ID: nht92-1.25

DATE: 12/11/92

FROM: PAUL JACKSON RICE -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: GUY MOZZICATO -- MERIDIAN, INC.

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 6-18-81 FROM FRANK BERNDT TO ROY LITTLEFIELD

TEXT: This responds to your telephone conversation with Walter Myers of my staff on November 16, 1992.

You explained to Mr. Myers that your company, Meridian, Inc., exports used tires and casings from the United States to other countries. You stated that although your company endeavors to export only good quality tires, other used tire exporters are not so quality-oriented and export defective or otherwise unserviceable tires. You further stated that as a result of such unscrupulous practices, the country of Venezuela has asked you what the requirements are for importation of used tires into the United States.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, 15 U.S. Code, @@ 1381 - 1431, as amended (hereinafter referred to as the Safety Act), provides at Section 1397(a)(1)(A): "No person shall . . . import into the United States, any . . . item of motor vehicle equipment manufactured on or after the date any applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard takes effect . . . unless it is in conformity with such standard . . . ." The effect of that language is to require that motor vehicle tires, whether new or used, manufactured on and after the effective date of applicable Federal safety standards must comply with those standards before they can be imported into the United States. Manufacturers must certify such compliance by molding the symbol "DOT" onto the tire sidewalls. Therefore, to be legally imported into the United States motor vehicle tires must either display the DOT symbol or be accompanied by proof that they were manufactured before the effective date of the applicable safety standards.

The only exception to the above requirement is that used truck tires which have less than 2/32 inch of tread remaining and which are being imported for retreading prior to on-road use may be imported without displaying the DOT symbol. This exception is explained in a June 18, 1981 letter addressed to Mr. Roy Littlefield of NTDRA (copy enclosed).

The standards that apply to passenger car tires are Standard 109, New Pneumatic Tires, and Standard 110, Tire Selection and Rims, found at 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 571.109 and 571.110 respectively. The standards applicable to tires for vehicles other than passenger cars are Standard 119, New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars, 49 CFR 571.119; and Standard 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars, 49 CFR 571.110. Other regulatory requirements pertinent to tires are Standard 117, Retreaded Pneumatic Tires; Standard 129, New Non-Pneumatic Tires for Passenger Cars; 49 CFR Part 569, Regrooved Tires; 49 CFR Part 574, Tire Identification and Recordkeeping; and 49 CFR Part 575, Consumer Information Regulations. For your information, I am enclosing a fact sheet prepared by this agency entitled Where to Obtain NHTSA's Safety Standards and Regulations which explains how and from where the full text of our safety standards and regulations may be obtained.

I hope the above information will be helpful to you. If you have any further questions regarding any of these matters, please feel free to contact Mr. Myers at this address or at (202) 366-2992, FAX (202) 366-5830.

ID: nht92-1.26

DATE: 12/11/92

FROM: PAUL JACKSON RICE -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: HERR O. SCHMIDT -- HELLA KG HUECK & CO

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 11-20-92 FROM O. SCHMIDT TO RICHARD L. VAN IDERSTINE (OCC 8049)

TEXT: This responds to your letter of November 20, 1992, to Richard L. Van Iderstine of this agency asking for an interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108. Please address your future requests for interpretation to the Chief Counsel.

You have asked for confirmation that the requirement that a center highmounted stop lamp "provide access for convenient replacement of the bulb without the use of special tools" does not exclude sealed lamps "where long life light sources like long life bulbs, LED's and neon tubes are provided."

We are pleased to provide the confirmation you request. Although the agency has used the term "the bulb", the term is not meant to exclude more than one bulb, or a light source other than a bulb, for the center lamp. Sealed units (entire lamps) are permissible as long as such a lamp is replaceable without the use of special tools.

ID: nht92-1.27

DATE: 12/10/92

FROM: PAUL JACKSON RICE -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: DAVID KENNEDY -- W. Y. MOBERLY, INC.

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 11-11-92 FROM DAVID KENNEDY TO NHTSA OFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL (OCC 8035); ALSO ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 12-30-82 FROM FRANK BERNDT TO KENNETH M. BUSH

TEXT: This responds to your letter of November 11, 1992, asking for an interpretation of Federal regulations pertaining to the importation of automotive rims for motorcycle use.

Your Canadian client ships to the United States a motorcycle conversion kit consisting of a prefabricated rear end assembly complete with brakes, drums, brake lines, and passenger car tires mounted on passenger car rims. While the tires bear a DOT certification symbol, the rims do not. You understand that motorcycle rims must bear a DOT certification symbol, and that passenger car rims are not required to be certified. You have asked whether, under these circumstances, the passenger car rims in the kit must bear a DOT certification.

Some years ago, Suzuki Motor Co. asked the agency whether Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars, allow a manufacturer to equip a motorcycle with passenger car tires and rims. On December 30, 1982, we replied that paragraph S5.1.1 of Standard No. 120 did permit a motorcycle to be equipped with tires meeting the requirements of Standard No. 109, the passenger car tire standard. Although passenger car tires must be fitted to rims suitable for their use, which will ordinarily be passenger car rims, Standard No. 120 nonetheless requires that rims intended for use on motorcycles be marked in accordance with paragraph S5.2. These markings include the DOT certification symbol. As you have surmised, the standard that covers passenger car tire rims, Standard No. 110, contains no marking requirements. Therefore, since your client wishes to export new tire/rim combinations for use on motorcycle conversions, the tires must be certified as conforming to Standard No. 109, and the rims certified as conforming to Standard No. 120. I enclose a copy of our letter to Suzuki.

ID: nht92-1.28

DATE: 12/10/92

FROM: PAUL JACKSON RICE -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: DAVID M. HART -- PRESIDENT, FLUSHSAVER

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 11-16-92 (11-16-91) FROM DAVID M. HART TO PAUL J. RICE (OCC 8021); ALSO ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 9-3-87 FROM ERIKA Z. JONES TO DAVID M. ROMANSKY (STD. 108)

TEXT: This responds to your letter of November 16 asking for "feedback" on your plan to market a decal called "Flashit" for installation over a center high-mounted stop lamp.

I enclose a copy of an agency letter representative of our advice to inquirers on this subject. Though this letter, to David M. Romansky, dates from September 3, 1987, it remains the agency's position today.

Should you wish to contact the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators on this subject, please note that its new address is 4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Va. 22203.

ID: nht92-1.29

DATE: 12/10/92

FROM: STAN KAPLAN -- SHIMAZAKI CORP.

TO: CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 1-25-90 FROM STEPHEN P. WOOD TO LARRY E. SNOWHITE (STD. 108); ALSO ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 12-29-92 FROM PAUL J. RICE TO STAN KAPLAN (A40; STD. 108)

TEXT: We at the Shimazaki Corporation are most interested in getting a review and knowing if a automotive product we are wanting to import into the U.S. for sales meets the required federal standards set by the traffic safety administration.

The product is called Red Alert. It is a safety device that automatically alerts the driver behind you that you are about to make a sudden stop before your foot hits the brake pedal.

Red Alert is a sophisticated sensor that is activiated only when there is a sudden release of the accelerator, as in the case during an emergency stop. RedAlert is located on the accelerator rod (not on the part that is by the foot) and does not interfere with driving habits.

You can install red alert in your car without making any changes in its electrical system. Installing Red Alert is quick and simple and only takes 15 minutes to install and requires no special tools.

Please advise if it meets the standard set by your administration and the how we can get a waiver on this product or does it require one at all?

Enclosed please find brochures on the Red Alert system for your study. I previously discussed this on the telephone with Mr. George Shifflett. He advised me to send you a letter to get a definitive statement on this product. Hope to here from you in this regard as soon as possible.

(BROCHURES OMITTED.)

ID: nht92-1.3

DATE: December 30, 1992

FROM: Donald L. Anglin -- Consulting Editor, MacMillan/McGraw-Hill Publishing, Automotive and Technical Writing

TO: William A. Boehly -- Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Standards, NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 4-19-93 from John Womack to Donald L. Anglin (A41; Redbook (4); Std. 105; Std. 121)

TEXT: Your assistance in the past has certainly been appreciated and informative. So may we ask for your insight into another issue affecting highway safety.

Does the removal of drum-brake self-adjusters from a vehicle constitute a violation of the anti-tampering provisions of the Clean Air Act, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, or any other Federal law, regulation, or standard?

As always, thank you very much for your continuing interest and assistance.

ID: nht92-1.30

DATE: December 10, 1992

FROM: Curtis J. Crist -- Product Development, US Marine

TO: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 12/29/92 from Paul J. Rice to Curtis J. Crist (A40; Std. 108); Also attached to letter dated 10/08/76 from Frank Berndt (signature by Stephen P. Wood) to Donald I. Reed; Also attached to letter dated 12/21/77 from Joseph J. Levin, Jr. to Warren M. Heath

TEXT:

Please confirm that the enclosed 1976 and 1977 clarifications relative to front side marker lamps on boat trailers are still valid.

Also, I would like to attempt to eliminate the requirement for rear "identification lamps" on boat trailers 80 or more inches in overall width. Many of today's boat trailers have rear crossmembers positioned as much as 24 inches forward of the aft end of their frame. Consequently, the identification lamps are essentially hidden from view by the boat's hull bottom and outdrive or outboard lower unit. Please advise me as to what action I must take to have elimination of this requirement considered.

Thank you for your assistance.

ID: nht92-1.31

DATE: 12/10/92

FROM: JUAN F. VEGA

TO: ANDREW CARD -- SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NHTSA

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 2-16-93 FROM JOHN WOMACK TO JUAN F. VEGA (A40; STD. 208)

TEXT: Attached to this letter you will find correct copies of multiples complaints that I have made. They have all been to no avial I wrote Captain [Illegible Words] of the Florida Highway Patrol complaining that the [Ilegible Word] being used at Florida State Prison to transport inmater have [Illegible Words]

On 9/20/92 I wrote the Asst. Superintendent at Florida State Prison setting which the same complaint.

In his response he stated that a copy of my complaint was being forward to the Department of Legal Affairs for further review and input.

The fact is that nothing has been done about the problem upto date.

[Illegible Words]

On 10/1/92 I wrote Florida State Prison Superintendent setting forth the same complaint.

On 10/9/92 he send me a response saying that the vans being used to transport inmates are not required to have seat belts.

Then he gave me the poor excuse that in the event of an accident it would [Illegible Words]

The fact is that in the event of an accident the injury is more saver if the prison does not have seat belts. And if the inmate breaks his back whats the hurry because you cannot move him. Its a clear established fact that Florida State Prison is trying to waste their duty to comply with Florida and Federal Safety belt law.[Illegible Paragraph]

ATTACHMENTS

1. LETTER UNDATED FROM JUAN F. VEGA TO TERRY R. MCINTYRE

2. INMATE REQUEST

DATED 9-20-92 FROM JUAN F. VEGA TO R. E TURNER

3. LETTER DATED 10-1-92

FROM Juan F. VEGA To STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTTIONS

4. Memorandum DATED 10-7-92 From Everett I. PERRIN, Jr. To Juan Vega

(Text Omitted)

ID: nht92-1.32

DATE: 12/09/92

FROM: DANIEL K. UPHAM -- PRESIDENT, SYS TEK CORPORATION

TO: CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TITLE: SUBJECT: COMPLIANCE WITH NATIONAL SAFETY STANDARDS, NEW PRODUCT

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 12-28-92 FROM PAUL J. RICE TO DANIEL K. UPHAM (A40; STD. 108); ALSO ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 8-17-89 FROM STEPHEN P. WOOD TO ALAN S. ELDAHR (STD. 108)

TEXT: We are a new company located in Southern California involved in new product development and manufacturing. We are currently designing a new product that can be used in motor vehicles as an advertising or silent communications device and we would like to be sure that we are not violating any local or federal laws. That being the case I spoke on the telephone with Mr. George Shefflett who suggested that we contact your office for an official opinion even though he believed there did not appear to be a problem.

The product we have in mind is a portable lighted message display using LED technology, that could be mounted inside the vehicle to the side rear or rear window. It will be either battery powered or it will be powered using the vehicle power source via cigarette lighter or directly to the cars electrical harness. This is an after market product sold through auto parts stores or various other consumer outlets.

We have reviewed the California Vehicle Code and are aware of the general constraints such as colors, view obstruction, light brightness, etc. Frankly we have found no serious obstacles to our endeavor at this point and we would like to hear your concerns and suggestions with regard to our idea. We would also appreciate any suggestions you may have as to what other agencies or organizations we might need to confer with before we make our final decisions.

Thank you very much for your time and help.

ID: nht92-1.33

DATE: December 8, 1992

FROM: Vasant Jinwala -- Consumer Testing Laboratories, Inc.

TO: Marvin Shaw -- Department of Transportation

TITLE: Flammability for Comfort Cushions

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 1/22/93 from John Womack to Vasant Jinwala (A40; Std. 302; VSA 102(4))

TEXT:

We have received a comfort cushion for testing. The sample does not conform to DOT 302 flammability requirements. The manufacturer claims that the DOT 302 standard is only applicable to a car's original equipment and NOT for auto accessories. Your input in this matter is appreciated.

Please see the attached copy of packaging. The packaging clearly indicates the intended CAR use.

(Comfort Cushion brochure omitted.)