[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 207 (Thursday, October 27, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 61908-61911]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21465]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA 2005-21048]
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: Denial of petition for rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document denies a petition for rulemaking submitted by
Honda Motor Co., Ltd. (Honda), to amend Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard (FMVSS) No. 213, ``Child restraint systems.'' Honda requested
that FMVSS No. 213 be amended to limit the weight of all child
restraint systems used with the 3-year-old dummy. Honda stated that
such an amendment would assure the proper operation of weight-based
occupant detection systems used to meet the air bag suppression
requirements of FMVSS No. 208, ``Occupant crash protection.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For Non-Legal Issues: Mr. Tewabe Asebe, Office of Crashworthiness
Standards, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, Telephone: (202) 366-2365.
For Legal Issues: Mr. Chris Calamita, Office of Chief Counsel,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20590, Telephone: (202) 366-2992, Facsimile: (202)
366-3820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On May 12, 2000, NHTSA issued a final rule for advanced air bags,
amending FMVSS No. 208 to, among other things, minimize injuries to
small adults and young children due to air bag deployment (65 FR
30680). To address the risk air bags pose to young children in child
restraint systems, the agency amended FMVSS No. 208 to include a number
of alternative tests, one of which requires the front passenger air
[[Page 61909]]
bag system to automatically suppress when a child or child in a child
restraint system is present. Some manufacturers rely on weight-based
technology to comply with the automatic air bag suppression
requirement. Weight-based technologies utilize load cells or other
sensors designed into the vehicle seat. With this option, the vehicle
air bag in the right front passenger seat is suppressed when a child or
a child in a child restraint system is placed on the seat. If an adult
occupies the front passenger seat, the feature enables the air bag
deployment. The threshold for enabling the air bag deployment is
dependent on the design and calibration of the suppression system used.
The agency selected certain child restraint systems to be used for
compliance testing of the air bag suppression systems. The selected
child restraint systems are included as an appendix (Appendix A,
``Selection of child restraint systems'') in FMVSS No. 208. The list of
child restraint systems is periodically updated to reflect child
restraint systems currently on the market. On November 19, 2003, the
agency updated the list of child restraint systems in Appendix A of
FMVSS No. 208 (68 FR 65179). FMVSS No. 208 requires that vehicles be
certified for compliance using any of the child restraint systems in
Appendix A.
II. The Petition
On February 11, 2004, the agency received a petition for rulemaking
from Honda requesting that NHTSA amend FMVSS No. 213 to limit the
weight of all child restraint systems, including rear-facing, forward-
facing, and convertible type restraints used by 3-year-old children and
produced in accordance with FMVSS No. 213, for the purpose of
maintaining the appropriate air bag deployment for small occupants.
Honda suggested that, based on available child restraint system
designs, ``perhaps a weight limit of about 8.5 kilograms (kg) (18.7 lb)
may be appropriate.''
As Honda's petition specifically addresses the air bag suppression
requirements for child restraints used with the 3-year-old dummy, NHTSA
notes that manufacturers choosing to certify to FMVSS No. 208 S21.2,
Option-Automatic suppression feature, must demonstrate compliance when
using any of the child restraints listed in sections C and D of FMVSS
No. 208 Appendix A. These child restraints include (1) forward-facing
toddler and forward-facing convertible seats, and (2) forward-facing
toddler/belt positioning-booster seats and belt-positioning booster
seats.
In its petition, Honda stated that it agrees with NHTSA that it is
very important to periodically update the child restraint system list
in Appendix A of FMVSS No. 208. However, Honda claimed that the weight
of certain child restraint system models recommended for 3-year-old
children in the updated list were heavier than others. Honda proposed
to limit the child restraint system mass to about 8.5 kg (18.7 pounds).
Specifically, the petitioner stated:
A current, popular system for automatic suppression of the air
bag for the infant and small child is seat weight detection. If
increasingly heavier CRSs are added to the market endlessly, the
stable and reliable performance of small occupant detection systems
cannot be achieved. Consequently, future air bag suppression systems
designed to prevent deployment with infants or small children in
very heavy future CRSs could also suppress deployment for small
adults such as the AF5 (5th percentile adult female). We are also
concerned that older vehicles already on the road with suppression
systems calibrated to the lower weights of older CRS specifications
will fail to recognize newer, heavier designs. This means the air
bag could deploy for an infant or small child in a very heavy CRS in
vehicles calibrated to lighter weight CRSs that were on the market
at the time the vehicle suppression system was designed.
Therefore, we believe NHTSA should amend the FMVSS No. 213,
``Child Restraint Systems,'' to limit the weight of all C3Y (Three-
year-old Child Dummy) CRSs (including rear-facing, forward-facing
and convertible type CRSs) produced in accordance with FMVSS 213 for
the purpose of maintaining the appropriate airbag deployment for
small occupants. Based on the CRS designs available, perhaps a
weight limit of about 8.5 kilograms may be appropriate.
Based on the wide variety of CRS designs already on the market,
Honda does not believe this simple requirement would unduly limit
CRS designs or performance. A lighter CRS weight would assist in
assuring the proper operation of weight-based air bag suppression
systems and would add to consumer convenience and usage by being
easier to carry and install in a vehicle.
III. Data
Honda provided the mass distribution for the child restraint
systems in Appendix A of FMVSS No. 208. The weight distribution for
these restraints ranged from about 1.5 kg (3.3 pounds) for Evenflo
Right Fit to about 7.9 kg (17.4 pounds) for Britax Expressway ISOFIX,
with an average weight of about 4.6 kg (11 pounds). Honda proposed to
limit the child restraint system weight to about 8.5 kg (18.7 pounds).
It is important to note that as currently written, FMVSS No. 213 is a
performance standard, and as such, does not specify any weight limit on
particular child restraint system designs.
While Honda's petition provided the weight of the child restraint
systems currently included in Appendix A of FMVSS No. 208, NHTSA
obtained the weight of a number of varying restraint designs, either
currently available or available in recent years, including infant
beds, infant seats with and without a base, convertible child seats,
forward-facing only seats, combination child and booster seats, and
booster seats child restraints.\1\ From this list, NHTSA examined the
weights of those restraints that could possibly be included in sections
C and D of FMVSS No. 208 Appendix A, and therefore relevant to the
subject petition (e.g., forward-facing toddler, forward-facing
convertible seats, forward-facing toddler/belt positioning-booster
seats, and belt-positioning booster seats). While the vast majority of
these child restraint systems weigh less than the Britax Expressway
ISOFIX (currently, the heaviest child restraint system included in
Appendix A of FMVSS No. 208), NHTSA found at least seven child
restraint systems heavier than the Britax Expressway ISOFIX. Further,
six of these are heavier than the 8.5 kg limit suggested by Honda in
its petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ SafetyBeltSafe U.S.A. provided the weights of these varying
child restraints to NHTSA. A list of the restrint make/models and
weights has been submitted separately to this docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Analysis
Appendix A of FMVSS No. 208 specifies a list of child restraint
systems that may be used by NHTSA to test the air bag suppression
systems of a vehicle that has been certified as complying with S19,
S21, or S23 of FMVSS No. 208. When selecting a child restraint system
to be included in Appendix A, the agency considers a number of
different factors. These factors are outlined in the agency's November
2003, final rule as follows:
In deciding whether to amend Appendix A, NHTSA will consider a
number of factors, such as whether a particular restraint has been a
high volume model, whether it has mass and dimensions that are
representative of many restraints on the market, whether its mass
and dimensions represent outliers, and whether a variety of
restraint manufacturers are represented in the appendix. This
approach will allow us to limit Appendix A to those restraints that
represent large portions of the CRS market, while including
exceptionally large or small restraints. We believe a combination of
restraints is needed to assure the robustness of automatic
suppression systems under real world conditions.
Specifically with respect to Honda's concern about the increasing
weight of
[[Page 61910]]
child restraint systems, the heaviest child restraint system selected
for inclusion in Appendix A, as amended in the November 19, 2003 final
rule, is about 0.5 kg (1.1 lbs) heavier than the heaviest child
restraint system removed from Appendix A. However, as noted earlier,
the Britax Expressway ISOFIX is lighter than at least seven other child
restraint systems either currently available or available in recent
years that could be included in sections C and D of FMVSS No. 208
Appendix A. Importantly, NHTSA notes that there is no single
established weight threshold for all weight-based air bag suppression
systems on the market. The design of these systems may vary depending
on a number of different parameters, as long as the system adequately
suppresses the air bag when tested in accordance with the requirements
of FMVSS No. 208.
Honda stated that for weight-based occupant detection systems used
for air bag suppression, if increasingly heavier child restraint
systems are added to the market endlessly, the stable and reliable
performance of small occupant detection systems could not be achieved.
NHTSA does not believe that the addition of the Britax Expressway
ISOFIX, the heaviest child restraint system included in Appendix A of
FMVSS No. 208 to date, serves as an indication that child restraints
are becoming heavier. As noted earlier, NHTSA has identified at least
nine child restraint systems that are above the 8.5 kg mass limit
proposed by Honda. However, as FMVSS No. 213 does not require child
restraint systems to meet specific weight limits, NHTSA does not weigh
the restraints as part of its annual compliance test program. As such,
the agency has no historical data to show that there is a trend towards
increasingly heavier child restraint systems as implied by Honda.
Further, Honda did not provide such data in support of its petition.
The agency did estimate that, in order to comply with the
requirement that all child restraint systems have hardware enabling the
restraint to attach to the universal child restraint anchorage system
required in vehicles as a result of FMVSS No. 225, ``Child restraint
anchorage systems,'' each child restraint system would have an
incremental weight increase ranging from less than 0.45 kg (1 pound) to
1.36 kg (3 pounds) depending on the type of attachment hardware
used.\2\ To date, virtually all child restraint systems have adopted
the use of flexible-type attachment hardware, which only marginally
increases the weight of the child restraint system. Notably, the
heaviest child restraint system in Appendix A of FMVSS No. 208-the
Britax Expressway ISOFIX-is a restraint that utilizes a rigid lower
attachment system to connect to the vehicle anchorages and is designed
for forward-facing use. These rigid anchorages are typically heavier
than the flexible attachment hardware that is predominant in current
designs. However, we note that the Britax Expressway ISOFIX, at 7.9 kg
(17.4 lb), is still significantly lighter than the heaviest child
restraint system examined by NHTSA-the Britax Super Elite (a forward-
facing seat for children weighing between 22 and 80 pounds, equipped
with a 5-point harness restraint system) at 11.6 kg (25.6 lb).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Final Economic Assessment, FMVSS No. 213, FMVSS No. 225,
Child Restraint Systems, Child Restraint Anchorage Systems. Docket
No. NHTSA-1998-3390-27, Page 44, February 1999.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Honda stated that based on the wide variety of child restraint
system designs already on the market, the company does not believe a
weight limit requirement would unduly limit child restraint system
design or performance. However, Honda did not present evidence to
support this claim. Absent such evidence, there is no way for the
agency to confirm Honda's assertion. As noted earlier, FMVSS No. 213-as
with the other FMVSSs-is a performance standard. The agency does not
believe that it is appropriate to impose design-restrictive
requirements that may hinder the development of safety features for use
in future child restraint system designs. For example, NHTSA is
conducting ongoing research in the area of improved side impact
protection for children in crashes in response to the Transportation
Recall, Enhancement, Accountability and Documentation (TREAD) Act.
NHTSA does not want to put constraints on potential innovative designs
that could improve safety for children in this or other areas in the
future, and believes that imposing design-restrictive parameters for
child restraints-such as imposing a weight limit as suggested in the
subject petition-could potentially preclude the development of safety
advances. While FMVSS No. 213 does not currently specify weight limits
on child restraint designs, the agency notes, as did Honda, that
lighter weight child restraint systems can be considered more user-
friendly in that they are easier to move from one vehicle to another
and from one seating position to another in the same vehicle if needed.
Honda stated that it is concerned that older vehicles that are
already on the road, with suppression systems calibrated to the lower
weights of older child restraint systems, will fail to recognize newer
and heavier child restraint systems. Honda stated that the air bag
could deploy for an infant or small child in a very heavy child
restraint system in vehicles calibrated to lighter weight child
restraint systems that were on the market at the time the vehicle
suppression system was designed. NHTSA notes that the mass of the
Britax Expressway ISOFIX is only 0.5 kg (1.1 lb) more than the previous
heaviest child restraint system included in Appendix A. This is a very
nominal increase (approximately 3 percent) in child restraint mass, and
the agency would expect that the margin of safety designed into the
occupant detection systems used to control air bag suppression systems
is sufficient to address such small changes in child restraint system
mass. This is especially important given that the agency has identified
a number of child restraints either currently available or available in
the recent past that are heavier- and in some cases, significantly
heavier-than the Britax Expressway ISOFIX.
While Honda proposed to limit child restraint system design mass to
about 8.5 kg (18.7 lb), it did not provide any rationale or supporting
data to justify this 8.5 kg limit. This, coupled with the fact that
there is no single established weight threshold for all weight-based
air bag suppression systems on the market, does not support the
adoption of Honda's proposed amendment. The agency does not have a
rationale to restrict the mass of child restraint systems to a limit of
8.5 kg at this time.
While NHTSA does not believe that amendments are necessary at this
time, the agency shares Honda's concern. As noted earlier, the agency
does not weigh child restraints as part of the FMVSS No. 213 compliance
test program. However, the agency does now weigh these seats for use in
(1) developing future upgrades to Appendix A of FMVSS No. 208 and (2)
the agency's Child Restraint Ease of Use Ratings Program. In addition,
we will continue to monitor developments on this matter through the
Society of Automotive Engineers-Child Restraint Systems Standard
Committee, whose members include motor vehicle and motor vehicle
equipment manufacturers, and child restraint systems manufacturers.
This committee has been and continues to be in dialog on this subject,
and we will ensure that the concerns are well communicated.
VI. Conclusion
The agency has clearly noted the composition of Appendix A is
intended to represent large portions of the child restraint system
market, while including
[[Page 61911]]
exceptionally large or small restraints. This combination of restraints
is needed to assure the robustness of automatic suppression systems
under real world conditions. It is also important to note that when
Appendix A was amended in November 2003, the Britax Expressway ISOFIX
was unique in design, in that it was the only child restraint system
available with rigid Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children (LATCH)
attachments. While the agency has identified a small percentage of
child restraint systems that weigh more than the Britax Expressway
ISOFIX, the inclusion of heavier child restraint system designs is not
inconsistent with the intent of Appendix A of FMVSS No. 208. Further,
while the Britax Expressway ISOFIX is approximately 0.5 kg (1.1 lb)
heavier than the heaviest child restraint system that was removed from
Appendix A as amended in the November 2003 final rule, the agency does
not consider this to be an indication that child restraint system
designs are increasing in weight.
As noted earlier, FMVSS No. 213 is a performance standard, and does
not specify particular design constraints such as mass and/or
dimensions. Honda did not provide any rationale for its proposal to
limit child restraint system designs to a maximum of 8.5 kg (18.7 lb).
NHTSA has not identified any real-world data to support the need to
limit the weight of child restraint systems, and specifically as it
relates to the performance of occupant detection systems for automatic
air bag suppression. Further, specification of a child restraint system
mass limit, when considered in conjunction with the mass of the dummy
used in air bag suppression testing, would effectively establish a
weight threshold for weight-based air bag suppression systems. It is
not the intent of the agency to specify such a threshold. Each vehicle
manufacturer is responsible for meeting the requirements of FMVSS No.
208 when using any of the child restraint systems listed in Appendix A.
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA is denying Honda's
petition for rulemaking to amend FMVSS No. 213 to adopt a design weight
limit for child restraint systems used with the 3-year-old dummy. In
accordance with 49 CFR Part 552, this completes the agency's review of
the petition.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117 and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
Issued on: October 13, 2005.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 05-21465 Filed 10-26-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P