Interpretation ID: 23277.ztv
Mr. John J. Sobotik
Assistant General Counsel
Wisconsin Department of Transportation
4802 Sheboygan Avenue, Rm. 1158
P.O. Box 7910
Madison, WI 53707-7910
Re: State Motor Vehicle Safety Standards Stop Lamp Colors
Dear Mr. Sobotik:
This is in reply to your letter of June 4, 2001, asking whether legislation recently introduced in Wisconsin would violate Federal law. The legislation would be similar to that adopted in 1999 by Minnesota.
Specifically, Minnesota Statutes 1998, section 169.64, subdivision 4 was amended to add a new paragraph (c) which reads: "A motorcycle may display a blue light of up to one inch diameter as part of the motorcycle's rear brake light." Wisconsin 2001 Assembly Bill 102 would amend 347.14(2) of the statutes to include the sentence "The stop lamp for a motorcycle may emit, in addition to red or amber light, a blue light that is located in the center of the lamp and that comprises less than 10% of the surface of the lamp."
Your initial analysis is that Wisconsin could not adopt this legislation, but you are unsure of this conclusion because of uncertainty whether the U.S. Department of Transportation has challenged the Minnesota law. Accordingly, you have asked four questions:
If Wisconsin adopts a law permitting the use of blue color on all or part of a motorcycle stop lamp, is the state prescribing a standard that is not identical to the federal standard for motorcycle stop lamps?
The answer is yes. Table III of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 (49 CFR 571.108) allows only red as a color for motorcycle stop lamps. A state standard permitting a stop lamp to emit either blue or amber light would not be identical to the Federal standard for motorcycle stop lamps, and hence would not be permitted under 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1). Assembly Bill 102 indicates that Wisconsin law may already permit amber as a color for motorcycle stop lamps.
Would permitting the use of blue color on all or part of a motorcycle stop lamp constitute the establishment of a standard higher than the otherwise applicable federal standard?
No. Permitting the use of blue color (or amber) would establish a state standard that is not identical to the Federal standard covering the same aspect of performance as the federal standard. Even if the use of blue (or amber) was regarded as establishing a higher standard of performance than the use of red, the exception in 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1) that a state may enact a standard of higher performance than the otherwise applicable Federal standard is not an exception of general application but one that applies only to vehicles a state or one of its political subdivisions obtains for its own use.
If adopting a law permitting the use of a blue color on all or part of a motorcycle stop lamp is considered by NHTSA to be the establishment of a standard that is not identical to or higher than the federal standard, what actions could theoretically be taken by NHTSA in response to Wisconsin adopting such a law?
Because 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1) allows a state to prescribe a state standard applicable to the same aspect of performance as a Federal standard only if the standard is identical to the Federal standard, the Department of the Transportation could seek to enjoin Wisconsin from giving effect to a law permitting the use of a blue color on a motorcycle stop lamp, or from continuing in effect a law permitting the use of amber for a motorcycle stop lamp.
What repercussions could befall individuals or entities that buy or sell motorcycles bearing stop lamps that have been altered to have a blue center?
We understand that a lighting accessory is available that consists of a clear blue circle which can be inserted in the middle of a red lens through which a blue light is emitted when the tail or stop lamp is activated. A motorcycle dealer must ensure that a motorcycle continues to meet all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards at the time the motorcycle is sold to its first purchaser for purposes other than resale. Thus, a dealer selling a new motorcycle whose stop lamp has been altered to have a blue center would be considered under Federal law to be violating Standard No. 108. The dealer must also ensure that replacement lighting equipment that it sells is designed to conform to Standard No. 108. We are authorized to impose a civil penalty of up to $5,000 per violation, up to $15,000,000 for any related series of violations, such as would occur with sales of noncomplying vehicles or replacement equipment. However, sale of an accessory that alters lamp color is not prohibited, even if its installation in a stop lamp would create a noncompliance with Standard No. 108. There are no Federal restrictions that apply to the sale of a motorcycle subsequent to its first purchase, even if it were originally equipped with a noncomplying stop lamp.
As for modifications of vehicles and equipment originally manufactured to conform, after their first sale for purposes other than resale, 49 U.S.C. 30122 prohibits dealers (and manufacturers, distributors, and motor vehicle repair businesses as well) from making inoperative any device or element of design installed in accordance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard. However, the statute does not prohibit a motorcycle owner from such alterations. Thus, an owner would not violate Federal law either by installing a stop lamp altered to have a blue center, or by inserting a blue center in the original stop lamp. The validity of owner modifications affecting compliance with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards is determinable under state law. Under your hypothetical scenario, there would be no violation of a state law permitting a stop lamp with a blue center. However, as noted earlier, we would view the sale of such a stop lamp as a violation of Federal law.
In closing, let me note that this Office was not aware of the 1999 Minnesota amendment until you brought it to our attention.
If you have any further questions, you may refer them to Taylor Vinson of this Office (202-366-5263).
Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
ref:108
d.9/28/01