Interpretation ID: nht89-1.46

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 03/22/89

FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL NHTSA

TO: JUNITA P. DAVISON

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 04/22/88 FROM JUANITA P. DAVISON TO NHTSA, OCC 2041

TEXT: Dear Ms. Davison:

Thank you for your letter describing your impressions of the automatic safety belts on your 1987 Toyota. I apologize for the delay in this reply. You said that this motorized automatic belt system "takes away the roominess of the front," because it is in the way when getting in the car with a handbag or package and that it is cumbersome to get out of the belt system. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our law and regulations to you.

Before I respond to your specific concerns, I would like to give you some background information on our requirement for automatic occupant protection systems in new cars. Pursuant to the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act in 1966 (the Safety Act; 15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.), a Federal safety standard on occupant crash protection was issued in 1967 requiring the installation of manual safety belts in all new passenger vehicles. Although these manual safety belts showed their effectiveness as saf ety devices, only a relatively small number of motorists used their manual belts. As recently as 1984, only 12.5 percent of front seat occupants wore their manual belts. Because so few people used their manual safety belts, the Department issued the fi rst requirement for automatic restraints in passenger cars in 1970, and it was scheduled to take effect in 1973. That implementation date was delayed for a variety of reasons. On June 24, 1983, the Supreme Court of the United States found our decision t o repeal the requirement for automatic restraints was "arbitrary and capricious," and ordered us to reconsider the decision (Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 463 U.S. 29). Against this background, for mer Secretary of Transportation Dole issued a final rule amending the Federal safety standard on occupant crash protection on July 17, 1984.

That decision, which promotes both automatic restraints and State safety belt use laws, provides a comprehensive approach designed to save as many lives as possible as quickly as possible. We believe that effectively enforced State laws requiring the pr oper use of the manual safety belts that are in most cars on the road today offer our best opportunity to

save lives at virtually no cost to the customer. The decision also reflects our belief in the value of automatic occupant protection systems, such as air bags and automatic belts, by requiring all new cars to have automatic protection starting with the 1990 model year. The decision requiring further that automatic protection be phased in during the three years preceding that model year. Each manufacturer was required to equip 10 percent of its model year 1987 cars with automatic restraints. That per centage rose to 25 percent for model year 1988, and 40 percent for model year 1989. However, if the Secretary determines not later than April 1, 989, that State belt use laws have been enacted that meet certain criteria and that are applicable to two-th irds of the U.S. population, then the automatic restraint requirements will be rescinded.

You have three specific concerns with your automatic belt system. First, you asked if the motorized automatic belt system in your car was installed to meet some safety regulation. The answer is yes. As explained above, our Standard No. 208, Occupant C rash Protection request all 1990 model year cars to be equipped with automatic occupant crash protection. Please note that this requirement permits manufacturers to install any automatic occupant protection technology that meets the occupant protection requirements set forth in Standard No. 208. Thus, manufacturers may choose to install motorized, or nonmotorized, automatic safety belts, air bags, other technologies such as "passive interiors," or any combination of these technologies.

Your second question was whether you can legally disengage the motorized mechanism on the automatic belts in your car. Section 108 of the Safety Act provides that: "No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly r ender inoperative . . . any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle . . . in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard . . ." In this case, the automatic belts in your car are a "device or element of desig n installed in a motor vehicle in compliance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard." Disengaging the motorized mechanism would render the automatic belts inoperative. Therefore, Federal law prohibits Toyota, any other manufacturer, and any distri butor, dealer, or repair shop from disengaging the motorized mechanism on your automatic belts.

Please note that this Federal prohibition does not prevent you, yourself, from disengaging the motorized mechanism on your automatic belts. However, each of the individual States has the authority to regulate the modifications that may be made to vehicl es by their owners and to establish requirements for vehicles to be registered or operated in that State. You may wish to contact the State of Florida to learn if they have exercised their authority to prohibit the disabling of automatic belts. Even if neither Federal nor State law prohibits you from disabling your automatic belt, we encourage vehicle owners not to tamper with the occupant crash protection systems installed in their vehicles. If you were to improperly disengage the motorized mechanism , you would put yourself, other occupants of your car and subsequent owners and users of the car at substantially greater risk of injury in a crash.

Third and finally, you said that you have been told it is not safe to wear your automatic belts without also fastening the manual lap belt,

because of the possibility of choking. The manual lap belt was voluntarily provided by the manufacturer of your car to provide an even higher level of crash protection for those occupants who choose to use the lap belt. However, the manufacturer of you r car has certified that, in a 30 mph frontal crash into a concrete barrier, a test dummy restrained only by the automatic belt in your car would not experience injury-producing forces in excess of the levels specified in Standard No. 208. Hence, the su ggestion that the automatic belt by itself is somehow unsafe is simply not true.

I would like to thank you for taking the time to express your views on this subject. We welcome the interest of all concerned citizens on this important question and appreciate this opportunity to advise you of our efforts to improve occupant crash prot ection for all Americans.

Sincerely,