Interpretation ID: nht76-2.47

DATE: 02/12/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; R. L. Carter; NHTSA

TO: F. A. McNiel

COPYEE: HON. J. J. PICKLE

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your petition of November 7, 1975, "for the correction of subsection S4.5.4 and S4.6(b) as set forth by existing Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108."

It is your opinion that S4.5.4, which requires activation of stop lamps upon application of the service brakes, is design restrictive, and "leaves no opportunity for innovation by the private sector for other solutions for the activation of a motor vehicle's stoplamps". You have suggested that S4.5.4 be amended to include at its end "or by other beneficial means which will not impair the lighting system or the mechanical functioning of the vehicle".

Any performance standard is design restrictive to some extent; it must restrict manufacturers to designs that meet the desired performance requirements. Its validity as a performance standard depends on whether the restrictions of the standard are only as narrow as reasonably necessary to achieve the desired safety performance. In this case we have found that the requirement meets this test. A signal to other drivers that the service brakes are being applied is precisely the performance being sought in S4.5.4. A signal based on some other condition (e.g., vehicle deceleration, might not be as timely, or might fail altogether to operate at the critical moment (as where it is based on lifting the accelerator pedal). Since the requirement is limited to the desired safety performance, we find it valid, and your petition in this area is denied.

You also ask for an amendment of S4.6(b) to include "rearlamps" among those that may be flashed for signalling purposes, since you believe that conventional wiring circuits presently allow these lamps to be flashed when headlamps are flashed. When the headlamps are flashed by means of the on-off switch, it is true that rear lamps will flash. But that type of flashing is in no way restricted by the standard. The flashing intended to be regulated by S4.6(b) is by automatic means (see S3 definitions) and, except for rear turn signal lamps, these automatic devices would not be connected to rear lamp circuits. Thus, there appears to be no need for the amendment you suggest and your petition is accordingly denied.

We appreciate your continuing efforts on behalf of traffic safety.

Sincerely,

ATTACH.

F. A. McNiel 611 Bouldin Avenue Austin, Texas 78704

NOVEMBER 7, 1975

U. S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Re: A petition for the correction of sub-sections S4.5.4 and S4.6(b) as set forth by existing Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.

Gentlemen:

Quoting from a letter date of Jan. 29, 1968, from William Heddon Jr., Director of the Department of Transportation National Highway Safety Bureau, in answer to a letter that Congressman J. J. Pickle had forwarded to the Department of Transportation in my behalf, - Director Haddon states:

"under the law the Congress directed us to set 'performance' standards and not standards requiring specific devices or designs. The Congress chose this approach to give the private sector the greatest opportunity for innovation and to permit a variety of solutions in meeting specific performance requirements".

The 'performance' standards as established by FMVSS No. 108 for the functioning of a motor vehicle's stoplamps are as follows;

Except for the size, location, lens type, and candlepower, the only standard 'set' for stoplamp functioning that is covered by FMVSS No. 108 is sub-section S4.5.4, which states:

"The stoplamps on each vehicle shall be activated upon application of the service brakes".

Sub-section S4.5.4 is in direct conflict with Director Haddon's letter on two seperate counts, i.e.

1. Said section as worded constitutes a mandate of intendence that a 'specific design' (use of the service brakes) shall be the only means used to activate a motor vehicle's stoplamps.

2. Also, as worded sub-section S4.5.4 leaves no opportunity for innovation by the private sector for other solutions for the activation of a motor vehicle's stoplamps.

In order to comply with Director Haddon's interpretation of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, I propose that sub-section S4.5.4 be expanded to read as follows:

"The stoplamps on each vehicle shall be activated upon the application of the service brakes, or by other beneficial means which will not impair the lighting system or the mechanical functioning of the vehicle".

Under Section S4.5 'special wiring requirements'

Sub-section S4.5.7 states - (a) "When the parking lamps are activated the taillamps, license plate lamps, and side marker lamps shall also be activated", - and (b) "When the headlamps are activated in a steady-burning state, the taillamps, license plate lamps, and side marker lamps shall also be activated". - Thus, the said section stipulates that it is mandatory that the side marker lamps be in-circuit with the taillamps and license plate lamps.

Under Section S4.6 'when activated'

S4.6 states, - (a) "Turn signal lamps, hazard warning lamps, and school bus warning lamps shall flash", - and (b) "All other lamps shall be steady-burning, except that means may be provided to flash headlamps and side marker lamps for signaling purposes".

Contextually, S4.5.7 (a) and (b), and S4.6 (b) make it unlawful to flash headlamps and side marker lamps by use of the conventional lamp activating means, as this act would also flash taillamps and license plate lamps.

The only manner by which headlamps and side marker lamps could be flashed and still leave taillamps and license plate lamps steady-burning would be to isolate headlamps and side marker lamps from the conventional wiring circuit by means of auxiliary wiring and switching means which would operate indipendent of the conventional lighting system.

Installation of such auxiliary wiring and switching means would tend to be costly, - and to what avail? In what instance could the flashing of headlamps and side marker lamps for signaling purposes enhance traffic safety, - and at the same time, the flashing of taillamps and license plate lamps be detrimental to traffic safety?

To make S4.6(b) credible, and to prevent perhaps millions of motorists from unwittingly breaking the letter of the law by flashing a vehicle's lights with the conventional light switch, I propose that the word 'rearlamps' be inserted after the word 'headlamps' to make the sub-section read -- "All other lamps shall be steady-burning, except that means may be provided to flash headlamps, rearlamps, and side marker lamps for signaling purposes".

In order to bring FMVSS No. 108 more into line with the apparent intent of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, I respectfully petition the Department of Transportation for rule making to re-phrase sub-sections S4.5.4 and S4.6 (b) of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 to include the wording that I have proposed.

Such re-phrasing would establish a standard against which any beneficial means for activating a motor vehicle's stoplamps could be tested.

Such a standard would provide an opportunity for the private sector to innovate means for improving the 'performance' of a motor vehicle's conventional stoplamps in a manner that could materially reduce the toll of "10 percent of the fatal motor vehicle accidents and 49 percent of all motor vehicle accidents" ascribed by the National Highway Safety Bureau as resulting from rear end collision type accidents.

Such re-phrasing would also remove the current restriction that now makes it unlawful under any circumstances for a motorist to flash a vehicle's lamps by the use of the conventional lamp activating switching means.

Respectfully,

Fred A. McNiel Traffic Safety Advocate

copy: Hon. J. J. Pickle