Skip to main content
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: nht88-4.16

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 11/25/88 EST

FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: KAREN WHITEHEAD

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: MEMO DATED 5-9-88, TO NHTSA, FROM KAREN WHITEHEAD, OCC2019

TEXT: This is in response to your letter in which you sought information about Federal motor vehicle safety standard No. 213, Child Restraint Systems (49 CFR @ 571.213; copy enclosed). You provided a diagram of your back and head rest attachment which would a ccompany a child's car toddler seat. You noted that your device will allow a child's head and shoulders to be supported in an up-right position and that the back rest is anchored by slipping the motor vehicle's seat belt through elastic loops by the bac k rest and around the toddler seat. I apologize for the delay in my response.

You should be aware that your device would be considered an item of motor vehicle equipment, and you would be considered a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. The safety Act specifies that all of our standards applicable to items of motor vehicle equipment, including Standard No. 213, apply to the child restraint system before its first purchase in good faith for purposes other than resale. The general rule is that aftermarket accessories, s uch as your back and head rest, may be added to a child restraint system after its first sale.

This general rule is, however, limited by section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A)). That section specifies: "No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative . . . any devi se or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard . . ."

You should be aware that some elements of design incorporated in child restraint systems in compliance with Standard No. 213 might be affected by adding your headrest. For example, under section S5.7, all child restraints are required to incorporate the flammability resistance requirements under standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials. Your letter indicates that you are aware of these requirements and that your product would be in compliance with these requirements. Also, child restraint s recommended for use by children weighing less than 20 pounds

must comply with paragraph S5.2.3.2 of Standard No. 213. That paragraph requires that each child restraint surface contactable by the child dummy's head during the crash test shall be covered with slow recovery energy absorbing materials with specified characteristics. This requirement ensures that children riding in these restraints will not suffer unnecessary head injuries during crashes. If the installation of your back and head rest by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair business would impair features provided in compliance with these or any other provision in the standard, then these entities would be rendering inoperative a Federally required element of design in violation of section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act. Section 109 of t he Safety Act specifies a civil penalty of up to $ 1,000 for each violation of section 108. Each child restraint on which a Federally required element of design was rendered inoperative would be considered a seperate violation of section 108.

Since an owner of a child restraint is not among the parties listed in section 108(a)(2)(A), he or she is not required to avoid rendering inoperative elements of design specified in the safety standards. Nevertheless, this agency urges you to voluntaril y ensure that your back and head restraint would not render any such elements inoperative.

You should also be aware that as a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment under the Safety Act, you would be subject to the requirements of sections 151-159 of the Safety Act, concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects related to motor ve hicle safety. If you as manufacturer or the agency determined that your product had a defect related to motor vehicle safety, you as the manufacturer would have to notify all purchasers of the defect and either:

1. repair the visor so that the defect is removed; or

2. replace the visor with an identical or reasonably equivalent product that does not have the defect.

Whichever of these options was chosen, you as the manufacturer would have to bear the full expense of the notification and remedy. Therefore, you could not charge owners of the back and head restraint for remedy if the device were first purchased less t han eight years before the notification campaign.

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

ENCLOSURE