PART 1260—SAFETY STANDARD FOR OPERATING CORDS ON CUSTOM WINDOW COVERINGS Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2056, 15 U.S.C. 2058, and 5 U.S.C. 553. Source: 87 FR 73189, Nov. 28, 2022, unless otherwise noted. § 1260.1 Scope and definitions. (a) This part establishes a consumer product safety standard for operating cords on custom window coverings. The effective date of this part is May 30, 2023. (b) The consumer product safety standard in this part relies on the following definitions in section 3 of ANSI/WCMA A100.1—2018 (incorporated by reference, see § 1260.5): (1) Custom window covering (2) Stock window covering (3) Operating cord (4) Cord shroud (5) Cord retraction device (6) Rigid cord shroud (7) Retractable cord (8) Loop cord and bead chain restraining device (9) Operating interface § 1260.2 Requirements. (a) Requirements for operating cords. (b) Requirements for rigid cord shrouds. (1) Test methods for rigid cord shrouds: Center load test. Figure 1 to Paragraph (b)(1)(i)—Rigid Cord Shroud Test Set-Up (ii) Apply a 5-pound force at the center of the rigid cord shroud for at least 5 seconds as shown in figure 2 to this paragraph (b)(1)(ii). Figure 2 to Paragraph (b)(1)(ii)—Rigid Cord Shroud Center Load Test and Deflection Measurement (iii) Measure the maximum deflection of the shroud, while the 5-pound force is applied. (iv) For rigid cord shrouds that are ≤19 inches, the deflection shall not exceed 1 inch. For every additional 19 inches in shroud length, the shroud can deflect an additional inch. See figure 2 to paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section. (v) While continuing to apply the 5-pound force, determine if the cord(s) can be contacted by the cord shroud accessibility test probe shown in figure 3 to this paragraph (b)(1)(v). If the cord shroud accessibility test probe can touch any cord, the cord(s) are considered accessible. Figure 3 to Paragraph (b)(1)(v)—Cord Shroud Accessibility Test Probe (2) Test methods for rigid cord shrouds: Axial torque test. (ii) Apply a 4.4 in-lb. (0.5Nm) torque along the other end of the rigid cord shroud for 5 seconds. (iii) While continuing to apply the torque, determine if the cord(s) can be contacted by the cord shroud accessibility test probe shown in figure 3 to paragraph (b)(1)(v) of this section. If the cord shroud accessibility test probe can touch any cord, the cord(s) are considered accessible. (c) Requirements for cord retraction devices. (1) When a 30 grams mass is applied to the operating interface, the cord retraction device shall maintain full retraction of the retractable cord such that the retractable cord is not accessible per Appendix C of ANSI/WCMA A100.1—2018. (2) The maximum stroke length for a cord retraction device is 12 inches measured from the bottom of the headrail. (3) The operating interface for cord retraction devices may not be a cord of any length including a short static or access cord. It may be a ring and pole, a wand or any other design that cannot bend on itself, eliminating the potential of creating a hazardous loop. (4) The cord retraction device shall have a service life of at least 5,000 cycles after exposed portions or components have been subjected to 500 hours of ultraviolet (UV) exposure per American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists (AATCC) Test Method 16-2004, Option 3 of ANSI/WCMA A100.1—2018. (d) Requirements for loop cord and bead chain restraining devices. (1) Test methods for loop cord and bead chain restraining device: UV stability and operational cycle test. (2) Test methods for loop cord and bead chain restraining device: Center load test. Figure 4 to Paragraph (d)(2)(i)—Cord and Bead Chain Restraining Device Test Set-Up (ii) Apply a 5-pound force at the center of the cord and bead chain restraining device for at least 5 seconds as shown in figure 5 to this paragraph (d)(2)(ii). Figure 5 to Paragraph (d)(2)(ii)—Loop Cord and Bead Chain Restraining Device Center Load Test and Deflection Measurement (iii) Measure the maximum deflection of the cord and bead chain restraining device, while the 5-pound force is applied. (iv) For cord and bead chain restraining device that are ≤19 inches, the deflection shall not exceed 1 inch. For every additional 19 inches in shroud length, the shroud can deflect an additional inch. See figure 5 to paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of this section. (v) While continuing to apply the 5-pound force, determine if the cord(s) create an opening between the cord and the restraining device. If the hazardous loop head probe (Figure D1 of ANSI/WCMA A1001-2018) can pass through the opening, the opening is considered a hazardous loop. (3) Test methods for cord and bead chain restraining devices: Axial torque test. (ii) Apply a 4.4 in-lb. (0.5 Nm) torque along the other end of the cord and bead chain restraining device for 5 seconds. While continuing to apply the torque, determine if the cord(s) if the cord(s) create an opening between the cord and the restraining device. If the hazardous loop head probe (Figure D1 of ANSI/WCMA A1001—2018) can pass through the opening, the opening is considered a hazardous loop. § 1260.3 Prohibited stockpiling. (a) Prohibited acts. (b) Base period. § 1260.4 Findings. (a) General. Note 1 to paragraph ( a Because the findings are required to be published in the rule, they reflect the information that was available to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (Commission, CPSC) when the standard was issued on November 28, 2022. (b) Degree and nature of the risk of injury. (2) Strangulation deaths and injuries on window covering cords are a “hidden hazard” because consumers do not understand or appreciate the hazard, or how quickly and silently strangulation occurs. Because young children may be left unsupervised for a few minutes or more in a room that is considered safe, such as a bedroom or family room, adult supervision is unlikely to eliminate or reduce the hazard. Children can wrap the cord around their neck, insert their head into a cord loop and get injured or die silently in a few minutes in any room, with or without supervision. (3) Safety devices such as cord cleats and tension devices are unlikely to be effective to eliminate or substantially reduce the hazard. Cord cleats, for example, need to be attached on the wall and caregivers must wrap the cord around the cleat each and every time the window covering is raised or lowered. As incident data show, children can still access and become entangled in cords by climbing on furniture. Tension devices also need to be attached on the wall or windowsill, which may not occur (and may not be permitted in rental homes); even if properly installed, depending on how taut the cord loop is, it can still allow a child's head to enter the opening as observed in the incident data. (4) A user research study found a lack of awareness on cord entanglement among caregivers; lack of awareness of the speed and mechanism of the injury; difficulty using and installing safety devices as primary reasons for not using them; and inability to recognize the purpose of the safety devices provided with window coverings. Warning labels are not likely to be effective because consumers are less likely to look for and read safety information about the products that they use frequently and are familiar with. Many of the children at risk of strangulation, those 8 years old and younger, cannot read or appreciate warning labels. Most of the window covering units involved in strangulation incidents had the permanent warning label on the product. Even well-designed warning labels will have limited effectiveness in communicating the hazard on this type of product. (5) Every custom product sold with an accessible operating cord presents a hidden hazard to young children and can remain a hazard in the household for one to two decades or longer. Some consumers may believe that because they do not currently have young children living with them or visiting them, accessible operating cords on window coverings are not a safety hazard. However, window coverings last a long time, family circumstances change, and when homes are sold or new renters move in, the existing window coverings, if they are functional, usually remain installed and could be hazardous to new occupants with young children. (6) Window coverings that comply with the operating cord requirements for stock window covering requirements in section 4.3.1 of ANSI/WCMA A100.1—2018 (incorporated by reference, see § 1260.5) adequately address the strangulation hazard, by not allowing hazardous cords on the product by design, and therefore do not rely on consumer action. CPSC finds that all of the operating cord incidents it identified as involving custom window coverings likely would have been prevented if the requirements in section 4.3.1 of ANSI/WCMA A100.1—2018 were in effect and covered the incident products. (7) CPSC databases contain incident data showing a total of 209 reported fatal and nonfatal strangulations on window coverings among children eight years and younger, from January 2009 through December 2021. Nearly 48 percent of the reported incidents were fatal (100 of 209). Sixteen of the surviving victims required hospitalization, and six survived a hypoxic-ischemic episode or were pulseless and in full cardiac arrest when found, suffered severe neurological sequalae ranging from loss of memory to a long-term or permanent vegetative state requiring tracheotomy and gastrointestinal tube feeding. One victim remained hospitalized for 72 days, was released with 75 percent permanent brain damage, and is confined to a bed. (8) Based on CPSC's Injury Cost Model, approximately 7.6 medically treated nonfatal injuries to children 8 years and younger occurred annually in the United States from 2009 through 2021. Based on National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) data and a separate study of child strangulations, a minimum of approximately 6.8 fatal strangulations related to window covering operating cords (excluding inner cords and lifting loops) occurred per year in the United States among children under eight years old from 2009-2020. (c) Number of consumer products subject to the rule. (d) The public need for custom window coverings and the effects of the rule on their utility, cost, and availability. (2) The Commission does not expect the final rule to have a substantial effect on the utility or availability of custom window coverings, and the impact on cost depends on the product type. The Commission considered whether some consumers, such as the elderly and disabled, or those with windows in hard-to-reach locations, would experience a loss of utility from the removal of accessible operating cords from custom window coverings. The final rule mitigates any potential loss in utility by including several methods to make operating cords safer while still providing ease of use, including rigid cord shrouds, retractable cords, and loop cord and bead restraining devices, to assist consumers to raise and lower custom window coverings. Additionally, consumers can choose to use a remote-controlled operating system, or other tools, such as a pole, to operate the window covering. (3) Retail prices of custom window coverings vary substantially. The least expensive units for an average size window retail for less than $40, while some more expensive units may retail for several thousand dollars. Custom window covering prices may increase to reflect the added cost of modifying or redesigning products to comply with the final rule. If the costs associated with redesigning or modifying a custom window covering to comply with the standard results in the manufacturer discontinuing that model, there would be some loss in availability of that type. (4) Although prices of stock window coverings have increased since ANSI/WCMA A100.1—2018 went into effect in 2018, sales of stock products remain consistent. For custom products, which have higher prices on average, consumers very well may be willing to pay more for a safer window covering without affecting sales, similar to stock window coverings. The regulatory analysis in the final rule states that the estimated net cost increase per household to replace all custom window products in a home to be as low as $24 for less expensive products, representing only a 5% increase in cost. Such cost increase is nominal to prevent the hidden strangulation hazard to children on window coverings for the 10 years custom window coverings are likely to be used. (e) Other means to achieve the objective of the rule, while minimizing adverse effects on competition and manufacturing. (2) Similarly, the Commission considered narrowing the scope of the rule to address only the hazards associated with operating cords on custom vertical blinds, curtains, and drapes, because cords are not critical to the operation of these products. Narrowing the rule to these three product types would lessen the cost impact and make it unlikely that any particular product type and/or size would be eliminated, and costs would be near $0 because using plastic rods for operation is very similar to cords in cost. However, only 3 of the 36 custom product incidents (all are fatalities) were associated with vertical blinds, and there were no curtain or drape incidents where the stock/custom classification could be determined. This option would not result in an effective reduction in injuries and deaths. (3) Other alternatives the Commission considered include: adopting the Canadian standard for window covering cords, which would increase the costs to comply with the rule with no additional benefits, and adopting a draft revised version of the voluntary standard, which the Commission staff has determined is inadequate to address the risk of injury because the revised standard would still allow accessible cords to remain available for sale to consumers. (4) The Commission also considered setting a later effective date. Based on the record before the Commission, including the severity of the strangulation hazard to children, the advanced state of compliance with similar requirements for stock window coverings in the United States and for stock and custom window coverings in Canada, and the long pendency of this proceeding, the final rule provides an effective date that is 180 days after publication of the final rule, as proposed. (f) Unreasonable risk. (2) The Commission estimates that the rule would result in aggregate benefits of about $31.6 million annually due to a reduction in deaths and injuries caused by custom window coverings. Of the potential modifications for which staff was able to estimate the potential cost, the lowest costs were about $2.18 per unit, although costs for some units are likely $0. Effective performance requirements for operating cords on window coverings are well known and already utilized for lower-priced stock window coverings. Technologies to address hazardous window covering cords are also known and utilized on stock products. (3) The determination of whether a consumer product safety rule is reasonably necessary to reduce an unreasonable risk of injury involves balancing the degree and nature of the risk of injury addressed by the rule against the probable effect of the rule on the utility, cost, or availability of the product. The Commission does not expect the final rule to have a substantial effect on the utility or availability of custom window coverings. The rule may impact the cost of custom window coverings, but consumers already pay more for custom window coverings, and are likely willing to pay more for safer products. (4) ANSI/WCMA-2018 eliminated the strangulation hazard on stock window coverings, which did not negatively impact sales of stock products; sales increased and cordless technologies became well-developed. The final rule will extend the requirements for stock products to custom window coverings. The Commission expects that the custom window covering market will absorb this cost, just as seen in the stock window covering market. This fact is also observed in the Canadian window covering market after Canada implemented a rule that eliminates hazardous cords on all window covering products. Staff identified no evidence from the Canadian market of a significant reduction in consumer choice as a result of their rule. Rather, the Canadian market has reacted with cost-effective substitutes and redesigned products. (5) Weighing the possibility of increased costs for custom window coverings with the continuing deaths and injuries to young children, the Commission concludes that custom window coverings with hazardous operating cords pose an unreasonable risk of injury and death and finds that the final rule is reasonably necessary to reduce that unreasonable risk of injury and death. (6) The Commission also finds that an effective date of 180 days after publication is reasonably necessary to address the unreasonable risk of strangulation from operating cords on custom window coverings. Section 9(g)(1) of the CPSA (15 U.S.C. 2058(g)(1)) sets a presumptive maximum effective date of 180 days after publication of the rule. To extend this period, the Commission must find good cause that doing so is within the public interest. When balancing the risk of severe harm and death to young children over the entire service life of noncompliant window coverings, against the possibility that some styles of custom window coverings may be less available during a transition period and stock products or other custom styles might need to be used instead, the Commission finds that the public interest is better served by protecting the safety of children and families. (g) Public interest. (h) Voluntary standards. (i) Relationship of benefits to costs. https://www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/VSL_Children_Report_FINAL_20180103.pdf (2) Staff's benefits and costs analysis also highlights unquantified benefits regarding the emotional distress of caregivers that could also be reduced by the final rule. This benefit is not directly accounted for in the primary VSL estimate of $10.5 million. The value of the shock or perceived guilt related to a caregiver's inattentiveness could be significant, as it could result in large reductions to physical wellbeing or income loss. (3) To determine how the final rule impacts consumers, staff converted costs and benefits of the rule into a calculated net cost per household, based on the data point that the average detached, single-family household has 12 window coverings. This analysis translates into a net cost of the final rule of $1.97 for metal or vinyl horizontal blinds. Using the assumption of 12 window coverings per household, this equates to a net cost of the rule (above the benefits provided) of $23.67 per household every time a household updates their custom window coverings, about once every 10 years. For metal or vinyl horizontal blinds, $23.67 is slightly more than 5 percent of the total cost of $448.32 that a household would spend to update their window coverings. (4) We note that economies of scale associated with the voluntary standard for stock product operating cords, and the Canadian standard, may have reduced costs associated with cordless components since Commission staff developed the bases for their cost estimates as early as 2016. Additionally, custom window coverings have a longer product life, which increases the benefit of improving safety beyond the levels Commission staff determined for both stock and customer window coverings. (5) Based on this analysis, the Commission finds that the benefits expected from the rule bear a reasonable relationship to the anticipated costs of the rule. (j) Least burdensome requirement that would adequately reduce the risk of injury. (2) The Commission considered relying on voluntary recalls, compliance with the voluntary standard, and education campaigns, rather than issuing a mandatory standard. These alternatives would have minimal costs but would be unlikely to reduce the risk of injury from custom window coverings that contain hazardous cords. (3) The Commission considered issuing a standard that applies only to certain types of window coverings such as vertical blinds. This would impose lower costs on manufacturers but is unlikely to adequately reduce the risk of injury because it would only address incidents associated with those types. Based on the custom product incident data, only 8.3 percent of the incidents involved vertical blinds and 22.2 percent involved faux wood/wood blinds. The Commission considered adopting the Canadian standard for window covering cords, which would increase the costs to comply with the rule with no additional benefits and/or providing a longer effective date. And the Commission considered adopting a 2022 draft revision of the voluntary standard but finds the requirements in the standard inadequate to address the risk of injury. § 1260.5 Standards incorporated by reference. (a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. All approved material is available for inspection at the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Contact CPSC at: Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, telephone (301) 504-7479, email: [email protected]. [email protected], www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. (b) Window Covering Manufacturers Association, Inc., 355 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10017, telephone: 212.297.2122, https://wcmanet.com. (1) ANSI/WCMA A100.1—2018, American National Standard for Safety of Corded Window Covering Products, approved January 8, 2018; IBR approved for §§ 1260.1, 1260.2, and 1260.4. (i) Read-only copy. https://www.wcmanet.com/pdf/WCMA-A100.1-2018_view-only_v2.pdf. (ii) Purchase. https://webstore.ansi.org/Standards/WCMA/ANSIWCMAA1002018. (2) [Reserved] § 1260.6 Severability. The provisions of this part are separate and severable from one another. If any provision is stayed or determined to be invalid, it is the Commission's intention that the remaining provisions shall continue in effect.