Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: a00473beltminder_cmc

    Mr. Bruce H. Carraway, Jr.
    Carraway Safety Belt Company
    14 Kings Bridge
    Atlanta, GA 30329


    Dear Mr. Carraway:

    This responds to your letter requesting that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) work towards requiring that ignition interlock belt-minder systems be installed in all new motor vehicles. As discussed below, the agency believes that improving safety belt use rates with vehicle-based incentives can best be accomplished through voluntary installation of such devices.

    According to your letter, you are considering a system that would prevent a driver from starting a vehicle unless all occupants were buckled up. Your letter described a system that would employ seat sensors to alert a driver if any vehicle occupant has not fastened his or her safety belt. An interlock system then would prohibit the vehicle from being started until the safety belt is buckled at each occupied seat. You then ask the agency to:

    Please introduce a bill, or, have someone on your transportation committee that handles highway safety to introduce a bill, and, pass a law requiring [such safety belt interlock systems] for all new vehicles.

    NHTSA considers safety belt use as its top priority in occupant protection. For each percentage point gain in national usage, we estimate that we will prevent about 250 fatalities. In 2003, safety belt use reached its highest level ever, with a national use rate of 79 percent. This was an increase from the 75 percent use rate reported in 2002. To achieve this rate, we relied on an array of programs that we have developed over the past few years, such as the Click It or Ticket program. We continue to support and promote programs to increase the use of safety belts. In March of this year, we announced the availability of $36.4 million in grants for states that develop innovative projects to increase safety belt use.

    With respect to vehicle-based safety belt incentives, Congress has provided the agency with specific direction. As part of the Motor Vehicle and School Bus Safety Amendments of 1974, Congress adopted a provision prohibiting NHTSA from requiring, or permitting as a compliance option, either ignition interlocks designed to prevent starting or operating a motor vehicle or buzzers that sounded for a period of more than 8 seconds after the ignition was turned to the "start" or "on" position (codified at 49 U.S.C. 30124).

    This provision was the result of opposition from various members of Congress and from members of the public to the belt-induced interlocks and audible alerts that manufacturers were installing in their vehicles to meet the existing compliance options in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 208, Occupant crash protection. Opposition was based on two factors: first, the low rate of belt use among the American public, 10 to 14 percent, meant that large portions of the population were subjected to either a 60 second audible warning or an ignition interlock; second, the available occupant detection technologies were insufficiently developed to determine reliably whether the two front outboard seating positions were occupied and the belt was being used by the occupant of a given seating position.

    However, the legislative history indicates no intent on the part of Congress to prohibit manufacturers from voluntarily installing either interlocks or other belt system use-enhancement features. With increases to the national belt use rates since 1974, and improvements in occupant recognition technology, we believe voluntarily-installed systems can be very helpful in increasing belt use. The voluntary installation of belt reminder systems is not contrary to existing law, unduly complicated or expensive, or likely to result in a public backlash that would lead Congress to prohibit the use of such systems.

    We do not believe the statutory prohibition against NHTSA mandating belt reminder systems should serve as a deterrent to manufacturers voluntarily installing vehicle-based incentives to improve seat belt use. In fact, NHTSAs Administrator,Dr. Jeffrey Runge, has sent letters to vehicle manufacturers encouraging them to enhance their vehicle-based systems. Based on the number responses from the vehicle manufacturers to Dr. Runges initial inquiries, we are gratified to report that many manufacturers appear to be moving in the direction of voluntarily-installed systems. See NHTSA Docket No. 13226 at http:\\dms.dot.gov. Further, we have facilitated the voluntary installation of such systems through a series of legal interpretations that would allow manufacturers to install both enhanced warning systems and vehicle interlocks. See letters to Mr. Robert C. Lange, February 28, 2003; Name withheld, September 13, 2002; and Mr. Bob Snyder, May 25, 2001 (enclosed).

    We believe that by encouraging the voluntary installation of belt minder systems consistent with statutory provisions, we can improve safety belt use rates while avoiding the opposition to these systems experienced in the 1970s.

    I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please contact Chris Calamita of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

    Sincerely,

    Jacqueline Glassman
    Chief Counsel

    Enclosures
    ref:208
    8/13/04