This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

91586 

Vol. 89, No. 224 

Wednesday, November 20, 2024 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE 

CORPORATION 

12 CFR Part 375 

RIN 3064–AG07 

Recordkeeping for Custodial 

Accounts; Extension of Comment 

Period 

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation (FDIC). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

extension of comment period. 

SUMMARY: On October 2, 2024, the FDIC 

published in the Federal Register a 

proposed rule that would strengthen 

FDIC-insured depository institutions’ 

(IDI) recordkeeping for custodial deposit 

accounts with transactional features and 

preserve beneficial owners’ and 

depositors’ entitlement to the 

protections afforded by Federal deposit 

insurance. The proposed rule provided 

for a 60-day comment period, which 

closes on December 2, 2024. The FDIC 

has determined that an extension of the 

comment period until January 16, 2025, 

is appropriate. This action will allow 

interested parties additional time to 

analyze the proposal and prepare 

comments. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

proposed rule that published at 89 FR 

80135 (October 2, 2024) is extended. 

Comments must be received on or 

before January 16, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this document using any of the 

following methods: 

• Agency Website: https://

www.fdic.gov/resources/regulations/ 

federal-register-publications/. Follow 

the instructions for submitting 

comments on the agency website. 

• Email: comments@FDIC.gov. 

Include RIN 3064–AG07 in the subject 

line of the message. 

• Mail: James P. Sheesley, Assistant 

Executive Secretary, Attention: 

Comments—RIN 3064–AG07, Federal 

Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th 

Street NW, Washington, DC 20429. 

• Hand Delivery: Comments may be 

hand delivered to the guard station at 

the rear of the 550 17th Street NW 

Building (located on F Street) on 

business days between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. 

• Public Inspection: Comments 

received, including any personal 

information provided, may be posted 

without change to https://www.fdic.gov/ 

resources/regulations/federal-registerpublications/. Commenters should 

submit only information that the 

commenter wishes to make available 

publicly. The FDIC may review, redact, 

or refrain from posting all or any portion 

of any comment that it may deem to be 

inappropriate for publication, such as 

irrelevant or obscene material. The FDIC 

may post only a single representative 

example of identical or substantially 

identical comments, and in such cases 

will generally identify the number of 

identical or substantially identical 

comments represented by the posted 

example. All comments that have been 

redacted, as well as those that have not 

been posted, that contain comments on 

the merits of the notice will be retained 

in the public comment file and will be 

considered as required under all 

applicable laws. All comments may be 

accessible under the Freedom of 

Information Act. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Division of Resolutions and 

Receiverships: Shivali Nangia, Assistant 

Director, 972–761–2945, SNangia@

FDIC.gov; Cathy K. Davis, Chief, Claims, 

972–761–2336, CDavis@FDIC.gov. 

Division of Depositor and Consumer 

Protection: Luke H. Brown, Associate 

Director, Supervisory Policy, 202–898– 

3842, LuBrown@FDIC.gov; Meron 

Wondwosen, Assistant Director, 

Supervisory Policy, 202–898–7211, 

MeWondwosen@FDIC.gov; Edward J. 

Hof, Senior Policy Analyst, 202–898– 

7213, EdwHof@FDIC.gov. Legal 

Division: Vivek V. Khare, Senior 

Counsel, 202–898–6847, VKhare@

FDIC.gov; James S. Watts, Counsel, 202– 

898–6678, JWatts@FDIC.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

October 2, 2024, the FDIC published in 

the Federal Register (89 FR 80135) a 

document proposing requirements to 

strengthen IDI recordkeeping for 

custodial deposit accounts with 

transactional features. The proposed 

rule stated that the comment period 

would close on December 2, 2024. The 

FDIC has received requests to extend the 

comment period. After reviewing the 

requests, the agency finds it appropriate 

to grant the requests and extend the 

comment period by an additional 45 

days. An extension of the comment 

period will provide additional 

opportunity for the public to prepare 

comments to address the matters raised 

by the proposed rule. Therefore, the 

FDIC is extending the comment period 

for the recordkeeping-related proposed 

rule from December 2, 2024, to January 

16, 2025. 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 

Dated at Washington, DC, on November 15, 

2024. 

James P. Sheesley, 

Assistant Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2024–27097 Filed 11–19–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

16 CFR Parts 1112 and 1250 

[CPSC Docket No. CPSC–2024–0039] 

Mandatory Toy Safety Standards: 

Requirements for Neck Floats 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA) 

mandates that ASTM F963 shall be a 

mandatory toy safety standard. This toy 

safety standard sets forth only minimal 

labeling requirements for aquatic toys 

such as neck floats. The U.S. Consumer 

Product Safety Commission (CPSC or 

Commission) proposes to establish new 

performance and revised labeling 

requirements to address potentially 

deadly hazards associated with neck 

floats. The Commission also proposes to 

amend CPSC’s list of notice of 

requirements (NORs) to include neck 

floats. 

DATES: Submit comments by January 21, 

2025. Submit comments related to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act aspects of the 

marking, labeling, and instructional 

literature requirements by January 21, 

2025 

ADDRESSES: Submit all comments, 

identified by Docket No. CPSC–2024- 

0039, by any of the following methods: 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91587 

1Since the CPSIA’s enactment in 2008, ASTM 

revised F963 five times: ASTM F963–08, ASTM 

F963–11, ASTM F963–16, ASTM F963–17, and 

ASTM F963–23 (approved August 1, 2023). 

2Section 3.1.92 of ASTM F963–23 defines a toy 

as: ‘‘Any object designed, manufactured, or 

marketed as a plaything for children under 14 years 

of age.’’ 

3On October 23, 2024, the Commission voted (5– 

0) to publish this NPR. 4On September 9, 2024, the Commission 

published an NPR to establish a mandatory 

standard for water beads, under Section 106(a) of 

the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 

2008 (CPSIA). Safety Standard for Toys: 

Requirements for Water Beads, 89 FR 73024. This 

NPR also proposed to revise the title of part 1250 

from ‘‘Safety Standard Mandating ASTM F963 for 

Toys’’ to ‘‘Safety Standards for Toys.’’ 

Electronic Submissions: Submit 

electronic comments to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at: https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Do not submit through this website: 

confidential business information, trade 

secret information, or other sensitive or 

protected information that you do not 

want to be available to the public. CPSC 

typically does not accept comments 

submitted by email, except as described 

below. 

Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier/ 

Confidential Written Submissions: CPSC 

encourages you to submit electronic 

comments by using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal. You may, however, 

submit comments by mail, hand 

delivery, or courier to: Office of the 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, 4330 East-West Highway, 

Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone: (301) 

504–7479. If you wish to submit 

confidential business information, trade 

secret information, or other sensitive or 

protected information that you do not 

want to be available to the public, you 

may submit such comments by mail, 

hand delivery, or courier, or you may 

email them to: cpsc-os@cpsc.gov. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include the agency name and docket 

number. CPSC may post all comments 

without change, including any personal 

identifiers, contact information, or other 

personal information provided, to 

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

submit through this website: 

Confidential business information, trade 

secret information, or other sensitive or 

protected information that you do not 

want to be available to the public. If you 

wish to submit such information, please 

submit it according to the instructions 

for mail/hand delivery/courier/ 

confidential written submissions. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to: https://

www.regulations.gov, and insert the 

docket number, CPSC–2024–0039, into 

the ‘‘Search’’ box, and follow the 

prompts. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Zachary Goldstein, Project Manager, 

Division of Mechanical Engineering, 

Directorate for Laboratory Sciences, 

Consumer Product Safety Commission, 

5 Research Place, Rockville, MD 20850; 

telephone 301–987–2472; email: 

zgoldstein@cpsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background and Statutory Authority 

Section 106(a) of the Consumer 

Product Safety Improvement Act of 

2008 (CPSIA) made ASTM 

International’s (ASTM) voluntary 

standard for toys, ASTM F963–07, 

Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Toy Safety (except 

sections 4.2 and Annex 4), a mandatory 

safety standard for toys beginning 180 

days after the enactment date of the 

CPSIA. 15 U.S.C. 2056b(a). The CPSIA 

states that ASTM F963 shall be 

considered a consumer product safety 

standard issued by the Commission 

under section 9 of the Consumer 

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

2058). Since 2009, CPSC has enforced 

ASTM F963 as a mandatory standard for 

toys.1 2 In 2017, the Commission 

codified the mandatory toy standard in 

16 CFR part 1250, Safety Standard 

Mandating ASTM F963 for Toys, and 

incorporated by reference the newly 

revised ASTM standard at that time, 

ASTM F963–16. 82 FR 8989 (Feb. 2, 

2017). Most recently, on January 18, 

2024, the Commission updated part 

1250 to incorporate by reference a 2023 

revision, ASTM F963–23. 89 FR 3344. 

ASTM F963–23 and 16 CFR part 1250 

contain requirements for a category of 

toys known as ‘‘aquatic toys.’’ Section 

3.1.4 of ASTM F963–23 defines an 

aquatic toy as an ‘‘an article, whether 

inflatable or not, intended to bear the 

mass of a child and used as an 

instrument of play in shallow water. 

This does not include bath toys, beach 

balls, and United States Coast Guardapproved life saving devices.’’ 16 CFR 

part 1250. 

Section 5.4 of ASTM F963–23 (which 

is an element of the mandatory standard 

pursuant to CPSIA section 106 and 16 

CFR part 1250) contains labeling 

requirements for ‘‘aquatic toys,’’ which 

include neck floats. The ASTM 

requirements are intended to 

communicate to the consumer that an 

aquatic toy is not a lifesaving device and 

to warn against leaving a child 

unattended while using the flotation 

device. However, as discussed in 

section IV of this preamble, ASTM 

F963–23 does not establish adequate 

requirements specific to neck floats 

because it does not include any 

performance requirements for these 

toys. Incident data, described in section 

III of this preamble, demonstrate that 

children have suffered drowning 

injuries and deaths associated with the 

use of neck floats. Accordingly, as 

described in section IV of this preamble, 

neck floats that comply with the 

labeling requirements in ASTM F963– 

23 still pose safety hazards. 

This notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPR) under section 106 of the CPSIA 

proposes additional requirements in 

part 1250 to establish a mandatory 

standard for neck floats which includes 

performance requirements and 

improved warning labels. CPSC 

proposes to define a ‘‘neck float’’ as ‘‘an 

article, whether inflatable or not, that 

encircles the neck, supports the weight 

of the child by being secured around the 

neck (such as by fastening, tightening, 

or other methods), and is used as an 

instrument of play in water 

environments including sinks, baths, 

paddling pools, and swimming pools, 

and is intended for use by children up 

to and including 4 years of age.’’ 

Further, this NPR proposes revising the 

title of part 1250 from ‘‘Safety Standard 

Mandating ASTM F963 for Toys’’ to 

‘‘Safety Standards for Toys,’’ to reflect 

the inclusion of additional proposed 

requirements that are not included in 

the existing requirements in ASTM 

F963.3 4

The Commission is authorized to 

issue this NPR pursuant to both sections 

106(c) and (d) of the CPSIA, 15 U.S.C. 

2056b(c) and (d). Section 106(c) requires 

the Commission to periodically review 

and revise its mandatory toy safety 

standards to ensure that such standards 

provide the highest level of safety for 

toys that is feasible. Section 106(d) 

further requires the Commission to 

examine and assess the effectiveness of 

its mandatory toy safety standards in 

protecting children from safety hazards, 

and then to promulgate consumer 

product safety standards that are more 

stringent than existing the existing 

standards if the Commission determines 

that more stringent standards would 

further reduce the risk of injury 

associated with such toys. Consistent 

with the consultation requirement in 

section 106(d)(1) of the CPSIA, staff has 

worked with the ASTM F15.22 

subcommittee task group since 2009 to 

update the toy standard. In addition, 

since August 2021, CPSC staff has been 

corresponding with the relevant ASTM 

Subcommittee and task group to discuss 

hazards associated with neck floats, 

including by sharing incident data 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
91588 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

5Section 3.1.4, in the definition of ‘‘Latex 

balloon,’’ of ASTM F963–23 includes a list of toys 

that are used in aquatic activities such as rafts, 

water wings, swim rings, or other similar items. 

associated with neck floats as well as 

staff’s recommendation to develop 

performance requirements to address 

the hazards identified in the incident 

data. 

Building on staff’s continued 

collaboration with ASTM and in 

consideration of the incident data, the 

Commission is issuing this NPR to 

address four identified hazard patterns 

associated with neck floats that are not 

adequately addressed by the current 

mandatory standard provision 

addressing aquatic toys. Specifically, 

the Commission proposes to address the 

following known hazards: (1) children 

slipping through the product due to 

deflation or underinflation; (2) children 

slipping through the product for reasons 

other than deflation or underinflation; 

(3) children slipping through the 

product due to a restraint system failure; 

and (4) children submerging in water 

without slipping through the product. 

Each of these hazard patterns presents a 

risk of drowning. The Commission 

proposes adding performance 

requirements to part 1250 to address 

these risks. The NPR also proposes 

revising labeling requirements for neck 

floats under part 1250, including 

mandating warnings on products and 

instructional literature. Lastly, the 

Commission is proposing a stockpiling 

prohibition under part 1250 for neck 

floats pursuant to section 9(g)(2) of the 

CPSA. 15 U.S.C. 2058(9)(g)(2). 

This NPR provides an overview of 

staff’s assessment and analysis, and it 

includes the Commission’s basis for 

issuing the proposed rule. For the 

reasons explained here, the Commission 

preliminarily determines that the 

proposed neck float requirements 

comply with section 106 of the CPSIA 

because they are more stringent than the 

current requirements in ASTM F963–23, 

would further reduce the risk of injury 

associated with neck floats and would 

achieve the highest level of safety that 

is feasible for such products. The 

Commission seeks comments on these 

issues. 

II. Description of Toys Within the Scope 

of the Rule 

Neck floats are aquatic toys that are 

typically ring-shaped tubes with 

discontinuous ends that wrap around a 

child’s neck. This placement is intended 

to allow the child’s head to float above 

the water while supporting their body. 

As is the case with other aquatic toys,5

this design is intended to allow the 

child to float and play in water when a 

child is incapable of floating on their 

own. 

Neck floats are available as both 

inflatable and non-inflatable products. 

Inflatable variants rely on air to provide 

buoyancy and are generally packaged 

and distributed while deflated. 

Caregivers must inflate the neck float 

prior to their initial use and are 

generally advised to check and re-inflate 

the neck float prior to subsequent uses 

as well. Inflatable neck floats have not 

typically been sold with an air pump 

and are generally intended to be inflated 

by mouth. In contrast, an inherently 

buoyant neck float likely does not 

require any additional efforts from the 

caregiver to ensure that it floats. 

Market research indicates that 

inflatable neck floats are primarily 

composed of plastic sheeting, typically 

polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic, held 

together through a process known as 

PVC welding. This manufacturing 

process fuses the plastic sheeting 

together by applying heat that melts the 

individual sheets (Foreman, 2024). The 

restraint systems of these neck floats 

also appear to be joined to the product 

using PVC welding. Non-inflatable or 

inherently buoyant neck floats are 

generally composed of two components, 

a buoyant internal ring made of open- or 

closed-cell foam that provides the neck 

float’s shape and flotation, and a fabric 

cover that encases the foam, typically 

secured with a zipper, where the 

restraint systems are stitched into the 

fabric cover. 

Neck floats are advertised for use by 

infants and toddlers based on 

minimum/maximum weight and 

suggested age ranges to identify 

appropriate product sizes. Most retailers 

advertise the products for children 0 to 

6 months for small sizes, 6 to 18 months 

for medium sizes, and 2 to 5 years for 

large sizes. The products generally are 

marketed for use in bathtubs and pools 

with direct parental supervision. Retail 

prices for neck float products intended 

for children typically range from $10 to 

$60 depending on material type and art 

design, with inherently buoyant 

products being more expensive than 

inflatable products. 

Section 3.1.92 of ASTM F963–23 

defines a ‘‘toy’’ as ‘‘any object designed, 

manufactured, or marketed as a 

plaything for children under 14 years of 

age.’’ Section 3.1.4 ASTM F963–23 

defines an ‘‘aquatic toy’’ as ‘‘an article, 

whether inflatable or not, intended to 

bear the mass of a child and used as an 

instrument of play in shallow water. 

This does not include bath toys, beach 

balls, and United States Coast Guardapproved life saving devices.’’ Neck 

floats are subject to the mandatory toy 

standard as an aquatic toy because they 

are instruments of play that are 

designed to allow a child to play in 

water, including shallow water. In this 

NPR’s proposed rule, the Commission 

defines a ‘‘neck float’’ as ‘‘an article, 

whether inflatable or not, that encircles 

the neck, supports the weight of the 

child by being secured around the neck 

(such as by fastening, tightening, or 

other methods), is used as an instrument 

of play in water environments including 

sinks, baths, paddling pools and 

swimming pools, and is intended for 

use by children up to and including 4 

years of age.’’ 

Neck floats include: (1) inflatable 

neck floats; (2) inherently buoyant (noninflatable) neck floats; and (3) neck 

floats that use a combination of 

inflatable and inherently buoyant 

components. All other products that are 

not neck floats, under the proposed 

definition of ‘‘neck float’’ in § 1250.5(b), 

are outside the scope of this rule. Lifesaving flotation devices regulated by the 

Coast Guard, including those that attach 

to the neck of a user, are also outside the 

scope of this rule. 

III. Incident Data and Hazard Patterns 

The incidents and hazard patterns 

associated with neck floats are based on 

CPSC’s Consumer Product Safety Risk 

Management System (CPSRMS). 

CPSRMS includes data primarily from 

three groups of sources: incident 

reports, death certificates, and in-depth 

follow-up investigation reports (IDIs). A 

large portion of CPSRMS consists of 

incident reports from consumer 

complaints, media reports, medical 

examiner or coroner reports, retailer or 

manufacturer reports (incident reports 

received from a retailer or manufacturer 

involving a product they sell or make), 

safety advocacy groups, law firms, and 

federal, state, or local authorities, among 

others. It also contains death certificates 

that CPSC purchases from all 50 states, 

based on selected external cause of 

death codes (ICD–10). The third major 

component of CPSRMS is the collection 

of in-depth follow-up investigation 

reports. The CPSRMS incidents 

identified for neck floats occurred from 

January 1, 2019, through January 25, 

2024; however, the National Electronic 

Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) 

database contained no incident reports 

during that time period referencing neck 

floats. 

From January 2019 through January 

2024, staff identified 115 incidents in 

CPSRMS associated with the use of neck 

floats. Two of these incidents resulted 

in a fatality, two incidents led to 

hospitalization, five incidents led to 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91589 

6Hyponatremia is a low concentration of sodium 

in the blood, which can cause neurological and 

metabolic problems. 

7Hypokalemia is a low concentration of 

potassium in the blood, which can cause 

neurological and metabolic problems. 

8The risk for partial slip-through poses the risk 

of aspiration of water through the mouth even if the 

nose is not submerged. 

emergency department (ED) treatment, 

and one incident led to care by a 

medical professional. The remaining 

105 incidents identified in CPSRMS 

noted home care, possible but uncertain 

medical treatment, or the level of care 

was not reported. In many of the nonfatal incidents, drowning appears to 

have been averted only due to quick 

action by a caregiver to rescue the 

infant. Of the reported incidents that 

indicate a child’s age, children’s ages 

range from 17 days to 12 months old. 

Where specified, most incidents 

occurred in home bathtubs, though 

some reports indicated use in pools. 

A. Overview of Neck Float Hazards 

Based on staff’s assessment of the 

incident data reported in CPSRMS and 

publicly available consumer-uploaded 

pictures and videos of the product in 

use, the Commission determines that 

neck floats pose a risk of drowning that 

can result in severe injury or death 

because of slipping through a neck float 

or being submerged in the water while 

using a neck float. 

Drowning is a multiphase process of 

pathophysiological changes (e.g., 

asphyxia, electrolyte imbalance, blood 

volume changes, alterations in 

respiration) that results in death if not 

interrupted. In most drowning 

incidents, consciousness is lost after 

approximately two minutes, and 

irreversible brain damage occurs within 

four to six minutes. Survival without 

neurological impairment after five 

minutes is highly unlikely. Rapid 

initiation of CPR, which helps increase 

ventilation and oxygen delivery to the 

brain, will increase the chance for 

survival and/or optimal medical 

outcomes (Fields, 1992), such as in 

CPSC’s IDI 230317CCC3554. Victims 

who survive anoxic episodes, such as in 

IDI 210114HCC1250, may need 

prolonged specialized care, including 

occupational and physical therapy, and 

can face lifelong disabilities (e.g., 

learning, language, and memory) that 

impact their life and those who care for 

them. Victims who cannot be 

resuscitated at the scene, are 

resuscitated with weak breathing and 

heart rhythm, or are transported in 

critical condition, will most likely suffer 

severe neurological impairment that 

may lead to organ failure and death as 

described in IDIs 200915HFE0001 and 

190711CCC2487. Prolonged submersion 

in water for more than five to ten 

minutes usually leads to poorer 

prognosis or a fatal drowning. 

During the drowning process, a victim 

experiences respiratory distress 

impairment because of submersion or 

immersion in liquid in the victim’s 

airway (Van Beeck et al., 2005). The 

drowning process begins either when 

the child’s mouth and/or nose goes 

below the surface of the water 

(submersion) or when water splashes 

over the face (immersion). In most of the 

incidents, neck floats posed a risk of 

drowning because of a child’s head 

slipping through the product with 

submersion of the mouth and nose. 

Seventy-seven incidents reported 

submersion of a child’s airway (nose 

and/or mouth) in water either full (76 

incidents) or partial (one incident), after 

slipping through the product. 

Additionally, 87 incidents reported a 

child’s head slipping through the neck 

hole of the product. Three incidents 

report turning, rotating, or flipping in 

the product, leading to the submersion 

of the nose and mouth. Because infants 

generally cannot self-rescue, every slip 

through or submersion incident has the 

potential to be a drowning, resulting in 

injury or death, if caregivers do not 

intervene to quickly pull the infant from 

the water. 

When water enters the airway of the 

drowning victim, the victim will 

attempt to spit out, cough up as a reflex 

response, or swallow the water, often 

inhaling more water involuntarily 

(Szpilman et al., 2012; Orlowski et al, 

1989; Grmec et al., 2009). Incident 

reports describe choking, coughing, 

water ingestion, vomiting, and spitting 

up water. The risk of injury is 

dependent on the duration of 

submersion and amount of water that 

enters the lungs, as well as the 

immediacy of rescue and resuscitation 

efforts. Submersion durations were 

reported ranging from immediate 

rescue, where caregivers immediately 

pulled the child out of the water before 

the victim suffered any apparent 

injuries, to several minutes where the 

caregiver was not nearby or in the same 

room as the child. Water aspiration to 

the lungs and water ingestion can 

happen with very brief submersions. If 

the child is not rescued, the aspiration 

of water continues. 

When large amounts of fluid are 

aspirated into the lungs, there is drastic 

mechanical impairment of gaseous 

exchange and lung function when the 

aspirated water destroys the pulmonary 

surfactant and disrupts the alveolarcapillary membranes. This injury to the 

lung leads to pulmonary edema, 

decreased lung compliance, and 

decreased exchange of oxygen and 

carbon dioxide. Incidents in which a 

victim is minimally symptomatic 

typically resolve without sustaining 

serious injuries or requiring continued 

medical treatment, but swallowing or 

aspirating significant amounts of water 

can require medical attention or 

observation, especially for very young 

infants because of the risk of lung 

injury, hyponatremia,6 hypokalemia,7 or 

other types of electrolyte imbalance. 

In four incidents, caregivers 

performed medical treatment at home 

(IDIs 220714CCC1021, 230629CAA1660, 

210826CCC3606, 220714CCC3164). In 

two of those four incidents, caregivers 

intervened to resuscitate an infant that 

was not breathing after being pulled 

from the water (one report of CPR, IDI 

220714CCC1021, and one report of back 

thumps, I2360082A). In nine incidents, 

caregivers sought medical attention by 

going to an emergency department (IDIs 

230720CCC1766, 210826CCC1826, 

210901CCC3625, and reports 

Y227C309G and Y2170991A), calling 

911 (IDI 210910CCC1030), calling a 

nurse/medical helpline (IDIs 

230317CCC3555 and 210901CCC1904), 

or by visiting an urgent care (IDI 

210910CCC1029)). The two incidents 

reporting injuries that required hospital 

admission (IDIs 230317CCC3554 and 

210114HCC1250) and the two fatalities 

(IDIs 200915HFE0001 and 

190711CCC2487) occurred in a home 

bathtub with the infant being submerged 

for an unknown length of time. 

B. Incident Data Hazard Patterns 

A neck float’s ability to keep the 

child’s mouth and/or nose above the 

water depends on the product’s 

capability to remain buoyant and 

upright during use, and its ability to fit 

the child for the duration of use such 

that the child does not slip through the 

product’s center opening to the extent 

that their mouth and nose become 

submerged in water.8 Staff examined the 

available incident data, incident and 

exemplar samples of inflatable and 

inherently buoyant child neck floats, 

and publicly available consumeruploaded photos and videos 

demonstrating use of neck floats. Based 

on this information staff identified four 

hazard patterns associated with the risk 

of drowning: (1) slip-through not 

associated with inflation; (2) slipthrough associated with inflation; (3) 

slip-through associated with restraint 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
91590 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

8The risk for partial slip-through poses the risk 

of aspiration of water through the mouth even if the 

nose is not submerged. 

9There is not enough information in reports for 

four incidents to associate them with one of the four 

hazard patterns. 

10See WHO growth charts for girls and boys ages 

0 to 24 months: https://www.cdc.gov/growthcharts/ 

who/girls_length_weight.htm and https://

www.cdc.gov/growthcharts/who/boys_length_

weight.htm. 

11See ‘‘WHO child growth standards: head 

circumference-for-age, arm circumference-for-age, 

triceps skinfold-for-age and subscapular skinfoldfor-age: methods and development’’; https://

www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241547185. 

12See ‘‘Anthropometric Reference Data for 

Children and Adults: United States, 2015–2018,’’ 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, https:// 

www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_03/sr03-046- 

508.pdf. 

13See CEN/TR 13387–1:2018, Child care 

articles—General safety guidelines—Part 1: Safety 

philosophy and safety assessment: https://

standards.iteh.ai/catalog/standards/cen/586a9a9d14b2-4626-bae4-4e13a80ce111/cen-tr-13387-1-2018. 

14The measurement and study of the proportions 

of the head and face, especially during development 

and growth. 

system failure; and (4) submersion 

without slip-through.9

1. Slip-Through Not Associated With 

Inflation 

Fifty-two reported incidents involved 

an infant slipping through the product 

despite the neck float showing no signs 

of deflation, underinflation, or any other 

reported product issues. Forty-four of 

these incidents reported a child’s mouth 

and/or nose submerging under the 

water, posing a risk of drowning or 

otherwise aspirating water. The other 

seven incidents involved a caregiver’s 

immediate rescue which prevented 

submersion. Where reported, victims 

ranged in age from 17 days old to 8 

months old. One fatal incident, IDI 

200915HFE0001, involved the drowning 

of a 6-month-old female child using a 

neck float, who was unattended for an 

unknown amount of time in a bathtub. 

Upon returning, the mother found the 

neck float on the surface of the water, 

and the child was submerged in the tub, 

unresponsive. Subsequently, the child 

was hospitalized in critical condition 

and succumbed to her injuries six days 

later. 

It is common for neck floats to rely 

solely on the size of the center opening 

being smaller than the size of a child’s 

head to prevent the child’s mouth and/ 

or nose from submerging in water. Neck 

floats are typically marketed for a wide 

range of ages and weights. 

Anthropometric data provided by the 

World Health Organization (WHO),10 11

Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC),12 and other 

researchers (e.g., Schneider et al., 1986), 

demonstrate a large variability in 

weight, head, and neck dimensions for 

children, particularly head dimensions 

for children between the ages of 0 and 

12 months. In addition, children’s head 

weight data in the voluntary standard 

for childcare articles, CEN/TR 13387–1, 

Child care articles—General safety 

guidelines—Part 1: Safety philosophy 

and safety assessment, shows 

appreciable growth over the years, 

particularly between 0 and 12 months.13

This variability in sizes and weights 

increases the possibility of an ill-fitting 

neck float and increases the risk of a 

child slipping through the neck float. 

Furthermore, a child’s body weight 

and head mass will not necessarily 

correspond to their head, face, and neck 

dimensions. For instance, infants who 

have especially smaller dimensions, 

such as those who were born pre-term 

or those with developmental delays or 

other conditions that affect head size or 

shape, may have typical weights for 

their ages but their smaller 

cephalometry 14 predisposes them to a 

higher risk of slip-through.15

Additionally, children’s heads and faces 

are not uniformly spherical and are 

somewhat malleable. This can 

contribute to the risk of the child’s head 

slipping through the neck float and will 

vary from child to child. In evaluating 

the incident data, staff observed that for 

incidents with known victim 

information and known product age and 

weight labeling, all victims had ages and 

weights consistent with the 

manufacturer-recommended guidance. 

Therefore, it is reasonably foreseeable 

that caregivers are likely to select and 

use neck floats marketed as 

appropriately sized for their child that 

may nonetheless be too large or too 

loose for their child. 

Even if a neck float appears to fit a 

child securely, that is, around a child’s 

neck with little to no extra space, the 

child’s position and activity can cause 

them to slip through the product. 

Incident data and publicly available 

consumer-uploaded content of children 

in neck floats demonstrate that children 

will use neck floats on their back, on 

their chest, on their side, and while 

sitting or standing, and are likely to tilt 

their head forward and rearward, tuck 

their chin, bite the chin rest, twist their 

head in the product, wiggle their bodies, 

kick their legs, flail their arms, and even 

push up on the front underside of their 

product. These and other actions can 

separate the discontinuous ends, deform 

the center opening, or otherwise alter 

the fit of the neck float on the child, 

resulting in the child’s mouth and nose 

sliding into the water. Figure 1 

exemplifies children wearing neck floats 

and kicking off the tub floor, leaning 

back to the point that the tops of their 

heads are submerged, and pushing up 

on the front underside of the neck floats, 

as captured in a consumer’s online 

video of twins wearing neck floats in a 

bathtub. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91591 

15See ‘‘Corrected Age for Preemies,’’ American 

Academy of Pediatrics, https://

www.healthychildren.org/English/ages-stages/baby/ 

preemie/Pages/Corrected-Age-For-Preemies.aspx; 

‘‘NICU Family Information Packet, Appx. B, 

Growth,’’ Agency for Healthcare Research and 

Quality, https://www.ahrq.gov/patient-safety/ 

settings/hospital/resource/nicu/packet/apb3.html; 

Fenton Preterm Growth Charts https://liveucalgary.ucalgary.ca/resource/preterm-growthchart/preterm-growth-chart. 

Neck float designs may include 

features intended to reduce the 

likelihood of slip-throughs. For 

example, some neck floats include a 

chin rest, which is intended to keep the 

child’s mouth and nose from being 

submerged during use. However, many 

incidents involving submersions due-to 

slip-through involved neck floats 

designed with chin rests. Incident data 

and consumer videos of use show that 

children may lean and tilt their heads 

such that their chin bypasses the chin 

rest; they may twist their head in the 

product such that their chin is no longer 

supported by the chin rest; or their 

changes in direction or body position 

can cause the product to rotate during 

use. For example, IDI 210824HCC1797 

indicates that the victim was using a 

neck float with a chin rest for 

approximately 10 minutes, when ‘‘the 

victim turned his head to the right and 

suddenly the victim’s head slipped 

through the neck opening.’’ In addition, 

incident data, such as fatal case IDI 

200915HFE0001, demonstrate that 

caregivers may put neck floats on their 

children backwards, or otherwise 

without placing the child’s chin on the 

chin rest, resulting in the child slipping 

through the center opening. Therefore, 

as shown in the incident data, a chin 

rest does not adequately prevent the 

submersion hazard. 

Incident reports show it is common 

for children to wear neck floats in water 

shallow enough for them to sit or lay in 

a reclined position, yet still deep 

enough to allow their mouth and/or 

nose submerge and pose a drowning 

hazard. For example, IDI 

220714CCC3164 reports that the victim 

was in a bathtub with only 

approximately 5 inches of water when 

the victim was suddenly and fully 

submerged in the water. If children can 

push/kick off the floor or sides of the 

body of water, they are more likely to 

arch their heads back and separate the 

discontinuous ends of the neck float 

causing an expansion of the center 

opening, making it more likely for the 

child’s mouth and/or nose to slip into 

the water. They may also have better 

leverage to lift the front underside of the 

product upward and over their face, as 

shown in Figure 1, resulting in the 

mouth and nose submerging in water. 

Where water depth was reported, most 

incidents (81 of 83) indicated the 

product was used in shallow water such 

as a bathtub or kiddie pool. 

If there are obstacles such as tub 

walls, then it is easier for the product to 

be partially or fully held in place. If the 

product is immobilized and the child 

twists their head, then their chin may 

no longer be supported by a chin rest, 

making it more likely for their mouth 

and nose to slip into the water. If they 

twist enough that they face the 

discontinuous ends of the product, then 

the greater space and separation 

afforded by the discontinuous ends may 

make it easier for their mouth and nose 

to slip into the water. Additionally, if 

the product is immobilized and the 

child pushes off other surfaces into the 

discontinuous ends, they may generate 

force sufficient to expand the center 

opening and slip through the product. 

The University of Michigan 

Transportation Research Institute 

(UMTRI) conducted child strength 

research for CPSC, which demonstrated 

a wide range of two-foot seated push 

forces for children ages 6–47 months, 

such as children in the 6–8 month range 

at the 95th percentile generating up to 

128.8 N (29 pound-force), and children 

in the 36–47 month range at the 95th 

percentile generating up to 547.3 N (123 

pound-force).16 Another study found 

that fetal kick force reached 47 N (10.6 

pound-force) at between 20 and 30 

weeks of gestation, demonstrating that 

newborns can generate at least this 

amount of force or greater (Verbruggen 

et al., 2018). 

The neck float can also be held in 

place by pressing up against other 

children in close proximity. Numerous 

incident reports and publicly available 

consumer-uploaded photos demonstrate 

that some children wear neck floats in 

confined spaces with siblings, even with 

siblings who are also wearing neck 

floats. For example, IDI 

210901CCC1899, which involved slipthrough, indicates that triplets wore 

infant neck floats in the same bathtub at 

the same time when the victim 

suddenly slipped through the product 

and went underwater for 2 to 10 

seconds. Cases like this can result in a 

very confined space with the floats 

bumping into each other and even 

overlapping. 

Caregivers are unlikely to understand 

how these environmental variables, 

such as shallow water and confined 

spaces, can contribute to the risk of slipthrough by enabling the child to twist 

their head in the product and exert 

forces that expand the center opening. It 

is reasonably foreseeable that they will 

mistake such environments as providing 

an increased level of safety, security, 

and comfort by making the water 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALSEP20NO24.092</GPH>
91592 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

experience more controllable compared 

to a standard pool. As detailed further 

below, they may also underestimate the 

risk of drowning in shallow water, 

further affording them a false sense of 

security. 

The slipperiness of the neck float’s 

material, exposure of the neck float to 

lubricants, and motion can allow the 

product to slide more easily against the 

child’s skin, increasing the likelihood of 

the child twisting and slipping through 

the product during use. Many neck 

floats are marketed for use when bathing 

children. Several reports describe the 

use of soap and shampoo with the 

product. For example, IDI 

210901CCC1906 reports that the 

caregiver applied soap to the victim’s 

head, and the soap made the victim’s 

head and neck slippery, causing the 

victim’s head to slip through the 

opening and submerge under the water. 

In reviewing products sold online and 

publicly available consumer-uploaded 

photos, staff observed that it is common 

for neck floats to be used in soapy 

environments (Figure 2). 

2. Slip-Through Associated With 

Inflation 

In 54 incidents, children slipped 

through or had the potential to slip 

through because the neck floats were 

more pliable or compressible at lower 

pressure levels or deflated during use. 

Thirty-three victims actually slipped 

through the product. The rest were at 

risk of slipping through the product 

because of issues pertaining to inflation 

(hole, tear, unknown deflation type, 

etc.). In one incident of a slip-through, 

it was intentionally underinflated. 

Neck floats that are initially fully 

inflated also can deflate over time or 

during use, such as from air escaping 

through holes, tears, or open air valves. 

Neck floats can be underinflated at the 

time the child begins to use the product 

due to numerous reasons, such as the 

caregiver’s perception that the product 

is uncomfortably snug or the caregiver 

not realizing that air escaped from the 

product since the last time it was 

inflated. 

Where reported, victims ranged in age 

from 28 days old to 10 months old. Two 

drowning injuries (IDIs 230317CCC3554 

and 210114HCC1250) and one drowning 

death (IDI 190711CCC2487) were 

reported in this category and involved 

leaks or deflation during use. 

There are unique risks of submersion 

for inflatable neck floats because they 

can be compressible and deform 

unevenly during use, vary in the 

amount of inflation prior to use, and 

may lose air during use. Manufacturers 

typically recommend that neck floats 

are ‘‘fully’’ inflated when used; 

however, full inflation is difficult for 

consumers to estimate. Variability in 

inflation prior to and during use can 

impact product performance. The 

inflatable neck float’s dependence on air 

to take shape means their dimensions 

vary by the amount of inflation and 

renders them compressible and 

unevenly deformable, especially if the 

product has discontinuous ends. Lower 

levels of inflation result in greater 

deformability and can allow the 

discontinuous ends to separate and 

expand the size of the center opening 

(Figure 3). 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALSEP20NO24.093</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91593 

17Cyanotic refers to a bluish discoloration of the 

skin resulting from poor circulation or inadequate 

oxygenation of the blood. 

a. Deflation During Use 

Fifty-two CPSRMS incidents involved 

holes, tears, or other leaks in neck floats 

at the time of the incident. For example, 

IDI 190711CCC2487 describes a fatal 

incident involving a 4-month-old male 

infant who was reportedly unattended 

for approximately 5 minutes in a 

bathtub wearing an inflatable neck float. 

He was found unresponsive floating face 

down without the neck float. The neck 

float was still secured in a closed 

position by both a Velcro strap and a 

buckle but appeared to be losing air. 

Another example, IDI 230317CCC3554, 

describes an injury to a 10-month-old 

male who was unattended for 5 minutes 

or less in a neck float in a bathtub. The 

child was found limp and cyanotic 17

with his face underwater, and the neck 

float was found to be partially deflated 

due to a leak in the seam. 

Some incidents involved tears, as in 

IDI 210901CCC1899, which describes a 

3-month-old infant slipping through the 

neck float that had a tear near the safety 

clip and IDI 210826CCC3605, which 

describes a 2-month-old male who 

slipped through a product after it began 

to deflate due to a leak directly under 

the chin strap portion of the product. 

Several incidents, such as IDI 

160512CBB2587, involved neck floats 

deflating during use due to problems 

with the air valve, such as the valve 

either opening or not being fully closed. 

Manufacturers’ instructions often 

direct caregivers to check the product 

for tears, holes, valve issues, and other 

sources of leaks prior to each use of 

inflatable neck floats. However, 

instructions to perform these checks can 

be unclear and ineffective and, as a 

result, leaks may go undetected or 

develop after an inspection. It can be 

particularly difficult to find small leaks 

or tears, especially along seams. For 

example, IDI 220714CCC3155 indicates 

that after the product deflated during 

use, the caregiver performed the 

manufacturer-instructed inspection for 

leaks and did not observe any air 

coming out of the product. The 

caregiver continued to use the product 

with a 6-month-old child and the 

product deflated further, resulting in the 

child going ‘‘underwater [for] 

approximately 5 seconds.’’ In another 

example, IDI 220714CCC1014 indicates 

that the caregiver tested the neck float 

for leaks and could not find any, yet the 

product deflated resulting in the child 

slipping through. 

Incident data also show that 

caregivers are unlikely to perform a leak 

check prior to every use of the product. 

For example, IDI 230720CCC1767 

indicates the caregiver performed the 

manufacturer-instructed leak test prior 

to the first use of the product, but not 

thereafter—contrary to the 

manufacturer’s instructions—and the 

product deflated during use after being 

used ‘‘at least 10 times before the 

incident occurred.’’ Leak checks require 

time and effort, and studies have shown 

that even small inconveniences can 

have a substantial negative effect on 

behavioral compliance with safety 

measures (Riley, 2006). Further, the 

neck floats that staff observed in 

incident data and on the market are 

simple and familiar in assembly and 

use, and they are marketed to keep 

children, even newborns, afloat in 

bathtubs and other bodies of water. 

These factors make it likely that 

consumers will overestimate the 

capabilities of the product, 

underestimate the importance of the 

checks, and underappreciate the nature 

and likelihood of the submersion hazard 

(Inaba et al., 2004; Woodson et al., 

1992). This underappreciation of risk is 

especially likely after the caregiver has 

seen their child and/or other children 

(e.g., through online marketing and 

endorsements of neck floats) use the 

product safely without submersion 

(Godfrey & Allender, 1994; Vredenburgh 

& Zackowitz, 2006; Ayres et al., 1989). 

As shown in the incident reports, it is 

common for caregivers to leave the 

product inflated between uses, and 

neither reinflate the product nor 

perform leak checks, prior to each use 

of the product. For example, IDI 

210908CCC1983 indicates the product 

was inflated once and never re-inflated, 

despite being used several times. 

Some incident reports, moreover, 

demonstrate that caregivers have 

continued to use neck floats despite 

being aware of leaks because they 

believed the leak was slow and 

perceived no hazard in continued use. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALSEP20NO24.094</GPH>
91594 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

For example, IDI 210908CCC1982 

indicated that the consumer was aware 

of a leak and ‘‘would simply re-inflate 

it and continue with the bath’’ until the 

day her child slipped through the 

product. Caregivers delay or even forego 

replacing neck floats with slow leaks for 

a myriad of reasons, such as 

underestimating the risk of slip-through 

and avoiding the practical burdens (e.g., 

expense and time) of finding a 

replacement. 

b. Underinflation 

Even without an air leak, neck floats 

are likely to be used at lower levels of 

inflation that compromise the products’ 

fit and increase the likelihood of an 

infant slipping through. Neck float 

manufacturers often direct caregivers to 

‘‘fully’’ inflate the products prior to use; 

however, as mentioned above, full 

inflation is likely to be interpreted 

differently from person-to-person. 

Consumers also vary in their capability 

to inflate neck floats and retain the air 

pressure as they switch from inflating it 

to closing the valve(s). Slip-through can 

occur at any level of inflation, but the 

risk is greater with lower inflation 

pressures. In examining neck float 

samples, staff observed that neck floats 

can take shape at as little as 0.1 pounds 

per square inch gauge (PSIG). Various 

factors (e.g., motion) can cause the 

center opening to expand, and 

consumers are likely to underappreciate 

the risk posed by these factors. Staff 

observed in product samples and 

incident reports that neck floats can feel 

secure around a child’s neck and appear 

as though the child’s head cannot pass 

through the center opening, yet, during 

use, whether from deflation, the child’s 

activity, or both, the child’s head does 

slip through the product such that their 

mouth and nose become submerged. For 

example, IDI 210910CCC1030 indicates 

that the product felt ‘‘quite tight,’’ yet 

the victim still slipped through the 

product without observable deflation. 

Additionally, some caregivers 

intentionally inflate neck floats to air 

pressures that leave space around a 

child’s neck to address their perception 

of discomfort for their child, not 

appreciating that the likelihood of slipthrough increases as the product’s 

inflation level decreases. Intentional 

underinflation has been reported even 

for neck floats that have warnings 

against underinflation. For example, IDI 

220714CCC3162 indicated that the 

caregiver intentionally underinflated the 

neck float because ‘‘she was worried 

about the product being too tight around 

the victim’s neck.’’ Inflatable neck floats 

typically do not have other means for 

adjustability of the fit around the child’s 

neck beyond the amount of inflation, so 

it is reasonably foreseeable that 

caregivers seeking to adjust the fit 

would intentionally underinflate the 

product. 

3. Slip-Though Associated With 

Restraint System Failures 

A restraint system is an 

interconnecting component, whether 

adjustable or not, that is integral to a 

neck float and is intended to hold the 

occupant in a fixed position relative to 

the neck float. Staff observed that 

latches, buckles, or Velcro straps are 

commonly used to bind the 

discontinuous ends of neck floats 

together during use, and keep the 

product wrapped securely and tightly 

around the child’s neck. Failure of the 

restraint system is likely to result in the 

child’s mouth and nose being 

submerged in water, whether from 

disconnecting entirely or simply 

loosening during use. According to 

report Y227Q815A, a 7-month-old 

infant slipped out of the product due to 

a latch/restraint failure: ‘‘the strap needs 

to be glued to the other side otherwise 

it opens.’’ The integrity of the fasteners, 

including their connection to each other 

and to the product, can be affected by 

user weights, sizes, and actions, such as 

children pushing up on the floats, 

kicking, and thrashing. 

The locations of the latches may also 

be a significant factor, though 

repositioning the location of the latches 

alone is not enough to prevent slipthrough. As shown in Figure 3, some 

neck floats with discontinuous ends 

have the latches located far from the 

child’s neck, affording greater 

separation of the part of the 

discontinuous ends closer to the child, 

where separation is most dangerous for 

center opening expansion. 

4. Submersion Without Slip-Through 

Children can be submerged in water 

while wearing neck floats without slipthrough or fastening and restraint 

system failures, putting them at risk of 

drowning. Where reported, victims 

ranged in age from 3 to 6 months old. 

In at least three incidents, children 

reportedly tilted, rotated, and/or flipped 

in the neck float such that their faces 

contacted the water. In IDI 

220714CCC3166, the child tilted 

forward and ingested water; in IDI 

220714CCC3156, the child was able to 

rotate his body such that his face was in 

contact with water; and in report 

Y217O989B, a child leaned back and 

flipped in the product. As discussed 

above, it is common for children 

wearing neck floats to exhibit a wide 

range of body positions and movements. 

Additionally, at least one incident, IDI 

220714CCC3158, involved an infant 

being pulled down into the water by an 

inflatable neck float that filled with 

water: ‘‘The neck float made a popping 

sound and began to accumulate water, 

pulling the infant down into the water.’’ 

This incident demonstrates another 

serious risk posed by inflatable neck 

floats, as numerous cases cite leaks in 

the products, and leaks can result in the 

product filling with water and weighing 

the child down. No injuries or deaths 

were reported in this category. 

C. Availability of Incident Data 

Upon publication of this NPR in the 

Federal Register, staff will make 

available for review and comment the 

CPSRMS incident reports relied upon 

and discussed in the NPR, to the extent 

allowed by applicable law, along with 

the associated IDIs. The data can be 

obtained by submitting a request to: 

https://forms.office.com/g/10Cqtd8JP6. 

You will then receive a website link to 

access the data at the email address you 

provided. If you do not receive a link 

within two business days, please 

contact zgoldstein@cpsc.gov. 

D. Recalls 

In July 2015, the Commission’s Office 

of Compliance conducted one recall of 

a neck float product. Table 1 below 

summarizes the recall, notes the recall 

date, the firm involved, hazard, the 

approximate number of units affected, 

number of reported incidents/injuries, 

and the press release number. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91595 

18Otteroo Corp Recalls Inflatable Baby Floats | 

CPSC.gov. 

IV. Review of Voluntary Standards 

A. Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Toy Safety, ASTM 

F963–23 

ASTM F963 includes performance 

requirements and test methods for toys, 

as well as requirements for warning 

labels and instructional literature, to 

reduce or prevent injury to children or 

death of children from mechanical, 

chemical, and other hazards associated 

with toy use. Toys must comply with 

this standard pursuant to 16 CFR part 

1250. Similar to other ASTM standards, 

ASTM F963 contains the following 

sections: scope, terminology, referenced 

documents, safety requirements, 

labeling requirements, instructional 

literature, producer’s markings, test 

methods, and additional sections 

appropriate for toys, such as age grading 

and flammability testing of certain types 

of toys. Since passage of the CPSIA in 

2008, the voluntary standard has been 

revised five times: ASTM F963–08, 

ASTM F963–11, ASTM F963–16, ASTM 

F963–17, and ASTM F963–23. Pursuant 

to the update procedures in section 106 

of the CPSIA, the Commission has 

accepted the sequential revisions as the 

mandatory standard. 15 U.S.C. 2056b(g); 

16 CFR part 1250. 

Neck floats are subject to the labeling 

requirements in section 5.4 of ASTM 

F963–23 for aquatic toys. This standard 

requires that aquatic toys and their 

packaging include a safety label that at 

minimum includes the following, or 

equivalent, text: ‘‘This is not a lifesaving 

device. Do not leave child unattended 

while device is in use.’’ It also requires 

‘‘no advertising copy or graphics shall 

state or imply that the child will be safe 

with such a toy if left unsupervised.’’ As 

detailed in section V.B. of this 

preamble, for the proposed 

requirements for marking, labeling, and 

instructional literature in this NPR, staff 

assesses that the warning requirements 

specified in section 5.4 of ASTM F963– 

23 are inadequate for neck floats 

because they do not address the hidden 

hazards specifically associated with 

these products, such as the risk of center 

opening expansion during use, the risk 

of drowning in very shallow water, and 

the risk of death associated with partial 

slip-through. Many of the reported 

incidents involved neck floats 

compliant with the labeling 

requirements specified in ASTM F963– 

23, thereby demonstrating that the 

existing labeling requirements are 

insufficient to address the hazards. 

ASTM F963–23 does not establish any 

performance requirements for aquatic 

toys, including neck floats. In August 

2022, the ASTM F15.22 subcommittee 

developed a dedicated aquatic toy 

revision task group to develop a draft 

ballot with performance requirements 

for aquatic toys. There have been no 

balloted draft requirements to date, 

however. 

Incident data described in section III 

of this preamble demonstrate 

weaknesses in the current ASTM toy 

standard. Therefore, the Commission 

preliminarily determines that ASTM 

F963 fails to adequately address 

children slipping through neck floats or 

being submerged into water and fails to 

provide the highest level of safety 

feasible. Accordingly, the Commission 

proposes more stringent performance 

and labeling requirements that further 

reduce the risk of injury associated with 

neck floats and provide the highest level 

of safety for such products that is 

feasible. 

B. Other Relevant Standards 

The U.S. Coast Guard uses ANSI/ 

CAN/UL 12402–5, Personal Flotation 

Devices—Part 5: Buoyancy Aids (Level 

50)—Safety Requirements, and ANSI/ 

CAN/UL 12402–9, Personal Flotation 

Devices—Part 9: Test Methods to 

evaluate level 50 Personal Floatation 

Devices (PFD’s) such as life vests. Some 

PFDs utilize flotation devices located 

around the user’s collar, similar to neck 

floats. PFDs are classified into levels 

based on intended use conditions, 

including calm versus stormy water and 

relative closeness to possible rescue 

such as at the beach versus offshore, 

with level 50 being the least stringent. 

These factors are not comparable or 

relevant to the use of neck floats in a 

pool or bathtub environment. ANSI/ 

CAN/UL 12402–5:2022 does classify 

possible PFD users into four categories 

based on weight, with ‘‘Infant PFDs’’ 

being intended for users weighing less 

than 15 kg (33 lbs). However, certain 

performance requirement metrics for 

level 50 PFDs are listed as ‘‘not 

allowed’’ for the infant class. For these 

reasons, ANSI/CAN/UL 12402–5 and 

ANSI/CAN/UL 12402–9 are not 

appropriate to apply to regulate neck 

floats, without sufficient modification to 

adapt its otherwise universal test 

methods with acceptance criteria suited 

for the infant class. 

BS EN ISO 13138, Buoyant aids for 

swimming instruction, is a multi-part 

standards collection for the European 

Union’s (EU) three swimming aid 

classifications. Class A swimming aids 

such as swim seats, covered by BS EN 

ISO 13138–3, are intended to be used by 

children up to 36 months as a ‘‘passive’’ 

user to introduce them to the in-water 

environment. Class B swimming aids, 

covered by BS EN ISO 13138–1, are 

intended to introduce an ‘‘active’’ user 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALSEP20NO24.095</GPH>
91596 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

19Shawn. ‘‘Temperature Considerations in Plastic 

Thermoforming Material Selection.’’ Productive 

Plastics Inc, 27 June. 2021, 

www.productiveplastics.com/temperatureconsiderations-plastic-thermoforming-materialselection. 

to the range of swimming motions. Class 

C swimming aids, covered by BS EN 

13138–2, are products held in the hands 

or by the body and are intended to aid 

‘‘active’’ users with improving specific 

aspects of swimming strokes. Class C 

swimming aids are intended for use by 

advanced swimmers, or even adult 

beginners. 

Class A devices as defined by BS EN 

ISO 13138 most closely align with the 

target users of neck float products 

within the scope of this NPR. However, 

BS EN ISO 13138 classifies floatation 

products that attach at the neck as Class 

B devices. Most of the general 

performance requirements in BS EN ISO 

13138–1:2021 and 13138–3:2021 and 

the associated test methods across the 

two standards are largely identical, with 

some exceptions. Many of the unique 

tests for Class A devices in BS EN 

13138–3:2021 do not apply to neck 

floats because Class A devices are swim 

seats. Tests for Class A products are not 

appropriate for neck floats because these 

flotation devices are placed and 

attached at the waistline versus at the 

neck for Class B flotation devices. 

Additionally, test methods in BS EN 

ISO 13138–1 for Class B devices, 

including buoyancy testing, align with 

the test methods for their respective 

counterparts in ANSI/CAN/UL 12402 

although the exact performance 

requirements differ. The risk 

management factors and tests of both 

ANSI/CAN/UL 12402 and BS EN ISO 

13138–1 may address many of the 

hazards identified in section III of this 

preamble and are universal in 

application. However, to address the 

identified hazards associated with neck 

floats, the performance requirements 

and test methods will require 

modifications, discussed in more detail 

in section V of this preamble. 

V. NPR Description of Proposed 

Provisions and Justifications 

Based on incident data described in 

section III of this preamble and staff’s 

engineering, health sciences, and 

human factors assessments, the NPR 

proposes creating a new § 1250.5 to 16 

CFR part 1250, Safety Standard 

Mandating ASTM F963 for Toys, with 

more stringent requirements by adding 

performance and labeling requirements 

for neck floats to further reduce the risk 

of injury associated with neck floats and 

to provide the highest level of safety for 

such products that is feasible. Further, 

this NPR proposes revising the title of 

part 1250 from Safety Standard 

Mandating ASTM F963 for Toys to 

‘‘Safety Standard for Toys,’’ to reflect 

the inclusion of proposed requirements 

that do not incorporate by reference 

existing requirements in the ASTM 

F963 voluntary standard. 

To address the risk of injury described 

in section III of this preamble, this NPR 

proposes to add a definition for ‘‘neck 

float’’ discussed in section II of this 

preamble and to add new performance 

requirements and replace existing 

labeling requirements for neck float. The 

NPR proposes to add test requirements 

for conditioning, buoyancy, fastening 

systems, restraining systems, and neck 

opening and to update marking, labeling 

and literature requirements. The 

additional requirements are more 

stringent than the existing requirements 

in part 1250 to further reduce the risk 

of injury associated with neck floats and 

to provide the highest level of safety for 

such products that is feasible to address 

child drownings associated with neck 

floats. This section of the preamble 

describes the proposed additions in 

§ 1250.5. 

A. Performance Requirements To 

Address Drowning Hazards 

Because ASTM F963–23 does not 

establish any performance requirements 

for aquatic toys, including neck floats, it 

fails to adequately address children 

slipping through neck floats or being 

submerged into water and does not 

provide the highest level of safety for 

such products that is feasible. 

1. Conditioning Procedure 

The NPR proposes conditioning 

requirements for neck floats prior to 

conducting any other tests under the 

proposed rule in § 1250.5(c)(1). The 

purpose of a conditioning procedure is 

to simulate the conditions in which the 

product may be stored or used. This 

helps to ensure that the product is 

tested under realistic circumstances. 

The proposed conditioning procedure 

involves subjecting the neck float to 

various stressors based on foreseeable 

use environments, which include 

exposure to cold, hot, and room 

temperature, exposure to chlorinated 

salt water, and exposure to ultraviolet 

(UV) light. All inflatable neck floats 

subject to the proposed rule should be 

deflated for the proposed testing 

requirements in the conditioning 

procedure. 

a. Exposure to Varying Temperatures 

Temperature changes can introduce 

both short- and long-term impacts on 

any material. For plastics and polymer 

chains, short-term effects can include 

expansion or contraction of objects’ 

shape, as well as softening of the 

material. Long-term exposure may result 

in deformation, or thermal degradation 

leading to cracking or breaking.19 These 

material changes are typically 

associated with exposure to high 

temperature, as can be expected when 

the neck float is used for bathing 

purposes or is stored outside with other 

swim toys; however, transitioning 

between cold storage to hot use may 

also exacerbate the mechanical 

degradation. 

Section 5.5.4.1 of ANSI/CAN/UL 

12402–9:2022 includes a ‘‘Temperature 

cycling test’’ for inflatable PFDs. The 

temperature cycling test requires 

alternate exposure to hot temperature at 

60 ± 2 °C (140 ± 4 °F) for 8 hours, then 

to cold temperature at ¥30 ± 2 °C (¥22 

± 4 °F) for 8 hours, repeated for two 

complete cycles. 

The Commission proposes to 

incorporate this test method from 

section 5.5.4.1 of ANSI/CAN/UL 12402– 

9:2022, for both inflatable and 

inherently buoyant neck floats, with 

modifications, in the proposed rule 

under § 1250.5(c)(1). ANSI/CAN/UL 

12401–9:2022 contains separate 

requirements for inherently buoyant 

PFDs that includes steps to fully open 

the devices to simulate donning and 

check for damage. However, as 

discussed in Section II of this preamble, 

the design of inherently buoyant neck 

floats does not typically include 

extraneous moving parts that require 

additional ‘‘opening’’ steps beyond 

being secured around the child’s neck. 

Therefore, CPSC proposes to apply the 

thermal conditioning procedure in 

section 5.5.4.1 of ANSI/CAN/UL 12402– 

9:2022 to both inflatable and inherently 

buoyant neck floats. 

BS EN ISO 13138–1 also recommends 

temperature conditioning for swimming 

aids, with a hot temperature set point of 

60 ± 2 °C (140 ± 4 °F) and cold 

temperature set point of ¥10 ± 2 °C (14 

± 4 °F). Since it is not reasonable to 

expect that a neck float will be stored 

or operated in temperatures low enough 

to warrant conditioning to ¥30 ± 2 °C 

as recommended by section 5.5.4.1 of 

ANSI/CAN/UL 12409–9:2022, the NPR 

proposes to increase the temperature set 

point of the cold extreme from ¥30 ± 

2 °C (¥22 ± 4 °F) up to ¥10 ± 2 °C (14 

± 4 °F) based on the cold temperature 

recommended by BS EN ISO 13138–1 

for comparable swimming devices. 

Additionally, rather than repeat 

thermal conditioning for two, 8-hour 

alternating cycles, the NPR proposes to 

condition neck floats for a single 8-hour 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91597 

20Chemical Resistance Chart for Plastics—an InDepth Look at Chemical and Acid Resistant Plastics 

| a&C Plastics. www.acplasticsinc.com/ 

informationcenter/r/a-chemical-resistance-guidefor-plastics. 

21 Giovanisci, Matt. ‘‘How Much Salt to Add to 

Your Pool (Easy Pool Salt Calculation).’’ Swim 

University, 8 July 2024, www.swimuniversity.com/ 

how-much-pool-salt. 22Home Pool and Hot Tub Water Treatment and 

Testing.’’ Healthy Swimming, 10 May 2024, 

www.cdc.gov/healthy-swimming/about/home-pooland-hot-tub-water-treatment-and-testing.html?CDC_

AAref_Val=https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/ 

swimming/residential/disinfection-testing.html. 23What Does UV Radiation Actually Do to 

Degrade Plastics? | U.S. Plastic Corp. 11 Dec. 2009, 

www.usplastic.com/knowledgebase/ 

article.aspx?contentkey=858. 

24 ‘‘UV And Its Effect on Plastics: An Overview.’’ 

Essentra Components U.S., 23 Jan. 2019, 

www.essentracomponents.com/en-us/news/ 

manufacturing/injection-molding/uv-and-its-effecton-plastics-an-overview. 

25American National Standards Institute (ANSI) 

and Association of Pool & Spa Professionals. 

American National Standard for Suction Outlet 

Fitting Assemblies (SOFA) for Use in Pools, Spas, 

and Hot Tubs. American National Standards 

Institute (ANSI), 18 Aug. 2017, APSP.org. 

26Buoyancy is a property of the object’s density, 

and for inflatables is achieved by increasing the 

float’s volume by blowing it up, without 

substantially affecting the float’s mass. 

period at both temperature extremes (60 

± 2 °C and ¥30 ± 2 °C), followed by a 

24-hour period at room temperature (20 

± 2 °C (68 ± 4 °F)). The NPR proposes 

to reduce the number of thermal cycles 

required in section 5.5.4.1 of ANSI/ 

CAN/UL 12402–9:2022 to more 

accurately reflect the use and storage 

conditions of neck floats in comparison 

to those of PFDs. Unlike PFDs, neck 

floats are not expected to be stored nor 

operated within the same extreme 

conditions expected of a life-saving 

device. The 24-hour requirement to hold 

the neck float at room temperature is 

sufficient to ensure that the hot and cold 

temperature exposures do not interfere 

with the remaining two conditioning 

requirements for neck floats (i.e., 

chlorinated salt water and UV 

exposure). 

b. Exposure to Chlorinated Salt Water 

Exposure to chlorine environments, as 

may be expected of a pool, can result in 

an adverse chemical reaction with a 

plastic or polymer chain if the material 

has not been carefully selected for, or 

prepared with, suitable chemical 

resistance.20 To address this, the 

proposed rule requires conditioning for 

exposure to chlorinated salt water to 

simulate the use of a neck float in a 

pool. 

To condition for exposure to 

chlorinated salt water, section 6.1 of BS 

EN ISO 13138–1:2021 requires the 

swimming aids to be submerged in a 

chlorinated saltwater solution. Staff 

recommends adopting similar 

procedures to account for exposure to 

various use locations of neck floats, 

which may include chemically treated 

bodies of water such as pools. 

Accordingly, the NPR proposes to 

require that a neck float should be 

submerged in a chlorinated saltwater 

solution. The solution should be 

prepared by dissolving 32 g 21 of sodium 

chloride (NaCl) in one liter of aqueous 

solution containing 2 ppm chlorine at 

pH 7.0–7.8.22 The neck float should be 

submerged in the necessary volume of 

the prepared chlorinated saltwater 

solution, in darkness and at room 

temperature (20 ± 2 °C (68 ± 4 °F)) for 

8 hours. 

c. Exposure to Ultraviolet Light 

UV light can cause degradation of 

plastics and polymer chains through a 

photochemical effect.23 Over continued 

exposure, plastics may weaken, begin to 

look discolored, take on a chalky 

appearance, or become brittle to the 

touch.24

Section 4.2.1.1–4.2.1.4 of ANSI APSP 

ICC–16 (2017), American National 

Standard for Suction Outlet Fitting 

Assemblies (SOFA) for Use in Pools, 

Spas and Hot Tubs, includes the 

‘‘Ultraviolet Light Exposure Tests’’ test 

method for exposure to ultraviolet light 

(UV). 16 CFR part 1450. Based on the 

test method requirements in section 

4.2.1.1–4.2.1.4 of ANSI APSP ICC–16, a 

product is required to be exposed to UV 

light under one of the four UV exposure 

conditioning methods, selected per the 

discretion of the evaluator, incorporated 

here: 

(a) 720 hours of twin enclosed carbonarc (ASTM G153, Table X1.1 Cycle 1 

except the Black Panel Temperature 

shall be 50 °C); or 

(b) 720 hours of twin enclosed carbonarc (ASTM G153, a programmed cycle of 

20 minutes consisting of a 17-minute 

light exposure and a 3-minute exposure 

to water spray with light shall be used 

with a black-panel temperature of 63 ± 

3 °C); or 

(c) 1000 hours of xenon-arc (ASTM 

G155, Table X3.1 Cycle 1 except the 

Black Panel Temperature should be 50 

°C); or 

(d) 750 hours of fluorescent (ASTM 

G154, Table X 2.1 Cycle 1 except the 8- 

hour UV shall be at a Black Panel 

Temperature of 50 °C and the 4-hour 

condensation Black Panel Temperature 

shall be 40 °C).’’ 25

In § 1250.5(c)(1), the Commission 

proposes to incorporate sections 

4.2.1.1–4.2.1.4 of ANSI APSP ICC–16 to 

simulate UV light exposure. This 

provision accounts for sun exposure 

during use of neck floats, which may 

include outdoor use and temporary or 

primary outdoor storage conditions. 

2. Minimum Buoyancy Requirements 

In § 1250.5(c)(2) the Commission 

proposes minimum buoyancy 

requirements to prevent unintentional 

submergence. Specifically, the 

Commission is proposing to require that 

all neck floats demonstrate a minimum 

upward buoyancy equal to or greater 

than 30 percent of the expected weight 

capacity of the neck float, which will 

ensure that a neck float is buoyant 

during use.26 Additionally, the 

Commission proposes to require 

inherently buoyant neck floats to not 

lose more than 5 percent of their initial 

buoyancy after being submerged for a 

24-hour period. 

The expected weight capacity, as 

defined in § 1250.5(b), will be 

determined as the neck float’s maximum 

recommended user weight, or the 

weight provided in Table 2 based on the 

neck float’s maximum recommended 

user age, whichever is greater. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
91598 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

27See CDC ‘‘Data Table for Boys Length-for-age 

and Weight-for-age Charts’’: https://www.cdc.gov/ 

growthcharts/who/boys_length_weight.htm, for ages 

0 to 12 months (weights by month). See CDC 

‘‘Anthropometric Reference Data for Children and 

Adults: United States, 2015–2018’’: https://

www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_03/sr03-046- 

508.pdf, for ages 2 to 4 years (weight by years). 

28The calibrated load cell is used to record the 

cage weight measurements, with and without the 

product. 

29Water cancels about 90 percent of a human’s 

body weight. DNP, Darcy Reber Aprn, C.N.P. 

‘‘Aquatic Exercise: Gentle on Your Bones, Joints, 

Muscles.’’ Mayo Clinic Health System, 9 Apr. 2024, 

https://www.mayoclinichealthsystem.org/ 

hometown-health/speaking-of-health/aquaticexercise-gentle-on-your-bones-joints-and-muscles. 

Section 5.5.9.2 of ANSI/CAN/UL 

12402–9:2022 requires the use of a 

weighted cage with a calibrated load 

cell 28 to submerge a swimming device 

in a tank of fresh water, with its upper 

surface at a depth of 100mm to 150mm 

below the water surface without 

touching any sides of the tank. In 

addition, the product must be secured 

within the cage such that both it and the 

cage always remain approximately 

horizontal and level. The test method 

requires the submerged weight of the 

cage be 1.1 times the expected buoyancy 

value of the swimming device to ensure 

there is sufficient load to fully submerge 

the weighted cage system when 

combined with the swimming device. 

The procedure in section 5.5.9.3 of 

ANSI/CAN/UL 12402–9 directs that the 

cage should be suspended in the water 

tank at a temperature of (20 ± 5) °C. 

First, the weight of the immersed cage 

with the product should be recorded, as 

A. Next, the weighted cage and product 

should remain immersed for 24 hours, 

and the weight shall be re-recorded as 

B. Lastly, the product should be 

removed from the cage and the weight 

of the immersed cage alone, without the 

product, should be recorded as C. 

Section 5.5.9.4 of ANSI/CAN/UL 

12402–9 explains that the initial 

buoyancy is determined by deducting A 

from C, and the final buoyancy is taken 

by deducting B from C. The buoyancy 

loss is taken by deducting the final 

buoyancy from the initial buoyancy. 

The Commission proposes to 

incorporate this test method from 

sections 5.5.9.2–5.5.9.4 of ANSI/CAN/ 

UL 12402–9:2022, with modifications, 

in the proposed rule to determine the 

minimum buoyancy for all neck floats, 

under § 1250.5(c)(2). Section 5.5.9.3 of 

ANSI/CAN/UL 12402–9:2022 requires a 

swimming device to be inflated to the 

pressure provided by its primary means 

of inflation, or to 4.0 ± 0.1 kPa (0.58 ± 

0.016 PSIG), whichever is less, if it 

contains inflatable components. This 

NPR, however, proposes that any neck 

float utilizing inflatable components 

must be inflated to the lower internal air 

pressure of 0.1 ± 0.01 PSIG for the 

duration of this test. It is foreseeable 

that a consumer could use the neck float 

while inflated to only 0.1 PSIG—even if 

that is below the proper operating 

pressure—because the float may appear 

to be in the proper shape and functional 

at this inflation level. An internal 

pressure of 0.1 PSIG is the lowest 

foreseeable operating pressure for neck 

floats, and therefore performance 

requirements that depend on inflation 

pressure (such as buoyancy) should be 

evaluated at that lowest limit. During 

experimental testing, staff found at least 

four sample inflatable neck floats 

(representing two distinct make/models) 

met the requirements of this NPR’s 

proposed buoyancy test when inflated 

to 0.1 PSIG internal pressure. 

This NPR proposes to evaluate the 

minimum required buoyancy of the 

neck float as a function of its intended 

user weight. Requiring the upward 

buoyancy to be equal or greater than 30 

percent of the expected weight capacity 

is based on applying a safety factor of 

three to 10 percent, which is the 

approximate body weight, on average, a 

human bears while submerged to their 

neck in water.29 Using three as the 

safety factor is based on performance 

requirements in ASTM F963 for toys 

intending to bear the weight of a child, 

such as the overload testing of ride-on 

toys and toy seats in section 8.28 of 

ASTM F963, which requires the test 

load to be three times the weight 

indicated by Table 7 in ASTM F963 or 

three times the manufacturer’s stated 

weight capacity, whichever is greater. In 

this instance, staff equates ASTM F963’s 

requirement for ride-on-toys to bear 

three times the dry-land weight of a 

child to the proposed buoyancy 

requirement that neck floats bear three 

times the in-water weight of a child. 

In addition, the Commission proposes 

that inherently buoyant neck floats must 

demonstrate no more than a 5 percent 

loss of buoyancy after being submerged 

for 24 hours to ensure that inherently 

buoyant materials do not absorb enough 

water such that the product’s ability to 

float properly is adversely impacted. 

The 5 percent loss is based on the staff’s 

analysis of other relevant standards. 

Both ANSI/CAN/UL 12402–9 and BS 

EN 13138–1 evaluate the buoyancy of 

flotation devices after a 24-hour 

submergence period to determine how 

much buoyancy is lost. BS EN 13138– 

1 requires inherently buoyant 

swimming aids to lose no more than 10 

percent of their initial buoyancy, while 

ANSI/CAN/UL 12402–9 requires PFDs 

to lose no more than 5 percent. The 

Commission preliminarily determines 

that the 5 percent loss metric is the 

more stringent of those two standards 

and is more appropriate to achieve the 

highest level of safety that is feasible. 

3. Restraint Systems 

To reduce the likelihood of a restraint 

system failure on a neck float, which 

can result in a child slipping through 

the product, the Commission proposes 

in § 1250.5(c)(3) requirements for the 

release mode of the fastening 

mechanism, and overall mechanical 

integrity of restraint systems. A 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALSEP20NO24.096</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91599 

fastening mechanism, such as a buckle, 

on a neck float serve as a restraint 

system because it secures and holds the 

child in place during use. The 

requirements proposed are intended to 

reduce the likelihood of an 

unintentional release of a fastener 

mechanism during use, and to reduce 

the likelihood of component failures in 

a restraint system and detachment from 

the neck float as seen in Y227Q815A. 

a. Fastening Mechanism 

Section 5.4.2 of BS EN 13138–1:2021, 

Fastening Systems, requires parts of a 

swimming device used to attach the 

swimming device to the body or to 

connect any other functional 

components to have at least two 

simultaneous or sequential actions for 

release to prevent unintended opening. 

Alternatively, the standard allows for a 

single action release if it requires at least 

50 N to open. The standard further 

directs that this testing must be 

performed in accordance with Annex C 

of BS EN 13138–1:2021, Procedure for 

testing the security of the pressure 

release of buckles without double action 

(simultaneous/sequential) release. 

Annex C specifies that the buckle used 

to secure a swimming device should be 

positioned and loaded with 5 N on a 

plain, rigid surface. For single release, 

mechanisms, a force of 50 N is required 

to be applied at point 3, perpendicular 

to the release mechanisms of the buckle. 

Section 4.13.1.2 of ASTM F963–23 

also includes requirements for latching 

and locking mechanisms, which require 

either a double-action locking device 

with two distinct and separate actions to 

release, or a single-action locking device 

that requires a minimum force of 45 N 

to open. There are similar provisions in 

other ASTM standards for children’s 

products that incorporate restraint 

straps, such as section 6.4.7 of ASTM 

F833–21, Standard Consumer Safety 

Performance Specification for Carriages 

and Strollers. 16 CFR part 1227. Based 

on these comparable restraint system 

requirements, the Commission proposes 

to require the release mechanism of 

neck float fasteners to have either a 

double-action release system with two 

distinct, but simultaneous actions to 

release, or a single-action release system 

that requires a minimum of 50 N to 

release. A minimum of 50 N to release 

is the greatest minimum force 

requirement for single-action release 

mechanisms in the applicable 

standards, and therefore ensures the 

highest level of safety. 

Unlike in ASTM F963–23, which 

allows the double-action release 

mechanism to use two separate actions 

to release, the NPR proposes to require 

two distinct, but simultaneous actions 

to release. Two simultaneous actions, 

such as depressing and twisting the cap 

of a medicine bottle open, are 

considered more difficult for a child in 

the age range considered by this NPR 

(0–4 years) to perform without 

assistance. Because there are no 

performance requirements for doubleaction release system, allowing the 

double-action release system to utilize 

sequential actions where each action 

can be performed one-at-a-time would 

be equivalent to allowing the neck float 

to rely on two unverified single-action 

release systems for fastening to the user. 

b. Restraint System Mechanical Integrity 

Section 6.4.4 of ASTM F833–21, 

requires that a restraint system and any 

closure mechanisms such as buckles 

must not part or slip more than 1 inch 

(25 mm) when tested in accordance 

with section 7.5 of ASTM F833–21. 16 

CFR part 1227. Additionally, the 

standard requires that any anchorages 

must remain attached without 

separating from their attachment points 

during testing. The standard also 

requires that the restraint system may 

not move more than 2 inches (51 mm) 

when tested in accordance with section 

7.5.2.8. Section 7.5.1, Restraining 

System Integrity Test Method, of ASTM 

F833–21 specifies the testing method for 

this requirement, which includes 

applying a force of 200 N (45 lbf) to a 

single attachment point on the 

restraining system. Specifically, the 

standard directs that force should be 

applied gradually within 5 seconds and 

maintained for an added 10 seconds, 

which should be repeated a total of 5 

times with a 5 second maximum time 

interval between tests for each 

attachment point on the restraint 

system. The standard further requires 

that, after testing, the Civil Aeronautical 

Medical Institute (CAMI) dummy, 

required for this test, should not be fully 

released. 

As noted in section III, the confined 

space of a bathtub environment 

provides the neck float occupant with 

possible surfaces to kick, pull, push, 

twist themselves off, or otherwise 

struggle against the surfaces of the 

bathtub. To account for this expected 

elevated force, the Commission 

proposes to incorporate section 6.4.4 

and 7.5.1 of ASTM F833–21, with 

modifications to omit both the CAMI 

dummy evaluation following testing, 

and any evaluation to section 7.5.2 of 

ASTM F833–21, Restraining System 

occupant Retention Test Method. The 

CAMI dummy and section 7.5.2 testing 

have been omitted from the proposed 

restraint system requirements because 

the seat-based retention tests are 

incompatible with the neck float 

retention method. Instead, the NPR will 

address occupant retention through the 

proposed neck opening requirements in 

section V.A.4. 

The Commission has considered a 

potential requirement for neck floats to 

incorporate a secondary attachment 

system as a backup in the event the 

primary neck opening securement fails. 

CPSC staff, however, have identified a 

risk that a child could partially slip 

through the neck opening and be 

supported by the secondary system with 

their mouth below the waterline, 

creating a drowning hazard without a 

notable visual change to alert the 

caregiver to the danger. The addition of 

the secondary attachment system also 

may convey to the caregiver the 

incorrect impression that there can be 

no possibility for the child to slip 

through the product. The Commission 

requests comments on a secondary 

attachment system for neck floats to 

address hazards associated with use the 

of neck floats. 

4. Neck Opening Test Requirements 

To address the hazard of a child 

slipping-through a neck float, the 

Commission proposes requirements for 

the neck opening on a neck float under 

§ 1250.5(c)(4). To meet the proposed 

requirement, the neck opening of the 

neck float must not admit the passage of 

a specified head probe when subjected 

to a specified dynamic movement, in 

accordance with the proposed test 

method. Currently, there are no existing 

standards or test methods developed to 

ensure that an aquatic toy such as a 

neck float will not pose a risk of 

drowning because of slip-throughs 

during its use. As a result, staff 

developed a test and test method to 

accommodate this need. 

Under the proposed neck opening 

test, first the neck opening of the neck 

float is saturated with a soapy solution 

to simulate use in a bathtub or with a 

slippery substance such as sunscreen. 

Second, the specified head probe is be 

weighted to a specific mass (M1) and 

positioned in the neck float. Next, a 

hanging weight of another specific mass 

(M2) is suspended below the head probe 

at a specified distance (L) of the 

specified head probe (see Table 3 for 

details on M1, M2 and L for various 

user-age categories). Finally, the 

hanging weight is brought up to a 90- 

degree displacement angle and released 

such that it is swung front-to-back 

relative to the neck float’s user as shown 

in Figure 4. The hanging weight must be 

allowed to move freely for 30 seconds 

in this manner. After 30 seconds have 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
91600 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

passed, the hanging weight is brought 

up again to a 90-degree displacement 

angle and then released so that it swings 

side-to-side relative to the neck float’s 

user and allowed to move freely for 30 

seconds in this manner. This alternating 

pattern is repeated for up to a total of 

ten swinging cycles, five front-to-back 

and five side-to-side. 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–C 

This dynamic test method was 

selected to account for the variety of 

movements children using this product 

have been reported to engage in, 

including kicking, back and belly 

floating, twisting, and pushing off of 

bathtub or pool walls and floors. The 

number of swing cycles, direction, and 

duration have been determined based 

on the CPSRMS incidents which 

contained many reported the incident 

occurring within 10 minutes of use. 

Based on this, the minimum number of 

dynamic swing cycles in the proposed 

test is set at ten swings and reflects the 

child shifting their body weight at least 

one time every minute. This 

approximation is considered a 

conservative estimate of a child’s 

expected activity over the 10 minute 

duration. The proposal to alternate 

directions between front-to-back and 

side-to-side accounts for multi-direction 

movements. The 90 degree starting 

swing angle and 30 second swing cycle 

reflect the shift in body weight, from the 

child’s transition from floating on their 

back or belly to one where their legs are 

positioned below them. 

The proposed test for neck opening is 

required to be repeated for both the 

smallest and largest head probe in the 

neck float’s recommended user range to 

ensure that the neck float adequately 

retains the occupant by preventing the 

occupant from slipping fully through 

the neck opening. Evaluating the neck 

float using the smallest specified head 

probe ensures the neck opening is not 

large enough, or cannot expand to 

become large enough during use, to 

allow the smallest foreseeable occupant 

to slip fully through it. Evaluating the 

neck float using the largest specified 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALSEP20NO24.097</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91601 

30See BSI Standards Publication. ‘‘Child Care 

Articles—General Safety Guidelines—Part 1: Safety 

Philosophy and Safety Assessment.’’ 2018. BSI 

Standards Publication, report, 2018. 

31 Values here are 20 percent of respective 95th 

percentile weights provided by CDC ‘‘Data Table for 

Boys Length-for-age and Weight-for-age Charts’’: 

https://www.cdc.gov/growthcharts/who/boys_

length_weight.htm, for ages 0 to 12 months. See 

CDC ‘‘Anthropometric Reference Data for Children 

and Adults: United States, 2015–2018’’: https://

www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_03/sr03-046- 

508.pdf, for ages 2 to 4 years. 

32See Schneider et al., 1986). 

head probe ensures the neck float can 

adequately support the forces generated 

by the largest foreseeable occupant such 

that they cannot fully slip through it, as 

well. If a neck float uses an adjustable 

fastening mechanism then the 

evaluation of both probes is performed 

at the largest, or loosest, possible size 

setting. 

As discussed in section III, some 

reports indicated that caregivers 

loosened or intentionally deflated a 

neck float because they believed it was 

too tight around their child’s neck (IDIs 

220714CCC3162 and 180403CCC1583). 

To ensure that a neck float achieves the 

highest-possible level of safety, the 

proposed test therefore includes testing 

the smallest recommended child using a 

product at the loosest available setting. 

If the neck float utilizes inflatable 

components, those components must be 

inflated to an internal pressure of 

0.1 ± 0.01 PSIG for the duration of this 

test. The internal air pressure specified 

by this test method has been discussed 

at length in the section V.A.2 of this 

preamble. 

As part of this test, the Commission 

proposes including the soapy water 

solution as described in ‘‘Baby Wash 

Test Solution’’ from section 7.4.1.5 of 

ASTM F1967–19 Standard Consumer 

Safety Specification for Infant Bath 

Seats in the proposed rule for neck 

floats under § 1250.5. 16 CFR part 1215. 

ASTM F1967 requires the use of an 

established baby wash solution mix to 

evaluate the stability of infant bath seats 

under the same onerous soapy 

conditions. Incidents discussed in 

section III of this preamble support that 

neck floats may be used in soapy water 

solutions. Therefore, to achieve the 

highest-level of safety that is feasible, a 

test sample must be saturated with soap 

to simulate the most slippery 

foreseeable use condition to evaluate the 

neck float’s ability to prevent the user 

from slipping through the neck float. 

The choice of specified head probe, 

mass M1, mass M2, and length L is 

based on the manufacturer’s 

recommended user age range, in 

conjunction with Table 3. If the 

recommended user age falls between 

two ranges, then the lower range shall 

be used to determine the smallest probe 

and associated testing conditions, and 

the higher range shall be used to 

determine the largest probe and 

associated testing conditions. 

Dimensions of the four specified head 

probes, depicted in Figure 5, are based 

on available anthropometric data 

(Schneider et al., 1986). The narrowest 

end of the probe is an ellipse whose 

semi-major axis corresponds to the neck 

depth, and whose semi-minor axis 

corresponds to the neck breadth. The 

widest end of the probe is an ellipse 

whose semi-major axis corresponds to 

the head length, and whose semi-minor 

axis corresponds to the head breadth on 

the plane passing through the point of 

greatest protrusion on the forehead and 

the point of greatest protrusion on the 

back of the head. The distance between 

the narrowest and widest 

circumferences on the probe is equal to 

the height of the head. 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALSEP20NO24.098</GPH>
91602 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALSEP20NO24.099</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91603 

33See U.S. Food & Drug Admin., Do Not Use Baby 

Neck Floats Due to the Risk of Death or Injury: FDA 

Safety Communication (June 28, 2022), available at 

https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/safetycommunications/do-not-use-baby-neck-floats-duerisk-death-or-injury-fda-safety-communication. 

34See AAP on drowning: https://www.aap.org/ 

en/patient-care/early-childhood/early-childhoodhealth-and-development/safe-environments/ 

drowning/; accessed on March 20, 2024. 

35See CDC on drowning facts: Drowning Facts | 

Drowning Prevention | CDC; accessed on March 20, 

2024. 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–C 

The four head probes represent 

children of various ages. Probe A is used 

to test products intended for children 

from 0 up to 3 months old, Probe B 

covers products for children up to 6 

months old, Probe C covers products for 

children up to 18 months old, and Probe 

D covers products for children up to 48 

months old. CPSC staff established these 

subsets based on the change in overall 

rate of growth of the head from 0–48 

months, which generally develops and 

grows more rapidly until around 7–9 

months. All dimensions used for the 

head probes represent the 5th percentile 

measurement of the specified age range 

for that probe. Where a probe is 

designated for use to evaluate multiple 

age ranges, the smallest 5th percentile 

measurement for that span has been 

selected. 

Staff note that the maximum neck 

circumference of a 43–48-month-old 

(10.2 in.) is smaller than the minimum 

head circumference of a 0–3-month-old 

(14.6 in.). Based on these measurements, 

a neck float intended to accommodate 

the neck of a 48-month-old should still 

be expected to prevent the head of a 3- 

month-old from slipping through it. If 

the head probe can slip through the 

neck opening then that means the neck 

opening is either large enough, or can 

expand during use to be large enough, 

to allow that child’s head to fully slip 

through the neck opening and submerge 

underwater. Staff assess this slip 

through metric to be a conservative 

representation of the slip through event. 

To simulate foreseeable use stresses 

on neck floats during use, each head 

probe is weighted to mass M1 and using 

a hanging weight of mass M2 positioned 

at distance L during the evaluation. 

Mass M1 represents the 95th percentile 

weight of a child’s head, alone, for the 

specified age range. Mass M2 has been 

selected as 20 percent of the 95th 

percentile weight of the user in the 

specified age range. As noted in section 

V.A.2, the average human bears 10 

percent of their dry-land weight when 

submerged up to their necks. The 

hanging weight used in this assessment 

is double the expected amount, or 20 

percent of the dry-land weight for that 

user, to incorporate an appropriate 

factor of safety. Distance L has been 

determined as half of the 95th percentile 

stature of the user in the specified age 

range. This choice is made to 

approximate the position of the hanging 

mass at roughly the user’s center of 

mass. Distance L includes the length 

between the narrowest and widest 

circumferences of probe to account for 

that distance as being the length of the 

user’s head, as described in the 

paragraphs above. 

The four hazard patterns addressed in 

this NPR may not be exhaustive of the 

hazards associated with this product 

category. For example, the United States 

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 

has warned about the risk of death due 

to suffocation, strain, and injury to a 

baby’s neck.33 Accordingly, the 

Commission is seeking comment on 

whether it should strengthen these 

performance requirements to address 

other hazards, or whether it should 

promulgate alternative performance 

requirements. 

B. Marking, Labeling, and Instructional 

Literature Requirements 

Section 5.4 of the ASTM F963–23 

requires aquatic toys, such as neck 

floats, and their packaging to have a 

warning that states: ‘‘This is not a 

lifesaving device. Do not leave child 

unattended while device is in use.’’ The 

incidents discussed in section III of this 

preamble reflect that the existing safety 

messaging by way of marking, labeling, 

and instructional literature has had 

limited effectiveness for preventing the 

submersion hazard associated with neck 

floats. Indeed, it is reasonably 

foreseeable that caregivers will 

disregard warnings and instructions for 

neck floats and fail to adhere to them for 

each use. Many of the reported 

incidents involved products that not 

only met but exceeded the existing 

ASTM F963–23 requirements. Safety 

messaging has inherent weaknesses 

compared to designing the hazard out of 

a product or guarding consumers from 

the hazard (Laughery & Wogalter, 2011), 

and it cannot, alone, adequately address 

the specific identified hazards from 

neck floats. Drowning statistics and 

water safety campaigns have shown that 

caregiver supervision can be imperfect 

and insufficient to avoid drowning 

hazards, and many children drown 

every year.34 35 Further, warnings and 

instructional literature depend on 

persuading the consumer to change 

their behavior to avoid a hazard, and 

various factors can impede the 

effectiveness of these mediums. 

Conversely, the requirements for safety 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALSEP20NO24.100</GPH>
91604 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

36ANSI Z535.4, American National Standard for 

Product Safety Signs and Labels is the primary U.S. 

voluntary consensus standard for the design, 

application, use, and placement of on-product 

warning labels when developing or assessing the 

adequacy of warning labels. 

messaging can be improved to increase 

the likelihood of consumers seeing, 

reading, remembering, and heeding the 

warnings and instructions, and better 

support the Commission’s proposed 

performance requirements. Accordingly, 

the Commission proposes in § 1250.5(d) 

to require the following marking, 

labeling, and instructional literature 

requirements for all products within the 

scope of the NPR and seeks comment on 

the format, location, and content 

requirements of the proposed warnings. 

1. Product and Package Marking and 

Labeling 

The primary U.S. voluntary consensus 

standard for product safety signs and 

labels, ANSI/NEMA Z535.4, American 

National Standard for Product Safety 

Signs and Labels,36 recommends that 

on-product warnings include content 

that addresses the following three 

elements: 

• a description of the hazard; 

• information about the consequences 

of exposure to the hazard; and 

• instructions regarding appropriate 

hazard-avoidance behaviors. 

Providing more explicit or detailed 

information in a warning has been 

found to increase warning effectiveness 

(Laughery & Smith, 2006) by increasing 

the perception of injury severity and 

perceived hazard (DeJoy, 1999). 

Vividness of message content has been 

found to increase message salience by 

triggering motivation to act in 

consideration of the warning (MurrayJohnson & Witte, 2003). Accordingly, 

the Commission proposes, in 

§ 1250.5(d)(1), that the products within 

scope of the rule, and their retail 

packaging, contain the warning message 

shown in Figure 6, including the use of 

bolding and the formatting of the text, 

the safety alert symbol, and the signal 

word, in the order presented. 

The portion, ‘‘[specify lower bound 

for age],’’ is to be filled with the lowest 

age intended for use of the product and 

in bold font. The portion, ‘‘[specify 

upper bound for age],’’ is to be filled 

with the highest age intended for use of 

the product and in bold font. The 

portion, ‘‘[specify lower bound for 

weight],’’ is to be filled with the 

minimum intended weight in pounds 

for use of the product and in bold font. 

The portion, ‘‘[specify upper bound for 

weight],’’ is to be filled with the 

maximum intended weight in pounds 

for use of the product and in bold font. 

The portion, ‘‘{Check for leaks before 

each use. Never use with leaks.},’’ is 

only required and appropriate for child 

neck floats with inflatable components. 

The brackets are to be omitted from the 

label in each case above. 

a. Content 

In developing the proposed message 

panel, among other sources, staff 

considered the available incident data, 

reasonably foreseeable use, warnings 

required for ‘‘Aquatic Toys’’ per ASTM 

F963, warnings recommended and 

required by other standards and bodies, 

and recommendations and requirements 

specified in ANSI/NEMA Z535.4. 

Additionally, the Commission considers 

that consumers are less likely to read, 

heed, and remember safety messaging if 

they feel overwhelmed by the volume 

and/or depth of the information. The 

Commission encourages manufacturers 

to include additional product-specific 

warnings where necessary; however, 

such warnings shall neither contradict 

nor confuse the intended meaning of the 

required warnings. 

The statement, ‘‘THIS PRODUCT 

DOES NOT PREVENT DROWNING,’’ 

begins the message panel by articulating 

clearly that children can still drown 

even though they use the product. Each 

letter in this statement shall be bold and 

capitalized to strengthen the statement 

and attract the consumer’s attention to 

the warning label. If the consumer reads 

nothing else, this statement may 

challenge some consumers’ perception 

that the product will necessarily keep 

the child’s mouth and nose above the 

water. This perception of safety is 

dangerous because it may lead 

consumers to provide inadequate 

supervision of the child using the 

product in water. This language is 

required by the Australian Competition 

& Consumer Commission (ACCC) for 

floatation aids as specified in the 

Australian standard, AS/NZS 

1900:2014, Flotation aids for water 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALSEP20NO24.101</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91605 

37See ACCC web page on ‘‘Swimming & flotation 

aids’’: https://www.productsafety.gov.au/productsafety-laws/safety-standards-bans/mandatorystandards/swimming-flotation-aids#:∼:text=

The%20mandatory%20standard%20contains%20

requirements%20to%20minimise%20incidences,

light%208%20buoyancy%20

of%20cellular%20material%20More%20items; 

accessed on March 27, 2024. 

38See ASTM F1967, Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Infant Bath Seats: https://

compass.astm.org/document/ 

?contentCode=ASTM%7CF1967-19%7Cen-US; 

accessed on March 27, 2024. 

39See ASTM F2670, Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Infant Bath Tubs: https://

www.astm.org/f2670-22.html; accessed on March 

27, 2024. ASTM F2670 on infant bath tubs and 

F1967 on infant bath seats specify that the warning 

label shall address that babies have drowned while 

using the respective products. 

40See ASTM F3681, Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Beach Umbrellas and Anchor 

Devices: https://www.astm.org/f3681-24.html; 

accessed on June 12, 2024. ASTM F3681 on beach 

umbrellas specifies that the warning shall state that 

beach umbrellas have killed people. 

41For example, see ‘‘Water Safety for Parents’’ 

from John Hopkins Medicine: https://

www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-andprevention/water-safety-for-parents; accessed on 

June 13, 2024. 

42ASTM F1967 on infant bath seats specifies the 

following warning regarding supervision using the 

word ‘‘your’’: ‘‘Stay in arm’s reach of your baby.’’ 

43ASTM F3681 on beach umbrellas specifies the 

following warning regarding the risk of death, using 

the word ‘‘you’’: ‘‘You can be killed too!’’ 

44See AAP on drowning and touch supervision. 

‘‘A Parent’s Guide to Water Safety.’’ Pediatric 

Patient Education, 1 Jan. 2021, https://doi.org/ 

10.1542/peo_document110. 

45ASTM F1967 on infant bath seats and F2670 on 

infant bath tubs specify the following warning 

regarding supervision: ‘‘Stay in arm’s reach of your 

baby.’’ 

familiarization and swimming tuition.37

Similar language is required for Aquatic 

Toys per section 5.4 of ASTM F963–23 

(i.e., ‘‘This is not a lifesaving device.’’) 

and for infant bath seats per ASTM 

F1967 (i.e., ‘‘NOT A SAFETY 

DEVICE.’’).38 16 CFR part 1215. 

However, the Commission preliminarily 

determines that the statement, ‘‘This is 

not a lifesaving device,’’ is not 

appropriate for the product because the 

proposed warnings better satisfy the 

intent to communicate that the product 

does not prevent drowning, and to 

include it in addition to the other 

warnings could dilute the warnings and 

increase the risk of warning exhaustion. 

Therefore, instead of complying with 

the warning text ‘‘This is not a 

lifesaving device.’’ in section 5.4 of 

ASTM F963–23, the Commission 

proposes to require the language in 

Figure 6. 

The statement, ‘‘Children have died 

after slipping through neck floats,’’ may 

reduce the likelihood of consumers 

otherwise inferring that the lifethreatening hazard is just an unlikely 

potential risk rather than a hazard that 

has occurred and may happen to their 

child. As detailed above in section III, 

at least 87 incidents involved a child’s 

head slipping through, two of which 

resulted in the child dying as a result of 

drowning. In most cases, the caregiver 

immediately intervened such that the 

child either did not fully submerge or 

was only submerged briefly. Had the 

caregiver not been present, these 

incidents could have resulted in the 

child drowning. Similar language is 

used in numerous other standards, such 

as for infant bath seats per ASTM 

F1967, infant bathtubs per ASTM 

F2670, Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Infant Bathtubs, and 

Beach Umbrellas per ASTM F3681, 

Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Beach Umbrellas and 

Anchor Devices.39 40

The statement, ‘‘Neck opening can get 

bigger during use, even if it feels snug,’’ 

addresses the critical and hidden hazard 

of center opening expansion, because 

consumers are likely to expect that the 

center opening will not permit the 

child’s mouth to go underwater if the 

product is tightly fitted, even though 

this is possible and has occurred in 

reported incidents (e.g., IDI 

210910CCC1030 detailed above). 

Without dispelling this false assumption 

of safety, the consumer is more likely to 

discredit the warning messages and use 

the product without taking all necessary 

precautions, particularly if they have 

previously used the product without 

incident or seen others use the product 

without incident. Of the 21 incident 

reports that mentioned whether the 

neck float felt snug when placed on the 

victim at the time of the incident, 19 of 

the incident reports indicated the neck 

float did have a tight fit. 

The statement, ‘‘Your child can 

drown in as little as 1 inch of water,’’ 

communicates an important point that 

may help maintain the consumer’s 

attention and educate them, as they are 

unlikely to be familiar with this fact,41

and they are likely to be caught off 

guard by it. It serves an important role 

by emphasizing that even very shallow 

water can be lethal, which may 

contradict the consumer’s expectation of 

safety associated with using the product 

in shallow water, such as in bathtubs. 

The statement is also personalized to 

the reader by using the words: ‘‘Your 

child,’’ as opposed to ‘‘a child,’’ or 

similar language, which can more easily 

be disregarded by the consumer as not 

applying directly to the child for whom 

they are responsible.42 Other standards, 

such as ASTM F3681 on beach 

umbrellas, also take the approach of 

personalized language regarding the risk 

of death.43

The message panel includes bulleted 

statements for important information 

about how to avoid the drowning 

hazard. The statement, ‘‘Always stay 

within arm’s reach to keep your child’s 

mouth above water,’’ emphasizes the 

importance of a caregiver’s attentiveness 

to a child while using a neck float to be 

able to rescue the child immediately if 

their mouth and/or nose submerges. 

Unattended children using neck floats 

in bathtubs sustained injuries and two 

reportedly died (e.g., IDIs 

190711CCC2487 and 200915HFE0001). 

Again, caregivers may develop a false 

sense of security when using the neck 

float, relaxing their supervision of the 

child for numerous reasons, such as past 

incident-free experiences, the 

perception that the neck float is too tight 

for the child to slip through, and the 

presumption of safety associated with 

the neck float being a consumer product 

marketed to such young ages for the 

purpose of keeping their mouth and 

nose above the water (Woodson et al., 

1992). 

The American Academy of Pediatrics 

(AAP) has encouraged caregivers to use 

‘‘touch supervision’’ that is, remaining 

within arm’s reach of infants and 

toddlers swimming in pools.44 Section 

5.4 of ASTM F963—23 requires a 

warning statement that addresses the 

following: ‘‘Do not leave child 

unattended while device is in use.’’ 

Similar juvenile product standards, 

such as ASTM F1967 and ASTM F2670, 

also support the use of statements 

pertaining to supervision and 

proximity.45 The proposed language is 

stronger for neck floats because it 

highlights the risk of partial slipthrough, which is a small movement 

that requires a more attentive caregiver 

than simply monitoring for a large 

motion, such as the child fully 

submerging. Further, the 

personalization via ‘‘your child’’ may 

help encourage the consumer to see the 

warning as applying to the child for 

whom they are responsible and increase 

its impact. 

The statements specific to inflatable 

products, ‘‘Check for leaks before each 

use. Never use with leaks,’’ are intended 

to motivate consumers using inflatable 

neck floats to check for leaks before 

each use and to never use neck floats 

with leaks. Detailed in section III of this 

preamble, numerous incidents involved 

products that had leaks. In many cases, 

the consumers did not report testing the 

product for leaks prior to every use, and 

some cases mentioned that the 

consumers were aware of slow leaks and 

continued to use the product anyway 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
91606 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

46ASTM Ad Hoc Wording Task Group (Ad Hoc 

TG) consists of members of various durable nursery 

product voluntary standards committees, including 

CPSC staff. The Ad Hoc TG’s purpose is to 

harmonize the wording of common sections (e.g., 

introduction, scope, protective components) and 

warning label requirements across nursery product 

voluntary standards. The latest version of the Ad 

Hoc-approved recommended language is published 

in the ‘‘Committee Documents’’ section of the 

Committee F15 ASTM website. 

47American National Standards Institute. (2011). 

ANSI Z535.4. American national standard: Product 

safety signs and labels. Rosslyn, VA: National 

Electrical Manufacturers Association, Section 9.1. 

due, in part, to past incident-free 

experiences and the costs associated 

with having to replace the product. The 

proposed instructional literature 

requirements, detailed below, 

complement this warning with specific 

instructions to help the consumer avoid 

the risks of underinflation. The 

Commission cautions that, while the 

proposed statements may help some 

consumers prevent submersion 

associated with leaks, most reported 

incidents involved products with 

warnings and instructions pertaining to 

leaks. 

Lastly, the statements in brackets 

pertaining to the child’s age and weight 

are intended to help and encourage the 

consumer to select and use the 

appropriate product for their child; 

though, as explained above, children 

can vary considerably in the key face, 

head, and neck measurements relevant 

to slip-through, regardless of their age 

and weight. Discussed below, the 

Commission proposes instructional 

literature requirements to further aid the 

consumer in accurately taking the 

necessary measurements. Providing the 

intended age and weight also serves to 

guide testing of the products to increase 

the safety of the products for the 

intended and foreseeable end users. 

b. Format 

CPSC commonly uses ANSI/NEMA 

Z535.4 as a reference for warning 

formatting requirements. Human factors 

experts and warnings literature 

regularly cite ANSI/NEMA Z535.4 when 

discussing the design and evaluation of 

on-product warning labels and generally 

consider the ANSI Z535 series of 

requirements as the benchmark and 

state of the art standards against which 

warning labels should be evaluated for 

adequacy (Vredenburgh & Zackowitz, 

2005; Wogalter & Laughery, 2005). 

Furthermore, the scope of ANSI/NEMA 

Z535.4 is broad enough to encompass 

nearly all consumer products, including 

children’s products and toys (Kalsher & 

Wogalter, 2008). 

Signal words, colors, graphics, and 

placement all increase conspicuity. The 

salience of a visual warning can be 

enhanced using large and bold print, 

high contrast, color, borders, pictorial 

symbols, and special effects like 

flashing lights. Therefore, the NPR 

proposes that the warning label design 

requirements for children’s neck floats 

adopt the current recommendations 

from ASTM’s Ad Hoc Language Task 

Group (Ad Hoc Task Group).46 Staff has 

worked closely with the Ad Hoc Task 

Group to develop warning 

recommendations that are based largely 

on the ANSI/NEMA Z535.4 

requirements. The recommendations 

provide permanent, conspicuous, and 

consistently formatted warning labels 

across juvenile products. Warnings that 

meet the recommendations address 

numerous format issues related to 

capturing consumer attention, 

improving readability, and increasing 

hazard perception and avoidance 

behavior. Such recommendations 

include requiring that the proposed 

warnings conform to ANSI/NEMA 

Z535.4 sections 6.1–6.4, 7.2–7.6.3, and 

8.1, with the following changes to the 

ANSI standard: 

• For enforceability, in sections 6.2.2, 

7.3, 7.5, and 8.1.2, replace the word 

‘‘should’’ with ‘‘shall;’’ 

• Also, for enforceability, in section 

7.6.3, replace the phrase ‘‘should (when 

feasible)’’ with the word ‘‘shall;’’ and 

• To allow greater production 

flexibility without affecting the efficacy 

of the warnings, strike the word ‘‘safety’’ 

when used immediately before a color 

(e.g., replace ‘‘safety white’’ with 

‘‘white’’). 

Further, certain text in the message 

panel must be in bold and in capital 

letters as shown in the example warning 

label in Figure 6, above, to provide 

emphasis and capture the reader’s 

attention. The signal word ‘‘WARNING’’ 

must appear in sans serif letters in 

upper case only and be at least 1⁄8 inch 

(3.2 mm) in height and be center or left 

aligned. The height of the exclamation 

point inside the safety alert symbol, an 

exclamation mark in a triangle, as 

shown in the example warnings must be 

at least half the height of the triangle 

and be centered vertically inside the 

triangle. The message panel text capital 

letters cannot be less than 1⁄16′′ (1.6 mm) 

and the message panel text shall be 

center or left aligned and appear in sans 

serif letters. The text in each column 

should be arranged in list or outline 

format, with precautionary (hazard 

avoidance) statements preceded by 

bullet points. Precautionary statements 

must be separated by bullet points if 

paragraph formatting is used. 

c. Placement 

Warning research indicates that 

warning labels with prominent 

placement increase the likelihood of 

being noticed (Rogers et al., 2000). 

Further, warnings that are placed 

directly on a product and/or the 

packaging have a higher noticeability 

rate (Wogalter et al., 1987; Frantz & 

Rhoades, 1993) because consumers are 

more likely to see such warnings when 

first examining the product prior to 

purchase. ANSI/NEMA Z535.4 provides 

general guidance on the placement of 

warnings, stating that warnings must be 

placed so they are ‘‘readily visible to the 

intended viewer’’ and will ‘‘alert the 

viewer to the hazard in time to take 

appropriate action.’’ 47 Similarly, both 

the Ad Hoc Task Group and section 

5.3.6 of ASTM F963–23 require 

warnings to be conspicuous. 

Accordingly, the Commission proposes 

that the warning label identified in 

Figure 6 is positioned conspicuously on 

the product, such that it is visible 

clearly and, in its entirety, when the 

product is placed on the child. 

For the product’s packaging, to ensure 

that the label is in an area of the 

packaging that stands out and is visible, 

the Commission proposes that the 

warning label in Figure 6 must be 

placed in the principal display panel, 

which is defined in ASTM F963 as ‘‘the 

display panel for a retail package or 

container, bin, or vending machine that 

is most likely to be displayed, shown, 

presented, or examined under normal or 

customary conditions of display for 

retail sale.’’ 

2. Instructional Literature 

The Commission proposes to require 

that instructions are provided with all 

neck float products and that they must 

be easy to read and understand, and 

shall be in the English language, at a 

minimum, consistent with the Ad Hoc 

recommended language under 

§ 1250.5(d)(2). These instructions must 

be printed on the product and provided 

separately, such as a user manual, and 

include information on assembly, 

installation, maintenance, cleaning, and 

use, where applicable. The instructions 

must explain how to check for adequate 

fit of the product to prevent the child 

from slipping through the center 

opening. Instructional literature 

provided with the product, but not 

printed on the product, must include all 

warnings specified above in section 1 on 

content. Any instructions provided in 

addition to those required in this 

section must neither contradict nor 

confuse the meaning of the required 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91607 

information, nor be otherwise 

misleading to the consumer. 

For products with inflatable 

components, the Commission proposes 

that the instructional literature includes 

clear directions for testing the product 

for leaks. These directions are important 

for reducing the likelihood of the 

product losing air during use, as air loss 

may increase the amount deformation 

and center opening expansion. Absent 

these directions, caregivers are less 

likely to identify leaks in their products 

prior to the children being submerged in 

water. 

The Commission assesses that these 

instructional literature requirements 

support the proposed performance 

requirements and may help some 

consumers to select, use, and maintain 

the products safely. Instructional 

literature, however, is likely to have 

limited effectiveness to address this 

hazard, as consumers using inflatable 

neck floats would need to remember 

and choose to follow the instructions 

every time they use the product, and it 

is reasonably foreseeable they will 

forego doing so for the reasons detailed 

above. Most neck floats involved in 

incidents provided instructional 

literature in the forms of user manuals 

and on-product labels, and many of the 

products were used contrary to the 

instructions, resulting in the children 

being submerged in water. 

VI. Prohibited Stockpiling 

The Commission is proposing in 

§ 1250.5(e) an anti-stockpiling provision 

to prevent firms from manufacturing or 

importing large quantities of 

noncompliant neck floats before the rule 

takes effect and seeks comment on this 

provision. Under this proposal, firms 

could not manufacture or import 

noncompliant products in a given 

month more than a rate of 105 percent 

of the base period. The base period is 

the average monthly manufacturing or 

import volume within the last 13 

months of production that immediately 

precedes the month of promulgation of 

the final rule. 

Neck float products have 

characteristics that make them ideal for 

firms seeking to stockpile, such as low 

inventory costs due to their small size 

(particularly for inflatable products 

before sale), durability, and low costs of 

production. Additionally, the new 

requirements may cause some firms to 

exit the market. Exiting firms would 

have an incentive to sell stockpiled neck 

floats to support the costs of switching 

to manufacturing another product. 

These firms would be relatively 

unconstrained by reputational concerns 

surrounding their sale of stockpiled 

non-compliant neck floats after the 

effective date of a final rule. Further, 

because many neck floats are sold 

primarily or exclusively on 

manufacturers’ or importers’ own 

websites, the responsible business 

practices of retailers that refuse to take 

noncompliant toys into their inventory, 

even before the effective date of a new 

safety regulation, would have little 

constraining effect on stockpiling by 

manufacturers and importers 

themselves. These firms could expect to 

sell their stockpiled noncompliant 

products even as other sellers limit their 

sales to compliant products. 

VII. Feasibility of Proposed 

Requirements 

Pursuant to section 106(c) of the 

CPSIA, Congress directed the 

Commission to ‘‘periodically review and 

revise the rules set forth under this 

section to ensure that such rules provide 

the highest level of safety for such 

products that is feasible.’’ 15 U.S.C. 

2056b(c). Based on the staff’s analysis 

provided in this NPR, the Commission 

preliminarily determines that the NPR is 

technically and economically feasible, 

and requests comment on this 

determination. 

A. Technological Feasibility 

A proposed rule is technically feasible 

if it is capable of being done. For 

example, compliant products might 

already be on the market; or the 

technology to comply with the 

requirements might be commercially 

available; or existing products could be 

made compliant; or alternative 

practices, best practices, or operational 

changes would allow manufacturers to 

comply. See, e.g., 15 U.S.C. 1278a(d) 

(discussing lead limits). The 

Commission preliminarily concludes 

that the NPR’s proposals meet technical 

feasibility criteria. No new or even 

emerging technology is needed to 

manufacture a compliant product. 

In addition, though testing 

laboratories may need to procure 

additional equipment to accommodate 

the conditioning, buoyancy, and neck 

opening requirements, the tools 

required for those test methods are not 

proprietary or exclusive items and may 

be reasonably sourced from commercial 

providers. Of the testing tools proposed 

by the NPR, only the specified head 

probes are unique; however, staff were 

able to fabricate those probes using 

commercially available resources. 

Additionally, many of the test methods 

proposed by the NPR are already either 

included in CPSC mandatory standards 

or come from other previously 

published external safety standards. 

B. Economic Feasibility 

The proposed rule is economically 

feasible because the cost of compliance 

would not threaten the viability of the 

industry. CPSC expects a significant 

economic effect on firms supplying 

inflatable neck floats and a de minimis 

impact on firms supplying inherently 

buoyant neck floats, which are more 

easily made compliant with the rule. 

The availability of inherently buoyant 

products that, CPSC staff assesses, are 

compliant or readily could be compliant 

with the proposed rule, demonstrates 

that the proposed rule is economically 

feasible. 

VIII. Incorporation by Reference 

Proposed section 1250.5 would 

incorporate by reference portions of 

ANSI/CAN/UL 12402–9, ANSI APSP 

ICC–16, ANSI/NEMA Z535.4–2023, 

ASTM F833–21 and ASTM F1967–19. 

The Office of the Federal Register (OFR) 

has regulations concerning 

incorporation by reference. 1 CFR part 

51. Under those regulations, agencies 

must discuss, in the preamble to a final 

rule, ways in which the material the 

agency incorporates by reference is 

reasonably available to interested 

parties and how interested parties can 

obtain the material. In addition, the 

preamble to the final rule must 

summarize the material. 1 CFR 

51.5(b)(3). 

In accordance with the OFR 

regulations, section V of this preamble 

summarizes the provisions of ANSI/ 

CAN/UL 12402–9, ANSI APSP ICC–16, 

ASTM F833–21, ASTM F1967–19 and 

ANSI/NEMA Z535.4–2023 that the 

Commission proposes to incorporate by 

reference into proposed § 1250.5. The 

standards are reasonably available to 

interested parties by permission of the 

relevant standards developing 

organization (SDO) to be viewed as a 

read-only document during the 

comment period on this NPR, at: 

• https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ 

DQVJYMKforANSI/CAN/UL 12402–9, 

• https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/ 

ANSIAPSPICC162017/title-page for 

ANSI APSP ICC–16, 

• https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ 

DQVJYMKforANSI/NEMA Z535.4–2023, 

• https://www.astm.org/productsservices/reading-room.html for ASTM 

F833–21, and 

• https://www.astm.org/productsservices/reading-room.html for ASTM 

F1967–19. 

Interested parties can also schedule 

an appointment to inspect a copy of the 

standards at CPSC’s Office of the 

Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product 

Safety Commission, 4330 East-West 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
91608 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

48Section 14(a)(3) specifies laboratories must 

have at least 90 days to implement new third-party 

testing requirements. 

Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, 

telephone: (301) 504–7479; email: cpscos@cpsc.gov. Alternatively, interested 

parties can purchase copies from the 

following sources: 

(1) Pool and Hot Tub Alliance 

(PHTA), 1650 King Street, Suite 602, 

Alexandria, VA 22314; phone: (703) 

838–0083; website: www.phta.org 

(i) ANSI APSP ICC–16, American 

National Standard for Suction Outlet 

Fitting Assemblies (SOFA) for Use in 

Pools, Spas, and Hot Tubs, (approved 

August 18, 2017). 

(2) Underwriters Laboratories (UL), 

1250 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 

520, Washington, DC 20036; phone: 

(202) 296–7840; website: www.ul.com. 

(i) ANSI/CAN/UL 12402–9, Standard 

for Personal Flotation Devices—Part 9: 

Test Methods, (published February 11, 

2021). 

(3) National Electrical Manufacturers 

Association (NEMA), 1300 17th St. N, 

Arlington, VA 22209; phone: (703) 841– 

3200; website: www.nema.org. 

(i) ANSI/NEMA Z535.4–23, American 

National Standard for Product Safety 

Signs and Labels (approved December 

14, 2023). 

(4) ASTM International (ASTM), 100 

Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West 

Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959; phone: 

(610) 832–9585; website: www.astm.org. 

(i) ASTM F833–21, Standard 

Consumer Safety Performance 

Specification for Carriages and Strollers, 

(approved June 15, 2021). 

(ii) ASTM F1967–19, Standard 

Consumer Safety Specification for 

Infant Bath Seats, (approved May 1, 

2019) 

IX. Effective Date 

The Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) generally requires that the 

effective date of a rule be at least 30 

days after publication of the final rule. 

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

proposes a 180-day effective date for 

this rule. The rule would apply to all 

neck floats manufactured after the 

effective date. 15 U.S.C. 2058(g)(1). 

Some neck floats may already comply 

with the proposed requirements; 

however, most neck floats would need 

to be redesigned, manufacturing 

equipment may need to be retooled, and 

all neck floats would require third-party 

testing to the new requirements. 15 

U.S.C. 2063(a)(3).48 Accordingly, to 

provide time to comply with the rule, to 

ensure adequate lab capacity to test and 

certify toys, and to spread the cost of 

compliance over a period of months, the 

Commission proposes to make this rule 

effective 180 days after publication of 

the final rule in the Federal Register. 

The effective date of 180 days should 

be sufficient for firms to come into 

compliance, because the proposed tests 

are consistent with testing required in 

16 CFR parts 1215, 1227, and 1450. For 

other proposed tests that are based on 

ANSI/CAN/UL 12402–9:2022, no 

unique tools will be required. For the 

neck opening testing, staff were able to 

fabricate head probes within a 

reasonable time using commercially 

available resources. Accordingly, CPSC 

expects that these laboratories are 

competent to conduct the required 

testing and obtain their International 

Organization for Standardization (ISO) 

accreditation and CPSC-acceptance 

updated in the normal course. The 

Commission invites comments, 

particularly from small businesses, 

regarding the proposed testing and the 

amount of time needed to come into 

compliance with a final rule. 

X. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

The RFA requires that agencies 

review a proposed rule for the rule’s 

potential economic impact on small 

entities, including small businesses. 

Section 603 of the RFA generally 

requires that agencies prepare an initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) 

and make the analysis available to the 

public for comment when the agency 

publishes an NPR, unless the rule 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on substantial number of small 

entities. 5 U.S.C. 603. The IRFA must 

describe the impact of the proposed rule 

on small entities and identify significant 

alternatives that accomplish the 

statutory objectives and minimize any 

significant economic impact of the 

proposed rule on small entities. The 

IRFA must also contain: 

(1) a description of why action by the 

agency is being considered; 

(2) a succinct statement of the 

objectives of, and legal basis for, the 

proposed rule; 

(3) a description of and, where 

feasible, an estimate of the number of 

small entities to which the proposed 

rule will apply; 

(4) a description of the projected 

reporting, recordkeeping and other 

compliance requirements of the 

proposed rule; and 

(5) an identification to the extent 

practicable, of all relevant Federal rules 

which may duplicate, overlap or 

conflict with the proposed rule. 

This proposed rule would have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small U.S. 

entities, primarily from redesign costs in 

the first year that the final rule would 

be effective. A significant impact would 

occur for small companies whose 

products do not meet the proposed 

requirements. 

A. Reason for Agency Action, NPR 

Objectives and Legal Basis 

Section I of this preamble explains 

why the Commission proposes to 

establish a mandatory rule for neck float 

and provides a statement of the 

objectives of, and legal basis for, the 

proposed rule. The proposed 

requirements in the NPR are more 

stringent than ASTM F963–23, which 

the Commission incorporated into the 

mandatory rule in 16 CFR part 1250, 

Safety Standard Mandating ASTM F963 

for Toys, as described in sections IV and 

V of this preamble. The NPR addresses 

the known hazards presented by neck 

floats, discussed in section III of this 

preamble, that the current mandatory 

toy safety standard does not adequately 

address. 

B. Small Entities to Which the Rule Will 

Apply 

Section II of this preamble describes 

the products within the scope of the 

proposed rule, provides an overview of 

the market for neck floats and the use 

of these products in the U.S. This 

section provides additional details on 

the market for products within the 

scope of the rule. 

The North American Industry 

Classification System (NAICS) defines 

product codes for U.S. firms. Firms that 

manufacture neck floats may be 

categorized under various NAICS 

product codes. Most of these firms 

likely fall under NAICS code such as 

339930 Doll, Toy, and Game 

Manufacturing, 326190 Other Plastics 

Product Manufacturing, and 326199 All 

Other Plastic Product Manufacturing. 

Importers of these products could also 

vary among different NAICS codes, with 

a majority of the firms categorized under 

NAICS codes as wholesalers: 423920 

Toy and Hobby Goods and Supplies 

Merchant Wholesalers, and 424610 

Plastics Materials and Basic Forms and 

Shapes Merchant Wholesalers. 

Currently, unlike inherently buoyant 

neck floats, the inflatable versions of 

these products are not available for 

purchase through larger retailers and 

retailers with physical store locations. 

Retailers of neck floats fall under NAICS 

codes 459120 Hobby, Toy, and Game 

Stores, 452210 Department Stores, 

452310 General Merchandise Stores 

Including Warehouse Clubs and 

Supercenters, and 454390 Other Direct 

Selling establishments. Floatation 

products can be sold among varying 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91609 

49Census Bureau, 2023. Statistics of US 

Businesses (SUSB) 2021. Suitland, MD. Census 

Bureau. 

50Some discrepancies exist between the 

published SBA size standard NAICS code and the 

SUSB code. Staff used the code description to 

match the size standard to the correct value. 

Retailer size determination is made using 2017 

SUSB data by applying the ratio of firms that meet 

the standard to the 2021 data values. 

retail channels focused on swimming or 

toddler products. Therefore, the NAICS 

codes listed in this IRFA for retailers, 

importers, and manufacturers are 

unlikely to be exhaustive. 

Under the U.S. Small Business 

Administration (SBA) guidelines, a 

manufacturer, importer, and retailer of 

neck float products is categorized as 

‘‘small’’ based on the SBA’s size 

thresholds associated with the NAICS 

code. SBA uses the number of 

employees to determine whether a 

manufacturer or importer is a small 

business while SBA uses annual 

revenues to consider retailers. Based on 

2021 Statistics of U.S. Businesses 

(SUSB) data,49 and a review of publicly 

available data on annual revenues, 

CPSC estimated the number of firms 

classified as small for the most relevant 

NAICS codes. Table 6 and Table 7 

provide the estimated number of small 

firms by each NAICS code.50 CPSC 

estimates that a total of 19 small U.S. 

manufacturers and importers, and 

27,260 small U.S. retailers, deal in neck 

floats. 

The data indicated that all the 

manufacturers/importers of these 

products are considered to be small 

businesses. CPSC assesses that the total 

size of this market likely does not 

exceed $5 million in aggregate. 

C. Compliance Reporting and 

Recordkeeping Requirements of the 

Proposed Rule 

The NPR would require 

manufacturers and importers of neck 

floats to meet performance, warning 

label, and instructional material 

requirements, and to conduct thirdparty testing to demonstrate 

compliance. Section V of this preamble 

describes the performance, warning 

label and instructional material 

requirements. 

Manufacturers must demonstrate that 

they have met the performance 

requirements of the rule by providing a 

children’s product certificate. As 

specified in 16 CFR part 1109, suppliers 

who are not the original manufacturer, 

such as importers, may rely on the 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALSEP20NO24.102</GPH> EP20NO24.103</GPH>
91610 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

51Non-inflatable neck floats were on average 20 

percent more than the most popular inflatable neck 

float. 52The mean hourly wage of a material engineer 

is $53.09 per hour as of May 2023 according to BLS. 

https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes172131.htm. 53The ratio of full compensation to wages for 

someone in Professional and related occupations in 

the Manufacturing industry is 1.50 ($68.47 

compensation per hour ÷ $45.60 wage per hour) as 

of December 2023. Table 4. Private industry 

workers by occupational and industry group—2023 

Q04 Results (bls.gov). 

54 $79.64 per hour = $53.09 wage per hour × 1.50 

compensation factor. 

55 $79.64 per hour × 480 hours (3 months) = 

$38,227, $79.64 × 640 hours (4 months) = $50,970. 

testing or certification suppliers 

provide, as long as the requirements in 

part 1109 are met. Manufacturers and 

importers are required to furnish 

certificates to retailers and distributors 

(section 14(g)(3) of the CPSA). Retailers 

are not required to third-party test the 

children’s products that they sell unless 

they are also the manufacturer or 

importer. Under section 14 of the CPSA, 

manufacturers, importers, and private 

labelers of neck float products would be 

required to certify, based on a test of 

each product by an ISO-accredited, 

CPSC-accepted third party conformity 

assessment body, that their products 

comply with the requirements of the 

proposed rule. Each children’s product 

certificate of compliance must identify 

the third-party conformity assessment 

body that conducted the testing upon 

which the certificate depends. 

D. Federal Rules Which May Duplicate, 

Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed 

Rule 

CPSC has not identified any other 

Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with the proposed rule. 

E. Potential Impact on Small Entities 

The Commission expects small firms 

of inflatable products to incur a 

significant cost from redesign/retooling, 

and material changes as a result of the 

proposed rule. If the rule is finalized, 

small manufacturers would incur onetime costs related to redesign, retooling, 

testing, labeling/literature updates and 

ongoing certification costs to comply 

with the rule for product lines that 

currently do not meet the proposed 

requirements. Generally, CPSC 

considers an impact to be potentially 

significant if it exceeds 1 percent of a 

firm’s revenue. Based on the 

aforementioned costs, CPSC expects 

approximately 19 small firms to incur a 

cost that exceeds 1 percent of the annual 

revenue of the firm. The Commission 

seeks comments from small firms stating 

their annual revenue and estimated 

compliance costs. 

Staff assesses that a large majority of 

inflatable neck float products cannot, as 

currently constructed, meet the 

proposed requirements of the rule. 

These products will require redesign, 

retooling and additional components to 

comply with the proposed rule. Major 

design changes are needed to meet the 

performance requirements related to 

durability, buoyancy, and the neck 

opening. The Commission anticipates 

that design and/or material changes, 

which may include modifying the shape 

of the neck float or modifying the 

structure by transitioning between or 

combining inherently buoyant and 

inflatable flotation components, would 

be required to the entirety of the 

product. The potential product costs are 

therefore the incremental cost for the 

material change and the one-time labor 

cost to perform the redesign and 

retooling. Inherently buoyant neck floats 

are expected to incur significantly lower 

costs. 

CPSC estimates that the incremental 

costs of the material change to be $6 per 

product based on a comparison of retail 

prices of inflatable neck floats with noninflatable neck floats. This assumes that 

most inherently buoyant neck floats are 

likely to meet the proposed performance 

standards without costly modification, 

while inflatable neck floats are likely 

not to comply with the performance 

requirements. CPSC assumes the 

observed premium of 20 percent of 

retail price 51 for non-inflatables 

represents the incremental cost of 

material between the types. CPSC 

estimates a range of 3 to 4 months of 

labor by a material engineer would be 

required for neck float redesign. Data 

from the Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(BLS) indicates that the average full 

hourly compensation rate of a material 

engineer, which includes wages 52 and 

benefits,53 is $79.64 per hour.54 Because 

neck float designs are very similar 

across product models and firms, CPSC 

assesses that firms would be able to 

incorporate design changes across all 

products lines that the manufacturer 

offers without additional effort required 

for each product line. CPSC staff 

estimates a range of possible redesign 

costs of $38,227 to $50,970 per firm.55

Some additional costs might be 

incurred related to updating and/or 

adding labels/literature. Generally, the 

costs associated with modifying or 

adding warning labels or instructional 

literature are low on a per unit basis 

because manufacturers of these products 

are already required to provide labels 

with their product. Nearly every 

manufacturer also provides some 

literature with their product. A one-time 

update is expected to be less than $0.01 

in cost per product sold. Therefore, 

CPSC expects the incremental cost 

related to the labeling and instructional 

literature provisions to be de minimis. 

F. Third-Party Testing Costs 

The NPR would require 

manufacturers and importers of neck 

floats to comply with performance 

requirements and demonstrate 

compliance by required third-party 

testing. As specified in 16 CFR part 

1109, entities that are not manufacturers 

of children’s products, such as 

importers, may rely on the certificate of 

compliance provided by others. 

Neck float manufacturers could incur 

some additional costs for certifying 

compliance with the proposed rule. The 

certification of must be completed by a 

third party conformity assessment body. 

Based on quotes from testing 

laboratories for ASTM F963 testing 

services, the cost of certification testing 

would range from $130 to $250 per 

product sample. For neck floats, the 

average number of models per firm is 

two, based on manufacturer websites, 

which would equate to a testing and 

certification cost range of $260 to $500 

per firm. 

H. Efforts To Minimize Impact, 

Alternatives Considered 

The Commission considered four 

alternatives to the proposed rule that 

could reduce the impact on small 

entities: (1) not establishing a 

mandatory standard for neck floats, (2) 

establishing an information and 

education campaign for neck floats, (3) 

incorporating existing international 

standards without modification, and (4) 

setting a later effective date. 

1. Not Establishing a Mandatory 

Standard 

Section 106 of the CPSIA requires 

CPSC to promulgate toy safety standards 

that are ‘‘more stringent than’’ the 

applicable voluntary standard if the 

Commission determines that more 

stringent requirements would further 

reduce the risk of injury associated with 

the product, as well as to periodically 

review and revise the rules set forth 

under section 106 to ensure that such 

rules provide the highest level of safety 

for such products that is feasible. 15 

U.S.C. 2056b(c), (d). Given CPSC’s 

statutory mandate, and continuing 

incidents associated with neck float as 

described in section III of this preamble, 

the Commission has determined that it 

must address the safety of children 

using neck float to ensure that the risk 

of drowning is mitigated. While failing 

to promulgate a mandatory standard for 

neck floats would have no direct impact 

on U.S. small businesses, it would allow 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91611 

unsafe products to remain on the market 

and ignore a known drowning hazard to 

children, with reported fatalities. After 

preliminarily determining that the 

existing requirements in ASTM F–963 

are inadequate, in section IV, the 

Commission is moving forward with 

this rulemaking to comply with its 

statutory mandate and prioritize the 

safety of children by mitigating 

potential child slip-throughs and 

submergence in water associated with 

the use of neck floats. 

2. Information and Education Campaign 

CPSC could create an information and 

education campaign to better alert 

parents and caregivers regarding the 

drowning hazard associated with neck 

floats. This would require consumer 

outreach efforts like advertising and 

marketing related to the hazards. This 

alternative could be implemented 

independent of regulatory action. 

Although information campaigns may 

be helpful, there have been deaths 

associated with these products while 

CPSC was conducting extensive 

drowning prevention educational 

campaigns. This demonstrates that 

information and education alone are 

inadequate to address the drowning 

hazard associated with neck floats. 

Therefore, the Commission preliminary 

finds that while information campaigns 

might be helpful, performance standards 

would be more effective in preventing 

deaths associated with the use of neck 

floats. 

3. Incorporate BS EN 13138–1:2021 

Without Modifications 

The Commission could adopt BS EN 

13138–1:2021 without modifications, 

discussed above in section V, because it 

has similar requirements as the 

proposed rule. Some neck float products 

currently available in the U.S. are 

advertised as meeting these 

requirements and as a result these 

products would be unaffected by 

proposed requirements. Adopting this 

alternative would lower the number of 

firms affected by the proposed rule. 

However, the international standards do 

not include specifications for slipthrough hazards associated with neck 

floats. Therefore, this alternative is 

unlikely to prevent drowning related 

injuries to children who may slip 

through neck floats. 

4. Later Effective Date 

To reduce burden on small 

businesses, the Commission could adopt 

an effective date later than 180 days 

after Federal Register publication, to 

spread the cost of compliance over a 

longer period. Although some neck 

floats already comply with most of the 

proposed requirements, most neck floats 

(primarily inflatable neck floats) would 

need to be redesigned, and all neck 

floats would require third-party testing 

to the new requirements. In this case, as 

described above, 180 days is reasonable 

for firms to comply with the rule, and 

many labs are already CPSC-accepted to 

conduct the same or similar testing and 

products expected to already be 

compliant are currently available for 

purchase. 

XI. Environmental Considerations 

The Commission’s regulations address 

whether the agency is required to 

prepare an environmental assessment or 

an environmental impact statement. 

Under these regulations, certain 

categories of CPSC actions normally 

have ‘‘little or no potential for affecting 

the human environment,’’ and therefore 

do not require an environmental 

assessment or an environmental impact 

statement. Safety standards providing 

performance and labeling requirements 

for consumer products come under this 

categorical exclusion. 16 CFR 

1021.5(c)(1). The NPR falls within the 

categorical exclusion. 

XII. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This proposed rule for neck floats 

contains information collection 

requirements that are subject to public 

comment and review by the Office of 

Management and Budget (‘‘OMB’’) 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3521). In this 

document, pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 

3507(a)(1)(D), we set forth: 

• Title for the collection of 

information; 

• Summary of the collection of 

information; 

• Brief description of the need for the 

information and the proposed use of the 

information; 

• Description of the likely 

respondents and proposed frequency of 

response to the collection of 

information; 

• Estimate of the burden that shall 

result from the collection of 

information; and 

• Notice that comments may be 

submitted to the OMB. 

Title: Safety Standard for Toys: 

Requirements for Neck Floats. 

Description: As described in section V 

of this preamble, the proposed rule 

would require new labeling and 

instructions for neck floats toys. The 

NPR proposes that neck float meet the 

proposed requirements of § 1250.5, 

which are summarized in section V of 

this preamble. 

Section 5 of ASTM F963–23 contains 

requirements for marking, labeling, and 

instructional literature of children’s toys 

in general. These requirements fall 

within the definition of ‘‘collection of 

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

3502(3). CPSC will request an OMB 

control number for the proposed 

collection. 

Description of Respondents: Persons 

who manufacture or import neck floats. 

Estimated Burden: We estimate the 

burden of this collection of information 

as follows: 

This estimate is based on the 

following: CPSC estimates there are 20 

suppliers that would respond to this 

collection annually, and that the 

majority of these entities would be 

considered small businesses. CPSC 

assumes that on average each 

respondent that reports annually would 

respond once, as product models for 

neck floats are brought to market and 

new labeling and instruction materials 

are created, for a total of 20 responses 

annually (20 respondents × 1 responses 

per year). CPSC assumes that on average 

it will take 1 hour for each respondent 

to create the required label and one hour 

for them to create the required 

instructions, for an average response 

burden of 2 hours per response. 

Therefore, the total burden hours for the 

collection are estimated to be 40 hours 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALSEP20NO24.104</GPH>
91612 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

56U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, ‘‘Employer 

Costs for Employee Compensation,’’ March 2024, 

Table 4, total compensation for all sales and office 

workers in goods-producing private industries: 

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_

06182024.htm. 

annually (20 responses × 2 hours per 

response = 40 total burden hours). 

CPSC estimates the hourly 

compensation for the time required to 

create and update labeling and 

instructions is $41.76.56 Therefore, the 

estimated annual cost of the burden 

requirements is $1,670 ($41.76 per hour 

× 40 hours = $1,670.40). No operating, 

maintenance, or capital costs are 

associated with the collection. Based on 

this analysis, the proposed information 

collection would impose a burden to 

industry of 40 hours at a cost of $1,670 

annually. 

In compliance with the Paperwork 

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

3507(d), we will submit the information 

collection requirements of this proposed 

rule to the OMB for review. Interested 

persons are requested to submit 

comments regarding information 

collection by January 21, 2025, (see the 

ADDRESSES section at the beginning of 

this notice). Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(2)(A), we invite comments on: 

D Whether the collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the CPSC’s functions, 

including whether the information will 

have practical utility; 

D The accuracy of the CPSC’s estimate 

of the burden of the proposed collection 

of information, including the validity of 

the methodology and assumptions used; 

D Ways to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; 

D Ways to reduce the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents, including the use of 

automated collection techniques, when 

appropriate, and other forms of 

information technology; and 

D The estimated burden hours 

associated with label modification, 

including any alternative estimates. 

XIII. Preemption 

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

2075(a), states that when a consumer 

product safety standard is in effect and 

applies to a product, no state or political 

subdivision of a state may either 

establish or continue in effect a standard 

or regulation that prescribes 

requirements for the performance, 

composition, contents, design, finish, 

construction, packaging, or labeling of 

such product dealing with the same risk 

of injury unless the state requirement is 

identical to the federal standard. Section 

106(f) of the CPSIA deems rules issued 

under that provision ‘‘consumer product 

safety standards.’’ Therefore, once a rule 

issued under section 106 of the CPSIA 

takes effect, it will preempt in 

accordance with section 26(a) of the 

CPSA. 

XIV. Certification and Notice of 

Requirements 

Section 14(a) of the CPSA imposes the 

requirement that products subject to a 

consumer product safety rule under the 

CPSA, or to a similar rule, ban, 

standard, or regulation under any other 

act enforced by the Commission, must 

be certified as complying with all 

applicable CPSC-enforced requirements. 

15 U.S.C. 2063(a). Section 14(a)(2) of the 

CPSA requires that certification of 

children’s products subject to a 

children’s product safety rule be based 

on testing conducted by a CPSCaccepted third party conformity 

assessment body. Section 14(a)(3) of the 

CPSA requires the Commission to 

publish an NOR for the accreditation of 

third-party conformity assessment 

bodies (or laboratories) to assess 

conformity with a children’s product 

safety rule to which a children’s product 

is subject. The proposed rule would 

create a new 16 CFR 1250.5 as part of 

16 CFR part 1250. If issued as a final 

rule, the proposed rule would be a 

children’s product safety rule that 

requires the issuance of a NOR. 

16 CFR part 1112 establishes 

requirements for accreditation of thirdparty conformity assessment bodies to 

test for conformity with a children’s 

product safety rule in accordance with 

section 14(a)(2) of the CPSA. Part 1112 

also codifies all of the NORs issued 

previously by the Commission. To meet 

the requirement that the Commission 

issue an NOR for the proposed standard, 

the Commission proposes to add neck 

floats to the list of children’s product 

safety rules for which CPSC has issued 

an NOR. 

Testing laboratories applying for 

acceptance as a CPSC-accepted third 

party conformity assessment body to 

test to the standard for neck floats 

would be required to meet the thirdparty conformity assessment body 

accreditation requirements in part 1112. 

When a laboratory meets the 

requirements as a CPSC-accepted third 

party conformity assessment body, the 

laboratory can apply to CPSC to have 16 

CFR 1250.5, Safety Standard or Toys: 

Requirements for Neck Floats, included 

within the laboratory’s scope of 

accreditation of CPSC safety rules listed 

for the laboratory on the CPSC website 

at: https://www.cpsc.gov/cgi-bin/ 

labsearch/. 

Testing laboratories should not be 

adversely impacted as a result of this 

rule. CPSC expects that laboratories will 

be able to test to this proposed rule in 

a short time period. Furthermore, no 

laboratory is required to provide testing 

services. The only laboratories that are 

expected to provide such services are 

those that anticipate receiving sufficient 

revenue from the mandated testing to 

justify procuring the testing equipment 

and obtaining accreditation. 

XV. Request for Comments 

The Commission requests comments 

on the proposed rule to promulgate a 

mandatory standard for neck floats 

under section 106 of the CPSIA. During 

the comment period, ASTM F963–23 is 

available as a read-only document at: 

http://www.astm.org/cpsc.htm. 

Comments should be submitted in 

accordance with the instructions in the 

ADDRESSES section at the beginning of 

this document. 

CPSC requests comments on all 

aspects of this rulemaking and 

specifically comment on the following 

topics: 

A. Neck Float Definition 

1. The proposed rule defines a ‘‘neck 

float’’ as ‘‘an article, whether inflatable 

or not, that encircles the neck, supports 

the weight of the child by securing 

around the neck (such as by fastening, 

tightening, or other methods), and is 

used as an instrument of play in water 

environments including sinks, baths, 

paddling pools and swimming pools, 

and is intended for use by children up 

to and including 4 years of age.’’ Should 

the proposed rule use a different 

definition of neck floats? 

B. NPR Scope 

1. Are there any other products that 

should be included within the scope of 

this NPR as neck floats? 

2. Based on FDA’s warning about the 

risk of death due to suffocation, strain, 

and injury to a baby’s neck, should the 

Commission strengthen the proposed 

performance requirements to address 

other hazards, or should the 

Commission promulgate alternative 

performance requirements? 

C. Proposed Requirements To Address 

Slip-Through Due to Deflation 

1. Are there any other performance 

requirements CPSC should consider to 

address the hazards associated with 

slipping through the product as a result 

of deflation? 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91613 

D. Proposed Requirements To Address 

Slip-Through Without Deflation 

1. Are there any other performance 

requirements CPSC should consider to 

address the hazards associated with 

slipping through the product without 

deflation? 

E. Proposed Requirements To Address 

Restraint System Failure 

1. Are there any other performance 

requirements CPSC should consider to 

address the hazards associated with 

restraint system failures? 

2. Should CPSC consider performance 

requirements to include secondary 

attachment systems? Please, provide 

details of any secondary attachment 

system that should be considered. 

F. Proposed Requirements To Address 

Submergence Without Slip-Through 

1. Are there any other performance 

requirements CPSC should consider to 

address the hazards associated with 

submergence during the use of the 

product without slipping through? 

G. Proposed Test Methods 

1. Does the proposed internal air 

pressure of 0.1 PSIG adequately 

simulate use conditions to address the 

hazard associated with deflation? 

2. Are the proposed neck opening 

performance requirements adequate to 

address the hazards associated with 

slip-through? 

H. Proposed Warning Label and 

Instructional Material Requirements for 

Neck Floats 

1. Are the proposed warnings 

adequate to address the hazards 

associated with neck floats? Should 

CPSC consider additional warnings? 

Should other warning formats be 

considered? 

2. Are the proposed instructional 

material requirements adequate to 

address the hazards associated with 

neck floats? Should CPSC consider 

requiring additional information to be 

provided? 

I. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

1. Significant impact. Is CPSC’s 

estimated cost of redesign to achieve 

compliance accurate? If not, please 

provide additional information and 

support for your proposed correction. 

Also, do the estimated costs represent 

more than one percent of annual 

revenue for individual small U.S. 

manufacturers and importers? 

2. Testing costs. Will third party 

testing costs for neck floats increase as 

a result of this requirements in this 

NPR, and if so, by how much? Are test 

labs currently accredited to test for 

ASTM F963–23 equipped to test neck 

floats in accordance with this proposal? 

3. Effective date of 180 days. How 

much time is required to come into 

compliance with a final rule (including 

product compliance and third-party 

testing)? Please provide supporting data 

with your comment, particularly from 

small businesses. 

4. Anti-Stockpiling Provision. Should 

CPSC finalize with the anti-stockpiling 

provision as proposed, or is it not 

unnecessary for neck floats? If an antistockpiling provision is included, are 

there any changes that should be 

included? Please provide supporting 

data with your comment, particularly 

from small businesses. 

5. Alternatives to reduce the impact 

on small businesses. Are there any 

alternatives to the rule that could reduce 

the impact on small businesses without 

reducing safety? Please provide 

supporting data with your comment, 

particularly addressing small 

businesses. 

J. Feasibility 

1. Are the proposed requirements in 

this NPR feasible, both technically and 

economically? 

2. What would be the total cost to 

industry of implementing this rule? 

Please be specific about labor and/or 

materials costs to redesign products, 

and costs of third-party testing. 

3. Will complying with this rule 

increase the costs of production or the 

retail price of neck floats? Why? By how 

much? 

XVI. References 

Thomas J. Ayres, Madeline M. Gross, 

Christine T. Wood, Donald P. Horst, 

Roman R. Beyer, & Neil J. Robinson, 

What is a warning and when will it 

work?, 33 Proceedings of the Human 

Factors Society Annual Meeting, 426– 

430 (1989). 

Dave M. DeJoy, Motivation, in Warnings and 

Risk Communication 221–243. (Michael 

S. Wogalter, David M. Dejoy, & Kenneth 

R. Laughery eds, Philadelphia: Taylor & 

Francis 1999). 

Alan I. Fields, Near-drowning in the pediatric 

population. 8 Crit. Care Clin., 113–129 

(1992). 

Foreman, Jim., ‘‘How to Make Inflatables 

(With Vinyl Welding)—Vinyl 

Technology.’’ Vinyl Technology, 12 June 

2024, www.vinyltechnology.com/blog/ 

how-to-make-inflatable-products-vinylwelding. 

J.P. Frantz & T.P. Rhoades, A Task-Analytic 

Approach to the Temporal and Spatial 

Placement of Product Warnings. 35 

Human Factors: The Journal of the 

Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 

719–730 (1993). 

Sandra S. Godfrey & Laurel Allender (1994). 

Warning Messages: Will the consumer 

bother to look? In Human Factors 

Perspectives on Warnings 53–57. (K.R., 

Wogalter, M.S. Young, S. Laughery, eds. 

1994). 

Stefek Grmec, Matej Strnad, & Dejan 

Podgorsek, Comparison of the 

characteristics and outcome among 

patients suffering from out-of-hospital 

primary cardiac arrest and drowning 

victims in cardiac arrest, 2 Int. J. Emerg. 

Med. 7–12 (2009). 

Kay Inaba, Suart O. Parsons, & Robert J. 

Smillie. Guidelines for developing 

instructions, (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. 

2004). 

Kalsher, M.J., & Wogalter, M.S. (2008). 

Warnings: Hazard Control Methods for 

Caregivers and Children. In R. Lueder & 

V.J.B. Rice (Eds.), Ergonomics for 

Children: Designing Products and Places 

for Toddlers to Teens (pp. 509–539). 

New York: Taylor & Francis; Rice, V.J.B. 

(2012). Designing for Children. In G. 

Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of Human 

Factors and Ergonomics (4th ed.) (pp. 

1472—1483). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. 

Laughery, K.R., & Wogalter, M.S. (2011). The 

Hazard Control Hierarchy and its Utility 

in Safety Decisions about Consumer 

Products. In W. Karwowski, M.M. 

Soares, & N.A. Stanton (Eds.), Human 

Factors and Ergonomics in Consumer 

Product Design: Uses and Applications 

(pp. 33–39). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 

Williams, D.J., & Noyes, J.M. (2011). 

Reducing the Risk to Consumers: 

Implications for Designing Safe 

Consumer Products. In W. Karwowski, 

M.M. Soares, & N.A. Stanton (Eds.), 

Human Factors and Ergonomics in 

Consumer Product Design: Uses and 

Applications (pp. 3–21). Boca Raton, FL: 

CRC Press; Vredenburgh, A.G., & 

Zackowitz, I.B. (2006). Expectations. In 

M.S. Wogalter (Ed.), Handbook of 

warnings (pp. 345–354). Mahwah, NJ: 

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 

Kem Laughery Sr. & D.P. Smith, Explicit 

Information in Warnings, In Handbook of 

Warnings 419–428. (M.S. Wogalter Ed., 

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum 

Associates 2006). 

L. Murray-Johnson & K. Witte. Looking 

Toward the Future: Health Message 

Design Strategies, in Handbook of Health 

Communication 473–495, (T.L. 

Thompson, A. Dorsey, K.I. Miller, & R. 

Parrott Eds., New York: Routledge 2003). 

J.P. Orlowski JP, M.M. Abulleil, & J.M. 

Phillips. The hemodynamic and 

cardiovascular effects of near-drowning 

in hypotonic, isotonic, or hypertonic 

solutions. 18 Ann Emerg Med 1044–9 

(1989). 

D.M. Riley (2006). Beliefs, attitudes, and 

motivation, In Handbook of Warnings 

289–300. (M.S. Wogalter Ed., Mahwah, 

NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 2006). 

W.A. Rogers, N. Lamson, & G.K. Rousseau, 

Warning research: An integrative 

perspective, 42 Human Factors 102–130 

(2000). 

L.W. Schneider et al., U.S. Consumer Prod. 

Safety Comm’n. Size and Shape of the 

Head and Neck from Birth to Four Years 

(Report No. UMTRI–86–2). (1986). 

https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/ 

2027.42/114. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
91614 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

David Szpilman, Joost J.L. Bierens, Anothony 

J. Handley, & James P. Orlowski, 

Drowning, 22 N Engl. J. Med. 2101–10 

(2012). doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1013317. 

E.F. van Beeck, C.M. Branche, D. Szpilman 

D, J.H. Modell, J.J. Bierens. A new 

definition of drowning: towards 

documentation and prevention of a 

global public health problem. 11 Bull 

World Health Organ 853–6 (2005). PMID: 

16302042 PMCID: PMC2626470. 

Stefaan W. Verbruggen, Bernhard Kainz, 

Susan C. Shelmerdine, Joseph V. Hajnal, 

Mary A. Rutherford, Owen J. Arthurs, 

Andrew T.M. Phillips, & Niamh C. 

Nowlan, Stresses and strains on the 

human fetal skeleton during 

development, 15 Journal of The Royal 

Society Interface 138 (2018). https://

doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2017.0593. 

A.G. Vredenburgh, & I.B. Zackowitz, Human 

Factors Issues to be Considered by 

Product Liability Experts, in Handbook 

of Human Factors in Litigation (Y.I. Noy 

& W. Karwowski Eds., Boca Raton, FL: 

CRC Press 2005). 

A.G. Vredenburgh & I.B. Zackowitz, 

Expectations, In Handbook of Warnings 

345–354. (M.S. Wogalter Ed., Mahwah, 

NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 2006). 

Michael S. Wogalter, Sandra S. Godfrey, Gail 

A. Fontenelle, David R. Desaulniers, 

Pamela R. Rothstein, & Kenneth R. 

Laughery. Effectiveness of warnings. 5 

Human Factors 599–612 (1987). 

Michael S. Wogalter & Kenneth R. Laughery, 

Effectiveness of Consumer Product 

Warnings: Design and Forensic 

Considerations, in Handbook of Human 

Factors in Litigation (Y.I. Noy & W. 

Karwowski Eds., Boca Raton, FL: CRC 

Press 2005). 

List of Subjects 

16 CFR Part 1112 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Audit, Consumer protection, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Third-party conformity 

assessment body. 

16 CFR Part 1250 

Consumer protection, Incorporation 

by reference, Infants and children, 

Labeling, Law enforcement, Toys. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Commission proposes to 

amend 16 CFR parts 1112 and 1250 as 

follows: 

PART 1112—REQUIREMENTS 

PERTAINING TO THIRD PARTY 

CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1112 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2063. 

■ 2. Amend § 1112.15 by adding 

paragraph (b)(32)(ii)(LL) to read as 

follows: 

§ 1112.15 When can a third party 

conformity assessment body apply for 

CPSC acceptance for a particular CPSC rule 

and/or test method? 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(32) * * * 

(ii) * * * 

(LL) 16 CFR part 1250.5, 

Requirements for Neck Floats. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. The title of part 1250 is revised to 

read as follows: 

PART 1250—SAFETY STANDARD FOR 

TOYS 

■ 4. Revise the heading to part 1250 to 

read as set forth above. 

■ 5. The authority citation for part 1250 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2056b. 

■ 6. Revise § 1250.1 to read as follows: 

§ 1250.1 Scope 

This part establishes a consumer 

product safety standard for toys. 

■ 7. Add § 1250.5 to read as follows: 

§ 1250.5 Requirements for neck floats. 

(a) Scope and purpose. This section 

establishes performance and labeling 

requirements for neck floats to reduce 

the risk of children drowning while 

using a neck float. The provisions of this 

part are intended to address the risk of 

injury and death to children from neck 

float hazards. This section adds 

requirements for neck float in addition 

to the requirements of § 1250.1 and 

§ 1250.2. 

(b) Definitions. In addition to the 

definitions incorporated by reference in 

§ 1250.2(a), the following definitions 

apply for the purposes of this section: 

Expected weight capacity means the 

maximum weight capacity the neck float 

is rated for, per the manufacturer’s 

recommended use instructions. 

Neck float means an article, whether 

inflatable or not, that encircles the neck, 

supports the weight of the child by 

being secured around the neck (such as 

by fastening, tightening, or other 

methods), is used as an instrument of 

play in water environments including 

sinks, baths, paddling pools and 

swimming pools, and is intended for 

use by children up to and including 4 

years of age in water environments 

including sinks, baths, paddling pools 

and swimming pools. 

Restraint system means 

interconnecting components, whether 

adjustable or not, that are integral to a 

neck float and are intended to hold the 

occupant in position relative to the neck 

float. A restraint system uses fastening 

mechanisms, such as buckles or Velcro 

straps, to secure together. 

(c) Performance requirements. In 

addition to any general requirements 

from § 1250.1 or § 1250.2, all neck floats 

within the scope of the rule must meet 

the performance requirements in this 

section to reduce the risk of children 

drowning while using a neck float. 

(1) Conditioning procedure. Neck 

floats shall undergo thermal 

conditioning in accordance with section 

5.5.4.1 of ANSI/CAN/UL 12402–9:2022, 

with modifications provided in this 

section. Following thermal 

conditioning, a neck float shall undergo 

exposure conditioning in a chlorinated 

saltwater bath. The chlorinated 

saltwater bath shall be prepared by 

dissolving 32 grams of sodium chloride 

(NaCl) in 1 liter of aqueous solution 

containing 2 ppm chlorine at pH 7.0– 

7.8. The necessary volume of solution at 

those concentrations shall be prepared 

to fully submerge the neck float, in 

darkness and at room temperature (20 ± 

2 °C (68 ± 4 °F)) for 8 hours. Lastly, the 

neck float shall undergo ultraviolet light 

exposure conditioning in accordance 

with sections 4.2.1.1–4.2.1.4 of ANSI 

APSP ICC–16 (2017), with the 

modifications provided in this section, 

prior to any testing in accordance with 

paragraphs (2)–(4) of this section. Any 

inflatable component(s), if applicable, of 

the neck float shall be deflated during 

the conditioning procedure. 

(i) The words ‘‘Inflatable PFDs’’ shall 

be removed and replaced with ‘‘Neck 

floats’’ in section 5.5.4.1 of ANSI/CAN/ 

UL 12402–9:2022. 

(ii) The cold temperature ‘‘¥30 ± 2 

°C’’ shall be removed and replace with 

‘‘¥10 ± 2 °C’’ in section 5.5.4.1 of ANSI/ 

CAN/UL 12402–9:2022. 

(iii) The words ‘‘for two complete 

cycles,’’ and the paragraph after item b) 

‘‘Inflatable PFDs, shall be . . . inflated 

for (5,0±0.1) min.’’ shall be removed 

from section 5.5.4.1 of ANSI/CAN/UL 

12402–9:2022. 

(iv) The words ‘‘1. Twelve new cover/ 

grates’’ shall be removed and replaced 

with ‘‘Neck floats’’ in section 4.2.1 of 

ANSI APSP ICC–16. 

(v) The words ‘‘and 4.2.15 through 

4.2.17’’ shall be removed in section 

4.2.1 of ANSI APSP ICC–16. 

(2) Minimum buoyancy requirements. 

Neck floats shall demonstrate a 

minimum upward buoyancy equal to or 

greater than 30 percent the expected 

weight capacity of the neck float, and 

neck floats utilizing inherently buoyant 

components shall lose no more than 5 

percent of their initial buoyancy, when 

tested in accordance with sections 

5.5.9.2–5.5.9.4 of ANSI/CAN/UL 12402– 

9:2022 with the following additions and 

exclusions: 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91615 

(i) The words ‘‘PFD’’ shall be removed 

and replaced with ‘‘neck float.’’ 

(ii) The weight of the cage shall be 

equal to 1.1 times the expected weight 

capacity of the neck float, which shall 

be determined based on either the 

maximum weight capacity according to 

the manufacturer’s recommended user 

weight, or the weight given by Table 1 

to paragraph (c)(2) according to the 

manufacturer’s recommended user age, 

whichever is greater. If the 

manufacturer’s recommended user age 

falls between two age range options, the 

older range shall be used. 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(2)(i)—EXPECTED WEIGHT CAPACITY

Age of child Weight in kg Weight in lb 

0–3 months .................................................................................................................................................. 7.7 17.0 

4–6 months .................................................................................................................................................. 9.5 21.0 

7–9 months .................................................................................................................................................. 10.6 23.4 

10–12 months .............................................................................................................................................. 11.5 25.4 

1 up to 2 years ............................................................................................................................................ 17.6 38.8 

2 up to 3 years ............................................................................................................................................ 23.2 51.2 

3 up to 4 years ............................................................................................................................................ 23.7 52.3 

(iii) The sentence ‘‘If the PFD contains 

inflatable . . . whichever is less’’ shall 

be removed from the first paragraph of 

section 5.5.9.3 of ANSI/CAN/UL 12402– 

9:2022. In its place, the following 

sentence shall be added to the beginning 

of that section: ‘‘Any inflatable 

component(s), if applicable, of the neck 

float shall be inflated to an internal air 

pressure of 0.1 ± 0.01 PSIG.’’ 

(iv) Add ‘‘If the neck float contains 

inherently buoyant components’’ to the 

beginning of the third paragraph (‘‘The 

assembly shall remain . . . recorded as 

B’’) of section 5.5.9.3 of ANSICAN/UL 

12402–9. 

(v) Remove the last two paragraphs 

‘‘The water temperature . . . immersion 

period’’ from section 5.5.9.3 of ANSI/ 

CAN/UL 12402–9. 

(vi) Remove the last paragraph ‘‘The 

water temperature . . . and pressure 

conditions’’ from section 5.5.9.4 of 

ANSI/CAN/UL 12402–9. 

(3) Restraint system requirements. All 

restraint systems used to attach the neck 

float to the body or to connect 

components of the neck float together 

shall require the release of the fastening 

mechanism to have either a doubleaction release system that requires two 

distinct, but simultaneous actions to 

release, or a single-action release system 

that requires a minimum of 50 N to 

release. The restraint system shall also 

comply with the requirements of section 

6.4.4 when tested in accordance with 

section 7.5.1 of ASTM F833–21, with 

the following additions and exclusions: 

(i) The sentence ‘‘At the . . . 2 in. (51 

mm).’’ of section 6.4.4 of ASTM F833– 

21 shall be removed. 

(4) Neck opening test requirement. 

The neck opening of the neck float shall 

not admit the passage of a specified 

head probe when tested in accordance 

with the following test procedure: 

(i) Test method. The neck float shall 

be placed on an elevated platform and 

positioned directly above and centered 

about a circular opening in that platform 

large enough to allow the head probes 

to fall fully through it. The surfaces of 

the neck float shall be saturated with 

baby wash solution, prepared in 

accordance with section 7.4.1.5 of 

ASTM F1967–19. 

(ii) If the neck float includes 

adjustable restraint straps, then all 

applicable head probes shall be 

evaluated at the loosest (largest) setting. 

(iii) Any inflatable components of the 

neck float shall be inflated to an internal 

air pressure of 0.1 ± 0.01 PSIG. 

(iv) A specified head probe shall then 

be weighted to mass M1 and positioned 

in the neck opening. A hanging weight 

of mass M2 shall then be suspended 

below the head probe at distance L, 

where L includes the length between the 

narrowest and widest circumference of 

the specified head probe. The choice of 

specified head probe, mass M1, mass 

M2, and distance L shall be determined 

using Table 2 to paragraph (c)(4) based 

on the manufacturer’s recommended 

youngest and oldest user age. If the 

manufacturer’s recommended user age 

falls between two age range options, the 

younger or older range shall be 

considered, as is appropriate. 

TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(4)(ii)—NECK OPENING TEST

Head probe designation Age range 

(months) 

Head probe mass 

M1 

(kg) 

Hanging weight M2 

(lbs) 

Distance L 

(in) 

A ............................................................................................. 0–3 1.5 3.4 12.45 

B ............................................................................................. 4–6 2 4.2 13.8 

C ............................................................................................ 7–9 2.2 4.68 14.65 

10–12 2.4 5.08 15.6 

13–18 2.6 7.76 16.55 

D ............................................................................................ 19–24 2.8 7.76 17.55 

25–30 3 10.24 18.75 

31–36 3 10.24 19.4 

37–42 3.2 10.46 20.45 

43–48 3.2 10.46 21.3 

(v) If the neck float’s recommended 

age range could apply to two or more 

head probes this procedure will be 

conducted first using the smallest 

applicable head probe, then repeated 

using the largest applicable head probe. 

(vi) The hanging weight shall be 

swung for a total of ten 30-second cycles 

by raising the hanging weight to a 90- 

degree angle and releasing it. Alternate 

between a front-to-back swinging 

direction interval and side-to side 

interval, relative to the intended 

position of the neck float user. The 10 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
91616 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

alternating swing cycles shall occur 

consecutively. 

(d) Labeling requirements. All neck 

floats and the packaging of neck floats 

must meet the marking, labeling, and 

instructional literature requirements in 

this section to reduce the risk of 

children drowning while using a neck 

float. 

(1) Requirements for Marking and 

Labeling. (i) Instead of complying with 

the warning text of section 5.4 of ASTM 

F963–23, neck floats and the packaging 

of neck floats must include the safety 

alert symbol, signal word, and word 

message as shown in Figure 1 to 

paragraph (d)(1)(i). 

Figure 1 to Paragraph (d)(1)(i)— 

Warning for Neck Floats and Packaging 

(ii) The warnings shall be in the 

English language at a minimum. 

(iii) The warnings shall be 

conspicuous and permanent on the 

principal display panel as defined in 

section 3.1.62 of the version of ASTM 

F963 incorporated by reference in 

§ 1250.2(a) and in a distinct color 

contrasting to the background on which 

it appears. 

(iv) The warnings shall conform to 

ANSI/NEMA Z535.4–2023, sections 

6.1–6.4, 7.2–7.6.3, and 8.1, with the 

following changes: 

(A) In sections 6.2.2, 7.3, 7.5, and 

8.1.2, of ANSI/NEMA Z535.4–2023 

replace the word ‘‘should’’ with the 

word ‘‘shall.’’ 

(B) In section 7.6.3 of ANSI/NEMA 

Z535.4–2023, replace the phrase 

‘‘should (when feasible)’’ with the word 

‘‘shall.’’ 

(C) In section X of ANSI/NEMA 

Z535.4–2023, strike the word ‘‘safety’’ 

when used immediately before a color 

(for example, replace safety white’’ with 

‘‘white’’). 

(v) Certain text in the message panel 

must be in bold and in capital letters as 

shown in the example warning labels in 

figures 3 and 4 to paragraph (d)(1)(ii). 

Text must use black lettering on a white 

background or white lettering on a black 

background. 

(vi) The message panel text shall 

appear in sans serif letters and be center 

or left aligned. Text with precautionary 

(hazard avoidance) statements shall be 

preceded by bullet points. 

(vii) Multiple precautionary 

statements shall be separated by bullet 

points if paragraph formatting is used. 

(viii) The safety alert symbol and 

the signal word ‘‘WARNING’’ shall 

appear in sans serif letters and be at 

least 1⁄8′′ (3.2mm) high and be center or 

left aligned. The remainder of the text 

shall be in characters whose upper case 

shall be at least 1⁄16′′ (1.6mm) high. 

(ix) The safety alert symbol, an 

exclamation mark in a triangle, when 

used with the signal word, must precede 

the signal word. The base of the safety 

alert symbol must be on the same 

horizontal line as the base of the letters 

of the signal word. The height of the 

safety alert symbol must equal or exceed 

the signal word letter height. The 

exclamation mark must be at least half 

the size of the triangle centered 

vertically. 

(x) The warning contained within { } 

‘‘Check for leaks before use. Never use 

with leaks.’’ is only required for neck 

floats utilizing inflatable components. 

(2) Requirements for Instructional 

Literature. Instructions shall have the 

same warning labels that must appear 

on the product and provided separately, 

as a user manual, with similar 

formatting requirements, but without 

the need to be in color. However, the 

signal word and safety alert symbol 

shall contrast with the background of 

the signal word panel, and the warnings 

shall contrast with the background of 

the instructional literature. The 

instructions shall include information 

on assembly, installation, maintenance, 

cleaning and use, where applicable. The 

instructions shall explain how to check 

for adequate fit of the neck float around 

the child’s neck to prevent slipping 

through the center opening. For 

inflatable neck floats, the instructions 

shall include clear directions for testing 

the neck float for leaks. Any additional 

instructions provided, that are not 

required, shall neither contradict nor 

confuse the meaning of the 

requirements. 

(e) Prohibited stockpiling. 

(1) Prohibited acts. Manufacturers and 

importers of neck floats shall not 

manufacture or import neck floats that 

do not comply with the requirements of 

this part between [DATE OF 

PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE] and 

[EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE] at 

a rate that is greater than 105 percent of 

the rate at which they manufactured or 

imported neck floats during the base 

period for the manufacturer or importer. 

(2) Base period. The base period for 

neck floats is the average monthly 

manufacturing or import volume within 

the last 13 months of production 

immediately preceding [DATE OF 

PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE]. 

(f) Incorporation by reference. Certain 

material is incorporated by reference 

into this section with the approval of 

the Director of the Federal Register in 

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

CFR part 51. All approved incorporation 

by reference material is available for 

inspection at the Consumer Product 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALSEP20NO24.105</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2024 / Proposed Rules 91617 

Safety Commission and at the National 

Archives and Records Administration 

(NARA). Contact the U.S. Consumer 

Product Safety Commission at: 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. For information on the 

availability of this material at NARA, 

visit www.archives.gov/federal-register/ 

cfr/ibr-locations or email fr.inspection@

nara.gov. The material may be obtained 

from the following sources: 

(1) Pool and Hot Tub Alliance 

(PHTA), 1650 King Street, Suite 602, 

Alexandria, VA 22314; phone: (703) 

838–0083; website: www.phta.org. 

(i) ANSI APSP ICC–16, American 

National Standard for Suction Outlet 

Fitting Assemblies (SOFA) for Use in 

Pools, Spas, and Hot Tubs, (approved 

August 18, 2017). 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(2) Underwriters Laboratories (UL), 

1250 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 

520, Washington, DC 20036; phone: 

(202) 296–7840; website: www.ul.com. 

(i) ANSI/CAN/UL 12402–9, Standard 

for Personal Flotation Devices—Part 9: 

Test Methods, (published February 11, 

2021). 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(3) National Electrical Manufacturers 

Association (NEMA), 1300 17th St. N, 

Arlington, VA 22209; phone: (703) 841– 

3200; website: www.nema.org. 

(i) ANSI/NEMA Z535.4–23, American 

National Standard for Product Safety 

Signs and Labels (approved December 

14, 2023). 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(4) ASTM International (ASTM), 100 

Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West 

Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959; phone: 

(610) 832–9585; website: www.astm.org. 

(i) ASTM F833–21, Standard 

Consumer Safety Performance 

Specification for Carriages and Strollers, 

(approved June 15, 2021). 

(ii) ASTM F1967–19, Standard 

Consumer Safety Specification for 

Infant Bath Seats, (approved May 1, 

2019). 

Alberta E. Mills, 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2024–25446 Filed 11–19–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 1 

[REG–116017–24] 

RIN 1545–BR36 

Administrative Requirements for an 

Election To Exclude Applicable 

Unincorporated Organizations From 

the Application of Subchapter K 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

notice of public hearing. 

SUMMARY: This document contains 

proposed regulations that would 

provide certain administrative 

requirements for unincorporated 

organizations taking advantage of 

modifications to the rules governing 

elections to be excluded from the 

application of partnership tax rules. 

These proposed regulations would affect 

unincorporated organizations and their 

members, including tax-exempt 

organizations, the District of Columbia, 

State and local governments, Indian 

Tribal governments, Alaska Native 

Corporations, the Tennessee Valley 

Authority, rural electric cooperatives, 

and certain agencies and 

instrumentalities. The proposed 

regulations would also update the 

procedure for obtaining permission to 

revoke a section 761(a) election. 

DATES: Written or electronic comments 

must be received by January 21, 2025. 

A public hearing on these proposed 

regulations has been scheduled for 

February 7, 2025, at 10 a.m. Eastern 

Standard Time (EST). Requests to speak 

and outlines of topics to be discussed at 

the public hearing must be received by 

January 21, 2025. If no outlines are 

received by January 21, 2025, the public 

hearing will be cancelled. Requests to 

attend the public hearing must be 

received by 5 p.m. on February 5, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Commenters are strongly 

encouraged to submit public comments 

electronically via the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at https://

www.regulations.gov (indicate IRS and 

REG–116017–24) by following the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Requests for a public hearing 

must be submitted as prescribed in the 

‘‘Comments and Public Hearing’’ 

section. Once submitted to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal, comments cannot 

be edited or withdrawn. The 

Department of the Treasury (Treasury 

Department) and the IRS will publish 

for public availability any comments 

submitted to the IRS’s public docket. 

Send paper submissions to: 

CC:PA:01:PR (REG–116017–24), Room 

5203, Internal Revenue Service, P.O. 

Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, 

Washington, DC 20044. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Concerning the proposed regulations, 

contact Cameron Williamson at (202) 

317–6684; and concerning submissions 

of comments and requests for a public 

hearing, contact the Publications and 

Regulations Section at (202) 317–6901 

(not toll-free numbers) or by email to 

publichearings@irs.gov (preferred). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority 

This document contains proposed 

amendments to the Income Tax 

Regulations (26 CFR part 1) under 

section 761(a) of the Internal Revenue 

Code (Code) issued by the Secretary of 

the Treasury or her delegate (Secretary) 

under the express authority granted 

under sections 761(a), 6031(a), 6417(d) 

and (h), and 7805(a) of the Code 

(proposed regulations). 

Section 761(a) provides, in part, an 

express grant of regulatory authority for 

section 761(a) stating, ‘‘[u]nder 

regulations the Secretary may, at the 

election of all the members of an 

unincorporated organization, exclude 

such organization from the application 

of all or a part of this subchapter.’’ 

Section 6031(a) provides an express 

grant of a regulatory authority for the 

Secretary to prescribe in forms or 

regulations partnership reporting 

information required ‘‘for the purpose of 

carrying out the provisions of subtitle 

A.’’ 

Section 6417(d) provides several 

express delegations of authority to the 

Secretary to enforce requirements for 

elective payments of applicable credits 

under section 6417 and recapture 

excessive payments. Section 6417(h) 

requires the Secretary to issue 

regulations or other guidance as may be 

necessary to carry out the purposes of 

section 6417, including guidance to 

ensure that the amount of the payment 

or deemed payment made under this 

section is commensurate with the 

amount of the credit that would be 

otherwise allowable (determined 

without regard to section 38(c)). 

Finally, section 7805(a) authorizes the 

Secretary to ‘‘prescribe all needful rules 

and regulations for the enforcement of 

[the Code], including all rules and 

regulations as may be necessary by 

reason of any alteration of law in 

relation to internal revenue.’’ 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS