ID: nht91-2.30

DATE: March 13, 1991

FROM: Jamie McLaughlin Fish -- Director, Intergovernmental Affairs, NHTSA

TO: Bill McCollum -- U.S. House of Representatives

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 6-18-81 from Frank Berndt to Roy Littlefield (Std. 119); Also attached to letter dated 1-7-90 from Perry E. Faulkner to William "Bill" McCollum

TEXT:

Thank you for your inquiry on behalf of your constituent, Mr. Perry Faulkner. Mr. Faulkner requested a written interpretation about whether casings imported into this country are required to have the "DOT number." A "casing" means a used tire to which additional tread may be attached for the purpose of retreading. As explained more fully below, casing for retreaded passenger car tires must have the DOT symbol, but casings for tires for use on vehicles other than passenger cars (referred to as "truck tires" in this letter) are not required to have the DOT symbol.

At the outset, I note that Mr. Faulkner's letter stated that the "DOT number" on a tire indicates that the Federal excise tax has been paid. That statement is inaccurate. The "DOT number" on a tire only represents the manufacturer's or retreader's certification of compliance with this agency's standards and regulations. If Mr. Faulkner wants further information about Federal excise taxes on tires, he may wish to contact the Internal Revenue Service, since that agency administers the Federal excise taxes.

Mr. Faulkner is mixing two different types of markings when he refers to a "DOT number." The first type of marking is the symbol "DOT." This marking by a tire manufacturer or retreader on a tire is a certification that the tire complies with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. Federal safety standards applicable to tires include Standard No. 109 for new passenger car tires, Standard No. 117 for retreaded passenger car tires, and Standard No. 119 for new truck tires.

Standard No. 117 (the retreaded passenger car tire safety standard) includes a requirement that all passenger car tire casings to be retreaded must include the symbol "DOT." See S5.2.3(a). Therefore, it is illegal to sell or import into this country any passenger car tire casings that are not marked with the symbol "DOT." However, none of our Federal safety standards set forth requirements for retreaded truck tires. Since there is no standard for retreaded truck tires, there is no requirement that casings for retreaded truck tires be marked with the DOT symbol. I have enclosed a June 18, 1981 letter to Mr. Roy Littlefield that offers a more detailed discussion of this issue.

The second type of marking to which Mr. Faulkner referred was the tire identification number specified in Part 574. This number identifies the manufacturer or retreader of the tire, along with the date of manufacture or retread and other attributes of the tire. A tire identification number is not required on any casing: Standard No. 117 does not require this marking on passenger car casings, and as explained above, there is

no Standard for casings for truck tires. Please note, however, that Part 574 requires all finished retreads, including retreaded truck tires, to be marked with the retreader's identification number.

I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if you have any further questions or need some additional information on this subject.

ID: nht91-2.21

DATE: March 8, 1991

FROM: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Louis F. Wilson -- Instant Traffic Lights

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 2-20-91 from Louis F. Wilson to NHTSA (OCC 5747); Also attached to letter dated 2-20-90 from Louis F. Wilson to NHTSA; Also attached to letter dated 9-1-89 from Louis F. Wilson to NHTSA

TEXT:

This is in reply to your letter of February 20, 1991, with respect to the acceptability under Federal law of your product, the "Instant Traffic Light. I regret that we do not appear to have a record of your earlier letters to the agency on this subject.

The "Instant Traffic Light" is a four-section unit intended to perform three functions, each indicated by a different color. A green light appears when the accelerator is applied, an amber light when the accelerator is released, and a red light when the brakes are-applied. The lamp's shipping carton shows the unit mounted on the rear parcel shelf behind the rear window. The text on the carton says that the lamp is easy to assemble. You have asked whether the product meets Standard No. 108, whether it would be "legal" in the U.S. "and her territories", and whether the product could replace, or be an option to, the requirements of Standard No. 108 for the center high-mounted stop lamp. Finally, of the 16 states that have responded to your inquiry, an equal number (six) have indicated that the lamp is and is not acceptable to them, while the remaining four "said they will follow the Federal requirement."

Standard No. 108 does not permit the center high-mounted stop lamp to be combined with any other lamp. This means that your product could not be used as original equipment on a passenger car, whether as standard equipment or as an option, or marketed and sold as replacement equipment for a center lamp on a passenger car that was originally equipped with it. However, Standard No. 108 does not apply to the "Instant Traffic Light" if it is marketed or sold exclusively for use on passenger cars that were not originally required to be manufactured with the center stop lamp, i.e., those cars that were manufactured before September 1, 1985. Under this circumstance, the question of the legality of use of the device is to be determined by the laws of the individual States. The "territories" are "States" for purposes of this discussion. Since there is no legal prohibition under Federal law for installation of your lamp only on older passenger cars, we presume that the four States that reserved their decision would permit it on pre - 1985 vehicles registered and/or operating within their borders.

We are aware that, nevertheless, there may be some owner interest in replacing original equipment center stop lamps with your product. We would like to advise that such replacement would be a violation of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, if performed by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business. There is no such restriction upon a vehicle owner who performs the

replacement of the lamp himself.

I hope that this responds to your questions.

ID: nht88-4.30

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 12/09/88 EST

FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- NHTSA CHIEF COUNSEL

TO: ERMAN JACKSON -- SALES MANAGER-TRAILMASTER TANKS, INC.

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: APRIL 18, 1988 FROM JACKSON TO JONES

TEXT: This is in response to your letter which requested our interpretation of the applicability of certification requirements to your company. You indicate that you attached a new body to a truck chassis that has been in service for a number of years. Your customer believes that Trailmaster Tanks, Inc., (Trailmaster) should have issued a new final-stage manufacturer certificate at the time of the mounting of the new body. Trailmaster, on the other hand, is of the opinion that the final-stage manufacturer certificate is only issued when the chassis is new. You asked me whether your company was required by Federal law or regulations to certify that the new body on the used truck chassis complies with all applicable safety standards. The answer to your qu estion depends on whether the used chassis consisted of any new components and, if not, whether the used components of the chassis came from different vehicles, as explained below.

As a general matter, our safety standards and certification requirements apply to vehicles only before the first sale of the vehicle in good faith for purposes other than resale. Generally speaking, vehicles that are produced from a chassis that has alr eady been sold to the public are notconsidered new vehicles, and are not subject to our safety standards or certification requirements. However, there is a special provision in our regulations for vehicles that are produced by combining new and used comp onents. This provision is in 49 CFR @ 571.7 (e), which provides:

(e)Combining new and used components. When a new cab is used in the assembly of a truck, the truck will be considered newly manufactured for purposes of paragraph (a) of this section, the application of the requirements of this chapter, and the Act, unless the engine, transmission, and drive axle(s) (as a minimum) of the assembled vehicle are not new, and at least two of these components are from the same vehicle.

This regulation means that a party attaching a new body to an old chassis is not required to attach a new certification label or make any certification under Federal law if that party simply uses the engine, transmission, and drive axle that are installe d on the old chassis at the time the party receives the old chassis. Based on your statement that the truck "was not modified in any way" at the time the new body was installed on the old chassis, this would appear to be the case in your situation. If this is true, you were not required to make any certification in connection with this vehicle.

On the other hand, if you substituted a new engine, transmission, or drive axle in the old chassis when you attached the new body, the vehicle was considered newly manufactured under @571.7(e) and your company was required to certify the vehicle in accor dance with Part 567. Similarly, if you substituted used components on the old chassis at the time you attached the new body, the vehicle was considered newly manufactured unless at least two of the three specified components (engine, transmission, and d rive axle) were from the same vehicle.

It should be noted that, even if the vehicle created when you attached a new body to a used truck chassis did not result in a newly manufactured vehicle pursuant to 49 CFR @ 571.7(e), your company was still subject to the provisions of section 108(a)(2)( A) of the Safety Act. This section prohibits any manufacturer, distributor, dealer or motor vehicle repair business from "knowingly rendering inoperative" any equipment or element of design installed on a vehicle in compliance with safety standards. In other words, no manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or repair business can modify used vehicles by removing or defeating any of the systems or devices that were installed on the vehicle to comply with an applicable safety standard. The modifier in the f irst instance must determine if the modifications constitute a prohibited "rendering inoperative" violation. However, the agency can reexamine the modifier's determination in the context of an enforcement proceeding.

I believe you can use the information presented in this letter to determine whether or not the vehicle your company made was considered a newly manufactured vehicle, subject to our safety standards and certification regulations. If you have any further questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact us.

ID: 3266o

Erman Jackson, Sales Manager
Trailmaster Tanks, Inc.
P. O. Box 161759
1121 Cantrell-Sansom Road
Fort Worth, TX 76161-1759

Dear Mr. Jackson:

This is in response to your letter which requested our interpretation of the applicability of certification requirements to your company. You indicate that you attached a new body to a truck chassis that has been in service for a number of years. Your customer believes that Trailmaster Tanks, Inc., (Trailmaster) should have issued a new final-stage manufacturer certificate at the time of the mounting of the new body. Trailmaster, on the other hand, is of the opinion that the final-stage manufacturer certificate is only issued when the chassis is new. You asked me whether your company was required by Federal law or regulations to certify that the new body on the used truck chassis complies with all applicable safety standards. The answer to your question depends on whether the used chassis consisted of any new components and, if not, whether the used components of the chassis came from different vehicles, as explained below.

As a general matter, our safety standards and certification requirements apply to vehicles only before the first sale of the vehicle in good faith for purposes other than resale. Generally speaking, vehicles that are produced from a chassis that has already been sold to the public are not considered new vehicles, and are not subject to our safety standards or certification requirements. However, there is a special provision in our regulations for vehicles that are produced by combining new and used components. This provision is in 49 CFR 571.7(e), which provides:

(e) Combining new and used components. When a new cab is used in the assembly of a truck, the truck will be considered newly manufactured for purposes of paragraph (a) of this section, the application of the requirements of this chapter, and the Act, unless the engine, transmission, and drive axle(s) (as a minimum) of the assembled vehicle are not new, and at least two of these components are from the same vehicle.

This regulation means that a party attaching a new body to an old chassis is not required to attach a new certification label or make any certification under Federal law if that party simply uses the engine, transmission, and drive axle that are installed on the old chassis at the time the party receives the old chassis. Based on your statement that the truck "was not modified in any way" at the time the new body was installed on the old chassis, this would appear to be the case in your situation. If this is true, you were not required to make any certification in connection with this vehicle.

On the other hand, if you substituted a new engine, transmission, or drive axle in the old chassis when you attached the new body, the vehicle was considered newly manufactured under 571.7(e) and your company was required to certify the vehicle in accordance with Part 567. Similarly, if you substituted used components on the old chassis at the time you attached the new body, the vehicle was considered newly manufactured unless at least two of the three specified components (engine, transmission, and drive axle) were from the same vehicle.

It should be noted that, even if the vehicle created when you attached a new body to a used truck chassis did not result in a newly manufactured vehicle pursuant to 49 CFR 571.7(e), your company was still subject to the provisions of section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act. This section prohibits any manufacturer, distributor, dealer or motor vehicle repair business from "knowingly rendering inoperative" any equipment or element of design installed on a vehicle in compliance with our safety standards. In other words, no manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or repair business can modify used vehicles by removing or defeating any of the systems or devices that were installed on the vehicle to comply with an applicable safety standard. The modifier in the first instance must determine if the modifications constitute a prohibited "rendering inoperative" violation. However, the agency can reexamine the modifier's determination in the context of an enforcement proceeding.

I believe you can use the information presented in this letter to determine whether or not the vehicle your company made was considered a newly manufactured vehicle, subject to our safety standards and certification regulations. If you have any further questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact us.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

ref:VSA#571 d:l2/9/88

ID: 20662.ztv

Mr. Mark Steele
Steele Enterprises
225 Merrill Place
Goshen, IN 46528

Dear Mr. Steele:

We are replying to your letter of June 28, 1999, which did not reach this Office until mid-September. I apologize for the delay.

You are interested in the acceptability of possible ABS warning systems under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108. Noting that the standard requires stop lamps to be steady burning and hazard warning lamps to flash, you have asked:

"1. Can an OEM automatically initiate the hazard flashers upon the application of the vehicle's ABS? This would pertain to all motor vehicles, including: automobiles, trucks and motorcycles."

The answer is no, for the following reasons. The hazard warning system operates by simultaneous activation of all turn signal lamps. Standard No. 108 permits rear turn signal lamps to be either red or amber. It is the common practice of vehicle manufacturers who choose red to use the same filament within a bulb to indicate separately the stop and turn functions, e.g., when the turn signal is flashing there is no separate indication that the brakes are applied. In this configuration, use of the hazard system to indicate application of the ABS would result in, first, a steady burning signal indicating the brakes are applied, followed by a flashing signal indicating application of the ABS. This, in essence, would be perceived as a flashing stop lamp which, as you note, is not permitted by Standard No. 108. We would also regard this configuration as a noncompliance with S5.1.3 of Standard No. 108, which prohibits the installation of additional lighting equipment that impairs the effectiveness of lighting equipment required by the standard. In this configuration, the stop signal would cease to function when the brakes are still applied.

We believe that impairment would also result within the meaning of S5.1.3 when the rear turn signal system is comprised of amber lamps. In this configuration, the stop lamps would be activated when the brakes are applied, followed by separate flashing amber lamps to indicate activation of the ABS. The sudden presence of flashing amber lamps dilutes the unmistakable message the stop lamp is sending, and can result in at least momentary confusion in the driver following a vehicle equipped with the ABS warning system.

Finally, as a matter of interest, motorcycles are not required to have hazard warning systems.

"2. Can an OEM automatically actuate a new set of lights on the rear of a vehicle to indicate that the vehicle's ABS has been activated?"

The answer again is no. Installation of supplemental lighting equipment is permitted by S5.1.3 of Standard No. 108 provided that it does not impair the effectiveness of lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108. We believe that an additional and unfamiliar lamp that is activated immediately following activation of the stop lamps has the potential to cause confusion and momentary hesitation in a following driver, and, in that sense, impair the effectiveness of the stop lamps.

"3. Can a product be sold in the aftermarket that would initiate the flashing of new or existing signal lights upon application of a vehicle's ABS?"

As we have discussed, installation of such a product by an OEM would create a noncompliance with Standard No. 108. Sale of the product per se is not an illegal act, but installation on a vehicle of a product that creates a noncompliance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is expressly prohibited by 49 U.S.C. 30122 when that device is installed by a manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or motor vehicle repair business. Further, use of such a product is also subject to the laws of the various States in which a vehicle is registered or used.

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

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:108
d.10/7/99

ID: nht92-8.41

DATE: February 28, 1992

FROM: Bill Gaines -- Engineer, Transfer Flow, Incorporated

TO: Wally Herger -- Congressman

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 4/27/92 from Frederick H. Grubbe to Wally Herger (A39; Std. 301); Also attached to letter dated 3/13/92 from Wally Herger to Nancy Bruce

TEXT:

The reason I am asking to speak with you on Saturday, February 29, 1992, involves my company's inability to meet Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 301-75 as the manufacturer. This standard has to do with required testing involving the vehicle's fuel system integrity. It is required testing if the vehicle in question has not been sold to the end user.

While we have no problem with the intent of this standard, we are very concerned with the inflexibility of testing and the high cost of performing these test.

We have been quoted $30,000.00 to perform one FMVSS 301 test. Of course, if it doesn't pass then we are required to redesign the fuel system, crash another vehicle and spend another $30,000.00.

If we were selling hundreds of thousands of the same tank, $30,000.00 would be inconsequential. However, if we only sell 50 of these tanks a year then the cost is ridiculous. If we make 600 different kinds of tanks a year, 30 of one style and 100 of another, like we do, then the cost for testing is unthinkable.

A completely different and less stringent structural test is required for vehicles over 10000 GVW and for vehicles under 10000 GVW that have been sold to the end user. We at Transfer Flow, perform these test as required. While they are not as expensive as the crash test, they do effectively demonstrate the structural integrity of the fuel tank and the components attached to it.

We have been in the fuel systems business for over nine years. In that time frame, we have designed over 600 different fuel systems for pick-ups, vans, motor homes, travel trailers and industrial equipment. We have written emissions certifications for companies such as Fleetwood, Oshkosh Truck, Gillig, Bluebird and many others. The California Air Resources Board refers other tank manufacturers to us, to help them submit emissions applications.

We want to provide our customers with safe fuel systems, but we must be given some flexibility in the testing requirements. As a small volume manufacture, we can't afford to perform the FMVSS 301-75 test. We need an alternative.

Again, we are not opposed to testing our product. There are many ways to demonstrate that a product meets the required specifications. Drop testing, vibration testing and finite analysis are just a few methods that can accomplish this task. The engineering analysis that we are capable of doing today was not even taught in the early seventies.

Since we have been unable on our own to alter this requirement for companies such as ourselves, we are asking for your assistance. Please give us a hand.

ID: GF009529

Ms. Susan Gabel
Rockland Coach Works LLC
120 Lyons Road
Mertztown, PA 19539




Dear Ms. Gabel

This responds to your December 14, 2004, letter asking whether a "coach" manufactured by your company using a previously used bus chassis requires a new Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) in accordance with 49 CFR Part 565.

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issues Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) applicable to new motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Chapter 301 of Title 49 of the United States Code, "Motor Vehicle Safety" (49 U.S.C. 30101 et seq.), establishes a "self-certification" process under which motor vehicle manufacturers are responsible for certifying that their vehicles meet all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

NHTSA does not generally regulate rebuilding or re-manufacturing of used motor vehicles. However, if the rebuilding or remanufacturing involves sufficient manufacturing operations and new parts, the vehicle may be considered newly manufactured. This would mean that it would be required to meet all applicable safety standards in effect at the time of rebuilding (re-manufacture), and to be certified as conforming to those standards. Because of the variety of fact situations involved, the agency has found it difficult to establish a general requirement, and it provides opinions on a case-by-case basis.

In this case, your letter (and the pictures on your web site) demonstrates an extensive manufacturing process, which includes the following:

1. A used MCI-9 bus is "stripped" completely leaving only the chassis and certain frame components;
2. Damaged frame components are replaced;
3. The rear of the vehicle is extended by 5 feet;
4. The vehicle roof is raised 8 inches;
5. All exterior body panels are replaced with a custom fiberglass body panels;
6. The vehicle is equipped with a different (new or remanufactured) engine and transmission;
7. Wiring, heat, and air components are all replaced;
8. The vehicle is equipped with a new, custom designed interior featuring living quarters.

The extent of manufacturing operations and new parts described in your letter indicate that the vehicles in question are newly manufactured motor vehicles. Particularly, we note that vehicles remanufactured by your company feature different, engines, transmissions, and entirely new bodies except for certain frame components. Thus, your company must assign a new VIN to these remanufactured vehicles. We note that these vehicles would be treated as newly manufactured for the purposes of NHTSAs safety standards and regulations. Among other things, this would mean that your company is required to certify that the vehicles comply with all applicable safety standards in effect as of the date the remanufacturing operations are completed on the vehicles. The information for new vehicle manufacturers is available at our web site at www.nhtsa.gov.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any other questions, please contact George Feygin of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

ref:565
d.2/16/05

ID: nht72-6.7

DATE: 09/19/72

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Gorou Utsunomiya

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of August 8, 1972, enclosing sketches of motor vehicles and asking into which vehicle category under the motor vehicle safety standards they fall. The numbered paragraphs below correspond to those in your letter.

1. Figures 1, 2, and 3 illustrate trailers under the standards. Trailers are presently subject only to Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, "Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment." Trailers equipped with air brakes and manufactured after September 1, 1974, will be required to conform to Standard No. 121, "Air Brake Systems." It is unlikely that many camping or recreational trailers will be subject to these requirements.

2. Figure 4 illustrates two pickup trucks equipped with slide-in campers. Pickup trucks must conform to all standards applicable to trucks. The campers must conform, as you state, to Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205, "Glazing Materials." Both pickup trucks and slide-in campers will be required to conform to a new Standard No. 126, "Truck-Camper Loading," when that standard becomes effective. A copy of the standard is enclosed.

3. In referring to the illustrations of the pickup trucks equipped with slide-in campers, you ask whether the requirements applicable to the trucks when combined with a camper are different from those applicable when the truck is not so equipped. The answer is no. The standards applicable to pickup trucks (those that are applicable to "trucks") are the same whether or not the pickup is equipped with a camper.

4. The requirements for pickup trucks and slide-in campers do not differ if both components are manufactured by the same company.

5. Wagon campers and motor homes are considered to be multipurpose passenger vehicles when constructed on truck chassis. The illustrations you enclose appear to us to represent vehicles manufactured on truck chassis.

ID: nht88-2.19

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: MAY 6, 1988

FROM: WILLIAM J. STEPHENSON -- PRESIDENT, PRO-FLITE OF VERO, INC.

TO: ERIKA JONES -- NHTSA CHIEF COUNSEL

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: JULY 11, 1988 LETTER FROM JONES TO STEPHENSON

TEXT: Please find enclosed two photographs of a new safety device designed to reduce turning accidents on large vehicles.

In conversations with insurance companies, safety engineers, school boards, motor home owners, truckers and local/state government officials, etc., we conclude there is definitely a need for "Pro-Lite."

I've presented "Pro-Lite" to municipalities, city and county governments, heavy equipment operators, truckers, as well as individuals, all of whom have enthusiastically endorsed "Pro-Lite."

A little about the construction of "Pro-Lite." The entire housing is of standard plastic, impregnated with emergency red pigment. It is internally lit by a series of clearance lights designed to flash in sequence with either turn signal. It is equipped with two (2) hot leads, one of which connects to the turn signal on each side of the vehicle. A single ground wire completes the circuit and . . . presto . . . "Pro-Lite!" Access to bulbs is simply accomplished by removing four (4) screws in the face p late and removing the cover. "Pro-Lite" is made water-tight through the use of a rubber strip that compresses when screws are tightened.

A myriad of mounting possibilities exist. One can mount "Pro-Lite" flush with screws or tape, mount under truck bed, on top of vehicle, etc. Ideally, "Pro-Lite" will be placed on the rear center of vehicle for maximum visability.

We are confident "Pro-Lite" will provide for safer highways and, after all, safety should be a priority concern for everyone.

Ms. Jones, if we may have your thoughts and suggestions, we shall be grateful.

Enclosures

ID: 22199.jeg

Mr. Jeffrey William Clawson
Cooper-Standard Automotive Fluid Systems
Corporate Fuel and Brake Applications Laboratory
3955 Pinnacle Court
Auburn Hills, MI 48326





Dear Mr. Clawson:

This responds to your request for an interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 106, Brake Hoses. In your letter, you state that you will be supplying "brake jumpers" to General Motors for production year 2002 vehicles. Based on a telephone conversation with you, we understand that "brake jumpers" are hydraulic brake hose assemblies. You state that it is your opinion "that as a Tier I supplier of brake lines a band on the part is not necessary." You note, however, that paragraph S5.2.4.1 of FMVSS No. 106 states that at least one end fitting must be stamped or otherwise designated with an identifying code or logo, and state that you are not sure whether this requirement applies to Tier I suppliers. You ask us to "advise if registration is necessary," and if so, how you should approach the matter. Your questions are addressed below.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards applicable to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. One of the standards we have issued is FMVSS No. 106, Brake Hoses, which applies to new motor vehicles and to hydraulic, air, and vacuum brake hose, brake hose assemblies, and brake hose end fittings.

Your questions concern the labeling requirements set forth in S5.2.4 of FMVSS No. 106. That paragraph states in relevant part:

S5.2.4 Each hydraulic brake hose assembly, except those sold as part of a motor vehicle, shall be labeled by means of a band around the brake hose assembly as specified in this paragraph or, at the option of the manufacturer, by means of labeling as specified in S5.2.4.1. . . . (Emphasis added.)

Your letter raises two issues:

(1) Whether, because you are a tier I supplier, your brake hose assemblies are excluded from the labeling requirements of S5.2.4, and

(2) Whether, even if your brake hose assemblies are excluded from the labeling requirements of S5.2.4, they are subject to S5.2.4.1.

Under paragraph S5.2.4, hydraulic brake hose assemblies that are sold as part of a motor vehicle are expressly excluded from that paragraph's labeling requirements. Moreover, S5.2.4 specifies that the labeling requirements of S5.2.4.1 are an option to those specified in S5.2.4. Therefore, hydraulic brake hose assemblies that are sold as part of a motor vehicle are excluded from the labeling requirements of both S5.2.4 and S5.2.4.1.

I note, as historical background, that the S5.2.4 exclusion initially applied only to assemblies "assembled and installed by a vehicle manufacturer in vehicles manufactured by him." In expanding this exclusion by removing the requirement that the assembly must be assembled by the vehicle manufacturer, NHTSA explained:

Assemblies installed in new vehicles need not bear a label because the vehicle certification and identification information serves to certify and identify the hose assembly. NHTSA believes it would make no difference whether the vehicle manufacturer itself produced the assembly.

See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 56 FR 7640-41, February 25, 1991; Final Rule, 56 FR 50520-21, October 7, 1991.

Thus, if all the brake hose assemblies you supply to General Motors are installed in and sold as part of new vehicles, they are excluded from the labeling requirements of both S5.2.4 and S5.2.4.1. However, if General Motors were to sell some of the brake hose assemblies you supply to it as replacement equipment, those assemblies would not be excluded from these requirements. If this is a possibility, it might be easier for you to simply label all of the assemblies in accordance with S5.2.4 or S5.2.4.1. Since General Motors will know how it will use the assemblies, we suggest that you consult with it about this matter.

Paragraphs S5.2.4 and S5.2.4.1 specify, among other things, that the assembly be labeled with:

A designation that identifies the manufacturer of the hose assembly, which shall be filed in writing with: Office of Crash Avoidance Standards, Vehicle Dynamics Division, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20590. The designation may consist of block capital letters, numerals or a symbol.

I note that our Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance now has the responsibility within NHTSA for handling and maintaining these designations. We plan to change the address in Standard No. 106 to reflect this change. You may contact James Gilkey of our Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, at (202) 366-5295, concerning how to file such a designation.

I hope this information is helpful. Please feel free to contact Edward Glancy of this office at (202) 366-2992 if you have any further questions or need additional information .

Sincerely,

John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
ref:106
d.4/23/01