ID: aiam2967

Dear Mr. DeLeone: This is in reply to your letter of January 29, 1979, asking for a interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 123, *Motorcycle Controls and Displays*, as it pertains to Derbi Variant Mopeds. you have asked whether the Derbi's manual fuel shut-off control meets the requirements of the standard.; Table 1 of the standard specifies the location and method of operatio of the equipment items listed therein. For the manual shut-off control (Item 7), no location is specified. The method of operation set forth, however, is that the control must point forward to indicate 'Off,' downward for 'On,' and upward for 'Reserve' (if provided). This requirements appears intended for a control mounted vertically, such as on the side of the vehicle. A standardized operating method for a vertical mounted control is in the interest of safety since the operator will not be able to read its legends while seated at the primary controls.; "However, on the Derbi, the manual fuel shut-off control is mounte horizontally on the frame connecting the front and rear parts of the machine and in a position that appears to be visible to an operator seated at the controls. You have attempted to identify j it in the manner specified by the standard. We are of the opinion that, until Standard No. 123 specifies that the control be vertically mounted, the Derbi control may be located and identified as you have depicted it."; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel

ID: nht92-4.31

DATE: August 20, 1992

FROM: Richard Allison -- Program Manager, The Bott Group, Inc.

TO: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: FMVSS No. 216, "Roof Crush Resistance-Passenger Cars", Request for Interpretation

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 9/21/92 from Paul Jackson Rice to Richard Allison (A39; Std. 216)

TEXT:

The Bott Group, Inc. (a Design, Sales & Engineering firm for manufacturers of roof racks (luggage racks), decklid racks and accessories), on behalf of all O.E.M. clients who use our products, requests the Agency render an interpretation of the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 216, "Roof Crush Resistance-Passenger Cars", while considering the conditions as described herein.

To be specific, The Bott Group requests an interpretation of 1) the proper application and orientation of the test device (S6.2 of this standard) and 2) the distance the test device is allowed to travel (paragraph S4 of this standard), when testing vehicles equipped with roof mounted accessories, such as roof racks (luggage racks).

This accessory neither contributes to nor detracts from the actual strength of the roof panel and would collapse easily upon application of the forces as specified in paragraph S6.3 of the standard. The roof rack examples we present for consideration, in the attached documentation, can be easily removed for compliance testing.

Roof racks are positioned on the roof panel surface to lend aesthetic enhancement to vehicle contours. This could influence the positioning of the test device (per S6.2), as well as render impossible compliance with the maximum allowed travel of the test device (per S4), and thus, not achieve the true objective of the standard.

The Bott Group roof rack designs fall into two unique categories:

1) Four Seasons Style Has adjustable/removable crossbar assemblies with end supports that move fore and aft above the vehicle roof in fixed, outer channels. Refer to Figure 1 on attachment "A".

2) Elevated Siderail Style (with fixed position end supports) Has adjustable crossbar assemblies that move fore and aft above the roof surface by sliding in an elevated, channeled siderail assembly, however, the end supports are in fixed positions on the vehicle roof. Refer to Figure 2 on attachment "B".

Please consider, for instance, the roof rack example in Figure 2 on attachment "B". The fixed position, front end support of the siderail assembly is mounted in the area of the "B" pillar on the roof surface.

Under normal conditions this style of roof rack assembly is not removable during use, but it can be easily removed for testing.

The adjustable crossbar assembly on the roof rack example shown in Figure 1 on attachment "A" (normal forward positioning is also in the "B" pillar area) can:

1) be adjusted to its rearward most position out of the contact area of the test device or,

2) be removed completely or,

3) the entire roof rack assembly can be easily removed for testing.

The Bott Group believes that there are three different test conditions which should be considered. We have illustrated the differences in the positioning of the test device (refer to Figure 3 on attachment "C").

Condition 1- Test conducted without a roof rack installed or the roof rack has been removed and the test device has been positioned as outlined in S6.2. The first point of contact has been established and is indicated (marked "A").

NOTE: Test condition 2 & 3 assumes that the "elevated siderail style" roof rack with the fixed position end supports is used.

Condition 2- Test conducted with a roof rack installed and the test device positioned the same as in test condition-1. Using the first point of contact established in condition-1 (marked "A"), as reference, the test proceeded. The actual first point of contact during this condition was to the fixed end support of the roof rack (marked "B") and this was a considerable distance rearward from the original contact point "A" established in condition-1.

The dimension between point "A" and point "B" varies according to the fore/aft positioning of the fixed end support of the roof rack on the roof surface.

When the first point of contact, "B", occurred, the second item we identified was a gap between the bottom of the test device and the roof surface at point "A". This may not comply with S6.2(c).

Condition 3- Test conducted with a roof rack installed and the test device positioned as outlined in S6.2 to the contact point (marked "B") established in test condition-2. This condition seemed to create three situations.

a) The complete test device is relocated some distance rearward of the original positioning in test condition-1 and its established contact point (marked "A"). This may not provide test requirements per S4, S6.2 & S6.4 of the standard.

b) The positioning of the test device left a gap between the bottom surface of the test device and the surface of the roof at point "A". The test device, not being tangent to the surface of the vehicle roof, when first point of contact occurs, may not comply with S6.2(c) of the standard.

c) With the test device not making contact (not tangent) with the roof surface at point "A" when the required pressure is applied to the test device, as specified in S6.3, a considerable amount of test device travel is required before contact (tangency) with the roof surface point "A" is made. This may cause non-compliance with S4, as measured in accordance with S6.4, of the standard.

The Bott Group requests the Agency's interpretation of which test condition above, number 1, 2 or 3, is correct and thus, satisfies the intent of FMVSS No. 216.

If test condition 2 or 3 is deemed correct, can the additional amount of test device travel, required between first point of contact and the actual contact (point "A") on the roof surface, be added to the "allowed distance" of test device travel when determining compliance with paragraph S4 of the standard?

The Bott Group is concerned for the timeliness of this matter because of the design timelines we work under (several model years in advance) and we would like to thank the Agency, in advance, for its kind, prompt, attention and consideration of this matter.

(Figures omitted)

ID: 86-5.12

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 09/04/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Stephen P. Wood for Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Binichi Doi

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Binichi Doi NSK Representative Office P.O. Box 1507 Ann Arbor, MI 18106

Dear Mr. Doi:

Thank you for your letters concerning the automatic safety belt warning requirements of Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection. You explained in your letters and in conversations with Stephen Oesch of my staff that NSK-Warner is developing a motorized automatic belt system that would be equipped with an emergency release buckle. You also plan to provide voluntarily a manual lap belt with the system. I regret the delay in our response and hope the following discussion answers your questions.

You first asked whether you can use an automatic belt warning system for your motorized belt system which would activate an audible signal under the following conditions: (1) the vehicle ignition is moved to the "on" or "start" position (2) the motorized automatic belt is not fastened and (3) the motorized belt has not reached its locked protective position. As explained below, such a system is permissible, but is not required by the standard.

S4.5.3 of the standard sets forth the requirements for automatic belt systems. S4.5.3.3(b) requires a motorized automatic belt system to have a warning system that sounds an audible signal for between 4 and 8 seconds if the automatic belt latchplate is not fastened or the emergency release is activated and the ignition is in the "on" or "start" position. However, S4.5.3.3(b) does not require the audible signal to be activated until a motorized belt has reached its locked protective mode. Your system would activate the audible signal while the motorized belt is moving to its locked position and it would sound again once it has reached its locked position. Thus, NSK is voluntarily providing a warning that is not required by the standard. As stated in the preamble to the November 6, 1985 notice (50 FR 16063) adopting the new warning system requirements for automatic safety belts, a manufacturer is free to provide additional features as long as the features required by the standard still continue to comply with all the applicable performance requirements. Thus, as long as the warning system provides the warning required by S4.5.3.3(b), NSK may voluntarily provide additional warnings as well.

You also said that NSK is planning to provide an automatic belt warning system for both the driver's and right front passenger's seating position. S4.5.3.3(b) requires an automatic belt warning system only at the left front designated seating position. Thus, the agency would consider the passenger side warning system as a voluntary system, which you may install as long as the driver'a warning system will continue to meet all applicable requirements.

You also asked several questions about when and how long the audible and light warning are to be activated. Specifically you asked whether the warnings must be reactivated when the tongue of an emergency release buckle (referred to as an ERB in your letter) is inserted into the latch mechanism and then removed again within a few seconds. You also asked if the warnings can be de-activated by insertion of the tongue of the emergency release buckle before expiration of the 4-8 seconds specification for the audible warning and the 60 second specification for activation of the warning light. As explained below, if the emergency release buckle has been fastened and then unfastened after a few seconds, the warning does not have to be re-activated until after the ignition switch has been turned "off" and then turned again to the "on" or "start" position. Also if the warning begins to activate and then the emergency release buckle is fastened, the warning may immediately be cancelled and thus does not have to be activated for the full time period specified in the standard.

S4.5.3.3(b) provides that the audible warning and the warning light are to be activated only under certain conditions. Thus, the standard provides that the warnings are to be activated when condition A (the ignition switch is in the "on" or "start" position) exists simultaneously with one of the other conditions, such as condition B (the emergency release buckle not being fastened). Thus, if the emergency release buckle is unfastened and, at the same time, the ignition is in the "on" or "start" position, the warnings must activate. However, if the ignition is not in the "on" or "start" position and the emergency buckle is released, then the warnings do not have to be activated. The agency has previously said, such as in a June 17, 1981 letter to Chrysler, that the warning is not to activate if the safety belt is buckled. Thus, the warning may be cancelled once the emergency release buckle is fastened.

Again, I regret the delay in our response. If you have any further questions, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

March 10, 1986

NHTSA Room 5219 400 Seventh Street, S.W.

Washington, DC 20590

Stephen L. Oesch Deputy Assistant Chief Counsel For Rulemaking

Subject: Questions Regarding FMVSS 208, 4.5.3.3(b).

Dear Mr. Oesch:

It was nice meeting with you the other day although I walked into your office without prior notice.

Below is a few questions NSK-Warner would like to ask your office, in addition to the previous request for interpretation of rules stated in my letter of February 4, 1986.

1. When conditions A and B exist simultaneously the audible and light warnings are activated. Under the existance of such conditions (say for two seconds), when a tongue of ERB is inserted into and removed from a buckle within a short time.

a) Are warnings (or one of two types of warning) required to be re-activated?

b) Are warnings required for the initially set time, that is, 4-8 seconds for audio-warning and not less than 60 seconds for light-warning after a tongue is inserted into and removed from a buckle during the initial warning activation time periods?

In other words, are the warning(s) needs to be re-activated for a certain length of time after a tongue is inserted into a buckle (this action would eliminate both types of warning) and removed immediately afterward as long as this sequence of events occurs within 4-8 seconds and not less than 60 seconds of initial activation of warnings?

Yet in other words, can the warnings be de-activated before expiration of 4-8 seconds and not less than 60 seconds by insertion of a tongue, for example, and not required to be reactivated at all until ignition switch is turned off once and turned on again?

2. NSK-Warner is considering the implementation of 'Condition B Warning' on the passenger side, also.

In such case, depending on the timing of anchor point reaching protected-mode at anchor-point, audible warning could last for a total of 16 seconds, 8 seconds on drivers side and 8 seconds on passenger side. Does this cause any rule-related problem?

I only hope that above questions sufficiently are clearly stated so that we can receive your kind consideration and response.

Very truly yours,

Binichi Doi NSK Representative

BD/mt

P.S. We would appreciate it if you could combine above with our previous set of questions for your consideration.

ID: aiam5638

"Dear Congressman Clement: Thank you for your letter of October 3 1995, enclosing correspondence from Mr. Dale Allen Pommer concerning his attempts to have a third seat belt installed in the back seat of his 1983 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer. Mr Pommer has been told that this cannot be done because of safety laws. You requested comments on Mr. Pommer's letter. As explained below, there is no Federal prohibition against the modification Mr. Pommer would like done to his vehicle. However, Federal law does place some limits on how the modification is done. The installation of additional seat belts must be done in a way that does not compromise the performance of the existing seat belts. Some background information about the agency may be useful. NHTSA has the authority to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Federal motor vehicle safety standards are minimum standards, and may be exceeded by manufacturers. Federal law prohibits the manufacture or sale of any new motor vehicle or new item of motor vehicle equipment which does not conform to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards in effect at the time of manufacture. After the first retail sale, there is a limit on the modifications that can be made by certain businesses to vehicles. Manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and repair businesses are prohibited from 'knowingly making inoperative' any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable safety standard (49 USC 30122). In general, the 'make inoperative' prohibition would require a business which modifies motor vehicles to ensure that it does not remove, disconnect, or degrade the performance of safety equipment installed in compliance with an applicable safety standard. A safety belt is an item of motor vehicle equipment and all safety belts sold in the United States must be certified as complying with Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies, regardless of whether the belts are installed as original equipment in a motor vehicle or sold as a replacement part. Standard No. 209 sets forth strength, elongation, webbing width, durability, and other requirements for seat belt assemblies. The additional belt which might be added to Mr. Pommer's vehicle must comply with the requirements of Standard No. 209. In addition to Standard No. 209, the agency has issued two additional safety standards which apply to new vehicles and affect safety belts: Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, which sets forth requirements for occupant protection at the various seating positions in vehicles, and Standard No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages, which establishes strength and location requirements for seat belt anchorages. The 1983 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer would have been required to have, at a minimum, a lap belt at each rear designated seating position. A 'designated seating position' is defined by NHTSA regulations as: any plan view location capable of accommodating a person at least as large as a 5th percentile adult female, if the overall seat configuration and design and vehicle design is such that the position is likely to be used as a seating position while the vehicle is in motion...Any bench or split-bench seat ...having greater than 50 inches of hip room (measured in accordance with SAE Standard J1100(a)) shall have not less than three designated seating positions. Since the 1983 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer had a rear bench seat with 49.5 inches of hip room, that seat was required to have a minimum of two lap belts. The 'make inoperative' prohibition discussed earlier would not prohibit a business from adding a third seat belt to Mr. Pommer's vehicle. In addition, the anchorages would not have to comply with Standard No. 210. However, in adding the third seat belt, it is possible that the existing belts and anchorages would have to be relocated. The businesses contacted by Mr. Pommer may be concerned that the belts and anchorages could not be removed and replaced without 'making inoperative' the compliance of those belts and anchorages. I hope this information has been helpful. Sincerely, Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel";

ID: aiam0529

Dear Mr. Nagle: This is in reply to your letter of October 28, 1971, requesting a interpretation of paragraph S4.3 of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302, 'Flammability of Interior Materials.' You ask whether cotton seat padding or jute used on the backing of automobile carpets, when prepared as a test specimen of 1/2-inch thickness as prescribed by the standard, will comply with paragraph S4.3 if it transmits a flamefront across its surface at a rate of more than 4 inches per minute but stops burning in 10 to 20 seconds, and the material does not burn more than 2 inches from the point where timing was started.; On December 18, 1971, you indicated in a phone conversation wit Michael Peskoe of the Office of the Chief Counsel that your letter did not take into account a 'flashing' of the flame across a particular surface of the cotton seat padding for more than 2 inches. You stated that this surface is a tufted surface that is created only when the seat padding, which has a thickness of 4 inches in the vehicle, is cut or separated to the half-inch thickness specified in the procedure of S5.2.1 of the standard.; We consider the 'flashing' of the flame across the tufted surface o the material to be a burning of the material under S4.3 of the standard, and as it did occur for more than 2 inches from the point where timing was started, the material would not comply with paragraph S4.3.; We recognize, however, that the failure of the material to meet th requirements in this case results from the fact that the surface of the material changes because of the test procedure, and we are presently considering possible changes in the standard to alter this result.; Sincerely, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel

ID: aiam5650

"Dear Mr. Cuvala: This responds to your letter of September 10, 1995 concerning 'conference and display vehicles' you have been asked to manufacture for a client. The vehicles used are cargo vans with a gross vehicle weight rating of 9200 pounds. You convert the cargo area of the van to a product display and conference area. Your letter contained an illustration of the vehicle, indicating an L-shaped seating area behind the driver and front passenger seats. Your letter states that this area is not intended for transport of people. You asked whether such a vehicle must comply with 'seating and occupant orientation and restraint directives.' As explained below, the seats in such a vehicle would have to comply with federal standards on seats and seat belts if the modification is done prior to the first retail sale of the vehicle. By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that apply to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not approve or certify any vehicles or items of equipment. Instead, each manufacturer is required to certify that its motor vehicles comply with all applicable Federal safety standards prior to their sale or import. NHTSA's certification regulations are set forth in 49 CFR Part 567. Conversion Prior to Sale Your letter does not state whether the conversion of the cargo area of these vehicles is done before or after the first retail sale of the vehicles. Prior to the first retail sale of a vehicle, the vehicle is considered to be 'new.' If the conversion is done prior to the first retail sale, your company would be considered an 'alterer' under our regulations. A person who alters a previously certified new vehicle also must certify that the altered vehicle complies with all applicable standards (49 CFR 567.7). The seats in a new vehicle must comply with federal regulations if they are 'designated seating positions.' A 'designated seating position' is defined in 49 CFR 571.3 as: any plan view location capable of accommodating a person at least as large as a 5th percentile adult female, if the overall seat configuration and design is such that the position is likely to be used as a seating position while the vehicle is in motion. While you indicate that the vehicles are not intended to transport people except in the front seats, the design of the seating area is similar to other vehicle seats. Therefore, it appears from their design that these seats are likely to be used and are therefore designated seating positions. NHTSA has exercised its authority to establish five safety standards which could be relevant to seats in these vehicles: Standard No. 207, Seating Systems (49 CFR 571.207), Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection (49 CFR 571.208), Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies (49 CFR 571.209), Standard No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages (49 CFR 571.210), and Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials (49 CFR 571.302). Standards Nos. 207, 208, 210, and 302 apply, with certain limited exceptions not relevant to your conversion, to vehicles and not directly to items of equipment. Standard No. 207 establishes requirements for seats, their attachment assemblies, and their installation to minimize the possibility of their failure in a crash. Standard No. 207 does not require a specific orientation for seats. However, some of the requirements are different for side- and rear-facing seats like those illustrated in your attachment. Standard No. 208 specifies seat belt requirements for seating positions in vehicles. For the seats in the rear of your vehicles, Standard No. 208 would require lap belts at each designated seating position. Standard No. 210 specifies performance requirements for seat belt anchorages. Standard No. 302 specifies burn resistance requirements for materials used in the interior of motor vehicles. Standard No. 302 would affect not only the seats, but also installation of other materials in these vehicles. Standard No. 209 applies to seat belt assemblies as separate items of motor vehicle equipment, regardless of whether the belts are installed as original equipment in a motor vehicle or sold as replacements. Thus, the manufacturer is required to certify that the seat belts comply with Standard No. 209. If you do not manufacture the seat belts yourself, you should install only belts certified by their manufacturer. This is true regardless of whether the conversion occurs before or after the first sale of the vehicle. Conversion After Sale If the conversion is done on a used motor vehicle, you do not have to certify that the vehicle complies with Standards Nos. 207, 208, 210, and 302. However, 49 USC 30122 provides, in pertinent part: A manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business may not knowingly make inoperative, any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard. . . . Thus, you could not convert these vehicles if the conversion affected a device or element of design, installed prior to sale, so as to cause the vehicles to no longer comply with any of the safety standards. I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any other questions, please contact Mary Versailles of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel";

ID: aiam4028

Dear Mr. Landers: This responds to your June 6, 1985 letter concerning Federal Moto Vehicle Safety Standard No. 207, *Seating Systems*. We apologize for the delay in our response. You asked whether your vehicle's 'folding flip seats' are required by section S4.3 of the standard to be equipped with a restraining device. As discussed below, the answer is no.; By the (sic) way of background information, this agency does no provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that its vehicles or equipment comply with applicable safety standards. The following represents our opinion based on the facts provided in your letter.; Section S4.3 of Standard No. 207 states: >>>...a hinged or folding *occupant seat* or occupant seat back shal be equipped with a self-locking device for restraining the hinged or folding seat or seat back and control for releasing that restraining device. (Emphasis added.)<<<; The term 'occupant seat' is defined in section S3 of Standard No. 20 as, 'a seat that provides at least one designated seating position.' The term 'designated seating position' is defined in 49 CFR Part 571.3(b) as:; >>>any plan view location capable of accommodating a person at least a large as a 5th percentile adult female, if the overall seat configuration and design is such that the position is likely to be used as a seating position while the vehicle is in motion, *except for the auxiliary seating accommodations such as temporary or folding jump seats.... (Emphasis added.)<<<; The issue raised by your letter is whether your folding flip seats ar seats that provide a designated seating position, within the definition of 49 CFR Part 571.3(b). If a seat provides a designated seating position, it is an occupant seat under Standard No. 207 and subject to section S4.3's requirement for a restraining device.; It is our opinion that your folding flip seats are 'auxiliary seatin accomodations (sic)' and therefore not subject to the Standard No. 207's requirement for a restraining device. This conclusion is based on the information shown on your brochure. The brochure shows that each of the flip seats normally remains folded up. When they are temporarily needed to accommodate additional passengers, they can be folded down to form a seating surface.; While folding jump seats are not subject to a number of safet requirements, including those of Standards No. 207 and 208, *Occupant Crash Protection*, we encourage you to ensure that the seats provide safe performance when in use. In particular, we would encourage you to provide safety belts for these seats to ensure that their occupants will have adequate crash protection.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel

ID: nht73-6.21

DATE: 02/15/73

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Nissan Motor Co., Ltd.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of January 4, 1973, concerning your continuing uncertainties about the intent of sections S4.3.1.1 and S4.3.1.3 of Standard 210.

In your figure 1, assuming the seat is not adjustable, the contact points would be (b) in the first drawing and (c) in the second. However, a rigid attachment of the length shown in the second drawing would appear to violate the intent of S4.3.1.1 that the angle formed by the webbing in passing from the hardware to the seating reference point should be a forward angle.

In your figure 2, if the bracket can be rotated so that an extension of its centerline would pass through the seating reference point, we would consider point (p) to be the nearest contact point for purposes of S4.3.1.1 and S4.3.1.3.

With respect to the proposed used of a flexible wire, as shown in figure 3, the ability of the wire to move with reasonable freedom removes it from the category of rigid hardware. We would consider the points shown as (c) and (f) to be the appropriate contact points for purposes of S4.3.1.1 and S4.3.1.3.

January 4, 1973

Lawrence Schneider National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Although we have received and appreciated your interpretation of MVSS 210, S4.3.1.1, and S4.3.1.3, Seat Belt Anchorages, this matter remains rather vague to us. Please permit us to restate the situations in question.

We would like to use the seat belt system in which the buckle is attached to the floor panel (tunnel) or seat structure by a rigid bracket as indicated in the enclosed Figure 1. In this situation, please advise us of the correct nearest contact point and angle in each of the attached drawings.

If the rigid bracket with buckle is able to rotate about point "P", as shown in Figure 2, please advise us where we should consider the nearest contact point and angle.

We are also considering using another type of seat belt system, as shown in Figure 3, in which the buckle is attached to the floor panel through the flexible wire. Again, please indicate the exact nearest contact point and angle.

Thank you for your kind assistance.

Tatsuo Kato Engineering Representative Liaison Office in USA Enclosures

The nearest contact point: (A) or (B)?

The angle: 20 degree SEATING REFERENCE POINT

WEBBING

HORIZONTAL LINE

TONGUE

BUCKLE

RIGID BRACKET FIXED TO FLOOR PANEL OR SEAT STRUCTURE

SEATING REFERENCE POINT

THE NEAREST CONTACT POINT: (C), (D) or The angle: 20 degree [Graphics Omitted]

FIGURE 1

RIGID BRACKET

POINT "P"

[Graphics omitted]

FIGURE 3

The nearest contact point: (A), (B) or (C)? The angle: 20 degree SEATING REFERENCE POINT

BUCKLE

FLEXIBLE STEEL WIRE

[Graphs Omitted]

BUCKLE

SEATING REFERENCE POINT The nearest contact point: (D), (E), or (F)? The angle: 20 degree <ODY>

ID: 11909RLX.LAB

Ms. Renee Brunson
Renolux Paris
5553 Ravenswood Rd., Suite 103-104
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33312

Dear Ms. Brunson:

This responds to your May 13, 1996, letter and May 14 telephone call to Deirdre Fujita of my staff, asking about the labeling requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 213, AChild Restraint Systems.@

Your letter is one of several we recently received concerning your company=s plan to sell imported child seats. In previous correspondence between your company (formerly Baby Comfort Inc.) and this office, it became apparent that certain child seats Baby Comfort wished to sell could not meet the requirements of Standard 213 and thus could not be certified to the standard or sold to the public. (April 16, 1996, letter to David Baret, President of Baby Comfort; April 29 letter to Lawrence Feder, counsel to Mr. Baret.) You told Ms. Fujita that the seats you now ask about are different from the nonconforming seats and that you believe these can meet the standard.

You ask a series of 14 questions about Standard 213. Your questions are restated below, followed by our answers.

Question 1: Can the specified labels in the standards be incorporated together? Are there any requirements or restrictions on which statements can be combined? (As long as the wording and placement of labels is according to standards.)

Answer: The information that S5.5.1 of Standard 213 requires to be permanently labeled on each child restraint can appear on one label. The standard has no restriction on which statements can

be combined. Note, however, that S5.5.3 requires some of the required statements to be visible when the system is installed. All the information on the restraint should be presented clearly.

2. Does the wording on the labels have to [appear] exactly as in the standards? Or can we add something to emphasize a point?

Generally, the wording must be as specified. However, manufacturers may present information in addition to the required information, if the additional information is presented in a manner that is not likely to obscure or confuse the meaning of the required information. See, e.g., April 17, 1989 letter to Robert Craig (labeling child seats with metric units), copy enclosed.

3. Can the instruction booklet be anywhere on the seat, possibly under the base?

You ask about S5.6.1.6 of Standard 213, which requires each add-on (portable) child restraint system to have a location on the restraint for storing the manufacturer=s instructions. The storage location may be under the base.

4. Can labels be sewn onto the seat cover? (Made out of a different material than the stickers, of course, and permanently affixed by sewing.)

The child seat cover (pad) may be labeled with the specified information. Under S5.5.1, the information must be permanent. Also, S5.7 of Standard 213 requires Aeach material used in a child restraint system@ to conform to the flammability resistance requirements of Standard 302. Labels affixed to a child restraint must comply with Standard 302, including sewn labels.

5. The label specified in S5.5(i) [sic] with regards to the use of the vehicle=s belt system does not apply to our seats as written in the standards. Can this be modified to suit our particular seat?

The statement specified in S5.5.2(i) is required only for booster seats, which we understand your seat is not. Thus, your seat need not have this statement.

While you are not required to label your seats with the S5.5.2(i) statement, you asked in a telephone call whether you may voluntarily add a statement similar to that of S5.5.2(i), because your seat can be used with both a vehicle=s lap belt or a lap and shoulder belt system. Your statement would direct users Ato install the seat using the vehicle=s belt system as specified in the manufacturer=s instructions.@ Our answer is the statement may be on the label. It would not obscure or confuse labeling required by Standard 213. In fact, it might help ensure that the seat is properly used.

6. Our seats are not belt positioning and no inversion tests were performed to determine aircraft compatibility. Do they require the label - NOT CERTIFIED FOR AIRCRAFT USE?

If the seat is not a belt-positioning seat (defined in S4 of the standard), it is excluded from the requirement of S5.5.2(n) that it must be labeled AThis Restraint is Not Certified for Use in Aircraft.@ Belt- positioning seats must be so labeled because the Federal Aviation Administration and NHTSA determined they are not suitable for aircraft use. The agencies have also recently determined that harnesses and backless booster seats must also be so labeled. (See enclosed final rule, 61 FR 28423, June 4, 1996.)

7. For instructions - as long as all statements are made according to standards - can we add any other information we wish regarding our seats? Are there any restrictions?

You ask about S5.6, which requires each add-on restraint system to be accompanied by installation instructions that includes certain specified information. You may add other information to the instructions, provided that the information would not cause confusion.

8. Are there Federal Label standards for materials [material content]? For any other states other than California?

There is no Federal requirement that you label the material content of the restraint. As for information on state requirements, we suggest you contact the Department of Motor Vehicles in the states the child seat will be sold or used.

9. Are there any requirements as to whether or not the seat (plastic part) has to have any information stamped into it? Or with raised letters?

Some manufacturers may have chosen to mold (or emboss) the required labeling into a restraint to ensure the permanency of the labeling. While NHTSA does not require molding or embossing the information, in a 1979 final rule upgrading Standard 213 NHTSA urged manufacturers, whenever possible, to mold the label into the surface of the restraint rather than use a paper label. 44 FR 72131, December 13, 1979.

10. I have noticed small numbers on some of the labels affixed to other carseats, do you know if it is some Federal requirement or what these numbers are? Must we show a patent number, etc.?

As discussed on the phone, we do not know what small numbers you refer to. Standard 213 does not require you to show a patent number.

11. Since we distribute the carseats, can our name be on the label for the recall information instead of the manufacturer, stating we are the distributor? We will be handling all inquiries regarding the seats.

Your company=s name may be on the label. We consider a Amanufacturer@ to include a company importing motor vehicle equipment.

12. Can we send labels for NHTSA approval before we print all of them? Is there someplace we could send a complete, labeled seat for approval?

NHTSA does not approve products or labeling on products. The responsibility for compliance with the labeling requirements, as well as all other requirements of the standard, rests with the manufacturer. Although we cannot recommend any testing facility, we are aware that the following facilities conduct tests of child restraints:

Calspan Corporation 4455 Genesee St. Buffalo, NY 14255

Detroit Testing Laboratory, Inc. 7111 E. Eleven Mile Rd. Warren, MI 48092

Child Passenger Protection University of Michigan c/o UMTRI 2901 Baxter Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48019-2150

13. What does Aoutboard@ seating position mean?

You ask this with regard to S5.5.2(l), which requires child restraints to be labeled with an installation diagram showing the system installed in the Aright front outboard seating position . . . .@ AOutboard designated seating position@ is defined in '571.3 of NHTSA=s regulations. The position you ask about is the front right seating position.

14. Does NHTSA require anything (labels, warnings, etc.) on the box or packaging?

The answer is no, with regard to boxes or packages for child restraint systems.

If you have other questions, please call Ms. Fujita at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel

Enclosure

ref:213 d:6/7/96

ID: aiam0444

Dear Mr. Baruth: This is in reply to your letter of August 30, 1971, to Michael Pesko of my staff, concerning Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302, 'Flammability of Interior Materials'. Your letter asks several questions concerning the applicability of the standard to vehicle seats you manufacture. These questions are dealt with individually below.; You first ask whether Standard No. 302 applies to open air tractors earthmoving equipment, or rapid transit seating, or only to ground transportation wherein the people are enclosed by a cab or housing. As stated in paragraph S3. of the standard, it applies to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses. These terms are defined at 49 CFR S571.3, and a copy of this section is enclosed for your information. The vehicles you mention, *i*.*e*., open air tractors, earthmoving equipment, and rapid transit vehicles are generally not vehicles of these types, but if you wish an opinion as to a particular vehicle, you must submit additional information concerning it to us. The criteria you establish, however, 'ground transportation wherein the people are enclosed by a cab or housing' is not an accurate reflection of the specific vehicle types involved, and should not be used as a guideline.; You state that you understand that 'all covering materials, foams thread, welting, etc. used in the construction of a seat is covered', and you are essentially correct, and proceed to ask several questions based on brochures of your product that you forwarded to us. These questions are answered below.; >>>1. *Adhesives*. Adhesives should be tested as part of adjacen materials whenever possible. Both the standard as issued and the notice of proposed rulemaking published May 26, 1971 (36 F.R. 9565) provide for the testing of composite materials, and adhesives joining materials that are to be tested as composites should be tested as part of the composites.; 2. *Seat composite*. Under the present standard, seat composit components that are welded together only at certain points should be treated as composites at the point of weld, and as separate materials between welds, if they are not otherwise uniformly attached to each other at those points. Under the notice of proposed rulemaking of May 26, 1971, however, this configuration would be considered as comprised only of separate materials.; 3, 4, 5. *Bearings, plastic parts and rubber parts, and shoc absorbers*. Components that comprise the seat track or suspension need not meet the standard's burn- rate requirements. Components that are included, however, that are smaller than the sample size specified in S5.2.1 may be tested using the heat-resistant wires specified in S5.1.3.; 6. *Permalator ties*. You describe 'permalator ties' as small diamete wires spaced parallel at about one inch increments, and tied together with hard twisted paper twine that are encapsulated within the foam. As both the wires and the paper twine are incorporated into the foam they must be tested if the particular foam is included within the portions of components set forth in S4.2. Furthermore, they should be tested as part of the foam.; 7. *Paint and decals*. Paint and decals on steel parts that would no be included under S4.1 need not meet the requirements of the standard. Paint and decals on steel parts that are within S4.1 should be tested as part of the steel parts.; 8. *Chassis lubricant*. Seat chassis lubricant is not within th standard's requirements.; 9. *Welting with and without paper core*. Welting with and withou paper core should be tested as part of the material to which it is attached whether it is either, as you mention, extruded vinyl or generated from the parent material. If necessary, it may be tested using the heat-resistant wires specified in S5.1.3.; 10. *Plywood*. Plywood used in seats in seat backs should be teste similarly to other materials used in the same locations.<<<; We are pleased to be of assistance. Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Chief Counsel