ID: GF007915

Mr. Derek Dean
ACDelco
2506 Frederick Drive
Conway, AK 72034

Dear Mr. Dean:

This responds to your e-mail regarding various issues related to aftermarket brake pads. The issues raised by your letter are addressed below.

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issues safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable requirements.

First, you ask about Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs) applicable to brake pads on new vehicles, as well as aftermarket brake pads. There is no Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) specifically applicable to new brake pads. Instead, several FMVSSs regulate entire brake systems. Specifically, Standards No. 105, 121, 122, and 135 regulate brake systems for various types of motor vehicles. Vehicle manufacturers are responsible for certifying that their vehicles comply with all applicable FMVSSs, including relevant brake system requirements. Accordingly, brake pad manufacturers are not directly responsible for any certification requirements.

Although NHTSA does not directly regulate brake pads, any brake pad designed to be used on a motor vehicle is an item of "motor vehicle equipment" and is subject to the notification and remedy (recall) provisions of 49 U.S.C. 30118-30120. If a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that the product contains a safety-related defect, the manufacturer is responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. Thus, defective aftermarket brake pads could be subject to our recall provisions.

In you letter, you discuss the obligations of repair businesses. Although our regulations do not address brake pad replacement procedures, we note that states may regulate repair businesses and how they perform their work.

In your letter, you ask about NHTSA research related to brake quality and causation of rear impact crashes, and about complaints pertaining to poorly performing brake pads. We note that NHTSA conducts various research projects related to braking performance, and our Office of Defects Investigations maintains a publicly accessible database of complaints filed with NHTSA. We suggest that you visit our web site at www.NHTSA.gov, where you may be able to find helpful information pertaining to your questions.

Finally, you ask for our opinion on the "D3EA certification that GM has voluntarily adopted for use on DuraStop our Aftermarket Brake line to help ensure our brake parts do indeed keep the vehicle in compliance with the FMVSS". As discussed above, NHTSA does not provide approvals or endorsement for motor vehicle equipment.

I hope this information is helpful. If you need further assistance, please contact George Feygin of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

ref:105
d.1/3/05

ID: GF007935

Terence McBride, Manager
City of Memphis Motor Vehicle Inspection Bureau
590 Washington Avenue
Memphis, TN 38015

Dear Mr. McBride:

This responds to your e-mail of November 4, 2003, to George Feygin of my staff. In your e-mail, you inform us that the State of Tennessee has passed a bill (No. HB1819/SB1765) permitting oscillating stop lamps on motorcycles. You ask whether the Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs) permit oscillating stop lamps on motorcycles. As discussed below, the answer is no.

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable requirements prior to the initial sale of the vehicle.

The Federal standard applicable to lighting equipment in motorcycles is FMVSS No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment. The relevant section of that standard reads as follows:

"S5.5.10      The wiring requirements for lighting equipment in use are:
(a) Turn signal lamps, hazard warning signal lamps, and school bus warning lamps shall be wired to flash;
(b) Headlamps and side marker lamps may be wired to flash for signaling purposes;
(c) A motorcycle headlamp may be wired to allow either its upper beam or its lower beam, but not both, to modulate from a higher intensity to a lower intensity in accordance with section S5.6;
(d) All other lamps shall be wired to be steady-burning" [emphasis added].

In short, S5.5.10(d) of FMVSS No. 108 mandates that all lamps be steady burning, unless otherwise permitted. In the present case, stop lamps do not fall under any exception enumerated in S5.5.10 (a) through (c). Accordingly, motorcycle stop lamps must be steady burning and cannot be oscillating.

With respect to Federal preemption of State laws, 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1) provides in pertinent part:

"Preemption. When a motor vehicle safety standard is in effect under this chapter, a State or a political subdivision of a State may prescribe or continue in effect a standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment only if the standard is identical to the standard prescribed under this chapter"

This means that, under 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1), a State cannot authorize oscillating motorcycle stop lamps since the applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard prohibits such lighting devices.

We further note that installation of a non-steady burning lamp by a manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or motor vehicle repair business after the initial sale is subject to the restrictions of 49 U.S.C. 30122, which prohibits "making inoperative, in whole or in part" any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard. Depending on the circumstances, installation of a non-steady burning lamp after the initial sale of the motorcycle could be viewed as a violation of this "make inoperative" provision.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you need further assistance, please contact George Feygin of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

ref:108
d.1/14/04

ID: GF007944

The Honorable Russell D. Feingold
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510-4904

Dear Senator Feingold:

Thank you for your October 7, 2004, letter on behalf of your constituent regarding bumper and lighting regulations. Specifically, your constituent is concerned about vehicle compatibility and the height of bumpers and lamps on certain vehicles. I appreciate the opportunity to address your constituents concerns.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issues standards and regulations applicable to new motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA regulates bumpers on passenger cars (49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 581), but not on multipurpose passenger vehicles (sport utility vehicles), because such regulation could significantly reduce their utility. For vehicles subject to our bumper standards, the bumper must be located at the height of not more than 20 inches above ground.

We note that the agency is very concerned with vehicle compatibility in multi-vehicle crashes. Bumper height is one of the factors affecting vehicle compatibility. In June of 2003, NHTSA published a report describing the scope of the safety problem represented by vehicle incompatibility and outlined strategies the agency plans to pursue in improving vehicle compatibility. See http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-11/aggressivity/IPTVehicleCompatibilityReport/. We have enclosed a copy of the report for your information. Currently, NHTSA and its global partners are conducting research to determine the best regulatory approaches in the area of vehicle compatibility. NHTSA is also working with vehicle manufacturers to minimize the effects of vehicle incompatibility and to develop consumer information related to this issue.

With respect to headlamp location, the Federal lighting standard (49 CFR 571.108) requires that the headlamps for all new vehicles be located between 22 inches and 54 inches above the road surface. Subsequent reinstallation of headlamps at a different height by a dealer or a repair business is also prohibited.

We note that the bumper and headlamp height issues raised by your constituent may not be the product of improper installation of those items, but instead may stem from raising or otherwise altering the vehicle suspension system. While this agency does not regulate suspension alterations, some states may do so. Accordingly, we suggest that your constituent contact the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Office of General Counsel at (608) 266-8810 or ogc.exec@dot.state.wi.us to ascertain Wisconsin regulations pertaining to vehicles suspension systems, bumper height, and lighting.

If you or your constituent have any further questions regarding this issue, you may contact Scott Brenner, Associate Administrator for External Affairs, at (202) 366-2566.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

Enclosure
ref:581#108
d.11/19/04

ID: GF007988

Ms. Amy Homan
Crown Energy Technologies, Inc.
3111 Shepard Place S.E.,
Calgary, Alberta
CANADA T2C 4P1

Dear Ms. Homan:

This responds to your October 21, 2004, e-mail to George Feygin of my staff. You ask whether two oilfield equipment rigs manufactured by your company would be classified as "motor vehicles" and subject to the requirements of Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) No. 121, Air brake systems.

Title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 authorizes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to prescribe Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs) applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Section 30102(a)(6) defines "motor vehicle" as:

"[A] vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways, but does not include a vehicle operated only on a rail line."

NHTSA has issued several interpretations of this language. We have stated that vehicles equipped with tracks, agricultural equipment, and other vehicles incapable of highway travel are not motor vehicles. We have also determined that certain vehicles designed and sold solely for off-road use (e.g. , airport runway vehicles and underground mining vehicles) are not motor vehicles, even if they may be operationally capable of highway travel. Finally, we have concluded that items of mobile construction equipment that use the highways only to move between job sites and that typically spend extended periods of time at a single site are not motor vehicles. However, we do consider vehicles that use the public roads on a necessary and recurring basis to be motor vehicles.

In the present case, the information you have provided describes two oilfield equipment rigs designed to service oil and gas wells. One is a tandem/tandem, which has four axles; the front two axles are steer axles. This units GVWR is 95,600 pounds. The second is a tandem/tridem, which has five axles; the front two axles are steer axles. This units GVWR is 120,600 pounds. Your letter indicates that these rigs travel on local roads and interstate highways between well locations. The period of time a rig spends at a single location varies depending on the end-user. You indicated that the rigs may be required to stay on a lease for a day, a week or a month at a time.

The vehicles you ask about appear similar to items of mobile construction equipment which are not considered motor vehicles. Given this similarity and the limited usage you describe, we believe that the vehicles are not "motor vehicles" subject to the Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any other questions please contact Mr. George Feygin at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

2 Enclosures

ref:571
d.2/2/05

ID: GF008126

Mr. Dietmar K. Haenchen
Safety Affairs and Vehicle Testing
Volkswagen of America, Inc.
Mail Code 3C02
3800 Hamlin Road
Auburn Hills, MI 48326

Dear Mr. Haenchen:

This responds to your letter of November 4, 2003, and subsequent phone conversation with George Feygin of my staff regarding applicability of certain provisions of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 201 "Occupant protection in interior impact," to sliding interior compartment doors. Specifically, you ask whether a sliding interior compartment door that does not project outward like a pivoting or hinged door would is subject to the requirements of S5.3 of FMVSS No. 201. In short, our answer is yes.

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable requirements prior to the initial sale of the vehicle.

FMVSS No. 201 establishes performance requirements designed to reduce the risk of injury in the event an occupant strikes the interior of a vehicle during a crash. S5.3 of FMVSS No. 201 specifies that doors to interior compartments must remain latched when subjected to certain forces that might be experienced in a crash. The determination of whether an interior compartment door is subject to the requirements of S5.3 is determined by both the location of the door and whether the door fits within the definition of "interior compartment door."S5.3 applies only to interior compartment doors located in the instrument panel, console, seat back or side panels adjacent to a designated seating position. We are assuming that the interior compartment in question is located in either the instrument panel, the console, the seat back or a side panel.

49 CFR 571.3(b) defines "interior compartment door" as "any door in the interior of the vehicle installed by the manufacturer as a cover for storage space normally used for personal effects" (emphasis added). For example, an ashtray is not normally used for storing personal effects, and therefore its cover is not considered to be an interior compartment door. [1] Similarly, the agency has also indicated that a fuse box door [2] and a cup holder door [3] are not interior compartment doors subject to the requirements of S5.3. In your phone conversation with George Feygin you indicated that the interior compartment in question is intended to store personal effects, thus making it subject to the requirements of S5.3.

The agency has never made a distinction between a sliding interior compartment doors and other, pivoting or hinged doors that project outward when opened. In your letter you assert that an open sliding compartment door does not present a potential for occupant injury because an open sliding compartment door does not project outward into the interior of the vehicle. S5.3 of FMVSS No. 201 requires that doors in the console or a side panel remain closed regardless of the method by which a manufacturer chooses to open or close them. The concern that an open door could cause occupant injury when there is a lateral or diagonal impact is not limited to a protrusion created by an open door. Rather, the concern addressed by the requirement is that a sharp or rigid surface does not expose an occupant to undue risk of injury.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you need further assistance, please contact George Feygin of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

ref:201
d.2/12/04

ID: GF008360

Mr. Jeff Thompson
Vice President
Timpte Trailer Co.
1827 Industrial Drive
David City, NE 68632

Dear Mr. Thompson:

This responds to your recent letter addressed to Richard Van Iderstine regarding installation of certain auxiliary lighting. Specifically, you ask whether Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment, allows for installation of an auxiliary [1] three-light identification cluster between the taillamps at the lower edge of the trailer. With certain limitations, our answer is yes.

Table II of FMVSS No. 108 specifies that 3 red identification lamps must be located on the top rear of a trailer with an overall width of 80 inches or more, and as close as practicable to the top of the vehicle. Identification lamps must meet the requirements of SAE Standard J592e Clearance, Side Marker, and Identification Lamps, July 1972, incorporated by reference in FMVSS No. 108. Paragraph 2.4 of SAE J592e defines identification lamps as "lamps used in groups of three." Your letter and an attached illustration indicate that your trailer satisfies these requirements. We assume that the auxiliary three-light identification cluster would also satisfy these requirements, except for those related to the cluster being at the top of the trailer.

With respect to additional lamps, FMVSS No. 108 does not prohibit installation of auxiliary lighting equipment so long as this equipment does not "impair the effectiveness" of lighting required by the standard. Thus, the three-light identification cluster located at the bottom of the trailer would be acceptable if it does not impair the effectiveness of the required identification cluster at the top of the trailer or the required lamps located at the outer edges of the bottom of the trailer.

After studying your illustration, it appears that the auxiliary cluster would not impair the effectiveness of the required lighting. It would be located several feet below the required cluster, so it would be distinct from that cluster, e.g., it would not appear to be part of a six-lamp cluster. Moreover, it would be located close to the vertical centerline of the trailer, so it would be distinct from the required lamps at the outer edges of the bottom of the trailer. In addition, drivers are used to seeing identification lamps in the same basic location on certain kinds of trailers such as flat-bed trailers.

We note that States also regulate auxiliary lighting devices in various ways.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you need further assistance, please contact George Feygin of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

ref:108
d.1/14/04





---

[1] We use the term "auxiliary lighting" to refer to any item of lighting equipment that is not required by the terms of FMVSS No. 108.

ID: GF008483

Robert Strassburger, Vice President
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers
1401 Eye Street, NW - Suite 900
Washington, DC 20005-6562

Dear Mr. Strassburger:

This is in response to your letter dated November 2, 2004, regarding Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 201, Occupant protection in interior impact. Specifically, you ask about certain target points located on the seat belt mounting structure.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is in the process of responding to petitions for reconsideration of the February 27, 2004, final rule that addressed issues related to the targets located on seat belt mounting structures (see 69 FR 9217). We will address the issue raised in your letter in our response to the petitions for reconsideration.

Should you have any remaining or additional questions once the response to the petitions for reconsideration is published, please feel free to submit them to the agency. If you have further questions in the interim, you may contact Mr. George Feygin of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

ref:201
d.12/30/04

ID: GF008639

Mr. Tom Lykken
President CEO
SnoBear Industries
3681 Fairway Road
Fargo, ND 58102

Dear Mr. Lykken:

This responds to an inquiry forwarded to us by Senator Byron L. Dorgan, and your subsequent e-mail communications with George Feygin of my staff. You ask whether a SnoBear ice fishing vehicle (SnoBear) that will be manufactured by your company would be classified as a "motor vehicle." As explained below, based on the information you provided us, we would not consider the SnoBear a "motor vehicle" for the purposes of our regulations.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our laws and regulations. Title 49 U. S. Code (U.S.C) Chapter 301 authorizes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to prescribe Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Section 30102(a)(6) defines "motor vehicle" as:

"[A] vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways, but does not include a vehicle operated only on a rail line."

In your e-mail you stated that the SnoBear is not intended for highway use. Instead, SnoBear is intended for use on lakes, primarily for the ice fishing industry, and other limited off road use. Pictures obtained from your website ^[1] and CAD drawings youve provided indicate that the SnoBear is equipped with skies and tracks instead of tires, and therefore cannot travel on surfaces other than snow and ice.

Based on the information you provided, it is our opinion that the SnoBear is not a motor vehicle within the statutory definition. We have previously interpreted Section 30102(a)(6) to mean that vehicles that are equipped with tracks or are otherwise incapable of highway travel are not motor vehicles.^[2] In this instance the SnoBear is incapable of highway travel and therefore is not a motor vehicle. Because the SnoBear is not a motor vehicle, it is not subject to any of our regulations, including the Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

We note that your product may fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Consumer Products Safety Commission. Contact information for that agency is at http://www.cpsc.gov/businfo/businfo.html. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency may have emissions regulations applicable to your product. Contact information for that agency is at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/comments.htm.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any other questions please contact Mr. George Feygin at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

cc: Nathan Berseth




---

[1] www.snobearindustries.com

[2] See our 09/25/87 interpretation letter to John R. Niemela of Ranger International Inc.

ID: GF008677

Mr. Bryce Pfister
Director of Operations
Collins Bus Corporation
P.O. Box 2946
Hutchinson, KS 67504-2946




Dear Mr. Pfister:

This is in response to your letter and subsequent e-mail regarding the placement of a tire safety information placard required by Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) No. 110 "Tire selection and rims for motor vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less."Specifically, you ask if FMVSS No. 110 permits attaching the placard to the panel located above the drivers door in a raised roof vehicle, when the placard does not fit in the other locations specified in S4.3.

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issues FMVSSs applicable to new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment. However, NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable requirements.

S4.3  of FMVSS No. 110 reads, in relevant part, as follows:

"S4.3  Placard. Each vehicle, shall show the information specified in on a placard permanently affixed to the driver's side B-pillar. In each vehicle without a driver's side B-pillar and with two doors on the driver's side of the vehicle opening in opposite directions, the placard shall be affixed on the forward edge of the rear side door. If the above locations do not permit the affixing of a placard that is legible, visible and prominent, the placard shall be permanently affixed to the rear edge of the driver's side door. If this location does not permit the affixing of a placard that is legible, visible and prominent, the placard shall be affixed to the inward facing surface of the vehicle next to the driver's seating position" (emphasis added)

The photographs attached to your e-mail show a tire safety information placard that is considerably larger than the one contemplated by the agency, and used as an example in Figure 1 of the regulatory text.We note however, that a larger placard is not prohibited by FMVSS No. 110 because the Standard does not specify a particular size or a dimension for the placard. We also note that your placard would not be legible if affixed to the B-pillar, or to the rear edge of the drivers side door because it would have to bend along the edges of the door or the B-pillar.We conclude that locating the tire safety information placard on the panel above the drivers side door satisfies the requirement that the placard be affixed to the inward facing surface of the vehicle next to the drivers sitting position.In this location, the placard is clearly legible, visible and prominent.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have further questions, you may contact Mr. George Feygin of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Wood
Acting Chief Counsel

ref:110
d.4/7/06

ID: GF008935

Ms. Dana Roeling
Executive Director
National Mobility Equipment Dealers Association
3327 W. Bearss Avenue
Tampa, FL 33618




Dear Ms. Roeling:

This is in response to your letter concerning legal responsibilities of vehicle modifiers (i.e., entities that modify motor vehicles after the first retail sale) with respect to the requirements of S4.3 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 110, Tire selection and rims for motor vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less. Specifically, you ask whether vehicle modifiers are obligated to replace the tire safety information placard required by S4.3, if the relevant information on the placard becomes inaccurate as a consequence of their actions. As explained below, the answer is no.

By way of background, S4.3 of FMVSS No. 110 requires that vehicles with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less contain a placard showing certain critical tire safety information, including but not limited to, the vehicle capacity weight, the recommended inflation pressure, and the tire size designation. This information enables consumers to ascertain the cargo carrying limitations of their vehicles, and to properly inflate their tires. It also enables consumers to purchase correct size replacement tires.

49 U.S.C. 30122 prohibits manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or motor vehicle repair businesses from "making inoperative, in whole or in part" any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable safety standard.

In your letter, you ask whether it would be a violation of the 30122 make inoperative provision if modifiers changed the vehicles such that the information of the tire placard is no longer accurate, but do not update the tire placard.

In evaluating this question, we have focused on the language of S4.3 of FMVSS No. 110. One of the items of safety information required by that section is identified in paragraph (d), which reads as follows:

"Tire size designation, indicated by the headings "size" or "original tire size" or "original size," and "spare tire" or "spare," for the tires installed at the time of the first purchase for purposes other than resale. For full size spare tires, the statement "see above" may, at the manufacturer's option replace the tire size designation. If no spare tire is provided, the word "none" must replace the tire size designation;" [Emphasis added]

Thus, the requirement for one of the critical items of safety information to be provided on the tire placard is specifically expressed in terms of the "tires installed at the time of first purchase for purposes other than resale." We also note that there is a relationship between a number of the items required to be specified on the tire placard.

We observe that regardless of what changes a modifier may make to a vehicle, it does not change the size of the tires that were installed at the time of the first purchase for purposes other than resale (the information S4.3 of FMVSS 110 requires to be on the placard).Given this, and recognizing the relationship between a number of the items required to be specified on the tire placard, it is our opinion that it would not be a violation of the 30122 make inoperative provision, with respect to S4.3 of FMVSS 110, if modifiers change the vehicles tire size, cold inflation pressure, and/or cargo capacity rating but do not update the tire placard.

We note that while our regulations do not require changes to the tire safety information placard if the changes to the vehicle occur after it is first sold for purposes other than resale, the potential inconsistency between the information on the placard and the actual vehicle could in some cases be misleading and dangerous to vehicle operators. Specifically, relying on what has become inaccurate information, vehicle operators could over-inflate or under-inflate their tires, thereby creating a safety hazard. Also, vehicle operators could overload their vehicles, which also would create a safety hazard. Finally, vehicle operators could end up purchasing incorrect replacement tires (e.g., original tire size not appropriate for aftermarket rim), erroneously relying on the placard that is no longer accurate.

In light of these concerns and consistent with previous interpretation letters concerning post-sale modifications relating to a vehicles Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (May 24, 1993, letter to Mr. John Paul Barber, Esq., and April 2, 1997, letter to Mr. James Baker), we would urge a party which modifies a used vehicle so that the tire safety information is no longer accurate to either add a new label to the vehicle which indicates the correct tire safety information or add a warning label (preferably proximate to the placard) indicating that the tire safety information placard is no longer accurate.

In your letter, you ask several questions highlighting the potential difficulties faced by vehicle modifiers attempting to ascertain accurate tire safety information, especially in situations where a vehicle has already undergone changes after the first sale. For example, the vehicle being modified could have tires that are different in size and recommended inflation pressure from those originally installed on the vehicle, and thus the information on the tire safety placard is already wrong when the vehicle arrives for modifications. As discussed in the previous paragraph, we would encourage vehicle modifiers to either affix a correct label or affix a warning indicating that the tire safety information placard is no longer accurate. In situations when the accurate tire safety information is difficult to ascertain, we encourage the latter option of a warning label.

You also ask a question regarding S4.3.2 of FMVSS No. 110. That section applies to vehicles altered prior to first retail sale and specifically requires that a new tire information placard replace the original placard if the previously certified vehicle has been altered such that the information on the existing placard is no longer valid. We caution that this interpretation applies only to modifications occurring after the first retail sale and does not concern alterers.

Finally, we note that with respect to modifications of vehicles to accommodate individuals with disabilities, 49 CFR 595.7(e)(5) requires modifiers to provide the vehicle owner with a document that indicates a reduction in the load carrying capacity of more than 100 kg (220 lb) after the modifications are completed.

If you have further questions, you may contact Mr. George Feygin of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Wood
Acting Chief Counsel

ref:110
d.4/7/06