Interpretation ID: 1985-03.42

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 09/10/85

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Jeffrey R. Miller; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Donald H. Giberson

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

September 10, 1985 Mr. Donald H. Giberson Assistant Director Division of Motor Vehicles Department of Law and Public Safety State of New Jersey 25 Montgomery Street Trenton, NJ 08666 Dear Mr. Giberson: Thank you for your letter of June 27, 1985, to Administrator Steed expressing your concerns about the safety of the "Litestar" motorcycle, and asking questions about the relationship of Federal regulations to it. The Administrator has asked me to respond to your questions. With respect to your first, second, and fourth questions, there is no such thing as a "Federally licensed motor vehicle manufacturer". However, a manufacturer of motor vehicles is required to file an identification statement with this agency containing the information specified in 49 CFR Part 566 not later than 30 days after it commences manufacture. A check of our records shows that Litestar of New Jersey has not yet filed an identification statement. The purpose of the requirement is to facilitate regulation of manufacturers under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. But no Federal approval or "license" is required for a manufacturer to produce vehicles subject to the Act. We do not currently have a list of manufacturers who have filed information statements. Your third question is whether a manufacturer may legally sell vehicles which do not comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. The answer is no; sale and offer for sale of a noncomplying motor vehicle are violations of Section 108(a)(1)(A) of the Act, (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1)(A)). It appears from the product literature you enclosed with your letter that the "Litestar" motorcycle is a motor vehicle and thus it must comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. In addition, any noncompliances or safety-related defects in those vehicles would be subject to the notification and remedy provisions of section 151-159 of the Vehicle Safety Act, (15 U.S.C. 1411-1419). Your fifth and sixth questions concern the powers of a State over motor vehicles and manufacturers subject to the Act and Federal motor vehicle safety standards. You asked specifically "Can a state legally refuse registration to vehicles constructed by licensed manufacturers which do comply with all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards". The answer to this is determinable under New Jersey law. Under the Act, Federal safety standards are standards to be met by a motor vehicle at the time of its sale to the first purchaser for purposes other than resale, and compliance with them is not intended as a prerequisite to State registration. Many States do, of course, condition eligibility for registration upon compliance with State standards. Under Section 103(d) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 1392(d)), if a State has a safety standard covering the same aspect of performance as a Federal safety standard, the State standard must be identical. But the Act does not prohibit a State from establishing standards in areas where there are no Federal safety standards, and if New Jersey has a condition for registration outside the areas covered by the Federal standards, it may refuse registration notwithstanding the fact that the vehicle may be certified as complying with all Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Your further question is whether a State may legally require a vehicle manufacturer to submit test data from an independent testing laboratory regarding the performance of the vehicle. If the area of performance is one that is covered by both State and Federal safety standards, a State may not impose burdens which differ in any significant respect from those of the Federal regulatory scheme. Thus, States may require manufacturers to submit available test data supporting their certifications so that the States may determine the adequacy of the data. States also cannot compel manufacturers to submit data only from independent test laboratories, since the Federal regulatory scheme is based on manufacturer self-certification. States may, however, undertake independent testing. If the area of performance is outside the coverage of the Federal standards, the answer would appear to be determinable under the explicit and implicit powers of the State. Finally, you have asked what type of dynamic tests should a vehicle such as the Litestar undergo to assure that it is roadworthy. The agency has had very little experience with vehicles configured like the Litestar, and is unable to offer any specific suggestions. You may be aware of the agency's research report "Motorcycle Handling" (DOT HS 804190, May 1979), prepared by Systems Technology, Inc., 13776 So. Hawthorne, Hawthorne, California 90250. David H. Weir of the company was Principal Investigator under the contract. He was assisted by Jon McKibben Engineering Co., 2172 Dupont Drive, Suite 18, Irvine, California 92662. These experts might be able to answer your seventh question, and address your other concerns. I hope this information is of assistance. If you have any further questions please let me know. Sincerely, Original Signed By Jeffrey R. Miller Chief Counsel