Skip to main content
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: may 29 571.213--battery dependent installation--Campbell2--13-002509

Mr. Corey Campbell

David E. Campbell & Associates, Inc.

3215 Greenwich Rd.

Wadsworth, OH 44281

 

Dear Mr. Campbell:

 

This responds to your letters concerning Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 213, Child restraint systems, and a new child restraint system (CRS) your client, Thorley Industries, would like to manufacture. The following interpretation of FMVSS No. 213 is based on our understanding of the information provided by you, and is limited to the particular aspects of the CRS you described.

 

Your questions relate to an infant seat. You state that the product requires disposable batteries to accomplish correct installation using one of the required means of installation per the table for 5.3.2.[1] The product has an automated installation system for attaching to a child restraint anchorage system.[2] If there is sufficient power in the CRSs batteries, the child restraint releases the LATCH belt to allow it to spool out.[3] The consumer attaches the LATCH connectors and presses a button on the CRS base to tell [the] system that the connectors are attachedThe system automatically tensions the LATCH lower anchor belt to a present tension.[4] If the batteries are depleted, the CRS notifies the consumer that an automated installation is not possible because the batteries are depleted. The consumer would have to manually install the CRS using the vehicle lap belt (Type 1 belt) or lap/shoulder belt (Type 2 belt).

 

Question 1

 

The first question you ask in the May 2013 letter is whether it is acceptable under FMVSS No. 213 if the users ability to install a child restraint using the LATCH lower anchor belt becomes inaccessible should the batteries become depleted. You state that the batteries are needed to accomplish correct installation using one of the required means of installation per the table for 5.3.2. As explained below, the answer is no.

 

Response to Question 1

 

S5.9(a) of FMVSS No. 213 specifies that CRSs such as infant seats shall have components permanently attached to the system that enable the restraint to be securely fastened to the lower anchorages of the child restraint anchorage system specified in Standard No. 225 (571.225)

 

The battery-dependent design of the CRS would not meet S5.9(a). One of NHTSAs goals for a universal child restraint anchorage system is that the system ensure correct child restraint system use by ensuring that the child restraint systems are convenient to install and use, and will be accepted by consumers. 64 FR 10786, 10797, col. 2 (March 5, 1999). NHTSA adopted the permanently attached requirement in S5.9(a) to help ensure that the components on a CRS that attach to the child restraint anchorage system lower bars (LATCH components) will be present and available for use by consumers through the life of the CRS.

 

With the battery-dependent design you describe, the batteries will deplete with regular use of the CRS during the life of the CRS. If the batteries deplete and the consumer does not replace them, at some point an automated battery-dependent CRS will have insufficient power to release the LATCH components for the consumers use. Your client recognizes this possibility by designing the CRS to inform the consumer, in the event the batteries are depleted, to refer to the instruction manual for instructions on how to perform a manual (non-automated) installation with the vehicle belt. In other words, the consumer will not be able to use the child restraint anchorage system.

 

In our opinion, such a battery-dependent design would not meet S5.9(a) since it is foreseeable that some consumers would be faced with depleted batteries. Without the batteries, the child restraint would fail to have components that enable the restraint to be securely fastened to the lower anchorages of the child restraint anchorage system.

 

Another requirement of FMVSS No. 213 is S5.3.2, which specifies that Each add-on child restraint system shall be capable of meeting the requirements of this standard when installed solely by each of the means indicated in the following table. For infant seats, the table specifies that the means of installation must include means to attach to a child restraint anchorage system. The Thorley CRS would not meet S5.3.2 because, without the batteries, the CRS would not be capable of meeting the performance requirements of FMVSS No. 213 when attached by way of a child restraint anchorage system.

 

In your December 2013 letter, you state that Thorley is considering adding a feature to the CRS to provide a means of manual installation for attaching to the LATCH anchorages if the batteries are depleted. You did not provide details about this feature, so we cannot comment extensively on it. We note, however, that having a means of manual installation to the LATCH anchorages, in addition to the battery-operated installation method, would meet S5.9(a) and S5.3.2.

 

Question 2

 

You ask about the way in which NHTSA would tighten the belts used to attach the automated battery-operated infant seat to the test seat assembly in a compliance test. You ask: If the process of LATCH lower anchor belt tensioning is automated in such a way that the user could not manually modify its level of tension, would it be acceptable for the level of tension to exceed the 67N [sic] specified in FMVSS 213 for the purposes of compliance testing? You state that after tensioning, the belt tensioning system is mechanically locked and no batteries are needed to maintain tension. You also state: Before the system will perform an automated installation and tensioning process, it verifies that the batteries have sufficient power to complete the cycle to minimize the risk of the batteries dying during the tensioning process which could result in unpredictable tension levels.[5]

 

Answer to Question 2

 

Paragraph S6.1.2(d)(1)(iii) of FMVSS No. 213 states: When attaching a child restraint system to the tether anchorage and the child restraint anchorage system on the standard seat assembly, tighten all belt systems used to attach the restraint to the standard seat assembly to a tension of not less than 53.5 [Newtons (N)] and not more than 67 N

 

Generally speaking, S6.1.2(d)(1)(iii) specifies the amount of tension on the LATCH belts (not less than 53.5 N to not more than 67 N) to control the means of attaching each child restraint, thereby reducing variability, and to better assess the performance of the restraint. Further, the provision helps ensure that all child restraints can provide a minimum level of safety when attached in a standardized manner.

 

However, with regard to your May 2013 letter about the LATCH lower anchorage belt which automatically tightens without any input from the consumer, we agree it is acceptable for the level of tension to exceed 67 N, as discussed below.

 

The situation you ask about was indirectly addressed in an October 17, 2000 interpretation of FMVSS No. 213 to Mr. William Shapiro (copy enclosed). In that letter, NHTSA did not agree with tensioning the belt used to attach a CRS to the vehicle seat to a higher tension than 67 N because a consumer had to use a tension bracket to manually adjust the tension. The agency was concerned that if a consumer did not use the tension bracket or used the bracket incorrectly, the belt might not achieve a tension greater than 67 N. Yet, in that letter, NHTSA also stated: We note that the child restraint requires action on the part of the consumer to increase the belt tension. It does not do so automatically. If the tension adjustment in the seat operated automatically, such that it was impossible to install the seat at a tension below 67 N, we would test at the higher tension.

After considering FMVSS No. 213 and the agencys interpretations of the standard, we conclude that the level of tension may exceed 67 N, subject to the following caveats. First, for the reasons provided in the 2000 letter, the tension adjustment in the CRS must operate automatically to tension the belts, i.e., it is not dependent on consumer input in tensioning the belts. Second, also as noted in the 2000 letter, we will tension the belts using the automatic tensioning system to a tension exceeding 67 N if it is impossible to tension the belts to a value below 67 N using the automatic tensioning system. Assuming these conditions are met, we would conduct a FMVSS No. 213 dynamic test with the CRS belts automatically tightened to a tension greater than 67 N.

 

Question 3

 

Your December 2013 letter asks about tightening the manual belt that would be used for attaching the CRS to the LATCH anchorages in the event the batteries are depleted. You ask for confirmation that NHTSA would tighten the belt to a tension of not less than 53.5 N and not more than 67 N, as specified in S6.1.2(d)(1)(iii) of FMVSS No. 213..

 

Answer to Question 3

 

Your understanding is correct. We would tighten the belt as we would other manually-adjustable belts. To ensure that the CRS performs well when installed using the manual belt, we would conduct the compliance test with belt tension at the FMVSS No. 213-specified tension of 53.5 N to 67 N.

 

If you have any further questions, please contact Deirdre Fujita of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

 

Stephen P. Wood

Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosure

Dated 6/4/15

Standard No. 213

 

[1] Your May 29, 2013 letter to NHTSA, p. 1.

[2] You use the term LATCH to refer to a child restraint anchorage system. LATCH refers to Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children, an acronym developed by manufacturers and retailers to refer to the child restraint anchorage system required by FMVSS No. 225 for installation in motor vehicles.

[3] Description of Installation Process, p. 1, April 23, 2014.

[4] Id.

[5] Description of Installation Process, p. 2, April 23, 2014.