Interpretation ID: nht70-2.38

DATE: 12/08/70

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Rodolfo A. Diaz; NHTSA

TO: Ford Motor Company

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of October 26, 1970, submitting a petition for reconsideration concerning Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 215, "Child Seating Systems", published September 23, 1970 (35 F.R. 14478). Because of the timing of your petition, it has been treated as a petition for rulemaking pursuant to 49 CFR @@ 553.35, 553.31. Your letter requests that two amendments be made to the standard before its effective date of April 1, 1971. First, you request that paragraph S4.3 be amended to substitute the language proposed for that paragraph in the notice of proposed rulemaking concerning Standard No. 213, also published on September 23, 1970 (35 F.R. 14786). Second, you request that the standard be amended to provide an alternative test procedure that is specified in your petition, as you believe "the test procedure under S4.11.1 and S5 of the standard to be wholly inappropriate for the Ford child restraint system."

With reference to your request concerning paragraph S4.3 of the standard, the Bureau did not intend the standard to require all child seating systems to have adjustable components to directly restrain the child. Consequently, the Bureau will not consider that a child seating system without adjustable components to directly restrain the child fails to comply, for that reason, with paragraph S4.3 of the standard. The language of the notice of proposed rulemaking, insofar as it states, "Each child seating system component that is adjustable and is designed to restrain the child directly . . ." is a clarification of the present language. For the proposed amendment to be made effective before April 1, 1971, is therefore unnecessary.

Regarding your request for an alternative test procedure, you state in your letter that "using the test procedures in S5.1, the torso block applies an unstabilized, concentrated load on the Tot-Guard shield much like that which would be applied by one cylinder loading another with their axes at 90 degrees to each other." It is not mandatory under S5.1(d) that the load be applied to the torso block at a single point. It may be applied at two or more points as long as the intersection of the load application line and the back surface of the torso block is not more than 8 inches or less than 6 inches above the bottom surface of the torso block. In the case of an unstabilized loading condition, such as that which you state occurs with the Tot-Guard, the load could be applied through a fixture attached to both the top and bottom of the torso block as long as the load application line is within the limits specified. During the test, however, only the torso block and not the attachment fixture may contact the seating system.

For the reasons specified above, the amendments you have requested have been found unnecessary and unjustified, and your petition is accordingly denied.