NHTSA's Interpretation Files Search
| Interpretations | Date |
|---|---|
| search results table | |
ID: aiam3301OpenMr. George Beggs, Mechanical Plastics Corp., Castleton Street, Pleasantville, NY 10570; Mr. George Beggs Mechanical Plastics Corp. Castleton Street Pleasantville NY 10570; Dear Mr. Beggs: This responds to your April 28, 1980, letter asking several question about your responsibility as a manufacturer if you modify a Volkswagen by the addition of a recreational device (Hatchpack). The modification that you propose appears to be substantial in that it might involve a significant alteration of the vehicle rear and roof structures.; Before addressing your specific questions, I would like to give yo some general background information. First, the agency does not give advance approvals of vehicles or equipment. It is the responsibility of a manufacturer to ensure that its vehicles or equipment comply with the applicable requirements of all of our safety standards. A manufacturer then certifies that its vehicles or equipment comply with all applicable standards. For example, when your device is added to a new motor vehicle prior to its 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 affected by the alteration. You will find the specific certification requirements for alterers in Volume 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations at Part 567.7, *Certification*. On the other hand, you as the manufacturer of the Hatchpack device would have no certification requirements, because we have no safety standards applicable to your equipment.; From the general discussion in your letter, you appear to wan information on safety standards for which you would be responsible. Further, you state that Volkswagen has indicated its concern about the compliance of its vehicle with the crashworthiness safety standards if it is modified as you propose. As we stated above, as an equipment manufacturer, you would not be responsible for the compliance of any safety standard since we have no equipment standards applicable to the device that you manufacture. However, the installer of the device on a new vehicle would be responsible for ensuring that the vehicle continues to comply with all affected safety standards. The installer will probably need your help in making its certification. Therefore, we suggest that you closely confer with Volkswagen to learn which safety standards they feel might be violated by the addition of your equipment. With this information, you can conduct testing or undertake engineering analyses of your device as mounted on the vehicle to see whether Volkswagen's fears have merit. If you can assure yourself that the vehicle as modified will continue to comply with the safety standards, then you can pass this information along to the installer of the equipment who could then certify the vehicle in compliance.; The following are the responses to your specific questions. 1. Under what section of the M.V. safety codes does our product fall if it is to be installed and sold on new automobiles by licensed new car dealers?; As I stated above, the addition of this equipment to a new vehicl means that the installer of the equipment must attach an alterer's label to the vehicle indicating that it continues to comply with all of the safety standards affected by the alteration. Therefore, the installer would be responsible for any safety standard that might be affected by the installation.; 2. Under what sections of the M.V. safety codes does our product fall if it is to be installed by an independent accessory installer onto a new automobile which is then sold as a new vehicle by a licensed new car dealer?; The answer to this question is the same as the answer to questio number 1.; 3. Under what section of the M.V. safety codes does our product fall if it is to be installed by an automobile manufacturer as a factory option for new vehicles which are then to be sold by licensed new car dealers?; If the automobile manufacturer installs the device, that manufacture simply certifies the vehicle in compliance with all safety standards as it must do with any vehicle it produces.; 4. Under what section of the M.V. safety codes does our product fall i it is to be installed by an automobile owner/user?; There are no safety standards or other regulations applicable t modifications made to vehicles by their owners if the modifications are entirely made by the vehicles' owners. If a business such as a garage were to make the modification, it would have to make sure that it did not knowingly render inoperative the compliance of the vehicle with any safety standard. However, since the vehicle would be used, such a business would not be required to attach a certification label.; 5. In each of the cases described in questions No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, an No. 4, who are the parties responsible for certifying to the N.H.T.S.A. that the product is in compliance with the required standards?; No person is required to certify to the NHTSA that a vehicle or produc complies with the requirements. In certain instances, a certification label must be attached to the vehicle. We have indicated in our response to each of the preceding questions when labels must be attached and by whom.; 6. In each of the cases described in questions No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, an No. 4, who are the liable parties in the event of injury or death as a result if (sic) improper installation?; If the improper installation results in a noncompliance with a safet standard or with a defect related to motor vehicle safety, the agency would hold the installer primarily responsible. If, however, we were to discover that the equipment itself were the cause of the defect or noncompliance, the equipment manufacturer would be responsible to the agency. With respect to private liability that might result from a defect or noncompliance, you should consult with your own attorneys for an answer to this question.; 7. Based on the general information supplied with this letter would th installation of this unit by other than a motor vehicle manufacturer require an 'alterers' label or certification?; As we indicated earlier, the answer to this question is yes if th installation is made on a new motor vehicle that has been previously certified by its manufacturer.; 8. Under which, if any, of the cases described in questions No. 1, No 2, No. 3, and No. 4 would there be an N.H.T.S.A. requirement for a fuel system integrity crash test?; The NHTSA does not require that any manufacturer perform a crash tes if it can prove that the vehicle would comply with the requirements by some other means, such as design analysis. It is impossible for us to tell from your drawings whether your device would likely impact the fuel system. Volkswagen can probably be helpful in providing information in this area. If some impact on the fuel system is likely, testing or analysis would be required in each of the first three instances raised in your questions. No testing is ever required for the modification of used vehicles by their owners.; 9. What form of assurances might N.H.T.S.A. require from Mechanica Plastics Corp. for the Hatchpack product?; The NHTSA requires no advance forms of certification or assurances fro manufacturers that their products comply with safety standards. Our enforcement scheme is one of self- certification where the agency might subsequently purchase and test a vehicle for compliance with the standards.; 10. What form of assurances might N.H.T.S.A. require from th installing party as described in questions No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, and No. 4?; The answer to this question is the same as the answer to questio number 9.; We hope that this clarifies your responsibilities and duties wit respect to the device that you propose to manufacture. Again, we strongly encourage you to consult with Volkswagen engineers who can be the most helpful in telling you of the standards that you are likely to impact with your device. If you have any further questions, please contact Roger Tilton of my staff at 202-426-9511.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam0604OpenMr. K. Nakajima, Director/General Manager, Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc., Factory Representative Office, Lyndhurst Office Park, 1099 Wall Street West, Lyndhurst, NJ, 07071; Mr. K. Nakajima Director/General Manager Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. Inc. Factory Representative Office Lyndhurst Office Park 1099 Wall Street West Lyndhurst NJ 07071; Dear Mr. Nakajima: This is in reply to your letter of February 3, 1972, regarding th application of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302, 'Flammability of Interior Materials,' to certain vehicle components which you enumerate.; You state that you do not consider the 'steering column tube cover' an the 'steering column cover' to be of 'any other materials . . . designed to absorb energy on contact by occupants in the event of a crash' in S4.1, and that it is your understanding that they are therefore excluded from the application of the standard. If these components are not in fact designed to be energy absorbing then your conclusion is correct.; You also ask whether the center console or air conditioner grilles ar required to comply with the standard. The answer again depends upon whether they are within the above quoted language of S4.1. I point out that the NHTSA is presently reviewing this particular requirement, and it may be modified in rulemaking which we expect to publish in the near future.; Finally, you ask for the specific meaning of the term 'trim panels' a used in S4.1. The phrase 'all trim panels, including door, front, rear, and side panels,' is intended to refer to various rigid or semirigid interior coverings, such as door, scuff, and other covering panels, which appear on the front, sides, and rear of the occupant compartment of motor vehicles.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2639OpenMr. John L. O'Connell, Pupil Transportation Administrator, State of Connecticut, Department of Motor Vehicles, State Street, Wethersfield, CT 06109; Mr. John L. O'Connell Pupil Transportation Administrator State of Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles State Street Wethersfield CT 06109; Dear Mr. O'Connell: This responds to your June 7, 1977, letter asking whether a school bu manufacturer can sell a bus to a private school or to a contractor for use in the transportation of the handicapped that is not built in compliance with the new school bus safety standards.; The new school bus definition to which you refer in your letter wa issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) at the direction of Congress. The definition requires that all buses carrying more than 10 persons to or from school or related events (other than common carriers in urban transportation) must be constructed in accordance with the school bus safety standards.; The buses to which you refer transport children to and from privat schools and also transport the handicapped. There is no distinction between private school and public school for purposes of the application of the school bus safety requirements. Accordingly, a bus designed to carry more than 10 persons to and from a private school must be constructed in accordance with the requirements and must be equipped with the lights, paint, and signs of a school bus. The same situation exists for buses designed for the transportation of the handicapped if they carry more than 10 persons to and from school or related events.; In conclusion, a manufacturer is not permitted to sell a bus designe to transport school children to and from school and related events, unless that bus is contructed (sic) in accordance with the requirements. Schools may purchase, however, small vehicles (fewer than 10 passenger) that are not built according to the requirements. These vehicles are not considered school buses for purposes of the application of the requirements.; Sincerely, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1916OpenMr. Harold Klug, Deputh Trade Delegate, Austrian Trade Delegation in the United States, 845 Third Avenue, 21st Floor, New York, NY 10022; Mr. Harold Klug Deputh Trade Delegate Austrian Trade Delegation in the United States 845 Third Avenue 21st Floor New York NY 10022; Dear Mr. Klug: This is in response to your letter of April 21, 1975, inquiring as t whether voltage regulators are of safety-related significance and therefore subject to the requirements of Pubic Law 93-492.; There are currently no motor vehicle safety standards regulating th performance of voltage regulators. However, under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act as amended (Pub. L. 93-492) the Secretary of Transportation is authorized to make a determination, in appropriate circumstances, that a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment contains a defect which relates to motor vehicle safety. If he finds that a safety-related defect exists, the manufacturer must notify purchasers of the hazard and recall and remedy the defective vehicles. Therefore, even though voltage regulators are not the subject of a safety standard, they still must be designed so as not to contain safety-related defects.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5406OpenMr. Larry Wessels President Rocky Mountain Technology Engineering Corporation P.O. Box 280307 Lakewood, CO 80228-0307; Mr. Larry Wessels President Rocky Mountain Technology Engineering Corporation P.O. Box 280307 Lakewood CO 80228-0307; "Dear Mr. Wessels: This responds to your letter requesting a interpretation about the use of your product, the 'Handi-Slide.' You state that your invention is a locking system for securing and releasing a sliding semitrailer undercarriage. You further state that the system is tied into the trailer's air brake system. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our regulations to you. By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) administers Federal requirements for the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act establishes a 'self-certification' process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS's). This process requires each manufacturer to determine in the exercise of due care that its products meet all applicable requirements. NHTSA tests vehicles and equipment sold to consumers for compliance with the FMVSS's and investigates defects relating to motor vehicle safety. If a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a noncompliance or safety-related defect exists, the manufacturer must notify purchasers of its product and remedy the problem free of charge. (This responsibility is borne by the vehicle manufacturer in cases in which your product is installed on a new vehicle by the vehicle manufacturer.) A manufacturer of a noncomplying product that is subject to an FMVSS is also subject to a civil penalty of up to $1,000 for each noncomplying item it produces. I have enclosed an information sheet that highlights the responsibilities of motor vehicle equipment manufacturers. NHTSA does not have any specific FMVSS for semitrailer undercarriages. However, since the Handi-Slide is tied to a vehicle's air brake system, your product could affect a vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 121, Air Brake Systems. That standard applies to new trucks, buses, and trailers equipped with air brake systems, and specifies performance and equipment requirements for the braking systems on these vehicles. Your product could also affect the vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 106, Brake Hoses, which specifies requirements for the air brake hoses, fittings and assemblies on the vehicle. If the Handi-Slide is installed as original equipment on a new vehicle, the vehicle manufacturer is required to certify that, with the device installed, the vehicle satisfies the requirements of all applicable safety standards, including Standards No. 121 and 106. If the device were added to a previously certified new motor vehicle prior to its first consumer purchase, then 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 affected by the alteration. If the Handi-Slide were installed on a used vehicle by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business, then the installer would not be required to attach a certification label. However, 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act requires the installer not to knowingly render inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable FMVSS. Section 108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to vehicle owners modifying their own vehicles. I note that you provide an attachment titled 'Current NHTSA Locking Pin Safety Concerns' that references several Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. Please note that these regulations are administered by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), not NHTSA. If you are interested in the FHWA requirements, you can write to that agency at the address provided in the enclosed information sheet. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure"; |
|
ID: aiam0254OpenMr. Donald O'Neill, Technical Editor, Automotive Engineering, Two Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, New York 10001; Mr. Donald O'Neill Technical Editor Automotive Engineering Two Pennsylvania Plaza New York New York 10001; Dear Mr. O'Neill: Thank you for your letter of August 17, 1970, concerning Mr. George R Smith's comments on the energy- absorbing steering system in response to my interview in your August issue.; I did not mean to imply that energy-absorbing steering systems were no installed by some manufacturers, such a General Motors, prior to the effective date of our Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 203 - Impact Protection for the Driver from the Steering Control System.; Mr. Smith is correct in noting that Standard No. 203 does not requir collapsible steering columns. It was intentionally written in performance terms rather than as a design specification. Most manufacturers chose the collapsible steering column to meet the standard, hence the common use of the term 'collapsible column' to refer to our requirements. However, it should be noted that the standard is also being complied with by steering control systems employing other methods of energy-absorption including energy-absorbing rims and a collapsible bellows located forward of the steering wheel hub.; Regarding your request for a copy of the National Highway Safety Burea 'Program Plan for Motor Vehicle Safety Standards,' This plan is a working document and represents the presently scheduled rulemaking actions to be issued by our Motor Vehicle Programs activity during the period of 1970-1972. I am pleased to enclose a copy as you requested.; I appreciate the opportunity to clarify some of my interview remark and I enjoy reading Mr. Smith's comments.; Sincerely, Douglas W. Toms, Director |
|
ID: aiam2269OpenHonorable Vance Hartke, Chairman, Surface Transportation Subcommittee, Committee on Commerce, United States Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510; Honorable Vance Hartke Chairman Surface Transportation Subcommittee Committee on Commerce United States Senate Washington D.C. 20510; Dear Senator Hartke: This is in response to your letter of March 30, 1976, enclosing letter from Mr. Dennis Oser concerning the effective date of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 119, *New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars.*; Standard No. 119 became effective March 1, 1975, and applies t non-passenger-car tires manufactured on and after that date. From his reference to 'April 1, 1976', Mr. Oser appears to be concerned with the effective dates of 49 CFR 393.75, a regulation issued by the FEderal Highway Administration's Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety (BMCS). That regulation addresses the type of tires with which motor vehicles in use in interstate commerce must be equipped. Accordingly, I have forwarded your letter to the BMCS for further reply.; Sincerely, James B. Gregory, Administrator |
|
ID: aiam5056OpenMr. Preston Golder Road Reflectors P.O. Box 493 Farmingville, N.Y. 11738; Mr. Preston Golder Road Reflectors P.O. Box 493 Farmingville N.Y. 11738; Dear Mr. Golder: This responds to your letter of September 14, 1992 asking about the legality under Federal law of your 'Auto Neon System', an accessory which reflects a glow from under the vehicle. We answered an inquiry from Mr. Allan Schwartz about a similar device, in a letter dated April 21, 1992. I enclose a copy of our response to Mr. Schwartz for your information. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel Enclosure; |
|
ID: aiam2793OpenMr. Tokio Iinuma, Nissan Motor Co., Ltd., P.O. Box 1606, 560 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632; Mr. Tokio Iinuma Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. P.O. Box 1606 560 Sylvan Avenue Englewood Cliffs NJ 07632; Dear Mr. Iinuma: This responds to Nissan Motor Company's March 9, 1978, request fo confirmation that section 581.5(c)(9) of Part 581, *Bumper Standard*, does not prohibit deformation of 'hood ledge' sheet metal which is spot welded to the reinforced panel that transfers bumper impact forces from the bumper shock absorber unit to the vehicle frame.; As I understand the function and location of the 'hood ledge' shee metal, it is not a component of the vehicle that is regulated by Part 581. It is not an exterior surface of the vehicle or any of the other components or aspects of the vehicle regulated by paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(8). It is also not a 'fastener or joint' regulated by paragraph (c)(9). With this understanding, the deformation you describe would not be prohibited by any portion of Part 581.; In a telephone conversation with Mr. Herlihy of this office, you aske if a prior interpretation to Nissan of the limitation on permissible 'dent' had been in error. Section 581.5(c)(11)(ii) states that dent is measured from a reference line 'connecting the bumper contours adjoining any such contact area'. Our December 1, 1977, interpretation to Nissan agreed that the line extends from any two points of contact of the impact ridge following impact, as opposed to contact just preceding impact. You noted a preamble discussion of May 12, 1977, (42 FR at 24058) that suggests a reference line be established across the area of impact prior to impact.; The preamble language you cited was only our suggestion of how manufacturer might establish a reference line for measurement purposes, rather than the 'definitional' line specified in the standard that establishes the dimensions of the dent. I would note that establishing this line prior to impact could greatly reduce the effective area which would qualify for treatment as a dent. For example, in the case of a convex surface the initial point of contact could be limited to the point of the impact ridge.; I would like to make another clarification of our December discussio on this point. While we agreed that the line designated 'D' would be the line specified by the standard, it appears that additional area (lying along the lower slope of the impact ridge) might have contacted the impact ridge during impact. The agency would consider this area to qualify as a portion of the dent area. It is because of such cases, where dynamic events affect the measurement, that the agency suggested the use of paint or another surface contact marking mechanism to measure areas of contact.; Sincerely, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3881OpenMr. Neal McCormick, Colorado Department of Education, 303 West Colfax Avenue, Denver, Co 80204; Mr. Neal McCormick Colorado Department of Education 303 West Colfax Avenue Denver Co 80204; Dear Mr. McCormick: This responds to your November 21, 1984 letter to the National Highwa Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) concerning the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) applicable to school buses. Our answers follow your specific questions which we have restated below.; 1. Do the Federal school bus standards in fact preclude a schoo district from transporting pupils in vehicles not meeting all school bus standards?; To begin, I would like to explain that there are two sets o regulations, issued under different Acts of Congress, that could affect a school district's choice of buses. The first of these are the motor vehicle safety standards to which you refer in your letter. These safety standards were issued by our agency under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (Public Law 89-563, 15 U.S.C. 1381-1426) and apply to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles. In a 1974 amendment to the Act, Congress expressly directed us to issue standards on specific aspects of school bus safety, including emergency exits, seating systems, windows and windshields, and bus structure. The standards we issued became effective April 1, 1977, and apply to each school bus manufactured on or after that date. If a school district plans to buy a *new* bus for use as an activity bus, the manufacturer and dealer must certify that the bus complies with the motor vehicle safety standards applicable to school buses. The Federal sanctions are directed against the dealer or manufacturer who sells a new noncomplying bus to a school for school use. Strictly speaking, a school district is not prohibited by our school bus safety standards from operating a noncomplying school bus.; There might, however, be an impediment under State law, if Colorado ha adopted the provisions of the standard on school transportation issued by our agency under the Highway Safety Act (Public Law 89-564, 23 U.S.C. 401-408). This standard, Highway Safety Program Standard No. 17 (HSPS 17), specifies that a bus used to transport more than 16 pupils to and from school should be painted yellow, be equipped with special mirrors and warning lights, and be marked 'School Bus.' Therefore, although the Vehicle Safety Act would not prevent a school district from operating a noncomplying school bus, HSPS 17 might affect your school districts if Colorado has adopted it and if Colorado accepts our view that the specifications apply to activity buses. I have enclosed a copy of HSPS 17 that was photocopied from volume 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1204.4, as requested by your associate, Mr. Joseph Marchese.; If Colorado chooses to exempt activity buses from being painted signed, and equipped as school buses, we might disagree with the wisdom of its decision but we would not insist on compliance with HSPS 17 to the extent of taking action against the State. Congress has given us discretion under the Highway Safety Act not to insist that a State comply with every requirement of the highway safety standards. While we have stressed the importance of a strong pupil transportation program, consistent with HSPS 17, we have not insisted that the States comply with every feature of the standard.; Having said this, however, I would like to restate the importance tha our agency attaches to the use of safe buses to transport children. It remains the agency's position that a yellow school bus meeting the motor vehicle safety standards is the safest means of transportation for school children. Such a bus has safety features such as seat backs designed to cushion impacts, windows that prevent ejections, and exits that facilitate escape after crashes. In the years since buses began to be manufactured with these features, there has been a marked improvement in school bus safety. These are features that school districts should consider when deciding to purchase their school vehicles.; 2. May a state set out definitions of vehicles (for transportation o pupils) which do not meet all applicable school bus standards? If not, what penalties may be applied?; Our Federal motor vehicle safety regulations define a bus as a moto vehicle designed to carry more than 10 persons and further define a school bus as a bus that is sold for the purposes of carrying students to and from school or related events. The decision of a State not to adopt the Federal classification has no affect on the application of the Federal school bus safety standards to that vehicle. The Federal school bus safety standards would apply to vehicles that meet the Federal definition of a school bus, regardless of whether the vehicle is considered a school bus under state regulations. Of course, the Federal standards apply only to those vehicles that were manufactured after the effective date of the standards, April 1, 1977.; Section 103(d) of the Vehicle Safety Act states generally that no Stat shall have in effect any State standard regulating an aspect of performance that is regulated by a Federal safety standard unless the State standard is identical to the Federal standard. State standards that are not identical are preempted by the Safety Act unless they impose a higher level of safety and are applicable only to vehicles procured for the State's own use.; The preemptive effect of section 103(d) is not altered by the fact tha a vehicle classified as a school bus under the Safety Act is classified as some other type of motor vehicle under State law. A State decision to adopt all or none of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards applicable to a type of motor vehicle has no effect on the necessity under the Safety Act of manufacturing such a motor vehicle in accordance with the Federal standards.; 3. If a local educational agency acquires a vehicle not meeting al applicable school bus safety standards and uses it for transporting pupils, what penalties may be applied? Would such penalties apply if the vehicle is used for 'activity' transportation only?; As we explained above, the school district that purchases and uses noncomplying school bus would not be subject to Federal sanctions under the Vehicle Safety Act. It is only illegal for a manufacturer or dealer to sell such a vehicle to a school knowing that the school will use it to transport students. Any person selling new vehicles for use in school transportation which fail to comply with all applicable safety standards is violating the Vehicle Safety Act and is subject to a maximum penalty of $1,000 per violation. Further, in regard to the second part of this question, the answer is yes. The penalties would apply to a person selling a new bus to a school for school related activity trips if that bus is not certified to the Federal safety standards.; You should note that although a school district would not be subject t Federal sanctions under the Safety Act for buying and using a noncomplying bus, using such a vehicle as a school bus could result in increased liability in the event of an accident. You might want to consult your attorney and insurance company to discuss this matter.; 4. If a local educational agency acquires a vehicle meeting al applicable school bus standards and modifies such a vehicle, is there a penalty? For example, replacement of 222 seating with seats not in compliance with the 222 standards.; The answer is no. Nothing in the Vehicle Safety Act prohibits an owner such as a school, from modifying its own vehicles. However, the Act does prohibit dealers, manufacturers and motor vehicle repair shops from knowingly rendering inoperative any element of design installed in compliance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard. The school can replace the seats of the original school bus with seats that do not comply with FMVSS No. 222 if it so desires. As we pointed out above, the school could be subject to increased liability in case of an accident. We suggest that you discuss this matter with your attorney or insurance agency.; 5. Is NHTSA at present considering any amendments to the existin standards for school buses? Also, are any additional standards likely to be promulgated with the next year?; Our agency has recently received a petition for rulemaking requestin that FMVSS No. 222 be amended to set certain specifications for seat belt performance on large school buses if seat belts are voluntarily installed on these vehicles. The decision to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking will be made by NHTSA in the course of the rulemaking proceeding, in accordance with statutory criteria.; 6. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has set out severa recommendations for 'activity' buses. Does NHTSA concur in these recommendations? (These refer to certification/training of mechanics, etc.); Enclosed is a copy of a November 2, 1984 letter from NHTSA' administrator, Diane K. Steed, to Chairman Burnett of the National Transportation Safety Board, which comments on several recommendations NTSB made regarding school bus repairs, certification of mechanics, instruction on emergency equipment use, et cetera. I believe this letter will discuss your concerns thoroughly.; If you have any further questions, do not hesitate to contact m office.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|