Skip to main content

NHTSA Interpretation File Search

Overview

NHTSA's Chief Counsel interprets the statutes that the agency administers and the standards and regulations that it issues. Members of the public may submit requests for interpretation, and the Chief Counsel will respond with a letter of interpretation. These interpretation letters look at the particular facts presented in the question and explain the agency’s opinion on how the law applies given those facts. These letters of interpretation are guidance documents. They do not have the force and effect of law and are not meant to bind the public in any way. They are intended only to provide information to the public regarding existing requirements under the law or agency policies. 

Understanding NHTSA’s Online Interpretation Files

NHTSA makes its letters of interpretation available to the public on this webpage. 

An interpretation letter represents the opinion of the Chief Counsel based on the facts of individual cases at the time the letter was written. While these letters may be helpful in determining how the agency might answer a question that another person has if that question is similar to a previously considered question, do not assume that a prior interpretation will necessarily apply to your situation.

  • Your facts may be sufficiently different from those presented in prior interpretations, such that the agency's answer to you might be different from the answer in the prior interpretation letter;
  • Your situation may be completely new to the agency and not addressed in an existing interpretation letter;
  • The agency's safety standards or regulations may have changed since the prior interpretation letter was written so that the agency's prior interpretation no longer applies; or
  • Some combination of the above, or other, factors.

Searching NHTSA’s Online Interpretation Files

Before beginning a search, it’s important to understand how this online search works. Below we provide some examples of searches you can run. In some cases, the search results may include words similar to what you searched because it utilizes a fuzzy search algorithm.

Single word search

 Example: car
 Result: Any document containing that word.

Multiple word search

 Example: car seat requirements
 Result: Any document containing any of these words.

Connector word search

 Example: car AND seat AND requirements
 Result: Any document containing all of these words.

 Note: Search operators such as AND or OR must be in all capital letters.

Phrase in double quotes

 Example: "headlamp function"
 Result: Any document with that phrase.

Conjunctive search

Example: functionally AND minima
Result: Any document with both of those words.

Wildcard

Example: headl*
Result: Any document with a word beginning with those letters (e.g., headlamp, headlight, headlamps).

Example: no*compl*
Result: Any document beginning with the letters “no” followed by the letters “compl” (e.g., noncompliance, non-complying).

Not

Example: headlamp NOT crash
Result: Any document containing the word “headlamp” and not the word “crash.”

Complex searches

You can combine search operators to write more targeted searches.

Note: The database does not currently support phrase searches with wildcards (e.g., “make* inoperative”). 

Example: Headl* AND (supplement* OR auxiliary OR impair*)
Result: Any document containing words that are variants of “headlamp” (headlamp, headlights, etc.) and also containing a variant of “supplement” (supplement, supplemental, etc.) or “impair” (impair, impairment, etc.) or the word “auxiliary.”

Search Tool

NHTSA's Interpretation Files Search



Displaying 101 - 110 of 6047
Interpretations Date

ID: nht91-6.31

Open

DATE: October 21, 1991

FROM: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Frank Kenney -- Sporting Tailors Manufacturing Co.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 6-29-90 from Paul Jackson Rice to Ed McCarron (Std. 302); Also attached to copy of 49 CFR 571.302, pages 517-519, Flammability of interior materials; Also attached to letter dated 8-12-91 from Frank Kenney to NHTSA Office of the Chief Counsel (OCC 6356)

TEXT:

This responds to your letter concerning the applicability of Federal motor vehicle safety standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials, (49 CFR 571.302, copy enclosed) to your product, a roll bar top or "Bikini Top" for use on vehicles such as Jeep Wranglers. You explained that the material would consist of three layers: a vinyl top layer, a flame retardant middle layer, and a brushed nylon tricot black backing as the lower layer. In addition, a binding fabric strip would be sewn around the edges of the roll bar top to lend stability and a finished appearance. You also explained that you may supply a tote bag in which the bikini top could be stored. Your questions are addressed below.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has no authority to certify or approve motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment for compliance with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the Safety Act; 15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.) establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that each of its products complies with all applicable safety standards. This agency periodically tests vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment for compliance with the safety standards, and also investigates alleged defects related to motor vehicle safety.

The Safety Act also gives this agency authority to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. The agency has exercised this authority to establish Standard No. 302. That standard sets forth flammability resistance requirements applicable to all new motor vehicles.

If your bikini top is added to a new vehicle, i.e., before the vehicle is sold for the first time to a consumer, then it must comply with Standard No. 302. That standard applies to certain vehicle occupant compartment components, including convertible tops, on new motor vehicles. Your bikini top would be considered a convertible top. Persons selling new vehicles equipped with your convertible top would need to ensure that the vehicles, including your top, conform to Standard No. 302.

Standard No. 302 does not directly apply to aftermarket items of motor vehicle equipment, i.e., accessories or additions to motor vehicles sold to owners of used vehicles. Nevertheless, section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act could affect the use of a product such as yours sold in the

aftermarket. That section prohibits manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or repair shops from knowingly "rendering inoperative" devices or elements of design that were installed in a motor vehicle to comply with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. NHTSA does not consider it to be a violation of the "render inoperative" prohibition when a dealer adds a convertible top which enables a vehicle to continue to meet Standard No. 302 and the other safety standards.

The prohibitions of section 108(a)(2)(A) do not apply to the actions of a vehicle owner in adding to or otherwise modifying his or her vehicle. Thus, a vehicle owner would not violate the Safety Act by installing your bikini top, even if doing so would negatively affect the safety features of his or her vehicle.

You should be aware that, as the manufacturer of an aftermarket item of motor vehicle equipment, you are subject to the requirements in sections 151-159 of the Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects relating to motor vehicle safety. In the event that you or NHTSA determines that your product contains a safety related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. I note that, whether or not Standard No. 302 applies to your convertible top, the product's flammability characteristics could be relevant to whether it contained a safety related defect.

I will now address you specific questions about Standard No. 302, on the assumption that the standard applies to your product. After explaining your belief that the main part of the material complies with Standard No. 302, you asked whether the binding fabric strip sewn all around the edges of the roll would also have to be made flame retardant. As explained below, the binding fabric strip would have to comply with Standard No. 302.

Under sections S4.1 and S4.2, any portion of a convertible top which is within 1/2 inch of the occupant compartment air space must meet the standard's flammability requirements. It is our opinion that the binding fabric strip sewn around the edges of your convertible top would be part of the convertible top and thus subject to this provision. I note that it is the agency's longstanding interpretation that a component "incorporated into" a component that is listed in section S4.1 of Standard No. 302 is subject to the standard. A June 29, 1990 interpretation to Mr. Ed McCarron (copy enclosed) explains this policy in the context of a mattress. In particular, that interpretation addressed whether a fabric "corner reinforcement" that is stitched on the outside of the mattress cover was subject to Standard No. 302. In answering in the affirmative, the interpretation explained that the corner reinforcement is incorporated into the mattress cover through the stitching process. By analogy, your "stitched binding strip" would be incorporated into your convertible top and thus subject to Standard No. 302.

The interpretation letter to Mr. McCarron further explained the testing procedures related to composite materials. Any components that do not

adhere to other materials at every point of contact would be tested separately under S4.2.1. Any components that adhere to other material at every point of contact would be tested as a composite with the other material.

The sample enclosed with your letter indicates that the binding fabric strip does not adhere to the main part of the bikini top at every point of contact. Instead, the binding strip is folded over the edge of the main part of the bikini top and held in place by single stitching. Therefore, it would be tested separately from the main part of the bikini top.

You also asked whether a tote bag used to store the roll bar top would be required to comply with Standard No. 302. The answer to that question is no. The list of components subject to Standard No. 302 set forth in S4.1 does not include a tote bag or similar item.

Finally, you stated that you understand that you must conform to 49 CFR Part 566, Manufacturer Identification, and asked whether there would be anything else that would apply to your product. No NHTSA requirements other than those discussed above would apply to your product.

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

Enclosure

Letter dated 6-29-90 from Paul Jackson Rice to Ed McCarron of Western Star Trucks Inc. (Text omitted)

Enclosure

Copy of 49 CFR 571.302: Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials (Text omitted)

ID: nht81-3.23

Open

DATE: 10/09/81

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Jellybean Express

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your letter of September 9, 1981, concerning the Federal flammability requirements applicable to seat covers for child restraints. As explained below, if the seat cover is sold as an item of original equipment on a child restraint system, it must meet the flammability requirements of Safety Standard No. 213, Child Restraint Systems. If the seat cover is sold as an item of aftermarket equipment, it is not covered by the standard. However, we would urge you to consider voluntarily complying with the standard.

Standard No. 213, Child Restraint Systems (49 CFR 571.213), sets performance requirements for child restraints as pieces of motor vehicle equipment. Section 5.7 of the standard provides that, "Each material used in a child restraint system shall conform to the requirements of S4 of Safety Standard No. 302 (S571.302)." Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials, provides that when tested under specified conditions, material may not have a burn rate of more than 4 inches per minute (copy enclosed). Thus, if your seat cover is sold as a component on a new child restraint, that child restraint must comply with the requirements of S5.7 of Standard No. 213. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the Act, 15 U.S.C. 1392 et seq., copy enclosed), manufacturers have the responsibility of certifying that they comply with all applicable standards. The agency does not grant prior approval or conduct tests to support a manufacturer's certification. Therefore, I am returning the sample of your seat cover.

Although Standard No. 213 only covers the manufacture of items of original equipment in child restraints, sale of your seat cover as an item of aftermarket equipment is indirectly affected by Section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Act. That section provides:

No manufacturer, distributor, dealer or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative, in whole or 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 Federal motor vehicle safety standard. . . .

Thus, none of the persons mentioned could not knowingly install your seat cover on a used child restraint if it renders inoperative the restraint system's compliance with Standard No. 213. However, the prohibitions of the Act and the standard do not cover sale of your cover as an aftermarket device nor its installation solely by the vehicle or equipment owner.

Regardless of whether your seat cover must comply with Standard No. 213, as a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment you have defect responsibilities under sections 151 et seq. of the Act. Those sections provide that manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment must notify owners of safety-related defects in their products and remedy those defects free of charge. If your covers are highly flammable, this could be regarded as a safety-related defect.

If you have any further questions, please let me know.

ENCLS.

(Illegible Word) EXPRESS

NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL

Sept. 9, 1981

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writting per instructions of the Department of Transportation in San Francisco, CA, Mr. Joe Zemaitis.

We are a business in Sacramento California manufacturing childrens wear and accessories. One of the items we manufacture is a seat cover for childrens car seats. The Department of Consumer Affairs and Department of Transportation have determined that we do not need a special license to manufacture this item but we do need a determination as to the fire proofing requirements.

Mr. Zemaitis suggested that we write to you to request this determination. I have enclosed a sample of our product. Please tell us as soon as possible if we have to meet any fireproofing requirements and if we have to have it noted anywhere that this product meets Federal Fireproof standards.

Your expedious reply would be greatly appreciated as we have orders for our product and would not like to break any laws by putting something out on the market that is unsafe.

Fran Anderson Business Manager

ATTACHS.

ID: 3140o

Open

Mr. Doug Cole
National Van Conversion Association, Inc.
2 West Main St., Suite 2
Greenfield, IN 46140

Dear Mr. Cole:

This responds to your letter asking about the test procedures of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials. I regret the delay in responding.

In your letter, you explained that the National Van Conversion Association (NVCA) gathers samples of materials used for vehicle floor coverings, seat covers, etc., in van conversions to determine the compliance of the material with Standard No. 302. In your test program, you have found that many samples do not appear to comply. You said that a closer look at the conditions under which these samples were tested revealed that use of support wires affected whether many materials passed or failed the standard's test. You ask for clarification as to when support wires are used in Standard No. 302 testing.

The conditions and procedures under which Standard No. 302 compliance testing is conducted using support wires are stated in paragraphs S5.1.3 and S5.3(a) of the standard. Basically, these two paragraphs specify, respectively, that support wires are used: (1) when testing a specimen "that softens and bends at the flaming end so as to cause erratic burning," to keep the specimen horizontal; and (2) when testing a specimen that has an available width of not more than 2 inches, to position and mount the specimen on the U-shaped frames used in the test. Standard No. 302 makes no provision for using the wires other than in these two situations.

The agency follows the test procedure specified in Standard No. 302 when testing vehicles for compliance with the requirements of the standard. The agency uses heat-resistant wires as specified in S5.1.3 when there is a reasonable expectation that a test specimen will bend or curl while burning. NHTSA bases its determination about the likelihood of bending or curling on observations made in previously-conducted compliance tests of the specimen, or on the agency's knowledge of or testing experience with materials similar to a test specimen. I would like to point out that manufacturers are not required by Standard No. 302 to test the flammability of their vehicles in only the manner specified in the standard. The standard only sets the procedure that the agency will use in its compliance testing. Thus, a manufacturer is not required to use wires only with specimens that are anticipated to bend or curl, or that are too small to fit in the test frame without wires. However, manufacturers must exercise due care in making their certification of compliance that their product will meet the standard's requirements when tested by the agency according to the specified procedures of the standard. Whether a manufacturer meets that due care standard when using heat-resistant wires in situations other than those described in Standard No. 302 is a matter that can be determined only in the context of an enforcement proceeding.

Please contact us if you have any further questions.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

/

ref:302 d:ll/1/88

1970

ID: 86-4.36

Open

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 08/06/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Ann Boriskie

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION !PAR=AUTHOR

TEXT:

Ms. Ann Boriskie 6738 Firelight Lane Dallas, TX 75248

Dear Ms. Boriskie:

Thank you for your letter of June 2, 1986, asking for approval of a device you have invented which is designed to prevent children from inadvertently or intentionally opening the buckle of a safety belt. As you requested, the agency will not disclose the details of your proprietary product. Although we understand your concern that young children should not be able to easily get out of a safety belt, we have significant reservations about your product. I hope the following discussion explains those reservations and the effect of our regulations on your product.

Our agency has the authority to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA, however, does not approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products. 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 our safety standards. The agency periodically tests vehicles and equipment items for compliance with the standards, and also investigates other alleged safety-related defects.

Although we do not have any standards that directly apply to your product, we do have several statutory provisions that could affect it. Manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment such as your device are subject to the requirements in sections 151-159 of the Vehicle Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects related to motor vehicle safety. The agency does not determine the existence of safety defects except in the context of a defect proceeding, and thus is unable to say whether your product might or might not contain such a defect. However, the agency is concerned that people be able to easily and quickly operate a safety belt in an emergency. As the agency said last year on the related topic of the force level necessary to operate buckles in child restraints:

The agency's safety concerns over child restraint buckle force release and size stem from the need for convenient buckling and unbuckling of a child and, in emergencies, to quickly remove the child from the restraint. This latter situation can occur in instances of post-crash fires, immersions, etc. A restraint that is difficult to disengage, due to the need for excessive buckle pressure or difficulty in operating the release mechanism because of a very small release button, can unnecessarily endanger the child in the restraint and the adult attempting to release the child. (50 FR 33722, August 21, 1985)

Your product could significantly increase the difficulty of using the buckle release and thus hinder a person attempting to release the belt in an emergency.

In addition, use of your product could be affected by section 108(a)12)(A) of the Vehicle Safety Act. That section prohibits commercial businesses from knowingly tampering with devices or elements of design installed in a vehicle in compliance with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. We have issued two safety standards which affect safety belts. Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies, requires the push-button release for a safety belt to have a minimum area for applying the release force. Installation of your device by a commercial business would be prohibited since it completely covers the safety belt push-button. In addition, Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials, requires new safety belts to meet a flammability resistance requirement. Thus, although Standard No. 302 does not directly apply to aftermarket equipment, commercial businesses could not install your device if it would mean that a safety belt no longer met the flammability resistance requirements of Standard No. 302.

The prohibition of section 108(a)(2(A) does not apply to individual vehicle owners who may install or remove any items of motor vehicle equipment regardless of its effect on compliance with Federal motor vehicle safety standards. However, our policy is to encourage vehicle owners not to remove or otherwise tamper with vehicle safety equipment. Installation of your product by any person would be inconsistent with that policy.

I am returning, under separate cover, the samples of your device that you sent the agency. If you have any further questions, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

ID: nht88-3.84

Open

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 11/01/88

FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- NHTSA

TO: DOUG COLE -- NATIONAL VAN CONVERSION ASSOCIATION, INC.

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 06/23/87 FROM DOUG COLE OF STEVE KRANTZKE; LETTER DATED 06/29/87 FROM JONATHAN JACKSON TO DOUG COLE; LETTER DATED 06/22/87 FROM ROSE M. TALISMAN TO DOUG COLE; LETTER DATED 06/08/87 FROM ROSE TALISMAN TO DOUG COLE

TEXT: Dear Mr. Cole:

This responds to your letter asking about the test procedures of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materils. I regret the delay in responding.

In your letter, you explained that the National Van Conversion Association (NVCA) gathers samples of materials used for vehicle floor coverings, seat covers, etc., in van conversions to determine the compliance of the material with Standard No. 302. In your test program, you have found that many samples do not appear to comply. You said that a closer look at the conditions under which these samples were tested revealed that use of support wires affected whether many materials passed or failed the stan dard's test. You ask for clarification as to when support wires are used in Standard No. 302 testing.

The conditions and procedures under which Standard No. 302 compliance testing is conducted using support wires are stated in paragraphs S5.1.3 and S5.3(a) of the standard. Basically, these two paragraphs specify, respectively, that support wires are use d: (1) when testing a specimen "that softens and bends at the flaming end so as to cause erratic burning," to keep the specimen horizontal; and (2) when testing a speciment that has an available width of not more than 2 inches, to position and mount the specimen on the U-shaped frames used in the test. Standard No. 302 makes no provision for using the wires other than in these two situations.

The agency follows the test procedure specified in Standard No. 302 when testing vehicles for compliance with the requirements of the standard. The agency uses heat-resistant wires as specified in S5.1.3 when there is a reasonable expectation that a tes t specimen will bend or curl while burning. NHTSA bases its determination about the likelihood of bending or curling on observations made in previously-conducted compliance tests of the speciment, or on the agency's knowledge of or testing experience wi th materials similar to a test specimen.

I would like to point out that manufacturers are not required by Standard No. 302 to test the flammability of their vehicles in only the manner specified in the standard. The standard only sets the procedure that the agency will use in its complaince te sting. Thus, a manufacturer is not required to use wires only with specimens that are anticipated to bend or curl, or that are too small to fit in the test frame without wires. However, manufacturers must exercise due care in making their certification of compliance that their product will meet the standard's requirements when tested by the agency according to the specified procedures of the standard. Whether a manufacturer meets that due care standard when using heat-resistant wires in situations ot her than those described in Standard No. 302 is a matter that can be determined only in the context of an enforcement proceeding.

Please contact us if you have any further questions.

ID: 15216.df

Open

Mr. Dean Knapp
Marketing Manager
Link Manufacturing Ltd.
223 15th St., N.E.
Box 68
Sioux Center, IA 51250-4876

Dear Mr. Knapp:

This responds to your May 12, 1997, letter to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) asking about Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials, as it applies to "an air mattress and cover that will be used in large class 8 truck sleeper cabs." You ask three questions about the standard which we have restated below, followed by our answers.

By way of background, NHTSA is authorized to issue Federal safety standards that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not, however, approve or certify any vehicles or items of equipment. Instead, the Safety Act establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The following is a discussion based on our understanding of your letter.

Question: Must this product comply with MVSS 302 for that application or is the normal class "C" coil spring mattress, cigarette burn standard acceptable?

Section S4.1 of Standard 302 lists the components that are covered by the standard, and includes "mattress covers" among them. However, the answer depends in part on whether the product will be sold as part of a new vehicle or as replacement equipment. Standard 302 applies to new trucks and other new motor vehicles, but not to items of replacement equipment that are separately sold to a vehicle owner. Thus, if your product will be sold in the aftermarket, NHTSA does not require its compliance to Standard 302. Nevertheless, our statute prohibits a manufacturer, repair business, dealer or distributor from making inoperative the compliance of a vehicle with the safety standards. Accordingly, those entities may not install a noncomplying mattress cover in any vehicle, because that would vitiate the vehicle's compliance with Standard 302.

In addition, the States have the authority to regulate aspects of vehicle use in their jurisdictions. A State may have its own flammability resistance requirements where Standard 302 does not apply.

Question: Does the standard apply only to the outer cover material or must the quilted foam liner and air bladder also comply?

We have previously defined "mattress cover" as including both a cover that is used generally to enclose a mattress for cleanliness or sanitary purposes as well as the ticking permanently attached to the mattress to enclose the mattress filling or core. While the configuration of your mattress is hard to visualize, at the very least, it would seem that both the outer cover material and the quilted foam liner must comply, the latter being similar to ticking material. As for the air bladder, we have said in interpretations of Standard 302 (e.g., December 15, 1972), that a component that is "incorporated into" a component that is listed in S4.1 is subject to the standard. Thus, if the bladder is incorporated into (attached to) the quilted foam liner, the bladder must meet the standard. Conversely, if the bladder is not part of the liner, it would be excluded from the standard.

Question: If it [our product] must comply, are there any exceptions based on market size, distribution channel, sales volumes, etc.?

Under one of our regulations (49 CFR Part 555), vehicle manufacturers may apply for a temporary exemption from Standard 302. Under Sec. 555.6(a), a manufacturer whose yearly production is not more than 10,000 units may ask for an exemption of up to three years on the basis that compliance would cause it substantial economic hardship and that it has attempted in good faith to comply with the standard from which it has asked to be excused. I have enclosed a copy of Part 555 for your information. There is no comparable provision in our statute allowing for applications for exemptions from manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment.

You also ask for a summary of Standard 302's test procedure. I have enclosed a copy of the standard for your information.

If you have other questions, please contact Deirdre Fujita of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
Enclosures
ref:302
d.7/3/97

1997

ID: 86-3.35

Open

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/29/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Brenda Hartman

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letter of February 27, 1986, asking how our regulations affect a product you are considering. In your letter, you asked the agency not to disclose your idea for this product. In a phone conversation of April 28, 1986, with Stephen Oesch of my staff, you waived your request for complete nondisclosure and agreed to the disclosure of a generic description of your product. As you requested, we will not disclose the specific details of your product or the sketches you enclosed with your letter.

Your product is designed to reduce the possibility that a young child could unbuckle a vehicle safety belt. The product would enclose the buckle of the safety belt, so that it is difficult for a child to operate the buckle release.

We have significant reservations about your product. I hope the following discussion explains our reservations and the effect of our regulations on your product.

Our agency has the authority to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA, however, does not approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products. 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 our safety standards. The agency periodically tests vehicles and equipment items for compliance with the standards, and also investigates other alleged safety-related defects.

Although we do not have any standards that directly apply to your product, we do have several statutory provisions that could affect it. Manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment such as your product are subject to the requirements in sections 151-159 of the Vehicle Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects related to motor vehicle safety. The agency does not determine the existence of safety defects except in the context of a defect proceeding, and thus is unable to say whether your product might or might not contain such a defect. However, the agency has reservations about your product because of our concern that people be able to easily and quickly operate a safety belt in an emergency. As the agency said last year on the related topic of the force level necessary to operate buckles in child restraints:

The agency's safety concerns over child restraint buckle force release and size stem from the need for convenient buckling and unbuckling of a child and, in emergencies, to quickly remove the child from the restraint. This latter situation can occur in instances of post-crash fires, immersions, etc. A restraint that is difficult to disengage, due to the need for excessive buckle pressure or difficulty in operating the release mechanism because of a very small release button, can unnecessarily endanger the child in the restraint and the adult attempting to release the child. (50 FR 33722, August 21, 1985)

In addition, use of your product can be affected by section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Vehicle Safety Act. That section prohibits commercial businesses from knowingly tampering with devices or elements of design installed in a vehicle in compliance with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. One requirement of Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies, is that the pushbutton release for a safety belt must have a a minimum area for applying the release force. Installation of your device by a commercial business could be prohibited since it apparently would substantially reduce the minimum area available for applying the release force to the safety belt pushbutton. In addition, Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials, requires new safety belts to meet a flammability resistance requirement. Thus, although Standard No. 302 does not directly apply to aftermarket equipment, commercial businesses could not install your device if it would mean that the safety belt no longer meet the flammability resistance requirements of Standard No. 302.

The prohibition of section 108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to individual vehicle owners who may install or remove any items of motor vehicle equipment regardless of its effect on compliance with Federal motor vehicle safety standards. However, our policy is to encourage vehicle owners not to remove or otherwise tamper with vehicle safety equipment. Installation of your product by any person could be inconsistent with that policy.

If you have any further questions, please let me know.

SINCERELY,

THIS IS A PROPIATARY IDEA, NOT FOR DISCLOSURE.

February 27, 1986

Erika Jones Chief Counsel N.H.T.S.A.

RE: Inquiry of safety standards.

Dear Miss Jones,

I am submitting to you my idea. I would like to know if there are any safety standards which may prohibit me from proceeding with such a product.

I appreciate your cooperation in this matter and would like a response at your earliest convience.

Sincerely,

Brenda Hartman 8617 CRESTON PINCKNEY, MI 48169 (313) 878-2413

ID: 86-4.30

Open

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 07/31/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Horton

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Horton Imperial Comfort Corporation P.O. Box 28367 Detroit, MI 48228

Dear Mr. Horton:

This is in response to your letter asking for our agency to approve a safety belt comfort adjuster you wish to sell. The literature you enclosed with your letter shows that the device is a strap with a clamp on each end. One end of the device can be clamped on the lap portion of a lap/shoulder belt and the other end clamped on the shoulder portion of the belt. By adjusting the strap, a person can reposition the shoulder belt away from his or her neck and apparently can introduce slack into the belt as well. I hope the following information will explain how our regulations affect your device.

As background information, let me explain that the agency does not have the authority to approve or endorse items of motor vehicle equipment, such as your device. We do have the authority to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that set performance requirements for motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. Manufacturers of vehicles or equipment covered by our standards must certify that their product complies with all of the applicable standards.

Your particular aftermarket product is not directly covered by any of our safety belt or other standards. However, as a manufacturer of an item of motor vehicle equipment, you do have certain responsibilities concerning possible safety-related defects you or the agency discover in your product. Those responsibilities are set out in sections 151-160 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. I have enclosed an information sheet on our defect and other regulations for your review.

In addition, use of your product could be affected by section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Vehicle Safety Act. That section prohibits commercial businesses from knowingly tampering with devices or elements of design installed in a vehicle in compliance with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. We have issued Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials, which requires new safety belts to meet a flammability resistance requirement. Thus, although Standard No. 302 does not directly apply to aftermarket equipment, commercial businesses could not install your device if it would mean that a safety belt no longer met the flammability resistance requirements of Standard No. 302.

The prohibition of section 108(a)(2(A) does not apply to individual vehicle owners who may install or remove any items of motor vehicle equipment regardless of its effect on compliance with Federal motor vehicle safety standards. However, our policy is to encourage vehicle owners not to remove or otherwise tamper with vehicle safety equipment.

The agency is also concerned that a belted occupant could inadvertently use your product to introduce excessive slack in the upper torso belt or reposition the shoulder belt too close to the edge of a person's shoulder and thereby reduce the effectiveness of the belt. The instructions you provide with your device do not warn users about the risks associated with introducing excessive slack or incorrectly repositioning the safety belt. We encourage you to provide more detailed guidance about the proper use of your device.

If you have any further questions, please let me know.

Sincerely:

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

Enclosure

To whom it may concern:

Imperial Comfort Corp. are asking if you would provide the necessary D.O.T. approval for this device which we have enclosed for you;

Please find in this package the information which we have provided for this devices approval.

P. Please reply to our application as soon as you possibly can.

Thank you,

Imperial Comfort Corp.

Enclosed

gdh

PACKAGE The seat belt comfort adjuster is made as following: It is a small elastic belt which has a clasp on each end and a slip lock adjustable buckle, which adjust the length.

The seat belt comfort adjuster operate as such: One end of the seat belt comfort adjuster is clapped to the cross waist belt of the seat belt. Then clasp the remaining loose end to the chest cross belt. Now you can adjust the cross harness chest belt from the neck and also relieve some of the pressure off the chest which the harness apply, to suit your comfort.

Imperial Comfort Corp.

gdh

If further information needed please contact us at (313) 273-2793.

ID: nht87-1.97

Open

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 06/04/87

FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL NHTSA

TO: BRUCE W. SMITH -- PRESIDENT UNIT CORPORATION

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 02/12/87 TO JONES; FROM BRUCE W. SMITH

TEXT: Dear Mr. Smith:

This responds to your letter, in which you sought this agency's "recommendation" on one of your new products. The product in question is a sun visor intended to be used on rear-facing toddler seats. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our statute and regulations to you.

This agency has promulgated the Federal motor vehicle safety standards under the authority granted by Congress in the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.). In the case of your sun visor, the only safety stan dard with which you would be concerned is Standard No. 213, Child Restraint Systems (49 CFR @571.213), a copy of which is enclosed for your information. Please note that the Safety Act specifies that all of our standards applicable to items of motor veh icle equipment, including Standard No. 213, do not apply to the child restraint system after its first purchase in good faith for purposes other than resale. The general rule then is that aftermarket accessories, such as your sun visor, may be added to child restraint systems without violating Standard No. 213.

This general rule is, however, limited by the provisions of section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A)). That section specifies: "No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperat ive ... any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard ..."

There are two elements of design incorporated in child restraints in compliance with Standard No. 213 that might be affected by adding your sun visor. First, all child restraints are required to incorporate resistance to flammability. Section S5.7 of St andard No. 213 specifies: "Each material used in a child restraint system shall conform to the requirements of S4 of FMVSS No. 302." I have also enclosed a copy of

2 Standard No. 302 for your information. Second, child restraints recommended for use by children weighing less than 20 pounds must comply with paragraph S5.2.3.2 of Standard No. 213. That section requires that each child restraint surface contactable by the child dummy's head during the crash test shall be covered with slow recovery energy absorbing materials with specified characteristics. This requirement ensures that children riding in these child restraints will not suffer unnecessary head injur ies during crashes. If the installation of your sun visor would impair either the flammability resistance or the head impact protection designed into a child restraint to which the visor is attached, any manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair busi ness installing the visor would be rendering inoperative a Federally required element of design, thereby violating section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act. Section 109 of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1398) specifies a civil penalty of up to $ 1,000 for each violation of section 108, and each child restraint on which a Federally required element of design was rendered inoperative would be considered a separate violation of section 108.

Since child restraint owners are not among the parties listed in section 108(a)(2)(A), they are not required to avoid rendering inoperative elements of design provided under either the head impact protection requirements of Standard No. 213 or the flamma bility resistance requirements of Standard No. 302. Nevertheless, this agency would urge you to voluntarily ensure that your sun visor would not render any such elements inoperative.

Additionally, you should be aware that you will be a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment if you manufacture the child restraint sun visor for sale. As such, you will be subject to the requirements of sections 151-159 of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 141 1-1419), concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects related to motor vehicle safety. If it were determined that your sun visor had a defect related to motor vehicle safety, you as the manufacturer would have to notify all purchasers of th e defect and either:

1. repair the visor so that the defect is removed; or

2. replace the visor with an identical or reasonably equivalent product that does not have the defect.

Whichever of these options were chosen, you as the manufacturer would have to hear the full expense of the notification and remedy. This means you could not charge owners of the visor for the remedy if the visor were first purchased less than eight year s before the notification campaign.

I would also like to make clear that this explanation is not an agency "recommendation". NHTSA does not offer its opinion as to the value or practicality of motor vehicles or equipment. When we are presented with questions from potential manufacturers of new vehicles or equipment, we only explain how our statute and regulations would apply to such products. It is up to the potential manufacturer to assess the value and practicality of the product.

3

If you have any further questions or need more information on this subject, please feel free to contact Steve Kratzke of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

ENCLOSURES

Sincerely,

ID: 2648o

Open

Ms. Laura C. Boniske
2928 Coconut Grove Drive
Coral Gables, FL 33134

Dear Ms. Boniske:

This responds to your letter asking for an interpretation of the requirements of Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials, as they apply to "materials used in the manufacture of an aftermarket product which will be utilized in the occupant compartment of a vehicle." In an October 27, 1987 telephone conversation with Ms. Hom of my staff, you mentioned in particular an item of equipment consisting of a pad for cushioning safety belts. Generally speaking, items of motor vehicle equipment are not covered by Standard No. 302.

Standard No. 302 is a vehicle standard and as such applies to completed vehicles. No vehicle can be manufactured unless the materials used in it comply with the requirements of the standard. The general rule is that aftermarket products may be added to vehicles, even if the addition of those products causes the vehicle to no longer comply with the requirements of Standard No. 302, without violating the requirements of Federal law.

This general rule is, however, limited by the application of the provisions of Section 108(a)(2)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (copy enclosed). That section specifies: "No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative . . . any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard . . ." NHTSA would consider the installation of safety belt pads that do not meet the requirements of Standard No. 302 as "rendering inoperative" an element of design (flammability resistance) installed in accordance with an applicable Federal safety standard. Thus, a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business that installed a safety belt pad which did not comply with the flammability resistance requirements of Standard No. 302 would be rendering inoperative that element of design, and thereby violating section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act. We note also that, since safety belts are safety devices installed in accordance with Safety Standards No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, and No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies, those commercial businesses would be prohibited from installing the safety belt pad if its installation would impair the effective operation of the belts. Section 109 of the Act specifies a civil penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation of /108.

The prohibitions of /108(a)(2)(A) do not apply to the vehicle owner rendering inoperative some element of design in his or her vehicle. Therefore, aftermarket safety belt pads may be sold to a vehicle owner for installation in his or her vehicle regardless of whether the pad complies with the flammability resistance requirements of Standard No. 302.

There are two factors which ought to be considered by the manufacturers of safety belt pads which do not satisfy the flammability resistance requirements of Standard No. 302. First is the possibility of liability under State and common law if those pads were to catch fire in a situation where a pad complying with Standard No. 302 would not have caught fire, or if those pads burn much more rapidly than pads that comply with Standard No. 302. Second is the possibility of a finding of a safety-related defect in your products. Sections 151-154 of the Safety Act require that, when an item or motor vehicle equipment contains a safety-related defect, the manufacturer of the item must recall and repair or replace the defective equipment without charge to the purchaser. In any event, we urge you to ensure that your products would not negatively affect the safety provided by the underlying belt assembly.

I hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if you have further questions.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

Enclosure ref:VSA#302#209 d:2/10/88

1988

Request an Interpretation

You may email your request to Interpretations.NHTSA@dot.gov or send your request in hard copy to:

The Chief Counsel
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, W41-326
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE
Washington, DC 20590

If you want to talk to someone at NHTSA about what a request for interpretation should include, call the Office of the Chief Counsel at 202-366-2992.

Please note that NHTSA’s response will be made available in this online database, and that the incoming interpretation request may also be made publicly available.

Go to top of page