[Federal Register: September 30, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 189)]
[Notices]
[Page 56375-56376]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr30se03-174]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-03-14810; Notice 1]
Evenflo Company, Inc.; Receipt of Application for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
Evenflo Company, Inc. (``Evenflo'') of Vandalia, Ohio, has
determined that as many as 742,736 child restraint systems and 633
accessory tether kits may 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.'' Evenflo 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 motor vehicle safety.
This notice of receipt of an application is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120, and does not represent any agency decision or
other exercise of judgement concerning the merits of the application.
FMVSS No. 213, Paragraph S5.9(b) requires ``In the case of each
child restraint system manufactured on or after September 1, 1999 and
that has components for attaching the system to a tether anchorage,
those components shall include a tether hook that conforms to the
configuration and geometry specified in Figure 11 of this standard.''
Figure 11 specifies that the height of the tether hook shall not exceed
a maximum of 20 millimeters.
In its Part 573 Report filed with the agency on February 3, 2003,
Evenflo stated that ``On the afternoon of January 28, 2003, a company
seeking to supply Evenflo with tether hooks for child restraints
advised Evenflo that it believed some of the tether hooks currently
used by Evenflo, as well as other child restraint manufacturers, did
not meet Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 213 S.5.9(b). Evenflo
undertook an investigation, and on January 31, 2003 determined that
some tether hooks supplied by SX Industries of Canton, Massachusetts
did not meet Evenflo's engineering specifications and did not meet
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 213 S.5.9(b). A percentage of the
hooks sampled by Evenflo measured between 20.11 and 20.39
millimeters.'' Evenflo estimates that, based on its sampling of
products, between 70 percent and 80 percent of the 742,736 child
restraints and 636 accessory tether kits manufactured between June 15,
2002 and January 30, 2003 contain the subject noncompliance.
Evenflo believes that the FMVSS No. 213 noncompliance described
above is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Evenflo supports its
application for inconsequential noncompliance with the following:
Installation Testing Confirms Non-Conformance Will Not Adversely
Affect Use of Tethers. In connection with this matter, Evenflo
undertook installation testing on 207 different models (after
eliminating duplicate tests on the same model performed by different
test engineers \1\) of vehicles to ensure that the non-compliance
would have no adverse affect on the ability of consumers to use
their tethers. For this testing, Evenflo chose two of the tether
hooks in its possession which exhibited the greatest non-conformance
(those that were furthest from the requisite 20 millimeters
specified in the Standard). These hooks measured 20.30 mm and 20.38
mm. Although 207 different models of vehicles were examined, where
applicable, all three tether attachment points \2\ in each vehicle
were separately evaluated (resulting in 586 unique data points). In
every one of the 586 unique installation points the non-conforming
tethers properly attached to the vehicle's tether attachment point *
* * Based upon this testing, it is clear that the non-compliance is
transparent to consumers, and will in no way adversely affect the
consumer's ability to use his/her tether.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The testing, which was conducted by two different test
engineers, resulted in 21 vehicles of the same model and model year
being tested by each test engineer. The duplicates of these tests
appear in the attached test reports, but were eliminated from the
numbers provided herein (to prevent testing conducted on the same
model vehicle from being counted twice).
\2\ As can be seen from the attached test reports, some vehicles
had less than three tether attachment points, and some vehicles had
more than three attachment points. For each vehicle tested, the test
engineers tested every tether attachment point in the vehicle which
they could locate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dynamic Sled Testing Conclusively Demonstrates No Adverse
Performance In Child Restraints. Although Evenflo cannot be certain
of the number, we estimate that at least one hundred (100) dynamic
sled tests were conducted (using the protocol set forth in FMVSS213)
on restraints which likely would have been equipped with tether
hooks that did not meet the dimensional requirements of S5.9(b) and
Figure 11. In
[[Page 56376]]
none of these tests did the tether hook malfunction or improperly
perform in any manner. Evenflo is confident that the non-compliance
has no adverse impact of the dynamic performance of the child
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
restraints.
Based on the above, Evenflo argued that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Evenflo requested
that it be exempted from the notice and remedy procedures of the
Vehicle Safety Act.
You may submit comments on the application described above. Your
comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your comments
are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket number of
this document in your comments. Please submit two copies of your
comments, including the attachments, to Docket Management, Room PL-401,
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Comments may also be
submitted to the docket electronically by logging onto the Dockets
Management System Web site at http://dms.dot.gov. Click on ``Help &
Information'' or ``Help/Info'' to obtain instructions for filing the
document electronically.
All comments received before the close of business on the closing
date indicated below will be considered. The application and supporting
materials, and all comments received after the closing date, will also
be filed and will be considered to the extent possible. When the
application is granted or denied, the notice will be published in the
Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.
Comment closing date: October 30, 2003.
(49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50
and 501.8)
Issued on: September 25, 2003.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 03-24742 Filed 9-29-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P