ID: nht87-1.66

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 04/19/87

FROM: Erika Z. Jones -- NHTSA

TO: Jim Bates -- U.S. House of Representatives

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

The Honorable Jim Bates United States House of Representatives 430 Davidson Street Suite A Chula Vista, CA 92010 Dear Mr. Bates:

This responds to your letter on behalf of a constituent, Tatar Osman. Mr. Osman was interested in learning how to get an "approval" for a child seat. According to advertising literature you enclosed with your letter, this child seat complies with the Eur opean ECE Regulation 44. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our regulations.

In enforcing its safety standards, this agency does not follow the European practice of requiring the manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment to deliver an item of the equipment to specified institutes for testing before the product can be sold. Instead, as required by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, the manufacturer itself must certify that each of its items of motor vehicle equipment fully satisfies all requirements of the Applicable Federal motor vehicle standards. In the case of c hild seats, every child restraint system for use in motor vehicles that is sold in or imported into the United States must be certified as complying with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 213, Child Restraint Systems (49 CFR S571.213 (copy enclos ed). This standard sets forth both performance and labelling requirements that must be satisfied by the child restraint system.

Further, this agency does not require that the manufacturer's certification be based on a specified number of tests of the child restraint system or any tests at all. Pursuant to the Vehicle Safety Act, we only require that the certification be made with the exercise of due care on the part of the manufacturer. It is up to the individual manufacturer in the first instance to determine what data, test results, or other information it needs to enable it to certify that its child restraint system complies with Standard No. 213. We would certainly recommend, however, that a manufacturer selling its child restraint systems in the United States for the first time test those systems according to the test procedures specified in Standard No. 213. Once the manu facturer has determined that its child restraint system complies with the requirements of Standard No. 213, it certifies that compliance by placing a certification label on the child restraint, as specified in section S5.5 of Standard No. 213.

There are two additional regulations you should bring to the attention of your constituent in the even he plans to import these child restraints into the United States. Copies of both these regulations are enclosed for your information. The first is 49 C FR Part 566, Manufacturer Identification. This regulation requires a manufacturer (including importer) of motor vehicle equipment to submit its name, address, and a brief description of the equipment it manufactures (or imports) to this agency within 30 days of the date the child restraints are first manufactured (Imported into the United States).

The second regulation in 49 CFR Part 551, Procedural Rules. Section 551.45 requires the actual manufacturer of foreign-manufactured child restraints to designate a permanent resident of the United States as the manufacturer's agent for service of proce ss in this country. It is not necessary for an importer located within this country to designate its own agent as well. Part 551 specifies that the designation of agent by the manufacturer must contain the following six items of information:

1. A certification that the designation is valid in form and binding upon the manufacturer under the laws, corporate by-laws, or other requirements governing the making of the designation at the time and place where it is made;

2. The full legal name, principal place of business, and mailing address of the manufacturer;

3. Marks, tradenames, or other designations of origin of any of the manufacturer's child restraint systems that do not bear its name;

4. A statement that the designation shall remain in effect until withdrawn or replaced by the manufacturer;

5. A declaration of acceptance duly signed by the agent appointed by the manufacturer, and that agent may be an individual, firm, or U.S. corporation; and

6. The full legal name and address of the designated agent.

Such a designation must be received by this agency before any of the manufacturer's child restraint systems are imported into this country.

Should you need further information on this subject, or a clarification of any of the information set forth herein, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel cc: Washington Office

March 4, 1987

Edward P. Harrill Congressional Relations Consumer Product Safety Commission 5401 Westbard Ave. Bethesda, MD 20207

Dear Mr. Harrill:

I was recently contacted by a constituent, Tatar Osman, regarding an approval for a babyseat, advertising attached.

I would greatly appreciate your looking into this matter and providing me with a reply so that I might properly respond to the inquiry. If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact Marie Scharfenberg of m y district office at 691-1166.

Thank you for your assistance. Please respond to me at 430 Davidson St., Suite A, Chula Vista, CA 92010.

Sincerely, J.M. BATES Member of Congress Attachment (SEE HARD COPY FOR GRAPHIC PICTURES)

ID: nht87-1.67

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 04/21/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; SIGNATURE UNAVAILABLE; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Dawn B. Brown

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Dawn B. Brown Currier, Zall & Shepard 207 Main Street P. O. Box L Nashua, New Hampshire 03061-2938

Dear Ms. Brown:

This responds to your January 2, 1987 letter asking a number of questions concerning certain aspects of automatic transmissions. You ask first if there is a Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) relating to the permissibility of a transmission de sign which allows a driver to remove the key from the ignition while the transmission is in drive. You state your belief that "Standard 114, 49 CFR 571.113 is relevant," and ask whether that standard ever has been interpreted for a purpose other than to prevent unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. (We assume that the citation of 571.113 instead of 571.114 was a typographical error.) You ask further if there are any Federal safety standards that address whether a vehicle should "jump from park to drive when left in park." Finally, you ask whether there are standards other then 114 "that govern these problems."

As it is currently written, Standard 114 requires a manufacturer to install a key-locking system that prevents starting a vehicle engine and also prevents either, steering a vehicle or moving a vehicle forward under its own power whenever the key is removed. Thus, the standard does not directly require that the vehicle be in park before a driver can remove the ignition key.

In 1968, when Standard 114 was adopted, the stated purpose was to "reduce the incidence of accidents resulting from unauthorized (motor vehicle) use." 33 Federal Register 6471, April 27, 1968. The agency based this goal on evidence showing that: "Cars operated by unauthorized persons are far more likely to cause unreasonable risk of accident, personal injury and death than those which are driven by authorized individuals." (See the preceding citation). Neither the Standard nor the language in the preamble to it states any other goal.

In 1980, this agency amended Standard 114 to prevent a driver from inadvertently locking the steering wheel of a moving vehicle by removing the ignition key or shutting off the engine (45 Federal Register 85450, December 29, 1980). However, after receivi ng petitions for reconsideration and studying the question further, NHTSA decided that while this kind of inadvertent activation might be a safety problem in certain vehicles, the problem did not then warrant requiring additional steps to protect against inadvertent ,lock-up. Therefore, the agency rescind the 1980 amendment. The agency stated that it would continue to monitor complaints on the subject, and infiltrate rulemaking should new data warrant it ( 46 Federal Register 32251, 32253, June 22, 1981 ).

Currently the agency is re-evaluating whether data warrants amending Standard 114 to improve key-locking systems by reducing the prospect of a driver's inadvertently locking the steering column while a motor vehicle is moving.

As to your question about the existence of a FMVSS which directly addresses the permissibility of a design which allows a car to jump from "park" to "drive" when a driver leaves the car in "park", the answer is there is no such standard. However, NHTSA h as received a number of letters complaining of this phenomenon and, using its authority not only to issue FMVSS but also require the recall and remedy of vehicles and equipment with safety-related defects, has conducted investigations based on these comp laints. A listing of the defect investigations based on these complaints. A listing of the defect investigations can be obtained from: Technical Reference Division, NHTSA, Room 5108, 400 7th St., S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590.

I hope you find this information helpful.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones

Ms. Erika Jones, Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic & Safety Administration 400 7th Street, SouthWest Washington, D.C. 20590

RE: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards

Dear Ms. Jones:

Dear Ms. Jones:

I would like to obtain some information about Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. First, I would like to know if there are any federal motor vehicle safety standards governing whether a vehicle with an automatic transmission must be in park before th e driver should be able to get the keys out of the ignition. In other words, are there any standards regulating whether or not a driver should be able to pull the keys out of the ignition of a vehicle when it is in drive as opposed to being in park. Seco nd, I would like to know whether there are any federal safety standards which deal with whether or not a vehicle should be able to jump from park to drive when left in park.

Please let me know whether there are any federal standards governing these questions. I am particularly interested in finding out whether Standard 114, 49 CFR 571.113 is relevent. I understand that the purpose of this particular standard is to prevent th e unauthorized use of motor vehicles, but I would like to know whether it has ever been interpreted for another purpose. I would also like to know whether there are other standards, besides Standard 114, that governs these problems. Any information you c an provide will be appreciated. Thank you for your assistance in this matter.

Very truly yours,

Dawn B. Brown

ID: nht87-1.68

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 04/21/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; SIGNATURE UNAVAILABLE; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Koji Tokunaga

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Koji Tokunaga Manager, Engineering Isuzu Motors America, Inc. 21415 Civic Center Drive Southfield, MI 48076-3969

Dear Mr. Tokunaga:

This letter responds to your inquiry of June 25, 1986, requesting an interpretation of S4.5 of Standard No. 115, Vehicle Identification Number--Basic Requirements, regarding the "part of the vehicle" on which the vehicle identification number (VIN) shoul d appear. I regret the delay in replying to your letter.

You ask whether either of two specific locations within the passenger compartment of a vehicle would meet the VIN location requirement, and submit diagrams of these locations. Paragraph S4.5 of Standard No. 115 reads:

"The VIN of each vehicle shall appear clearly and indelibly upon either a part of the vehicle other than the glazing that is not designed to be removed except for repair or upon a separate plate or label which is permanently affixed to such a part."

You state in your letter that your concern is whether a VIN or a plate or label with the VIN affixed to it, may be "fitted to a part that is not designed to be removed except for repair but that can be replaced by a new part as a result of the repair."

We interpret S4.5 to require that the VIN be placed on a part that is designed to be removed only for the purpose of repairing (or replacing) that part. Thus, the VIN may not be placed on a part which is designed to be removed to allow the maintenance or repair of other parts.

The first location you describe is the instrument panel front cover. That cover is a plastic strip immediately behind and below the inner surface of the front windshield, and it appears from your diagram that the part is designed to be removed only for i ts repair or replacement. If that is correct, placing the VIN at this location would meet the requirement of S4.5.

The second location is the top of the meter upper hood. On your diagram, this location seems to be on the plastic cover for the speedometer and tachometer. It appears from the diagram that the meter upper hood is designed to be removed to permit the repa ir or maintenance of those meters or other parts of the dash board. If this is the case, then this location would not comply.

As a separate matter, we note from your diagram that the meter hood location may be in a passenger car, multipurpose passenger vehicle, or light truck. If that is so, you must meet both the S4.5 requirement with respect to placement of the VIN, and the r eadability requirement of S4.6.

I hope this information is helpful to you.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

June 25, 1986

Mr. Jeffrey R. Miller Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 700 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Dear Mr. Miller:

Subject: Confirmation of NHTSA's Interpretation of our Request

The attached letter, DE-85-181, requested your agency's interpretation regarding "a part of the vehicle" where the vehicle identification number (VIN) is required to appear.

We mailed this letter last August. However, we have not received your interpretation. On June 24th and 25th, Mr. Imai or Isuzu Motors America, spoke with your secretary and was informed that you do not have any record of this request. Therefore, we are s ending this letter again. Please check your records and please forward your interpretation.

We would appreciate your response as soon as possible.

If you have any questions, please contact us.

Sincerely yours,

Koji Tokunaga Manager, Engineering

August 26. 1985

Mr. Jeffrey R. Miller Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 700 Seventh Street. S.W. Washington. D.C. 20590

Dear Mr. Miller:

Subject: VIN Durability.

The purpose of this letter is to request your agency's interpretation regarding "a part of the vehicle" where the vehicle identification number (VIN) is required to appear.

FMVSS 115. S4.5 requires a VIN to be fitted to "...a part of the vehicle...that is not designed to be removed except for repair Our concern is whether the VIN may be fitted to a part that is not designed to be removed except for repair but that can be re placed by a new part as a result of the repair. In the context of a specific vehicle, we would request you to advise us whether it meets the requirement to affix the VIN or a VIN plate or label to either of the following parts in the locations shown in t he attached fig. 1 and 2:

1. Instrument panel front cover (Fig. 1)

This cover is made of plastics and can be detached from the vehicle by removing a clip on each side and the three screws shown. There is a possibility, although not great, of this cover being replaced by a new cover when damaged or badly stained.

2. Meter upper hood (Fig. 2)

This hood is also made of plastics, and can be detached from the vehicle by removing the four screws shown. The possibility of this hood being replaced is still smaller but not nil.

We would appreciate your prompt confirmation as to whether affixing the VIN to these parts meets the requirements of S4.5 of FMVSS 115.

Sincerely yours.

Koji Tokunaga Manager. Engineering

SEE HARD COPY FOR GRAPHIC ILLUSTRATIONS

ID: nht87-1.69

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 04/22/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; SIGNATURE UNAVAILABLE; NHTSA

TO: T. Chikada

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. T. Chikada Manager, Automotive Lighting Engineering Control Dept. Stanley Electric Co., Ltd. 2-9-13, Nakemeguro, Meguro-ku Tokyo 153, Japan

Dear Mr. Chikada:

This is in reply to your letter of March 13, 1987, with respect to the mounting height of driving lamps and front fog lamps. Noting that these lamps are not equipment required by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, you have asked whether they need to be mounted within the range of height which the standard prescribes for headlamps, or may they be mounted, for example, at a height lower than 22 inches such as in the front bumper.

Any lamp that is not required by Standard No. 108 may be added to a motor vehicle and located wherever it appears suitable, provided that the lamp at its location does not impair the effectiveness of lighting equipment required by the standard. Headlamps , parking lamps, and turn signal lamps are the lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108 on the front of a passenger car, and any other four-wheeled vehicle of less than 80 inches overall width. Although Standard No. 108 imposes a minimum mounting height of 22 inches on headlamps, it allows parking lamps and turn signal lamps to be mounted as low as 15 inches above the road surface, which means that they could be mounted in the front bumper, or otherwise close to the mounting location of fog lamps and driving lamps. Therefore, compliance with paragraph S4.1.3 of Standard No. 108 would require a manufacturer of a vehicle equipped with fog and driving lamps to ensure that they do not impair the effectiveness of the headlamps, turn signal lamps, and parking lamps.

Because fog lamps and driving lamps are not covered by Standard No. 108, the individual States may have their own restrictions on the mounting height of these lamps. We regret that we are unable to advise you on these laws. However, the American Associat ion of Motor Vehicle Administrator (AAMVA), 1201 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C., may be able to advise you.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

Ms. Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590 U.S.A.

Dear Ms. Jones,

Re : Mounting height of auxiliary driving lamps and front fog lamps

We have a question on mounting height of driving lamps and front fog lamps.

Do they need to be mounted within the range of height which is required for headlamps in FMVSS No. 108?

Although they help the function of headlamps, they are not required lighting equipments in FMVSS No. 108.

So we understand that they can be mounted in the lower position than 22 inches, the lower required height of headlamps; for example, into the front bumper, the height of which is less than 22 inches.

We would like to have your confirmation on this matter. We are looking forward to your reply.

Yours sincerely,

Stanley Electric Co, Ltd.

T. Chikada Manager, Automotive Lighting Engineering Control Dept.

ID: nht87-1.7

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 01/09/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Lewis H. Goldfarb -- Assistant General Counsel, Chrysler Corporation

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Lewis H. Goldfarb, Esq. Assistant General Counsel Chrysler Corporation P.O. Box 1919 Detroit, Michigan 48288

This responds to your letters asking about Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 102, Transmission Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect, with regard to a design you are considering producing. You asked whether the standard's requirement that identification of shift lever positions of automatic transmissions shall be permanently displayed in view of the driver would be met by an electronic display that is activated for three minutes after the driver's door b open, whenever the key is in the ignition switch, and for three minutes after the key is removed from the ignition switch. You later asked about a variation of the proposed design. Noting that drivers sometimes leave the key in the ignition switch for long per iods of time, you stated that you planned to incorporate a timing device which would shut off the illumination after 15 minutes if the key is left in the ignition switch and the ignition switch remained in either the "lock" or "off" position. As discusse d below, it is our opinion that neither of your proposed designs would meet the standard's requirement for permanent display in view of the driver.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that its vehicles or equipment comply with applicable standards. The following represents our opinion based on the facts provided in your letter.

Section S3.2 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 102 requires that the "(i)identification of shift lever positions of automatic transmissions and of the shift lever pattern of manual transmissions . . . shall be permanently displayed in view of the driver." (Emphasis added) NHTSA has previously interpreted this provision as requiring a display that can be seen regardless of the operating mode of the engine. Thus, it is not permissible for the display to be visible (e.g., in the case of an elect ronic display, be activated) only when the key is in the ignition switch.

Your letter raises the issue of whether it is permissible for an electronic display to become activated at the time the driver enters the car and, if so, whether it must remain activated indefinitely as long as the driver remains in the car, even if the ignition is not turned on. is our opinion that is permissible for an electronic display to become activated at the time the driver enters the car and need not be activated when there is no person in the driver's seating position. Section S3.2's requireme nt that the identification of shift lever positions of automatic transmissions be "permanently displayed" is modified by the phrase "in view of the driver." It is our opinion that no such display is required at times when no driver is in the car, i.e., n o person in the driver's seating position. We also conclude, however. that such a display must remain activated indefinitely as long as the driver remains in the driver's seating position even if the ignition is not turned on. If the display only remaine d activated for a specific period of time, such as three minutes or 15 minutes, it would not be "permanently" displayed.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

October 7, 1986 Ms. Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington. D.C. 20590

Re: Confirmation of Interpretation of MVSS 102, Transmission Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect

Dear Erika:

Chrysler Motors Corporation requests confirmation of our interpretation that the PRNDL display in a new electronic cluster we are designing for one of our 1990 model vehicles meets the requirements of paragraph S3.2 of MVSS 102, "Transmission Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect." That paragraph states in part that "Identification of shift lever positions of automatic transmissions...shall be permanently displayed in view of the driver."

We believe this provision is intended to provide that the PRNDL should be displayed to a person in the driving position for the purpose of operating the vehicle. It is not intended, however, to require the display of the PRNDL when there is no one engage d in operating or "driving" the vehicle and where the continuous lighting of an electronic PRNDL display would be a serious drain on the vehicle's battery.

In our new electronic instrument cluster design, the PRNDL display illuminates and displays the transmission gear position as soon as the driver's door is opened. This feature provides the driver an immediate indication of the position of the transmissio n gear selector just as does a conventional "mechanical" PRNDL indicator. With our design the transmission gear selector position will continue to be lighted if the ignition key is inserted into the ignition lock cylinder within approximately three minut es. The only difference between our electronic PRNDL display and a mechanical one is that, to save battery strength when the vehicle is not being driven, our electronic indicator will turn off after three minutes unless the driver inserts the key in the ignition key cylinder.

Should the PRNDL display turn off after a three minute period, however, inserting the ignition key will cause it to come on immediately, and it will remain on as long as the key is in the ignition switch. The three minute period is more than sufficient t ime to allow the driver to get settled in the seat, fasten the safety belt, and insert the ignition key. When the trip is completed and the key is removed from the ignition lock, the PRNDL display remains lighted for approximately three minutes while the driver unfastens safety belts, picks up articles, exits, and locks the vehicle.

We believe that the design of our electronic PRNDL display meets the intent as well as the needs of motor vehicle safety as stated in the requirements of paragraph S3.2 of MVSS 102.

In summary, the shift lever position will be displayed to the driver while the driver enters the vehicle, while the ignition key is in the ignition lock, and while the driver exits the vehicle.

We would appreciate your early consideration and confirmation of this interpretation.

Sincerely,

Lewis H. Goldfarb

CC: R. O. Sornson

ID: nht87-1.70

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 04/27/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; SIGNATURE UNAVAILABLE; NHTSA

TO: Mr. James E. Campbell

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. James C. Campbell 2719 So. 29th Street Ft. Pierce, FL 33450

Dear Mr. Campbell:

This is in reply to your letter of December 17, 1986, in which you have asked the following question:

"If someone has a patent on an invention, as in the case of the turn signals, and you at the N.H.T.S.A. make it mandatory that all cars be equipped with that feature, does the inventor retain the marketing rights to that invention, or does he lose those rights once it becomes mandatory?"

The answer to your question is that rights given under a patent issued by the United States Patent Office cannot be divested by the actions of a governmental agency such as the N.H.T.S.A. Were we to require that a patented item of equipment be standard o n all passenger cars, the patent holder would retain all rights. However, it is important that you understand that the agency does not mandate the adoption of equipment of a proprietary nature. By law, the Federal motor vehicle safety standards are defin ed as minimum standards for motor vehicle performance; to the extent practicable the standards specify performance requirements to be met (e.g., no more than 5 ounces of fuel spillage in the first 5 minutes following a 30 mph frontal barrier collision), leaving the design solution to the manufacturer who may incorporate proprietary components if he chooses.

The performance requirements of our standards vary in their degree of specificity. In some instances the agency has had to develop fairly specific requirements to ensure uniformity and interchangeability of replacement equipment items such as brake hoses , tires, and lighting equipment. This can increase the likelihood of the incorporation of proprietary elements. Many of the changes which are made to the standards are made in response to petitions from manufacturers of motor vehicles or motor vehicle eq uipment. This is especially true in the area of motor vehicle lighting which is covered by Standard No. instances, a petitioner may request a change which incorporates specifications which are covered by a patent. In these cases, the agency endeavors to insure that the technology is made available on a non-exclusive royalty-free basis to all who wish to use it before amending the standard.

I hope that this answers your question.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

Sir or Madam;

If someone has a patent on an invention, in the case of the turn signals, and you at the N.H.T.S.A make it mandatory that all cars be equipped with that feature, does the inventor retain the marketing rights to than invention, or does he lose those right s once it becomes mandatory?

Sincerely;

James E. Campbell

ID: nht87-1.71

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 04/27/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Charles Schamblin -- Flag-It Fluorescent Signaling Device Co.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Charles Schamblin Flag-It Fluorescent Signaling Device Co. Post Office Box 1709 Bakersfield, CA 93302

Your letter of December 29, 1986, to Michael M. Finkelstein has been referred to my Office for reply. You also addressed a letter of January 9, 1987, to my Office. Because these letters concern the same matter, this response addresses them both. In the D ecember 29 letter, you asked about the appropriate color for your product, the Flag-it Fluorescent Signaling Device. The device, which you enclosed with your correspondence, is a rectangular green fluorescent strip, designed to be permanently attached to and hang vertically from the license plate frame on the front of a motor vehicle.

You state that you designed this device "especially to meet the requirements for fluorescent material in the front of motor vehicles." You ask for a "letter of certification" that your device can be used and sold in the United States.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has authority to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment. However, NHTSA does not approve nor certify motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, or endorse any commercial product. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer must certify that its product meets agency safety standards, or other applic able standards. Periodically, NHTSA tests whether vehicles or equipment comply with there standards, and may investigate alleged safety-related product defects.

Your product is an item of motor vehicle equipment under S102(4) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, and as such, falls under NHTSA's jurisdiction. However, none of our federal motor vehicle safety standards applies to your product.

Standard 125, Warning Devices, sets uniform design specifications for reflective warning devices used to warn approaching traffic of the presence of a stopped vehicle. As is apparent from the provisions regarding the scope and application of the Standard , Standard 125 applies to devices designed to be carried in motor vehicles and erected when needed to warn approaching traffic. It does not apply to warning devices designed to be permanently attached to a motor vehicle. Nevertheless, you may wish to use the colors specified in paragraph S5.3. They are the ones which the agency believes most appropriate for warning devices subject to the standard.

Standard 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, applies to reflective devices. While the agency notes that your product includes reflective material, Standard 108 covers aftermarket reflective devices only to the extent that the afterm arket device replaces required original reflective equipment. Because the kind of device you described is not subject to any Standard 108 requirement as original reflective equipment, it is likewise not subject to any such requirement as aftermarket equi pment.

Finally, please be aware that if you or the agency finds your product to contain a safety-related defect after you market the product, you are responsible for conducting a notice and recall campaign under S154 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Sa fety Act (15 U.S.C. 1414).

Further, you should be aware that State law may apply to equipment such as your signalling device You may wish to consult the State and local transportation authorities in the areas where you intend to market your product.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

December 29, 1986

Mr. Michel M. Finkelstein Associate Administrate for Research and Development National Highway Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street S. W. Washington, D. C. 20590

Dear Mr. Finkelstein:

I received your letter of December 22, 1986 concerning the Flag-It Fluorescent Signalling Device. Thanks very much for your interest and informing me concerning the device.

It is my understanding that reflecterized material can be used on motor vehicles through out the USA. The color red can be used only to reflect and be seen from the rear only.

Since the Flag-It device is designed especially to meet the requirement for fluorescent material in the front of motor vehicles. Using the color green on the device I presume no doubt be legal.

If you could send me a letter of certification that the Flag-It Fluorescent Safety Device can be used and sold in the USA I would appreciate concerning this matter.

Sincerely yours,

Charles Schamblin

SEE HARD COPY FOR ADDITONAL INFORMATION AND GRAPHIC ILLUSTRATIONS

ID: nht87-1.72

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: APRIL 27, 1987

FROM: KOJI TOKUNAGA -- MANAGER, ISUZU MOTORS

TO: ERIKA Z. JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TITLE: FMVSS 124 - ACCELERATOR CONTROL SYSTEMS

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO MEMO DATED 8-8-88, TO KOJI TOKUNAGA, FROM ERIKA Z. JONES, STD. 124

TEXT: The purpose of this letter is to seek your agency's interpretation of some requirements of FMVSS 124 - Accelerator Control Systems in the specific context of a new system to be used for our vehicles.

This system features electric control. The system's outline is explained below and illustrated on the attached sheet.

As the accelerator pedal is depressed by the driver, the amount of pedal displacement is converted into proportional electric signals by the accelerator pedal sensor which is in fact a potentiometer equipped with two accelerator pedal position switches. These signals are fed into the control unit where position switch, and then fed into the stepping motor. The stepping motor works to move the throttle lever through the motor's arm and linkage. Thus, the engine speed is controlled in proportion to the amount of accelerator pedal displacement.

The moving components in this system are the accelerator pedal, stepping motor arm, linkage and throttle lever. I would like to receive your answer to the following questions regarding the interpretation of the requirements:

1. Energy sources (S5. 1)

In this vehicle, Isuzu considers the battery that drives the stepping motor to be one of the energy sources under S5. 1, and the return springs (accelerator pedal and throttle lever return springs) the other sources. Is this interpretation correct?

2. Disconnection or severance (S5. 2)

a. Is a severance in electric wires in this system a severance or disconnection within the meaning of S5.2? Isuzu considers negative because electric wires are not a moving part.

b. If a severance in electric wires were a severance or disconnection under S5.2, what about a short-circuiting that may result from such a severance? Does the Standard require that the throttle returns to the idle position even in such a condition?

c. Our understanding is that a failure (other than severance or disconnection) of a system component itself (i.e. a failure in the accelerator pedal sensor with pedal position switches, control unit, throttle valve position switch, or stepping motor) is not subject to the throttle return requirement under the Standard. Is this correct?

3. Definition of "driver-operated accelerator control system"

It is our interpretation that the battery and the electric wires from the battery to the control unit are not a part of the accelerator control system under this definition. Is this interpretation correct?

Vehicles equipped with this control system are already distributed in Japan, and we would like to introduce such vehicles to our U.S. customers as soon as possible. Therefore, your prompt review of, and answer to, these questions would be greatly apprec iated.

I am looking forward to hearing from you on this subject.

Attached sheet

Battery

Throttle valve position switch

Accelerator pedal sensor with accelerator pedal position switches

Arm

Throttle lever

Linkage

Return springs

Stepping motor

Accelerator pedal

Return spring

Control unit

Electric wire

Accelerator Control System

ID: nht87-1.73

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 04/29/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: John K. Liu

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. John K. Liu President, John K. Liu Enterprises, Inc. Box 544 Valley Forge, PA 19481

Dear Mr. Liu:

This responds to your letter concerning planned modifications to a used Class 8 truck/tractor. I regret the delay in this response. The answers to your questions are provided below.

It should be noted that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, it is the responsibility of the manufactu rer to ensure that it complies with all applicable requirements. The following represents our opinion based on the facts provided in your letter.

1. If we take a used Class 8 truck/tractor and modify it by adding an axle to increase the GVWR, do we have to make sure that the modified vehicle complies with the braking requirements of FMVSS 121/CFR 49:

By way of background information, new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment manufactured or imported for sale in the United States must comply with all applicable safety standards set forth in 49 CFR Part 571. One such standard is Safety St andard No. 121, Air Brake Systems, which applies to trucks, buses and trailers equipped with air brake systems. Vehicle manufacturers are required to certify that their new vehicles satisfy the requirements of all applicable safety standards. Also, if a vehicle is modified prior to first sale, the person who modifies the vehicle would be an alterer of a previously certified motor vehicle and would be required to certify that, as altered, the vehicle continues to comply with all of the safety standards a ffected by the alteration.

A person who modifies a used vehicle is not required to attach a certification label. However, manufacturers, distributors, dealers or motor vehicle repair businesses are prohibited by section 108(a)12)(A) of the Vehicle Safety Act from knowingly renderi ng inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. Thus, in adding an axle to a used truck/tractor to increase its G VWR, you must ensure that you do not knowingly render inoperative the compliance of the vehicle with Safety Standard No. 121. I have enclosed an interpretation letter of July 20, 1977, to the Truck Body and Equipment Association in which the agency discu sses in more detail how section 108(a)(2)(A) applies to the installation of additional axles in a used vehicle.

2. Do we have to revise the nameplate or install a new nameplate giving the new GVWR and axle ratings:

Under 49 CFR Part 567, Certification, manufacturers of motor vehicles are required to affix a certification label to their vehicles. The label is required to specify, among other things, the gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) and the gross axle weight ra ting for each axle. See S 567.4(g). In addition, Safety Standard Ho. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars, requires that specifications concerning tire and rim selection be placed on either the certification label or a separate tire information label. See S S5.3.2.

As indicated above, persons who alter certified vehicles prior to first sale are required to certify that their vehicles, as altered, conform to all applicable safety standards. Such alterers are required by Part 567 to leave the original certification l abel on the vehicle and add an additional label. See S 567.7. If the gross vehicle weight rating or any of the gross axle weight ratings of the vehicle as altered are different from those shown on the original certification label, the modified values mus t be specified. See 567.7(b).

Persons who modify used vehicles are not required to attach a certification label. However, in adding an axle to a used truck/tractor to increase its GVWR, you must ensure that you do not knowingly render inoperative the compliance of the vehicle with Sa fety Standard No. 120. We encourage you to supplement the original certification label and/or tire information label by an additional label to reflect changes in gross vehicle weight rating, axle ratings, and tire and rim specifications, to avoid confusi on on the part of vehicle users.

3. Do we have to adopt a new VIN (vehicle identification number)?

The answer to this question is no. Safety Standard No. 115 requires that manufacturers of new motor vehicles provide vehicle identification numbers. The vehicle identification number is not affected by the subsequent modification of the vehicle.

4. Do we have to tell a buyer that he is buying a modified vehicle:

NHTSA does not have any regulations requiring sellers of used vehicles to inform buyers about axle modifications.

Our answers to your questions cover the Federal regulations and laws administered by NHTSA. I have also enclosed a general information sheet which provides additional information concerning our regulations.

You should be aware that by adding an axle you are considered a manufacturer under the Vehicle Safety Act and subject to its provisions concerning safety-related defects. Under the Act, manufacturers must notify purchasers of safety-related defects and r emedy such defects without charge. Our engineering staff reviewed your plans and noted that in some instances the addition of an axle to a vehicle could constitute a safety-related defect, by making the vehicle unsafe for anticipated usage. You should ca refully analyze this issue for the vehicle in question. Among other things, you should consider whether, as modified, the overall vehicle structure, including the truck's frame, will be able to adequately accommodate the load distribution resulting from the additional axle and/or the higher GVWR, throughout the truck's anticipated length of service.

You may wish to contact the Federal Highway Administration's Office of Motor Carrier Standards concerning whether any of its regulations are relevant to your planned modifications. Also, with respect to Question 4, you may wish to contact the Federal Tra de Commission concerning whether it has any applicable regulations. Finally, a local attorney can advise you concerning the state law implications of your plans.

I hope this information is helpful.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

Enclosures

Dec. 10,1986 NHTSA Rm 5219 400 7th St. SW Washington DC 20590

Att: Ms Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel

Dear Ms Jones,

Please render an opinion in the following matter:

1) If we take a used Class 8 truck/tractor and modify it by adding an axle to increase the GVWR, do we have to make sure that the modified vehicle complies with the braking requirements of FMVSS 121/CFR 49?

2) Do we have to revise the nameplate or install a new nameplate giving the new GVWR and axle ratings?

3) Do we have to adopt a new VIN(Vehicle identification number )?

4) Do we have to tell a buyer that he is buying a modified vehicle?

You may call us if you wish, since we would like your response as soon as feasible.

Thanking you in advance for your assistance. I remain

Sincerely yours,

John K. Liu. President JKL/sh

ID: nht87-1.74

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 04/30/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; SIGNATURE UNAVAILABLE; NHTSA

TO: William L. Millard

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

William L. Millard, Esq. Law Offices of Shirley F. Majors 2656 South Arlington Road Akron, Ohio 44319

Dear Mr. Millard:

This responds to your letter concerning the "emergency shutdown switch" which would allow a passenger to shut of the ignition on a vehicle. You indicate in your letter that your client, Anthony M. Mazzagatti, would like to sell this idea to the Departmen t of Transportation. Your letter has been forwarded for a response to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), an agency within the Department of Transportation. I regret the delay in responding to your letter.

This agency did not purchase or require the use of particular patented devices. By way of background information, the NHTSA is authorized under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Vehicle Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 51391, et seq.) to issue safe ty standards applicable to new motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. These are performance standards which leave the choice about means of compliance to the manufacturer.

Since your client may wise to sell his device directly to manufacturers or to consumers, let me describe some Vehicle Safety Act provisions he should bear in mind. The NHTSA is not authorized to certify or approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipmen t for compliance with our Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS). Instead, under the Vehicle Safety Act, each manufacturer of a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable F MVSS. A copy of the Safety Act is enclosed for your information.

This "self-certification" process requires each manufacturer to determine in the exercise of due care that its product meets all applicable FMVSS requirements. This agency periodically tests items of motor vehicle equipment for compliance with the standa rds, and also investigates alleged safety related defects. If your client or the agency determines that a safety related defect or noncompliance exists, your client would be obligated to notify purchasers of the product and remedy the problem without cha rge. Manufacturers who fail to provide notification of or remedy for a defect or noncompliance may be subject to a civil penalty of up to $1,000 per violation. (A general information sheet describing the responsibilities under the Vehicle Safety Act is e nclosed.)

If your client's product is installed in a previously certified new vehicle prior to its first sale to a consumer, then the person performing this alteration would be considered a vehicle alterer under the certification regulation, 49 Code of Federal Reg ulations (C.F.R.) 567, Certification. Part 567.7, Requirements for persons who alter certified vehicles, requires alterers to certify that the vehicle as altered complies with all applicable safety standards. The safety requirements that may apply to the installation of your client's device as described in your letter are Safety Standard No. 124, Accelerator control systems, and Safety Standard No. 101, Controls and displays. I have enclosed an information sheet describing how you can obtain copies of o ur regulations.

In addition, your client should be informed that the installation of this device in a used vehicle could be affected by S108(a)(2)(A) of the Vehicle Safety Act. This section provides, in part:

No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative...any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal mot or vehicle safety standard....

Thus, a commercial business installing your client's product in a used vehicle would have to ensure that it did not knowingly render inoperative the vehicle's compliance with any of the safety standards.

Finally, please note that section 108(c) of the Vehicle Safety Act provides that compliance with these regulations does not preclude him from liability under common law for any accidents or injuries caused by the use of this device.

I hope that you find this information helpful.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street S.W. Washington. DC 20590

Re: Safety Switch

To Whom It May Concern:

I represent Mr. Anthony M. Mazzagatti in his attempt to sell a low-cost safety device that can save many lives. This device can be called an Emergency Shutdown Switch (ESD Switch). This would take the form of a button located in the center of an automobi le dashboard; it would be wired to the ignition system so that, if pushed, it would shutdown the primary ignition circuit. The only way to reset the ignition would be to stop the car, put the shift lever in park, and turn the key off.

This would save lives in several situations.

1) If a passenger finds herself in the company of a driver who is inebriated or otherwise incapacitated, she can push the ESD Switch. The car would roll to a safe stop and the passenger would have time to exit the vehicle. The driver would have time to r ethink his driving and, perhaps, travel no further.

2) In a panic situation, such as a stuck accelerator pedal, either the driver or the passenger would have the ability to stop the car without turning off the ignition and locking the steering column. If the ESD Switch was mounted in the middle of a minia ture stop sign plaque attached to the dash, it would be more likely to be used by panic stricken drivers than the ignition switch.

The ESD Switch. for the first time, gives the automobile passenger a voice in the safe driving of a vehicle. Its cost would be but a few dollars. The payback would be immense, not only in lives and money saved, but also in peace of mind.

My client would like to sell this idea to you. Please contact me to discuss this matter further.

Sincerely,

William L. Millard. Attorney at Law