Skip to main content
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: nht87-1.53

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 03/27/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Thomas R. Fahl

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Thomas R. Fahl, Esq. Brendel, Flanagan, Sendik & Fahl, S.C. 6324 West North Avenue Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53213-2099

Dear Mr. Fahl:

This responds to your letter to Dr. Richard Strombotne, the chief of our Crashworthiness Division. In your letter, you posed three questions about child restraint systems. I will answer those questions in the order you presented them.

1. Does NHTSA have information as to where a family with two children 3 years of age or under should put the second of two child restraint systems, assuming that the safest place for one is the middle of the rear seat?

NHTSA has not specifically addressed this topic in any of our regulations or recommendations. We believe, however, that in this situation both child restraint systems should be placed in the rear seat. This belief is based on the generally greater distan ce from the rear seat to the interior surface in front of that seat and the fact that the interior surface in front of the rear seat is primarily the rear of the front seats. The rear of the front seats tends to be a less hostile surface than the dashboa rd. Additionally, crash data show that all vehicle occupants (both adults and children) suffer fewer injuries and fatalities in the rear seating positions than in the front seating positions.

2. Has NHTSA developed any rules or regulations suggesting or requiring that manufacturers of child restraint systems advise the consumer where to put a second child restraint, assuming that two children under 3 years of age will be occupying a motor veh icle at the same time and also assuming that neither child restraint system is a backward facing system?

No, NHTSA has not imposed any such requirements. With respect to child restraints manufactured before August 12, 1986, section S5.6.1 of Standard No. 213, Child Restraint Systems (49 CFR S571.213) specified that: "The instructions shall state that the re ar center seating position is the safest seating position in most vehicles for installing a child restraint system." For child restraints manufactured on or after August 12, 1986, section S5.6.1 requires: "The instructions shall state that, for maximum s afety protection, child restraint systems should be installed in a rear seating position in vehicles with two rear seating positions and in the center rear seating position in vehicles with such a seating position."

NHTSA has somewhat modified its position about the rear center seating position being the safest place to install a child restraint system in a recent rulemaking action amending Standard No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages (49 CFR S571.210). Please no te that this standard applies only to vehicle manufacturers, and not to child restraint manufacturers. However, in an August 19, 1986 rule (51 FR 29552; copy enclosed), section S6(b) of Standard No. 210 requires the owners manual for vehicles manufacture d after September 1, 1987 to state that "according to accident statistics, children are safer when properly restrained in the rear seating positions than in the front seating positions." We are currently considering whether Standard No. 213 should be ame nded to include similar language. However, neither of these requirements specifically addresses the situation where two child restraints are to be installed in the same vehicle.

3. Has NHTSA done studies to determine that the right front passenger seat is not an appropriate place for a child restraint system and, if so, what are the results of those studies?

No study of which we are aware, whether done by this agency or any other party, suggests that the right front passenger seat is not an appropriate place for a child restraint system. In fact, those studies of which we are aware indicate that a properly i nstalled child restraint system in the right front passenger seat will afford the child occupant a high level of safety protection in a crash situation. The safety protection can be maximized by properly installing the child restraint in a rear seating p osition, but we are aware of no basis for stating that the right front passenger seat is not an appropriate place for a child restraint system.

If you have any further questions on this subject or need more information, please feel free to contact Steve Kratzke of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

Enclosure

September 17, 1986

Mr. Richard L. Strombotne Chief, Crashworthiness Division U.S. Dept. of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Dear Mr. Strombotne:

In conjunction with a matter upon which I am presently working in this office I am in need of information relative to child restraint systems and pose the following inquiries to you

1. Does the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration have information as to where a family with 2 children 3 years of age or under should put the second of 2 child restraint systems assuming that the safest place for one is the middle of the rear s eat?

2. Has the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration developed any rules or regulations suggesting or requiring that manufacturers of child restraint systems advise the consumer where to put a second child restraint system assuming that 2 children u nder 3 years of age will be occupying a motor vehicle at the same time and also assuming that neither child restraint system is a backward facing system?

3. Has the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration done studies to determine that the right front passenger seat is not an appropriate place for a child restraint system and if so what are the results of those studies?

In the event the Administration has developed background information pertaining to any one of the three areas about which I am making an inquiry I would appreciate your directing me to that information or sending copies to me.

Very truly yours,

Thomas R. Fahl

TRF:mhs