Skip to main content
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: aiam5392

Mr. Dan Neaga and Ms. Dianna Sabo Johnson Controls, Inc. 49200 Halyard Dr. P.O. Box 8010 Plymouth, MI 48170; Mr. Dan Neaga and Ms. Dianna Sabo Johnson Controls
Inc. 49200 Halyard Dr. P.O. Box 8010 Plymouth
MI 48170;

Dear Mr. Neaga and Ms. Sabo: This responds to your letter asking abou a requirement of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 213, 'Child Restraint Systems,' for built- in child restraints that use 'the same seat back surface as the adult occupant.' I apologize for the delay in responding. Before I begin, I would like to reference a May 26, 1994 telephone call to you from Ms. Deirdre Fujita of my staff, about your letter's statement that the information you sent us is confidential. Ms. Fujita explained that letters requesting interpretations of our FMVSSs are public information, but suggested that we could return your sketches to you and make publicly available only your cover letter. You agreed this would satisfy your concerns about not disclosing your design concepts. Accordingly, Ms. Fujita has mailed your sketches to you. By way of background, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act authorizes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA, however, does not approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment or pass on the compliance of a vehicle or item of equipment outside the context of an actual enforcement proceeding. Instead, the Safety Act establishes a 'self-certification' process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The following represents our opinion based on the facts set forth in your letter. You ask if your understanding is correct that 'lateral support of the side of the child's torso is not required by FMVSS 213.' The answer is yes. The torso impact protection requirement of S5.2.2.1(b) of Standard 213 specifies requirements for ' e ach system surface provided for support of the side of the child's torso' (emphasis added). The preamble for the final rule adopting S5.2.2.1(b) explains: 'The specifications do not require manufacturers to incorporate side supports in their restraints, they only regulate the surfaces that the manufacturer decides to provide so that they distribute crash forces over the child's torso.' 44 FR 72131, 72135, December 13, 1979. Please note that NHTSA determines independently from the manufacturer whether a particular surface is provided for side support. The determination is based on factors such as the design and intended use of the restraint, and the advertising literature for the restraint. Accordingly, a manufacturer cannot avoid complying with S5.2.2.1(b) simply by asserting that a side surface was not provided for side support. However, with regard to a built-in restraint such as yours that uses the same seat back surface as the adult occupant and where 'no lateral support other than the one offered to the adult occupant is provided,' it does not appear that the child restraint incorporates side supports subject to S5.2.2.1(b). If you have any questions, please call Ms. Fujita at (202) 366-2992. Again, my apologies for the delay in responding. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure;