Interpretation ID: ES09-007169 213
The Honorable Diana DeGette
Member, U.S. House of Representatives
800 Grant Street, Suite 202
Denver, CO 80203
Dear Congresswoman DeGette:
Thank you for your letter on behalf of Mr. Glenn Aaron of Denver, regarding the National Highway Traffic Safety Administrations (NHTSAs) requirements for child restraint systems and Mr. Aarons vehicle harness restraint systems. Mr. Aaron has asked you to contact NHTSA to overturn their rulemaking of non-compliance.
NHTSA is authorized (49 U.S.C. 30101 et seq.)(the Safety Act) to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards that establish performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. We have used this authority to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (Standard) No. 213, Child Restraint Systems (49 CFR 571.213). NHTSA regulates the manufacture and sale of new child restraints and requires all new child restraint systems imported into or sold in this country to be certified as meeting Standard No. 213.
Mr. Aaron has separately written to NHTSA asking about our requirements for child harness systems. We have responded by a separate letter, a copy of which is enclosed. In our response, we explain that Standard No. 213 would apply to the harnesses Mr. Aaron wishes to manufacture. Unfortunately, it appears that Mr. Aarons harnesses would not meet a number of requirements of the standard.
To increase the likelihood that child restraints are correctly used, Standard No. 213 standardizes the means of attachment of child restraints, including harnesses. The standard requires harnesses to attach to a vehicle seat by means of a Type 1 seat belt assembly (i.e., a vehicle lap belt). Mr. Aarons harnesses do not comply with Standard No. 213 because the harnesses are not capable of being installed on a vehicle seat by the lap belt system.
Although Mr. Aaron did not describe his harnesses in detail in his letter to NHTSA or to your office, agency staff has seen photographs of a rear-facing child harness on the website he once had. It appeared to NHTSA staff viewing the website that the top of the rear-facing restraint was slung like a hammock from the head restraint of the front passenger seat to a ceiling anchor in the rear. As explained in our letter to Mr. Aaron, anchoring a restraint to or hanging it from the head restraint is not permitted by FMVSS No. 213. There could be
Page 2
The Honorable Diana DeGette
excessive forces imposed by the child restraint on the forward seat, and dangerous crash forces transmitted to a child suspended from the head restraint of the vehicle seat.
These and other potential conflicts with FMVSS No. 213 are discussed in the enclosed letter. Because Mr. Aarons harnesses would not meet the requirements of the standard, they can not be certified as meeting FMVSS No. 213 and can not be sold in this country.
Interested persons may petition NHTSA to initiate rulemaking to amend the FMVSS
(49 CFR Part 552). However, the agency denies petitions that are not in the interest of motor vehicle safety.
Mr. Aaron has asked for information regarding the toxicity of the material used in the plastic frames of conventional child restraints. This agency does not have information indicating a problem relating to motor vehicle safety.
I hope this information will prove useful to you and your constituent. If you have any questions, please have your staff contact me or O. Kevin Vincent, NHTSAs Chief Counsel, at (202) 366-9511.
Sincerely yours,
David L. Strickland
Enclosure
Dated: 2/18/2010