Skip to main content
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: nht70-2.40

DATE: 12/08/70

FROM: D.W. TOMS -- DIR., NHTSA; SIGNATURE BY CHARLES H. HARTMAN

TO: Physicians for Automotive Safety

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letters of November 6, 1970, to Secretary Volpe and me, concerning child restraint systems. I have taken the liberty of replying to both of your letter, as they seem to raise identical issues.

The points you raise are summarized at the conclusion of your letters. Your first is based upon your belief that no attempt has been made to require labeling on child harnesses that would enable the public "to distinguish between harnesses that provide collision protection, and those that merely serve to secure the child in one place and, at best, prevent him from being thrown forward in a sudden (but controlled) stop." You further state of the latter type of harness.

The Bureau's position in this matter is that harnesses marketed to provide restraint in panic or sudden stop situations must meet the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 209. In addition, enforcement proceedings in this area are presently underway to climinate harnesses that do not comply with the standard. The Bureau does not consider that these inexpensive harnesses provide a satisfactory minimum level of protection when used in motor vehicles. Furthermore, consumers desirable of obtaining crash protection for their children may be induced to compromise on safety by the availability of the cheaper systems, without realizing how limited is the effectiveness of these systems. Any benefits obtained from the cheaper harnesses are more than outweighed by these deficiences.

Your second recommendation concerns child seating systems, and consists of two parts. First, you suggest banning the manufacture of child seating systems that do not comply with Standard No. 213. Second, you recommed that warning notices be required on seating systems remaining on the market after April 1, 1971, that do not comply with the standard because they were manufactured before its effective date.

With reference to your first recommendation, the Buresu has proposed to take the action you recommend. In the notice of proposed rulemaking concerning Standard No. 213, published September 23, 1970 (35 F.R. 14786), the Bureau has proposed to extend the Scope of the standard to include all devices for seating children in motor vehicles. This requirement would become effective January 1, 1972, and a copy of the notice is enclosed for your information. Your letters will be placed in the rulemaking docket. With reference to your second recommendation, the Bureau is not authorized under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act to require much a warning. The Act, pursuant to which Standard No. 213 and all other motor vehicle safety standards are issued, provides that only motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment manufactured after the effective date of a standard must comply with it. We could not, therefore, impose a requirement, including a warning requirement, on those seating systems manufactured before April 1, 1971.

The Bureau agrees, however, that consumers should be aware that child seating systems that do not comply with Standard No. 213 will still be available after April 1, 1971. The Bureau is planning, therefore, to issue an advisory at or about the time the standard becomes effective that will indicate how consumers may distinguish between those child seats that comply with the standard and those that do not.

Your third recommendation is that child harnesses not meeting Standard No. 209 be required to contain warnings as to their deficiencies, and that harnessen that do meet the standard be required to carry detailed information about their value in a crash. As stated above, harnesses that do not comply with the standard may not be manufactured. As to requiring harnesses that do comply to carry detailed information concerning their value, the benefits that these devices can provide will differ according to the dynamics of all individual crash, and are not, therefore, capable of precise statement. The Bureau will, however, consider other methods of informing the public as to the broad safety benefits obtainable from the use of child restraint devices.

Your continued interest in motor vehicle safety is very much appreciated.