[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 11 (Tuesday, January 19, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2833-2843]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-1138]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
16 CFR Parts 1615 and 1616
Final Technical Changes; Standard for the Flammability of
Children's Sleepwear: Sizes 0 Through 6X; Standard for the Flammability
of Children's Sleepwear: Sizes 7 Through 14
AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission.
ACTION: Final technical changes.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission is amending the flammability standards for
children's sleepwear in sizes 0 through 6X and 7 through 14 to make
several technical changes that would correct the definition of ``tight-
fitting garment.'' The changes will clarify the points where garment
measurements should be made.
DATES: The amendments will become effective on February 18, 1999].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marilyn Borsari, Office of Compliance,
Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, D.C. 20207; telephone
(301) 504-0400, extension 1370.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
The Commission administers two rules issued under section 4 of the
Flammable Fabrics Act (``FFA''), 15 U.S.C. 1193, that prescribe
flammability tests for children's sleepwear garments and fabrics
intended for use in children's sleepwear. The first, issued in 1971 by
the Secretary of Commerce, covers children's sleepwear in sizes 0
through 6X. 16 CFR Part 1615. After responsibility for administration
and enforcement of the FFA was transferred to the Consumer Product
Safety Commission by provisions of section 30(b) of the Consumer
Product Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 2079(b), the Commission issued a
flammability standard for children's sleepwear in sizes 7 through 14.
The tests in that standard are substantially the same as those in the
standard for children's sleepwear in sizes 0 through 6X. The
flammability standard for children's sleepwear in sizes 7 through 14 is
codified at 16 CFR Part 1616.
Both standards require that test specimens must self-extinguish
when exposed to a small open-flame ignition source. Self-extinguishing
fabrics and garments are those that stop burning when removed from an
ignition source. Both standards require manufacturers of sleepwear
garments to perform prototype tests on specimens of fabric, seams, and
trim with acceptable results before beginning production of sleepwear
garments. Both standards also require manufacturers of sleepwear
fabrics and garments to group fabrics and garments into production
units and to randomly sample and test products from each production
unit. Neither standard requires that specific fabrics or flame-
retardant treatments be used in the manufacture of children's
sleepwear.
On September 9, 1996, the Commission issued a final rule amending
the flammability standards for children's sleepwear to exclude from the
definition of ``children's sleepwear'' (1) garments sized for infants
nine months of age or younger and (2) tight-fitting sleepwear garments
for children older than nine months. 61 FR 47634.
The Commission found that such tight-fitting sleepwear did not
present an unreasonable risk of injury. Rather, the Commission's
information showed that sleepwear incidents occurred with loose-fitting
garments such as T-shirts. A review of literature for that amendment
showed that fit can influence garment flammability. Garments that fit
close to the body are less likely to catch fire in the first place and
less likely to allow heat to develop between the fabric and the body,
thus decreasing the likelihood of thermal injury. Id. The Commission
concluded that garments fitting closely and that touch the body at key
points should be exempt from the sleepwear standards as they do not
present the same risk as loose-fitting garments. These amendments
became effective on January 1, 1997. However, the Commission also
issued a stay of enforcement for close-fitting garments which are
labeled and promoted as underwear. That stay expired on June 1, 1998.
62 FR 60163.
The Commission defined tight-fitting garments as those that did not
exceed certain measurements in the chest, waist, seat, upper arm,
thigh, wrist, and ankle for each size ranging from over 9 months
through children's size 14. In the amendments, the Commission specified
maximum allowable measurements for each of these locations for each
size garment. 61 FR 47644-47.
B. Statutory Provisions and the Proposed Rule
The FFA provides that the Commission can issue or amend a
flammability standard when the standard may be needed to protect the
public from an unreasonable risk of the occurrence of fire leading to
death, injury or significant property damage. 15 U.S.C. 1193(a).
Section 4(g) of the FFA states that a proceeding ``for the
promulgation of a regulation under this section'' shall be initiated by
publication of an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (``ANPR''). 15
U.S.C. 1193(g). Due to the technical nature and narrow scope of this
proceeding, the Commission concluded that an ANPR would be of no value
to the public or the Commission.
Thus, the Commission began this proceeding on May 21, 1998, with a
notice of proposed rulemaking (``NPR''). 63 FR 27877 (corrected on June
11, 1998, 63 FR 31950). That notice explained that once manufacturers
began to design tight-fitting sleepwear that would meet the amendments,
they
[[Page 2834]]
identified some problems with design and construction of these
garments. After meeting with industry members and considering various
suggestions, the staff concluded that some adjustments needed to be
made to the locations for measurements specified in the amendments for
some points on the garments. The staff believed that these adjustments
would be needed for the point of measurement of the upper arm, the
seat, and the thigh. The staff also examined possible changes to the
sweep (bottom of the top of a two-piece garment).
In order to better assess this need and to determine if the
possible changes would result in practical, wearable garments, the
staff conducted structured observations of some garments. As explained
in the NPR, these observations demonstrated that garments made
according to measurement locations contemplated by the staff were
wearable, comfortable and suitable for sleeping and play. They also
demonstrated that making changes to the sweep of the top of a two-piece
garment by allowing an hourglass silhouette would allow the sweep to
flare away from the body, exposing the bottom edge when a child raised
her arms. Thus, the Commission did not propose making any changes to
the sweep of the garments.
C. Comments on the NPR
In response to the proposal of May 21, 1998, six written comments
were received. In addition, nine related comments and several oral
inquiries were received. The significant issues addressed by these
comments are discussed below.
1. Issuance of the Amendments
American Marketing Enterprises, Inc., an importer of childrenswear,
commented that it agrees to a certain extent with the proposed
amendments. Similarly, the National Cotton Council, representing cotton
producers, believes that the proposed technical changes are an
improvement.
The Safe Children's Sleepwear Coalition (SCSC), a group formed in
response to the Commission's decision in 1996 to exempt certain tight-
fitting garments and garments intended for infants from the sleepwear
flammability standards, commented that it opposes the 1996 amendments.
SCSC stated that its members ``do not believe any technical changes to
the amendments can make the new requirements for children's sleepwear
effective'' and thus ``it would be counter-productive and misleading''
to comment on specific measurement protocols. Rather, SCSC would like
the Commission to rescind the 1996 amendments. The Commission also
received nine other letters from hospitals, public interest groups, and
fire or emergency groups asking that the Commission reconsider the 1996
exemption for tight-fitting and infant garments.
Garments on children observed by the staff while it was developing
the proposed technical amendments demonstrated that comfortable,
practical, snug-fitting sleepwear could be produced with these slight
changes in the standards. The purpose of the May 21, 1998 proposed rule
was to propose necessary technical changes that would clarify the
points where garment measurements should be made.
The proposed rule has a very narrow scope. The comments of the SCSC
and the others mentioned above are responding to the broader 1996
rulemaking and are beyond the scope of the May 21, 1998 notice.
However, as required by the recent appropriations bill enacted by
Congress, Pub. L. 105-276, the Commission intends to propose for
comment a revocation of the September 9, 1996 amendments to the
standards for the flammability of children's sleepwear and any
subsequent amendments.
2. Consumer Education Campaign
Letters received from hospitals, public interest and fire and
emergency groups were critical of the consumer education campaign
promised by the American Apparel Manufacturers Association at the time
the exemption for tight-fitting sleepwear was published. These letters
said that the ``apparel industry has failed to agree on labeling or
tight-fitting requirements or design and implement the promised
educational campaign . . . [and that] it is virtually impossible for
consumers to judge the relative safety of such sleepwear garments in
the marketplace.''
These comments are beyond the scope of the proposed technical
amendments, but the issue is an important one. AAMA has declined to
initiate a comprehensive consumer information campaign as originally
planned with a press conference. AAMA indicated that it is prepared to
do so when the sleepwear amendments are final and it is satisfied that
saleable, wearable, and comfortable snug-fitting garments can be
produced.
Nevertheless, AAMA is actively distributing the art work for the
hang tags and reproducing copies of the brochure developed to inform
consumers about safety and the new snug-fitting sleepwear at the point
of sale. Early in 1997, AAMA distributed the art work and brochure
information to 40 organizations (AAMA members, non-members, and other
interested parties.) Since March 1998, 13 companies have requested the
art work for the hang tags. Approximately 3,500 brochures have been
distributed by a major retailer and two major AAMA member companies. On
December 14, 1998 AAMA issued a holiday press release giving children's
sleepwear safety tips about snug-fitting and FR sleepwear.
There is still no formal industry coordination of consumer
information efforts at this time. However, at trade shows, meetings,
and in other communications with industry members, the CPSC staff has
encouraged the use of a consistent message on hang tags to facilitate
consumer understanding. All known manufacturers of snug-fitting
sleepwear are marketing their garments with the basic information from
the AAMA hang tag. Some flame-resistant garments also carry a version
of this information. The label states ``Fabric and fit are important
safety considerations for children's sleepwear. Sleepwear should be
flame resistant or snug-fitting to meet U.S. Consumer Product Safety
Commission sleepwear requirements.'' Labels further state that the
garment attached is either flame-resistant or should be worn snug-
fitting. Some retailers have expanded their use of this labeling to
store displays and have informed their salespeople and customers
through training courses and in-house publications.
Also, in November 1998 the Commission issued a video news release
(VNR) warning about the use of loose-fitting garments, especially T-
shirts, for sleepwear. The VNR also described the safer alternatives
available under the existing sleepwear regulations--flame-resistant and
snug-fitting sleepwear--and the hang tags that commonly identify them
in retail stores.
3. Measurement Standard
A major retailer commented that ``the measurements proposed by the
CPSC for sizes 7-14 are based on one university study, rather than
generally accepted industry standards. Standards CS 53-48 (Girls) and
CS 51-50 (Boys) should be the applicable measurement standards for
children's sizes 7-14.''
The standards recommended in the comment were incorrectly titled.
The correct titles are CS 153-48 (Girls) and CS 155-50 (Boys). However,
these are not the latest versions of the former National Bureau of
Standards (NBS) sizing standards (last updated in 1970 and 1972 before
the NBS was renamed
[[Page 2835]]
the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)). The most
recent versions are NBS Voluntary Product Standards PS 54-72 (Girls)
and PS 36-70 (Boys).
The snug-fitting dimensions for sizes 7-14 in the children's
sleepwear standards are based on the latest NBS standards and data from
the University of Michigan's study ``Anthropometry of Infants,
Children, and Youths to Age 18 for Product Safety Design.'' The
majority of the CPSC snug-fitting dimensions match those of the NBS
standards.
During an April 25, 1995 meeting with CPSC staff, sleepwear
industry representatives indicated that they do not adhere to any
consistent sizing standards. Therefore, CPSC staff developed the snug-
fitting dimensions from the most current and reliable data available
that pertain to typical body dimensions of children.
4. Upper Arm Dimensions
Two commenters requested an increase in the upper arm dimensions of
the snug-fitting requirements. Gap, Inc., a garment producer,
recommends an increase of \1/4\ inch in the upper arm dimensions of
baby garments from size 9 months to 36 months (or size 3T) to improve
comfort and fit. AAMA recommends all upper arm measurements be
increased 2 inches. AAMA disagrees with Commission staff conclusions
that saleable, wearable, and comfortable garments can be produced with
current upper arm dimensions.
The Commission is not persuaded that an increase in upper arm
dimensions is needed to produce comfortable, functional garments.
Previous presentations from AAMA in 1997, requesting an additional 2
inches in the upper arm dimension, were based on garments made with
popular interlock fabrics that only had 55% stretch. No further
technical support was provided with this most recent recommendation,
and no substantiation was provided for the claim that such an addition
to the upper arm dimension would not affect safety.
Fabrics with inadequate stretch are not appropriate for use in this
style of garment where the fabric must be worn in the stretched
condition. The best fabrics available for the 1997 staff observations
worked well in this snug-fitting style with 65%-85% stretch. Some of
the newer fabrics being introduced to the snug-fitting sleepwear market
since July 1998 stretch over 100% of their original dimension. This is
more than enough to ensure comfort and accommodate a child's arm
motion. Even the additional \1/4\ inch increase in the upper arm
dimension proposed by Gap appears unnecessary under these
circumstances.
While AAMA believes that saleable garments cannot be produced with
current upper arm dimensions, manufacturers estimate that snug-fitting
cotton sleepwear accounts for 20-25% of total children's sleepwear
sales. By these figures, there is a significant market for these
garments. Manufacturers contacted by the staff were optimistic about
this market as well.
5. Measurement Method for Upper Arm
Several commenters suggested that the current method for measuring
the upper arm (three steps) is complicated and should be reduced to
two. J.C. Penney commented that the ``upper arm measurement is too
complicated for factory inspection and will lead to controversy between
manufacturers, retailers and CPSC enforcement staff.'' J.C. Penney,
along with AAMA, suggests measuring down the under arm seam 2 inches
for infants and toddler sizes (12 mos. to 4T) and 3 inches down for
sizes 4 to 14 before measuring the upper arm. Gap also suggests a
measurement along the underarm seam as easier to follow and less prone
to error.
The Commission recognizes that the measurement method for the upper
arm is more complicated than for other typical garment dimensions
measured by the industry. This is because the upper arm of the body is
defined as a point between the shoulder and the elbow. Sleeves do not
have elbows; and since some sleeve designs do not have a defined
shoulder, the shoulder was defined by a logical extension of the side
seam. The location of the upper arm can then be measured down the
sleeve according to average body dimensions for each size. The CPSC
staff observations described in the April 1998 briefing package showed
this method to produce a fairly accurate match with the upper arm of
the children wearing the garments.
AAMA and Gap suggested an easier way to measure the upper arm--a
specified distance along the underarm sleeve seam. CPSC staff evaluated
a large sample of snug-fitting garment styles to determine the impact
of the simplified measurement method. Because the style of the sleeves
varied, so did the location for the upper arm to be measured by the
suggested method. In some cases, the upper arm would be measured
further down the sleeve than where the child's upper arm is, allowing
the sleeve to be larger or fuller for more of the sleeve than currently
specified. In other cases, the measurement would be closer to the
armhole than measurement by the current proposed amendment. This would
create even more restrictions in the upper sleeve design, already the
area offering the greatest design challenge to manufacturers.
Even with the dimensional restrictions of the snug-fitting
requirements, garment styles vary considerably. Manufacturers could,
for various sizes of a particular style, determine the distance(s) down
the underarm seam(s) that coincides with the point(s) where the
measurement should be made by the standard method. This could provide
the simplicity of the industry measurement proposals and the accuracy
and maximum allowance for the upper arm dimension provided by the
standard method. Because of style variations among garments and
manufacturers, CPSC would continue to use the standard method for
measuring the upper arm.
6. Need for Diaper/Training Pant Ease
J.C. Penney notes that the standard garment dimensions do not allow
for diaper or training pant ease (an increase in the width of the
garment in the seat area). An allowable increase in the rise (the
length of the garment in the seat area) produces ill-fitting garments.
For garments made of woven fabrics or knits with little or no
stretch, extra fabric or ease in the seat is necessary for a practical,
wearable garment. However, with the use of fabrics that stretch
adequately for this style of garment (85 to 100% stretch), diaper ease
is unnecessary.
7. Thigh Measurement
AAMA recommended that the thigh measurement be taken 1 1/2 inches
below the crotch seam for all sizes instead of 1 inch. Although no
specific justification was given for the recommendation in this
comment, AAMA designers provided rationale in an August 14, 1997, phone
conference. They indicated that because of the changing dimension of
the pant in this area, the lower measuring point would help with
getting the correct stride in the pant.
The Commission is not persuaded to change this measurement point
further. In developing the proposed technical amendments, the staff
received input from a wide variety of industry contacts, including
childrenswear and actionwear design instructors. They indicated that it
is typical industry practice to measure the thigh 1 inch down on the
inseam. In August 1997, when AAMA members originally made this
recommendation, they were still trying to design snug-fitting garments
with interlock knits
[[Page 2836]]
with inadequate stretch for this garment design. CPSC staff
observations in 1998 showed that snug-fitting sleepwear on children
could be made well following the industry practice of measuring 1 inch
down the inseam. Again, the fabrics used in these successful
observation garments had considerable stretch (65-85%).
8. Hourglass Silhouette
Two commenters requested that the bottom sweep (hem of the top) of
a two piece garment be increased to the standard seat dimension rather
than the waist dimension. Examples given by the J.C. Penney Company
showed that the sweep of various sizes of boys and girls garments would
have to stretch 14 to 28% of their original dimension to fit the hip.
They noted other problems from their perspective: (1) a questionable
pajama silhouette, (2) difficulty pulling the top over the head and
shoulders, (3) the sweep would ride up to the waist with body movement,
and (4) the fabric would be stretched loose (wrinkled) around the chest
and waist.
Gap expressed similar concerns about the exaggerated undersizing of
the sweep to the waist dimension, especially when factories are already
manufacturing garments toward a negative ``tolerance''. They observed
bunching as the garment rides up toward the waist and are concerned
that this is a safety hazard. They propose that the sweep be less than
or equal to the standard seat dimension for girls sizes 7 to 14 and
toddler sizes 2XL and 3XL (similar to 2T and 3T in the standards) for
reasons of comfort and fit.
The snug-fitting garment silhouette is very different than the
silhouette consumers have come to expect for pajamas. One reason the
Commission wanted the industry to move forward with the consumer
education campaign was to help consumers make the necessary adjustment
in their expectations. These snug-fitting garments should be viewed
realistically and appreciated for the safety of their design.
CPSC staff observed a variety of snug-fitting garments made of
different fabrics and by different manufacturers during the development
of the proposed technical amendments. None of the child models or
parents, in the case of the infant, had difficulty putting on or
removing the garments made to the proposed technical amendments.
The sweep is one of several dimensions for which commenters
requested increased dimensions to improve fit and comfort. The sweep
sized to the standard waist dimension has no problem stretching to fit
the larger hip, if made of fabrics that stretch adequately. Even if the
sweep is undersized one inch in production (Gap's concern), the J.C.
Penney examples discussed above must still only stretch approximately
14-28% of their original dimension. This is a small portion of the
available stretch of the fabric.
During the proposal's development, several manufacturers thought
the hourglass silhouette option might be helpful for larger girls'
sizes where the seat is considerably larger than the waist, but not
helpful for other sizes. The staff included the hourglass option in the
observations because it had the potential to reduce fabric bunching at
the waist and/or produce a more functional garment.
For the CPSC staff observations, a girls' size 12 garment was
constructed with a conservative hourglass silhouette; the sweep was
equal to the smaller chest dimension required by the standard rather
than the larger seat dimension. The top of the garment fit nicely while
the model stood still; however, when she raised her arms or moved
during the observation, the sweep flared away from the body
significantly, exposing the bottom edge of the garment.
All of the garments observed on children by the staff showed some
wrinkling or bunching of fabric at various points, most commonly around
the waist, knees and elbows. None of the pajama tops pulled up to the
waist as anticipated. The concept of snug-fitting was readily defeated
with the flaring of the sweep of the hourglass silhouette in the 2-
piece garment. For this reason, the Commission declines to increase the
size of the bottom sweep.
9. Sewing Tolerances
Three commenters supported the addition of sewing tolerances to the
standards. American Marketing Enterprises, Inc., commented that
tolerances are currently used during sewing and manufacturing of knit
garments. ``It is impossible to not have `plus or minus' tolerances in
a size specification. . . . [In] CPSC's policy . . . only minus
tolerances are allowed.'' Manufacturers are forced to undercut these
already snug fitting garments which results ``in substandard
garments.'' Not allowing for both a positive and negative tolerance is
``asking the trade to operate outside of the normal manufacturing
procedures.''
AAMA commented that its manufacturers have to undercut garments to
comply with the published measurements. ``This yields a garment that is
too tight and will force the consumer to buy a larger size creating new
safety hazards from garments that are too long.'' Also, the National
Cotton Council ``strongly believes that there is a need for a sewing
tolerance.''
Plus or minus tolerances are normally used in the production of all
garments and allow for permissible variations to the pattern
specifications that can occur during cutting or sewing of the garment.
However, a production tolerance that increases the garment dimensions
specified in the sleepwear standards would result in a less than snug-
fitting sleepwear garment. The snug fit is important because the ease
of ignition increases when the wearer's clothing stands away from the
body. Without a snug fit, if ignition occurs, the oxygen under the
garment and the absence of a heat sink increase the opportunity for
sustained burning.
The garment dimensions specified in the standard are maximum
dimensions for the seven body locations indicated. Manufacturers are
allowed to sell snug-fitting sleepwear garments so long as the garment
dimensions for a specific size are not exceeded. Knit fabrics are
available with a sufficient degree of stretch that even if the
manufacturer undercuts the fabric somewhat, the garment will still fit
the intended size child.
Snug-fitting sleepwear garments acceptable to consumers have been
available for purchase since the fall of 1997. Manufacturers are able
to produce acceptable sleepwear garments through the selective use of
specific knit fabrics that allow for necessary stretch and recovery.
These garments hug the body. Through careful planning before and during
the manufacturing process, manufacturers can build in acceptable
tolerances to the pattern so that the finished garments will meet the
required specification after assembly.
10. Shrinkage Tolerances
The National Cotton Council ``strongly believes that there is a
need for a * * * 5% shrinkage tolerance.''
The amount of shrinkage that occurs in a garment varies and is
dependent on the fiber type (or types in the case of blends), quality
of fiber, fabric construction and weight, method of manufacture, type
of finishing process, and subsequent laundering conditions. The
amendments to the children's sleepwear standards do not specify a
particular fiber or fabric; therefore, manufacturers may choose among a
variety of fiber contents, fabric constructions, etc., for snug-fitting
garments. A 5% tolerance for shrinkage may not be needed for all
fabrics. Those
[[Page 2837]]
garments with less than 5% shrinkage would be less than snug-fitting
because they would exceed the maximum dimensions after laundering. In
addition, with laundering required before measurements could be taken,
it would be burdensome and impractical for the Commission's staff and
others to determine compliance at the retail or manufacturing levels.
Difficulties in controlling shrinkage were previously cited by
industry members as reasons for allowing positive manufacturing
tolerances. Manufacturers of successful products this fall are using
several methods to control the shrinkage of their snug-fitting
garments: fabric compacting, garment washing, and fabrics made of more
stable cotton/polyester blends. For these reasons, the Commission
declines to add tolerances for shrinkage.
11. Fit and Consumer Preference
The National Cotton Council commented that the proposed amendments
``do not go far enough in correcting the garment fit problems and could
be further improved without affecting the safety provided by the
standard.'' SCSC is concerned that any changes may not help the
situation because it believes parents will purchase larger sizes and
defeat the tight fit intended by the rule.
Neither commenter provided data or other evidence to support its
position. CPSC staff observations from fittings with real garments and
children were reported in April 1998. These showed that comfortable,
functional garments that fit the size child intended can and are being
produced with the measurement clarifications proposed, and that are
being made final in this document.
12. Chest Measurement
Gap proposes that the chest measurement be taken 1 inch below the
armpit to armpit line. ``Because the armpit is a sewing point, the
garment is prone to stretching in this area, compromising the accuracy
of the measurement. The one inch modification will eliminate this
inaccuracy.''
Although other industry members have previously mentioned that this
measurement could be shifted to 1 inch below the armpit, none indicated
that it was troublesome to have the chest measured at the armpit. For
that reason, it was not included in the staff observations of snug-
fitting garments for developing the proposed technical amendments.
During the CPSC fittings reported in April 1998, the staff observed no
fit or function problems with garments made with chest measurements
determined at the armpit.
13. Enforcement Sample Size and Tolerances
Gap commented that clarification of CPSC's enforcement policy is
necessary to further set quality assurance guidelines. This is
important, Gap believes, because of the high variability inherent in
manufacturing knitted products. Specifically, Gap requests the sample
size and tolerance to be used by the Commission in enforcement testing.
Measurements defined in the tight-fitting amendments to the
sleepwear standards refer to maximum dimensions at specified locations
on garments. There are no positive tolerances specified in the proposed
amendments. The staff will consider enforcement of these measurements
on a case-by-case basis, and the staff will exercise enforcement
discretion where appropriate. The staff will consider the overall
compliance of the garments and may base enforcement actions on more
than one garment and/or dimension exceeding the maximum measurement,
including the frequency and size of the dimensional difference(s).
14. Sleeve Taper Clarification
During the comment period for the NPR, the Compliance staff
received several inquiries and comments from the industry regarding the
design and style of short sleeves and their acceptability under the
definition of tight-fitting garments. Several industry representatives
requested clarification about the required tapering of a sleeve that is
shorter than where the upper arm is to be measured.
With the proposed technical changes (May 21, 1998), the upper arm
measurement point is moved from the armpit to a location that more
closely approximates the true upper arm of a child wearing the garment.
The proposed location (approximately one quarter length down the
sleeve) is the midpoint between the shoulder and the elbow. The maximum
upper arm dimensions remain unchanged.
The original amendments of September 1996 (Sec. 1615.1(o)(3) and
Sec. 1616.2(m)(3)) define sleeves of a tight-fitting garment ``which
diminish in width gradually from the upper arm to the wrist''. The
upper arm of the garment was measured from the armpit. However, in the
proposed technical amendments, the upper arm measurement is made
further down the sleeve. The change, if interpreted literally, allows
for short or cap sleeves on garments that could realistically end at a
point above where the upper arm measurement is to be made.
In order to avoid flaring sleeves and maintain the desired safety
of the tapering sleeve silhouette, the language describing the sleeve
is changed to ``which diminish in width gradually from the top of the
shoulder (point G in diagram 1) [of sections 1615.1(o) and 1616.2(m)]
to the wrist.'' If a short sleeve ends before the location of the upper
arm measurement, the sleeve should still taper (rather than flare)
toward the wrist along the same lines as a long sleeve. This
clarification reflects the original intent of the amendment.
D. The Technical Changes
This final rule makes the technical changes that were proposed in
the NPR. These changes alter some of the locations where measurements
should be taken to determine if a sleepwear garment is tight-fitting.
Measurement of Upper Arm. As explained in the NPR, this change will
allow manufacturers to measure sleepwear garments at a location that
better approximates the true upper arm of the garment. In an effort to
simplify the definition of ``tight-fitting garment'' the 1996 sleepwear
amendments called for measuring from the arm pit; however, this does
not allow sufficient room at the upper opening of the sleeve. Under
this correction, the upper arm will be measured from the shoulder to
approximately one quarter the length of the arm.
The maximum upper arm dimensions for each size specified in the
1996 sleepwear amendments remain unchanged. The amendment only changes
the location where the upper arm is measured.
Measurement of Seat. The 1996 sleepwear amendments stated that the
seat should be measured ``at widest location between waist and
crotch.'' 16 CFR 1615.1(o) and 1616.2(m) (see footnotes to chart). If
read literally, this describes a location immediately above the bottom
of the crotch and is essentially the same location as specified for the
thigh measurement. This is not where the seat/hip measurement is
normally made under general industry practices. A literal reading of
this direction results in a more constricted pant in the seat and thigh
area.
During the staff observations of children wearing snug-fitting
garments, the staff found that specifying the point of measurement as 4
inches above the crotch consistently matched the seat/hip location on
the wearer. Specifying a uniform measurement for all sizes also has the
advantage of being easier to
[[Page 2838]]
apply both for manufacturers and for Commission enforcement. Thus, the
Commission is specifying that the seat should be measured 4 inches
above the crotch for all sizes.
Measurement of Thigh. The 1996 amendments stated that the thigh
measurement should be taken ``at a line perpendicular to the leg
extending from the outer edge of the leg to the crotch.'' 16 CFR
1615.1(o) and 1616.2(m) (see footnotes to chart). This calls for
measuring the thigh right at the bottom of the crotch. This is not
really the location of the thigh and means measuring at a point where
bulky seams join. Typical practice in the garment design and
manufacturing industry is to measure the thigh at a point one inch down
the inseam from its intersection with the crotch seam. This provides a
more accurate measurement of the thigh without interference from the
bulky intersection of the seams. Thus, the Commission is now specifying
that the thigh be measured at this point.
Sleeve Taper. As discussed with the comments above, changing the
point where the upper arm should be measured may cause confusion in
interpreting the requirement that sleeves taper from the upper arm. 16
CFR 1615.1(o)(3); 16 CFR 1616.2(m)(3). Because these technical changes
will revise the definition of ``upper arm,'' the tapering requirement
needs to be clarified. Thus, the Commission is revising the tapering
requirement so that it states that the sleeves must ``diminish in width
gradually from the top of the shoulder (Point G in Diagram 1) to the
wrist.''
E. Effective Date
Section 4(b) of the FFA provides that an amendment of a
flammability standard shall become effective one year from the date it
is promulgated, unless the Commission finds for good cause that an
earlier or later effective date is in the public interest and publishes
that finding. 15 U.S.C. 1193(b). Section 4(b) also requires that an
amendment of a flammability standard shall exempt product ``in
inventory or with the trade'' on the date the amendment becomes
effective, unless the Commission limits or withdraws that exemption
because those products are so highly flammable that they are dangerous
for use by consumers.
As explained in the NPR, the Commission believes that an effective
date 30 days after publication of final amendments will be in the
public interest. This provides adequate notice to the public and allows
for the prompt initiation of these minor adjustments.
The Commission is not withdrawing or limiting the exemption for
products in inventory or with the trade as provided by section 4(b) of
the FFA. The Commission stated in the NPR that manufacturers could use
the proposed points of measurement in making garments, and the staff
would not take any enforcement action.
F. Impact on Small Businesses
As noted in the NPR, when an agency undertakes a rulemaking
proceeding, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
generally requires the agency to prepare proposed and final regulatory
flexibility analyses describing the impact of the rule on small
businesses and other small entities. Section 605 of the Act provides
that an agency is not required to prepare a regulatory flexibility
analysis if the head of an agency certifies that the rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
In the NPR, the Commission certified that the proposed amendments
to the flammability standards for children's sleepwear would not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small businesses or other
small entities. The Commission is not aware of any basis for changing
this conclusion.
G. Environmental Considerations
Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, and in
accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality regulations and
CPSC procedures for environmental review, when the Commission issued
the NPR, it assessed the possible environmental effects associated with
the proposed amendments to the children's sleepwear standards. The
Commission determined that neither an environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement was required. The Commission is not
aware of any information leading to a contrary conclusion.
H. Executive Orders
According to Executive Order 12988 (February 5, 1996), agencies
must state in clear language the preemptive effect, if any, of new
regulations. These amendments would slightly modify the flammability
standards for children's sleepwear under the FFA. The FFA provides
that, generally, when a flammability standard issued under the FFA is
in effect, ``no State or political subdivision of a State may establish
or continue in effect a flammability standard or other regulation for
such fabric, related material, or product if the standard or other
regulation is designed to protect against the same risk of occurrence
of fire'' as the FFA standard ``unless the State or political
subdivision standard or other regulation is identical'' to the FFA
standard. 15 U.S.C. 1203(a). Upon application to the Commission, a
State or local standard may be excepted from this preemptive effect if
the State or local standard (1) provides a higher degree of protection
from the risk of injury or illness than the PPPA standard and (2) does
not unduly burden interstate commerce.
Thus, the amendments modify the points specified for measuring
garments exempt from the sleepwear flammability standards that preempt
non-identical state or local flammability standards or regulations
which are designed to protect against the same risk of occurrence of
fire as the FFA flammability standards for children's sleepwear.
In accordance with Executive Order 12612 of October 26, 1987, the
Commission certifies that the amendments do not have sufficient
implications for federalism to warrant a Federalism Assessment.
List of Subjects in 16 CFR Parts 1615 and 1616
Clothing, Consumer protection, Flammable materials, Infants and
children, Labeling, Records, Sleepwear, Textiles, Warranties.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated above and pursuant to the authority of
section 4 of the Flammable Fabrics Act (15 U.S.C. 1193) the Commission
amends 16 CFR parts 1615 and 1616 as follows:
PART 1615--STANDARD FOR THE FLAMMABILITY OF CHILDREN'S SLEEPWEAR:
SIZES 0 THROUGH 6X
1. The authority citation for part 1615 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Sec. 4, 67 Stat. 112, as amended, 81 Stat. 569-70; 15
U.S.C. 1193.
2. Section 1615.1 is amended by revising the introductory language
and paragraphs (o) introductory text, (o)(1) and (o)(3) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1615.1 Definitions.
In addition to the definitions given in section 2 of the Flammable
Fabrics Act, as amended (15 U.S.C. 1191), the following definitions
apply for purposes of this Standard:
* * * * *
(o) Tight-fitting garment means a garment which:
(1)(i) In each of the sizes listed below does not exceed the
maximum dimension specified below for the chest,
[[Page 2839]]
waist, seat, upper arm, thigh, wrist, or ankle:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chest Waist Seat Upper arm Thigh Wrist Ankle
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 9-12 mos
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 48.3 48.3 48.3 14.3 26.7 10.5 13
(inches)....................... (19) (19) (19) (5\5/8\) (10\1/2\) (4\1/8\) (5\1/8\)
Size 12-18 mos
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 49.5 49.5 50.8 14.9 28.3 10.5 13.1
(inches)....................... (19\1/2\) (19\1/2\) (20) (5\5/8\) (11\1/4\) (4\1/8\) (5\1/8\)
Size 18-24 mos
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 52.1 50.8 53.3 15.6 29.5 11 13.6
(inches)....................... (20\1/2\) (20) (21) (6\1/8\) (11\5/8\) (4\1/4\) (5\3/8\)
Size 2
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 52.1 50.8 53.3 15.6 29.8 11.4 14
(inches)....................... (20\1/2\) (20) (21) (6\1/8\) (11\3/4\) (4\1/2\) (5\1/2\)
Size 3
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 53.3 52.1 56 16.2 31.4 11.7 14.9
(inches)....................... (21) (20\1/2\) (22) (6\3/8\) (12\3/8\) (4\5/8\) (5\7/8\)
Size 4
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 56 53.3 58.4 16.8 33.0 12.1 15.9
(inches)....................... (22) (21) (23) (6\5/8\) (13) (4\3/4\) (6\1/4\)
Size 5
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 58.4 54.6 61.0 17.5 34.6 12.4 16.8
(inches)....................... (23) (21\1/2\) (24) (6\7/8\) (13\5/8\) (4\7/8\) (6\5/8\)
Size 6
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 61.0 55.9 63.5 18.1 36.2 12.7 17.8
(inches)....................... (24) (22) (25) (7\1/8\) (14\1/4\) (5) (7)
Size 6X
Maximum dimension:.............
Centimeters.................... 62.9 57.2 65.4 18.7 37.8 13.0 18.7
(inches)....................... (24\3/4\) (22\1/2\) (25\3/4\) (7\3/8\) (14\7/8\) (5\1/8\) (7\3/8\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) Note: Measure the dimensions on the front of the garment. Lay
garment, right side out, on a flat, horizontal surface. Smooth out
wrinkles. Measure distances as specified below and multiply them by
two. Measurements should be equal to or less than the maximum
dimensions given in the standards.
(A) Chest--measure distance from arm pit to arm pit (A to B) as in
Diagram 1.
(B) Waist--See Diagram 1. One-piece garment, measure at the
narrowest location between arm pits and crotch (C to D). Two-piece
garment, measure width at both the bottom/ sweep of the upper piece (C
to D) and, as in Diagram 3, the top of the lower piece (C to D).
(C) Wrist--measure the width of the end of the sleeve (E to F), if
intended to extend to the wrist, as in Diagram 1.
(D) Upper arm--draw a straight line from waist/sweep D through arm
pit B to G. Measure down the sleeve fold from G to H. Refer to table
below for G to H distances for each size. Measure the upper arm of the
garment (perpendicular to the fold) from H to I as shown in Diagram 1.
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
[[Page 2840]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR19JA99.015
BILLING CODE 6355-01-C
Distance From Shoulder (G) to (H) for Upper Arm Measurement for Sizes 9 Months through 6x
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9-12 mo 12-18 mo 18-24 mo 2 3 4 5 6 6x
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.8 cm 21/8''... 6.6 cm 25/8'' 7.4 cm 27/8'' 7.4 cm 27/8'' 8.1 cm 31/4'' 8.8 cm 31/2'' 9.5 cm 31/4'' 10.3cm 4'' 11 cm 43/8''
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(E) Seat--Fold the front of the pant in half to find the bottom of
the crotch at J as in Diagram 2. The crotch seam and inseam intersect
at J. Mark point K on the crotch seam at 4 inches above and
perpendicular to the bottom of the crotch. Unfold the garment as in
Diagram 3. Measure the seat from L to M through K as shown.
(F) Thigh--measure from the bottom of the crotch (J) 1 inch down
the inseam to N as in Diagram 2. Unfold the garment and measure the
thigh from the inseam at N to O as shown in Diagram 3.
(G) Ankle--measure the width of the end of the leg (P to Q), if
intended to extend to the ankle, as in Diagram 3.
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR19JA99.016
[[Page 2841]]
BILLING CODE6355-01-C
* * * * *
(3) Has sleeves which do not exceed the maximum dimension for the
upper arm at any point between the upper arm and the wrist, and which
diminish in width gradually from the top of the shoulder (point G in
Diagram 1) to the wrist;
PART 1616--STANDARD FOR THE FLAMMABILITY OF CHILDREN'S SLEEPWEAR:
SIZES 7 THROUGH 14
1. The authority for part 1616 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 4, 67 Stat. 112, as amended, 81 Stat 569-570; 15
U.S.C. 1193.
2. Section 1616.2 is amended by revising the introductory language
and paragraphs (m) introductory text, (m)(1) and (m)(3) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1616.2 Definitions.
In addition to the definitions given in section 2 of the Flammable
Fabrics Act, as amended (15 U.S.C. 1191), the following definitions
apply for purposes of this Standard:
* * * * *
(m) Tight-fitting garment means a garment which:
(1)(i) In each of the sizes listed below does not exceed the
maximum dimension specified below for the chest, waist, seat, upper
arm, thigh, wrist, or ankle:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chest Waist Seat Upper arm Thigh Wrist Ankle
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 7 Boys \1\
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 63.5 58.4 66 18.7 37.2 13.0 18.7
(inches)....................... (25) (23) (26) (7\3/8\) (14\5/8\) (5\1/8\) (7\3/8\)
Size 7 Girls
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 63.5 58.4 67.3 18.7 38.7 13.0 18.7
(inches)....................... (25) (23) (26\1/2\) (7\3/8\) (15\1/4\) (5\1/8\) (7\3/8\)
Size 8 Boys \1\
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 66 59.7 67.3 19.4 38.4 13.3 19.1
(inches)....................... (26) (23\1/2\) (26\1/2\) (7\5/8\) (15\1/8\) (5\1/4\) (7\1/2\)
Size 8 Girls
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 66 59.7 71.1 19.4 41.3 13.3 19.1
(inches)....................... (26) (23\1/2\) (28) (7\5/8\) (16\1/4\) (5\1/4\) (7\1/2\)
Size 9 Boys \1\
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 68.6 61.0 69.2 20 39.7 13.7 19.4
(inches)....................... (27) (24) (27\1/4\) (7\7/8\) (15\5/8\) (5\3/8\) (7\5/8\)
Size 9 Girls
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 68.6 61.0 73.7 20 42.6 13.7 19.4
(inches)....................... (27) (24) (29) (7\7/8\) (16\3/4\) (5\3/8\) (7\5/8\)
Size 10 Boys \1\
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 71.1 62.2 71.1 20.6 41.0 14 19.7
(inches)....................... (28) (24\1/2\) (28) (8\1/8\) (16\1/8\) (5\1/2\) (7\3/4\)
Size 10 Girls
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 71.1 62.2 76.2 20.6 43.8 14 19.7
(inches)....................... (28) (24\1/2\) (30) (8\1/8\) (17\1/4\) (5\1/2\) (7\3/4\)
Size 11 Boys \1\
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 73.7 63.5 73.7 21 42.2 14.3 20
(inches)....................... (29) (25) (29) (8\1/4\) (16\5/8\) (5\5/8\) (7\7/8\)
Size 11 Girls
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 73.7 63.5 78.7 21 45.1 14.3 20
(inches)....................... (29) (25) (31) (8\1/4\) (17\3/4\) (5\5/8\) (7\7/8\)
Size 12 Boys \1\
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 76.2 64.8 76.2 21.6 43.5 14.6 20.3
(inches)....................... (30) (25\1/2\) (30) (8\1/2\) (17\1/8\) (5\3/4\) (8)
Size 12 Girls
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 76.2 64.8 81.3 21.6 46.7 14.6 20.3
(inches)....................... (30) (25\1/2\) (32) (8\1/2\) (18\1/2\) (5\3/4\) (8)
[[Page 2842]]
Size 13 Boys \1\
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 78.7 66 78.7 22.2 44.8 14.9 20.6
(inches)....................... (31) (26) (31) (8\3/4\) (17\5/8\) (5\7/8\) (8\1/8\)
Size 13 Girls
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 78.7 66 83.8 22.2 47.6 14.9 20.6
(inches)....................... (31) (26) (33) (8\3/4\) (18\3/4\) (5\7/8\) (8\1/8\)
Size 14 Boys \1\
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 81.3 67.3 81.3 22.9 46 15.2 21
(inches)....................... (32) (26\1/2\) (32) (9) (18\1/8\) (6) (8\1/4\)
Size 14 Girls
Maximum dimension:
Centimeters.................... 81.3 67.3 86.4 22.9 49.5 15.2 21
(inches)....................... (32) (26\1/2\) (34) (9) (19\1/2\) (6) (8\1/4\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Garments not explicitly labeled and promoted for wear by girls must not exceed these maximum dimensions.
(ii) Note: Measure the dimensions on the front of the garment. Lay
garment, right side out, on a flat, horizontal surface. Smooth out
wrinkles. Measure distances as specified below and multiply them by
two. Measurements should be equal to or less than the maximum
dimensions given in the standards.
(A) Chest--measure distance from arm pit to arm pit (A to B) as in
Diagram 1.
(B) Waist--See Diagram 1. One-piece garment, measure at the
narrowest location between arm pits and crotch (C to D). Two-piece
garment, measure width at both the bottom/sweep of the upper piece (C
to D) and, as in Diagram 3, the top of the lower piece (C to D).
(C) Wrist--measure the width of the end of the sleeve (E to F), if
intended to extend to the wrist, as in Diagram 1.
(D) Upper arm--draw a straight line from waist/sweep D through arm
pit B to G. Measure down the sleeve fold from G to H. Refer to table
below for G to H distances for each size. Measure the upper arm of the
garment (perpendicular to the fold) from H to I as shown in Diagram 1.
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR19JA99.017
BILLING CODE 6355-01-C
Distance From Shoulder (G) to (H) for Upper Arm Measurement for Sizes 7 Through 14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11.4 cm...... 11.7 cm 11.9 cm 12.5 cm 12.8 cm 13.1 cm 13.7 cm 14.2 cm
4\1/2\ ''.... 4\5/8\'' 4\3/4\'' 4\7/8\'' 5'' 5\1/8\'' 5\3/8\'' 5\5/8\''
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(E) Seat--Fold the front of the pant in half to find the bottom of
the crotch at J as in Diagram 2. The crotch seam and inseam intersect
at J. Mark point K on the crotch seam at 4 inches above and
perpendicular to the bottom of the
[[Page 2843]]
crotch. Unfold the garment as in Diagram 3. Measure the seat from L to
M through K as shown.
(F) Thigh--measure from the bottom of the crotch (J) 1 inch down
the inseam to N as in Diagram 2. Unfold the garment and measure the
thigh from the inseam at N to O as shown in Diagram 3.
(G) Ankle--measure the width of the end of the leg (P to Q), if
intended to extend to the ankle, as in Diagram 3.
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR19JA99.018
BILLING CODE 6355-01-C
* * * * *
(3) Has sleeves which do not exceed the maximum dimension for the
upper arm at any point between the upper arm and the wrist, and which
diminish in width gradually from the top of the shoulder (point G in
Diagram 1) to the wrist;
Dated: January 13, 1999
Sadye E. Dunn,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission
References
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:
1. Memorandum from Margaret Neily, Project Manager, Directorate
for Engineering, to the Commission, ``Children's Sleepwear
Flammability Standards--Technical and Enforcement Policy
Amendments--Analysis of Public Comments and Proposed Final Rules,''
January 5, 1999.
2. Memorandum from Michael A. Greene, Ph.D., Directorate for
Epidemiology and Health Sciences, ``Update to the Proposed Technical
Changes To Sleepwear Standard Briefing Package,'' December 18, 1998.
3. Memorandum from Margaret Neily, Project Manager, Directorate
for Engineering, to File, ``Analysis of Public Comments on Proposed
Technical Amendments to the Children's Sleepwear Amendments,''
November 30, 1998.
4. Memorandum from Terrance R. Karels, Directorate for Economic
Analysis, to Margaret Neily, ES, ``Sleepwear Market,'' December 10,
1998.
5. Memorandum from Terrance R. Karels, Directorate for Economic
Analysis, to Margaret Neily, ES, ``Revisions to the Children's
Sleepwear Amendments,'' December 10, 1998.
6. Memorandum from Carolyn Meiers, ESHF, to Margaret Neily, ES,
``Response to Comments on Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Regarding
Changes to the Amendments for Children's Sleepwear,'' December 3,
1998.
7. Memorandum from Linda Fansler, Division of Engineering, to
Margaret L. Neily, ES, ``Response to Comments on Technical
Amendments to the Children's Sleepwear Standards,'' November 25,
1998.
8. Memorandum from Marilyn Borsari, Compliance Officer, to
Margaret L. Neily, ES, ``Clarification of sleeve taper/short sleeve
garments and enforcement policy regarding sample size and
tolerance,'' December 7, 1998.
9. Memorandum from Marilyn Borsari, Compliance Officer, to
Margaret LO. Neily, Project Manager, ``Clarification of Proposed
Clarification of Statement of Policy,'' December 7, 1998.
[FR Doc. 99-1138 Filed 1-15-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
