Interpretation ID: aiam3930
Honest International Corp.
P.O. Box 851391
Richardson
TX 75081;
Dear Ms. Ho: This responds to your letter to Mr. Radovich of this agency' Rulemaking Division, seeking an interpretation of Standard No. 213, *Child Restraint Systems* (49 CFR S571.213). Specifically, you asked if a child restraint which has been certified as meeting the Japanese safety standard could automatically be considered as complying with Standard No. 213, and, if not, asked for the names and addresses of the U.S. testing laboratories.; There is no requirement that the measures, such as testing, taken by manufacturer to demonstrate it exercised due care to produce an item of equipment in accordance with Standard No. 213, be performed in this country. If a foreign standard is essentially identical to Standard No. 213, then it may be that the efforts made by a manufacturer in a foreign country to show compliance with that country's standard could form the basis for the manufacturer's certification that its product complied with Standard No. 213. The adequacy of those efforts would depend on a variety of factors, including the degree of similarity between the standards and the resources available to the manufacturer to determine its compliance. For additional information relating to your question, please see the enclosed letter written last year to an Austrian child restraint manufacturer. That letter explains in detail the procedures for certifying compliance with Standard No. 213.; For purposes of enforcing Standard No. 213, this agency conducts spo checks of child restraints after they have been certified by the manufacturer as complying with the standard, by purchasing child restraints and testing them in accordance with the procedures specified in the standard. If the child restraints pass those tests, no further steps are taken.; If a child restraint fails the tests and is determined not to compl with Standard No. 213 or if it is determined that the child restraint contains a safety- related defect, the manufacturer of the child restraint is required to remedy the problem. Section 154(a)(2)(B) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1414(a)(2)(B)) specifies that, in the case of a child restraint which fails to comply with Standard No. 213 or contains a safety- related defect, the manufacturer may elect to either:; (1) repair the child restraint so that the defect or noncompliance i removed, or; (2) replace the child restraint with an identical or reasonabl equivalent restraint which does not have the defect or noncompliance.; Whichever of these options is chosen, the child restraint manufacture must bear the expense and cannot charge the child restraint owner for the remedy.; Should you have any further questions or need more information on thi subject, please contact Mr. Stephen Kratzke of my staff at this address.; Sincerely, Jeffrey R. Miller, Chief Counsel