The Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208 of 1968 (49 CFR § 571.208 – Standard No. 208) provides guidelines which vehicle manufacturers must comply with in order to make their products as safe as possible in the event of a crash. In 1966 the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) found that motor-vehicle crashes accounted for 50,894 deaths in the United States. The law intended to reduce this shocking figure by implementing safety guidelines which aim to decrease the probability of fatality in the event of a crash. The law simultaneously intended to reduce the severity of injuries – aiming to produce fewer life changing injuries and instead produce more minor injuries.  The law was designed specifically for frontal crashes, which typically are more dangerous than any other type of crash. During the 1960’s, over 50,000 people died each year on the road. Regulation was needed to lower this figure and make it safer for people to drive motor vehicles. The law intended to reduce this figure by implementing safety regulations which vehicle makers had to comply with. The NHTSA’s role is outlined by the following statement – “Through enforcing vehicle performance standards and partnerships with state and local governments, NHTSA reduces deaths, injuries and economic losses from motor vehicle crashes”. In this essay I will expose the flaws in the regulations set forth by the NHTSA and explore the extent to which they were successful in preventing fatalities on the highway.

The law required that all auto manufacturers install seatbelts on the seats of all passenger vehicles – this applies to cars, trucks, busses and various other passenger vehicles. Specifically, the law requires that lap and shoulder belts are mandatory in outboard seating positions, however inboard seating positions (middle seats) can be either lap and shoulder or solely lap belts. These rules do not apply to convertibles who must have lap and shoulder belts in every seat. In addition, safety measures were required in the event of a crash for pressure vessels (to contain the spread of harmful liquids or gasses) and explosive devices (to keep the occupants and public safe). Manufacturers were required to meet the S5.1 frontal crash protection requirements as well as many other, smaller safety rules which aim to protect passengers.

Today, we get into a car and put our seatbelts on without thinking twice, however, the first seat belts were only produced in the 1950’s and were not considered as mandatory equipment until The Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208 was first introduced in 1968. This law was administered by the United States Department Of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. This was the first step towards creating safer motor vehicles, and before this, there was nothing in law that required auto manufacturers to install seat belts. This law was required due to the significant increase in motor vehicle crash fatalities between 1960 where 36,399 died to 1966 where over 50, 000 died. Regulation was required imminently to prevent any more deaths due to a lack of seat belts.

Looking at the devastating amount of fatalities, physicians were instrumental in helping the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to implement these new requirements. The issue of the seat belt was raised by Ralph Nader who wrote Unsafe at Any Speed in 1965. The article became a bestseller because it outlined the immoral way which car manufacturers were sacrificing lives to achieve more profits. Nader was one of the first people to investigate why so many Americans were dying each year in car accidents. Nader worked with and listened to physicians and this allowed him to gain an insight into why so many fatalities were being recorded each year. He spoke before a senate subcommittee in 1966 and was instrumental in raising public awareness and simultaneously increasing the pressure on politicians to take action against vehicle makers. The issue of seat belts became an increasingly political issue, in 1959, Daniel Patrick Moynihan a key advisor to President Nixon described the rising deaths as “the epidemic on the highways”.

Surprisingly, one of the main opponents of the law was motorists themselves. In 1956, before this law was introduced and seatbelts were an optional extra, only 2% of Ford buyers chose to install seatbelts in their vehicle. Despite the fact that manufacturers had to install seat belts, seat belt usage was completely voluntary, until 1984 when New York became the first state to enforce the use of seatbelts by law. Another opponent was the auto manufacturers who believed that installing seat belts would cause immense financial stress – increasing their costs which would result in job cuts. These companies disregarded the rising death toll and were instead solely concerned about profits. This neglect shows that if left unregulated, the public, as well as the vehicle makers would have ignored the safety regulations necessary and this is why the NHTSA was needed to intervene.

The Law was aimed at auto manufacturers who were required by law to install the correct seat belt in every seat. Failure to do so would result in strict action – both large fines and threats to stop the auto manufacturer from producing vehicles were used to make sure that the law was obeyed. Despite some complaints from the auto manufacturers regarding the additional cost of installing seat belts, they were forced to comply with the law.

The Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208 of 1968 (49 CFR § 571.208 – Standard No. 208) provides guidelines which vehicle manufacturers must comply with in order to make their products as safe as possible in the event of a crash. This law was administered by the United States Department Of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration who are responsible for regulating vehicle makers and ensuring that they abide by the rules. The guidelines set by the NHTSA are simple – comply with our regulations or you won’t be able to sell your vehicles to the public. In addition the NHTSA carried out random inspections on vehicle makers at their production facilities and tested vehicles which came out of the factory to ensure that seat belts were installed correctly. If vehicle manufacturers did not comply with the regulations then the NHTSA could stop production and prevent vehicles from being sold to the public. In the face of this, vehicle makers chose to comply with the seatbelt laws and produced vehicles which complied with the standards set forth in The Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208.

The regulations apply to all auto manufacturers and require them to install seatbelts on the seats of all passenger vehicles – this applies to cars, trucks, busses and various other passenger vehicles. Due to the fact that this law applies to all of those in the automotive industry, there is little bias possible when enforcing the rules. Every single vehicle maker in America has to comply – no companies are exempt from this law and it is very easy to determine if companies are breaking the law. The rules are blanket laws that apply to the entire industry – therefore there is no selective application of the law. 

Williamson v Mazda Motor of America (2011) was a case where the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Federal Motor Vehicle Standard 208, does not federally preempt state tort lawsuits against vehicle makers from injuries caused by a lack of seat belt safety. The case arose when Thanh Williamson died in 2002 from internal bleeding from seat belt related injuries. Thanh was sitting in the middle seat when he died and was wearing a type 1 lap seat belt. According to Safety Standard 208, Mazda was solely required to install a type 1 lap belt in this seat. In the window seats of the car, where type 2 lap and shoulder belts were installed, everyone survived. The case was originally tried at trial court in California, where the court agreed with Mazda that the action taken was “preempted by federal law.” The California Court of Appeal then affirmed the dismissal and the California Supreme Court refused to review the case. However, the U.S Supreme Court took on the case on the grounds of certiorari – they unanimously decided that federal preemption does not apply and reversed the decision of the California Courts. The question is – is the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208 the only regulation that vehicle makers should abide by? Or should they be responsible for the safety of their vehicles? Who is culpable, the NHTSA or Mazda? The Supreme Court held that Mazda should be responsible for their passengers’ safety – ruling that they should have installed type 2 belts in every seating position. It could be argued that this ruling makes the The Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208 redundant because this case shows that vehicle makers, such as Mazda, must go above and beyond the regulations set by the NHTSA. From this perspective, we can say that while the law made sure that vehicle makers installed seatbelts, it failed to recognize that type 1(solely lap) and type 2 (lap and shoulder) seat belts can be the difference between life and death. The Supreme Court ruled that Mazda should have been responsible for the safety of passengers in their vehicles. Whilst I agree with this ruling, the NHTSA should have required that type 2 seat belts be installed in every seat. It is the NHTSA’s job to regulate vehicle manufacturers, and it was the lack of a type 2 seatbelt that caused the death of Thanh Williamson.

There have been numerous calls to reform the regulations set by the NHTSA on an annual basis, this would help to prevent regulations from becoming obsolete in the light of new safety information. It is crucial that the NHTSA are forward thinking and can implement rules without being forced to from political pressure. The regulations need to be set forth knowing that one safety precaution such as the seat belt can save thousands of lives and prevent thousands of grieving families from heartbreak. Therefore, the NHTSA needs to continually evolve and set regulations which aid vehicle manufacturers in the pursuit of road safety. 

All in all, looking at the success of The Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208, the figures show that between 1968 and 2020 motor vehicle deaths have reduced by almost 20,000. When reviewing this statistic, it is essential to realise that the US population during this time has grown by 127 million. A telling statistic is the fatalities per 100,000 of the population; in 1968 this figure was 26.27; in 2020 this figure was 11.18. The facts show that The Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208 has been successful in its aim to reduce fatalities, having said that, the case of Thanh Williamson, demonstrates how vehicle manufacturers and the NHTSA are responsible for maximizing public safety on the roads and have failed to do so in the past. 

References

Published by bendraper1

Leave a comment