November 28, 2021

September 1, 2020 NHTSA Published a Request for Comments on an Interim Final Rule Changing the Phase-In Schedule for FMVSS 141 (Minimum Sound Requirements for Electric and Hybrid Electric Vehicles) in Response to the COVID-19 Effects on the Auto Industry.

DATES: The amendments made in this rule are effective August 28, 2020. Comments should be submitted your comments early enough to ensure that the docket receives them by September 16, 2020.

SUMMARY: This interim final rule responds to an emergency petition submitted by the Alliance resulting from the COVID–19 public health emergency. After considering the issues raised in the Alliance petition, NHTSA agreed that the COVID-19 disruptions to automotive manufacturing made compliance with the phase-in schedule for FMVSS 141 impracticable and warranted appropriate regulatory relief. The Agency granted two of petitioner’s requests, in part, by deferring both the compliance dates for the phase-in schedule and date for full compliance by six months. The Agency declined to adopt petitioner’s third request for an alternative phase-in performance requirement. NHTSA is seeking comment on this interim final rule.

On June 2, 2020, NHTSA Reopened the Comment Period on the Hybrid III 5th Percentile Female Anthropomorphic Test Dummy (49 CFR 572; Docket No; NHTSA-2019-0023)

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before August 3, 2020.

BACKGROUND:  The comment period was reopened because of public requests.  In addition, NHTSA is also docketing a document describing procedures it has developed to measure SAE chest jackets already in use in the field in order to assess the uniformity of the jackets and to determine jacket dimensions and tolerances to be specified in the Final Rule

On April 3, The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) Published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Proposing a Safety Standard for Crib Bumpers/Liners (16 CFR 1240, Docket No. CPSC 2020-0010)

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before June 17, 2020

SUMMARY:  The CPSC is proposing a safety standard for crib bumpers/liners, and it is also proposing to identify crib bumpers/liners as durable infant or toddler products subject to CPSC’s consumer registration requirements. In addition, the Commission is proposing an amendment to include crib bumpers in the list of notice of requirements (NORs) issued by the Commission.

The Commission proposes to incorporate by reference ASTM F1917– 12, with the following modifications to the standard, (discussed in Section VI of the Notice):

  1. Provide a broad definition of crib bumpers that encompasses traditional crib bumpers as well as mesh crib liners;
  2. Suffocation Hazard
    1. The Commission proposes to apply the F1917-12 thickness requirement to all crib bumpers/liners, regardless of their construction;
    1. The Commission is proposing a firmness requirement and test method that is based on an Australian/New Zealand standard, AS/NZS 8811.1:2013, Methods of Testing Infant Products: Part 1: Sleep Surfaces—Test for Firmness.
  3.  Suffocation Hazard and Entrapment Hazard—Crib Bumper Attachment
    1. The Commission is proposing a new performance requirement that would replace the existing F1917 attachment requirements. The proposed requirement would not allow the small head probe currently used in ASTM F963 to pass between an installed crib bumper and the interior crib side.
  4. Entanglement, Choking, and Suffocation Hazards—Crib Bumper Tie/ Attachment Means Strength Requirement
    1. Attachment Means, Decorative Components, and Seams—ASTM F1917–12 includes a strength requirement for crib bumper ties. The Commission is proposing to revise the strength requirement for bumper ties to apply to all “attachment means”, rather than just to ties. 
    1. Decorative Components and Seams Strength Requirements—The Commission is proposing to include strength requirements for decorative components and bumper seams. 
  5. Suffocation, Entanglement and Fall Hazards—Crib Bumper Warnings and Instructions
    1. Warning Content and Format—The Commission proposes to replace the ASTM F1917–12 warning requirements with new warning requirements involving content and general format.
    1. They propose changes involving (a) warning placement, (b) warning permanence, (c) additional crib bumper warnings, and (d) the proposed standard would require instructional literature in addition to the product warnings.

XVII. Request for Comments—The Commission invites comments on any aspect of this proposal. In addition, the Commission invites comments on the following:

1. Is the 2 inch maximum thickness requirement and the related test method sufficient?

2. With regard to the firmness requirements and related test methods:

  1. Potential facial conformity test devices and methods, such as mechanical test surrogates;
  2. recommendations for a more anthropomorphic test method;
  3. the repeatability of the proposed firmness test; and
  4. the validity of the proposed firmness requirements and related test methods.

3. Is an airflow performance requirement based on the airflow characteristics of typical mesh bumpers protective enough to eliminate the risks of suffocation against a crib bumper?

4. What further modifications to the British air flow test method (BS 4568:1970) would enhance the repeatability and validity of the airflow test requirement for crib bumpers?

5. Is there an alternative test method, such as ASTM D737–18, Standard Test Method for Air Permeability of Textile Fabrics, that can be correlated with results from the British Standard, as modified, and would adoption of this alternative test method offer benefits?

6. If the Commission adopts an airflow performance requirement, what effect will this have on the need for the proposed thickness and firmness tests and will the proposed warnings and instructions need to be modified?

7. Is there evidence that demonstrates that climb-out rates are higher when crib bumpers or mesh liners are installed in a crib, and should the Commission require the new warnings about removal of the product and climbing out?

8. Does having an airflow performance requirement for crib bumpers adversely affect public education about safe sleep best practices?

9. Is there any research into air permeability, breathability, infants’ oxygen and carbon dioxide levels, rebreathing, anatomical features, airway openings, respiratory rates and volumes, anthropometry of facial features such as nasal deformation against crib bumpers, effects of exhaled moisture and saliva on the air permeability of fabric and mesh bumpers, patterns of gas dispersal within a crib, or other related topics that the Commission should consider?

10. Are there reports of incidents or injuries associated with vertical bumpers? What is the recommended user population, market size and expected, useful lifespan of vertical bumpers? What design characteristics of vertical bumpers are critical for safety, such as shape, thickness, fill materials, and attachment means? Are there any requirements in this proposal from which vertical bumpers should be exempt and why? Are there any test methods that need to be modified for testing vertical bumpers?

11. A central purpose of the Consumer Product Safety Act is ‘‘to develop uniform safety standards for consumer products and to minimize conflicting State and local regulations.’’ See 15 U.S.C. 2051(b)(3). Given this mandate, what should the preemptive effect of any regulation promulgated under this rulemaking be?

12. Should the Commission consider an effective date of 12 months for any regulation promulgated under this rulemaking?

13. Should CPSC consider any other alternatives to reduce the impact on small entities?

14. On October 19, 2016, the Commission voted to initiate rulemaking under section 104 of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) to address the risk of injury or death associated with the use of crib bumpers. Do crib bumpers and liners meet the definition of ‘‘durable product’’? What are the anticipated legal challenges to pursuing rulemaking under this authority?

15. Many outside groups have advocated for an outright ban of crib bumpers and liners. Does CPSC have jurisdiction under Section 104 to ban this product category? If not, may CPSC promulgate a rule declaring such products a banned hazardous product under Section 8 of the CPSIA, 15 U.S.C. 2057? During the comment period, the ASTM F1917–12 Standard Consumer Safety Performance Specification for Infant Bedding and Related Accessories, is available as a read-only document at:

For a more detailed summary of the notice please email me at To see the notice itself, follow the link

On March 20, The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced it will soon be revising the 573 Recall Report form in the Manufacturer Recalls Portal to include a new section, labeled “Involved Components.”

NHTSA ANNOUNCEMENT–The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) will soon be revising the 573 Recall Report form in the Manufacturer Recalls Portal to include a new section, labeled “Involved Components.” This section will contain three component-related fields: Component Name, Component Description, and Component Part Number, to be used to supply the information relating to the specific component(s) or software involved in the recall.

Previously, NHTSA requested this information in the “Identify the Remedy” area of the form. This upcoming change will assist in compliance with 49 U.S. Code § 30119(g).

(g) Information Regarding Components Involved in Recall.—A manufacturer that is required to furnish a report under section 573.6 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor regulation) for a defect or noncompliance in a motor vehicle or in an item of original or replacement equipment shall, if such defect or noncompliance involves a specific component or components, include in such report, with respect to such component or components, the following information:
(1) The name of the component or components.
(2) A description of the component or components.
(3) The part number of the component or components, if any.

Please note that the revised form will allow for the entry of multiple components via a plus-sign icon (“+”).

Thank you,

Recalls Portal Helpdesk
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)  

On February 25, the Consumer Product Safety Commission Published a Direct Final Rule for Portable Bed Rails (15 CFR 1224), Replacing the 2012 Version of ASTM F 2085-12 with the 2019 Version ASTM F 2085-19

SUMMARY: This rule pertains to portable bed rails intended to be installed on an adult bed to prevent children from falling out of bed.

Section 104(b)(1)(B) of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) requires the CPSC to promulgate consumer product safety standards for durable infant or toddler products. The law requires these standards to be ‘‘substantially the same as’’ applicable voluntary standards or more stringent than the voluntary standards if the Commission concludes that more stringent requirements would further reduce the risk of injury associated with the product.

The CPSC is updating 15 CFR 1224 by replacing the 2012 Version of ASTM F 2085-12 with the 2019 Version, ASTM F 2085-19.

The CPSC found that all of the non-substantive changes made in ASTM F2085–19 were neutral regarding safety for portable bed rails because they were editorial in nature. The one substantive change to the standard was the change in the type of twin bed sheet from 50/50 polyester cotton blend to 60/40 polyester cotton blend. The test labs had indicated that it was difficult to find a sheet that could be verified as a 50/50 blend and that most twin sheets on the market were the 60/40 blend.

The CPSC staff believes that changing the sheet source from a 50/50 blend to a 60/40 blend would not affect how a technician performs the test or alter the results of the testing. Therefore, the CPSC concludes that this change is neutral regarding safety while increasing the ease of sourcing the test materials and is adopting this revision as the new safety standard.

DATES: The rule is effective on May 20, 2020, unless the CPSC receives significant adverse comment by March 26, 2020.