NHTSA's Interpretation Files Search

ID: 571.205--Low Speed Windshield Clarification --Burgess

October 28, 2022

Mr. Dave Burgess
Burgess Consulting
Unit 6, Benford Court
Warwick CV34 5DA
United Kingdom

Dear Mr. Burgess,

I write in response to your email to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) asking about federal requirements for windshields in low-speed vehicles (LSVs). Please note that our answer below is based on our understanding of the specific information provided in your initial and subsequent email correspondence.

Background

NHTSA is authorized by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act, 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301) to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. The Safety Act requires manufacturers to self-certify that their vehicles and equipment conform to all applicable FMVSS in effect on the date of manufacture. NHTSA also investigates safety-related defects.

Your email correspondence, dated June 17, 2022, laid out several questions relating to LSVs and FMVSS 500, including: (1) whether LSVs must be fitted with a windshield; (2) if fitted with a windshield, whether LSVs must comply with 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)

§ 571.500; and (3) if a fitted windshield is required, what, if any, are the size and position requirements for the windshield?

In response, on July 25, 2022, NHTSA asked via email for further clarification on the number of wheels and maximum capable speed for the specific vehicle referenced in your correspondence. You provided written confirmation to NHTSA that the vehicle at issue has four wheels, is capable of a maximum speed of no more than 25 miles per hour, and subsequently confirmed that the vehicle has a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) that is less than 1,361 kilograms (3,000 pounds).

Discussion

49 CFR § 571.3 defines an LSV as a motor vehicle that: (1) is four wheeled; (2) has a speed attainable in 1.6 kilometers (1 mile)1 that is more than 32 kilometers per hour (20 miles per hour) and not more than 40 kilometers per hour (25 miles per hour) on a paved level surface; and (3) has a GVWR that is less than 1,361 kilograms (3,000 pounds). A vehicle must meet all three criteria to qualify as an LSV.

A vehicle that meets the definition of an LSV must be manufactured to conform to 49 CFR § 571.500, which, among other things, requires LSVs to be equipped with a windshield that conforms to paragraph S5.4 of FMVSS No. 205 on glazing materials. Specifically, FMVSS No. 205 applies to glazing installed in motor vehicles prior to first purchase and also to aftermarket glazing for use in motor vehicles. The standard incorporates by reference an industry standard, the “American National Standards Institute American National Standard for Safety Glazing Materials for Glazing Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment Operating on Land Highways-Safety Standard” (ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996). FMVSS 205 S5.4 specifically notes that windshields of LSVs must meet the ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 specifications for either AS-1 or AS-4 glazing.

In summary, if a vehicle qualifies as an LSV under the definition laid out in 49 CFR § 571.3, it must meet the requirements outlined in 49 CFR § 571.500, which include a windshield that conforms to paragraph S5.4 of FMVSS No. 205. Specifically, LSV windshields must meet the ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 specifications for either AS-1 or AS-4 glazing. No specific federal requirements exist concerning the size or position of windshields for LSVs.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Natasha Reed of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

John Donaldson
Acting Chief Counsel

Dated: 10/28/22

Ref: FMVSS No. 205

1 See 49 CFR 571.500 S7. Test Procedure, stating that “[e]ach vehicle must meet the performance limit specified in S5(a) under the following test procedure. The maximum speed performance is determined by measuring the maximum attainable vehicle speed at any point in a distance of 1.6 km (1.0 mile) from a standing start and repeated in the opposite direction within 30 minutes.”

ID: 571.108--Convertible CHMSL Beam Angle--Magna

April 3, 2023

Doris C. Schaller 

Homologation

Magna Steyr Engineering AG & Co KG

Liebenauer Hauptstrasse 317

8041 Graz Austria 

Dear Ms. Schaller:

This responds to your request for an interpretation regarding the permissibility, under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment, of two proposed variants for mounting the center high-mounted stop lamp (CHMSL) on a soft top convertible. Based on the information you provided in your letter, as explained in more detail below, we have concluded that mounting the CHMSL on the “service lid” is permissible under FMVSS No. 108, whereas mounting the CHMSL on the “soft top cover” is not.

Background
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment (see 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301). NHTSA does  not provide approval of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, and NHTSA does not determine compliance of a vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment outside the context of an actual enforcement proceeding. Instead, manufacturers are required to self-certify that their products conform to all applicable safety standards that are in effect on the date of manufacture. The following represents NHTSA’s opinion regarding the applicability FMVSS No. 108 requirements to your CHMSL designs based on the information you have provided.

FMVSS No. 108 specifies requirements for original and replacement lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment. Paragraph S6.1.3.1 of FMVSS No. 108 contains requirements for the mounting location of all required lamps, including CHMSLs, and states specifically that:

Each lamp, reflective device, and item of associated equipment must be securely mounted on a rigid part of the vehicle, other than glazing, that is not designed to be

removed except for repair, within the mounting location and height limits as specified in Table 1, and in a location where it complies with all applicable photometric requirements, effective projected luminous lens area requirements, and visibility requirements with all obstructions considered.

You ask how S6.1.3.1 applies to two possible lighting design variations. Although you ask that certain information in your interpretation request be treated as confidential, we do not need to reveal or reference the information other than in general descriptive terms in order to answer your questions. What follows is our interpretation based on our understanding of the facts you provided.

Variant 1: CHMSL mounted on the “service lid”
The first variant you describe places the CHMSL on the vehicle’s “service lid,” which we understand to be an access panel that is fixed in place during normal vehicle operation and that can be opened only with a specialized tool by technicians at certified repair shops. From the illustrations provided with your request, it appears that the service lid is located between the trunk and the passenger cabin at the rear of the vehicle.

You state that you believe that a configuration in which the CHMSL is located on the vehicle’s service lid complies with the mounting location requirement in S6.1.3.1 of FMVSS No. 108. We agree. As noted above, S6.1.3.1 of FMVSS No. 108 states that required lamps “must be securely mounted on a rigid part of the vehicle, other than glazing, that is not designed to be removed except for repair.” NHTSA believes that the service lid is “a rigid part of the vehicle,” based on the information that you have provided, which suggests that the service lid is similar (albeit adjacent) to a trunk lid. NHTSA has previously interpreted a vehicle’s “deck lid” (i.e., trunk lid) as a rigid part of the vehicle,[1] and while the service lid you describe is not a trunk lid, we believe that interpretation covers other similar lids on a vehicle, such as the service lid, that are solid and cannot be easily removed. Additionally, you expressly describe the service lid as “only [able to] be moved with special tools in qualified garages,” which is consistent with the “not designed to be removed except for repair” requirement.  Therefore, so long as the CHMSL meets all photometric and other requirements, NHTSA believes that it would be permissible under FMVSS No. 108 to mount the CHMSL on the vehicle’s service lid.

Variant 2: CHMSL mounted on the “soft top cover”
The second variant you describe places the CHMSL on the “soft top cover,” which we understand to be the lid that covers the compartment at the rear of the vehicle in which the convertible soft top is stored while it is open (i.e., retracted). In this variant, the CHMSL would comply with all applicable photometric requirements while the soft top cover is fully open or closed.  However, for the approximately 20-second duration of the soft top opening or closing process, the soft top cover tips backward, causing the CHMSL to be temporarily out of compliance with photometric requirements. The driver can initiate the opening or closing process when the vehicle is traveling at speeds of up to 50 kilometers per hour. From your description, there is no auxiliary CHMSL in operation while the soft top cover is in the process of opening or closing.

Based on the information you have provided, this second variant is not permissible. As noted above, S6.1.3.1 of FMVSS No. 108 states that a required lamp must be mounted “in a location where it complies with all applicable photometric requirements, effective projected luminous lens area requirements, and visibility requirements with all obstructions considered.” If there are obstructions that would cause the lamp to fail to meet photometric and visibility requirements, S6.2.2 of FMVSS No. 108 requires that “the vehicle must be equipped with an additional lamp or device of the same type which meet[s] all applicable requirements of this standard, including photometry and visibility.”

In a past interpretation request, a vehicle manufacturer sought to install a CHMSL on a movable rear spoiler, such that it would occasionally not comply with the photometric requirements for CHMSLs. The manufacturer stated that it would employ an additional CHMSL that met the requirements when the “primary” CHMSL on the movable spoiler did not. NHTSA responded[2] that this approach to compliance would be permissible under what is now S6.2.23 of FMVSS No. 108, which states that “If any required lamp…is obstructed by motor vehicle equipment…, and cannot meet the applicable photometry and visibility requirements, the vehicle must be equipped with an additional lamp … which meet[s] all applicable requirements of the standard, including photometry and visibility.”4 The situation you describe, where the CHMSL on the soft top will occasionally not comply with FMVSS No. 108, is similar to the one described above, except that it does not appear that your vehicle is equipped with an auxiliary CHMSL. Accordingly, it is our conclusion that the “soft top cover” CHMSL mounting variant is not permissible under FMVSS No. 108.

If you have further questions, you may refer them to Eli Wachtel of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Ann Carlson

Chief Counsel

Dated: 4/3/23

Ref: FMVSS No. 108

[1] See letter to M. Iwase (Sept. 15, 1988), available at https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/2954o

[2] Letter to Michael Love (July 7, 1992), available at https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/nht92-528. 3 The original reference was to S5.3.1.1.

ID: 11799.MLS

Mr. Tom Byrne
Vice President
Goodridge (USA) Inc.
20309 Gramercy
Torrance, CA 90501

Dear Mr. Byrne:

This responds to your April 19, 1996 request for an interpretation of certain hydraulic brake hose labeling requirements in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 106, ABrake Hoses.@

You ask whether a hydraulic brake hose that is sold as part of a brake hose assembly would meet the requirements of S5.2.1 and S5.2.2 if it has the stripes specified in S5.2.1 but does not include the information in S5.2.2(a) through (e). The answer is yes.

Hydraulic brake hoses must be marked with: (1) two stripes meeting the requirements of '5.2.1 of Standard No. 106, unless the hose is of a type excluded under that paragraph; and (2) the information set forth in '5.2.2(a) through (e), until the hose is made into a brake hose assembly. After such assembly, the labeling information of '5.2.2(a) through (e) Aneed not be present on hose . . . .@ (See last sentence of '5.2.2.) However, the hose must continue to have the stripes required by '5.2.1. In addition, the hose assembly would have to be labeled in accordance with the requirements of '5.2.4 or '5.2.4.1 for labeling hydraulic brake hose assemblies.

If you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Marvin Shaw of this office at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel

ref:106 d:5/10/96

ID: 11801-5.PJA

Ms. Jane L. Dawson
Thomas Built Buses, Inc.
P.O. Box 2450
1408 Courtesy Road
High Point, NC 27261

Dear Ms. Dawson:

This responds to your April 1, 1996, letter seeking clarification about some conclusions contained in an interpretation dated March 20, 1996 from this office to Mr. Tom Turner of the Blue Bird Body Company, concerning Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 217, Bus emergency exits and window retention and release. You have correctly identified statements in the March 20, 1996, letter to Mr. Turner that should be corrected.

In the March 20 letter, we state that voluntarily installed left side emergency exit doors do not have to meet the location requirements of S5.2.3.2. You agree with that position. However, the March 20 letter then states:

voluntarily installed side exit doors would still be subject to prohibitions and requirements that apply to side exit doors generally. For example, S5.2.3.2(a)(4) prohibits installing two side exit doors "in whole or in part, within the same post and roof bow panel space." In addition, section S5.2.3.2(a)(1) requires "each" side exit door to be hinged on its forward side (not merely those doors installed pursuant to Table 1).

As you point out, the scope of all the requirements of S5.2.3.2 is limited by the introductory sentence of S5.2.3.2, which states "[a]ll emergency exits required by S5.2.3.1(a) and S5.2.3.1(b) shall meet the following criteria: . . ." (emphasis added).

You are correct that the scope of S5.2.3.2's requirements is limited by S5.2.3.2's introductory sentence, and that none of the requirements of that section apply to voluntarily installed exits. To the extent that the March 20 letter stated otherwise, it was incorrect. It would be preferable if voluntary exits conform to S5.2.3.2, so that there will be no differences in hinging, spacing and location that may confuse occupants in an emergency.

This letter also clarifies another point made in the March 20, 1996 letter to Mr. Turner. We state in the third paragraph that voluntarily installed exits on school buses "should" meet the requirements of Standard No. 217, to avoid confusing occupants who may choose the exit for emergency egress. The discussion may have implied that voluntarily installed exits are excluded from Standard No. 217's requirements, which would be incorrect.

Standard No. 217 establishes requirements "for bus emergency exits." (See section S1 of the standard.) Most of the standard's requirements apply generally to all school bus emergency exits, without regard to whether an exit is required or voluntarily installed. All the requirements that apply to exits generally, i.e., which use terms such as "each" or "any" when describing the exit to which the requirement applies, apply to voluntarily installed exits. In some instances, the standard's requirements only apply to a required school bus emergency exit (e.g., S5.5.3(a) and (c), emergency exit identification). Requirements that apply only to required exits do not apply to voluntarily installed exits.

Thank you for bringing the error to our attention. If you have further questions or concerns, please call Paul Atelsek of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin
Chief Counsel

cc: Mr. Thomas D. Turner
Blue Bird Body Company

ref:217
d:8/1/96

NCC-20:PAtelsek:6-2992:5/1/96: revised 7/22/96

OCC# 11801.pja
cc: NCC-01 Subject/chron
NCC-20 P.Atelsek
NRM-01; NSA-01

Interp. Std. 217, Redbook (2)

A:\11801­5.PJA

ID: 11804.ZTV

Mr. Donald W. Vierimaa
Vice President - Engineering
Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association
1020 Princess Street
Alexandria, VA 22314

Dear Mr. Vierimaa:

We have received your letter of April 15, 1996, asking for interpretations of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 as it relates to trailer lighting.

You have informed us of "lowbed trailers [with] narrow goosenecks that are attached to a wider load deck which may be less than 15 inches above the ground." Because Table II of Standard No. 108 requires side marker lamps on trailers whose overall width is 80 inches or more to be mounted at a height of not less than 15 inches, you have asked if the lamps may be mounted at a height of less than 15 inches if the height of the mounting location is "as high as practicable."

Your question is asked with reference to a combination clearance/front side marker lamp. As we explain below, this combination lamp cannot be used to meet the requirements of Standard No. 108 in the manner you posit.

The requirement of Standard No. 108 for front side marker lamps is that they be located "as far to the front as practicable" and, at the front, "not less than 15 inches" above the road surface. Thus, the minimum mounting height is expressed as an absolute rather than, like the horizontal location, in terms of practicability. It is our observation that the gooseneck on lowbed trailers is more than 15 inches above the road surface, and that it would be practicable to mount a side marker lamp there, thus complying with the location requirements of Table II.

You have also informed us that, on the typical lowbed trailer with a gooseneck, the combination front clearance/front side marker lamp is mounted at an angle on the front corners of the deck. The manufacturer chooses this location because "[i]f front clearance lamps were mounted on the front face of the deck directly behind the tires of the towing vehicle, they would likely be damaged by debris thrown by the towing vehicle's tires." Based upon certain NHTSA interpretations which you quoted, you asked for confirmation that a combination lamp mounted at such a location complies with Standard No. 108 "without needing to be visible at 45 degrees inboard."

Upon review, we did not find that the interpretations you quoted really provided confirmation of the interpretation that you seek. However, you also called our attention to the following:

"Clearance lamps may be mounted at a location other than on the front and rear . . . for protection from damage during normal operation of the vehicle, and at such a location they need not be visible at 45 degrees inboard." (49 CFR 571.108, S4.3.1.1.1)."

This provision (now renumbered as S5.3.1.1.1) does allow mounting clearance lamps "at a location other than on the front" if the manufacturer determines that the alternate location is needed to protect the lamp from damage during normal operation of the trailer. We believe that the lamps should also be protected from damage if the alternate location is chosen. It seems to us that mounting the clearance lamps at an angle on the front, rather than on the front involves a move of only a few inches at most, and might not provide any greater protection from road debris than mounting the clearance lamps on the front. We ask you to consider this in determining the appropriate location for the clearance lamps, keeping in mind that their primary purpose is to indicate the overall width of the trailer.

This means that a combination clearance/front side marker lamp will not meet the location requirements of Standard No. 108. A separate front side marker lamp must be provided and located on the gooseneck. A separate clearance lamp must be provided, and located in accordance with the views expressed in the preceding paragraph.

If you have any further questions you may refer them to Taylor Vinson (202) 366-5263.

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel

ref:108 d:5/28/96

ID: 11806WKM

Mr. D. L. O'Connor
Manager
Government & Customer Compliance
The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company
Akron, OH 44316-0001

Dear Mr. O'Connor:

This responds to your telephone conversation with Walter Myers of my staff on April 18, 1996, and your follow-up letter also dated April 18, 1996.

You state that Goodyear is encountering difficulties in exporting tires to Venezuela, South America, in that Venezuela wants verification from a U.S. governmental agency that Goodyear tires comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards when the DOT symbol is marked on them. You state that this is the same problem that Goodyear encountered in exporting tires to Colombia last year, and that Venezuela would accept the same type of letter from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that we issued to you last year for Colombia. You request, therefore, that we issue a letter to you similar to the one we issued last year regarding the Colombian imports.

As you requested, please find enclosed a "To Whom It May Concern" letter very similar to the one we provided you on August 9, 1995. As we explained to you at that time, the Federal government cannot and does not approve, certify or endorse vehicles and equipment as do many other countries, including the Central and South American countries. Accordingly, this statement is as far as we can go in describing the Federal government's role in what by law is essentially a manufacturer responsibility.

I hope the enclosed letter will be helpful to you. Should you have further questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact Mr. Myers at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel

Enclosure

ref:571 d:4/30/96

ID: 11807A.SPW

Mr. John Hrabosky
Earth Tool Company LLC
Post Office Box 3
Oconomowoc, WI 53066

Dear Mr. Hrabosky:

This responds to your letter of April 9, 1996, addressed to Walter Myers of my staff, in which you ask what "D.O.T. safety standards [do you] need to be aware of" in producing a vehicle you refer to as a "winch trailer."

You enclosed pictures of your winch trailer, which can be described as a single-axle enclosed trailer whose dimensions are estimated to be approximately 6 to 8 feet long, 5 feet wide, and 4 feet high. The metal enclosure is equipped with side hatches and a back door that open to provide access to the winch and associated tools and equipment mounted inside. The pictures show the trailer hitched to a pickup truck in preparation for towing. You state that the purpose of the winch trailer is "to aid in utility replacement." You also state that the trailer is equipped with electric brakes, has a gross vehicle weight of approximately 4,000 pounds, and has a tongue weight of approximately 250 pounds.

In response to your question about applicable standards, we are enclosing a fact sheet entitled "Federal Requirements for Manufacturers of Trailers," which lists the standards and regulations applicable to trailers. Copies of the listed standards and regulations may be obtained by following the instructions in the enclosed fact sheet entitled "Where to Obtain NHTSA's Safety Standards and Regulations." A copy of the cover of the volume you will need is attached to this fact sheet. The cost of the volume is approximately $40.00.

In addition, we are enclosing the following pertinent information for motor vehicle manufacturers:

a. Chapter 301 of Title 49, U.S. Code (the statutory provisions under which NHTSA has issued its safety standards and regulations); and

b. Fact sheet entitled "Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment."

Should you have any further questions or need additional information, feel free to contact this office at the address shown above or at (202) 366-2992, FAX (202) 366-3820.

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel

Enclosures

Ref:VSA d:5/9/96

ID: 11814.ZTV

Mr. William J. Schultz
Principal Engineer
United States Motorcycle Manufacturers Association
Dept. 704
3700 W. Juneau Avenue
Milwaukee, WI 53208

Dear Mr. Schultz:

This is in reply to your letter of April 4, 1996, asking for an interpretation of Table IV of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 as it applies to the location of reflex reflectors on motorcycles.

You point out that agency interpretations permit front turn signal lamps and headlamps "to rotate about the steering axis as long as they are within the location limits specified in the regulation". You ask for confirmation that this interpretation is equally applicable to front side reflex reflectors.

The answer is yes. Table IV requires front side reflex reflectors to be located "on each side. . . as far to the front as practicable." Conformance is determined with the front wheel in the straight-ahead position. The determination of practicability of location is initially that of the motorcycle manufacturer and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration will not question it unless it is clearly erroneous. Thus, a front side reflex reflector may be mounted on a portion of the motorcycle that turns if the manufacturer determines that that location is as far to the front as practicable, even though, during a turn, that reflector may not be visible from the side of the motorcycle.

If you have any questions, you may refer them to Taylor Vinson of this Office (202-366-5263).

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel ref:108 d:5/10/96

ID: 11815.ZTV

Mr. Tom Barron
320 Putnam
Springdale, Arkansas 72764

Dear Mr. Barron:

Thank you for your letter mailed April 10, 1996, telling the Department of Transportation of your "Saf-T-Lit" invention. This consists of a two-lamp unit containing a stop lamp and a turn signal lamp. These lamps would be mounted on each side of a semi trailer, at the top. In your view, they are needed because the original equipment lamps mounted at the bottom of a trailer may be obscured by intervening traffic, or by snow or fog.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is the agency within the Department that establishes the Federal motor vehicle safety standards that apply to the manufacture of vehicles, including trailers. The Federal Highway Administration is the agency that establishes similar standards for the operation of commercial motor vehicles, including trailers, in interstate commerce.

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment , is the safety standard that applies to original equipment lighting for vehicles, including trailers. Under Standard No. 108, a trailer manufacturer may locate rear turn signal lamps at any point it chooses between 15 and 83 inches above the road surface, and stop lamps between 15 and 72 inches.

Under Standard No. 108, your invention is regarded as supplementary lighting equipment, and it is permissible as original equipment if it does not "impair the effectiveness" of the other lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108. We regard original equipment as including equipment that a dealer may install after receiving a new vehicle from the factory and before the sale of the vehicle to its first purchaser. In your case, we do not believe that your invention , as you have described it to us, would impair the effectiveness of any other rear lighting equipment. However, your diagram shows your lamps in the location generally occupied by clearance lamps. Standard No. 108 requires that trailers whose overall width is 80 inches or more have a pair of clearance lamps to indicate the overall width of the vehicle and located as near the top as practicable. Thus, your invention could not be installed to replace these lamps without creating a noncompliance with Standard No. 108. We assume that your invention would therefore be mounted below these lamps.

With respect to the aftermarket, there is no Federal restriction on the sale of supplementary lamps but the question under Federal law is whether their installation by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business (this does not include the owner's own service facilities if restricted to its own vehicles) would "make inoperative" any of the lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108. Generally, we interpret "make inoperative" to equate to "impair the effectiveness". We have previously concluded that your invention is not likely to impair the effectiveness of the required lighting equipment if installed before the initial sale of a trailer, and, for this reason, we do not believe that your invention would have an inoperative effect on other rear lighting equipment when installed after the initial sale of the vehicle, keeping in mind my previous comment about the clearance lamps. The Office of Motor Carriers of the Federal Highway Administration has advised that operation of semi trailers with your invention installed would be permissible under its regulations, provided that the installation does not impair the effectiveness of the lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108.

Please bear in mind that the sale and use of supplementary lighting equipment, though permissible under Federal law, is also subject to the laws of the individual states. We are unable to advise you on state law but an interpretation can be provided by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Va. 22203.

We appreciate your writing us of your concerns and your efforts to improve safety on our nation's highways. If you have any questions, Taylor Vinson of this Office will be pleased to answer them. His phone number is 202-366-5263.

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel ref:108 d:5/16/96

ID: 11842.ZTV

Mr. John D. Higinbothom
John S. Connor, Inc.
The World Trade Center
401 E. Pratt Street
Suite 700
Baltimore, MD 21202
Ref. 554761
Dear Mr. Higinbothom:

This is in reply to your letter of April 18, 1996, with respect to scrappage of a 1993 Toyota Starlet that does not conform to the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. You stated that the vehicle is currently in a bonded warehouse, and the importer has decided to destroy the car rather than spend the money necessary to bring it into conformity with Federal standards. You have asked "whether any of the parts on the car can be used on other vehicles".

The brake hoses, lamps and reflectors, tires, glazing, and seat belt assemblies may be permanently imported if they are marked with a DOT symbol. This constitutes the equipment manufacturer's certification of compliance that the equipment complies with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, and it is permissible to import DOT-marked equipment even if the vehicle from which it is taken has not been certified by the vehicle manufacturer as meeting Federal standards. However, the remainder of the vehicle (or the entire vehicle, if none of the parts listed above) must be exported.

If you have any questions, please call Taylor Vinson of this Office (202-366-5263).

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel

ref:591#VSA d:5/23/96