Cosco, Inc.; Receipt of Application for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-99-5800; Notice 1]

Cosco, Inc.; Receipt of Application for Decision of

Inconsequential Noncompliance

Cosco, Incorporated, of Columbus, Indiana, has determined that a

number of child restraint systems 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.'' Cosco 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, S5.5.2.(k), requires that each add-on child

restraint system designed to be used rear facing must have a label that

warns the consumer not to place the rear-facing child restraint system

in the front seat of a vehicle that has a passenger side air bag, and a

statement that describes the consequences of not following the warning.

These statements must be on a red, orange, or yellow contrasting

background, and placed on the restraint so that it is on the side of

the restraint designed to be adjacent to the front passenger door of a

vehicle and is visible to a person installing the rear-facing child

restraint system in the front passenger seat.

Cosco has notified the National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration that between March 31, 1999 and April 7, 1999, it

manufactured 815 Arrive Infant Child Restraints, Model 02-729-TED, that

do not have the air bag warning label required in S5.5.2(k) of FMVSS

213. During this time period, one of the production lines used by Cosco

to produce the Arriva model used pads for the Canadian version of this

child restraint which do not incorporate the air bag warning label

required by FMVSS 213.

Cosco supports its application for inconsequential noncompliance

with the following:

Cosco contends this noncompliance is inconsequential as it

relates to motor vehicle safety. A notice and remedy campaign

(``recall'') would not serve any safety related purpose and would in

fact, cast doubt in the minds of the consumer as to the

effectiveness of child restraints. We believe the low number of

units involved (815) combined with the enormous publicity given to

the warning label issue, rear-facing seats in air bag locations, and

given the fact the instructions and unit labels do warn to the

consumer about this misuse do not warrant a recall.

To reiterate, Cosco does not believe this noncompliance warrants

a recall. The Agency, child restraint manufacturers and child

passenger safety advocates are all aware of the negative impacts of

recalls resulting from technical noncompliance. The two primary

negative effects are, the public, because of the number and

frequency of such recalls, pays no attention to recalls that in fact

do in a practical way affect child passenger safety. In addition,

the public upon seeing the number of recalls, concludes child

restraints currently available are unsafe and therefore declines to

use them. The Agency is aware and , in fact, has publicly advised

consumers to use child restraints which have defects or

noncompliances that have resulted in recalls until such child

restraints can be corrected. This is in recognition of the fact that

technical noncompliance does not compromise the overall

effectiveness of child restraints. In the event a recall is ordered

for the noncompliance which has been identified, both of the effects

described will impact consumers negatively.

In conclusion, Cosco submits reasonable evaluation of the facts

surrounding this technical noncompliance will result in the decision

that no practical safety issue exists.

Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and

arguments on the application of Cosco described above. Comments should

refer to the docket number and be submitted to: U.S. Department of

Transportation Docket Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20590. It is requested, but not required, that two

copies be submitted.

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: July 16, 1999.

(49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and

501.8)

[[Page 32304]]

Issued on: June 10, 1999.

L. Robert Shelton,

Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 99-15251 Filed 6-15-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P