Page images

Conference Report House Report 1919, Page 15


Paragraph (1) of section 102 of the House amendment defines the term "motor vehicle safety' to mean the performance of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment in such a manner that the public is protected against unreasonable risk of accidents occurring as a result of the construction or performance of motor vehicles and is also protected against unreasonable death or injury of persons in the event accidents do occur, and includes nonoperational safety of such vehicles.

Paragraph (1) of section 102 of the proposed conference substitute defines the term "motor vehicle safety” in the same terms as the House amendment with the exception that the definition is expanded to include protection of the public against unreasonable risk of accidents occurring as a result of the “design, construction, or performance" of motor vehicles.

The addition of the word "design” was accepted by the House managers not as an expansion of the authority of the Secretary but merely to clarify that the public is to be protected from inherently dangerous designs which conflict with the concept of motor vehicle safety and the performance standards issued by the Secretary. The Secretary is not to become directly involved in questions of design.

House Passed Act

Same as enacted Act, except that the word “design” in subsection 102(1) was added to the definition of “Motor vehicle safety" as enacted.

House Debate Congressional Record-House August 17, 1966, 19664

Mr. MOSS. Mr. Chairman, I offer discussed it with the distinguished rankan amendment.

ing member of the minority and with the The Clerk read as follows:

mchairman of the committee. It would Amendment offered by Mr. Moss: On page strike the definition of "person" as con30 strike out lines 22 and 23 and renumber tained in this proposed statute, and succeeding paragraphs and any references therefore fall back on title I and the defi. thereto accordingly.

nition of "person," broadening it, and I Mr. MOSS. Mr. Chairman and Mem. Teel in a constructive manner. bers of the Committee, I do not believe urge adoption of the amendment

Mr. STAGGERS. Mr. Chairman, we this amendment is controversial. I have

accept the amendment on this side.

Mr. SPRINGER. Mr. Chairman, may The CHAIRMAN. The question is on I ask whether this is the amendment the amendment offered by the gentleman which we discussed previously?

from California.
Mr. STAGGERS. Yes, it is.

The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. SPRINGER. We have no objec-

The part of the House reported bill amended by the amendment offered by Mr. Moss:

22 (11) Personmeans an individual, partnership, cor- 30 23 poration, association, or other form of business enterprise.

Congressional Record-House
August 17, 1966, 19664 and 19665

Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Chairman, I Do I understand that this means the move to strike the last word.

provisions of this law do not apply to off Mr. Chairman, I take this time in or- highway vehicles or vehicles such as Inder to make an inquiry of the distin- dianapolis race cars which are towed to guished chairman of the committee. On and from the race track or modified stock page 29 of the bill, on line 18, under the cars which are geared in such a way that definitions, a motor vehicle is defined as they cannot be used on the highways? meanding “any vehicle driven or drawn by Mr. STAGGERS. That is correct. My mechanical power manufactured pri- interpretation would be it does not apply marily for use on the public streets, to them. roads, and highways, except any vehicle operated exclusively on a rail or rails."


Congressional Record-House
August 17, 1966, 19666 and 19667

Mr. WAGGONNER. Mr. Chairman, will be increased. We can build houses this bull is traught with danger' and as that will not burn but who can abord such it establishes a dangerous prece- them? dent. I shall vote for it with reluctance The administration asked for authority and fear for I am fearful the day will to control design but the committee, in come when we will regret this action its wisdom, deleted this from the bill. It does increase the authority of the They will be back again with this request. Federal Government over private enter- Wait and see. prise and it does weaken the free enter- If the Federal Government is to decide prise system. For this reason I have what is safe and what is unsafe when trouble understanding why the automo- will they say you cannot build convertitive industry wants this legislation. But bles and hardtop convertibles because they say they do for the reason it will they fall to offer as much protection as produce saler cars we are told. Indeed sedans when turned over in an accident?

I hope they are right and I am wrong. Or when will certain colors be outlawed 19667 - Certainly we should bulld cars as safe because they are harder to see under

es possible but we must realize that prices certain conditions?

Where and on what basis does the as- will not be recovered in the sale price of sumption come from that the Govern- the car? ment has or can get personnel who know Many more questions can be raised but more about building cars than those in It 18 sale to say that this bill rises or

industry? Must every spare part be falls on whether or not commonsense is manufactured to a Government stand- employed in its administration. To be ard before it can be sold?

sure, more commonsense will be required Is the Government to duplicate the re- than has been used in the Beautifcation search and development facilities of in- Act, for example, to date. dustry? Are, in the end, prices to be sub- I have always been guided by the rule sidized with hidden subsidies in the of "when in doubt don't." I am in form of grants for research, test, and de- doubt today. The man behind the wheel velopment, the cost of which must or is the greatest safety factor of all.

Congressional Record-House
August 17, 1966, 19628

The bill we present to the Committee sign, but we do not want to set the design, today primarily has to do with the man- we want to require the Secretary to set ufacture of cars and their performance. Performance standards. Someone has said it has to do with de

Congressional Record-House
August 17, 1966, 19629


The Committee on Interstate and For- ported by the other body, vehicles subeign Commerce added a number of pro- ject to part 1 of the Interstate Comvisions which do not appear in other merce Act or the Transportation of Exversions of the proposed legislation on plosives Act, would have been excluded. the subject of trafic safety and which This would have substantially limited are not in the bill reported by the other the Secretary's authority to set safety body. Your attention is directed to the standards for the manufacture of vedefinition section of H.R. 13228 wherein hicles and, in addition, no one has all motor vehicles driven or drawn by been able to state with any certainty just mechanical power and manufactured for what vehicles would have been excluded. use on the highways are covered. As re

Congressional Record-House
August 17, 1966, 19630


But what does the bw do to make cars uc of cars by making them inordinately saler for you? It directs the Secretary expensive or outlawing types and models. of Commerce to establish standards fæ It is intended to put in them better and new cars which will make them as safe better safety features which will make as possible consistent with commonsense them less apt to be involved in accidents and the realities of auto manufacturing. and less apt to injure occupants if and It is not the intention to deprive the pub- when they are.

Congressional Record-House
August 17, 1966, 19634


I would sum up by saying, yes, we will we have more or less made a mistake pass this bill. I will say there has been in repealing some of the safety requiretoo much sensationalism surrounding the ments we passed in other years which design of the automobile as far as it legislation was brought out of our comconcerns trafic safety. There is not & mittee. I do hope that when the folbit of evidence that would indicate that lowing bill comes up from the Public the design of the car is the cause of the Works Committee, all the Members will accident. In fact, surveys have been recognize that it is the one that offers made that prove to the contrary. I the greater opportunity to meet this have evidence of this. I do believe that problem with which we are all concerned.

Congressional Record-House
August 17, 1966, 19634 and 19635

Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Chairman, does Mr. TAYLOR. For instance, I drive the bill give the Secretary authority to car made by General Motors. My wife standardize operation control equipment drives a car made by Ford Motor Co. on diferent kinds of new automobiles et The gearshift on one is just the opposite safety performance is alected?

from the other. It is dimcult for me to Mr. MACKAY. Yes, it doco. The drive her car in trafic when quick, autogentleman from Florida (Mr. ROGERS)

matic action is needed. The diferences presented an excellent amendment to in gearshifts acld to the hazards of provide an advisory Council that will driving and could cause an accident. I bring in all the interested parties- Stato em of the opinion that operating feaand local oncials, automotive industry tures on new cars, such as gearshifts, and equipment people to participate in should be standardized. the formulation of those standards.

Mr. MACKAY. I thank the gentleMr. TAYLOR. Mr. Chairman, will the man from North Carolina. That is a gentleman yield further?

good Wustration of the type of safety Mr. MACKAY. I yield to the gentle hazard we are trying to get at. man from North Carolina.


Congressional Record-House
August 31, 1966, 21349


The House definition covers all vehi.
cles, including trucks and buses. The
definition in the Senate version was

more restrictive and was interpreted as not including trucks and buses. The managers for the Senate receded.

House Committee Report House Report 1776, Pages 15 and 16


Which would which vehich appear

Section 102 of the reported bill defines for the purposes of title I of the bill the following terms: (1) “motor vehicle safety''; (2) "motor vehicle safety standards”; (3) "motor vehicle”; (4) motor vehicle equipment”; (5) "manufacturer”; (6) "distributor”; (7) "dealer”; (8) "State”; (9) "interstate commerce”; (10) "Secretary”; (11) "person”; (12) "defect”; (13) “United States district courts”; and (14) “Vehicle Equipment Safety Commission”. The introduced bill did not undertake to define all of these terms. In the course of the committee's consideration the definitions of "manufacturer", "distributor”, "dealer", "person", "defect”, “United States district courts”, and “Vehicle Equipment Safety Commission” were added. The most significant change made by the committee in the definition section was the deletion from the definition of motor vehicle of the exemption of those vehicles subject to part II of the Interstate Commerce Act or the Transportation of Explosives Act. Under the original bill, these vehicles would not have been subject to safety standards established by the Secretary. In its consideration of the bill it became clear to the committee that much confusion was created by this exemption. There appeared to be no way to determine with any certainty which vehicles would be subject to the standards and which would be exempt. This exemption was therefore removed. The definition of motor vehicle in the reported bill includes all vehicles driven or drawn by mechanical power. Thus, the Secretary of Commerce will have the authority to issue standards as to the manufacture, sale, and importation of all such vehicles.

In order to insure that there would be the greatest uniformity possible between the standards established under this act and the regulations of the Interstate Commerce Commission as to safety, the 16 committee inserted as subsection (g) of section 103 a requirement that in prescribing safety regulations the Interstate Commerce Commission will not adopt or continue in effect any regulation on safety which is different from a safety standard issued under this title. The Interstate Commerce Commission, however, after manufacture, can impose a higher standard of safety performance on a motor vehicle subject to its jurisdiction.

Additionally, in the definition of "distributor" the committee added the word "primarily” to modify the description of those engaged in the sale and distribution of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment to make it clear that an occasional sale by one dealer to another on an accommodation basis would not make such a "dealer” a “distributor” for the purposes of this title.

There is no reference anywhere in the definitions to the concept of "design." Rather, the definitions, and this bill have been written in terms of requiring standards of motor vehicle and equipment performance. The Secretary would not become directly involved in questions of design.

« PreviousContinue »