[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 147 (Tuesday, August 2, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-18789]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: August 2, 1994]
VOL. 59, NO. 147
Tuesday, August 2, 1994
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 1500
Baby Walkers; Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Request for
Comments and Information
AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Based on currently available information, the Commission has
reason to believe that unreasonable risks of injury and death may be
associated with baby walkers. The Commission knows of 11 deaths
involving baby walkers since January 1989. One of these deaths involved
a failure of the walker's seat. In the others, the walker may have
provided the child with the mobility to access the hazard. In 1993,
there were approximately 25,000 baby walker-related injuries treated in
hospital emergency rooms in the United States.
The rate of walker-related injuries has increased significantly
over the period 1984-1993. Almost all of the injuries during that
period involved children under 15 months of age. About 79 percent of
the incidents involved children who fell down stairs or between levels
in a baby walker. Other injuries occurred when a walker tipped over or
from burns when a child in a walker contacted a hot oven, heater, or
radiator or when a child upset a container of hot liquid that the child
was able to reach because he or she was supported by a walker.
This advance notice of proposed rulemaking (``ANPR'') initiates a
rulemaking proceeding under the authority of the Federal Hazardous
Substances Act (``FHSA''). One result of the proceeding could be the
promulgation of a rule mandating performance or design requirements or
additional labeling for baby walkers. Such requirements might, for
example, result in walkers that are less mobile, that will not pass
through standard door openings at the head of stairs, or that will be
immobilized if part of the walker crosses the edge of a step. If there
is no feasible performance or design requirement that will adequately
reduce the risks associated with baby walkers, the Commission can
consider other alternatives.
The Commission solicits written comments from interested persons
concerning the risks of injury and death associated with baby walkers,
the regulatory alternatives discussed in this notice, other possible
means to address these risks, and the economic impacts of the various
regulatory alternatives. The Commission also invites interested persons
to submit an existing standard, or a statement of intent to modify or
develop a voluntary standard, to address the risks of injury described
in this notice.
DATES: Written comments and submissions in response to this notice must
be received by the Commission by October 3, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be mailed, preferably in five (5) copies, to
the Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission,
Washington, D.C. 20207-0001, or delivered to the Office of the
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 502, 4330 East-West
Highway, Bethesda, Maryland 20814; telephone (301) 504-0800.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Jacobson, Directorate for
Health Sciences, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, D.C.
20207; telephone (301) 504-0477, ext. 1206.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
For the reasons discussed in this notice, the U. S. Consumer
Product Safety Commission (``CPSC'' or ``Commission'') is beginning a
rulemaking proceeding to address risks associated with baby walkers.\1\
A baby walker is a device that supports a child so that the child can
use its feet to move around before or while learning to walk. A baby
walker generally consists of a fabric seat with leg openings mounted to
a rigid plastic deck. The deck is attached to a base that usually has
wheels to make it mobile. Walkers generally can be folded for storage,
and may have a feeding tray, adjustable seat height, and a bouncing
mechanism. Activity toys may be attached to the trays, and some walkers
have wheel lock mechanisms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\The Commission voted 2-1 to begin this proceeding. Chairman
Ann Brown and Commissioner Jacqueline Jones-Smith voted to publish
this notice; Commissioner Mary Sheila Gall voted against. Statements
by the Commissioners concerning this vote can be obtained from the
Office of the Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission has long recognized that hazards are associated with
baby walkers. The Commission's regulations establish mandatory
requirements for ``baby walkers,'' ``baby bouncers,'' and ``bouncer-
walkers.'' These products are banned under 16 CFR 1500.18(a)(6) unless
they meet the criteria described in 16 CFR 1500.86 (a)(4). These
criteria specify that baby walkers must be designed to prevent injury
from any scissoring, shearing, or pinching when the frame or other
components rotate or move relative to one another; cover coil springs
that have spaces greater than 0.125 inches when fully extended; guard
any holes, slots, or cracks greater than 0.125 inches in diameter or
width; and prevent accidental collapse. The product also must be
labeled with the name and address of the manufacturer, packer,
distributor, or seller and with a code mark indicating the model number
of the walker.
In 1986, a voluntary standard (ASTM F977) was published which
contains performance requirements addressing some of the baby walker
hazards addressed by the CPSC mandatory standard. In addition, the
voluntary standard included six warnings that address the risk of falls
down stairs and other hazards. In 1989, the ASTM voluntary standard was
changed to require a permanent stairs-warning label in a place that
will be seen by the consumer when placing a child in a walker. This new
label states, ``WARNING: Avoid serious injury. NEVER use near stairs.''
The Commission's staff has recommended revisions to the current
ASTM warning labels, including a warning label to tell consumers to
block stairway openings, rather than to tell them never to use walkers
near stairs. The staff also suggested that the stair warning label be
redesigned according to the ANSI Z535.4-1991 Standard for Product
Safety Signs and Labels. In addition, the staff suggested that the ASTM
baby walker standard state specifically several options of where the
stair warning label should be placed to assure that it is conspicuous.
As the Commission's staff continued to monitor data submitted from
hospital emergency rooms through the National Electronic Injury
Surveillance System (``NEISS''), it became apparent that falls down
stairs were a major cause of injuries associated with baby walkers.
While the staff was considering what action to recommend for this
hazard, the Commission was petitioned, in August of 1992, to ban
wheeled baby walkers. The petitioners were the Consumer Federation of
America (``CFA''), the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Washington
Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, the National Safe Kids
Campaign, and Consumers Union. The petition asked that the Commission
declare baby walkers to be a mechanical hazard under the FHSA. As
discussed in section G of this notice, such a declaration would ban the
product.
After considering the available information on deaths and injuries
associated with walkers, and other available information, the
Commission unanimously voted to deny the petition on April 15, 1993.\2\
The petition was denied because the available information did not
establish a reasonable probability that the Commission would be able to
make the necessary statutory findings if a rulemaking proceeding were
commenced at that time. It appeared that several potential design
modifications to existing baby walkers were feasible to address the
major hazard scenario with walkers--that of falls down stairs. These
modifications included a device without wheels with a treadmill to
simulate walking, a walker with a ``wheel-stop'' mechanism (which would
resist motion of the walker if a wheel or feeler went over the edge of
a step), or a walker that is too wide to fit through most door openings
at the top of stairs. Given these possible alternatives to a total ban,
the Commission could not conclude that it would likely be able to make
the requisite statutory finding that the requested total ban was the
least burdensome alternative that would adequately reduce the risks
from baby walkers. In addition, not enough was known about the costs
and benefits of a total ban to conclude that the Commission would
likely be able to make the statutory findings that the ban was
reasonably necessary to reduce an unreasonable risk of injury and that
the benefits of the ban would bear a reasonable relationship to its
costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\At that time, the Commission consisted of Chairman Jacqueline
Jones-Smith, Commissioner Mary Sheila Gall, and Commissioner Carol
Dawson.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the Commission denied the petition for a total ban, at the
same time it directed the staff to develop a proposed project that
would produce recommendations to address the hazards associated with
baby walkers.\3\ Shortly thereafter, the Commission approved a project
to determine the feasibility of developing a standard to effectively
reduce the risk of injury associated with baby walkers, particularly
the risk of falling down stairs. The project included a special study
of emergency-room-treated injuries related to walkers that were
reported through NEISS. This data-gathering activity is discussed in
section D of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\The Commission voted 2-1 to develop this project, with
Commissioner Carol Dawson dissenting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During fiscal year 1993, the Commission's Office of Compliance and
Enforcement conducted a field program to assess the compliance level of
certain juvenile products with the mandatory small parts regulations
(Juvenile Products Small Parts Compliance Survey, FPC 93-010). Baby
walkers were one of the products included in the survey. As part of the
survey, baby walkers were also screened for compliance with the
mandatory requirements regarding scissoring, shearing, and pinching (16
CFR 1500.86(a)(4)), and for conformance with the warning label
requirements in the voluntary standard (ASTM F977-89). The survey
covered 74 major juvenile product manufacturers or importers that were
randomly selected for inspection. Eleven of these firms manufactured or
imported baby walkers. Thirty-four styles of baby walkers were
screened. All walkers complied with the mandatory requirements
regarding scissoring, shearing, and pinching, and all but two styles of
one manufacturer conformed with the voluntary labeling requirements.
This manufacturer agreed to label its current inventory and future
production.
A status report on the baby walker project was submitted to the
Commission in June 1994. After considering the status report, the
Commission decided to commence a rulemaking proceeding by publishing
this ANPR.
B. The Product
The products that are the subject of this proceeding are baby
walkers, as described in section A of this notice. The Commission's
staff does not expect this proceeding to result in additional features
to prevent falls down stairs for stationary walkers and other walkers
which a young child cannot move. However, performance requirements may
have to be developed to determine which walkers have the requisite
degree of immobility.
Most traditional walkers range in price from $25 to $60, with the
average price about $32. The Commission's staff estimates that there
were approximately 4 million new and used walkers in use in the U.S. in
1991. Consumers spend about $115 million per year on baby walkers. This
represents sales of at least 3 million units.
Staff has conducted a number of interviews of caregivers in
connection with the ongoing baby walker project. Caregivers were asked
to evaluate the most useful functions of walkers. Caregivers believed
most often that the walker, ``Keeps the child happy or quiet,'' ``Helps
the child exercise,'' ``Gives the child freedom and independence,'' and
``Is a place to put the child while the caregiver is occupied.''
Sixty-two percent of the parents in the follow-up investigations
reported that the child used the walker more than once a day. For each
use, 37 percent reported that the child typically was in the walker for
less than 30 minutes; 45 percent reported that for each use the child
typically was in the walker for about 30-60 minutes.
C. The Industry
The Commission knows of 18 manufacturers or importers of baby
walkers and jumpers. The leading manufacturer sells several times as
many walkers as the next largest, and the top 9 brands or private
labels are thought to account for about 60 percent of the market.
D. Risks of Injury and Death
Deaths. The Commission is aware of 11 deaths related to baby
walkers that have occurred between 1989 and 1993. Of these, four
children drowned, four suffocated, two fell down stairs, and one fell
out of a walker and received a fatal head injury. In one of these
incidents, the seat loosened, allowing the child to slip downward and
suffocate when his trachea was compressed against the walker's tray. In
all the other incidents, the walker may have provided the child with
the mobility to access the hazard.
The deaths reported to CPSC are not statistically representative,
and may not include all the deaths associated with baby walkers during
this time period. Also, with the exception of 1991, CPSC received death
certificates from deaths classified as ``falls'' from only one or two
states. Thus, the number of fall-related baby walker deaths known to
CPSC is probably an undercount.
Injuries. In 1993, there were an estimated 25,000 baby walker-
related injuries treated in hospital emergency rooms in the United
States. Baby walkers account for higher numbers of injuries annually
than does any other type of nursery product. For example, in 1991,
there were an estimated 10,400 injuries related to strollers and
carriages, the nursery product category with the next highest number of
estimated injuries.
Based on an estimated 27,000 emergency-room-treated injuries to
children under 15 months of age in 1991 and an estimated 4 million
walkers in use, the estimated annual rate of injury is 6.75 injuries
per 1,000 walkers in use. The most current data show a 12 percent
increase in baby walker-related injuries treated in hospital emergency
rooms for January through April 1994, compared to the same period in
1993.
In order to find out more about how baby walker injuries are
occurring, the Commission's staff is identifying a sample of 300-400
cases through NEISS for the period beginning August 15, 1993, with data
collection to continue through September 1994. These cases are being
followed up by telephone to obtain additional information about the
incident. In addition, incidents involving falls down stairs or steps,
and other incidents where more detail is needed, are being assigned for
on-site investigations. The data collected through February 1994 have
been analyzed and are discussed below.
Of the baby walker incidents reported through NEISS between August
15, 1993, and February 1994, 79 percent were falls down stairs or
between levels. About half of the stair fall incidents involved a fall
down basement stairs. About 3 percent of the incidents were due to
walker tipovers, 3 percent to burns, and 15 percent to other hazard
patterns (for instance, babies hitting their heads on walker trays,
climbing on walkers, etc.). In about 10 percent of all baby walker
incidents, another child appeared to be directly involved in causing
the accident. In stair fall incidents, approximately 5 percent involved
other children.
The ages of the children injured ranged from 4 months to 2 years,
with a median age of 8 months. About 95 percent of the victims were 15
months of age or younger.
Severity of injury. The majority of children involved in baby
walker incidents (75 percent) received injuries classified as ``less
severe,'' even though the head and face were often the injured body
parts. Less severe injuries include lacerations, contusions, abrasions,
hematomas, dental injuries, punctures, and strains or sprains.
About one-fourth of the children (23 percent) received injuries
classified as potentially ``more severe,'' such as concussions, burns,
fractures, and internal organ injuries. Incidents that resulted in
severe injuries occurred even when parents were in the same room or
area as the child in the walker. The majority of potentially severe
injuries were head injuries resulting from children in walkers falling
down a flight of basement stairs onto either a covered or uncovered
cement floor. The remaining potentially severe injuries were burns and
limb fractures. The injuries were of varying severity, ranging from
children who were treated and released to injuries that resulted in
hospitalizations up to 7 days. At the time of the telephone
investigations, all of the 128 parents contacted through February 1994
reported that the children had ``fully recovered.''
In 1991, the proportion of ``more severe'' to ``less severe''
injuries related to walkers was similar to that of cribs, high chairs,
playpens, and changing tables. There was a significantly higher
proportion of ``more severe'' injuries related to baby walkers than to
strollers and carriages.
During 1991, 7 percent of the children involved in walker- related
incidents were hospitalized for observation or more extensive
treatment. There were no significant differences between the
proportions of hospitalizations to non- hospitalizations for baby
walkers and cribs, high chairs, playpens, and changing tables. There
was a significantly higher proportion of hospitalizations related to
baby walkers than for strollers and carriages.
The mechanism of general stair-related injuries differs in some
respects from the mechanism of stair-related injuries involving baby
walkers. Falls down stairs without walkers involve a series of impacts;
an initial mild to severe impact, followed by a series of mild impacts
(tumbling). The bouncing of a walker down steps, however, may result in
an initial backward thrust of the head as the walker descends down the
steps followed by a forward head thrust. One author suggests that
``[s]uch a sequence could add additional impact energy and thus more
severe injury.'' (DiMario F: Chronic Subdural Hematoma--Another
Babywalker-Stairs Related Injury. Clinical Pediatrics 1990; 29:405-8.)
E. Other Factors Related to Baby Walker Incidents
Step falls and doorway width. For the stair or step fall incidents,
82 percent of the respondents who agreed to take measurements reported
the width of the narrowest dimension of the opening at the top of the
stairs or step as 36 inches or less (approximately the size of a normal
door opening).
Supervision of the Child and Precautions Taken. At the time of the
incident, about half of the caregivers were in the same room or area as
the child in the walker. For those caregivers who were in the same room
or area with the child when the incident happened, 43 percent reported
that they witnessed the incident. Some parents who did not witness the
incident said they had looked away momentarily or were distracted by
another child when the incident occurred. In some incidents where the
caregivers were in another room or area than the child in the walker at
the time of the incident, the child was in the caregiver's view.
Over half of the respondents (61 percent) for the stair and step
fall incidents reported a closed door, gate, or some other barrier in
use prior to, or around, the time of walker use (doors-78 percent,
gates-16 percent, other barriers-6 percent.) In 90 percent of the stair
and step fall incidents where a barrier was in use, the door, gate, or
other barrier had been moved, left ajar, or not latched properly. Seven
percent of the respondents for these incidents who reported a gate in
use suggested that the gate may have failed; this was reported solely
as ``the walker pushed the gate open.'' Other stair and step fall
incidents included cases where children bypassed a barrier or safety
precaution or moved too quickly for a nearby adult to prevent the
incident.
Ten percent of the respondents reported a baby walker incident
prior to the incident in the study. Three percent reported a previous
stair fall incident. Seventy-six percent of the respondents reported
using the walker again after an injury occurred, including over half of
those whose child was diagnosed as having a potentially serious injury.
For the stair fall incidents where the walker was still available, 57
percent of the respondents who agreed to look for labeling information
reported a label with a stair warning.
E. Existing Standards
As explained in section A of this notice, ASTM has a voluntary
standard for baby walkers, ASTM F977. This standard has performance
requirements that address walker tipover and structural failure. Falls
down stairs are addressed by a warning label. The CPSC staff's
compliance program, also discussed in section A of this notice,
indicated a high level of conformance with the stair warning label
requirement of the voluntary standard.
At this time, ASTM is not considering performance requirements to
address the hazard of children falling down stairs in walkers. ASTM
members are waiting for completion of the CPSC data collection,
discussed above, to determine the appropriate direction for any new
requirements.
A voluntary safety standard published by the Canadian Juvenile
Products Association, effective June 1, 1989, requires walkers to be
constructed to preclude their passage through a simulated door opening
900 mm (35.4 inches) in width. In Canada, this standard had the same
effect as a ban of the sale of walkers. Walker manufacturers apparently
believed that the low market sales of walkers in Canada (about 150,000
annually as compared to 4 million in the U.S.) did not justify
redesigning their products. However, due to the much larger market in
the United States, and the fact that this alternative retains much of
the mobility of a traditional walker, the Commission has no reason to
believe that a standard similar to the Canadian one would eliminate the
U.S. market for baby walkers.
F. Statutory Authority
The FHSA is the appropriate act for regulating risks associated
with baby walkers or other articles intended for use by children that
present a mechanical hazard. 15 U.S.C. 1261(F)(1)(D). Section 2(s) of
the FHSA provides:
An article may be determined (by rule) to present a mechanical
hazard if, in normal use or when subjected to reasonably foreseeable
damage or abuse, its design or manufacture presents an unreasonable
risk of personal injury or illness . . . (4) from moving parts, (5)
from lack or insufficiency of controls to reduce or stop motion, . .
. (8) because of instability, or (9) because of any other aspect of
the article's design or manufacture.
15 U.S.C. 1261(s). The Commission's current regulations for baby
walkers were issued under the FHSA. 16 CFR 1500.18(a)(6),
1500.86(a)(4).
Section 2(s) of the FHSA provides CPSC with jurisdiction over
unreasonable risks of children tipping over in walkers, being injured
by a walker's moving or collapsible parts, or falling down stairs in
walkers. However, the primary risk associated with walkers is that of
children falling down stairs. The design features that may be
implicated by this particular risk include, for example, the absence of
an effective way to limit or stop the product's motion and its ability
to fit through a standard doorway.
Declaring that all walkers, or walkers that fail to meet specified
criteria, are a hazardous substance because they present a mechanical
hazard would trigger the banning provision of FHSA Sec. 2(q)(1)(A).
This section of the act provides that the term ``banned hazardous
substance'' includes ``any toy, or other article intended for use by
children, which is a hazardous substance. . . .'' 15 U.S.C.
1261(q)(1)(A).
This proceeding under the FHSA to determine whether baby walkers
present a mechanical hazard is being conducted under sections 3(f)-(i)
of the FHSA. This involves a three-stage rulemaking, commenced by the
publication of this ANPR.
The next stage in the rulemaking proceeding will be a decision
either to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (``NPR'') or to
terminate the proceeding. If the Commission decides to continue the
rulemaking proceeding after considering responses to the ANPR, the
Commission must publish the text of the proposed rule, along with a
preliminary regulatory analysis, in accordance with FHSA section 3(h).
15 U.S.C. 1262(h). If the Commission then wishes to issue a final rule,
it must publish the text of the final rule and a final regulatory
analysis that includes the elements stated in section 3(i)(1) of the
FHSA. 15 U.S.C. 1262(i)(1). Before the Commission may issue a final
regulation, it must make statutory findings concerning voluntary
standards; the relationship of the costs and benefits of the rule; and
the burden imposed by the regulation. FHSA sec. 3(i)(2), 15 U.S.C.
1262(i)(2).
G. Regulatory Alternatives Under Consideration
The Commission is considering alternatives to reduce the number of
injuries and deaths related to baby walkers.
1. Performance or design requirement. For the reasons discussed
above, it appears possible that a performance or design requirement can
be developed that will reduce the risk of children falling down stairs
in baby walkers. The staff is aware of the following product designs
intended to address the hazard of falls down stairs:
1. Walkers with a diameter larger than the normal door opening to
prevent access to stairs.
2. Walkers with a ``wheel-stop'' mechanism.
3. Walkers with mobility limited to a confined space.
4. Stationary alternatives.
The Commission concludes that it is possible to develop a
performance or design requirement that will allow the use of one or
more of these designs to address the risk of falls down stairs. These
alternatives are discussed separately below.
Wide walkers. The results of the analysis of the current CPSC
special study indicate that walkers with a 36-inch-diameter base
theoretically could address 82 percent of the stair and step fall
incidents, including almost all of the severe incidents (falls down
basement stairs). A 36-inch requirement would add approximately 6 to 10
inches to the diameter of walkers currently on the market. There may be
a perceived or actual loss of utility of such a product in terms of
actual use by a child if it will not fit between furniture in most
households. Also, there would be a loss of convenience if the walker is
too large for convenient storage or for transporting to other locations
by car.
If the product is unacceptable to consumers, they may choose to
purchase used, traditional walkers. In this event, the percentage of
incidents addressed by a larger diameter walker could be significantly
less than 82 percent--at least for the period of time that used,
traditional walkers are available.
Wheel-Stop Mechanisms. One manufacturer is marketing a walker with
a wheel-stop mechanism which retails for around $55. The consumer can
use the wheel-stop mechanism to manually retract all eight wheels so
that the walker is stationary. Another manufacturer marketed a walker
with an automatic wheel-stop mechanism, which retailed for $60-$80.
This product had the wheels arranged so that if one wheel passed over a
step, a second wheel would retract, causing the base ring to drop, grip
the floor surface, and restrict further mobility of the walker. This
product was discontinued due to limited sales.
Products with wheel-stop mechanisms provide all the utility and
features of a traditional walker. The staff does not know how effective
passive or automatically retracting wheels can be in addressing stair
and step fall injuries.
Walkers with Mobility Limited to a Confined Space. One manufacturer
plans to introduce a new walker with limited mobility in September
1994. This product is expected to retail for $80-$90 initially, with a
goal of lowering the retail price to $69 with a higher sales volume.
With this walker, a child can walk, clockwise or counter-clockwise,
around the circumference of a 36 inch stationary base. The child can
also rotate the seat 360 deg..
There is a patent pending on a walker with a pivot point and
control arm that converts a traditional walker into a tethered walker.
A child can travel in a circle, clockwise or counterclockwise, around
the weighted central pivot point. The control arm can be adjusted to
increase or decrease the circumference of the walker's path.
Stationary Alternatives. A nonmobile product is being marketed that
retails for around $50. This product has a 28-inch diameter saucer base
and a seat that the child can bounce up and down and rotate 360 deg..
Three legs can be lowered to stop the rocking motion.
Another nonmobile product is marketed that retails for around $70.
This product has a seat that the child can bounce up and down and
rotate 360 deg..
Theoretically, walkers with limited mobility or stationary
alternative products could address almost all deaths and injuries
associated with walkers. With restricted mobility, a child would not
have access to stairs, steps, hot surfaces, uneven floor surfaces, or
other hazards. However, mobility is a unique characteristic of a walker
that is attractive to consumers and toddlers. Sales of traditional
mobile walkers have always substantially exceeded sales of stationary
products such as jumpers and bouncers.
The staff does not know whether stationary alternative products or
walkers with limited mobility can provide levels of stimulation
comparable to mobile walkers. If such products are unacceptable to
consumers, they may choose to purchase used traditional walkers. In
this event, the percentage of incidents addressed could be
significantly less than expected--at least for the period of time that
used traditional walkers are available.
2. Labeling and instructions. Another alternative is labeling the
product to warn against its hazards and providing information on the
risks in the product's instructions. The Commission's staff is working
with members of the ASTM Section for Infant Walkers to revise the
current labeling on baby walkers. However, labeling and instructions
alone are not likely to adequately reduce the risk and should be used
in conjunction with product modifications, where possible.
3. Voluntary standards. As noted above, there is no voluntary
standard in existence that would adequately reduce the risk of injury
from stair falls in walkers. Even if a voluntary standard were
developed, the Commission has no basis for concluding that the standard
would be conformed with generally by walker manufacturers.
H. Solicitation of Information and Comments
This ANPR is the first step of a proceeding which could result in a
mandatory performance, design, or labeling requirement for baby walkers
that present an unreasonable risk of falling down stairs.
All interested persons are invited to submit to the Commission
their comments on any aspect of the alternatives discussed above. The
Commission is interested in any information about the ability of
stationary alternative products or walkers with limited mobility to
provide levels of stimulation comparable to mobile walkers. In
addition, in accordance with section 9(a) of the FHSA, the Commission
solicits:
(1) Written comments with respect to the risk of injury identified
by the Commission, the regulatory alternatives being considered, and
other possible alternatives for addressing the risk.
(2) Any existing standard or portion of a standard which could be
issued as a proposed regulation.
(3) A statement of intention to modify or develop a voluntary
standard to address the risk of injury discussed in this notice, along
with a description of a plan (including a schedule) to do so.
Comments should be mailed, preferably in five (5) copies, to the
Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission,
Washington, D.C. 20207-0001, or delivered to the Office of the
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 502, 4330 East West
Highway, Bethesda, Maryland 20814; telephone (301) 504-0800. All
comments and submissions should be received no later than October 3,
1994.
Dated: July 27, 1994.
Sayde E. Dunn,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission
Reference Documents
The following documents contain information relevant to this
rulemaking proceeding and are available for inspection at the Office
of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 502, 4330
East-West Highway, Bethesda, Maryland 20814:
1. ASTM F 977-86 Standard Consumer Safety Specification for
Infant Walkers.
2. ASTM F 977-89 Standard Consumer Safety Specification for
Infant Walkers.
3. Petition HP 92-2, Petition to Ban Baby Walkers, August 27,
1992.
4. Letter from Bruce W. Dixon, M.D., September 4, 1992.
5. Letter from Daniel and Lois Fermaglich, M.D.'s, concerning
alternative walker designs, September 17, 1992.
6. Request for consolidation from Daniel and Teresa Fonua,
September 24, 1992.
7. Supplementary information from petitioners, September 29,
1992.
8. Correspondence from Chung B. Kim, ``Opposition to Petition
No. HP92-2 for an Absolute Ban on Baby Walkers Intended for Use by
Children,'' October 22, 1992.
9. Commission staff memo, from Frank Krivda, ``Infant Walker
Compliance Activities,'' November 17, 1992.
10. Correspondence from Graco Children's Products, Inc.,
``Address to the Commission: Comments Opposing the Petition of the
Consumer Federation of American et al to Ban Baby Walkers,''
December 4, 1992.
11. Commission staff memo from Carolyn Meiers, ``Petition to Ban
Baby Walkers,'' December 8, 1992.
12. Commission staff memo, from Leonard E. Schachter, EPHA,
``Petition Requesting a Ban of Baby Walkers (HP 92-2), December 9,
1992.
13. Commission staff memo, from John Preston, ``Baby Walker
Petition, HP 92-2,'' December 9, 1992.
14. Commission staff memo, from Anthony Homan, ``Baby Walkers--
Petition HP 92-2,'' December 11, 1992.
15. Letter from Locker, Greenberg & Brainin, P.C., representing
the Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association, December 17, 1992.
16. Letter from George McKown, December 22, 1992.
17. Letter from James S. Todd, Executive Vice President, AMA,
December 29, 1992.
18. Statement from Moneyworth Watermelon, January 8, 1993.
19. Letter from Taipei Inventors' Association, January 15, 1993.
20. Letter from Diane Meredith Belcher in support of ban,
February 5, 1993.
21. Letter from Washington State Academy of Pediatric Dentists,
February 11, 1993.
22. Letter from Jim Deming, M.D., Lake Tomah Clinic, February
12, 1993.
23. Undated letter from Sam and Joril Danna opposing ban.
24. Commission staff memo, from Terrance Karels, ``Briefing
package--Baby Walker Petition HP 92-2,'' March 15, 1993.
25. Letter from Sharlene McKenna, March 19, 1993.
26. Commission staff memo to the Commission transmitting letters
received concerning the baby walker petition, March 23, 1993.
27. Letter from the American Physical Therapy Association, March
30, 1993.
28. Proposed changes to ASTM F 977-89, November 8, 1993.
29. Commission staff memo, from Manon Boudreault, ``Report on
Baby Walker Incidents for the period August 15, 1993, to February
28, 1994,'' May 18, 1994.
30. Commission staff memo, from Anthony Holman, ``Baby Walkers--
Regulatory Analysis Discussion,'' May 18, 1994.
31. Commission staff memo, from Suad Nakamura, ``Baby Walker,
Severe Injuries,'' May 26, 1994.
32. Commission staff memo, from Dollie Manley, ``Infant Walkers
Screened under the Juvenile Products Small Parts Compliance Survey,
FPC 93-0101,'' June 1, 1994.
33. Commission staff memo, from Manon Boudreault, ``Addendum to
Report on Baby Walker Incidents Submitted May 18, 1994,'' June 8,
1994.
34. Briefing paper from Barbara Jacobson, ``Baby Walker Project
Status Report with Options,'' June 9, 1994.
35. Letter from William L. MacMillan, President of JPMA, June
30, 1994.
[FR Doc. 94-18789 Filed 8-1-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
