Skip to main content
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: 86-6.10

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 12/12/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Denis H. Oyakawa

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letter of September 16, 1986, to Stephen Oesch of my staff concerning how the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act and our regulations affect the proposed manufacture and sale of aftermarket safety belts by your client. As discussed below, your proposed plan would not violate either the Vehicle Safety Act or our regulations.

You explained that your client has supplied safety belts to a vehicle manufacturer for use both as an item of original equipment in a new vehicle and as item of replacement equipment for sale in the aftermarket. You said your client has recently been requested by the vehicle manufacturer to supply safety belts to be used as a replacement part for an older model vehicle which was exported to and marketed in the United States over 10 years age. You further explained that your client manufactured the original safety belts used in this older model vehicle, but is no longer equipped to readily manufacture the original safety belts.

Your client wishes to supply the vehicle manufacturer with a newer model safety belt. This newer safety belt has been designed to be installed as a replacement part in the older model vehicle and will fully comply with all of the requirements of Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies. In addition, the safety belt is also designed so that when it is installed in a vehicle, the vehicle will continue to comply with all of the applicable requirements of Standard Nos. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, and 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages. Finally, you said that the newer model safety belt will not render inoperative any other features of the vehicle necessary to meet any other applicable safety standards.

As you are already aware, your client's proposed safety belt would be required to comply with Standard No. 209. As you are also aware, installation of your client's safety belt by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair shop would be affected by the render inoperative provision of section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Vehicle Safety Act. However, as stated in your letter, your client has determined that installation of the belt will not render inoperative any other safety features of the vehicle. There is another 108(a)(2)(A) related issue raised by your letter. This concerns whether an item of equipment installed in accordance with one version of a Federal motor vehicle safety standard can be replaced with an item of equipment that complies with a later version of that standard. The agency addressed this issue in a letter of July 7, 1975 to Toyo Kogyo Co., Ltd. In that letter, the agency explained that it would not be a violation of section 108 as long as the vehicle or equipment complies with the safety standards in effect at the time of its manufacture or with the standards in effect at the time a particular system is replaced or altered, even if the new standards set less stringent performance requirements.

If you have any further questions, please let me know.

SINCERELY,

GRAHAM & JAMES

September 16, 1986

Steven L. Oesch, Esq. U.S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Chief Counsel's Office

Re: FMVSS NO. 209: Sale of After-Market Seat Belts Our File Reference: TKTS 2.2

Dear Mr. Oesch:

We represent a Japanese manufacturer of motor vehicle seat belts and are writing to obtain confirmation that our client's proposal to manufacture replacement seat belts intended for ultimate distribution in the United States will not contravene the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the "Safety Act") nor any regulations or policies of the Department of Transportation relating thereto.

As we discussed in our telephone conversation of September 8, 1986, our client for a number of years has supplied seat belts to a certain Japanese motor vehicle manufacturer (the "Vehicle Manufacturer") for use both as original, installed equipment on new motor vehicles as well as for distribution by the Vehicle Manufacturer as replacement parts in the after-sales market. Our client has recently been requested by the Vehicle Manufacturer to supply seat belts to be used as a replacement part for an older model vehicle which was exported to and marketed in the United States over 10 years ago. The Vehicle Manufacturer will distribute the belts in the U.S. after-sales market through its affiliated U.S. distributor and network of dealers.

Our client manufactured the original seat belts installed in this older model vehicle. Since the technology and equipment associated with manufacturing seat belts has continually been improved over the last 10 years, our client is no longer equipped to readily manufacture the original seat belts. The process of re-tooling its facilities to produce the original seat belt would be extremely costly to our client and would not take advantage of technological advances which have been made since the original belt was first manufactured.

Instead of manufacturing the original seat belt, our client proposes to supply the Vehicle Manufacturer with a newer model seat belt. The newer belt has been designed to be suitable for installation as a replacement part in the motor vehicle in question. Of course, the newer model belt will fully comply with the Seat Belt Assemblies Standard, as set forth in 49 CFR @ 571.209. In addition, the newer model belt is designed such that when installed, the vehicle will continue to satisfy the safety standards set forth in 49 CFR @ 571.208 and @ 571.210. Moreover, the newer model belt will not render inoperative other features of the vehicle necessary to meet any other applicable safety standards.

Our review of this issue indicates that our client's proposal will not violate the Safety Act or any applicable regulations thereunder. Since this plan is one of first impression for our client and involves a substantial commitment of resources, however, we respectfully request an opinion from your office confirming that the proposal outlined above will not violate the Safety Act or any other applicable laws or regulations of the United States which are under the regulatory authority of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

If you have any questions on this matter, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Denis H. Oyakawa of GRAHAM & JAMES