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