Interpretation ID: nht93-6.14

DATE: August 16, 1993

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Ron D. Belk -- President, Kustom Fit

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 5/17/93 from Ron D. Belk to John Womack (OCC 8694)

TEXT:

This responds to your letter of May 17, 1993, which is a follow-up to our May 6, 1993, letter in which we explained the self-certification process, "render inoperative," and "due care." You include information from tests you have done to determine whether seats you manufacture can be installed in vehicles that must comply with requirements for dynamically tested manual belts in Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection (49 CFR S571.208), which specifies performance requirements for the protection of vehicle occupants in crashes.

You have experienced difficulties because of variability in belt pay-out ranging from 2.25 inches to 4.9 inches and asked whether Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies (49 CFR S571.209) allows this much variability. It is unclear from the information you provided what is causing the belt pay-out you are experiencing. I note that S4.3(i) of Standard No. 209 limits the amount of webbing which can extend from an automatic-locking retractor prior to the retractor locking. A similar requirement for webbing-sensitive emergency-locking retractors is included in S4.3(j). Section 4.6 of Standard No. 209 excepts dynamically tested manual belts from the requirements of S4.2(a)-(f) and S4.4 of Standard No. 209, however, these belts must still comply with S4.3. The test for compliance with sections S4.3 (i) and S4.3 (j) are different from the tests you have been performing. Therefore, your tests would not indicate whether the seat belt assembly complies with these requirements of Standard No. 209.

You also asked for further advice on how to reassure your customers that vehicles will comply with Standard No. 208 with your seat installed. It is possible that you may not be able to do this. As explained in our previous letter, Standard No. 208 is applicable to vehicles and not to individual items of equipment (except for pressure devices and explosive devices used in air bags). Therefore, you, as the seat manufacturer, would have no certification responsibilities under standard No. 208. The vehicle manufacturer is required to certify compliance with Standard No. 208. This is because compliance with Standard No. 208 is dependent on a variety of factors, including the seat, the seat belts, and the vehicle interior. Because you manufacture only the seat, you cannot control the other factors, and, therefore, probably cannot provide your clients with all the information they need in order to certify their vehicles compliance with Standard No. 208. However, you should be able to provide them with information on your seats that they can use to help determine if their vehicles comply with Standard No. 208.

Finally, you asked whether NHTSA would impose liability on you or the seat belt manufacturer if we discovered an apparent non-compliance with Standard No. 208. Because Standard No. 208 applies to the vehicle, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.) imposes liability for non-compliance on the vehicle manufacturer, not the seat or seat belt

manufacturer. However, state law may allow the vehicle manufacturer to recover damages from the manufacturer of either the seat or the seat belt.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any other questions, please contact Mary Versailles of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992.