ID: aiam1150

Dear Mr. Pieratt: This is in reply to your letter of May 11, 1973, in which you ask abou the certification responsibilities for consecutive manufacturers of certain multi-stage vehicles that are intended for use by utilities. The facts as you present them are that a chassis-cab is purchased by a customer and delivered to a utility distributor, who installs a sub-base and a digger-derrick. The truck is then sent to a body-builder who installs a body consisting essentially of storage compartments, which are used to carry personal tools. The compartments are installed to the floor installed by the utility distributor. The unit is then returned to the utility distributor, who installs clearance and other lamps, reflectors, and other accessories, and hooks up hydraulic lines. Smaller vehicles are described as being manufactured in essentially the same manner.; It appears to us that the manufacturing operations you have describe fit quite readily into the manufacturing categories established by Parts 567 and 568. The utility equipment distributor is an intermediate manufacturer, he performs manufacturing operations, but does not complete the vehicle, as further manufacturing operations, the installation of the body, are clearly contemplated for the vehicle to perform its intended function. The body-builder is the final-stage manufacturer. When he completes his work the vehicle is ready to perform its intended function, except for the addition of the lighting equipment and the other operations performed by the utility equipment distributor. These latter operations appear to involve 'readily- attachable components' and if so the party performing them would not be a final-stage manufacturer.; The certification requirements do not operate differently because, i the case you describe, the utility equipment distributor performs operations on the vehicle at two separate times (installing the derrick, and later the lighting). His responsibilities each time are governed by the operation he then performs. However, inasmuch as the utility distributor appears to perform much of the heavy manufacturing, and because he is also the last person to modify the vehicle, he may wish to assume the responsibility for certification under section 568.7(b), in order that he may affix his name as the manufacturer to the certification label.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel

ID: aiam1151

Dear Mr. Pieratt: This is in reply to your letter of May 11, 1973, in which you ask abou the certification responsibilities for consecutive manufacturers of certain multi-stage vehicles that are intended for use by utilities. The facts as you present them are that a chassis-cab is purchased by a customer and delivered to a utility distributor, who installs a sub-base and a digger-derrick. The truck is then sent to a body-builder who installs a body consisting essentially of storage compartments, which are used to carry personal tools. The compartments are installed to the floor installed by the utility distributor. The unit is then returned to the utility distributor, who installs clearance and other lamps, reflectors, and other accessories, and hooks up hydraulic lines. Smaller vehicles are described as being manufactured in essentially the same manner.; It appears to us that the manufacturing operations you have describe fit quite readily into the manufacturing categories established by Parts 567 and 568. The utility equipment distributor is an intermediate manufacturer, he performs manufacturing operations, but does not complete the vehicle, as further manufacturing operations, the installation of the body, are clearly contemplated for the vehicle to perform its intended function. The body-builder is the final-stage manufacturer. When he completes his work the vehicle is ready to perform its intended function, except for the addition of the lighting equipment and the other operations performed by the utility equipment distributor. These latter operations appear to involve 'readily- attachable components' and if so the party performing them would not be a final-stage manufacturer.; The certification requirements do not operate differently because, i the case you describe, the utility equipment distributor performs operations on the vehicle at two separate times (installing the derrick, and later the lighting). His responsibilities each time are governed by the operation he then performs. However, inasmuch as the utility distributor appears to perform much of the heavy manufacturing, and because he is also the last person to modify the vehicle, he may wish to assume the responsibility for certification under section 568.7(b), in order that he may affix his name as the manufacturer to the certification label.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel

ID: nht93-1.10

DATE: January 14, 1993

FROM: Bob Dittert -- Trooper, Texas Department of Public Safety, Safety Education Service

TO: Chief Counsel -- NHTSA

COPYEE: Janet Monteros -- Office of the Attorney General, General Litigation Section

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 5-5-93 from John Womack to Bob Dittert (A41; Std. 205; VSA 103(d))

TEXT: It would be appreciated if your agency would make clear the authority of the CFR's concerning automotive equipment standards for new vehicles and after- market equipment.

1. Are the CFR's law and enforceable only by federal agents?

2. Are the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards law and only enforceable on new manufactured vehicles?

3. Are states allowed to enact legislation that allows less stringent standards than the CFR's?

4. Concerning the installation of non-complying automotive equipment, i.e., sun screening, taillamp 'black out' lenses, neon license plate lamps, etc., is this allowed by the owner but prohibited installation by a commercial entity?

I am of the understanding that the CFR 48, Part 571.105 requires light transmission of 70% minimum (words illegible) is this correct? If this is correct and Texas law, VCS S701(illegible) Art. XII, Sec. 184(C), allows light transmission of only 35% (words illegible) action of Federal law? (Words illegible) Sec. 108 stated that if a Federal standard for any item of automotive equipment exists that standard will take precedence over any state standard and this section also empowers the Department (Texas Department of Public Safety) to control the sale and use of automotive equipment. If the state statutes are in error can that be remedied by the Federal Government? If so, how?

It doesn't seem realistic that every state could have different standards for automotive equipment, either new manufactured vehicles or after-market!

Your answers to these questions are awaited in ernest.

ID: nht73-1.42

DATE: 05/18/73

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Signum Plastics

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of April 26, 1973, requesting that you be assigned a "DOT" code number for purposes of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205, "Glazing Materials". You state that you purchase acrylic plastic sheet from Thailand and Japan, and indicate that you are sole importers of this material.

Under paragraph S6 of Standard No. 205, the assignment of a code number is restricted to prime glazing material manufacturers, who are those manufacturers who either fabricate, laminate, or temper the glazing material. As you import only acrylic sheet, you are not a prime glazing material manufacturer, and the assignment of a code number to you is not appropriate.

I have enclosed a copy of marking requirements for glazing materials. Paragraph S6.2 requires a prime glazing material manufacturer to apply a code number, which is obtained upon written request to this agency, to that glazing designed as a component of any specific motor vehicle or camper. The code number requirement does not apply to glazing sheets not designed for a specific motor vehicle or camper. If you plan to import glazing material that is designed for a specific motor vehicle or camper, the prime manufacturer of that material, whether foreign or domestic, must apply for and receive a DOT code number.

Yours truly,

Enclosure

April 26, 1973

Administrator National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Gentlemen:

We are requesting assignment of a D O T number, relative to Standard No. 205.

We purchase acrylic sheet plastic from Thailand and Japan, and are the sole importers of this material, as evidenced by the enclosed labels.

We are in the process of getting a registered trademark for this label.

Very truly yours,

SIGNUM PLASTICS --

Jack Molesworth, Partner

Encl.

ID: nht71-1.38

DATE: 02/10/71

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Lawrence R. Schneider; NHTSA

TO: Kelly Springfield Tire Company

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of February 2, 1971, concerning Part 574 - Tire Identification and Record Keeping regulations and to confirm that the date code may be placed at the end of the tire identification number by means of a screw as depicted in the sketch attached to your letter.

ID: nht78-2.30

DATE: 09/22/78

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Joseph J. Levin Jr.; NHTSA

TO: Fiat Research & Development - U.S.A. Branch

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your June 16, 1978, letter asking whether a manufacturer is permitted to list on the certification label required by Part 567, Certification, the gross axle weight rating (GAWR) in kilograms as well as pounds. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has permitted the use of kilograms on the certification label as long as the label continues to list the GAWR in pounds also.

ID: nht78-4.1

DATE: 03/09/78

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; John Womack; NHTSA

TO: The Reynolds and Reynolds Company

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your letter of February 3, 1978, requesting that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration review your small Odometer Mileage Statement Form ODOM-1030N, your large Odometer Mileage Statement Form ODOM-105-N, and your Retail Buyers Order. It is our opinion that the forms which you submitted meet the Federal odometer requirements which became effective January 1, 1978. Thank you for your cooperation in preparing the forms.

ID: nht68-1.48

DATE: 01/12/68

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Robert M. O'Mahoney; NHTSA

TO: Road and Track

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: In response to your letter of December 19 to Mr. Boaz regarding the proposed regulations governing the importation of motor vehicles and how they affect racing cars, I enclose a copy of the final regulations which are now in effect. You will see that 19 C.F.R. 12.80(b)(7) permits importation of noncomplying motor vehicles for purposes of competition if they are not licensed for use on the public roads.

ID: aiam2678

Dear Mr. Reider: This is in reply to your letter of October 14, 1977, to Don Williamso of our Ohio regional office.; You enclosed information on an automatic warning flasher lamp that i designed for installation on the parcel shelf inside the rear window of automobiles. You asked whether such a device would be legal on U.S. cars or U.S. highways, and 'what steps might be required to obtain an endorsement for the generic device from the N.H.T.S.A.'; The unit appears to be designed for sale as a motor vehicle accessor in the aftermarket. There are no Federal prohibitions against the sale of the warning device or its installation in motor vehicles. Whether it is legal to use such a device however is a question to be answered under the laws of the jurisdiction where the motor vehicle in which it is installed is registered and/or operated.; The NHTSA does not issue approvals or endorsements of propriety safet devices.; Yours truly, Frank Berndt, Deputy Chief Counsel

ID: nht71-1.30

DATE: 12/06/71

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Auto Sun Products Company

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of November 16, 1971, on behalf of Kangol Magnet, Ltd., in which you requested our opinion on the number of identifying labels required on a sent belt assembly by Standard No. 209. It is our opinion that the marking requirement of that standard (S4.1(k)) is satisfied by one permanent marking or label on each assembly and that it does not require each component of an assembly to be separately marked.