Opinion ID: 1101070
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Pertinent Statutes

Text: ¶ 8. Four provisions of the Safety Act are pertinent to our inquiry. We set them out in detail before proceeding to a more in-depth discussion of the issues. ¶ 9. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208 expressly grants manufacturers the option to install manual seat belts in lieu of air bags. Three options are provided for manufacturers: 1. Passive protection from frontal and angular collisions (air bags only); 2. Passive protection from head-on collisions, supplemented by seat belts and a belt warning system (air bags and seat belts); or 3. Lap and shoulder belts, plus a belt warning system. 49 C.F.R. § 571.208, S4.2.2 (1983). Here, General Motors exercised the third choice. The Safety Act contains a preemption clause, 15 U.S.C. § 1392(d)(1988) [2] , which provides: Whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard established under this title is in effect, no State or political subdivision of a State shall have any authority either to establish, or to continue in effect, with respect to any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment any safety standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of such vehicle or item of equipment which is not identical to the Federal standard. Nothing in this section shall be construed as preventing any State from enforcing any safety standard which is identical to a Federal safety standard. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the Federal Government or the government of any State or political subdivision thereof from establishing a safety requirement applicable to motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment procured for its own use if such requirement imposes a higher standard of performance than that required to comply with the otherwise applicable Federal standard. (emphasis added). The Safety Act also contains a savings clause, which states that: [c]ompliance with any Federal motor vehicle safety standard issued under this title does not exempt any person from any liability under common law. 15 U.S.C. § 1397(k)(1988). Also, part of the federal regulatory framework is § 1410b which provides: (2) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (3), no Federal motor vehicle safety standard respecting occupant restraint systems may - (A) have the effect of requiring, or (B) provide that a manufacturer is permitted to comply with such standard by means of, an occupant restraint system other than a belt system. (3)(A) Paragraph (2) shall not apply to a Federal motor vehicle safety standard which provides that a manufacturer is permitted to comply with such standard by equipping motor vehicles manufactured by him with either  (i) a belt system, or (ii) any other occupant restraint system specified in such standard. 15 U.S.C. § 1410b(b)(2)-(3)(A)(1988). [3]