[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 104 (Tuesday, June 1, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29410-29412]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-13824]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-98-4383; Notice 2]


Kolcraft Enterprises, Inc.; Denial of Application for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

    Kolcraft Enterprises of Chicago, Illinois, has determined that 
706,068 child restraint systems it manufactured fail to comply with 49 
CFR 571.213, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 213, 
``Child Restraint Systems,'' and has filed an appropriate report 
pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, ``Defects and Noncompliance Reports.'' 
Kolcraft has also applied to be exempted from the notification and 
remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301--``Motor Vehicle Safety'' 
on the basis that the noncompliance is inconsequential to safety.
    Notice of receipt of the application was published on September 8, 
1998, in the Federal Register (63 FR 47545), with a 30-day comment 
period. We received no comments.
    FMVSS No. 213, S5.6.1.8, requires:

    In the case of each child restraint system that can be used in a 
position so that it is facing the rear of the vehicle, the 
instructions shall provide a warning against using rear-facing 
restraints at seating positions equipped with air bags, and shall 
explain the reasons for, and consequences of not following the 
warning. The instructions shall also include a statement that owners 
of vehicles with front passenger side air bags should refer to their 
vehicle owner's manual for child restraint installation 
instructions.

    In adopting S5.6.1.8, we said that such instructions would 
``complement'' the requirement that owner's manuals of vehicles having 
a front passenger side air bag provide information regarding ``proper 
positioning of occupants, including children, at seating positions 
equipped with an air bag.'' 59 FR 7643, 7646 (Feb. 16, 1994) (final 
rule). This requirement appears in S4.5.1(f) of FMVSS No. 208, which 
was added in 1993. 58 FR 46551, 46564 (Sep. 2, 1993) (final rule).
    The items affected by the noncompliance are the instructions for 
proper use that were provided after August 15, 1994, with certain 
models of Kolcraft's child restraints in its effort to comply with S5.6 
of FMVSS No. 213. Kolcraft's instructions provided the appropriate 
warning against using rear-facing restraints at seating positions 
equipped with air bags, as well as the reason for the warning and the 
consequences of not following it. However, Kolcraft's instructions did 
not include a statement expressly referring owners of vehicles with 
front passenger side air bags to their vehicle owner's manual for child 
restraint installation instructions. The noncompliances began August 
15, 1994, the effective date of S5.6.1.8. The following models of child 
restraints were affected by the noncompliance: Rock'n Ride (until April 
1996); Auto-Mate (until June 1997); Traveler 700 (until December 1995); 
Performa (until June 1997); and Secure Fit (until June 1997). The total 
number of child restraints involved is 706,068. In response to an April 
17, 1997, letter from us concerning miscellaneous compliance issues,

[[Page 29411]]

Kolcraft has subsequently revised its instructions to conform to 
S5.6.1.8.
    Kolcraft supports its application for inconsequential noncompliance 
with the following:

    S4.5.1(f) of FMVSS No. 208 requires owner's manuals to provide 
information regarding ``proper positioning of occupants, including 
children, at seating positions equipped with air bags.'' (Emphasis 
supplied.) It does not, however, require a vehicle manufacturer to 
include ``child restraint installation instructions'' in general. 
Indeed, for rear-facing infant restraints such as Kolcraft's Rock 
``n Ride, there should be no child restraint installation 
instructions for ``seating positions equipped with air bags,'' 
because rear-facing restraints should not be used in air bag 
equipped seats. And not surprisingly, no owner's manual we reviewed 
contains installation instructions for rear-facing infant seats at 
``seating positions equipped with air bags'; rather, they 
consistently warn against installation of a rear-facing restraint at 
an air bag equipped seating position. While some owner's manuals 
contain child restraint installation instructions for other (non-air 
bag) seating positions, not all owner's manuals contain such 
information. Thus, since the vehicle owner's manual will not always 
yield the ``child restraint installation'' information apparently 
contemplated by S5.6.1.8 of FMVSS No. 213, the inadvertent omission 
from the Kolcraft instruction sheets of a reference to the vehicle 
owner's manual is not consequential to motor vehicle safety.
    Moreover, although Kolcraft does not question the usefulness of 
a statement directing vehicle owners to their owner's manual for 
``complement[ary]'' (59 FR at 7646) information relating to the 
positioning of occupants--especially children--at seat positions 
equipped with air bags, Kolcraft's inadvertent failure to include 
such a statement in its instructions is inconsequential because 
Kolcraft's instructions set forth in detail the very information 
about child restraint installation and the proper positioning of 
children that is contemplated in S5.6.1.8 and the final rule 
promulgating the regulation, and, in many cases, exceed that 
information. In short, the omission of the statement directing 
owners of vehicles with front passenger side air bags to their 
owner's manual would not deprive vehicle owners using Kolcraft child 
restraints from any information germane to the safe installation of 
child restraints in vehicles equipped with air bags.
    For example, Kolcraft's instructions include warnings not to 
place a rear-facing child restraint in a seat equipped with air 
bags, as well as a statement explaining the reason for the warning 
and the consequences of ignoring it. The instructions provide 
information regarding appropriate seating positions. The 
instructions also provide elaborate information about how to install 
child restraints with a variety of seat belts, and they illustrate a 
number of different seat belt configurations, explaining which are 
and which are not appropriate for use in installing child 
restraints. The instructions also explain why certain configurations 
are inappropriate and what vehicle owners should do if a seat belt 
will not hold a child restraint tightly. Thus, Kolcraft's 
instructions provide all the information concerning installation and 
positioning of children that S5.6.1.8 apparently contemplates would 
be provided in owner's manuals, and, in many respects, exceed the 
information described in S5.6.1.8. Accordingly, Kolcraft's 
inadvertent noncompliance with S5.6.1.8's requirement of a statement 
referring to the vehicle owner's manual is inconsequential as it 
relates to motor vehicle safety.
    Kolcraft does not question the usefulness or importance of 
S5.6.1.8's requirement that the instructions for child restraints 
direct owners of vehicles with front passenger side air bags to 
their vehicle owner's manual for child restraint installation 
instructions. As soon as it learned of its noncompliance with the 
requirement, Kolcraft revised its instructions to conform exactly to 
S5.6.1.8. However, because Kolcraft's noncompliant instructions 
provide detailed information relating to the installation of child 
restraints with a variety of seat belt configurations, as well as 
information concerning the proper positioning of children in 
vehicles equipped with air bags, the omission of a statement 
referring to the owner's manual in Kolcraft's instructions was 
inconsequential with respect to vehicle safety.

    We are denying Kolcraft's application for the following reasons.
    By way of background, upon conducting dynamic testing in 1991 that 
indicated air bags generally produce substantial increases in the 
values for the head injury criterion (HIC) and chest acceleration of 
dummies seated in rear-facing child restraints (compared to dummies in 
rear-facing restraints tested with no air bag), we sought to inform 
consumers about the adverse interaction of rear-facing child restraints 
and air bags as quickly as possible. We issued a ``Consumer Advisory'' 
(December 10, 1991) which warned parents about using rear-facing child 
seats in vehicle seats equipped with an air bag. Subsequently, we 
initiated actions in two separate areas to ensure that consumers would 
be provided important safety information about the effect of air bags 
on rear-facing child restraints.
    First, on December 14, 1992, we published a Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (NPRM) which proposed to amend FMVSS No. 208, ``Occupant 
Crash Protection,'' to (1) specify that vehicle manufacturers must 
install air bags as the means to provide the automatic crash protection 
required by the standard, and (2) require that labels bearing specified 
information about air bags be placed in vehicles equipped with air 
bags, and that additional, more detailed information about air bags be 
provided in the vehicle owner's manual (57 FR 59043). The proposed 
labeling requirements were intended to ensure that consumers will have 
access to important safety information with respect to the air bags 
installed in their vehicles, including specific warnings against 
installing rearward-facing child restraint systems in front passenger 
seating positions equipped with an air bag. We published a final rule 
adopting these amendments on September 2, 1993 (58 FR 46551). The 
owner's manual requirements became effective on March 1, 1994, and the 
vehicle label requirements became effective on September 1, 1994.
    Second, on April 16, 1993, we supplemented these actions by 
publishing an NPRM which proposed to amend labeling and other 
requirements of FMVSS No. 213 for rear-facing infant restraint systems 
(58 FR 19792). We proposed to require that (1) warning labels for these 
systems include a warning against using the restraint in any vehicle 
seating position equipped with an air bag, and (2) printed instructions 
for rear-facing restraints include safety information about air bags. 
We published a final rule adopting these requirements on February 16, 
1994 (59 FR 7643). In response to a suggestion from Volkswagen, we also 
included the requirement at question in Kolcraft's application, namely, 
that the written instructions provided with child restraint systems 
that can be used in a position so that it is facing the rear of the 
vehicle must include a statement that owners of vehicles with front 
passenger side air bags should refer to their vehicle owner's manual 
for child restraint installation instructions. The vehicle owner's 
manual would include precautions specific to the vehicle that should be 
heeded for the safety of occupants, including children. These would 
include information on where to place a child restraint system in the 
air-bag equipped vehicle, which is an item of vehicle-specific 
information that only the vehicle manufacturer--and not the child 
restraint manufacturer--can provide. These requirements became 
effective on August 15, 1994.
    We firmly believe that strict adherence to the requirements 
addressing warning labels, printed instructions, and information in the 
owner's manual as outlined above will maximize to the extent 
practicable the implementation of precautionary measures to preserve 
the safety of infants and young children traveling in motor vehicles 
equipped with air bags. Each of these warnings was developed with care 
to ensure that the specific content and location of the labels and 
instructions clearly and concisely convey the hazards of placing of 
rear-

[[Page 29412]]

facing child restraints in air bag-equipped seating positions. In 
addition, the requirements help ensure that consumers are provided 
information about where a rear-facing child restraint can appropriately 
be placed in the vehicle.
    In the years since these amendments were adopted, we have continued 
to work very closely with both vehicle and child restraint 
manufacturers and others in the child passenger safety community to 
reduce the likelihood that a rear-facing infant restraint would be 
placed in a vehicle seating position that has an air bag. Through media 
advisories, consumer information fact sheets, revisions to the vehicle 
and restraint labeling and information requirements noted above, and 
other means, the entire child passenger safety community has taken 
measures to educate the public regarding the detrimental effects of a 
quickly deploying air bag when it strikes the seat back of a rear-
facing infant restraint.
    However, between 1995 and 1998, and despite the concerted efforts 
detailed above, we have confirmed that 15 children have been fatally 
injured in crashes where their rear-facing child restraints were 
installed in a seating position that was equipped with an air bag that 
had deployed, and another nine have sustained serious, but nonfatal, 
injuries.
    The statement missing from Kolcraft's product conveys important 
safety information. Kolcraft contends that, while (1) S5.6.1.8 of FMVSS 
No. 213 requires written instructions for child restraints to include a 
statement ``that owners of vehicles with front passenger side air bags 
should refer to their vehicle owner's manual for child restraint 
installation instructions,'' (emphasis added), and (2) the 
corresponding requirements of S4.5.1(f) of FMVSS No. 208 requires 
vehicle owner's manuals to provide information regarding ``proper 
positioning of occupants, including children, at seating positions 
equipped with air bags,'' (emphasis added), there, in fact, should be 
no child restraint ``installation instructions'' for ``seating 
positions equipped with air bags,'' because rear-facing restraints 
should not be used in air bag equipped seats. We believe that Kolcraft 
is too narrowly interpreting the phrase ``installation instructions'' 
in the S5.6.1.8 requirement of FMVSS No. 213 as it relates to the 
S4.5.1(f) requirements of FMVSS No. 208.
    In the final rule addressing installation of air bags and 
associated information to appear on labels and in owner's manuals (58 
FR 46551), we specified that the vehicle owner's manual must provide 
any necessary precautions regarding the proper positioning of 
occupants, including children, at seating positions equipped with air 
bags to ensure maximum safety protection for those occupants. In 
commenting on our proposal to adopt this requirement, SafetyBeltSafe 
U.S.A. stated that it felt:

    Complete information on the positioning of infants in cars with 
passenger side air bags would be essential in the vehicle owner's 
manual. It should include these points: (1) Children riding in a 
rear-facing restraint must never ride in the front seat if a 
passenger air bag is installed, because the air bag could hit the 
leading edge of the child restraint with great force if it deploys; 
(2) therefore, children under 20 pounds (and about one year of age) 
must always ride in a child restraint that faces the rear (or in a 
car bed that meets FMVSS 213) and must be placed in the rear seat, 
so they will not be hit by the air bag. If a child uses a car bed, 
this advice also applies, because current car beds have not been 
accepted for use in an air bag position. A child under this size 
must never be turned to face forward in the front or rear seat, due 
to the risk of neck and spinal cord injury; and (3) If there is no 
rear seat, this vehicle is not suitable for children under 20 pounds 
and one year, given the current state of the art of child 
restraints.'' (Docket 74-14-N79-005)
    We adopted the requirement without incorporating the SafetyBeltSafe 
recommendations, explaining that ``the agency believes that a 
requirement specifying that the owner's manual must provide any 
necessary precautions regarding the proper positioning of children at 
seating positions equipped with air bags to ensure maximum safety 
protection for those occupants is sufficient to ensure that information 
along the lines identified by SafetyBeltSafe U.S.A. will be provided.'' 
(58 FR 46557.) From this, it is clear that we did not intend to limit 
the information included in the vehicle owner's manual to specific 
``installation instructions'' for child restraints per se, but rather, 
for the owner's manual to detail all necessary precautions to ensure 
safety, such as identification of which seating positions are 
appropriate, and which are not, for positioning child restraints 
depending upon the orientation of the child restraint, forward or rear 
facing. We consider this information to be ``installation 
instructions,'' and in fact, most vehicle manufacturers now include 
specific warnings against the use of rear-facing child restraints in 
air bag-equipped seating positions in their owner's manuals similar to 
those suggested by SafetyBeltSafe USA. Kolcraft's argument that the 
subject noncompliance is inconsequential on the theory that rear-facing 
child restraints should not be used in seating positions equipped with 
air bags, and as such, no ``installation instructions'' for such 
seating positions need be provided in the vehicle's owner's manual, is 
incorrect.
    Further, in an issue as sensitive as air bags and infants, 
Kolcraft's failure to fully comply with the requirements of Standard 
No. 213--specifically, by not including the statement required in 
S5.6.1.8 referring owners of vehicles with front passenger side air 
bags to their vehicle owner's manual for child restraint installation 
instructions for supplemental information in 706,068 of its child 
restraints between 1994 and 1997--should not be excused. We do not 
accept Kolcraft's explanation as an indication that it exercised 
reasonable care in developing its product and associated documentation 
when Kolcraft states that ``Kolcraft believes that the S5.6.1.8 
requirement was overlooked because the NPRM did not propose the 
requirement * * * thus, because it (Kolcraft) was already in compliance 
with the requirement contemplated in that subsection of the NPRM, 
Kolcraft believes that its personnel did not check that subsection in 
the final rule and, therefore, did not discover that the requirement of 
a statement referring to the owner's manual had been added in the final 
rule.'' We cannot condone Kolcraft's approach given the grave potential 
consequences should a parent mistakenly place a child in a rear-facing 
child restraint in a seating position equipped with an air bag that 
subsequently deploys in a crash.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that the 
applicant has not met its burden of persuasion that the noncompliance 
it describes is inconsequential to safety. Accordingly, its application 
is hereby denied.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118(d), 30120(h) delegations of authority 
at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: May 26, 1999.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 99-13824 Filed 5-28-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P