Federal Register, Volume 61 Issue 175 (Monday, September 9, 1996)

[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 175 (Monday, September 9, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47634-47649]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-22697]

[[Page 47633]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part III

Consumer Product Safety Commission

_______________________________________________________________________

16 CFR Parts 1615 and 1616

Flammable Fabrics Act: Children's Sleepwear (Sizes 0-6x, 7-14)
Flammability Standards; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 175 / Monday, September 9, 1996 /
Rules and Regulations

[[Page 47634]]

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

16 CFR Parts 1615 and 1616

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 amendments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Commission issues final amendments of the flammability
standards for children's sleepwear in sizes 0 through 6X and sizes 7
through 14. The amendments issued below revise the definition of
``children's sleepwear'' in the standard for sizes 0 through 6X to
exclude from the requirements of that standard: garments sized for
infants nine months of age or younger; and tight-fitting sleepwear
garments. The amendments also revise the definition of ``children's
sleepwear'' in the standard for sizes 7 through 14 to exclude tight-
fitting sleepwear garments.^{1 The amendments define the term
``tight-fitting garment'' in terms of maximum dimensions at specified
locations on garments in sizes for children older than 9 months through
children's size 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ The Commission voted 2-1 to issue these amendments of the
children's sleepwear flammability standards, Chairman Ann Brown
dissenting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Commission issues these amendments because it finds that the
existing children's sleepwear standards are not limited to those
sleepwear garments which present an unreasonable risk of burn deaths
and injuries. The Commission concludes that the amendments will afford
consumers a wider selection of sleepwear garments for children without
diminishing the protection provided by the children's sleepwear
standards.

DATES: The amendments will become effective on January 1, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Fairall, Division of
Regulatory Management, Office of Compliance, Consumer Product Safety
Commission, Washington, DC 20207; telephone (301) 504-0400, extension
1369.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Provisions of Final Amendments

By publication of this notice of final rulemaking, the Commission
amends the Standard for the Flammability of Children's Sleepwear: Sizes
0 through 6X (16 CFR part 1615) and the Standard for the Flammability
of Children's Sleepwear: Sizes 7 through 14 (16 CFR part 1616). The
amendments issued below exempt sleepwear garments sized for children
nine months of age and younger and ``tight-fitting'' sleepwear garments
sized for children older than nine months to children's size 14 from
all requirements of the children's sleepwear flammability standards.
The term ``tight-fitting garment'' is defined by specifying maximum
dimensions for the chest, waist, seat, upper arm, thigh, wrist, and
ankle of the garment for each size from 9-12 months through children's
size 14.
The amendments issued below are similar to proposed amendments
published in the Federal Register of October 25, 1994 (59 FR 53616).
The final amendments differ from the proposal by:
Increasing the size of infant garments exempted from the
current standard for sizes 0 through 6X;
Changing some of the maximum dimensions specified for
tight-fitting garments in children's sizes 6X through 14; and
Eliminating the requirement for a permanent label on
tight-fitting sleepwear garments to advise the purchaser that those
garments are not flame-resistant.
The differences between the proposed and final amendment are
discussed in detail under the heading G. Comments on the Proposed
Amendments.
The amendments issued below become effective on January 1, 1997.
The Commission's finding that this effective date is in the public
interest and the reasons for that finding are set forth under the
heading H. Effective Date. Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
Register, the Commission has published a notice to continue through
March 9, 1998 a stay of enforcement for close-fitting garments which
are labeled and promoted as underwear.

B. Background

The Flammable Fabrics Act (FFA) (15 U.S.C. 1191 et seq.) authorizes
the issuance of flammability standards for products of wearing apparel
made from fabric to protect the public from unreasonable risks of the
occurrence of fire leading to death, injury, or significant property
damage.
In 1971, the Secretary of Commerce issued a flammability standard
for children's sleepwear in sizes 0 through 6X under the authority of
section 4 of the FFA (15 U.S.C. 1193). The standard was issued to
protect young children from death and serious burn injuries which had
been associated with ignition of sleepwear garments, such as nightgowns
and pajamas, by small open-flame sources. The standard for sleepwear in
sizes 0 through 6X became effective in 1972 and is now codified at 16
CFR part 1615.
In 1973, authority to issue flammability standards under provisions
of the FFA was transferred from the Department of Commerce to the
Consumer Product Safety Commission by section 30(b) of the Consumer
Product Safety Act (CPSA) (15 U.S.C. 2079(b)). In 1974, the Commission
issued a flammability standard for children's sleepwear in sizes 7
through 14. That standard became effective in 1975 and is now codified
at 16 CFR part 1616.
The safety requirements of the two standards are nearly identical.
They prescribe a test which requires that specimens of fabrics, seams,
and trim of children's sleepwear garments must self-extinguish after
exposure to a small open flame. Both standards require manufacturers of
children's sleepwear subject to their provisions to test prototypes of
sleepwear garments with acceptable results before beginning production.
Both standards also require manufacturers to sample and test garments
from regular production. Failure to comply with the sampling and
testing requirements of the standards is a violation of section 3 of
the FFA (15 U.S.C. 1192). The standards do not require or prohibit the
use of any particular type of fabric or garment design as long as the
manufacturer successfully completes the prescribed prototype and
production testing.

C. Garments Subject to the Sleepwear Standards

Both standards define the term ``children's sleepwear'' to mean
``any product of wearing apparel'' in the sizes covered by the standard
``such as nightgowns, pajamas, or similar or related items, such as
robes, intended to be worn primarily for sleeping or activities related
to sleeping.'' As originally issued and as amended below, both
standards exclude diapers and underwear from their coverage. See 16 CFR
1615.1(a) and 1616.2(a).
Under this definition, the coverage of the sleepwear standards is
not limited to children's pajamas, nightgowns, and robes, but also
includes other garments ``intended primarily for sleeping or activities
related to sleeping.'' 16 CFR 1615.1(a), 1616.2(a) During the time that
the standards have been in effect, the Commission staff has responded
to a large number of inquiries from manufacturers and importers of
children's garments about whether particular products are ``children's

[[Page 47635]]

sleepwear'' subject to the standards; or ``underwear,'' which is
specifically excluded from the standards; or ``daywear,'' ``playwear,''
or other categories of non-sleepwear garments, each of which is outside
the scope of the standards.
To provide guidance to the children's garment industry on the scope
of the sleepwear standards, in 1984 the Commission issued policy
statements which discuss the factors the Commission will consider when
determining whether a garment is intended to be worn primarily for
sleeping or related activities.(1) ^{2 These policy statements are
codified at 16 CFR 1615.64 and 1616.65. Additionally, the staff
developed a pamphlet describing and illustrating various styles of
sleepwear and non-sleepwear garments. This pamphlet was revised from
time to time, most recently in 1989.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ Numbers in parentheses identify reference documents in the
List of Relevant Documents at the end of this notice. Requests for
inspection of any of these documents should be made at the
Commission's Public Reading Room, 4330 East-West Highway, room 419,
Bethesda Maryland 20814, or by calling the Office of the Secretary
at (301) 504-0800.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

During the past several years, many consumers have expressed a
desire to obtain children's garments made from 100 percent untreated
cotton fabric for use as sleepwear. Although the standards do not
prohibit any specific type of fabric in the production of children's
sleepwear, 100 per cent cotton fabric cannot pass the flammability
tests in the standards unless treated with a flame retardant. The
Commission also received information indicating that many parents were
dressing their children in underwear, large T-shirts, or other garments
made of 100 percent untreated cotton rather than traditional sleepwear
manufactured to comply with the sleepwear flammability standards.
These actions by manufacturers and consumers resulted in an
increasing number of children sleeping in garments which did not comply
with the children's sleepwear standards. In view of this trend, the
Commission decided in 1991 to re-examine the scope of the children's
sleepwear standards and to consider amending the definitions of the
term ``children's sleepwear'' in the two standards. The Commission
began this rulemaking proceeding in 1993.

D. Statutory Provisions

Section 4 of the FFA (15 U.S.C. 1193) authorizes the Commission to
issue or amend a flammability standard for a product of wearing apparel
if the Commission finds that a new or amended standard is needed to
protect the public against the unreasonable risk of the occurrence of
fire leading to death, injury, or significant property damage.
Section 4(g) of the FFA (15 U.S.C. 1193(g)) requires publication in
the Federal Register of an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR)
to begin a proceeding for the issuance or amendment of a flammability
standard. The ANPR must describe the product and the risk of injury
under consideration; summarize the regulatory alternatives being
considered; provide information about existing standards which may be
relevant; invite interested parties to submit an existing standard to
the Commission for publication as the proposed standard or a statement
of intention to develop or modify a voluntary standard to address the
risk of injury under consideration; and solicit written comments on the
risk of injury and regulatory alternatives under consideration.
If the Commission decides to continue the proceeding after
consideration of comments and submissions received in response to the
ANPR, section 4(i) of the FFA (15 U.S.C. 1193(i)) requires publication
in the Federal Register of a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR). The
NPR must set forth the text of the proposed standard or amendment and a
preliminary regulatory analysis containing a discussion of the
anticipated benefits and costs of the proposed rule and other
regulatory alternatives considered by the Commission. Section 4(d) of
the FFA (15 U.S. C. 1193(d)) specifies that the NPR must provide
interested persons the opportunity to submit written comments and to
request a public hearing for oral presentation of data and opinions
concerning the proposal.
To issue a final standard or amendment, section 4(j) of the FFA (15
U.S.C. 1193(j)) requires the Commission to publish a notice of final
rulemaking setting forth the text of the final rule and the
Commission's final regulatory analysis of costs, benefits, and
regulatory alternatives. Additionally, section 4(b) of the FFA (15
U.S.C. 1193(b)) requires the notice of final rulemaking to contain
findings that the standard or amendment is needed to protect the public
from the unreasonable risk of death, injury, or significant property
damage from fires associated with the product under consideration; is
reasonable, technologically practicable, and appropriate; and is
limited to those fabrics or products which have been determined to
present an unreasonable risk of death, injury, or significant property
damage.

E. Publication of ANPR

The Commission began this proceeding by publication of an ANPR in
the Federal Register of January 13, 1993 (58 FR 4111).(4) The ANPR
identified the products under consideration as children's sleepwear
garments in sizes 0 through 14, and the risk of injury as death or
personal injury from fires resulting from ignition of children's
sleepwear by small open-flame sources.
The ANPR also described the regulatory alternatives being
considered by the Commission. Briefly summarized, the alternatives
were:
(1) Amend the children's sleepwear standards to exempt tight-
fitting sleepwear garments and sleepwear garments in infant sizes.
Children's sleepwear garments exempted from the requirements of the
sleepwear standard would be subject to the provisions of the Standard
for the Flammability of Clothing Textiles (16 CFR Part 1610). That
standard prohibits the manufacture, importation, or sale of garments
which are ``dangerously flammable because of rapid and intense
burning,'' but does not require garments to self-extinguish when
exposed to a small open-flame ignition source.
(2) Issue an enforcement policy statement to announce that the
Commission will not apply the requirements of the children's sleepwear
standards to tight-fitting sleepwear garments and garments in infant
sizes if those garments met the requirements of the clothing textiles
flammability standard.
The ANPR also contained information about other flammability
standards for children's sleepwear; solicited information about
relevant voluntary standards and statements of intention to develop or
modify a voluntary standard; and invited interested persons to submit
written comments on the ANPR.
On the same date the Commission published the ANPR, the Commission
announced that it would not enforce the children's sleepwear standards
in cases involving garments currently being used as sleepwear if those
garments are skin-tight or nearly skin-tight, relatively free of
ornamentation, made from fabrics such as rib knit, interlock knit, or
waffle knit, and labeled as ``underwear.'' 58 FR 4078(5)
In response to the ANPR, the Commission received more than 2,100
written comments from individuals, firms, and organizations. (More than
a third of the comments were identical form letters with space for the

[[Page 47636]]

commenter's name.) Comments were received from all 50 states, the
District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and from
United States citizens living abroad.(3), (6), (7) Almost all of these
comments favored modification of the standards to exempt some or all
children's sleepwear garments from their requirements.
In addition to the information provided by commenters, the
Commission also considered information developed or obtained by the
Commission staff. That information included injury data(10);
information about flammability characteristics of various fabrics and
garments(8), (11); and a review of children's sleepwear flammability
standards issued by Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United
Kingdom.(9), (11)
From its review of burn injury data, the Commission estimates that
on average, about 1,150 children younger than 15 years of age were
treated each year in hospital emergency rooms for burn injuries
associated with clothing during the period from 1980 through 1993. Of
that total, the Commission estimates that each year, about 90 burn
injuries to children were associated with sleepwear, about 860 were
associated with day wear, and about 200 were associated with other
types of clothing or unspecified types of clothing.(10)
On average, each year about four children younger than fifteen
years of age died from fires associated with clothing of all types.(10)
Available information also shows that most thermal burn injuries
associated with sleepwear involved females, whereas most burn injuries
associated with day wear involved males. Thermal burn injuries from
nightwear were usually associated with nightgowns or pajamas that
probably were not tight-fitting.(10)
In 1978, the Commission staff reviewed information about deaths and
injuries associated with sleepwear to children younger than one year of
age. Ten cases involved injuries associated with sleepwear. However,
nine of these cases involved whole-house conflagrations, and the other
involved a home-made garment.(11) Thus, none of these cases involved
risks of injury which the sleepwear standards were intended to address.

F. Proposed Amendments

After consideration of comments received in response to the ANPR,
information compiled by the staff, and information presented at an oral
briefing by the staff, the Commission decided to propose amending the
children's sleepwear standards.
The Commission published a notice to propose amending the
children's sleepwear standards by exempting infant garments and tight-
fitting garments from their requirements on October 25, 1994. (59 FR
53616)(20)
Section 4 of the FFA (15 U.S.C. 1193) authorizes the agency to
issue or amend mandatory requirements for the flammability of wearing
apparel only when such requirements are ``needed to adequately protect
the public against unreasonable risk of the occurrence of fire leading
to death, injury, or significant property damage.'' (Emphasis added.)
Section 4 of the FFA also requires that in order to issue or amend a
standard, the Commission must find, among other things, that the
standard or amendment is ``limited'' to include only those garments
which have been determined to present an ``unreasonable risk'' of burn
deaths or injuries, or significant property damage. Consequently, the
Commission concluded that if the children's sleepwear standards
currently apply to garments which do not present an unreasonable risk
of fire leading to death, injury, or significant property damage, the
scope of the standards could be narrowed to remove those garments from
the coverage of the standards.
That notice proposed to amend the children's sleepwear flammability
standards by exempting:
(1) Garments intended for children six months of age and younger
from the standard for sizes 0 through 6X; and
(2) ``Tight-fitting'' sleepwear garments from the standard for
sizes 0 through 6X and the standard for sizes 7 through 14.
The proposed exemption for infant garments was stated in terms of
maximum dimensions for the chest and length of the garment. The maximum
dimensions specified were selected by considering body sizes of
children approximately six months old, as set forth in ASTM standard D
4910-89, ``Standard Tables of Body Measurements for Infants, Ages 0 to
18 months,'' published by ASTM (formerly the American Society for
Testing and Materials). (12)
The proposed amendments also required that an exempted infant
garment must be labeled to indicate that the garment is intended for
use by a child six months of age or younger.
In addition, the proposed amendments stated that garments in sizes
for infants six months of age or younger must meet the applicable
requirements of the flammability standards for clothing textiles and
vinyl plastic film (16 CFR parts 1610 and 1611).
The proposed amendments defined the term ``tight-fitting garment''
by specifying maximum dimensions for the following parts of the
garment: Chest, waist, seat, upper arm, thigh, wrist, and ankle. The
proposed amendments also required that an exempted tight-fitting
garment must be labeled to indicate its size. The maximum dimensions
specified by the proposed amendments for tight-fitting garments in
sizes for children six to 24 months old were selected by considering
body sizes of children approximately six months old set forth in a
proposed revision of ASTM standard D 4910. (12) The proposed maximum
dimensions for tight-fitting garments in sizes 2 through 6X were based
on dimensions specified in a draft ASTM standard tentatively designated
``Standard Table of Body Measurements for Pre-School Children Sizes 2--
6X/7.''(12) Maximum dimensions specified by the proposed amendments for
tight-fitting garments in sizes 7 through 14 were based on a report of
an anthropometric study of children ranging in age from infancy to the
age of 18 years, conducted in 1977 by the University of Michigan. (12)
To be eligible for the exemption from the requirements of the
children's sleepwear standards, the proposal specified that a tight-
fitting garment be labeled to indicate its size. The proposed
amendments also required that when offered for sale to consumers,
exempted garments in sizes for 6-to-9 months and larger must be clearly
and conspicuously labeled with a statement to advise consumers that the
garment is not flame-resistant and should be tight-fitting for the
safety of the child.
Finally, the proposed amendments required that sleepwear garments
exempted from the flammability requirements as ``tight-fitting''
garments must comply with applicable provisions of the flammability
standards for clothing textiles and vinyl plastic film (16 CFR parts
1610 and 1611).
In a separate notice also published on October 25, 1994 (59 FR
53584), the Commission extended until further notice the stay of
enforcement of the children's sleepwear standards published in 1993 for
cases involving skin-tight or nearly skin-tight garments similar in
design and manufacture to underwear, provided those garments were
labeled and marketed as underwear. (21)

G. Comments on the Proposed Amendments

In response to the proposal to amend the sleepwear standards, the

[[Page 47637]]

Commission received 39 written comments. Some commenters submitted more
than one comment.(22)-(61) Commenters included individual consumers,
students, a physician, a retired Federal employee, manufacturers and
importers of children's sleepwear and other children's garments, an
association of manufacturers of children's sleepwear, the American Burn
Association, the Coalition for American Trauma Care, Fire Prevention
Canada, the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the National
Cotton Council of America, and the Learn Not to Burn Foundation of the
National Fire Protection Association.
Additionally, on April 25, 1995, members of the Commission staff
conducted a public meeting with manufacturers and importers of
children's sleepwear and other children's garments, consumers, and
other interested persons to discuss the proposed amendments.(81)
The following is a summary of the principal issues raised by the
written comments and at the public meeting, and the Commission's
resolution of those issues.

1. Revocation of the Standards

A comment from one manufacturer of children's garments expresses
the view that available injury information does not establish that any
children's sleepwear garments present an unreasonable risk of burn
deaths or injuries to children. This comment urges the Commission to
revoke the standards in their entirety. (25)
When the Department of Commerce issued the flammability standard
for sizes 0 through 6X, it considered injury data collected by the
National Bureau of Standards (now the National Institute of Standards
and Technology) through the Flammable Fabrics Accident Case and Testing
System (FFACTS). From 1967 through January 1973, FFACTS obtained
information about 434 cases involving burn injuries associated with
sleepwear, 101 of which involved children younger than six years of
age. Although FFACTS incidents do not constitute a probability sample,
they document instances in which children were injured in fires
involving sleepwear before issuance of the standard for sizes 0 through
6X. (70)
Unlike FFACTS, the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System
(NEISS) gathers information about injuries by using a probability
sample. For that reason, NEISS data can be reliably projected into
national estimates of injuries associated with products. From burn
injuries to children associated with children's sleepwear during the
years 1980 through 1994 reported by NEISS, the Commission estimates
that during that time period, on average, about 90 children younger
than 15 years of age were treated in hospital emergency rooms each year
for burns associated with children's sleepwear. (70)
The estimated number of burn injuries associated with children's
sleepwear in the years following issuance of the sleepwear standards
has been relatively low. This indicates that the sleepwear standards
have been relatively successful. Therefore, the Commission does not
believe that available injury information supports revocation of the
children's sleepwear standards in their entirety.
A comment from one consumer questions whether use of children's
sleepwear manufactured from man-made fabrics to comply with the
sleepwear standards may increase the risk of sudden-infant-death
syndrome (SIDS). (22) The Commission has reviewed medical publications
concerning SIDS and has found no references which implicate a specific
type of fabric or clothing as a contributing factor to SIDS. (73)

2. Exemption for Infant Garments

The proposed amendments contained provisions to exempt garments for
infants six months of age and younger from the requirements of the
sleepwear standard for sizes 0 through 6X. The proposed amendments
limited the exemption for infant garments to those not exceeding
specified dimensions for the chest and overall length of the garment.
Those dimensions were selected using information about the body size of
children approximately six months old.
Before proposing that exemption, the Commission reviewed
information about burn deaths and injuries to children one year of age
and younger associated with sleepwear. That information included a
study completed in 1978 of 66 burn injuries to children younger than
one year old associated with clothing. In ten cases, the clothing
involved was specifically identified as sleepwear. Nine of those cases
involved whole-house fires; the other involved a home-made garment. The
Commission concluded that none of these cases involved risks of injury
which the sleepwear standard was intended to address. (11)
The Commission also considered information about children's
physical and mental development. That information shows that most
children are not capable of moving themselves until they are about
seven months old. For that reason, children six months of age and
younger are not likely to come within range of small open-flame
ignition sources when an adult is not present. (12)
A comment from the Children's Sleepwear Coalition (a group of
children's sleepwear manufacturers and suppliers) objects to the
proposal to exempt sleepwear garments for infants six months of age and
younger. This comment states that infants are unable to defend
themselves from risks of burn injury, and could be exposed to ignition
sources by adults. Such exposure could occur if adults smoke in their
presence, or place them near a kitchen range or other open flame
source. (30) Comments from two individual manufacturers of children's
sleepwear object to the proposed exemption for similar reasons. (45),
(54)
Comments from two manufacturers of children's sleepwear, an
importer of children's garments, and the National Cotton Council urge
the Commission to expand the scope of the exemption to include garments
for children one year of age and younger. (25), (28), (33), (47) In
support of this position, the comments cite the absence of injuries
associated with sleepwear to children younger than one year of age.
Comments from two manufacturers and one importer of children's
garments state that the proposed amendment to exempt infant sleepwear
garments was not consistent with industry practices for the sizing of
infant clothing. (23), (35), (53) Two of these comments state that the
maximum dimensions based on body measurements of children six months of
age would have the effect of exempting some, but not all, infant
garments. Garments in sizes 0 to three months (or infants ``small''
size) and three to six months (or infants ``medium'' size) would be
exempted by the proposal, but not garments in sizes six to nine months
(or infants ``large'' size). These comments recommend that the
exemption apply to garments intended for infants nine months of age and
younger, thereby exempting all sleepwear garments in infant sizes.
(35), (53)
A comment from one manufacturer of children's garments observed
that infants grow rapidly. This comment states that a garment having
the maximum dimensions for exemption as an ``infant garment'' in the
proposed amendment would fit a six-month-old child for only a short
period of time. This comment states that most parents purchase
children's garments with the expectation that their children will be
able to wear them for a reasonable period of time. (23)

[[Page 47638]]

At the Commission's public meeting on April 25, 1995, several
manufacturers of children's garments stated that parents typically buy
garments one size larger than the age of their children.(81)
After consideration of all of these comments, the Commission
concludes that the proposed exemption of ``infant garments'' should be
included in the final amendments, with some modification. The amendment
of the standard for sizes 0 through 6X issued below defines the term
``infant garment'' as one which is ``sized for a child nine months of
age or younger.''
The Commission proposed to exempt garments for children six-months
of age and younger because information about child development
indicates that until they reach the age of seven months, most infants
are not capable of moving by themselves.(12) Consequently, infants six
months of age and younger are at minimal risk of exposing their
clothing to an ignition source. And, available injury information
reveals an absence of burn injuries associated with sleepwear to
children younger than one year of age which might have been prevented
or reduced by the sleepwear standard.(10), (11)
The Commission recognizes that many parents and other adults
purchase infant garments one or two sizes larger than the age of the
intended wearer, due in part to the rapid rate at which infants grow.
By revising the definition of ``infant garment'' to include garments
sized for children nine months of age and younger, the amendment issued
below exempts garments in sizes frequently purchased for children
approximately six months of age and younger. Exemption of garments
sized for infants nine months of age and younger also makes allowance
for those infants who are slightly larger than the average six-month
old, and assures that a garment purchased for a six-month old will fit
the infant for a reasonable length of time. Additionally, this
modification of the proposed amendment makes the size of exempted
``infant garments'' more compatible with the range of sizes used by
manufacturers of infant garments.
The amendments issued below specify that the maximum length for a
one-piece infant garment shall not exceed 64.8 centimeters (25.75
inches). The maximum dimension for the length of either piece of a two-
piece infant garment is 40 centimeters (15.75 inches). These dimensions
were selected by considering body sizes of children approximately nine
months old set forth in ASTM standard D 4910-95 ``Standard Tables of
Body Measurements for Infants, Sizes 0 to 24 months,'' published by
ASTM (formerly the American Society for Testing and Materials). No
maximum dimension is specified for the chest of an infant garment
exempted by the final amendments because the safety of infant garments
is not dependent on a tight fit.
Exempted garments must comply with the flammability standards for
clothing textiles and vinyl plastic film (16 CFR parts 1610 and 1611),
and bear a label stating the size of the garment in terms of months of
age. If the label is not visible when the garment is offered for sale,
the size of the garment, in months, must appear legibly on the package.

3. Exemption for Tight-Fitting Garments

Comments from the National Cotton Council (33), (40), (48), five
firms which manufacture or import children's sleepwear or other
children's garments (28), (31), (34), (35), (42), (53), and a student
research group (29) generally support issuance of final amendments to
exempt tight-fitting children's sleepwear garments from the
requirements of the sleepwear flammability standards. (Some of these
comments recommend changes to specific provisions of the proposal,
which are discussed below.)
Comments supporting an exemption for tight-fitting garments made
from fabrics which are not flame-resistant state that those garments
provide protection to children from unreasonable risks of burn injuries
for the following reasons:
(1) Incident data do not show burn injuries associated with tight-
fitting sleepwear;
(2) If exposed to an ignition source, tight-fitting garments are
not easily ignited because the body absorbs some of the heat from the
ignition source;
(3) If these garments are ignited, the wearer becomes aware of
ignition almost immediately; and
(4) If ignited, these garments burn slowly because oxygen to
support combustion is available on only one side of the garment.
Comments supporting issuance of final amendments for tight-fitting
garments also observe that flammability standards for children's
sleepwear in effect in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand exempt tight-
fitting pajamas.(33), (40), (48)
In addition, a study cited in the proposal shows that no burn
deaths associated with children's sleepwear have been reported in
Canada since 1987.(33), (63)
Comments from the Children's Sleepwear Coalition (30), (58), five
individual manufacturers of children's sleepwear (45), (46), (54)-(56),
(59), a student research group (27), the Learn Not to Burn Foundation
of the National Fire Protection Association (32), (78), the
International Association of Fire Fighters (36), Fire Prevention Canada
(37), and the Coalition for American Trauma Care (60) assert that the
current low rate of children's deaths associated with ignition of
clothing is evidence that the children's sleepwear standards have been
effective. These comments express concern that exempting tight-fitting
sleepwear garments and thereby allowing them to be made from fabrics
which are not flame-retardant will expose children to an increased risk
of burn deaths and injuries.
Before proposing the amendments, the Commission considered
available data which show a measurable reduction in burn deaths
associated with all types of clothing, including children's sleepwear,
during the past 20 years. (10), (11). Additionally, information about
burn injuries associated with all types of children's clothing from
1980 through 1994 shows that children's sleepwear has been associated
with a relatively small proportion of those injuries. From its
evaluation of this injury information, the Commission concludes that
the children's sleepwear standards have contributed to the relatively
low level of reported burn injuries associated with sleepwear. However,
existing injury information does not support the assertion that
amendment of the standards to exempt tight-fitting garments made from
fabrics which do not pass the flammability test in the children's
sleepwear standards will expose children to a greater risk of burn
injuries.
Flammability standards for children's sleepwear issued by Canada
and three other countries exempt tight-fitting garments. In 1993, the
government of Canada advised the Commission that a proposed five-year
study of burn injuries to assess the effectiveness of the Canadian
sleepwear standard was discontinued before the end of the five-year
period because of a lack of reported burn cases.(63)
When the Commission began this proceeding in 1993, it also
announced that it would not enforce the children's sleepwear standards
in cases involving garments which are skin-tight or nearly skin-tight
and are similar in fabric and design to underwear.(5) That stay was
continued at the time the Commission published the proposed amendments
of the standards.(21) The garments covered by the stay of enforcement
have somewhat larger dimensions than the ``tight-fitting'' garments
defined in the proposed amendments.

[[Page 47639]]

On the basis of injuries reported to the National Electronic Injury
Surveillance System (NEISS), the Commission estimates that about 2,520
children were treated in hospital emergency rooms for burn injuries
associated with clothing during the years 1993 and 1994. During the
years 1991 and 1992, the Commission estimates that approximately 2,760
children were treated in hospital emergency rooms for burn injuries
associated with clothing.(62) Thus, burn injuries associated with the
general category of children's clothing have not increased since the
Commission issued the stay of enforcement.
During the years 1993 and 1994, the Commission received no reports
of any burn injury to a child younger than 15 years of age associated
with a garment which was identified as one covered by the stay of
enforcement. (62)
Additionally, a Canadian study of 174 burn injuries cases
associated with clothing involving children nine years of age or
younger found that closeness of fit and the presence or absence of an
adult at the time of injury were significantly associated with the
severity of the burn injury. Fiber content was not included as a
variable in this study. Burns tended to be more severe in cases
associated with loose-fitting clothing and the absence of an adult.(11)
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that amending the standards
to exempt tight-fitting sleepwear garments made from fabrics which are
not flame-resistant will not create an unreasonable risk of burn
injuries to children.(8), (10), (11), (62), (65)

4. Definition of ``Tight-Fitting Garment''

The proposed amendments defined the term ``tight-fitting garment''
as one which did not exceed specified dimensions in the chest, seat,
upper arm, thigh, wrist, and ankle for each size ranging from 6-to-9
months through children's size 14.
A comment from one manufacturer of children's garments observes
that the maximum dimensions specified for size 6 in the proposal were
larger than the maximum dimensions specified for size 7.(28) The
Commission agrees that the maximum dimensions for size 7 should be
larger than the maximum dimensions for size 6. In the amendments issued
below, maximum dimensions increase continuously from the smallest to
the largest sizes of garments.
Other comments express the view that the maximum dimensions
specified in the proposal for all sizes are too small. One manufacturer
states that the amendments should exempt garments which fit
``reasonably close to the body,'' such as children's polo pajamas,
rather than define the exempted garments by maximum dimensions intended
to result in a ``skin-tight'' fit.(25) An importer suggests that the
maximum dimensions specified for chest, seat, and thigh in all sizes
should be increased by one or two inches.(35)
Before proposing amendments to exempt tight-fitting garments, the
Commission reviewed technical literature indicating that tight-fitting
garments are less likely to contact an ignition source, and if ignited
to burn less rapidly, than loose-fitting clothing.(8) The Commission
also considered burn injury data indicating that injuries associated
with close-fitting garments are generally less severe than those
associated with loose-fitting garments.(11)
Research on the flammability of wearing apparel indicates that fit
and fiber are both important factors affecting a garment's
flammability. The existing provisions of the children's sleepwear
standards address the risk of burn injury by specifying a test for
flame-resistance. Garments made from fabrics which pass the
flammability test of the children's sleepwear standards do not present
an unreasonable risk of injury, regardless of their fit. Similarly,
tight-fitting garments exempted by the amendments issued below do not
present an unreasonable risk of burn injury, even if they are made from
fabrics which do not pass the flammability test of the children's
sleepwear standards.
Section 4(b) of the FFA requires that an amendment of a
flammability standard must be ``stated in objective terms.'' The term
``tight-fitting garment'' in the amendments issued below is defined by
maximum dimensions at specified locations on the garment for each size.
Although these dimensions include adjustments to provide a continuous
increase in dimensions from the smallest to largest sizes, the
dimensions and points of measurement are substantially similar to those
in the notice of proposed rulemaking.
The final amendments also include language in the definition of
``tight-fitting garment'' to assure that the garment will conform
closely to the contour of the body. Provisions of Secs. 1615.1(o)(3)
through (7) and 1616.2(m)(3) through (7) require that the torso of such
garments must fit closely from chest to waist and from waist to seat;
that the sleeves must taper from upper arm to wrist; and that the legs
must taper from thigh to ankle.
Comments from three manufacturers of children's garments recommend
adjustment of the maximum dimensions to allow for fabric shrinkage
after laundering.(25), (28), (31) One of these comments states that if
the maximum dimensions do not include an allowance for shrinkage,
manufacturers may be required to wash garments before offering them for
sale or to use other means to control shrinkage. This comment states
that those measures would be ``expensive,'' but does not provide
quantitative information about the extent of the additional costs.(28)
At the public meeting on April 25, 1995, one importer recommended that
the Commission allow an additional 10 per cent to the maximum
dimensions for shrinkage.(81)
The maximum dimensions for ``tight-fitting garments'' in the
amendments issued below have not been increased to allow for shrinkage
after laundering or to provide a margin of tolerance for manufacturing
variation. Garment shrinkage depends on the type of fiber or fiber-
blend, method of construction, and finishing process used in the
production of the fabric, and the laundering conditions to which the
garment is exposed after wearing. Increasing the maximum dimensions to
allow for shrinkage could reduce the likelihood that garments will be
tight-fitting when worn by children.(72)
Garments made from knit fabrics have the ability to stretch and
adapt to the shape of the body. For this reason, they are suitable,
although not necessarily required, for production of ``tight-fitting
garments'' exempted from the children's sleepwear standards by the
amendments issued below.(72) Additionally, as indicated by one comment,
various means are available to manufacturers to control shrinkage,
although they may result in higher production costs.(28)

5. Labeling

The proposed amendments included in the definition of ``tight-
fitting garment'' a requirement that when displayed for sale to
consumers, the garment must be clearly and conspicuously labeled with
the statement: ``Garment is not flame-resistant. For child's safety,
garment should be tight fitting. Loose-fitting clothing is more likely
to contact an ignition source and burn.''
Comments from a manufacturer and an importer of children's garments
stated that the proposed labeling statement was too lengthy.(25), (35)
At the Commission's public meeting on April 25, 1995, manufacturers
also expressed the view that the proposed labeling statement was too
negative.(81)
A comment from the National Cotton Council states that children's
garments currently bear labels stating size, information about the
manufacturer,

[[Page 47640]]

fiber content, country of origin, and care instructions. This comment
states that the addition of the language specified by the proposed
amendments would require an unsuitably large label for tight-fitting
sleepwear garments.(33)
The same comment suggests that an educational effort to provide
safety information to consumers about tight-fitting sleepwear by use of
hang tags on garments and signs at retail stores would be a less
expensive way to convey safety information about tight-fitting
sleepwear garments to consumers. At the public meeting in April 1995
and in a subsequent written comment, the National Cotton Council stated
that it would work cooperatively with the Commission to develop an
information and education campaign to inform consumers that garment
design is an important factor in burn injuries associated with
children's sleepwear, and that snug-fitting sleepwear that fits close
to the body is a safer choice than loose-fitting garments.(48), (81)
Individual manufacturers of children's garments have also indicated
their willingness to participate in such an effort.
The amendments issued below do not include the proposed labeling
statement for tight-fitting sleepwear garments exempted from the
flammability requirements of the children's sleepwear standards. The
Commission concludes that a well-designed and broadly disseminated
information and education campaign, developed with guidance from the
Commission, will be a better means to inform consumers about
appropriate selection and use of the tight-fitting garments exempted
from the sleepwear standards by the amendments issued below. Such a
campaign can help consumers understand why sleepwear garments which are
not flame-resistant are being offered for sale and the importance of a
tight fit for those garments; that other children's sleepwear garments
which are not tight-fitting but are manufactured to comply with the
sleepwear standards remain available for purchase; and that loose-
fitting garments which are not flame-resistant (such as those made from
untreated cotton and cotton blends) should not be used for children's
sleepwear.
The Commission expects that point-of-sale materials directed to
consumers, including hang-tags on garments, labeling statements on
packaging, and store signs, will be an important component of the
sleepwear industry's information and education effort. The Commission
also expects that another part of this effort will be directed at
retailers to emphasize the necessity for separation of children's
nonsleepwear garments such as underwear, daywear, and playwear from
sleepwear garments manufactured to comply with the standards and tight-
fitting sleepwear garments exempted from those standards by the
amendments issued below. Separation of non-sleepwear garments from
children's sleepwear is necessary to assure that consumers will not
inadvertently purchase a loose-fitting, non-sleepwear garment which is
not flame-resistant when shopping for children's sleepwear.

H. Effective Date

Section 4(b) of the FFA (15 U.S.C. 1293(b)) provides that an
amendment of a flammability standard shall become effective twelve
months after publication of the notice of final rulemaking unless the
Commission makes a finding for good cause that an earlier or later
effective date is in the public interest and publishes the reasons for
that finding.
On May 23, 1996, members of the Commission staff met with
representatives of manufacturers, importers, and retailers of
children's garments, the National Cotton Council, and other interested
parties to discuss technical issues related to the Commission's
decision to amend the children's sleepwear standards. At this meeting,
representatives of the National Cotton Council and some manufacturers
claimed that the amendments should become effective upon publication.
They observed that the amendments do not impose any additional
requirements on firms, but instead exempt certain garments from the
requirements of the children's sleepwear standards that do not present
an unreasonable risk of burn injury. These proponents of an immediate
effective date asserted that many firms are able to begin marketing the
newly exempted sleepwear garments within a short time after issuance of
the final amendments.
Representatives of several importers claimed that their businesses
would need several months or more after publication of the final
amendments to draft specifications, place orders, and receive
merchandise from overseas suppliers. Similarly, representatives of some
domestic manufacturers stated that they would need time to devise
specifications for fabrics, place orders with fabric suppliers, and
receive fabrics to be used in production of the sleepwear garments that
will be exempted from the requirements of the sleepwear standards.
After considering all information concerning an appropriate
effective date, the Commission concludes that the amendments issued
below shall become effective on January 1, 1997. The Commission finds
for good cause that a short delay in the effective date, less than the
one year specified by the FFA, is in the public interest because it
balances the need of some firms for a period of transition in which to
make those adjustments necessary to market the sleepwear garments
exempted by the amendments with the interest of other firms in
marketing those products as soon as possible.
The Commission is aware that many of the firms favoring a delayed
effective date are producers or importers of children's sleepwear
manufactured to comply with the sleepwear flammability standards. The
Commission recognizes the important role which complying sleepwear
plays in preventing burn injuries. The regulations governing the
flammability of material used to make children's sleepwear garments
other than garments covered by these amendments will continue to apply
to garments such as robes and nightgowns. However, a delay in the
effective date of the amendments issued below beyond January 1, 1997,
postpones the availability of tight-fitting cotton and cotton-blend
sleepwear garments, and prolongs the period during which consumers
seeking untreated cotton sleepwear for their children may purchase
alternative garments which pose greater flammability risks. For these
reasons, the Commission concludes that an effective date of January 1,
1997, is appropriate to: (1) Provide a transition period for
manufacturers and importers of complying sleepwear garments who wish to
sell garments permitted by these amendments; and (2) allow all
companies to take advantage of the amendments within a reasonable
period of time.
The Commission has also extended the stay of enforcement of the
sleepwear standards for 18 months for close-fitting garments labeled
and promoted as underwear. The Commission has taken this action to
minimize costs to manufacturers, distributors, and retailers of
children's sleepwear and other garments which may result from
adjustments of inventories of both sleepwear and non-sleepwear garments
which are subject to the stay of enforcement.(67)

I. Final Regulatory Analysis and Required Findings

Section 4(j) of the FFA (15 U.S.C. 1193(j)) requires that a notice
of final rulemaking must include a final regulatory analysis
containing:

[[Page 47641]]

A discussion of potential benefits and costs of the final
rule, including those which cannot be quantified, and an identification
of those persons likely to receive its benefits and bear its costs;
A description of any alternatives to the final rule which
were considered by the Commission together with a summary description
of their potential benefits and costs and a brief explanation of why
these alternatives were not chosen; and
A summary of significant issues raised by comments on the
preliminary analysis, and the Commission's assessment of those issues.
Additionally, section 4(j) requires that the final rule
must include the Commission's findings that:
The benefits expected from the rule bear a reasonable
relationship to its costs;
It imposes the least burdensome requirement which prevents
or adequately reduces the risk of injury for which it is promulgated.

1. Potential Benefits of the Amendments

The amendments issued below will provide consumers a wider choice
of children's sleepwear. Specifically, the amendments will allow
garments intended for children younger than nine months of age and
tight-fitting garments in sizes as large as children's size 14 to be
made from untreated cotton and cotton blends, which may not currently
be used in the production of children's sleepwear. Although a dollar
value cannot be placed on this benefit, the Commission is aware that
large numbers of consumers have expressed a desire for children's
sleepwear made from cotton rather than the man-made fibers used to
produce most sleepwear garments manufactured to comply with the
children's sleepwear flammability standards.(6), (29), (34), (42),
(66), (67)
The amendments will permit consumers to dress their children for
sleeping in the tight-fitting sleepwear garments exempted from the
requirements of the standards instead of loose-fitting underwear,
playwear, or daywear garments. This, in turn, could reduce the risks of
burn injuries and deaths to children because tight-fitting sleepwear
garments present a lower fire risk to children than loose garments
which are not flame-resistant and do not comply with the children's
sleepwear standards. The extent to which such a substitution will occur
is not known, and therefore any resulting benefit is not
quantifiable.(67)
Manufacturers who elect to produce the garments in infant sizes and
tight-fitting garments exempted from the children's sleepwear standards
will benefit from a wider choice of fabrics and the elimination of
requirements for sampling, testing, and recordkeeping under the
sleepwear standards. The Commission is not able to predict the extent
to which manufacturers will elect to produce sleepwear garments
exempted by the amendments issued below. For that reason, the benefits
to manufacturers from increased choice of fabric and elimination of
sampling, testing, and recordkeeping costs cannot be quantified.(67)

2. Potential Costs of the Amendments

Potential costs of the amendments include those related to
temporary disruptions in the production process as manufacturers make
changes needed to produce garments exempted by the amendments.
According to industry sources, those changes could include
recalibration of cutting and sewing machines. Some costs may be
associated with modification of packaging, but they are expected to be
negligible. To minimize disruptions in the production process, the
Commission has extended a stay of enforcement for close-fitting
garments labeled and promoted for sale as underwear for 18 months to
allow manufacturers, distributors, and retailers to dispose of existing
inventories of those garments.(67)
Because the Commission cannot predict the extent to which
manufacturers will elect to produce the sleepwear garments exempted
from the requirements of the children's sleepwear standards, the
Commission is unable to quantify the costs to manufacturers which may
result.(67) However, the amendments do not require manufacturers to
produce the exempted garments. Consequently, the Commission anticipates
that only those firms which find it profitable to produce the exempted
garments will incur the costs required to begin making them.
The amendments issued below permit the manufacture of certain
children's sleepwear garments which will not pass the flammability test
in the children's sleepwear standards. Consequently, the potential
costs of the amendments include the possibility of increased societal
costs resulting from any burn injuries which may be associated with the
exempted garments.(67) However, during the three-year period in which
the stay of enforcement for close-fitting garments has been in effect,
the Commission has received no reports of burn injuries associated with
ignition of those garments.(62) Additionally, Canada's experience with
sleepwear standards which contain provisions similar to those in the
amendments issued below indicates the risk of increased burn injuries
is extremely low.(63) And if consumers dress their children for
sleeping in the tight-fitting garments exempted by the amendments
instead of loose-fitting T-shirts and other loose-fitting garments
which are not flame-resistant and do not comply with the children's
sleepwear standards, risks of burn injuries to children are expected to
decrease.(67)

3. Alternatives to the Amendments

a. Make no change to the standards. The existing children's
sleepwear flammability standards have contributed to the relatively low
level of burn injuries to children associated with clothing.(10)
Additionally, information is available to demonstrate that a number of
burn injuries to children younger than six years of age were associated
with sleepwear before the flammability standard for sizes 0 through 6X
became effective.(70) If the Commission made no change to the
standards, the level of protection against risks of burn injuries to
children associated with children's sleepwear would not be altered.
However, if the Commission does not amend the standards, consumers
will be unable to purchase children's sleepwear garments made from
untreated cotton and cotton blends. Some consumers have expressed a
strong desire to purchase such garments for their children to wear
while sleeping.(6), (29), (34), (42), (66), (67) In addition, if the
Commission does not make changes to the standards, problems related to
their enforcement in cases where garments resemble children's sleepwear
but are marketed and sold as underwear or playwear are expected to
continue.(68) This has been a problem in the past which the changes to
the standard are expected to alleviate. And, to satisfy their desire
for cotton sleepwear for their children, more people may turn to
looser-fitting substitutes which are not flame-resistant and present a
greater risk of burn injury.
b. Continue the stay of enforcement without amending the standards.
On January 13, 1993, the Commission announced that it would not enforce
the children's sleepwear standards in cases involving close fitting
garments which are similar in design and construction to underwear,
relatively free of ornamentation, and are labeled and marketed as
underwear. The Commission continued this stay of enforcement when it
published the notice of proposed rulemaking on October 25, 1994. During
the period that this stay of enforcement has been in effect, the
Commission has not observed any burn injuries to children associated

[[Page 47642]]

with the garments covered by the stay of enforcement.(62)
However, the tight-fitting garments exempted by the amendments
issued below fit more closely than the garments subject to the stay of
enforcement. Additionally, those tight-fitting garments can be marketed
as children's sleepwear. Consequently, the Commission anticipates the
exempted tight-fitting garments would provide better protection against
risks of burn injuries than the garments covered by the stay of
enforcement.(67)

4. Issues Raised by Comments on the Preliminary Regulatory Analysis

a. Potential benefits. A comment from a manufacturer of children's
garments asserts that issuance of final amendments to exempt garments
in infant sizes and close-fitting garments from the children's
sleepwear standards may result in a decrease, rather than an increase
in consumers' choice of sleepwear garments. This comment states that
retailers devote a limited amount of shelf space to children's
sleepwear. If consumers demonstrate a significant preference for cotton
sleepwear garments exempted from the requirements of the standards,
this comment claims that retailers will stock fewer garments
manufactured to comply with the sleepwear standards, and may eventually
stop selling those garments.(59)
As stated above, in 1993 the Commission published a stay of
enforcement of the sleepwear standards in cases involving skin-tight or
nearly skin-tight garments which are similar in design to the tight-
fitting garments exempted by the amendments issued below. Available
marketing data shows that during 1992, the last year before the stay,
sales of traditional children's sleepwear manufactured to comply with
the flammability standards were approximately 123.6 million units.
During 1994, the second year of the stay of enforcement, sales of
traditional children's sleepwear were 123.5 million units.(66)
The Commission concludes that available information about sales of
children's sleepwear does not support the assertion that the amendments
issued below will result in reduced choice to consumers. Additionally,
many parents and children may prefer the comfort of looser-fitting
garments made from flame-resistant fabrics over the tight-fitting
garments made from cotton or cotton blends. Certain styles of
sleepwear, such as nightgowns, robes, and traditional pajamas will
still be required to be made from fabrics which pass the tests of the
sleepwear standards. The Commission does not expect consumers to cease
purchasing these styles of sleepwear.
b. Potential costs. A comment from the American Burn Association
states that the Commission's preliminary regulatory analysis
underestimated the number of burn injuries which may result from the
proposed amendments and consequently the costs to society for treatment
of those injuries. This comment observes that in the notice proposing
the amendments, the Commission estimated that each year about 1,150
children were treated in hospital emergency rooms for burn injuries
associated with clothing of all types. The comment asserts that the
true number of emergency room visits may be as high as 4,000 a year,
citing a study published in the May-June 1995 issue of the Journal of
Burn Care and Rehabilitation.(38)
The Commission observes that the study cited by this comment
reviewed cases involving children referred to burn centers for burn
injuries of all types, and was not limited to burns associated with
ignition of clothing or sleepwear. Accordingly, the estimates of
children's burn injuries treated in emergency rooms made in this
comment are not comparable to those made by the Commission in the
notice of proposed rulemaking.(10) Additionally, the study cited in
this comment does not contain any information from which to predict the
likely effect of the proposed amendments on the number of children's
burn injuries associated with sleepwear.
A comment from The Learn Not to Burn Foundation of the National
Fire Protection Association asserts that increased burn injuries to
children are likely to result if the Commission issues final amendments
of the children's sleepwear standards.(32) That comment sets forth the
following rationale: At present, children's cotton garments suitable
for use as sleepwear are ``sufficiently expensive'' that they are
purchased primarily by consumers with higher incomes. Higher-income
consumers are more likely to have behaviors that offset the increased
risk of burn injury presented by sleepwear garments which do not comply
with the flammability standards. The proposed amendments will reduce
the cost of the exempted sleepwear garments, thereby making them
available to lower-income consumers. According to this comment, ``low
income correlates negatively with all measures of fire risk.''
However, recent marketing and injury information does not support
the expectations expressed in this comment. As noted in the response to
an earlier comment, since the stay of enforcement of the children's
sleepwear standards was issued in 1993, sales of traditional sleepwear
manufactured to comply with the standards has remained relatively
constant. During the same period of time, sales of children's underwear
garments increased from 476 million units in 1992 to 502.4 million
units in 1994. One trade publication attributes this gain in sales of
children's underwear to the use of some of these garments for
sleeping.(66) Underwear and playwear garments subject to the stay of
enforcement are sold by high-volume retailers and discounters at lower
prices than sleepwear which complies with the children's sleepwear
flammability standards.(87) Consequently, these garments have been
available to both higher- and lower-income consumers. Again, during the
time the stay has been in effect, the Commission has received no
reports of burn injuries associated with the garments identified as
subject to the stay.(62)
c. Regulatory alternatives. A comment from a retired Federal
employee states that as an alternative to the exemption of infant
garments from the standards, the Commission should consider elimination
of requirements for testing seam and trim, but continue to require the
fabric used in those garments to meet the flammability requirements of
the standard for sizes 0 through 6X. The comment states that such a
change would have a negligible effect on safety.(26)
The suggestion in this comment would relieve manufacturers of
garments in infant sizes from some, but not all, of the requirements of
the standard for sizes 0 through 6X. However, if fabric used in those
garments remained subject to the flammability requirements of that
standard, untreated cotton and cotton blends could not be used.
As noted above, one of the principal benefits of the amendments
issued below is to provide consumers with a greater choice of sleepwear
garments by permitting the use of those fabrics for production of
certain types of children's sleepwear. The Commission concludes that
the alternative suggested by this comment would significantly reduce
the potential benefits of the amendments issued below, without a
corresponding reduction in their potential costs.(10)
For these reasons, the Commission affirms the conclusion of its
preliminary and final regulatory analysis that the amendments are not
likely to increase societal costs resulting from burn injuries to
children associated with sleepwear.

[[Page 47643]]

5. Findings

After considering all information concerning benefits and costs of
the amendments, including comments on the preliminary regulatory
analysis, the Commission finds the benefits of the amendments issued
below bear a reasonable relationship to their costs. Although these
benefits are not quantifiable, they include increased choice to
consumers in children's sleepwear garments. To the extent that
consumers choose the tight-fitting sleepwear garments permitted by the
amendments rather than loose-fitting garments which are not flame-
resistant, risks of burn injuries to children may be reduced.
The costs of the amendments include some disruption to the
children's sleepwear industry, and the possibility of increased
societal costs of treating burn injuries associated with the garments
exempted by the amendments. By establishing an effective date of
January 1, 1997, and extending the stay of enforcement for certain
close-fitting children's underwear and playwear, the Commission has
minimized costs associated with disruption of the children's sleepwear
industry. For the reasons set forth in the discussion of potential
costs of the amendments and comments on the preliminary regulatory
analysis, the Commission concludes that the potential costs of the
amendment, although unquantifiable, are minimal.
The Commission also finds that the amendments issued below impose
the least burdensome requirements which adequately reduce the risks of
burn injuries to children associated with sleepwear. The Commission has
considered the possibilities of withdrawing the proposed amendment,
with or without extending the stay of enforcement for certain close-
fitting children's underwear and playwear. For the reasons set forth
above in the discussion of regulatory alternatives, the Commission
finds that none of the alternatives considered will provide the
increased choice to consumers at as low a level of risk as the
amendments issued below.

J. Other Statutory Findings

Section 4(b) of the FFA (15 U.S.C. 1193(b)) states that each
flammability standard or amendment shall be based on findings that the
standard or amendment is: Reasonably needed to protect the public
against an unreasonable risk of the occurrence of fire leading to death
or personal injury, or significant property damage; reasonable,
technologically appropriate, and practicable; and limited to those
fabrics, related materials, or products of wearing apparel or interior
furnishing which have been determined to present an unreasonable risk
of fire leading to death, personal injury, or significant property
damage.
After considering all of the information received during this
rulemaking proceeding, the Commission finds that to the extent that the
Standard for the Flammability of Children's Sleepwear: Sizes 0 Through
6X (16 CFR part 1615) and the Standard for the Flammability of
Children's Sleepwear: Sizes 7 Through 14 (16 CFR part 1616) are
applicable to garments intended for children nine months of age or
younger or to the tight-fitting garments described in the amendments
issued below, those standards are not: (i) Reasonably necessary to
protect the public from risks of fire leading to death, personal
injury, or significant property damage; or (ii) limited to the garments
which present that unreasonable risk. After considering the same
information, the Commission also finds that the amendments issued below
are reasonable, technologically practicable, and appropriate.

K. Future Activities

The Commission will continue to monitor closely and thoroughly
information from all available sources concerning burn injuries to
children from sleepwear and other garments. If at any time, the
Commission detects an increase in burn deaths or injuries to children
associated with any of the garments exempted by these amendments, it
will take any appropriate action, including initiation of rulemaking to
broaden the scope of the children's sleepwear flammability standards.
The Commission will also monitor the information and education
campaign undertaken by manufacturers of children's sleepwear and other
garments to assure that it accurately and effectively informs consumers
about the children's sleepwear flammability standards, garments
manufactured to comply with those standards, and the garments exempted
from those standards by the amendments issued below.

L. Stay of Enforcement

The stay of enforcement which was issued on January 13, 1993, and
continued on October 25, 1994, will end on March 9, 1998. A separate
notice published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register
provides additional details about the stay of enforcement and its
termination date.

M. Impact on Small Businesses

In accordance with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Commission hereby certifies that the amendments
to the children's sleepwear standards issued below will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
including small businesses.
At this time, about 65 firms manufacture or import traditional
children's sleepwear garments, i.e., nightgowns, pajamas, and
robes.(66). The number of firms in the children's sleepwear industry
has not changed substantially in the past several years.(15) About 45
of these firms have fewer than 500 employees and are considered to be
small businesses.(83) None of the firms which are small businesses
market children's sleepwear exclusively. In addition to traditional
children's sleepwear, these firms also manufacture or import other
types of garments such as infantwear, children's underwear and
playwear, and in some cases, adult underwear and lingerie.(83)
For many years, the market for traditional children's sleepwear has
been relatively small but constant. In 1970, the year before
promulgation of the first children's sleepwear standard, sales of all
new children's sleepwear garments amounted to about 1.4 garments per
child younger than 14 years of age.(83) From 1992 through 1994, sales
volume has been about 124 million units, about two garments per child
each year.(84) This sales information reflects a strong preference for
traditional sleepwear by some consumers.
However, if one assumes that most children use several garments
each year for sleeping, a logical inference is that children are using
many garments other than traditional nightgowns and pajamas for
sleeping.
The amendments issued below exempt sleepwear garments sized for
children nine months of age and younger and certain tight-fitting
sleepwear garments from the requirements of the children's sleepwear
standards. The tight-fitting sleepwear garments exempted by the
amendments are similar in fit and appearance to long underwear.
A decision to produce or import the exempted garments would entail
minimal costs for any current manufacturer or importer of children's
sleepwear, regardless of size, for several reasons. First, these firms
have an existing customer base for the sleepwear and other garments
which they currently distribute. Second, in the children's sleepwear
industry, design

[[Page 47644]]

and fabric choices are under continuous reassessment; consumer demand
and production costs are important considerations when deciding on the
design and fabric to be used. Usually, only minor capital costs are
involved in making changes to design or material used to produce these
garments.(83)
Firms which decide to produce or import garments exempted from the
sleepwear standards by the amendments issued below will be able to use
untreated fabrics made from cotton and cotton blends which cannot pass
the flammability test of the standards. Additionally, they will avoid
costs of testing and recordkeeping imposed by the standards.
However, no firm is required to produce or import exempted
garments. Firms which decide that demand for the garments exempted by
the amendments does not justify the costs of producing or importing
them will not be required to make any changes to their current
practices.(67)
For these reasons, the Commission concludes that the final
amendments will not likely have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, including small businesses.(83)

N. Environmental Considerations

The amendments issued below fall within the categories of
Commission actions described at 16 CFR 1021.5(c) that have little or no
potential for affecting the human environment. The amendments are not
expected to have a significant effect on production processes or on the
types or amounts of materials used for construction or packaging of
children's sleepwear. The amendments will not render existing
inventories unsalable, or require destruction of existing goods. The
Commission has no information indicating any special circumstances in
which these amendments may affect the human environment. For that
reason, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact
statement is required.(67)

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Parts 1615 and 1616

Clothing, Consumer protection, Flammable materials, Infants and
children, Labeling, Records, Textiles, Warranties.

Conclusion

Therefore, pursuant to the authority of section 30(b) of the
Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 2079(b)) and section 4 of the
Flammable Fabrics Act (15 U.S.C. 1193), the Commission hereby amends
title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter II, Subchapter D,
parts 1615 and 1616 to read as follows:

PART 1615--STANDARD FOR THE FLAMMABILITY OF CHILDREN'S SLEEPWEAR:
SIZES 0 THROUGH 6X

1. The authority for part 1615 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Sec. 4, 67 Stat. 112, as amended, 81 Stat. 569-570;
15 U.S.C. 1193.
2. In Sec. 1615.1, Paragraphs (c) through (m) are redesignated
paragraphs (d) through (n), respectively.
3. Section 1615.1 is amended by revising paragraph (a) and adding
new paragraphs (c) and (o) to read as follows:

Sec. 1615.1 Definitions.

(a) Children's Sleepwear means any product of wearing apparel up to
and including size 6X, such as nightgowns, pajamas, or similar or
related items, such as robes, intended to be worn primarily for
sleeping or activities related to sleeping, except:
(1) Diapers and underwear;
(2) ``Infant garments,'' as defined by section 1615.1(c), below;
and
(3) ``Tight-fitting garments,'' as defined by section 1615.1(o),
below.
* * * * *
(c) Infant garment means a garment which:
(1) Is sized for a child nine months of age or younger;
(2) If a one-piece garment, does not exceed 64.8 centimeters (25.75
inches) in length; if a two-piece garment, has no piece exceeding 40
centimeters (15.75 inches) in length;
(3) Complies with all applicable requirements of the Standard for
the Flammability Clothing Textiles (16 CFR Part 1610) and the Standard
for the Flammability Vinyl Plastic Film (16 CFR part 1611); and
(4) Bears a label stating the size of the garment, expressed in
terms of months of age. For example, ``0 to 3 mos.'' or ``9 mos.'' If
the label is not visible to the consumer when the garment is offered
for sale at retail, the same information must appear legibly on the
package of the garment.
* * * * *
(o) Tight-fitting garment means a garment which:
(1) 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 9-12 mos

Size 12-18 mos

Size 18-24 mos

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 47645]]

Size 2

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 3

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 4

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 5

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 6

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Maximum dimensions are calculated by placing the garment on a horizontal, flat surface with the outer
surface of the garment exposed, measuring the distances between the points specified below; and multiplying
that value by two:
Chest--measure distance from arm pit to arm pit.
Waist--on one-piece garment, measure at the narrowest location between arm pits and crotch. On two-piece
garment, measure width at the bottom of the upper piece, and the top of the lower piece.
Seat--on one-piece garment, measure at widest location between waist and crotch. On two-piece garment, take this
measurement on lower piece only.
Upper arm--measure at a line perpendicular to the sleeve. Extending from the outer edge of the sleeve to the arm
pit.
Thigh--measure at a line perpendicular to the leg extending from the outer edge of the leg to the crotch.
Wrist--measure the width of the end of the sleeve, if intended to extend to the wrist.
Ankle--measure the width of the end of the leg, if intended to extend to the ankle.

(2) Has no item of fabric, ornamentation or trim, such as lace,
appliques, or ribbon, which extends more than 6 millimeters (\1/4\
inch) from the point of attachment to the outer surface of the garment;
(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 upper arm to the wrist;
(4) Has legs which do not exceed the maximum dimension for the
thigh at any point between the thigh and the ankle, and which diminish
in width gradually from the thigh to the ankle;
(5) In the case of a one-piece garment, has a width which does not
exceed the maximum dimension for the chest at any point between the
chest and the waist and which diminishes gradually from the chest to
the waist; and has a width which does not exceed the maximum dimension
for the seat at any point between the seat and the waist and which
diminishes gradually from the seat to the waist;
(6) In the case of a two-piece garment has an upper piece with a
width which does not exceed the maximum dimension for the chest at any
point between the chest and the bottom of that piece and which
diminishes gradually from the chest to the bottom of that piece; in the
case of an upper piece with fastenings, has the lowest fastening within
15 centimeters (6 inches) of the bottom of that piece;
(7) In the case of a two-piece garment, has a lower piece with a
width which does not exceed the maximum dimension for the seat at any
point between the seat and the top of the lower piece and which
diminishes gradually from the seat to the top of that piece;
(8) Complies with all applicable requirements of the Standard for
the Flammability of Clothing Textiles (16 CFR part 1610) and the
Standard for the Flammability of Vinyl Plastic Film (16 CFR part 1611);
and
(9) Bears a label stating the size of the garment in terms of age
in months, or by child's size; for example: ``Size 9 to 12 mos.'' or
``Size 2.'' If the label is not visible to the consumer when the
garment is offered for sale at retail, the same information must appear
legibly on the package of the garment.

[[Page 47646]]

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 paragraph (a) and adding a
new paragraph (m), to read as follows:

Sec. 1616.2 Definitions.

In addition to the definitions given in section 2 of the Flammable
Fabrics Act, as amended (sec. 2, 81 Stat. 586; 15 U.S.C. 1191), the
following definitions apply for the purposes of this Standard:
(a) Children's sleepwear means any product of wearing apparel size
7 through 14, such as nightgowns, pajamas, or similar or related items,
such as robes, intended to be worn primarily for sleeping or activities
related to sleeping, except:
(1) Diapers and underwear; and
(2) ``Tight-fitting garments'' as defined by section 1616.2(m),
below.
* * * * *
(m) Tight-fitting garment means a garment which:
(1) 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:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 7 Girls

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 8 Boys \1\

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 8 Girls

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 9 Boys \1\

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 9 Girls

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 10 \1\ Boys

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 10 Girls

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Size 11 \1\ Boys

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 47647]]

Size 11 Girls

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 12 Boys ^{1

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 12 Girls

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 13 Boys

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 13 Girls

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 14 Boys ^{1

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size 14 Girls

Note: Maximum dimensions are calculated by placing the garment on a horizontal, flat surface, with the outer
surface of the garment exposed; measuring the distances at the points specified below; and multiplying that
value by two:
Chest--measure distance from arm pit to arm pit.
Waist--on one-piece garment, measure at narrowest location between arm pits and crotch; on two-piece garment,
measure width at the bottom of the upper piece, and at the top of the lower piece.
Seat--on one-piece garment, measure at widest location between waist and crotch. On two-piece garment, take this
measurement on the lower piece only.
Upper arm--measure at a line perpendicular to the sleeve extending from the outer edge of the sleeve to the arm
pit.
Thigh--measure at a line perpendicular to the leg extending from the outer edge of the leg to the crotch.
Wrist--measure the width of the end of the sleeve, if intended to extend to the wrist.
Ankle--measure the width of the end of the leg, if intended to extend to the ankle.

[[Page 47648]]

dimension for the seat at any point between the seat and the top of the
lower piece and which diminishes gradually from the seat to the top of
that piece;
(8) Complies with all applicable requirements of the Standard for
the Flammability of Clothing Textiles (16 CFR part 1610) and the
Standard for the Flammability of Vinyl Plastic Film (16 CFR part 1611);
and
(9) Bears a label stating the size of the garment; for example
``Size 7.'' If the label is not visible to the consumer when the
garment is offered for sale at retail, the garment size must appear
legibly on the package of the garment.
Effective date: These amendments shall become effective on January
1, 1997, and shall be applicable to garments which are introduced into
commerce on or after that date.

Dated: August 29, 1996.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Deputy Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission.

List of Relevant Documents

1. Federal Register notice ``Flammability Standards for
Children's Sleepwear; Statements of Enforcement Policy'' published
by the Consumer Product Safety Commission; 4 pages; March 20, 1984
(49 FR 10249).
2. Supplemental CPSC Staff Guide to the Enforcement Policy
Statements of the Flammability Standard for Children's Sleepwear--
Garment Diagrams and Assessments, published by the Division of
Regulatory Management, Consumer Product Safety Commission; 27 pages;
1989.
3. Memorandum from Terrance R. Karels, ECPA, to the Commission,
entitled ``Children's Sleepwear Project''; 12 pages; July 19, 1994.
4. Federal Register notice ``Standards for the Flammability of
Children's Sleepwear: Sizes 0 Through 6X and 7 Through 14; Advance
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,'' published by the Consumer Product
Safety Commission; 4 pages; January 13, 1993 (58 FR 4111).
5. Federal Register notice ``Standards for the Flammability of
Children's Sleepwear: Sizes 0 Through 6X and 7 Through 14; Stay of
Enforcement,'' published by the Consumer Product Safety Commission;
1 page; January 13, 1993 (58 FR 4078).
6. Tabular summaries of comments and staff responses to comments
to the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; 50 pages; July 19,
1994.
7. ``Statement by The Children's Sleepwear Coalition In Response
to the Consumer Product Safety Commission's Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking''; 10 pages; March 25, 1993.
8. Memorandum from Linda Fansler, ESME, to Terrance R. Karels,
ECPA, entitled ``Technical Rationale Supporting Tight-Fitting
Children's Sleepwear Garments''; 11 pages; March 14, 1994.
9. Memorandum from Linda Fansler, ESME, to Terrance R. Karels,
ECPA, entitled ``Recent Conversation Between Staff of Consumer and
Corporate Affairs Canada and Commission Staff''; 4 pages; July 17,
1992.
10. Memorandum from Dr. Terry L. Kissinger, EPHA, to Terrance R.
Karels, ECPA, entitled ``Injury Data Related to the Children's
Sleepwear Standards''; 13 pages; February 8, 1994.
11. Memorandum from Dr. Terry L. Kissinger, EPHA, to Terrance R.
Karels, ECPA, entitled ``Results of Review of Available
Literature,'' and attachments; 21 pages; April 1, 1994.
12. Memorandum from George Sweet, EPHF, to Terrance R. Karels,
ECPA, entitled ``Human Factors Issues Regarding Sleepwear,'' and
attachment; 8 pages; March 8, 1994.
13. Memorandum from George Sweet, EPHF, to Terrance R. Karels,
ECPA, entitled ``Garments Intended for Infants''; 4 pages; July 8,
1994.
14. ``Preliminary Regulatory and Regulatory Flexibility Analyses
for the Proposed Amendments to the Children's Flammability
Standards,'' by Anthony C. Homan, Directorate for Economic Analysis;
7 pages; June, 1994.
15. ``Market Sketch--Children's Sleepwear,'' by Anthony C.
Homan, Directorate for Economic Analysis; 14 pages; March, 1992.
16. Memorandum from Eva S. Lehman, HSPS, to Terrance R. Karels,
ECPA, entitled ``Toxicological Evaluation of Fabrics Used in
Children's Sleepwear''; 3 pages; June 7, 1994.
17. Memorandum from Patricia Fairall, CERM, to Terrance Karels,
ECPA, entitled ``Compliance History--Enforcement of Children's
Sleepwear''; 6 pages; April 20, 1994.
18. Memorandum from James F. Hoebel, Acting Director, ESME, to
Terrance R. Karels, ECPA, entitled ``Amendments to Children's
Sleepwear Standards''; 3 pages; July 7, 1994.
19. Memorandum from Dr. Terry L. Kissinger, EPHA, to Terrance R.
Karels, ECPA, entitled ``Proposed Amendment to Children's Sleepwear
Standards''; 7 pages; July 15, 1994.
20. Federal Register notice ``Standard for the Flammability of
Children's Sleepwear: Sizes 0 Through 6X; Standard for the
Flammability of Children's Sleepwear: Sizes 7 Through 14; Proposed
amendments'' published by the Consumer Product Safety Commission; 11
pages; October 25, 1994 (59 FR 53616).
21. Federal Register notice ``Continuation of Stay of
Enforcement of Standards for the Flammability of Children's
Sleepwear, Sizes 0 Through 6X and 7 Through 14'' published by the
Consumer Product Safety Commission; 1 page; October 25, 1994 (59 FR
53584).
22. Comment on proposed amendments from Aline Farr; 1 page;
September 14, 1994.
23. Comment on proposed amendments from Leonard Schwab, the
Schwab Company; 7 pages; November 29, 1994.
24. Comment on proposed amendments from Kay M. Villa, American
Textile Manufacturers Institute; 1 page; December 22, 1994.
25. Comment on proposed amendments from Carl Schlosser, Salant
Children's Apparel Group; 5 pages; December 28, 1994.
26. Comment on proposed amendments from John F. Krasny; 2 pages;
January 4, 1995.
27. Comment on proposed amendments from student research group,
Florida International University; 2 pages; January 4, 1995.
28. Comment on proposed amendments from Steven E. Loftin, the
William Carter Company; 2 pages; January 5, 1995.
29. Comment on proposed amendments from student research group;
2 pages; January 6, 1995.
30. Comment on proposed amendments from Gerald L. Colliers, the
Children's Sleepwear Coalition; 6 pages; January 8, 1995.
31. Comment on proposed amendments from Mary-beth Boughton,
Oneita Industries; 2 pages; January 9, 1995.
32. Comment on proposed amendments from James McMullen, Learn
Not to Burn Foundation, National Fire Protection Association; 2
pages; January 13, 1995.
33. Comment on proposed amendments from Phillip J. Wakelyn,
Ph.D., National Cotton Council of America; 7 pages; January 9, 1995.
34. Comment on proposed amendments from John Wigodsky, Fruit of
the Loom; 1 page; January 5, 1995.
35. Comment on proposed amendments from Julie Goldscheider,
Impact Imports International, Inc.; 3 pages; January 9, 1995.
36. Comment on proposed amendments from Alfred K. Whitehead,
International Association of Fire Fighters; 1 page; July 31, 1995.
37. Comment on proposed amendments from Frank Albert, Fire
Prevention Canada; 2 pages; August 1, 1995.
38. Comment on proposed amendments from Andrew M. Munster, M.D.,
American Burn Association; 2 pages; August 29, 1995.
39. Comment on proposed amendments from Ramsey J. Choucair,
M.D., Shriners Hospitals for Crippled Children, Burns Institute; 2
pages; August 30, 1995.
40. Comment on proposed amendments from Phillip J. Wakelyn,
Ph.D., National Cotton Council of America; 2 pages; September 8,
1995.
41. Comment on proposed amendments from Anthony R. O'Neill,
National Fire Protection Association, with enclosures; 7 pages;
October 23, 1995.
42. Comment on proposed amendments from Carl Schlosser, Salant
Children's Apparel Group; 1 page; October 10, 1995.
43. Comment on proposed amendments from Mary Jane Murray; 1
page; undated.
44. Comment on proposed amendments from Tim Ackerman, T & G
Associates, Inc., with enclosure; 3 pages; October 25, 1995.
45. Comment on proposed amendments from John McCarthy, Kid Duds,
with enclosure; 3 pages; October 30, 1995.
46. Comment on proposed amendments from Leigh Ann Schwarzkopf,
Kid Duds, with enclosure; 8 pages; January 5, 1996.
47. Comment on proposed amendments from Phillip J. Wakelyn,
Ph.D., National Cotton Council of America; 2 pages; October 30,
1995.
48. Comment on proposed Amendments from Phillip. J. Wakelyn,
Ph.D., National

[[Page 47649]]

Cotton Council of America, with enclosures; 5 pages; December 18,
1995.
49. Comment on proposed Amendments from Phillip. J. Wakelyn,
Ph.D., National Cotton Council of America, with enclosure; 3 pages;
December 21, 1995.
50. Comment on proposed amendments from Leonard S. Bernstein,
Candlesticks, Inc.; 2 pages; October 31, 1995.
51. Comment on proposed amendments from Leonard S. Bernstein,
Candlesticks, Inc., with enclosure; 3 pages; December 14, 1995.
52. Comment on proposed amendments from Leonard S. Bernstein,
Candlesticks, Inc.; 1 page; January 10, 1996.
53. Comment on proposed amendments from Mary-beth Boughton,
Oneita Industries; 2 pages; November 6, 1995.
54. Comment on proposed amendments from G. L. Collier, I-C
Manufacturing Company, with enclosure; 5 pages; December 30, 1995.
55. Comment on proposed amendments from Hy Grubman, InnerWorld;
1 page; December 28, 1995.
56. Comment on proposed amendments from Jack Brownstein,
Waterbury Garment Corporation, with enclosure; 2 pages; January 3,
1996.
57. Comment on proposed amendments from Craig V. Mayer, P.E.; 2
pages; January 5, 1996.
58. Comment on proposed amendments from Gerald L. Collier,
Children's Sleepwear Coalition; 5 pages; January 24, 1996.
59. Comment on proposed amendments from Stephen Schnitzer and
Marvin Sandberg, PCA Apparel; 5 pages; February 6, 1996.
60. Comment on proposed amendments from The Coalition for
American Trauma Care; 2 pages; February 6, 1996.
61. Comment on proposed amendments from Cressie Goff, Sew Sweet
Stitches, and Carol Grider, R.N., with enclosures; 3 pages; February
21, 1996.
62. Memorandum from Terry L. Kissinger, Ph.D., EHHA, to Terrance
R. Karels, ECPA, entitled ``Injury Data Related to the Children's
Sleepwear Standards''; 13 pages; July 12, 1995.
63. Letter from Carole LaCombe, Director, Product Safety Canada,
to Eric C. Peterson, Executive Director, Consumer Product Safety
Commission, concerning Canadian standards for the flammability of
children's sleepwear; 3 pages; September 13, 1993.
64. Memorandum from Linda Fansler, ES, concerning telephone
conversation between staff of the Consumer Product Safety Commission
and staff of Consumer and Corporate Affairs Canada on June 18, 1992,
concerning the Canadian standards for the flammability of children's
sleepwear; 3 pages.
65. Memorandum from Linda Fansler, ESME, to Terrance R. Karels,
ECPA, entitled ``Tight Fitting Children's Sleepwear''; 5 pages; July
14, 1995.
66. Memorandum from Terrance R. Karels, Project Manager, to
Warren J. Prunella, Associate Executive Director for Economic
Analysis, entitled ``Sleepwear Market Update''; 2 pages; October 6,
1995.
67. Final Regulatory Analysis for amendments of the children's
sleepwear standards by Terrance R. Karels; 8 pages; July 1995.
68. Memorandum from David Schmeltzer, Assistant Executive
Director for Compliance, to Terrance Karels, Project Manager,
entitled ``Sleepwear Briefing Package''; 4 pages; August 24, 1995.
69. Memorandum from Patricia Fairall, Compliance Officer, to
Terrance Karels, Project Manager, entitled ``Compliance Discussion
of the Proposed Amendments to the Children's Sleepwear Standards'';
2 pages; June 26, 1995.
70. Memorandum from Terry L. Kissinger, Ph.D., EHHA, to Terrance
R. Karels, ECPA, entitled ``Response to Public Comments Received
after Publication of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''; 8 pages;
July 12, 1995.
71. Memorandum from George Sweet, EPHF, to Terrance R. Karels,
ECPA, entitled ``Human Factors Responses to Sleepwear NPR
Comments''; 7 pages; May 5, 1995.
72. Memorandum from Linda Fansler, ESME, to Terrance R. Karels,
ECPA, entitled ``Response to Comments''; 3 pages; July 14, 1995.
73. Memorandum from Suad Nakamura, Ph.D., EHPS, to Terrance R.
Karels, Project Manager, entitled ``Children's Sleepwear--Response
to Comments on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''; 2 pages; July
19, 1995.
74. Memorandum from Patricia Fairall, Compliance Officer, to
Terrance R. Karels, Program Manager, entitled ``Response to Comments
from Proposed Amendments to the Children's Sleepwear Standards
published in the Federal Register on October 25, 1994''; 5 pages;
June 26, 1995.
75. Memorandum from Terry L. Kissinger, Ph.D., EHHA, to Terrance
R. Karels, ECPA, entitled ``Response to Letter from John Krasny to
James Hoebel''; 5 pages; August 3, 1995.
76. Memorandum from George Sweet, ESHA, to Terrance R. Karels,
ECPA, entitled ``Issues involved in amendment the sleepwear
flammability regulation: Sizing and Labeling''; 3 pages; September
20, 1995.
77. Memorandum from Karen G. Krushaar, OIPA, to Terrance R.
Karels, ECPA, entitled ``Children's Sleepwear Informational
Campaign''; 2 pages; July 11, 1995.
78. Position statement of the National Fire Protection
Association and the Learn Not to Burn Foundation in Opposition to
the Proposed Amendment of the Children's Sleepwear Standards; 5
pages; July 1995.
79. Letter from John F. Krasny to J. F. Hoebel concerning paper
by Vickers, Krasny, and Tovey entitled ``Some Apparel Fire Hazard
Parameters''; 2 pages; July 17, 1995.
80. Memorandum from Linda Fansler, ESME, concerning telephone
conversation with John Krasny on September 20, 1995; 2 pages.
81. Log of public meeting conducted on April 25, 1995,
concerning proposed amendments of the children's sleepwear
flammability standards; 4 pages.
82. Memorandum from James F. Hoebel, Chief Engineer for Fire
Hazards, to Terrance R. Karels, Project Manager, entitled
``Children's Sleepwear''; 3 pages; October 10, 1995.
83. Memorandum from Warren J. Prunella, Associate Executive
Director for Economic Analysis, to file concerning small business
effects of proposed amendments to the children's sleepwear
flammability standards; 3 pages; February 17, 1995.
84. Memorandum from Warren J. Prunella, Associate Executive
Director for Economic Analysis, to Eric A. Rubel, General Counsel,
concerning requirements for Congressional review of final amendments
to the children's sleepwear standards; 3 pages; undated.
85. Vote sheet to accompany briefing package on children's
sleepwear flammability standards; 2 pages; October 11, 1995.
86. Memorandum from Terrance R. Karels, Project Manager, and
Ronald L. Medford, Assistant Executive Director for Hazard
Identification and Reduction entitled ``Questions Regarding
Children's Sleepwear Amendments,'' with attachments; 21 pages;
January 30, 1996.

[FR Doc. 96-22697 Filed 9-6-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P}}}}}