1. family and parenting
2. children

“Motor vehicle injuries are the greatest
public health problem facing children
today” Center for Disease Control
a
P
A
on
r
pe
the
d
n
a
y
t
e
f
a
S
e
l
ic
h
e
V
n
e
r
ld
i
h
C
firm
5473 Blair Road
Dallas, Texas 75231
(214) 324-9000
[email protected]
Introduction
Thousands of children each year are catastrophically injured or killed on America's roadways,
parking lots and driveways. On some occasions, no design principle would have prevented the
tragedy. On the vast majority of others however, safety designs directed toward protecting
children would have prevented these tragedies. Yet, the vehicle and child safety industries refuse
to take responsibility for these needless injuries and deaths. Instead, they choose to routinely
blame parents and others for safety problems they have created.
Who should be held responsible when a child dies or is maimed when his child seat fails to
provide adequate restraint? Who should bear the financial burden when a seven year old, rear
seated passenger submarines under the lap belt or rolls out of the shoulder belt and is paralyzed
because the restraint system was designed for a 170 lb. adult male, rather than a 70 lb. female
child? Who is to blame when a power window fatally strangles a child because the child placed
her knee on the rocker switch and raised the window? Even more importantly then who bears
responsibility is the following question: HOW SAFE ARE OUR CHILDREN IN OUR
VEHICLES?
Page 2
Children are the most precious cargo we will ever place in a vehicle. As such, no child should be
left behind when it comes to vehicle safety. If the vehicle and child safety industries are not going
to protect children equally, then the government should intervene. After all, Thomas Jefferson
once wrote that “the care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and
legitimate object of good government.”
the
firm
Child Seats
According to the NHTSA, "child restraints are highly effective in
reducing the likelihood of death or serious injury in motor vehicle
crashes." However, statistics contained in a recent Notice of
Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) Change 2002-11707-20 indicate
that child restraint effectiveness for children ages 1-4 is cited as 54
percent in passenger cars and 59 percent in light trucks. A good
friend of mine, Dr. Martha Bidez, in responding to this NPRM
queried "assuming that these data represent survivable crashes,
what other business can survive, much less prosper, with an
apparent 40% failure rate?” NHTSA's admission that children die
in 40% of all crashes causes me grave concern as a parent. I am
disgusted since I know other design opportunities are available but
are not used.
Why are child seats so ineffective? There are five answers to this
question; First, parents simply do not realize that children need
something other than an adult seat belt up to age eight or 80 lbs.
Second, child seat inadequacy can be traced to the federal standard
that governs child seat safety. Prior to 2002, Federal Motor Vehicle
Safety Standard (FMVSS 213) was an antiquated regulation that did
not insure that child seats would perform properly in real world type
tests. (For the record, 213 has been improved, but it remains
woefully inadequate). For example, there was no requirement for
angled or offset frontal impacts, side impacts, rear impacts or
rollovers. The standard also allowed for 32 inches of forward head
excursion despite the fact that oftentimes there was not 32 inches of
rear seat space due to downsized vehicle interiors. Also, there was no
lateral head excursion provision. Third, the child seat manufacturers
themselves have historically been unsophisticated and under-funded
entities that had little to no biomechanical expertise. Fourth, vehicle
manufacturers are not testing child seats in their own vehicles to
determine child seat effectivness. Lastly, until the LATCH system
there was not any requirement that mandated child seat compatibility
with the vehicle. Hence, you might have the safest child seat ever
built but since it does not fit in your vehicle properly, it is rendered
dangerous.
5 lb 10 lb 20 lb 30 lb 40 lb 50 lb 60 lb 70 lb 80 lb
Infant-only seat, rear facing, never in front seat with
passenger side airbag. Car bed if medically
necessary.
Convertible safety seat, rear facing until child is at
least 1 yr. of age and at least 20 lb, then forward
facing to the maximum weight and height allowed
by seat.
Combination seat with internal harness that transitions to a belt-positioning
booster seat; seat forward facing only, weight varies.
Forward facing seat with internal harness, weight varies.
Integrated child seat; toddler seat with harness (20-40 lb) or some as beltpositioning booster seat with lap/shoulder belt (more that 35-40 lb),
as long as child fits.
Belt positioning booster seat with lap/shoulder belt as long as child fits.
the
firm
Page 3
Too many parents and caregivers rush children out of child seats and
into the vehicle’s 3-point seat belt. The chart above was proposed by
the American Academy of Pediatrics. Notice that weight, not age, is
the determining factor.
Seats & Harnesses
Now that you know why child seats are so ineffective in real
world crashes, one must understand the types of child seats that
are available to consumers to determine if better education,
testing, resources and vehicle compatibility would make a
difference.
Types of Safety Seats
Child seats are specifically designed to protect children within certain weight, height, physical and
developmental parameters. Some seats only accommodate infants, while others protect older toddlers,
preschoolers, and school-age children, as well as children with special needs. The following is a brief
description of the types of safety seats currently available.
There are four basic designs of internal harness
systems that secure children in their safety seats. If
the seat meets or exceeds all applicable U.S. Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, then the type of
harness chosen becomes a matter of personal
preference, although most child seat passenger
safety experts agree that the five point harness
generally provides the best protection for the widest
range of children.
Harness Types
Five-Point. This harness type has straps that are worn
over each shoulder, over each hip and the midline over
the crotch where they meet and are buckled together.
Because the child safety seats with a five-point
harness are frequently less expensive than ones with
a tray-shield, caregivers might mistakenly believe that
this indicates that five-point harness seats are of
“lesser quality” or provide less protection. In fact,
purchasing a seat with a five-point harness could be
considered a situation where you get “more than you
pay for”. The straps on these seats do tend to twist,
however making it very important to be sure they are
lying flat during use.
Shield
Infant-only. These seats are designed to be used from
birth until 20 to 22 pounds (depending on the model) or
until the top of the child’s head is within one inch of the
top of the seat shell, whichever occurs first. An infantonly seat must never be used forward facing.
Booster Seats are available in two types:
A:)Removable-shield boosters, which are not
recommended unless the shield is removed and the
base alone is used with a shoulder/lap belt and
B:) Belt-positioning boosters, which come in two
styles: high back and backless
Belt positioning booster seats are designed to be used
with the vehicle shoulder/lap belt, elevating the child so
the safety belt fits properly over the thighs and
shoulders (rather than the abdomen and neck). A belt
positioning booster is not recommended until a child is
at least 3 years old and weights 30-40 puonds.
Children are generally safest using safety seats with full
harness systems until they are more than 40 pounds or
their shoulders are above the top harness slots of both
convertible and combination child seat/booster seats.
Shield. This harness has two straps that are
worn over the shoulders and attach to a flat
plastic “shield” that fits over the lower torso.
The straps tend to lie flat, and the harness is
easily buckled with one hand. The T-shield
cannot be adjusted properly to fit a newborn
since the shield is in front of the baby’s face or
chest instead of the hips.
Three Point
Three-Point. Found on most infant-only seats, this
harness system features a strap worn over each
shoulder and midline over the crotch.
Convertible. Before the weight or height limit of an infant
only seat has been reached, the child should be
switched to a convertible seat, generally to continue
rear-facing. Weight limits for rear and forward-facing.
vary by seat model, but all models can be used only until
a child weights 40 pounds. Convertible seats are so
named because they can face either direction. The
safer, rear facing position is recommended for as long as
possible.
Built-in seats. A forward-facing seat with a full internal
harness that fits children at least 1 year old and more
than 20 pounds may be part of the vehicle seat design.
Some vehicles have a built-in belt-positioning booster
which may be used by children at least 3 years old who
weigh at least 30 to 50 pounds, depending on the
manufacturer’s recommendations.
Tray-Shield. With this system, the shoulder harness
straps are attached to a wide, padded shield that snaps
into the seat at the crotch. Since the shoulder straps
loosen each time the shield is brought over the child’s
head, caregivers need to be certain to adjust the straps
for a snug fit each time their child is buckled into the
seat. This style also does not fit infants as well.
Tray
Shield
Combination Child Seat/Booster. Some child safety
seats are designed to function as a forward-facing seat
with an internal harness when a child is under 40 pounds
and then as a belt-positioning booster (with the harness
removed) when the child reaches 40 pounds. Both
lower and upper weight limits vary among models
There is no debate about this fact: rear facing is safest for both
adults and children, but especially for babies. Rear facing car seats
spread frontal crash forces over the whole area of a baby's back,
head and neck; they also prevent the head from snapping relative to
the body in a frontal crash. Rear facing child seats also allow for a
longer ride-down period so that there is less energy transferred to
the child. Hence, parents should keep their children in rear facing
child seats for as long as possible. Some rear facing child seats
have a 35 lb. maximum weight. A child is too tall for a rear facing
child seat when the top of his head is at the level of the child seat
shell. In Sweden, children often remain in rear facing child seats
through age four.
5-Point Harness
Page 4
The American Academy of Pediatrics has
concluded that a rear facing child seat is safest.
the
firm
Child Seat
Safety Related Issues
Angle of recline for a rear facing seat, the seat should be reclined
so that the angle of the back surface is not more than 45 degrees
from vertical. As the baby grows, the angle should be decreased.
For a forward facing seat, the most upright position is the safest in
terms of load distribution. Newer model child seats have a level,
which advises users the correct angle of recline. Some
manufacturers mislabeled their instructions which allowed for
excessive reclination.
Chest clip holds the shoulder straps together. If not spring loaded,
the clip could slide down allowing the child's shoulders to slip out
which could lead to complete or partial ejection. The clips that are
not spring loaded also have a tendency to be flimsy and one of the
teeth can shear rendering the shoulder straps ineffective.
Spring Loaded
Tray shield- located on a convertible child seat. The tray breaks
off and impacts the child or the child impacts the tray and suffers
injury because the tray was not adequately padded. Testing has
shown that tray shields result in 35% higher head peak
acceleration forces than 5-point harnesses.
T-shields- shoulder straps are attached to a flat, plastic pad on a
fairly rigid stalk that buckles into the child seat shell between the
child's legs. Testing has revealed that a child's throat can impact
the top of the T-shield. Also, neck forces are 40% higher on Tshields compared to 5-point harnesses.
Plastic shell fracturing - over the years, shell deformation has
resulted in unnecessary child injury.
Friction Loaded
Shoulder harness slots - two common problems. Mislabeling
which slot to put the shoulder belt through is most common. For
rear facing child seats, the shoulder straps should be at or just
below the child's shoulders. For forward facing child seats, put the
shoulder strap in the slot at or above the child's shoulders. The
slots also have a tendency to be weak and un-reinforced such that
the slots tear out under load ejecting the child.
Mislabeled by a Major
Child Seat Manufacturer
Head excursion- before September 1999, the forward head
excursion was 32 inches forward of a point located five inches
rearward of the seat bight. After September 1999, the head
excursion has been reduced to 28 inches from that point but with a
tether device. There is still no
lateral head excursion
requirement.
Lateral child seat excursion- Vehicle safety belts are not
properly designed to laterally restrain a child seat. Lateral
movement places the child in harm's way from intruding
components. The top tether and LATCH system have minimized
this problem.
Wrong Way
Cracks Due To Weak
and Un-reinforced
design
Harness strap tightness- this is a major problem because users
will wrap the child in bulky clothing or a blanket then the harness
is not tight enough. However, nothing advises parents about
swaddling a child in a blanket. Also some manuals differ in how
they define tightness. Some say one finger between the straps.
Some say two, others say three fingers.
3-point harness- this harness configuration has two straps over
the shoulders and a single crotch strap. A child is susceptible to
ejection or submarining with this design because there is no pelvic
support.
Safe Passage Brochure:
From Leading Child
Seat Manufacturer
“You must also use a top tether strap if you can
pull the top of the child restraint more than one
inch forward or one to two inches to the side”.
Lateral head excursion- focuses on the failure to use a winged
seat design to help minimize head excursion in side impacts.
Twisted harness belt- the load carrying capacity of the straps is
decreased to the point the harness can separate under otherwise
survivable accidents.
Page 5
Correct Way
Low shield booster seats- these were first introduced in the US
in 1979 and problems quickly followed because there is no
harness restraint to retain the upper torso. As a result, children in
shield boosters can be ejected or injured due to head contact or
abdominal loading. One company recommended to its US
customers that it was safe to use a shield booster seat for children
under 40 lbs. This was contrary to the message it gave its Canadian
customers. In 1991, the NHTSA wrote that "shield boosters may
not provide adequate protection because they don't offer adequate
upper body restraint and children can be ejected from them."
US Version
Vehicle seat incompatibility- due to the
angle of the seat rake and seat bight location,
the child seat cannot be placed securely to the
vehicle.
Canadian Version
Design Fixes
Top Tethers- a top tether is the supplemental attachment now
standard on almost every new vehicle sold in the US. A top tether
is a strap that connects the top of the child seat to an anchor
mounted in the vehicle at a location behind the child seat. It is
designed to prevent the forward or lateral excursion of the child
seat. Most vehicles sold since 1989, have factory locations for the
installation of a tether anchor. In comparison crash testing, child
seats with top tethers reduce head excursion. More importantly,
tethered child seats tend to reduce head accelerations and neck
loads.
30-40
The GM Love Seat was introduced in 1973. It incorporated a top
tether strap because it resulted in a reduction of head excursion of
approximately 12 inches.
(40 and 60 lbs)
Unstable base- a narrow or unstable base that allows the child seat
to move excessively sideways due to the vehicle belt placement
can allow a child to impact the striking object or vehicle interior.
No positive belt capture feature- this has been seen primarily on
no-back booster seats. The vehicle's belt routed around the booster
but was not captured or locked in place. As such, the booster seat
could slip out from under the vehicle's belt allowing the child to be
ejected. On more conventional child seats the vehicle’s belt is
routinely not capable of being locked to the child seat. This lack
of retention can allow excessive lateral movement.
Page 6
Rear Facing
Front Facing
Booster Seat Rolls Out from Under Belt
LATCH- this stands for lower anchors and tethers. LATCH
became mandatory on new cars September 1, 2002. With the
LATCH system, there is no need to use the vehicle belts. The goal
behind the LATCH system was to eliminate misuse through loose
seats and misrouted belts. LATCH has not been the panacea
however. Multiple configurations of how to affix child seats have
been produced which have lead to confusion in how to affix the
child seat to the latch in the vehicle.
The safety principle behind a top tether and the LATCH system is
to couple the child seat to the vehicle as tightly as possible.
Eliminating looseness also explains why all child seats now use a
5-point harness rather than a 3-point harness. Coupling the seat
and the child allows for a longer ride-down period, eliminates
excessive forward and lateral excursion and decreases deadly
forces on the child's head, neck and torso.
Forgotten
Child
Comparison of a 8 1/2 -9 1/2 yr old 50th percentile Girl
& Boy Anthropometry to the 5th percentile Female &
50th Percentile Male Adult
Over 500 children a year are killed because
they are either unrestrained or effectively
unrestrained because of poor belt fit and
improper restraint.
Most parents allow their children to stop using any form of child
seat after age four. These parents are making a potentially life
altering mistake. Unless your child can meet the following criteria,
they need to stay away from adult seat belts:
·
·
·
·
·
·
They are tall enough so that their legs bend at the
knees at the edge of the seat when seated;
They are mature enough to remain seated with their
backs flat against the back of the seat (no slouching);
The lap belt sits high on the thighs or low on the
hips;
The shoulder belt crosses the shoulder and chest;
The latch plate is as far as possible from the
occupant center line; and
The buckle is close to the child’s hip.
Adult seat belts do not protect children properly because the seat
belt fails to fit them correctly. As a consequence, children are
maimed or die. Why do adult seat belts not fit children properly?
Shoulder belt anchor too high.
Shoulder belt cuts
across neck or chest.
Children between the ages of four to eight are typically less than
48 inches tall and under 80 lbs. These sized children are exposed
to a high risk of severe injury or death because they are strapped
into adult safety belts that are designed to protect adults, not small
children.
Lap belt anchors too far apart
Comparison of a 4 1/2 -5 1/2 yr old 50th percentile Girl
& Boy Anthropometry to the 5th percentile Female &
50th Percentile Male Adult
Stalk too tall.
Too much gap between
buckle and pelvis.
Consequences of Improper Seat Belt Fit
Shoulder Belt Rollout Sequence
the
firm
Page 7
Submarining
Rollout
Mis-Positioning Belt Behind Back
A 1996 NHTSA study showed that only 6.1 percent of the children
who were weight eligible were actually restrained in a booster
seat. This small percentage could be explained by state laws.
Even though adult seat belts do not fit children four to eight
properly, as of 2002, 26 states allowed parents to place children in
an adult seat belt after the child reached age four. Four allowed
children to use an adult seat after age three. Two allowed children
to use an adult seat belt after age two.
Child Passenger Protection Laws
Age of Effect vs. Number of States
Number of States
40
30
20
26
13
10
5
0
2
2
4
3
1
4
Age (& Under)
5
6
Knowing that 32 states allow parents and caregivers to place four
year old and younger children in adult seat belts, vehicle
manufacturers have advocated the use of booster seats for
children ages four to eight. In April 2000, former Ford CEO
Jacques Nasser touted the safety benefits of booster seats in
announcing Ford's Boost America campaign:
"We have made great progress in protecting infants in
car crashes, but now we need to focus on older
children between the ages of 4 to 8. They are too big
for a regular child safety seat and too small for adult
safety belts. The child safety gap must and will be
closed."
A year later in front of a Senate Subcommittee hearing, Ford's
Director of Automotive Safety testified about the safety benefits
of booster seats:
the shoulder belt portion of the
lap-shoulder belts should not be used if it contacts the
childs face, chin, neck or throat.
WARNING - If the shoulder belt portion contacts or
remains in front of the child’s face, chin, neck or throat,
move the child to a seat with a lap belt only, if available.
Otherwise, place the shoulder belt portion behind the
child’s face.
Once the shoulder portion of the restraint system is defeated, the
restraint system is rendered dangerous since the upper torso is no
longer restrained. Without the upper torso restraint, the child will
hyperflex over the lap belt and sustain paralyzing injuries because
the 3-point belt has become a lap belt only design.
"We have increased our focus recently on the need to
improve the effectiveness of restraint systems for
children aged 4 to 8. In a crash, poor belt fit can
reduce the protection that the safety belts should
provide against the risk of serious or fatal injuries.”
However, when faced with litigation, these same vehicle
manufacturers argued in court that booster seats were not safety
related items at all but were used merely to improve comfort. In
fact, Ford's retained experts argued in a Florida trial that booster
seats are a matter of comfort and convenience, not safety. CEO
Nasser testified, contrary to his Boost America comments, that
booster seats were intended to increase seat belt use based on
comfort issues, not safety issues.
Page 8
So, are four to eight year old children adequately protected by
adult seat belts or do they need booster seats? Vehicle
manufacturers for years have recommended that the shoulder
portion of the belt be placed behind the back of a child if the seat
belt did not fit properly. In short, they encouraged belt mispositioning.
the
firm
Lap Belt Only Kinematic Sequence
Further, by placing the shoulder belt behind the back, the injury
producing consequences of submarining are increased.
Submarining injuries devastate the internal organ injuries and can
cause lower spine fractures.
Lap Belt Submarining Sequence
In September 1996, the NTSB issued a safety
report recommending that the NHTSA revise
FMVSS 213 to create a performance standard
for child seats for children up to 80 lbs. Until
2002, the only safety standard designed to
protect children limited its protection to
children up to 50 lbs. By June 2003, the
revised FMVSS 213 extended protection to
children who weigh up to 65 lbs. However,
the NHTSA acknowledges that "children must weigh
approximately 80 lbs. to fit properly in a safety belt without a
booster seat." Why not protect children between 65-80 lbs.?
Don’t they deserve protection?
What injuries are four to eight year old children exposed to even
when they properly use an ill-fitting adult seat belt? If the lap belt
fails to properly restrain a child's pelvis, the forces of the crash will
be distributed into the abdomen rather than the bony pelvis.
Abdominal tears, paralysis and death are common injuries when a
child submarines under the lap belt. Because so much space exists
between the lap belt anchors, a child can literally be ejected from
under the lap belt. Because the shoulder belt anchor is so high and
so far forward, the shoulder belt can literally strangle a four to eight
year old child or create a fulcrum causing spinal injuries. Other
times, the child will slip out of the shoulder belt and be exposed to
lap belt only type injuries.
Despite decades of research that demonstrate that four to eight year
old children are not adequately protected by adult seat belts, only a
handful of vehicle manufacturers have provided integrated child
seats.
2002 Model Year Vehicles with Standard Built-In Child Seat
Chevrolet Venture
2002 Model Year Vehicles with Optional Built-In Child Seat
Saab 9-3, 9-5; Subaru Legacy; Volvo S40, S60, S80, V40, V70,
V70XC; Chrysler Town and Country, Voyager, Caravan, Grand
Caravan; Nissan Quest
The time is now to protect children age four to eight from the illfitting consequences of adult seat belts. four to eight year old
children who are using adult seat belts are being maimed and killed
at a staggering rate. In 1997 alone, over 10 times the number of
children who were ever killed by airbags were killed while using
an adult seat belt. Adult seat belts and children four to eight are a
deadly combination. As long as four to eight year old children
remain a forgotten priority, deaths and catastrophic injuries will
continue to rise at epidemic proportions.
Knowing that vehicle manufacturers were taking inconsistent
positions on the need to protect four to eight year old children and
knowing that the safety of four to eight year old children remains
ignored, Public Citizen, in April, 2002, urged the vehicle industry,
NHTSA and Congress to require integrated, built-in child
restraints for children four to eight.
Airbags and Children are a Deadly Combination
Hope may be on the horizon however. The NHTSA announced its
2003-2006 Rulemaking Priorities and Supporting Research
recently. One of the special populations the NHTSA intends to
focus on is the protection of children. This is certainly well
overdue. Unfortunately, it could be another 10 years before any
meaningful required legislation is adopted. In the meanwhile,
safety advocates will have to keep encouraging manufacturers to
implement safety features even before legislation requires them to
do so.
Conventional Child Seat vs. Integrated Booster
the
firm
Page 9
Public Citizen's request is well-founded. Various integrated child
seats have been available since the 1980's. In fact, Ford has
indicated in internal engineering notes that for children between
four to eight, the integrated child seat with 5-point harness is the
"safest form" of restraint system to use because it is both "safe"
and convenient."
EXTENDING THE RESTRAINT
DESIGN PROTECTION ENVELOPE
TO CHILDREN UP TO 14
UNICEF reported in 2001 that injury from motor vehicle accidents
is the principal cause of child death in all developed nations
accounting for almost 41 percent of deaths in the age group one to
14.
The total annual costs of motor vehicle
occupant related injury and death is more
than $25.8 billion for all children ages 14
and under.
Even though the United States is the strongest
political power in the world, it is ironic that
when ranked according to deaths per 100,000
children (ages 1-14 yrs.), The US ranked 21st
out of the 25 richest industrialized nations in
the world during the early 1990’s.
Most safety advocates argue that children reach a certain age
before they can safely use an adult seat belt. The age threshold
position is flawed even though it is recommended by state restraint
laws, the NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board), the
vehicle industry and the child safety industry. The proper method
by which to determine when a child can safely use an adult seat belt
is based on anthropometry. Based on the biomechanical research
conducted to date, a child should only use an adult 3-point belt if
they are 80 lbs., have a seated height of 29 inches and a standing
height of 4 foot 7 inches. These sizes are larger than almost 70% of
the children under age 14.
Page 10
Age and Associated Body Weight Required
to Reach Threshold Seated Height to Use
3-point Belts
5th Percentile
Boy or Girl
5th Percentile
Boy or Girl
5th Percentile
Boy or Girl
13.5 - 14.5
81 lbs.
10.5 - 11.5
78 lbs.
8.5 - 9.5
89 lbs.
the
firm
There is good reason for concern that the nine
to 14 year old is unprotected. Motor vehicle
crashes are the leading cause of death in the
US for children ages four to14. In May 2003,
the NHTSA partnered with the National
Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and
Ordinances, the Air Bag & Seat Belt Safety
Campaign, the Automotive Coalition for
Traffic Safety and the Governors Highway
Safety Association to create a model law that will help eliminate
the gaps that often occur in occupant protection litigation. Here are
a few key points of the model law:
·
·
·
Cover all occupants up to age 16 in all seating
positions;
Require child occupants to be restrained in age and
size appropriate restraint systems;
Require all vehicles to have uniform restraint
systems; and
Require all occupants be belted, not just front seat
occupants.
Why is this model law necessary? As is seen with children ages
four to eight, adult seat belts simply do not fit children ages nine to
14 properly. Just like with children age four to eight, many
children age nine to 14 who do not weigh 80 lbs., do not have a
seated height of 29 inches and are not 4 foot 10 inches tall are
susceptible to submarining, shoulder belt rollout and other dangers
associated with ill-fitting belts. However, unlike for children age
four to eight, a built-in booster seat is not practical for a nine to 14
year old.
Manufacturer testing with child sized dummies
demonstrates that belt strangulation is a real
world possibility
So, what can be done to protect children age 9-14 who are too light
and too short to use a vehicle’s 3-point belt while at the same time
protecting all sized adults? The answer is simple- provide a
restraint system that couples all occupants more closely to the seat
rather than the vehicle. Several designs alternatives have existed
for decades that allow for better seat belt fit. These include:
Rollout
·Adjustable anchors in the rear like in the front
seat.
·Pretensioners which remove slack and cinch
the occupant closer to the seat.
·ABTS (All Belts to Seat) helps correct belt
geometry issues.
·Anti-submarining seats help keep buttocks
from sliding off seat so that belt geometry stays
consistent.
Strangulation
Unfortunately, these designs have not been tested to date
on children who are beyond the weight and seating height
limit of a booster seat. A battery of tests needs to be
conducted to insure that children who can no longer use a
booster seat will be protected when they ride in a rear seat.
At the same time, the design needs to protect the 95th
percentile male in the worst possible scenario. A wonderful
organization called Voices for Alabama’s Children is actively
trying to put a test protocol together to verify how these design
improvements will help extend the design envelope to children
over age eight.
Submarining
I would like to thank Dr. Martha Bidez
and Autumn Alexander for their
tireless efforts, positive criticisms
and technical insights into making
vehicles safer for all children.
the
firm
Page 11
·
Ford has acknowledged in a recent filing with the NHTSA in 1980
that shoulder harness fit is critical.
Hidden Dangers to
Children Inside and
Outside Vehicles
Children should never be left unattended inside or even near
parked vehicles because there are a host of hidden dangers that can
kill a child. Since 1990, every state has experienced child injuries
and fatalities because children were left unattended near
vehicles.
Two wonderful organizations were born out
of tragedies associated with hidden vehicle
dangers: www.kidsincars.org and
www.kidsandcars.org. The Struttman and
Fennell families realized following lifealtering events that a public forum was
needed to educate parents and caregivers on
the dangers of vehicles and children. These
families have also tirelessly lobbied for creation of laws to protect
children.
The following are examples of hidden dangers that have claimed
the lives of children. Education, legislation and vehicle safety
enhancements would have prevented most of these deaths.
Children Left in Vehicles
37% of all children killed in the last
5 years in non-traffic accidents
died while left inside a hot vehicle
Each year when summertime temperatures outside soar to 100
degrees, the temperature inside a vehicle can reach 150 degrees. A
locked vehicle is clearly no place to leave a child alone. But, it
happens and frequency is on the rise.
To prevent these numbers from rising, parents and caregivers
should take the following steps to insure child safety:
· Always lock your vehicle;
· Teach your children not to play in or around vehicles,
they are not toys;
· Never leave your child inside a vehicle, even if it is
running with the air conditioner or heat on;
· Teach your children about the dangers of playing in and
around vehicles; and
· Do not be afraid to tell parents or caregivers about the
dangers of leaving a child unattended if you see a child
left inside a vehicle.
Page 12
There is no federal or state database that collects information
related to deaths and injuries that occur as non-traffic related
incidents. The following data was collected from news sources.
the
firm
Caregivers must also be educated on the hazards of leaving
children unattended in a vehicle. If you see a child inside a vehicle,
it is hot and the engine is not running, break the window and save
the child. If you see a child inside a vehicle, it is hot and the engine
is running, put a note on the windshield that reminds people of the
dangers of leaving a child unattended inside a vehicle. A sample
note has already been prepared by www.kidsincars.org.
What exposure do vehicle manufacturers face when this appears
to be a situation where the parents and caregivers are exclusively
to blame? Imagine this scenario. A father who never takes his child
to school is asked to take his child to school. The father loads up
his child in the rear facing child seat where the child quickly
returns to sleep. Before he leaves the house, a business call comes
into the house that requires the dad to rush into work like he
routinely does every day. The dad parks in the parking lot and goes
into his office. The dad receives a call from his wife several hours
later asking how dropping the child off at school went. The dad
then realizes that he forgot his child in his vehicle. Upon returning
to the parking lot, the father finds his child dead in his child seat.
Because of the father's innocent oversight, his child is dead. For
those of you who believe this could never happen to them, I
encourage you to watch the movie the Key Man. The story is
telling.
the
Rather than blame solely that innocent father, I believe the
vehicle manufacturer should be held partly responsible. Vehicle
manufacturers provide warnings when our seat belts are not on,
when we leave our lights on, when we leave keys in the ignition,
when our doors are ajar, when our trunk is ajar, when our
windshield washer fluid is low, when our engine's oil, water, and
brake fluid levels are low. Why not provide a reminder sensor
when our children are left unattended in our vehicle? Why not
provide an alarm that goes off when an occupant remains in the
vehicle over a minute after the vehicle is turned off?
Children Run Over by a
Backing Vehicle
32.1% of all children killed in the
past 5 years were run over in a
driveway
Each day parents take all kinds of precautions to insure that
children are protected from injury or death should they be
involved in a traffic accident. Few parents would ever envision
that their own driveways are oftentimes more dangerous than
highways. As vehicles get larger and larger, and Sport Utility
Vehicles become more prevalent, the blind spot on vehicles
increases. As such, the risk of running over a child in a driveway
has increased. According to the Center for Disease Control,
vehicle backing accidents resulted in more than 2,700 emergency
room treatments between July 2000-June 2001. From January 1October 21, 2002, there were 349 backover incidents involving
children, 104 resulting in death.
firm
Page 13
A child left alone in a vehicle when the
temperature outside is 90 or above can die
within five minutes. However, in most
states, there is no law that punishes people
who leave children unattended in vehicles
and an injury or fatality occurs. Only three
states have laws that punish people for
leaving a child unattended in a vehicle that
results in injury or death: Kentucky, Missouri and Texas. Seven
states have laws that provide for a fine for leaving a child
unattended in a vehicle: Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland,
Nebraska, Pennsylvania, and Washington. It should be noted that
Texas allows a child to be unattended for up to five minutes and
Illinois up to 10 minutes before any criminal wrongdoing has
occurred. Safety advocates have proposed model legislation to
prevent leaving a child unattended in a vehicle even for a minute.
Blind spots exist on all vehicles. A blind spot is defined as the area
of the vehicle that you cannot see from the driver's seat. A blind
spot can be as high as three feet. Consumer Reports reported that a
5 foot 8 inch driver would have to drive forward 12 feet to see a 28
inch traffic cone behind him if driving a Honda Accord. In a
Chevrolet Avalanche, that same driver had to drive forward 29
feet. In a Ford Expedition the blind spot was 30 ft.
Safety risk
Taller vehicles have big blind spots which
make it difficult for drivers to see behind
them, particularly the area closest
to the ground.
So, what is a driver to do if he checks his
side mirrors, his rearview mirror and has
turned around to look for potential threats?
Purchase a vehicle with rear sensors. The
technology is being used today as standard
equipment on vehicles like the Lincoln
Navigator which detects both moving and
stationary objects
up to 20 feet behind
the vehicle. An alarm inside the vehicle
Danger Zone
sounds when the vehicle is backing up and
Being backed over by a vehicle
gets closer to an object. The alarm beeps
is the second-leading cause of
auto-related child deaths.
faster as the object becomes closer. Ford
PERCENTAGE OF FATALITIES BY INCIDENT: claims however that the feature is for
Fire inside
Trunk
convenience and should not be considered
the vehicle
entrapment
3.1%
3.9% a safety feature according to Ford Product
design engineer Bob Kwiecinski. Nissan is
Power
Car put in
offering an optional camera that shows
accessory
motion by
strangulation
child
behind the vehicle in its Infiniti Q45 sedan.
10.1% Honda has a standard camera system on its
3%
Acura MDX SUV and charges $900 for it
Other
11.3% on the Honda Pilot SUV. A growing after
market industry sells various alarms,
Left in car
Backed
sensors and cameras to prevent backover
in hot weather
over
incidents.
36.7%
32.1%
Kids in Cars
In the past five years, over 200 children have died in driveway,
backover related incidents. By November 2003, 55 children had
died in backover incidents. Most of the children were four years
old or younger. At least 60% of the vehicles involved were light
trucks, SUV's and minivans. Amazingly, however, according to
Kids and Cars founder Janette Fennell, "not a single surveillance
system in the US captures data on the number of children that are
killed each year in backover incidents."
According to the
NHTSA, "traditionally we have not tracked non-traffic related
fatalities of any kind." This is about to change. The Senate
Commerce Committee voted in June 2003 on a bill to begin
collecting data on how many backover deaths occur each year in
driveways.
SUV, light truck and minivan sales have increased dramatically in
the last 10 years.
Here are a sample of manufacturers that have products to help
prevent backover accidents.
50.0
45.0
Market Share (%)
40.0
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0
Page 14
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Year
U.S. Sales of LTV’s from 1980-1996 expressed as
a fraction of light vehicle market share
(Automotive News Market Data Book)
the
firm
Vehicles put into
motion by Children
Left Unattended
A brake shift interlock or park shift interlock is a safety device
that prevents a vehicle with an automatic transmission from
being moved out of "park" and into "neutral" or "drive" until the
driver depresses the brake pedal.
10.1% of all children killed in the last 5 years
were killed by a child putting a vehicle into motion.
Children should never be left alone in vehicles, because if the
vehicle does not contain a brake shift interlock device, the child
can move the gear shift and have the vehicle roll away even
without the keys in the ignition. As the vehicle is rolling, children
in front or behind can be struck and killed. The child in the vehicle
may also panic and be struck by the rolling vehicle if he tries to exit
the vehicle.
For those of you who think that this is a freak accident, consider the
numbers. 75 children have died due to unwanted gear shift
engagement. The best selling minivan of all-time was investigated
by the NHTSA for model years 1981-1990. The NHTSA found
startling results:
·
·
·
212 roll-aways
111 injuries
7 fatalities
Technology has existed for almost 100 years to prevent deaths
caused by vehicle rollaway. From 1914-1930, three interlock
devices were patented to prevent a vehicle from going into motion
unless a series of safety steps were first undertaken. Between
1930-1934, GM alone acquired 4 interlock patents. All three
domestic vehicle manufacturers had their own modern interlock
patents by the early 1970's. Safety improvements were proposed
by many others.
The 1963 Human Engineering Guide To Equipment Design,
dedicated a whole chapter to methods of preventing accidental
activation of controls. Operation sequencing was the key design
element to prevent unwanted activation. This is the classic
definition of an interlock device. Patent no. 3,434,315 issued in
1969 provided that "as is often the case, a child is left in the vehicle
while the adult driver must leave for a few moments to accomplish
a particular task. Many cases are known where a child has
accidentally placed the gear selector in a neutral position causing
the car to roll with subsequent injury to the child and damage to the
motor vehicle.” In 1991, the Department of Pediatrics at the
University of California Irvine wrote that “the most common
injury to a child in a non-traffic related incident occurred when a
child moved the vehicle out of gear.” In 1992, the Human Factors
Society wrote that a shift interlock system that required the driver
to depress the brake before shifting out of park would eliminate
potentially dangerous shifting habits.
Despite having technologically feasible designs
to cure a hazard that was foreseen earlier,
vehicle manufacturers have been slow to adopt
brake shift interlocks as standard equipment.
·
·
·
the
AS-body 1984-1995
NS-body 1996-2000
RS-body 2000- present
firm
Page 15
Considering all of the patents and technical literature, why would a
company not use a device with such a useful purpose? The answer
lies with the NHTSA. Even though the number of vehicle
rollaways continues to climb, the NHTSA has never required
brake shift interlocks. This certainly does not suggest that the
NHTSA believes shift interlocks are not helpful however. In fact,
the NHTSA wrote a report in 1989 entitled An Examination of
Sudden Acceleration wherein the NHTSA proposed the use of
automatic shift locks which would require the driver to depress the
brake pedal before the vehicle can be shifted out of gear. The
NHTSA concluded that shift locks would "prevent unattended
children from shifting the car out of park."
Furthermore,
minivans which were classified as multipurpose passenger
vehicles were initially exempt from having to comply with the
same federal standards as passenger automobiles. Using this
loophole, Chrysler marketed its minivans as family vehicles and
encouraged the transportation of small children. There were three
generations of Chrysler minivans:
In 1992, Chrysler bought a full-page ad in the Wall Street Journal
which included the following headline:
Yet, Chrysler did not include brake interlocks on it’s 1992
minivans. Chrysler bragged that its 1996 Dodge Caravan was a
leader in safety. In its 1996 Town and Country brochure, Chrysler
commented that it had unprecedented emphasis on research and
development. Yet, Chrysler did not use a brake shift interlock on
its minivan until the RS-body which came out in 2000. This was
well after its competitors had started using brake shift interlocks in
1993.
1993 Ford Aerostar, 1993 Mercury Villager
1994 Mercury Villager, 1995 Honda Odyssey
all had brake shift interlocks as standard
equipment
Even more important, however is the fact that Chrysler was
installing brake shift interlocks on its 1993 Mitsubishi Eagle
Summit. In 1997, Chrysler offered a retrofit to owners of 19841995 Jeep Cherokee and Wagoneer vehicles for the installation of a
brake shift interlock.
Vehicle manufacturers and others argue that if parents and
caregivers watch their children and prevent them from playing
inside a vehicle that brake shift interlocks are unnecessary. In a
perfect world this is true. But, parents cannot possibly watch their
children every second of the day. Parents will also sometimes
make mistakes and forget to lock a vehicle that is sitting in a
driveway. Knowing that people make mistakes, it is incumbent on
manufacturers to provide the last line of defense for children.
The mechanics of an electric window are simple. By applying a
two pound force on a power window toggle switch, the window
motor is activated to exert an upward raising force of between
50-80 pounds. Since only 8-12 pounds of force is needed to
raise the average vehicle window, the excess available force (4268 pounds) is more than enough to lift and strangle or crush a
child between the glass and the upper window frame.
The hazards of power windows closing on occupants has been
known in the industry for years. In response to two separate
proposed rulemaking changes by the NHTSA in 1969 that
addressed ways to minimize the likelihood of personal injury
when a power window is inadvertently operated and a person is
caught between the window that is closing and the framework
that encloses the window, the industry responses were
surprising. One such design fix touted by the NHTSA was a
pressure sensitive device that would contain an automatic
reverse feature. Ford admitted that it had developed a system
that would interrupt, stop or reverse the direction of windows
when a predetermined force is exerted on an object interposed
between the glass and the frame channel. However, "the high
indicated minimum cost of such a system appeared to far
outweigh the resultant benefits, particularly in view of the
existing Ford safeguards." By the time the NHTSA
had adopted its power window safety regulation, FMVSS 118,
in 1970, it had been watered down. Specifically, the NHTSA no
longer required a pressure sensitive device. The NHTSA seemed
to buy into the industry's position-"a requirement for these
devices cannot be justified on the basis of safety benefits, cost
effectiveness and economic impact." Power windows were not
permitted to be operable when the key was not in the ignition.
The NHTSA had another chance in 1975 to mandate pressure
sensitive devices. Again, it refused. In 1987, the NHTSA had
another chance to mandate pressure sensitive devices. Again, it
refused. Interestingly, however, the NHTSA raised the issue of
unsupervised children being strangled by power windows. Also
in 1987, the NHTSA investigated 140,000 Jeep Wagoneers and
Cherokees after several children had been strangled in those
vehicle's rear tailgate power window. Even after Chrysler
recalled 180,000 of these vehicles, the NHTSA did nothing. By
1991, the NHTSA mandated that reverse window direction
features be used so that the window will reverse direction upon
its meeting an obstruction. However, before the industry was
required to implement the new rule, the NHTSA again softened
its position and modified the force resistance specification and
the size of the opening permitted before reversal was required.
No further safety improvements have been made. Auto reverse
is still not required (except on vehicles with remote window
activation and one-touch automatic) nor are pressure sensitive
devices.
Power Window Dangers
Page 16
Electric windows are a decades-old convenience feature. People
use them everyday, but few know how dangerous these devices
can be to children. Since power windows were introduced in the
early 1960's, children have been injured and killed each year due
to power window related injuries. In the last twenty years, 53
children have died in power window accidents. Many of these
injuries and deaths were strangulation or crush related.
the
firm
What makes the NHTSA's unwillingness to
adopt meaningful safety legislation even more
disturbing is that workable solutions have been
available for years to prevent these deaths.
Au to ma ti c po we r wi nd ow re ve rs in g
mechanisms exist in several forms:
·
Since 1970, 1,250 people have been victims of trunk entrapment.
Victims of trunk entrapment fall into two categories: people who
are intentionally locked in a vehicle in a criminal incident and
people, usually children, who unintentionally lock themselves in a
trunk. Unintentional entrapment occurs during children's games
or exploration. The average age of the 37 children who have died
since 1970 were four or younger. The cause of death is usually
heat related as trunk temperatures can reach 172 degrees in the
summer.
Optical sensors to detect an object in the window path;
Voltage load buildup sensors which reverse at contact
with an object; and
Infrared sensors which reverse even before contact.
The fix for trunk entrapment is an interior trunk release device.
Patents for this device date back to the 1950's. The NHTSA had
even considered an inside trunk release but denied requiring such
devices in the 1970's after the vehicle industry argued that such
incidents are rare.
In Europe, 80% of all vehicles are equipped with a power window
auto-reverse feature. This includes vehicles sold by American
manufacturers. The cost for this feature is eight dollars. Sadly, as
of January 2002, only the Cadillac line and Lincoln platform were
the only American vehicles sold in the US that have an autoreverse feature.
Since vehicle manufacturers are not
providing the safety fix for power
windows, the question that must be
asked is what power windows are
dangerous and why? The answer lies
in the switch itself. The majority of
American vehicles use a rocker or
toggle switch, which rest on a central
pivot, usually near the armrest. To
raise the window, the switch is
depressed or pushed forward.
If a knee or foot contacts a rocker or
toggle switch, the window raises up
and can strangle a child. GM
engineers have acknowledged in
depositions that it would be safer to
design a window to go down when
the switch is pressed down.
The lever switch requires that the
user deliberately pull upward on the
switch to raise the window. These
devices were used by Ford from the
1980's through 1994. Some
manufacturers have even touted how
its vehicles have lever switches for safety.
In 1998, the Center for Disease Control reported that between
1987-1998, 19 children died in car trunks. After learning of the
CDC numbers, the NHTSA commissioned a study on the benefits
of an interior device to release the trunk lid. The NHTSA's expert
panel recommended that trunk release devices would increase
safety. In commending the expert report, NHTSA's Director
indicated that "the Department holds safety-especially the safety
of young children-as
its highest priority. In
October, 2000 the
NHTSA announced
that all passenger cars
with trunks must have
a release or other
automatic system
inside to allow people
to escape effective
September 1, 2001. In
announcing the new
standard, the NHTSA
noted that "there have
been too many deaths
of children caught in
trunks in hot weather with no way out-this will provide them a
means of escape."
Unsafe
Horizontal Rocker
Toggle Switch
Safe
Lever Switches have
to be pulled up to raise
a car window.
Even though the interior trunk release glows in the dark, some
children will panic and will never pull the release handle, others
will be too small to pull the handle. As a first line deterrent,
children should not be able get into a trunk in the first place. For
example, most vehicles today allow the trunk to be opened
without the use of a key. Hence, the vehicle keys can be locked
away yet the trunk can still be opened. Vehicle manufacturers
should require that the only way a trunk can be opened is with a
key. This would eliminate the opening of the trunk in the first
place. As for seats that can be laid down so that there is passthrough between the rear seat and the trunk, the locking
mechanism for the rear seat should be found in the trunk.
Ford's L.W. Camp wrote the NHTSA in 1996 stating that "closing
the window requires the switch to be pulled and held…The intent
of these features is to minimize the chance of unintentional
activation of a power window closing that could, with other
switch design configurations, result from a child leaning or resting
a foot on the switch." Ford re-introduced them in its 2003 Lincoln
Navigator.
The interior trunk release will save lives. However, others will be
lost because the trunk could be opened without a key.
Convenience must take a backseat to safety occasionally. As
such, trunk designs should prevent access to the trunk.
Safe Switches
the
firm
Page 17
·
·
Trunk Entrapment
Stop the Blame Game
A fundamental part of engineering is to identify potential risks, hazards and dangers through Design
Failure Mode Analysis, Failure Mode EffectsAnalysis and fault tree analysis.
The engineer’s job should include evaluating every potential use and misuse of the product. Once the identification of
potential risks, hazards and dangers is conducted, then the engineer can address ways to design away, guard against
and warn users of the identified risks, hazards and dangers of a given product.
WARN
Against
Risks, Hazards
and Dangers
GUARD
Against
Risks, Hazards
and Dangers
DESIGN AWAY
Risks, Hazards
and Dangers
Engineering Triad
Nowhere does the concept of blame the consumer or user enter the engineering triad. Engineers need to get back to the
basics of protecting everyone equally who ride in vehicles regardless of whether or not it is mandated by Federal
Safety standards. The code of ethics for engineers is simple:
Engineers, in the fulfillment of their professional
duties, shall hold paramount the safety, health and
welfare of the public.
Page 18
Applying the engineering triad to child safety issues requires that children and adults be protected equally.
the
firm
Conclusion
There are hidden dangers inside vehicles that are killing and maiming children every day. Rather than
focusing on blaming parents and caregivers when a child dies, the vehicle and child safety industry should
work together to help protect our children. These same industries should work with state and federal officials
to draft legislation that will provide meaningful safety standards for children.
If children are truly the most precious cargo we carry in vehicles, why is it that they seem to be neglected after
age four? Children of all ages deserve equal protection in the event of a vehicle accident. Parents and
caregivers cannot be prison guards to children. Knowing this, the vehicle industry should take design steps to
insure that no child can be hurt due to an innocent mistake.
The organizations that I have listed in this brochure are staffed by wonderful volunteers. And, like most
organizations, are always looking for contributions. Organizations like Kids-and-Cars, Kids-in-Cars and
VOICES for Alabama’s Children are helping parents and caregivers alike to realize that there are numerous
hidden dangers inside the vehicle sitting in your driveway right now. With time, they will convince
legislators. With our help, we can help them convince the vehicle and child safety industry that hidden
dangers inside our vehicles are unacceptable.
the
firm
Page 19
Our children are the most precious cargo we will ever place in a vehicle. All reasonable steps should be taken
to leave no child behind when it comes to vehicle safety.
Wouldn’t it be nice to wake up to
a new policy which actually takes steps
to keep any more children from
being killed on our nation’s highways.
iveways
r
d
n
w
o
ir
ed in the
l
l
i
k
n
e
r
ild
more ch
o
w
t
k
e
i s we
ATION: Th
r
e
t
s
i
g
e
R
HE N
l
a
n
AROUND T
o
lication
i
b
t
u
P
a
A
S
N
AU
y
l
i
a
D
The
wn USA
Any To
3
n, 200
l Editio
Specia
ed
See relat
paper
g News
Leadin
’s
n
o
ti
The Na
s
n
g
i
S
t
Presiden
New Law
articles
ats
Child Se
Page 3 - Design Fixes
Page 6 - Hidden Dangers e
Page 12 Inside and outsid
.
Vehicles
o be
t
d
l
i
h
C
“No
d In
n
i
h
e
B
t
f
Le
ty”
e
f
a
S
e
l
c
i
Veh
d
and chil
le
ic
h
e
v
d
“The
e delaye
v
a
h
s
ie
the
dustr
safety in d too long”, said our
e
of
and stall
oo many s , o u r
T
“
t.
n
Preside e c i o u s a s s e t
ly”.
r
m o s t p ave died needless SA,
T
h
ng small
o
children, cording to NH e of
m
a
te
a
Ac
charg
death r s time that th is
ency in ardization, the
g
It’
a
l
a
r
e
elming. tions. By an
h
w
r
the fed fety and stand
e
v
o
er na
d
les is
a
vehicle s and around vehic ndards set in oth both houses an t
in
in
ta
umen
children me up to the s law was passed
d the doc nger
e
n
ig
o
s
c
is
e
y
h
As
in, th
no lo
countr
ing marg by the President. ally. There will
lm
ay
e
h
w
r
e
e
ov
m this d t
equ
ang
o
d
h
r
c
F
te
t
c
u
.
te
o
e
o
h
g
r
a
it
a
signed w hildren must be p ight, weight or ddress this issue
e
a
C
h
“
d
n
to
due
eyes a
he said
in safety ety will open its
p
a
g
a
be
af
vehicle s
forward, vehicle design”.
e,
the sourc
the
ts
50 cen
firm
5473 Blair Road
Dallas, Texas 75231
(214) 324-9000
[email protected]