|
|---|
|
Baby Trend, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance Publication: Federal Register Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Byline: Otto G. Matheke III Date: 9 September 2022 Subject: American Government  , Safety
Topic: Baby Trend |
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 174 (Friday, September 9, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55465-55467]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-19516]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
[Docket No. NHTSA-2022-0074; Notice 1]
Baby Trend, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Receipt of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Baby Trend, Inc., (BT), has determined that certain BT Hybrid
3-in-1 Combination Booster Seat child restraint systems (CRSs) do not
fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
213, Child Restraint Systems. BT filed an original noncompliance report
dated July 6, 2022. BT subsequently petitioned NHTSA on August 1, 2022,
for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety. This document announces receipt of
BT's petition.
DATES: Send comments on or before October 11, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data,
views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the
docket and notice number cited in the title of this notice and may be
submitted by any of the following methods:
Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590.
Hand Delivery: Deliver comments by hand to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
except for Federal Holidays.
Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website at https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Comments may also be faxed to (202) 493-2251.
Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that comments you have submitted by mail were
received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the
comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
All comments and supporting materials received before the close of
business on the closing date indicated above will be filed in the
docket and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the fullest extent possible.
When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will
also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority
indicated at the end of this notice.
All comments, background documentation, and supporting materials
submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and
times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for
accessing the dockets. The docket ID number for this petition is shown
in the heading of this notice.
DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a
Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelley Adams-Campos, Safety Compliance
Engineer, NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance,
kelley.adamscampos@dot.gov, (202) 366-7479.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 55466]]
I. Overview
BT determined that certain BT Hybrid 3-in-1 Combination Booster
Seat CRSs do not fully comply with paragraph S5.4.1.2(a) of FMVSS No.
213, Child Restraint Systems (49 CFR 571.213).
BT filed an original noncompliance report dated July 6, 2022,
pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility
and Reports. BT petitioned NHTSA on August 1, 2022, for an exemption
from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301
on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates
to motor vehicle safety, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)
and 49 CFR part 556, Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or
Noncompliance.
This notice of receipt of BT's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
II. Child Restraint Systems Involved
Approximately 101,361 BT Hybrid 3-in-1 Combination Booster Seat
CRSs, manufactured from December 6, 2021, to June 6, 2022,\1\ are
potentially involved:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As reported in BT's July 6, 2022, Part 573 filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Noncompliance
BT explains that the lower anchor webbing in the subject CRSs
failed the minimum breaking strength when tested in accordance with
S5.1 of FMVSS No. 209,\2\ referenced in FMVSS No. 213 S5.4.1.2(a).
Specifically, the breaking \3\ strength of the lower anchor webbing of
the Lower Anchors and Tethers for CHildren (LATCH \4\) system in the
subject CRSs was 13,926 Newtons (N), 13,940 N, and 14,087 N when tested
by NHTSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ In its petition, BT refers to the test in S5.1 of FMVSS No.
209 as tensile.
\3\ In its petition, BT refers to breaking as tensile.
\4\ ``LATCH'' refers to the child restraint anchorage system
that FMVSS 225, ``Child restraint anchorage systems,'' requires to
be installed in motor vehicles. Industry and advocates have
developed the term ``LATCH'' to refer to Standard 225's child
restraint anchorage system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Rule Requirements
Paragraph S5.4.1.2(a) of FMVSS No. 213 includes the requirements
relevant to this petition. The webbing of belts provided with a child
restraint system and used to attach the system to the vehicle must have
a minimum breaking strength for new webbing of not less than 15,000 N,
including the tether and lower anchorages of a child restraint
anchorage system, when tested in accordance with S5.1 of FMVSS No. 209.
``New webbing'' means webbing that has not been exposed to abrasion,
light or micro-organisms as specified elsewhere in FMVSS No. 213.
V. Summary of BT's Petition
The following views and arguments presented in this section, ``V.
Summary of BT's Petition,'' are the views and arguments provided by BT.
They have not been evaluated by the Agency and do not reflect the views
of the Agency. BT describes the subject noncompliance and contends that
the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle
safety.
Upon receiving an information request from NHTSA on June 6, 2022,
regarding the subject noncompliance, BT states that production and
distribution of the subject CRSs were halted, and BT began an
investigation. BT states that, as part of its investigation, it
conducted dynamic sled testing, webbing testing and examined internal
processes to determine the root cause of the noncompliance. As a result
of its investigation, BT found that the wrong webbing was installed in
a portion of the subject CRSs, but BT believes, through its analysis of
existing and new test data, that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
BT claims that FMVSS No. 213 dynamic sled testing ensures the
structural integrity of the subject CRSs and that this is supported by
NHTSA's November 2, 2020, notice of proposed rulemaking \5\ regarding
FMVSS No. 213. In its petition, BT questions ``the utility of
considering the webbing strength tests in isolation rather than the
integrity of the LATCH system as required under FMVSS 213.'' BT
believes the webbing tests specified in FMVSS No. 213 have utility in
safety ``only in the context of maintaining strength of the webbing
with wear and tear of the child restraint following years of use and
asserts that the unabraded webbing strength test is not necessary to
ensure the structural integrity of a CRS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Child Restraint
Systems, Incorporation by Reference; 85 FR 69388 (November 2, 2020.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BT states that it conducts, in addition to the dynamic sled testing
required by FMVSS No. 213, dynamic sled testing through Consumer's
Union (CU), on child restraints produced by each of its factories. BT
contends that if NHTSA previously found the dynamic sled testing at 48
kph to be sufficient to ensure the structural integrity of a CRS, BT's
additional testing is also similarly sufficient.
The CU dynamic testing, as BT explains, has important differences
from that required by FMVSS No. 213. First, the test is conducted at 56
kph whereas the FMVSS No. 213 test is conducted at 48 kph. Second, the
bench used is derived from a vehicle seat, providing ``a boundary
condition for LATCH attachment and seat cushion-to-CRS interaction.''
Finally, the CU test protocol includes a structure to represent the
seat in front of the CRS seat position, which, BT claims, provides a
``clear tell-tale'' of failure in any way of the LATCH lower anchor
belt in adequately restraining the CRS and its occupant.
BT also claims that the minimum LATCH lower anchor webbing strength
requirements of FMVSS No. 213 are unrealistic, based on dynamic crash
testing it conducted on the subject CRSs using the same incorrect
webbing used on the noncompliant CRSs that are the subject of this
petition, and without attaching the CRS' tether to the tether anchor.
This testing, as BT explains, was conducted on the test bench proposed
by NHTSA in the 2020 FMVSS No. 213 NPRM. Other test apparatus and
conditions used in its testing were those either specified in FMVSS No.
213, and/or the current NPRM, or ``widely accepted'' as due care tests.
For the tests BT conducted in the frontal direction, sled test speeds
ranging from 57.1 kph to 63.9 kph were used. See the Table \6\ in BT's
petition for the parameters used in its testing. BT states that it is
confident that its frontal sled testing conducted at ``64 kph . . .
encompasses all crashes including the most severe crashes'' and that
``at no time and in no test did the LATCH Lower Anchor webbing or belt
system fail to perform its intended purpose of restraining the CRS.''
BT also found ``that at no time during any of these tests did the LATCH
Lower Anchor webbing load exceed 5000 Newtons and, more importantly,
come even close to the 15,000 Newton minimum threshold'' required by
FMVSS No. 213.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Section 3 of its petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its petition, BT shares a graphic \7\ to illustrate its beliefs
for the minimum strength of various components in the LATCH system and
points to examples where, ``in the rare instances of failures of the
LATCH system, the failures occurred in . . . the LATCH lower anchor on
the vehicle.'' Thus, BT contends that the webbing is not the weak link
in the LATCH lower anchor system, and that ``any deficiencies with
[[Page 55467]]
the strength of the LATCH Lower Anchor webbing would have been revealed
in the dynamic sled tests of FMVSS 213.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Section 5 of its petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BT states that there is no evidence of webbing failure in any CRS
in the real world, that it has never received a complaint, nor has any
knowledge of, a webbing failure on any of its products in the real
world.
BT concludes by stating its belief that the subject noncompliance
is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety and its
petition to be exempted from providing notification of the
noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the
noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on
this petition only applies to the subject child restraints that BT no
longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance
existed. However, any decision on this petition does not relieve child
restraint distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale,
offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into
interstate commerce of the noncompliant child restraints under their
control after BT notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.
(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 49
CFR 1.95 and 501.8)
Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2022-19516 Filed 9-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P