Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: RIBILL23454



    Mr. Charles F. Dolan
    Administration
    State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations
    Division of Motor Vehicles
    286 Main Street
    Pawtucket, RI 02860

    Dear Mr. Dolan:

    This responds to your letter, and to telephone calls from John DiTomasso of your staff, asking whether a Rhode Island state law would be preempted by Federal law, in light of a possible inconsistency with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 205. Your correspondence attached a copy of the law, and expressed concern regarding a subsection that allows the ownership and operation of motor vehicles with a light transmittance of less than 70 percent by persons with a physical condition that "makes it necessary to equip the vehicle with a sunscreening device." Based on our understanding of your correspondence, we believe that the legislation would not be preempted.

    BACKGROUND

    According to your correspondence, Section 31-23.3-2 of the Rhode Island General Laws prohibits persons from owning and operating any motor vehicle with nontransparent or sunscreen material to cover the front windshield, the side windows immediately adjacent to the right and left of the driver's seat, and other windows in a vehicle, unless the material has a total visible light transmittance of not less than seventy percent. (1)

    Subsection (7) of Section 31-23.3-4 exempts from the 70 percent light transmittance for tinting material requirement "a motor vehicle registered in this state in the name of a person, or the person's legal guardian, who has an affidavit signed by a physician or an optometrist licensed to practice in this state indicating that the person has a physical condition that makes it necessary to equip the motor vehicle with a sunscreening device which may exceed federal standards."

    The State law pertains to the light transmittance of glazing in motor vehicles, which is an aspect of performance regulated by FMVSS No. 205, Glazing Materials (49 CFR 571.205). The standard incorporates by reference an industry standard, the American National Standard "Safety Code for Safety Glazing Materials for Glazing Motor Vehicles Operating on Land Highways (ANSI Z26), and specifies performance requirements and permissible locations for the types of glazing that may be installed in motor vehicles. The standard requires some glazing to allow at least 70 percent of the incident light to pass through. For passenger cars, the standard specifies the 70 percent light transmittance requirement for all glazing at levels requisite for driving visibility. For buses, trucks, and multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPVs), the standard specifies the 70 percent light transmittance requirement for glazing installed in the windshield, the windows to the immediate left and right of the driver, and any rear window that is used for driving visibility.

    ANALYSIS

    The provision of our statute referring to Federal preemption is section 30103(b) of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, which states in part:

    when a motor vehicle safety standard is in effect under this chapter, 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.

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) safety standards apply to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. (49 U.S.C. 30112.) Thus, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30103(b), State laws that apply to the manufacture and sale of new vehicles, and to the same aspect of performance, must be identical to the FMVSS. Thus, if the Rhode Island provision applied to the sale of vehicles in Rhode Island, it would be preempted since it would purport to allow the sale of vehicles with light transmittance below that required by FMVSS No. 205.

    However, NHTSA does not regulate the operation (i.e., use) of motor vehicles, which is generally under the jurisdiction of the States. Section 30103(b) does not require Rhode Island to set operational requirements that are "identical" to the FMVSS. Nonetheless, there are limits on State operational requirements, in that general principles of preemption law apply. These principles preclude States from adopting operational requirements that are more stringent than the requirements applicable to new vehicles under the FMVSS, because more stringent State requirements would have the effect of precluding the use of a Federally compliant vehicle in that State. The proposed Rhode Island law appears to be less stringent than the FMVSS, in that it would allow a light transmittance of less than 70 percent in certain areas of glazing where the Federal requirement is 70 percent. As such, the proposed State law would not preclude the use of vehicles certified to FMVSS No. 205, and thus would not be invalid under general principles of preemption. This conclusion is consistent with a 1996 letter to Betsy Dittmore, in which we stated that Iowa legislation allowing drivers with "light-sensitive disorders permits" to have darkened windows generally would not conflict with Federal laws. (See enclosed letter, dated November 18, 1996.)

    Note, however, that a State law could not permit a modification that is prohibited by Federal law. Our statute at 49 U.S.C. 30122 provides that a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or vehicle repair business may not knowingly "make inoperative" any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle in accordance with any FMVSS. A State law that purported to permit the installation of dark tinting material by entities listed in 30122 where the tinting material results in a light transmittance through the glazing of less than 70 percent would not undermine the validity and enforceability of section 30122. (2) Nonetheless, in situations where a vehicle must be modified to accommodate the needs of a particular disability, we have been willing to consider any violations of the "make inoperative" prohibition a purely technical one justified by public need. In situations qualifying for exemption under your statute, NHTSA will not institute enforcement proceedings against a business that applies the tinting material to the vehicle to accommodate the condition warranting the exemption.

    In closing, we understand your safety concerns about decreased visibility through dark tinting material and concur with them. We ask States to limit use of the tint material to the extent necessary and to ensure that their operational requirements are commensurate with the safe operation of vehicles.

    If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Nancy Bell of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

    Sincerely,

    John Womack
    Acting Chief Counsel

    Enclosure
    ref:205#VSA
    d.2/14/02


    1 As we read Section 31-23.3-4(3), it allows the "use" of tinting material that has at least 70 percent light transmittance. Therefore, when this material is placed on an original equipment manufacturer window that is already at 70 percent light transmittance, the combined transmittance of the glazing and tinting material could be down to 49 percent. This ambiguity, however, does not affect the outcome of our analysis.

    2 The "make inoperative" provision does not apply to equipment attached to or installed on or in a vehicle by the vehicle owner. However, NHTSA urges vehicle owners not to degrade the safety of any system or device on their vehicles.