This
is an original NHTSA Interpretation File[This
file was downloaded from the NHTSA
Website] September
25, 2000 John A.
Green, Supervisor California Department of Education Office of School
Transportation 721 Capitol Mall P. O. Box 944272 Sacramento, CA 94244-2720
Dear Mr. Green:
This responds to your letter asking about an Oceanside (California) Unified School
District school bus modified with a product manufactured by Majestic Transportation
Products, Ltd. , (Majestic) called the Safe-T-Bar passenger restraint system.
You explain that
the Safe-T-Bar is a "heavily padded U-shaped bar similar to the type of restraint
systems most commonly found on amusement park rides." Majestic asserts that "during
a sudden stop, collision, or bus rollover - etc., a small weighted pendulum swings
and engages a latch, locking the 'Safe-T-Bar' in the down position, thereby controlling
and restraining the passenger within the padded seating area." You further inform
us that Majestic and the Oceanside Unified School District are "cooperating" in
testing the system on an Oceanside school bus. You do not describe how or what
type of testing is being conducted, or whether school children are involved in
the testing. You
asked that we respond to six questions. The questions address the safety of the
Safe-T-Bar system and whether a school bus that has its passenger seats retrofitted
with Safe-T-Bars would continue to meet Federal motor vehicle safety standards
(FMVSS), including Standard No. 222, School Bus Passenger Seating and Crash Protection.
Our answers are provided below. In addressing your questions, it might be helpful
to have some background information on school bus crash protection.
In response to the Motor Vehicle and Schoolbus Safety Amendments of 1974, we issued
a number of safety standards under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety
Act (now codified at 49 U.S.C. §30101 et seq.) to improve protection of school
bus passengers during crashes. One of these standards was Standard No. 222, which
provides for passenger crash protection through a concept called "compartmentalization."
Prior to issuance of Standard No. 222, we found that the school bus seat was a
significant factor contributing to injury. We found that seats failed the passengers
in three principal respects: by being too weak; too low; and too hostile. In response,
we developed requirements to improve the performance of school bus seats and the
overall crash protection of school buses. Those requirements comprise the "compartmentalization"
approach we adopted for providing high levels of crash protection to school bus
passengers. Compartmentalization
is directed toward ensuring that passengers are surrounded by high-backed, well-padded
seats that both cushion and contain the children in a crash. If a seat is not
compartmentalized by a seat back in front of it, compartmentalization must be
provided by a restraining barrier. The seats and restraining barriers must be
strong enough to maintain their integrity in a crash yet flexible enough to be
capable of deflecting in a manner which absorbs the energy of the occupant.They
must meet specified height requirements and be constructed, by use of substantial
padding or other means, so that they provide protection when they are impacted
by the head and legs of a passenger.
It is helpful to bear in mind the following highlights about compartmentalization:
(1) Compartmentalization
provides effective occupant crash protection, minimizes the hostility of the crash
environment, and limits the range of movement of an occupant, without using seat
belts; (2) Compartmentalization
ensures that high levels of crash protection are provided to each passenger independent
of any action on the part of the occupant; and
(3) Seat belts are needed on passenger cars and other family vehicles and on small
school buses (school buses with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less) because the crash
pulse, or deceleration, experienced by the lighter vehicles is more severe than
that of larger vehicles in similar collisions. Large school buses are inherently
safer vehicles because they are larger and heavier than the vast majority of the
other vehicles on the road. In addition, occupants in large school buses sit above
the forces that are typically imparted to the bus by smaller impacting vehicles
during a crash. The training and qualification requirements for school bus drivers
and the extra care taken by other road users in their vicinity add to the safety
of school buses.
With this background in mind, we now turn to your questions.
1. Does testing of any product in an independent testing facility (other than
[by] a manufacturer) certify that the product meets applicable FMVSS? The answer
is no. The manufacturer of a motor vehicle must certify that the vehicle meets
applicable FMVSSs. Under 49 CFR Part 567, Certification, the motor vehicle manufacturer
must "affix to each vehicle a label" that among other information, states: "This
vehicle conforms to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards in effect
on the date of manufacture shown above." This statement is the certification.
Most items of the
motor vehicle equipment that have applicable FMVSS are marked "DOT" to indicate
that they meet the standards' requirements. Regarding certification to FMVSS requirements,
independent testing laboratories sometimes provide services to vehicle and equipment
manufacturers, including information and test data that support the manufacturers'
certifications. However, testing by itself is neither a certification nor a substitute
for certification.
2. Does NHTSA certify independent testing facilities? The answer is no. Any representation
that NHTSA "certifies" or "approves" test laboratories or facilities to conduct
compliance testing, or for any other purpose, would be misleading. I note that
in its information to you, Majestic describes a testing facility that produced
a "comprehensive seventy two page report" as a "federally approved collision testing
facility." NHTSA has not approved the facility, or any other facility, to conduct
compliance testing or for any other purpose.
3. Does the Safe-T-Bar system conform to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards?
Because the Safe-T-Bar
system is an item of equipment that is sold separately from a school bus, there
are no safety standards that directly apply to it. Our safety standards for school
buses apply to new, completed vehicles, not to separate components or systems.
As such, Standard No. 222 does not apply to the Safe-T-Bar system, assuming the
system is sold in the aftermarket and is not sold as part of a new school bus.
A representation that a product meets crash protection standards that do not apply
is misleading. (1) If the Safe-T-Bar system were installed on new school buses,
the vehicle would have to meet Standard No. 222 and the other school bus standards
with the product installed. Without testing a vehicle, we cannot make a positive
determination of whether the standard could be met with the product installed.
However, as explained below, we believe that a new school bus may not be able
to meet the standard with the Safe-T-Bar system. We have other safety concerns
as well, apart from whether the requirements of Standard No. 222 could be met.
4. Does the Safe-T-Bar
system make inoperative the school bus's compliance with Standard No. 222?
Section 30122 of our statute
prohibits a motor vehicle manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or repair business
from installing any modification that "make[s] inoperative any part of a device
or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle in compliance with an
applicable motor vehicle safety standard . . . ." Any person in the aforementioned
categories that makes inoperative the compliance of a device or element of design
on the vehicle would be subject to fines of up to $1,100 per violation and to
injunctive relief.
The compartmentalization requirements of Standard No. 222 include requirements
that a protective seat back must be provided to protect an unrestrained passenger.
We are concerned about the continued compliance of a bus with a Safe-T-Bar installed
with Standard No. 222's seat deflection and head and leg protection requirements.
5. Does the Safe-T-Bar
attachment to a school bus passenger seat back reduce or compromise the effectiveness
of compartmentalization? We believe it is possible that the incorporation of the
Safe-T-Bar system into existing school bus seats would reduce the benefits of
compartmentalization, and otherwise adversely affect safety. NHTSA has previously
discussed compliance and other safety concerns applicable to similar devices,
including the R-Bar, a padded restraining device designed to be mounted on the
seat backs of school buses that folds down to restrain the passengers in the next
rearward seat. In a letter of October 15, 1993 (copy enclosed), NHTSA summarized
how it has addressed various compliance and safety issues applicable to devices
similar to R-Bars and the Safe-T-Bar: As we stated in a letter to Mr. Kenneth
A. Gallo dated February 19, 1993, (copy enclosed) the agency believes that the
concept of using "safety bars" as occupant retraining devices in school buses
raises significant safety concerns, including whether the bar could result in
excessive loads (e.g., abdominal, leg or chest) on occupants during a crash, as
a result of contact between the bar and the occupants. We explained in a July
14, 1992, letter to you (copy enclosed) that the vehicle in which R-Bars are installed
must meet the requirements of Standard No. 222 with the device in any position
in which it may be placed. We have said that if a padded restraining device similar
to the R-Bar is attached to the seat back, it becomes part of the seat and the
device, as folded into its position, must not intrude into the leg protection
zone described in S5.3.2 of Standard No. 222 (NHTSA letter of January 31, 1991,
to Mr. Scott Hiler, enclosed). Also enclosed are NHTSA letters of March 10, 1989,
and November 3, 1988, to Mr. Joseph Nikoll, which discuss issues concerning installation
of "safety bars" in small school buses in addition to or in lieu of the seat belts
required by Standard No. 208.
Standard No. 222 specifies a forward and a rearward push test on the seat back
of a school bus seat. These tests are designed to require seat backs to deform
in a controlled manner. For example, in a frontal crash, occupants will impact
the seat back in front of their seating position. That seat back must deflect
forward to absorb energy from the occupants, but not collapse so far as to cause
injuries to passengers seated in front of it. Our crash statistics show that the
compartmentalization concept supported by Standard No. 222 has been successful
in protecting the students who ride on the nation's school buses. The agency is
concerned that the introduction of Safe-T-Bar type devices will adversely affect
the protection provided by Standard No. 222. Using the same frontal crash example,
these devices will likely place loads on the student's abdomen and force the upper
torso to rotate around the bar, place strains on the student's spine, and allow
the heads of larger students to strike the top of the seat back in front of them.
In contrast, unrestrained passengers will translate forward into the seat back
in front of them and distribute the load across their entire upper torso. Standard
No. 222 requirements for head and leg protection, where compliance is demonstrated
by impacting the seat back, result in seat designs that accommodate this type
of loading. In
addition, Safe-T-Bar type devices can reduce and otherwise limit the living space
between seats. In the event a seat back is loaded and deformed by the students
in the rear seat, the students in the forward seat may be sandwiched between their
seat back and the restraining device attached to the seat in front of them. Similar
arguments may be made for rear end impacts.
6. If a school bus were retrofitted with the Safe-T-Bar system, will the school
bus continue to meet all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards?
Compartmentalization is
intended to restrain passengers in a crash without seat belt assemblies or devices
such as the Safe-T-Bar. As previously explained, we have concerns about a product
that might interfere with the capability of a school bus to protect occupants.
For the above reasons,
we believe that a school bus seating system with a bar system might reduce the
crash protection provided in vehicles which meet the requirements of the Federal
motor vehicle safety standards. There is limited information on how bar systems
would perform in a crash or affect the current safety of school buses. We are
undertaking a comprehensive school bus safety research program to evaluate better
ways of retaining occupants in the seating compartment. As part of that program,
we will be looking into possible ways of redesigning the school bus seat, as well
as integrating a lap and shoulder belt into the seat that is compatible with compartmentalization.
Also, we plan to conduct research on extra padding, not only for the seat itself
but also for the bus side wall.
On a final note, we would like to point out that many of Oceanside's newer school
buses may still be under the school bus manufacturer's warranty. Before Oceanside
decides to retrofit any school bus with the Safe-T-Bar or a similar system, it
may be prudent for the school district to share Majestic's information with the
school bus manufacturer, and request a determination whether the school bus manufacturer
will continue to honor applicable warranties if the Safe-T-Bar system were placed
on school buses. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions,
please feel free to contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or by telephone
at (202) 366-2992.
(sgn) Frank Seales, Jr. Chief Counsel Enclosures ref:222
d.9/25/00 1. Regardless
of whether a safety standard applies to the product, our statute at 49 U.S.C.
§30120 requires manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle replacement
equipment to notify owners and to provide remedies if it is determined their products
have safety-related defects. If it were determined that the Safe-T-Bar systems
had a safety-related defect, the manufacturer would have to notify all purchasers
and repair or replace the defective item without charge. |