Bombardier Motor Corporation of America, Inc.; Receipt of Application for Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA 99-6207, Notice 1]

Bombardier Motor Corporation of America, Inc.; Receipt of

Application for Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance

Bombardier Motor Corporation of America, Inc. (``BMCA'') of

Melbourne, Florida has applied to be exempted from the notification and

remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 ``Motor Vehicle Safety''

for a noncompliance with 49 CFR 571.209, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety

Standard (FMVSS) No. 209, ``Seat Belt Assemblies,'' on the basis that

the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. BMCA has

filed a report of noncompliance pursuant to 49 CFR part 573 ``Defects

and Noncompliance Reports.''

Notice of receipt of the application is published under 49 U.S.C.

30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or other

exercise of judgement concerning the merits of the application.

Description of the Noncompliance

S4.1(j) of FMVSS No. 209 requires that each seat belt assembly be

permanently and legibly marked or labeled with the year of manufacture,

and the model and name or trademark of the manufacturer or distributor.

The seat belt assemblies, manufactured by Good Success Corporation,

model AB401 (309), and were installed in the Bombardier NVs sold

between June 17, 1998 and April 9, 1999, do not contain the requisite

marking or labeling. With the exception of the marking, the seat belt

assemblies in question fully comply with all NHTSA safety requirements.

Bombardier Arguments

Bombardier argues that this noncompliance is inconsequential for

the following reasons: ``Under the National Traffic and Motor

Vehicle Safety Act (the ``Act''), 49 U.S.C. 30101 et seq., each

FMVSS that is promulgated is required to be ``practicable, meet the

need for motor vehicle, and be stated in objective terms.'' 49

U.S.C. 30111(a). The definition of ``motor vehicle safety'' is as

follows:

``Motor vehicle safety'' means the performance of a motor

vehicle or motor vehicle equipment in a way that protects the public

against unreasonable risk of accidents occurring because of the

design, construction or performance of a motor vehicle, and against

unreasonable risk of death or injury in an accident, and includes

nonoperational safety of a motor vehicle.

Section 30118(d) of the Act exempts manufacturers from the Act's

notice and remedy requirements when the Secretary determines that a

defect or noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor

vehicle safety. Section 30118(d) of the Act demonstrates Congress'

acknowledgment that there are cases where a manufacturer has failed

to comply with a FMVSS and yet the impact on motor vehicle safety is

so slight that an exemption from the notice and remedy requirements

of the Act is justified.

FMVSS No. 209 provides the requirements for seatbelt assemblies.

49 CFR 571.209 S1 (1998). The purpose for seat belt assemblies is to

provide occupant restraint. Id at S4.1(b). Although not discussed in

regulations, common sense dictates that when a seat belt assembly is

properly installed, the marking or labeling requirements at FMVSS

No. 209 S4.1(j) play no role in the performance of such seatbelt

assembly.''

The seat belt assembly labeling requirement at FMVSS No. 209

S4.1(j) provides in pertinent part:

Each seatbelt assembly shall be permanently and legibly marked

or labeled with year of manufacture, model, and make or trademark of

manufacturer or distributor, or of importer if manufactured outside

the United States.

Because this standard does not address seatbelt assembly

materials or performance requirements, the purpose of FMVSS No. 209

S4.1(j) appears to assure that the correct seat belt assemblies are

installed in a given vehicle--either as original equipment

manufacturer, or as replacement equipment. BMCA's noncompliance with

FMVSS No. 209 S4.1(j) thus raises two questions:

(1) Could the labeling noncompliance have caused the seat belt

assemblies to have been installed improperly by BMCA?

(2) Would the labeling noncompliance interfere with the proper

acquisition and installation of a replacement seat belt assembly?

BMCA is confident that all noncompliant seat belt assemblies

were properly installed at its manufacturing facility. Because BMCA

only manufactures one motor vehicle subject to FMVSS, there can be

little confusion regarding which belt goes in which vehicle. BMCA is

also confident that the labeling noncompliance will not interfere

with acquisition and installation of a replacement seat belt

assembly should there even be one. The seat belt marking also

assists should there be a recall regarding the seat belt, and would

identify the belt by year and manufacturer. As BMCA has been selling

NV for a short period, the chance of confusion over the year or seat

belt manufacturer is remote.

Because of the design of the seat belt assemblies found in

Bombardier NVs, it

[[Page 61179]]

would be very difficult to inadvertently install any of the seat

belt assemblies in question in anyplace other than the seat belt

assemblies' intended location in the Bombardier NV.

BMCA is unaware of any owner complaints, field reports or

allegations of hazardous circumstances relating to either the lack

of the requisite seat belt assembly label, or of the improper

installation of seat belt assemblies in any of its NVs. Furthermore,

BMCA has found no instance where a seat belt assembly (regardless of

labeling compliance) was improperly installed in any Bombardier NV.

In fact Bombardier is unaware of any complaints from consumers

regarding the seat belts.

Seat belt assemblies for the Bombardier NV are not distributed

through the general automotive aftermarket; they are only sold by

Bombardier NV dealers. The part number for the Bombardier NV seat

belt assembly is 00078. This is the only seat belt part number for

the vehicles in question so there can be no confusion. Because seat

belt assemblies for the Bombardier NV are presently only available

through dealers, and that the Bombardier parts numbering system will

assure proper replacement seat belt assemblies, BMCA is confident

that the labeling noncompliance will not interfere with the proper

acquisition and installation of a replacement seat belt assembly.

NHTSA has granted similar petitions for noncompliance with

seatbelt assembly labeling standards. See, generally, TRW, Inc.,

Docket. No. 92-67; Notice 2, 58 FR 7171 (1993) Chrysler Corporation,

Docket. No. 92-94; Notice 2, 57 FR 45,865 (1992). In both of these

cases the petitioners demonstrated that the noncompliant seat belt

assemblies were properly installed, and that due to their respective

replacement parts ordering systems, improper replacement seat belt

assembly selection and installation would unlikely occur.

BMCA believes that because the labeling noncompliance has no

bearing on the materials or performance standards articulated in

FMVSS No. 209, that [S16] all the seat belt assemblies in question

were properly installed as original equipment, and that BMCA's

replacement part system would preclude the purchase and installation

of an improper replacement seat belt assembly for a Bombardier NV,

the noncompliance poses no motor vehicle risk.

Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and

arguments on the petition of BMCA, described above. Comments should

refer to the Docket Number and be submitted to: Docket Management,

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Room PL 401, 400

Seventh Street, SW., Washington DC 20590. It is requested that two

copies be submitted.

All comments received before the close of business on the closing

date indicated below will be considered. The application and supporting

materials, and all comments received after the closing date will also

be filed and will be considered to the extent practicable. When the

application is granted or denied, the Notice will be published in the

Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.

Comment closing date: December 9, 1999.

(49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and

49 CFR 501.8)

Issued on: November 3, 1999.

Stephen R. Kratzke,

Acting Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 99-29269 Filed 11-8-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P