ID: nht94-4.95

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: December 6, 1994

FROM: David O'Neil -- Manager, Product Development, Hehr International Inc.

TO: Philip R. Recht -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: FMVSS 205 requirements for glass - plastic side windows installed on transit buses.

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO 2/14/95 LETTER FROM PHILIP R. RECHT TO DAVID O'NEIL (A43; STD. 205)

TEXT: Hehr International has received a contract to supply 196 bus sets of windows to Neoplan USA Corporation. The buses will enter service with the Los Angeles County MTA.

The passenger and driver side window glazing will be a glass - plastic composite consisting of 1/4 inch tempered glass with DuPont Spallshield 307 laminated to the interior surface.

Hehr requests your interpretation of FMVSS 205 with respect to the following:

1) Certification and Marking - Must the glazing be certified and marked as Item 15B/16B or is it possible to certify and mark the glazing as Item 2/3?

2) Cleaning Instructions - Does a label containing all required instructions which is taped to the glazing satisfy the requirements of paragraph S5.1.2.10?

Production is scheduled to begin by March 1995. We would appreciate receiving your response prior to that time.

If you have any questions regarding this request, I may be reached at (213) 663-1261. Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter.

ID: nht94-4.96

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: December 6, 1994

FROM: G. Brandt Taylor -- President, Day-Night Mirrors, Inc.

TO: Chief Council -- NHTSA

TITLE: Reference: Code of Federal Regulation Title 49 Section 571.111 Chapter V Standard 111: Rear-view Mirror Paragraph S11. Mirror Construction

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO 2/13/95 LETTER FROM PHILIP R. RECHT TO G. BRANDT TAYLOR (A43; STD. 111)

TEXT: We at Day-Night Mirrors have developed a rear-view mirror that changes reflectivity. Please see figure A. We have a question in regard to the above referenced regulation. Our mirror is a mechanical device that is operated by rotating a shaft. For rem ote actuation an electric motor and worn gear assembly could be used. The regulation requires that electrically actuated mirrors have means to override the electrical actuator in the event of an electric malfunction. Ours could be manually overriden wi th a knob as in figure B. Could this override be removable? Figure C. In particular could the override actuator be supplied by the car manufacturer along with the car keys or with the owners manual for insertion into the mirror and use only in the even t of some electrical failure? Would this removable mechanical actuator be acceptable for west coast mirrors on trailer trucks?

(ATTACHMENT OMITTED)

ID: nht94-4.97

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: December 7, 1994

FROM: Philip R. Recht -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Bryan J. Williams -- Director, International Operations, Red Spot Paint & Varnish Co Inc.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 10/24/94 FROM BRYAN J. WILLIAMS TO TAYLOR VINSON (OCC 10437)

TEXT: This is in reply to your FAX of October 24, 1994, to Taylor Vinson of this Office requesting an interpretation regarding the relationship of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 to an AAMVA list.

Your company manufactures UV coatings for polycarbonate headlamp lenses. These "provide abrasion resistance properties as well as protecting the plastic lens from the deleterious effects of outdoor exposure." One of these coatings, UVT200, is used by Fo rd, General Motors, and Chrysler on headlamp lenses. However, "UVT200 does not appear on the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) 'Listing of Acceptable Plastics for Optical Lenses and Reflectors Used on Motor Vehicles.'" You info rm us that some overseas headlamp manufacturers believe that appearance on the list is required by Federal law and is a prerequisite to certification. The question you ask is:

Must a coating for plastic (polycarbonate) headlamp lenses appear on the AAMVA "Listing . . ." in order to meet the requirements of FMVSS 108?

The answer is no. Paragraph S5.1.2 of Standard No. 108 requires that plastic materials used in lenses (which include headlamp lenses) conform to SAE Recommended Practice J576c, Plastic Materials for Use in Optical Parts, Such as Lenses and Reflectors of Motor Vehicle Lighting Devices, May 1970. Under SAE J576c's outdoor exposure test, the luminous transmittance of the material must not change by more than 25% from its performance before the test. In appearance, the headlamp lens material must not sho w surface deterioration, crazing, dimensional changes, or delamination. Also, under paragraph S5.1.2(b), after the outdoor exposure test, the haze and surface luster of the material must not be greater than 30 percent haze, as measured by ASTM D-1003-61 . Manufacturers have found that a coating is required for the plastics used in headlamp lenses to meet Standard No. 108's outdoor exposure requirements. However, neither SAE J576c or Standard No. 108 require the coating, let alone specify what coating is acceptable. The decision to coat, and the choice of coating, is that of the manufacturer in determining compliance with and certification to Standard No. 108. Therefore, the AAMVA list has no legal relationship to Standard No. 108 and it is immaterial to NHTSA whether the coating used is or is not on the AAMVA list.

ID: nht94-4.98

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: December 7, 1994

FROM: Philip R. Recht -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Roger W. Cole -- Vice President, Sales, Twin Tire U.S.A., Inc.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 10/18/94 FROM ROGER W. COLE TO WALTER MYERS (OCC 10419)

TEXT: This responds to your letter of October 18, 1994, received by facsimile transmission, addressed to Walter Myers of my staff. You asked whether passenger car tires that have the DOT symbol and the Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards (UTQGS) ratings mo lded on the sidewalls may legally be sold in the United States. The short answer is yes, provided that the tires in fact comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS).

By way of background information, 49 U.S.C. @ 30101, et seq. (hereinafter referred to as Safety Act), directs the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to issue FMVSSs applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equip ment prior to the first retail sale of such vehicles or equipment. Tires are considered motor vehicle equipment. The Safety Act provides at 49 U.S.C. @ 30112(a) that no person may manufacture, sell, offer for sale, or import into the United States any new motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment unless that vehicle or equipment complies with applicable FMVSSs and is covered by a certification to that effect issued in accordance with 49 U.S.C. @ 30115. The latter section provides in pertinent part that "Certification of equipment may be shown by a label or tag on the equipment . . . ." Thus, any new tire sold by Twin Tire must comply with all applicable FMVSS's, and be certified as doing so.

FMVSS No. 109, New pneumatic tires, a copy of which is enclosed for your information, specifies the minimum standards applicable to new passenger car tires. This standard specifies labeling and performance requirements applicable to passenger car tires, which include tubeless tire resistance to bead unseating, tire strength, tire endurance, and high speed performance. If the tires in question fail to comply with Standard No. 109, the manufacturer (or importer of noncomplying tires) must notify the pur chasers of the product and remedy the noncompliance without charge to the purchaser(s). Failure to comply with any FMVSS can also result in civil penalties of up to $ 1,000 per violation, up to a maximum of $ 800,000 for a series of related violations.

With regard to the situation you present, 49 U.S.C. 30112(b) provides two exceptions to the prohibition of 30112(a) against selling noncomplying equipment, such as tires. The first exception is that the prohibition does not apply to a person who had no reason to know, despite exercising reasonable care, that an item of equipment does not comply with applicable FMVSS's. The second exception is for a person who holds a certificate issued by the equipment manufacturer stating that the equipment complies with applicable FMVSS's, provided that the person does not know about the noncompliance. However, if Twin Tire were to sell the tires in question and those tires failed to comply with applicable FMVSS's, it is unlikely that Twin Tire could successfully argue that it qualifies for these exceptions, as a defense to an enforcement action for selling the noncomplying equipment.

You state in your letter that the tire manufacturer "breached their contract to manufacture these tires under the premise of US regulations." If the breach concerned the ability of the tires to conform to the requirements of the applicable FMVSS's, Twin Tire would be on notice that there is a reasonable possibility that the tires in question, while labeled with a DOT mark certifying compliance, do not in fact comply. In a situation where a seller has reason to believe the equipment it is selling might not comply with applicable FMVSS's, the seller must ascertain if the certification is bona fide before selling the item.

The following discussion relates to the "DOT" and other markings that you describe on the tires. Paragraph S4.3.1 of FMVSS No. 109 provides that:

Each tire shall be labeled with the symbol DOT in the manner specified in Part 574 of this chapter, which shall constitute a certification that the tire conforms to applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards (emphasis added).

Similarly, the UTQGS, also applicable only to passenger car tires, found at 49 CFR 575.104 (copy enclosed), provides at 49 CFR 575.104(d)(1)(i)(A):

Except for a tire of a new tire line . . ., each tire shall be graded with the words, letters, symbols, and figures specified in paragraph (d) (2) of this section, permanently molded into or onto the tire sidewall . . . .

Finally, 49 CFR 574.5 requires each tire sold in the United States have a tire identification number (TIN) molded into or onto the tire sidewall by the manufacturer to facilitate recall in the event of a noncompliance or defect.

To summarize, the answer to your question is the tires in question can be sold only if they comply with all applicable FMVSSs (including Standard No. 109's labeling and performance requirements) and are so labeled in the prescribed locations with the DOT symbol, the UTQGS grades, and the TIN.

I hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any additional questions or need further information, please feel free to contact Mr. Myers at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

ID: nht94-4.99

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: December 7, 1994

FROM: Philip R. Recht -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: John Sheppard -- Sales and Marketing Manager, Reflexite Canada, Inc.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 11/2/94 FROM JOHN SHEPPARD TO CHIEF COUNCIL, NHTSA (OCC 10473)

TEXT: We have received your letter of November 2, 1994, asking whether certain conspicuity material could be used on trailers required to meet S5.7 of U.S. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108. You have enclosed samples of the material.

The material alternates red and white stripes "oriented at a 45 degree angle to the edge of the roll." Rolls are either 6 or 8 inches in width and "will not have DOT-C2 marking." In addition, we note that the horizontal length of the red segments is 5 1/ 2 inches (and presume an equal length for the white segments). Specifically, you have asked whether this material could "be applied to the lower edge of the vehicle's rear doors as a compliant substitute for the 2" 'block pattern' material currently bein g used?"

Paragraph S5.7's specifications for conspicuity material are intended to ensure uniformity of treatment in order to enhance the ability of drivers of other vehicles to detect large objects in the roadway under conditions when headlamps are used. While S 5.7 does not require that the red and white color segments be rectangular, it does establish requirements for their length and width. Under S5.7.1.3(b), each segment shall have a length of 300 mm +/- 150 mm. The color segment separation of 5 1/2 inches on your sample is approximately 140 mm, and thus below the minimum permitted by the standard. Although currently, under S5.7.1.3(d), three widths of retroreflective material are permissible: 50 mm (DOT-C2), 75 mm (DOT-C3), and 100 mm (DOT-C4) and your widths of 6 inches (150 mm) and 8 inches (200mm) do not conform to these specifications, the agency has proposed that these be minimum minimum widths for the DOT grades indicated. We expect a final rule to be issued on this proposal in the near future.

Because the retroreflective material discussed above would not comply with Standard No. 108's requirements for color segment length (and currently width), it could not be used as a substitute for the DOT-C2 material that you currently manufacture. Furth er, geometrically and photometrically complying material would require the appropriate DOT grade identification marking for use on a trailer required to comply with Standard No. 108.

ID: nht94-5.1

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: December 7, 1994

FROM: Philip R. Recht -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Herr P. Binder -- ITT Automotive europe

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 11/22/94 FROM P. BINDER TO JOHN WOMACK (OCC 10510)

TEXT: This responds to your FAX of November 21, 1994, to John Womack of this Office.

You inquire with respect to a yellow bulb intended for use as both original and replacement equipment in a rear turn signal lamp for a passenger car. The bulb complies with ECE specifications. You have asked the following questions:

"1) Is it allowed in USA that new rearlamps are fitted with such 'Europe' - bulbs?"

Yes. Bulbs other than those specified by SAE J573 are considered "special bulbs" and are permitted by Note 3 at the end of Standard No. 108 as long as the lamp assemblies in which they are used conform to all applicable requirements of Standard No. 108.

"2) Do spare bulbs of the same type (PY 21W) have to be freely available in USA (e.g. supermarket, station, etc.)?"

There is no legal requirement that replacement bulbs be freely available. For reasons of safety, NHTSA encourages wide distribution of replacement parts of all sorts.

"3) Would it be sufficient if the car manufacturer offers this bulb (PY 21W) as a spare part within his service stations in USA?"

The determination of the distribution of replacement bulbs is a decision to be made by the car manufacturer.

"4) Is there any specification or law regarding the use of bulbs in USA? If so, please inform us about these specifications."

Although not directly incorporated by reference in Standard No. 108, NHTSA regards SAE Standards J567 "Lamp Bulb Retention System" and J573 "Lamp Bulbs and Sealed Units" as appropriate specifications for bulbs and their sockets used in motor vehicle lamp s other than headlamps. However, as indicated above, Note 3 permits the use of bulbs other than these.

"5) Is the use of bulbs treated differently in the single states?"

We have no information that any state treats the use of bulbs differently. Questions regarding the laws of the individual states are answered by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Va. 22203, and yo u may wish to consult them for an opinion.

ID: nht94-5.10

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: December 15, 1994

FROM: Tom Hindson

TO: Philip Recht -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO 4/24/95 LETTER FROM PHILIP RECHT TO TOM HINDSON (A43; VSA 102(4))

TEXT: Dear Mr. Recht,

I have been told by other people within DOT that I should address my request to you. My company intends to develop and market a consumer device that fits on automobiles. It will be sold by dealers at time of new car purchase and will be installed by th e dealer. Basically it is comprised on a slim container holding a light weight car cover which will be bolted underneath the rear bumper and trunk of the automobile. By means of a handle(wand) and an electric motor which is supplied with power from the car's battery, the cover is propelled out of the container by means of motor driven rollers. The cover is then guided over the car and attached to the front bumper. When ready to leave, the handle switch is pressed and the whole operation reverses to that the cover is pulled off the car and back into the sealed container.

The system does NOT:

1. Invade any fuel storage. 2. Invade any EPA device 3. Hinder the driver in any way. 4. Pose any ground clearance problems 5. Pose any electrical problems. A simple battery lead and rugged conduit is used.

Please consider this system and give us a Letter of Interpretation concerning our compliance with any applicable safety standards. If more information is required please let me know.

Thanks very much for your help.

(PHOTOS OMITTED.)

ID: nht94-5.11

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: December 16, 1994

FROM: Mark Warlick -- FMVSS Coordinator, Four Winds International Corporation

TO: Philip Recht -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO 2/27/95 LETTER FROM PHILIP R. RECHT TO MARK WARLICK (REDBOOK (2); PART 302)

TEXT: This letter concerns a question of what legal documentation is required for Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302 compliance.

Four Winds International Corporation is a manufacturer of Class A and Class C motorhomes. I am in process of organizing our FMVSS letters of compliance from our vendors that supply our interior materials. I have included a sample of a letter that I hav e received from a vendor. Does this letter meet NHTSA requirements for certification of compliance for FMVSS No. 302 as far as proof of compliance by Four Winds?

If this letter does not contain sufficient information to prove compliance by Four Winds, can you send me a sample of what we need in our records per vendor to show compliance?

enclosure

December 9, 1994

We have tested the panel from Northland Enterprise that was made with COR63-AX-40. We used the MVSS302 flame test, and obtained a flame rating of 0.64 inch per minute.

If you have any questions regarding this information or on any products in general, please contact us.

Sincerely,

INTERPLASTIC CORPORATION

Rey de la Rosa Group Leader Physical Testing

ID: nht94-5.12

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: December 19, 1994

FROM: Glyn Thomas -- Thomas Tire

TO: Walter Myers -- Department Of Transportation

TITLE: Re: 19 CFR 12.80

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO 2/27/95 LETTER FROM PHILIP R. RECHT TO GLYN THOMAS (REDBOOK (6); PART 591; STD 109; STD. 119) AND 6/13/81 LETTER FROM FRANK BERNDT TO ROY LITTLEFIELD (STD 119)

TEXT: I am writing to you after our telephone conversation of today's date. This is a very urgent matter and I am writing to ask for a waiver to be allowed to continue to import truck casings into the U.S.A. for the purpose of retreading.

Some Japanese casings do not have the D.O.T. marking on the side wall. To allow for this, tires with less than 2/32" and being imported solely for the purpose of retreading are allowed entry.

However, my point is that tires with less than 2/32" tread remaining are usually not of sufficiently good quality.

I maintain that a declaration signed by the importer and confirmed by the receiving retread shop, at the time of entry, stating that the casings are being imported solely for the purpose of retreading, could [Illegible Word] solve this problem.

If this is not done, then it would badly effect the total number of casings available for U.S. retread shops and definitely effect production.

Is it possible to mail or fax me immediately, a waiver to this effect. Thus allowing the continued smooth import of casings.

ID: nht94-5.13

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: December 19, 1994

FROM: Patricia J. Jackson -- Owner, Patnel Co.; Patt Jackson

TO: Mr. Racht, Chief Council, NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO 3/3/95 LETTER FROM PHILIP R. RECHT TO PATRICIA JACKSON (REDBOOK (2); STD, 213; PART 302)

TEXT: I have just received a patent on my cushion. I needed to know if their are any safety standards that I need to pass on my cushion. I am sending a pamphlet to help you under stand my product and how the cushion is used. Should I meet any fire safety st andards since my cushion is used by children of all ages.

If you should have any question regarding this please feel free to call me at (314) 839-5382

ENCLOSURE

December 19, 1994

Deirdre R. Fujita NHTSA Office of the Chief Counsel 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Room 5219 Washington D.C. 20590

RE: Phone call conversation in December 7, 1994

Enclosed is the brochure of my product "BoosterBuddy" a childs car cushion that comforts and protects. The cushion is used under the booster seat that is state regulated. This cushion has rolled pads on each side to provide comfort. The cushion prot ects tha car upholstery from the load bearing friction caused by the state regulated restraint seats. The cushion is used under the restraint seat from 0 to 40 pounds. The cushion can be used by the older child over 40 pounds with a safety belt.

Please send me a letter stating if my product meets all safety regulations required. I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Enclosure (OMITTED)