Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 954.0

529US3

Unit: $U62

[09-26-01 12:54:01] PAGES PGT: OPIN

Cite as: 529 U. S. 861 (2000)

879

Opinion of the Court

28997. DOT wrote that it had rejected a proposed FMVSS
208 “all airbag” standard because of safety concerns (per-
ceived or real) associated with airbags, which concerns
threatened a “backlash” more easily overcome “if airbags”
were “not the only way of complying.”
It
added that a mix of devices would help develop data on
comparative effectiveness, would allow the industry time to
overcome the safety problems and the high production costs
associated with airbags, and would facilitate the develop-
ment of alternative, cheaper, and safer passive restraint sys-
tems.
Id., at 29001–29002. And it would thereby build
public conﬁdence, id., at 29001–29002, necessary to avoid
another interlock-type ﬁasco.

Id., at 29001.

Id., at 28999.

The 1984 FMVSS 208 standard also deliberately sought a
gradual phase-in of passive restraints.
Id., at 28999–29000.
It required the manufacturers to equip only 10% of their car
ﬂeet manufactured after September 1, 1986, with passive re-
straints.
It then increased the percentage in
three annual stages, up to 100% of the new car ﬂeet for cars
manufactured after September 1, 1989.
Ibid. And it ex-
plained that the phased-in requirement would allow more
time for manufacturers to develop airbags or other, better,
safer passive restraint systems.
It would help develop in-
formation about the comparative effectiveness of different
systems, would lead to a mix in which airbags and other non-
seatbelt passive restraint systems played a more prominent
role than would otherwise result, and would promote public
acceptance.

Id., at 29000–29001.

Of course, as the dissent points out, post, at 903, FMVSS
208 did not guarantee the mix by setting a ceiling for each
different passive restraint device.
it provided a
form of extra credit for airbag installation (and other nonbelt
passive restraint devices) under which each airbag-installed
vehicle counted as 1.5 vehicles for purposes of meeting
FMVSS 208’s passive restraint requirement. 49 CFR
§ 571.208, S4.1.3.4(a)(1) (1999); 49 Fed. Reg. 29000 (1984).

In fact,