Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: 21331ogm


    Ms. Ann Spink
    American Coachworks, Inc.
    8458 Lockhart Road
    Denham Springs, LA 70726


    Re: Replacement Parts Crashworthiness


    Dear Ms. Spink:

    This responds to your letter to Mr. Clive Van Orden regarding the use of aftermarket parts in collision repairs. I apologize for the delay in responding.

    As your company is a body repair business, you are concerned about the possible safety consequences of aftermarket crash parts. You have attached an article from a trade publication in which Mr. Clarence Ditlow is quoted as saying that while the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) "polices the safety of all aftermarket parts by ordering recalls where necessary, no federal agency polices the quality of aftermarket parts." You further state that it is your belief that NHTSA does not have regulatory authority over any "stand-alone" part except for lights and does not regulate crash parts.

    You then ask if NHTSA is in fact regulating aftermarket crash parts and if the statement attributed to Mr. Ditlow is correct. In order to further understand NHTSA's authority and activities in relation to aftermarket crash parts, you ask five questions:

    1. Does NHTSA "police" the safety of all aftermarket parts?

    2. Does NHTSA "police" the safety of aftermarket crash parts?

    3. Does NHTSA order recalls of aftermarket crash parts?

    4. Does NHTSA or any other governmental agency regulate the safety of OEM replacement crash parts (not safety related mechanical parts)?

    5. Does NHTSA or any other governmental agency regulate the safety of aftermarket replacement crash parts (not safety related mechanical parts)?

    NHTSA has the authority to issue safety standards for both motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Most Federal motor vehicle safety standards (F.M.V.S.S.) issued by the agency apply only to new vehicles. However, certain standards apply to parts and equipment, whether they are installed in new vehicles or sold in the aftermarket. Examples of these standards are Standard No. 106, Brake hoses; Standard No. 108, Lamps; reflective devices, and associated equipment; Standard No. 109, New pneumatic tires; Standard No. 116, Motor vehicle brake fluids; Standard No. 205, Glazing materials; and Standard No. 209, Seat belt assemblies. None of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards that cover replacement equipment (e.g. brake hoses, lights) apply to sheet metal or other replacement body parts.

    The defect provisions we administer apply to both motor vehicles and motor vehicle replacement equipment, including aftermarket equipment to which standards do not apply. Under Section 30118 of Chapter 301 of Title 49 of the United States Code, "Motor Vehicle Safety" (49 U.S.C. 30118), if a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that an item of motor vehicle equipment contains a safety-related defect, the manufacturer would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and for remedying the problem free of charge. Thus NHTSA has the authority to order recalls of aftermarket crash parts, whether they are made by the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) by an independent parts manufacturer. However, NHTSA has not done so to date, because we have not discovered any information that has indicated that any particular aftermarket crash product contains a safety-related defect.

    You may be interested to know that our Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance (OVSC) addressed the issue of possible adverse safety aspects of the use of non-original equipment manufacturer (OEM) replacement sheet metal components in some detail in 1990-91. OVSC sent interrogatory letters on this subject to the three major domestic automobile manufacturers, seeking test data as well as the answers to questions. The agency's concern was that replacement sheet metal components, such as fenders, hoods, and doors, could possibly reduce the crash protection provided by a vehicle.

    Although all three manufacturers indicated concern about this issue, none produced any test data in response to NHTSA's original inquiry. Ford Motor Company (Ford) reported that it had performed some studies on non-OEM replacement part fit and finish, structural quality, and corrosion. Ford stated that these tests indicated that the parts were not equivalent to original equipment, but also reported that it had not conducted any tests for compliance of replacement parts with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS). General Motors Corporation stated that it had not performed any safety testing on non-OEM crash parts. Chrysler Corporation (Chrysler) representatives met with OVSC on this issue and subsequently conducted limited testing to observe the effectiveness of an offshore manufactured hood with respect to a vehicle's compliance with FMVSS No. 219 -- Windshield Zone Intrusion. No windshield zone intrusion was noted during the test.

    During this inquiry, NHTSA also received a letter from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), a private not-for-profit organization established by the insurance industry, which described testing that IIHS sponsored in 1987 on a Ford Escort with cosmetic body parts (such as the grill, left and right front fenders and front door sheet metal) removed and a "competitive hood" installed. IIHS reported that the vehicle complied with FMVSS Nos. 208, 212, 219, and 301 by a wide margin, and concluded that the data clearly showed that the use of cosmetic body parts, whether made by an OEM or a "competitive factory," did not affect the safety performance of the vehicle.

    If you have any further questions or would like to discuss this matter further, please contact
    Mr. Otto Matheke of this office at (202) 366-5263.

    Sincerely,

    Frank Seales, Jr.
    Chief Counsel

    ref:misc.
    d.1/3/01