clarifications, the anticipated benefits 

and costs are expected to be small and 

bear a reasonable relationship to each 

other. 

Least burdensome requirement. The 

amendments do not substantively 

change the Standard but provide 

changes that are necessary for clarity 

and so that testing laboratories may 

obtain necessary materials and 

equipment to conduct testing. Several 

amendments expand the permissible 

range of materials or equipment to 

reduce burdens. For revisions that 

include new equipment or materials, the 

amendments either allow use of the new 

materials and equipment as additional 

alternatives, or the Commission 

provides information to support the 

continued use of equipment or materials 

in the current Standard under 16 CFR 

1610.40. 

XVII. Congressional Review 

The FFA requires CPSC to transmit a 

copy of a flammability regulation to the 

Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of 

the House of Representatives. 15 U.S.C. 

1204. The Congressional Review Act 

(CRA; 5 U.S.C. 801–808) similarly states 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency issuing the rule must submit the 

rule, and certain related information, to 

each House of Congress and the 

Comptroller General. 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1). 

The CRA submission must indicate 

whether the rule is a ‘‘major rule.’’ The 

CRA states that the Office of Information 

and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) 

determines whether a rule qualifies as a 

‘‘major rule.’’ A ‘‘major rule’’ is one that 

OIRA finds has resulted in or is likely 

to result in: 

• an annual effect on the economy of 

$100,000,000 or more; 

• a major increase in costs or prices 

for consumers, individual industries, 

government agencies, or geographic 

regions; or 

• significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or the ability 

of U.S. enterprises to compete with 

foreign enterprises in domestic and 

export markets. 

5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Because the costs and benefits 

associated with this rule are expected to 

be minimal, OIRA determined that this 

is not a major rule. To comply with the 

CRA and FFA, CPSC will submit the 

required information to the appropriate 

Congressional offices and the 

Comptroller General. 

XVIII. Conclusion 

For the reasons stated in this 

preamble, the Commission concludes 

that the amendments to the Standard 

adopted in this notice are needed to 

protect the public against unreasonable 

risk of the occurrence of fire leading to 

death or personal injury, or significant 

damage. 

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 1610 

Clothing, Consumer protection, 

Flammable materials, Incorporation by 

reference, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Textiles, Warranties. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Commission amends title 

16 of the Code of Federal Regulations by 

revising part 1610 to read as follows: 

PART 1610—STANDARD FOR THE 

FLAMMABILITY OF CLOTHING 

TEXTILES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1610 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1191–1204. 

■ 2. Amend § 1610.2 by revising 

paragraphs (a) and (p) to read as follows: 

§ 1610.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

(a) Base burn (also known as base 

fabric ignition or fusing) means the 

point at which the flame burns the 

ground (base) fabric of a raised surface 

textile fabric and provides a selfsustaining flame. Base burns, used to 

establish a Class 2 or 3 fabric, are those 

burns resulting from surface flash that 

occur on specimens in places other than 

the point of impingement (test result 

code SFBB) when the warp and fill 

yarns of a raised surface textile fabric 

undergo combustion. Base burns can be 

identified by an opacity change, 

scorching on the reverse side of the 

fabric, or when a physical hole is 

evident. 

* * * * * 

(p) Stop thread supply means 3-ply, 

white, mercerized, 100% cotton sewing 

thread, with a Tex size of 40 ±5. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 1610.4 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(2), (b)(2), (c)(2), and 

Table 1 to read as follows: 

§ 1610.4 Requirements for classifying 

textiles. 

(a) * * * 

(2) Raised surface textile fabric. Such 

textiles in their original state and/or 

after being refurbished as described in 

§ 1610.6(a) and (b), when tested as 

described in § 1610.6, shall be classified 

as Class 1, Normal Flammability, when 

the burn time is more than 7.0 seconds, 

or when they burn with a rapid surface 

flash (0.0 to 7.0 seconds), provided the 

intensity of the flame is so low as not 

to ignite or fuse the base fabric. 

(b) * * * 

(2) Raised surface textile fabric. Such 

textiles in their original state and/or 

after being refurbished as described in 

§ 1610.6(a) and (b), when tested as 

described in § 1610.6, shall be classified 

as Class 2, Intermediate Flammability, 

when the burn time is from 4.0 through 

7.0 seconds, both inclusive, and the 

base fabric starts burning at places other 

than the point of impingement as a 

result of the surface flash (test result 

code SFBB). 

(c) * * * 

(2) Raised surface textile fabric. Such 

textiles in their original state and/or 

after refurbishing as described in 

§ 1610.6(a) and § 1610.6(b), when tested 

as described in § 1610.6, shall be 

classified as Class 3, Rapid and Intense 

Burning, when the time of flame spread 

is less than 4.0 seconds, and the base 

fabric starts burning at places other than 

the point of impingement as a result of 

the surface flash (test result code SFBB). 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 73231 

TABLE 1 TO § 1610.4—SUMMARY OF TEST CRITERIA FOR SPECIMEN CLASSIFICATION

[See § 1610.7] 

Class Plain surface textile fabric Raised surface textile fabric 

1 .................... Burn time is 3.5 seconds or more. ACCEPTABLE (3.5 seconds is a pass).(1) Burn time is greater than 7.0 seconds; or (2) Burn time is 

less than or equal to 7.0 seconds with no SFBB test result 

code. Exhibits rapid surface flash only. ACCEPTABLE—Normal Flammability. 

2 .................... Class 2 is not applicable to plain surface textile fabrics ............ Burn time is 4.0 to 7.0 seconds (inclusive) with base burn 

(SFBB). ACCEPTABLE—Intermediate Flammability. 

3 .................... Burn time is less than 3.5 seconds. NOT ACCEPTABLE ......... Burn time is less than 4.0 seconds with base burn (SFBB). 

NOT ACCEPTABLE—Rapid and Intense Burning. 

Note: SFBB poi and SFBB poi* are not considered a base burn for determining Class 2 and 3 fabrics. 

■ 4. Amend § 1610.5 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(2)(ii), (b)(6), and (b)(7) to 

read as follows: 

§ 1610.5 Test apparatus and materials. 

(a) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) Stop thread supply. This supply, 

consisting of a spool of 3-ply, white, 

mercerized, 100% cotton sewing thread, 

with a Tex size of 40 ±5 Tex, shall be 

fastened to the side of the chamber and 

can be withdrawn by releasing the 

thumbscrew holding it in position. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(6) Commercial dry cleaning machine. 

The commercial dry cleaning machine 

shall be capable of providing a complete 

automatic dry-to-dry cycle using 

perchloroethylene solvent or 

hydrocarbon solvent and a cationic dry 

cleaning detergent as specified in 

§ 1610.6(b)(1)(i). 

(7) Dry cleaning solvent. The solvent 

shall be perchloroethylene, commercial 

grade, or hydrocarbon solvent, 

commercial grade. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Amend § 1610.6 by revising 

paragraphs (b)(1)(i)(A), (b)(1)(ii), 

and(b)(1)(iii) to read as follows: 

§ 1610.6 Test procedure. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(A) All samples shall be dry cleaned 

before they undergo the laundering 

procedure. Samples shall be dry cleaned 

in a commercial dry cleaning machine, 

using one of the following prescribed 

conditions: 

(1) For perchloroethylene: 

(i) Solvent: Perchloroethylene, 

commercial grade. 

(ii) Detergent class: Cationic. 

(iii) Cleaning time: 10–15 minutes. 

(iv) Extraction time: 3 minutes. 

(v) Drying Temperature: 60–66 °C 

(140–150 °F). 

(vi) Drying Time: 18–20 minutes. 

(vii) Cool Down/Deodorization time: 5 

minutes. 

(2) For hydrocarbon: 

(i) Solvent: Hydrocarbon. 

(ii) Detergent Class: Cationic. 

(iii) Cleaning Time: 20–25 minutes. 

(iv) Extraction Time: 4 minutes. 

(v) Drying Temperature: 60–66 °C 

(140–150 °F). 

(vi) Drying Time: 20–25 minutes. 

(vii) Cool Down/Deodorization Time: 

5 minutes. 

Samples shall be dry cleaned in a load 

that is 80% of the machine’s capacity. 

* * * * * 

(ii) Laundering procedure. The 

sample, after being subjected to the dry 

cleaning procedure, shall be washed 

and dried one time in accordance with 

section 9.2, section 9.4, section 12.2(A), 

Table I ‘‘(1) Normal,’’ ‘‘(IV) Hot,’’ and 

Table VI ‘‘(Aiii) Permanent Press’’ of 

AATCC LP1–2021 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 1610.6(b)(1)(iii)). 

Washing shall be performed in 

accordance with the detergent (powder) 

specified in section 9.4 of AATCC LP1– 

2021; parameters for water level, 

agitator speed, stroke length, washing 

time, spin speed, spin time, and wash 

temperature specified in Table I, 

‘‘Standard Washing Machine 

Parameters,’’ ‘‘(1) Normal’’ and ‘‘(IV) 

Hot’’ of AATCC LP1–2021; and a 

maximum wash load as specified in 

section 9.2 of AATCC LP1–2021, which 

may consist of any combination of test 

samples and dummy pieces. Drying 

shall be performed in accordance with 

section 12.2(A) of AATCC LP1–2021, 

Tumble Dry, using the exhaust 

temperature and cool down time 

specified in Table VI, ‘‘Standard Tumble 

Dryer Parameters,’’ ‘‘(Aiii) Permanent 

Press’’ of AATCC LP1–2021. 

(iii) AATCC LP1–2021, Laboratory 

Procedure for Home Laundering: 

Machine Washing, 2021, is incorporated 

by reference. 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. A read-only 

copy of the standard is available for 

viewing on the AATCC website. You 

may obtain a copy from the American 

Association of Textile Chemists and 

Colorists, P.O. Box 12215, Research 

Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709; 

telephone (919) 549–8141; 

www.aatcc.org. You may inspect a copy 

at the Office of the Secretary, U.S. 

Consumer Product Safety Commission, 

Room 710, 4330 East-West Highway, 

Bethesda, MD 20814, telephone (301) 

504–7479, email cpsc-os@cpsc.gov, or at 

the National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, email fr.inspection@

nara.gov, or go to: www.archives.gov/ 

federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Amend § 1610.7 by revising 

paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 1610.7 Test sequence and classification 

criteria. 

* * * * * 

(b) Test sequence and classification 

criteria. (1) Step 1, Plain Surface Textile 

Fabrics in the original state. 

(i) Conduct preliminary tests in 

accordance with § 1610.6(a)(2)(i) to 

determine the fastest burning direction 

of the fabric. 

(ii) Prepare and test five specimens 

from the fastest burning direction. The 

burn times determine whether to assign 

the preliminary classification and 

proceed to § 1610.6(b) or to test five 

additional specimens. 

(iii) Assign the preliminary 

classification of Class 1, Normal 

Flammability, and proceed to 

§ 1610.6(b) when: 

(A) There are no burn times; or 

(B) There is only one burn time, and 

it is equal to or greater than 3.5 seconds; 

or 

(C) The average burn time of two or 

more specimens is equal to or greater 

than 3.5 seconds. 

(iv) Test five additional specimens 

when there is either only one burn time, 

and it is less than 3.5 seconds; or there 

is an average burn time of less than 3.5 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
73232 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 

seconds. Test these five additional 

specimens from the fastest burning 

direction as previously determined by 

the preliminary specimens. The burn 

times for the 10 specimens determine 

whether to: 

(A) Stop testing and assign the final 

classification as Class 3, Rapid and 

Intense Burning, only when there are 

two or more burn times with an average 

burn time of less than 3.5 seconds; or 

(B) Assign the preliminary 

classification of Class 1, Normal 

Flammability, and proceed to 

§ 1610.6(b) when there are two or more 

burn times with an average burn time of 

3.5 seconds or greater. 

(v) If there is only one burn time out 

of the 10 test specimens, the test is 

inconclusive. The fabric cannot be 

classified. 

(2) Step 2, Plain Surface Textile 

Fabrics after refurbishing in accordance 

with § 1610.6(b)(1). 

(i) Conduct preliminary tests in 

accordance with § 1610.6(a)(2)(i) to 

determine the fastest burning direction 

of the fabric. 

(ii) Prepare and test five specimens 

from the fastest burning direction. The 

burn times determine whether to stop 

testing and assign the preliminary 

classification or to test five additional 

specimens. 

(iii) Stop testing and assign the 

preliminary classification of Class 1, 

Normal Flammability, when: 

(A) There are no burn times; or 

(B) There is only one burn time, and 

it is equal to or greater than 3.5 seconds; 

or 

(C) The average burn time of two or 

more specimens is equal to or greater 

than 3.5 seconds. 

(iv) Test five additional specimens 

when there is only one burn time, and 

it is less than 3.5 seconds; or there is an 

average burn time less than 3.5 seconds. 

Test five additional specimens from the 

fastest burning direction as previously 

determined by the preliminary 

specimens. The burn times for the 10 

specimens determine the preliminary 

classification when: 

(A) There are two or more burn times 

with an average burn time of 3.5 

seconds or greater. The preliminary 

classification is Class 1, Normal 

Flammability; or 

(B) There are two or more burn times 

with an average burn time of less than 

3.5 seconds. The preliminary and final 

classification is Class 3, Rapid and 

Intense Burning; or 

(v) If there is only one burn time out 

of the 10 specimens, the test results are 

inconclusive. The fabric cannot be 

classified. 

(3) Step 1, Raised Surface Textile 

Fabric in the original state. 

(i) Determine the area to be most 

flammable per § 1610.6(a)(3)(i). 

(ii) Prepare and test five specimens 

from the most flammable area. The burn 

times and visual observations determine 

whether to assign a preliminary 

classification and proceed to § 1610.6(b) 

or to test five additional specimens. 

(iii) Assign the preliminary 

classification and proceed to § 1610.6(b) 

when: 

(A) There are no burn times. The 

preliminary classification is Class 1, 

Normal Flammability; or 

(B) There is only one burn time and 

it is less than 4.0 seconds without an 

SFBB test result code, or it is 4.0 

seconds or greater with or without am 

SFBB test result code. The preliminary 

classification is Class 1, Normal 

Flammability; or 

(C) There are no base burns (SFBB) 

regardless of the burn time(s). The 

preliminary classification is Class 1, 

Normal Flammability; or 

(D) There are two or more burn times 

with an average burn time of 0.0 to 7.0 

seconds with a surface flash only. The 

preliminary classification is Class 1, 

Normal Flammability; or 

(E) There are two or more burn times 

with an average burn time greater than 

7.0 seconds with any number of base 

burns (SFBB). The preliminary 

classification is Class 1, Normal 

Flammability; or 

(F) There are two or more burn times 

with an average burn time of 4.0 

through 7.0 seconds (both inclusive) 

with no more than one base burn 

(SFBB). The preliminary classification is 

Class 1, Normal Flammability; or 

(G) There are two or more burn times 

with an average burn time less than 4.0 

seconds with no more than one base 

burn (SFBB). The preliminary 

classification is Class 1, Normal 

Flammability; or 

(H) There are two or more burn times 

with an average burn time of 4.0 

through 7.0 seconds (both inclusive) 

with two or more base burns (SFBB). 

The preliminary classification is Class 2, 

Intermediate Flammability. 

(iv) Test five additional specimens 

when the tests of the initial five 

specimens result in either of the 

following: There is only one burn time 

and it is less than 4.0 seconds with a 

base burn (SFBB); or the average of two 

or more burn times is less than 4.0 

seconds with two or more base burns 

(SFBB). Test these five additional 

specimens from the most flammable 

area. The burn times and visual 

observations for the 10 specimens will 

determine whether to: 

(A) Stop testing and assign the final 

classification only if the average burn 

time for the 10 specimens is less than 

4.0 seconds with three or more base 

burns (SFBB). The final classification is 

Class 3, Rapid and Intense Burning; or 

(B) Assign the preliminary 

classification and continue on to 

§ 1610.6(b) when: 

(1) The average burn time is less than 

4.0 seconds with no more than two base 

burns (SFBB). The preliminary 

classification is Class 1, Normal 

Flammability; or 

(2) The average burn time is 4.0 to 7.0 

seconds (both inclusive) with no more 

than 2 base burns (SFBB). The 

preliminary classification is Class 1, 

Normal Flammability; or 

(3) The average burn time is greater 

than 7.0 seconds. The preliminary 

classification is Class 1, Normal 

Flammability; or 

(4) The average burn time is 4.0 to 7.0 

seconds (both inclusive) with three or 

more base burns (SFBB). The 

preliminary classification is Class 2, 

Intermediate Flammability; or 

(v) If there is only one burn time out 

of the 10 specimens, the test is 

inconclusive. The fabric cannot be 

classified. 

(4) Step 2, Raised Surface Textile 

Fabric After Refurbishing in accordance 

with § 1610.6(b). 

(i) Determine the area to be most 

flammable in accordance with 

§ 1610.6(a)(3)(i). 

(ii) Prepare and test five specimens 

from the most flammable area. Burn 

times and visual observations determine 

whether to stop testing and determine 

the preliminary classification or to test 

five additional specimens. 

(iii) Stop testing and assign the 

preliminary classification when: 

(A) There are no burn times. The 

preliminary classification is Class 1, 

Normal Flammability; or 

(B) There is only one burn time, and 

it is less than 4.0 seconds without an 

SFBB test result code; or it is 4.0 

seconds or greater with or without an 

SFBB test result code. The preliminary 

classification is Class 1, Normal 

Flammability; or 

(C) There are no base burns (SFBB) 

regardless of the burn time(s). The 

preliminary classification is Class 1, 

Normal Flammability; or 

(D) There are two or more burn times 

with an average burn time of 0.0 to 7.0 

seconds with a surface flash only. The 

preliminary classification is Class 1, 

Normal Flammability; or 

(E) There are two or more burn times 

with an average burn time greater than 

7.0 seconds with any number of base 

burns (SFBB). The preliminary 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 73233 

classification is Class 1, Normal 

Flammability; or 

(F) There are two or more burn times 

with an average burn time of 4.0 to 7.0 

seconds (both inclusive) with no more 

than one base burn (SFBB). The 

preliminary classification is Class 1, 

Normal Flammability; or 

(G) There are two or more burn times 

with an average burn time less than 4.0 

seconds with no more than one base 

burn (SFBB). The preliminary 

classification is Class 1, Normal 

Flammability; or 

(H) There are two or more burn times 

with an average burn time of 4.0 to 7.0 

seconds (both inclusive) with two or 

more base burns (SFBB). The 

preliminary classification is Class 2, 

Intermediate Flammability. 

(iv) Test five additional specimens 

when the tests of the initial five 

specimens result in either of the 

following: There is only one burn time, 

and it is less than 4.0 seconds with a 

base burn (SFBB); or the average of two 

or more burn times is less than 4.0 

seconds with two or more base burns 

(SFBB). 

(v) If required, test five additional 

specimens from the most flammable 

area. The burn times and visual 

observations for the 10 specimens 

determine the preliminary classification 

when: 

(A) The average burn time is less than 

4.0 seconds with no more than two base 

burns (SFBB). The preliminary 

classification is Class 1, Normal 

Flammability; or 

(B) The average burn time is less than 

4.0 seconds with three or more base 

burns (SFBB). The preliminary and final 

classification is Class 3, Rapid and 

Intense Burning; or 

(C) The average burn time is greater 

than 7.0 seconds. The preliminary 

classification is Class 1, Normal 

Flammability; or 

(D) The average burn time is 4.0 to 7.0 

seconds (both inclusive), with no more 

than two base burns (SFBB). The 

preliminary classification is Class 1, 

Normal Flammability; or 

(E) The average burn time is 4.0 to 7.0 

seconds (both inclusive), with three or 

more base burns (SFBB). The 

preliminary classification is Class 2, 

Intermediate Flammability; or 

(vi) If there is only one burn time out 

of the 10 specimens, the test is 

inconclusive. The fabric cannot be 

classified. 

■ 7. Amend § 1610.8 by revising 

paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 1610.8 Reporting results. 

* * * * * 

(b) Test result codes. The following 

are definitions for the test result codes, 

which shall be used for recording 

flammability results for each specimen 

that is burned. 

(1) For Plain Surface Textile Fabrics: 

(i) DNI Did not ignite. 

(ii) IBE Ignited, but extinguished. 

(iii) _._sec. Actual burn time 

measured and recorded by the timing 

device. 

(2) For Raised Surface Textile Fabrics: 

(i) _._SFBB Time in seconds, surface 

flash base burn starting at places other 

than the point of impingement as a 

result of surface flash. 

(ii) _._SFBB poi Time in seconds, 

surface flash base burn starting at the 

point of impingement. 

(iii) _._SFBB poi* Time in seconds, 

surface flash base burn possibly starting 

at the point of impingement. The 

asterisk is accompanied by the 

following statement: ‘‘Unable to make 

absolute determination as to source of 

base burns.’’ This statement is added to 

the result of any specimen if there is a 

question as to origin of the base burn. 

(iv) _._SF only Time in seconds, 

surface flash only. No damage to the 

base fabric. 

(v) SF poi Surface flash, at the point 

of impingement only (equivalent to ‘‘did 

not ignite’’ for plain surfaces). 

(vi) SF uc Surface flash, under the 

stop thread, but does not break the stop 

thread. 

(vii) SF pw Surface flash, part way. 

No time shown because the surface flash 

did not reach the stop thread. 

Alberta E. Mills, 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2023–23388 Filed 10–24–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[MB Docket No. 23–280; RM–11957; DA 23– 

980; FR ID 179873] 

Television Broadcasting Services 

Colusa, California 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Video Division, Media 

Bureau (Bureau) has before it a Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking issued in 

response to a Petition for Rulemaking 

filed by One Ministries, Inc. (Petitioner). 

The Petitioner requests the allotment of 

reserved noncommercial educational 

(NCE) channel *2 to Colusa, California 

(Colusa), in the Table of TV Allotments 

as the community’s first local television 

service. The Petitioner filed comments 

in support of the petition, as required by 

the Commission’s rules, reaffirming its 

commitment to apply for channel *2, 

and if authorized, to construct the 

facility. 

DATES: Effective November 24, 2023. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joyce Bernstein, Media Bureau, at (202) 

418–1647 or Joyce.Bernstein@fcc.gov; or 

Emily Harrison, Media Bureau, at (202) 

418–1665 or Emily.Harrison@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

proposed rule was published at 88 FR 

57031 on August 22, 2023. The 

Petitioner filed comments in support of 

the petition reaffirming its commitment 

to apply for channel *2. No other 

comments were filed. 

The Bureau believes the public 

interest would be served by allotting 

channel *2 at Colusa, which has a 

population of 6,411 and clearly qualifies 

for community of license status for 

allotment purposes. As stated in the 

NPRM, Petitioner provides that Colusa 

is the seat of Colusa County and is 

known for its agricultural production. 

The Petitioner further states that Colusa 

has a mayor, mayor pro tem, and three 

council members; police, public works, 

parks and recreation, planning, fire, and 

utility departments; a library, airport, 

and numerous businesses and places of 

worship; and its own zip code. In 

addition, the proposal would result in a 

first local service to Colusa under the 

Commission’s second allotment priority. 

The Petitioner demonstrates, and a staff 

engineering analysis confirms, that 

channel *2 can be allotted to Colusa 

consistent with the minimum 

geographic spacing requirements for 

new DTV allotments in section 

73.623(d) of the rules. In addition, the 

allotment point complies with section 

73.625(a)(1) of the rules as the entire 

community of Colusa is encompassed 

by the 35 dBm contour. 

This is a synopsis of the 

Commission’s Report and Order, MB 

Docket No. 23–280; RM–11957; DA 23– 

980, adopted October 16, 2023, and 

released October 16, 2023. The full text 

of this document is available for 

download at https://www.fcc.gov/edocs. 

To request materials in accessible 

formats for people with disabilities 

(braille, large print, electronic files, 

audio format), send an email to fcc504@

fcc.gov or call the Consumer & 

Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202– 

418–0530 (voice), 202–418–0432 (tty). 

This document does not contain 

information collection requirements 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1