ID: 77-2.39

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/20/77

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; John Womack; NHTSA

TO: Noah Stone

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This letter is to confirm a telephone conversation you had with Kathy DeMeter of this office on May 17, 1977. You asked whether the Federal odometer mileage disclosure statement, required to be executed by 49 CFR Part 580, needed to be a separate piece of paper. The answer is "no." The regulation does not require the disclosure to be separate from other documents. If the full information required by section 580.4 can be included, a disclosure on the bill of sale or other document would satisfy the requirements. The only limitation is that it would have to be executed prior to the completion of the sale as required by section 580.4(a) of the regulation.

If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to write.

ID: 77-2.4

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 03/29/77

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Townsend & Townsend Attorneys at Law

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your February 9, 1977, letter in which you ask how the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration determines whether a school bus must comply with the new school bus safety standards.

On April 1, 1977, several new standards will become effective relating to the construction of school buses: Standard No. 220, School Bus Rollover Protection; Standard No. 221, School Bus Body Joint Strength; and Standard No. 222, School Bus Passenger Seating and Crash Protection. Further, several old standards have been amended to provide special requirements for school buses. These amendments also become effective on April 1.

Section 108(a)(1)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Pub. L. 89-563), as amended (Pub. L. 93-492), prohibits the manufacture for sale, sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment manufactured on or after the date any applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard takes effect that does not conform to the standard. This means that any school bus manufactured on or after April 1, 1977, must comply with the school bus safety standards, regardless of the date on which the bus is actually sold or introduced into interstate commerce.

For vehicles that you complete by mounting a body on a new chassis, you are permitted to choose as the date of manufacture either the date of manufacture of the incomplete vehicle (as defined in Part 568, Vehicles Manufactured in Two or More Stages), the date of final completion of the vehicle, or a date between those two dates. Only those standards in effect on the date chosen to represent the date of manufacture would be applicable to the vehicle, irrespective of the date upon which the vehicle is sold to the ultimate consumer.

I am enclosing copies of the new school bus safety standards and Part 568 for your information.

SINCERELY,

February 9, 1977

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Department of Transportation

Re: School Bus Safety Standards

We represent an automobile dealership which has heretofore entered into a contract for the purchase of several school buses.

Essentially, the chassis portion of the school bus is manufactured by General Motors and the bodies are then placed upon the chassis by a third party.

Our client recently received information from General Motors regarding new school bus safety regulations which will become effective on April 1, 1977 under the Motor Vehicle and School Bus Safety Amendments of 1974. Our dealer understands that there will be several modifications necessary to future school buses including locking devices for brake systems and such things as guards for gas tanks. Of course, the cost of these modifications may be great (Illegible Word) circumstances.

With this in mind, our client is particularly interested in your interpretation of when a school bus is sold or introduced into interstate commerce pursuant to Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations Section 571.3. Specifically, if the school bus was ordered and the chassis manufactured prior to the effective date of these changes, would this constitute a sale or do you contemplate sale to mean the date that the final bus is sold to the ultimate consumer? Secondly, if the school bus was completed pursuant to prior specifications before the effective date of the new standards, but is sold to the ultimate consumer after the date of the effective standards, must the modifications be incorporated in the final unit?

We would also appreciate your advise as to the effective date of these new standards for school buses.

We are located some distance from a library containing the Code of Federal Regulations and the Federal Register and thus solicit your help in attempting to answer these questions we have posed.

Your assistance in this matter will be greatly appreciated.

TOWNSEND AND TOWNSEND, ATTORNEYS

Robert N. Townsend

ID: 77-2.40

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/25/77

FROM: FRANCIS ARMSTRONG -- NHTSA DIRECTOR OFFICE OF STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT MOTOR VEHICLE PROGRAMS

TO: TOM SCHOFIELD -- A. N. DERINGER & CO.

TITLE: NONE

TEXT: Dear Mr. Schofield:

This is in response to your recent inquiry concerning the importation of motor vehicles for resale. Such importation makes you a "manufacturer" under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (the Act) (15 USC 1381 et seq.) and subject to the regulations listed as items two through ten on the last page of this letter.

As a general rule, under section 108(a)(1)(A) of the Act, all motor vehicles, new or used, manufactured on or after January 1, 1968, must conform to all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) in order to be imported into the United States. The regulation governing the importation of motor vehicles is Title 19, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 12.80 (19 CFR 12.80).

If you import a vehicle not certified by the original manufacturer, you must submit within 90 days of the entry a compliance statement to substantiate that the vehicle has been brought into conformity. Your statement must identify the manufacturer, contractor, or other person who has brought the vehicle into conformity, and must describe in exact detail the nature and extent of the work performed. Failure to substantiate that the vehicle has been brought into conformity or sale of the vehicle before release of bond, renders you liable for imposition of civil penalty of up to $ 1,000 per vehicle and/or assessment of liquidated damages in the amount of the value of the bond required by 19 CFR 12.80(c).

Section 114 (15 USC 1403) of the Act and Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 567 (49 CFR 567), require that manufacturers permanently affix a tag or label to a motor vehicle certifying that it conforms to all applicable FMVSS. Prior to your sale of a vehicle, you as the "manufacturer" are also required to certify conformance with all applicable FMVSS by permanently affixing the certification label specified, see 567.2(b) and 567.4(g)(1). This label shall be affixed at the time of submission of your compliance statement.

If you determine in good faith that any vehicle imported and sold by you does not conform with any of the applicable FMVSS or contains a safety-related defect, section 151 (15 USC 1411) of the Act requires that you furnish notification to the Secretary and to owners in accordance with section 153 (15 USC 1413) and to remedy without cost the failure to conform or defect in accordance with section 154 (15 USC 1414).

Since in all probability the trucks referenced in your conversation with Mr. Robert W. Aubuchon, a member of my staff, fall into the classification of vehicles manufactured in two or more stages, we are enclosing a copy of 49 CFR 568.

As requested the points of contact for certification matters in the companies you referenced are:

Mr. J. C. Eckhold Director, Auto Safety Office Ford Motor Co. The American Road Dearborn, Michigan 48121

Mr. David E. Martin Manager, Auto Safety Engineering Dept. Environmental Activities Staff General Motors Technical Center Warren, Michigan 48090

Mr. L. W. Moore Manager, Reliability and Warranty International Harvester Co. P.O. Box 1109 Fort Wayne, Indiana 46801

Mr. James W. Lawrence Manager, Safety and Environmental Engineering Truck Group White Motor Corp. P.O. Box 91500 Cleveland, Ohio 44101

You should also note that under 49 CFR 566 you are required to submit certain identifying information and a description of your product to the Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

It should also be noted that before offering a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment for importation into the United States, a foreign manufacturer is required to register an "Agent-for-Service" of process as set forth in 49 CFR 551.45 and to furnish the information required by 49 CFR 566.

Federal regulations concerning anti-pollution emission control devices are not the responsibility of the Department of Transportation. For guidance in this area it is suggested that you write the Environmental Protection Agency, Director, Mobile Source Enforcement Division, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460

You are advised to carefully examine the Act, Importation Regulations, and FMVSS as well as other regulations listed below to insure that you fully understand the extent of the responsibilities you incur upon the importation of a motor vehicle for resale. Enclosed for your information and guidance is a copy of the following:

1. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (15 USC 1381 et seq.)

2. 49 CFR 551, "Procedural Rules"

3. 49 CFR 566, "Manufacturer Identification"

4. 49 CFR 567, "Certification"

5. 49 CFR 571, "Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards"

6. 49 CFR 574, "Tire Identification and Recordkeeping"

7. 49 CFR 575, "Consumer Information"

8. 49 CFR 577, "Defect Notification"

9. 49 CFR 580, "Odometer Disclosure Requirements"

10. 19 CFR 12.80, "Importation Regulations"

11. Where to Obtain Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations

12. Form HS-189, "General Requirements of FMVSS"

Should you have other questions, please contact Mr. Robert Aubuchon, a member of my staff, telephone number 202-426-1693.

13. ENCLOSURES

Sincerely,

ID: 77-2.41

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/27/77

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; J. J. Levin, Jr.; NHTSA

TO: Senate Transportation Committee

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Permit me to comment upon Oregon House Bill 2998 which I understand is to be considered by the Transportation Committee of the Oregon Senate on June 3, 1977.

The Bill would amend ORS 483.404 to require that headlamps on motor vehicles registered in Oregon meet the standards established for such under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 or

". . . the United Nations Agreement concerning the Adoption of Approval and Reciprocal Recognition of Approval for Motor Vehicle Equipment and Parts; done at Geneva on 20 March 1958, as amended and adopted by the Canadian Standards Association (CSA Standard 106.2) or both."

Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1392(a) [Section 103(a) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966] Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment (49 CFR 571.108), has been established, effective January 1, 1972, as the Federal standard for headlamps both as original and replacement equipment on motor vehicles. Under 15 U.S.C. 1392(d).

"Whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard established under this title is in effect, no State or political subdivision of a State shall have any authority either to establish, or to continue in effect, with respect to any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment any safety standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of such vehicle or item of equipment which is not identical to the Federal standard." [Emphasis added.]

The United Nations Agreement, and this Agreement as amended by the Canadian Standards Association, permit the use of motor vehicle headlamps that are not of sealed beam construction and whose candlepower output may exceed 75,000, and do not require that they be mechanically aimable. Standard No. 108, on the other hand, requires that headlamps on passenger vehicles be of sealed beam construction, imposes a limit of 75,000 candlepower on all but one type of headlamp, and requires that all headlamps be mechanically aimable. Thus, the United Nations Agreement, and this Agreement as amended by the Canadian Standards Association, do not specify requirements for headlamps that are identical to those of Standard No. 108. This means that if House Bill 2998 is enacted in its present form the language that I quoted from it would, in our opinion, be preempted by 15 U.S.C. 1392(d), and of no legal effect. This means also that any person in Oregon manufacturing for sale, selling, offering for sale, introducing or delivering for introduction in interstate commerce, or importing into the United States a headlamp that did not conform to Standard No. 108, in reliance upon House Bill 2998 were it to be enacted, would be subject to civil penalties for apparent violations of 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1)(A) in an amount up to $ 800,000 (15 U.S.C. 1398(a)), and to a restraining order (15 U.S.C.

1399(a)).

Section 1392(d) and the Act's preemptive effect have been invariably upheld. (See e.g. Chrysler Corp. v. Malloy, 294 F. Supp 524 (U.S.D.C. Vt. 1968), Chrysler Corp. v. Tofany, 419 F.2d 499 (C.C.A. 2 1969)) We would also observe that the interpretation of the preemption language by this agency, as the administering agency, has been viewed by courts as "of controlling weight." (Thorpe v. Housing Authority of Durham, 393 U.S. 268 (1969) quoted with approval in Chrysler Corp. v. Tofany, supra, at 512.)

If you have any questions, Taylor Vinson of this office will be glad to assist you (202-426-9511).

ID: 77-2.42

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/27/77

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; J. J. Levin, Jr.; NHTSA

TO: Volvo of America Corporation

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your March 24, 1977, request for an interpretation concerning the requirements for attachment hardware specified in Safety Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies. You ask about the force requirements that would be applicable to attachment hardware that is common to the left and right front safety belts and also common to the pelvic and upper torso restraints.

You are correct in your assumption that the subject attachment hardware (designated part "14" in your diagram) would be required to withstand a force of at least 6,000 pounds or 2720 kilograms without fracture of any section. However, the pertinent section is paragraph S4.3(c)(2) of the standard rather than paragraph S4.4(b)(3), as you stated. Paragraph S4.3(c)(2) specifies that attachment hardware designed to receive the ends of two seat belt assemblies shall withstand a tensile force of at least 6,000 pounds. The agency concludes that the Volvo attachment part "14" is hardware designed to receive the ends of two seat belt assemblies.

The attachment bolt, part "17", for part "14" would be required to withstand a force of 9,000 pounds or 4080 kilograms under paragraph S4.3(c)(1) of the standard.

Sincerely,

ATTACH.

March 24, 1977

Frank Berndt -- National Highway Traffic Safety Adminstration

Re: Interpretation of FMVSS #209

Dear Mr. Berndt:

Volvo requests a clarification of the applicability of the following section of FMVSS #209 to certain specific items:

Paragraph S.4.3(c)(1) states: "Eye bolts, shoulder bolts or other bolts used to secure the pelvic restraint of a seat belt assembly to a motor vehicle shall withstand a force of 9000 pounds or 4080 kilograms when tested by the procedure specified in S.5.2.(c)(1), except that attachment bolts of a seat belt assembly designed for installation in specific models of motor vehicles in which the ends of two or more seat belt assemblies cannot be attached to the vehicle by a single bolt, shall have a braking strength of not less than 5000 pounds or 2070 kilograms".

Paragraph S.4.3(c)(2) states: "Other attachment hardware designed to receive the ends of two seat belt assemblies shall withstand a tensile force of at least 6000 pounds or 2720 kilograms without fracture of any section when tested by the procedure in S.5.2(c)(2)".

Paragraph S.4.4(b)(3) states: "The structural components in the assembly that are common to pelvic and upper torso restraints shall withstand a force of not less than 3000 pounds or 1360 kilograms".

Volvo uses a front seat belt assembly where certain components are common to the pelvic and upper torso restraints for both front seats. Thus, we interpret paragraph S.4.4 (b)(3) to require that the attachment hardware which is common to the left and right front safety belts and also common to the pelvic and upper torso restraints to withstand 2 x 3000 pounds or 6000 pounds. Furthermore, because a seat belt assembly is defined as all hardware designed for installing the assembly in a motor vehicle, we interpret this requirement to include the attachment bolts. Enclosed for your information is a drawing of the Volvo safety belt system.

Are these interpretations correct? If there are any questions on this matter, please contact the undersigned.

In advance, thank you for your cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely,

VOLVO OF AMERICA CORPORATION -- Product Engineering and Development;

William Shapiro P.E. -- Pegulatory Analysis Engineer

[Enclosure Omitted]

ID: 77-2.43

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/27/77

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Joseph J. Levin Jr.; NHTSA

TO: Sullair Corporation

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your April 1, 1977, question whether your company's wheel mounted portable air compressors qualify as motor vehicles under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended, (15 U.S.C. @ 1381, et. seq.).

The answer to your question is yes. Section 102(3) of the Act defines motor vehicle as:

any vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways, except any vehicle operated exclusively on a rail or rails.

Thus, a motor vehicle is a vehicle which the manufacturer expects will use the public highways as part of its intended function. Vehicles which use the highway on a necessary and recurring basis to move between work sites are motor vehicles. Since your portable air compressors are used in this manner they qualify as motor vehicles. For purposes of regulating motor vehicles, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) established vehicle catagories within that class. Your portable air compressors meet the definition of one of those catagories, trailers.

The following safety standards are applicable to the manufacture of trailers: Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment; Standard No. 121, Air Brake Systems, and Standard No. 106-74, Brake Hoses (in the case of trailers equipped with air brakes); and Standard No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars.

You will have to certify the compliance of your trailers to these safety standards. Part 566, Manufacturer Identification (49 CFR Part 566), specifies identification information which must be submitted to the NHTSA by manufacturers of vehicles and equipment that are regulated by our safety standards. Part 567, Certification (49 CFR Part 567, specifies the content and location of the certification label or tag that must be attached to motor vehicles regulated by our standards.

SINCERELY,

SULLAIR CORPORATION

April 1, 1977

United States Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration James B. Gregory, Administrator

Sullair Corporation requests a formal determination as to whether or not wheel mounted portable air compressors manufactured by our company fall under the jurisdiction of 15USC1391-1431 National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, or any of the Federal Regulations listed in Appendix 1, or any other Federal Regulations administered by the United States Department of Transportation.

Briefly, our wheel mounted portable air compressors can be categorized as shown in Fig. 1 through 4, attached. Obviously, all of these categories may be considered trailers. They all have pneumatic tires, some with rims. They all contain an engine with fuel system, but none are self propelled, nor are they intended to carry passengers or any operator, and some are lined with acoustical materials.

15USC1391-1431 National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, Title 1, Part A, Sec. 102, (3), states -" 'Motor Vehicle' means any vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways, except any vehicle operated exclusively on a rail or rails".

Our interpretation of this statement has been that our wheel mounted portable air compressors do not come under the jurisdiction of these Federal Regulations due to the fact that they are manufactured primarily to provide compressed air at construction sites and the like, and the fact that they are drawn over public street roads, and hghways for the purpose of transporting them from one construction site to another, or to the site of road repair, for example, was only incidental to their use, and not the primary function they are manufactured to perform.

Occasionally, we factory install customer specified optional equipment on these wheel mounted portable air compressors, such as electric, hydraulic, pneumatic, or vacuum operated service brakes, mechanical, hydralic, or pneumatic, operated parking brakes, electric or hydralic operated brakeaway brakes, safety chains stop lights, turn indicator lights, tail lights, running and/or clearance lights, hazard warning lights, and/or reflective devices, for example.

It has been our thinking that installing this sort of optional equipment only enhances the safety with which these wheel mounted portable air compressors may be drawn from one work site to another, and in no way alters the primary function that they are manufactured to perform, and as a result, does not automatically bring these products under the jurisdiction of the Federal Regulations mentioned elsewhere.

Please let us have your determination as to whether or not our interpretation and thinking are correct.

E. C. Elliott Engineer, Product Safety and Environment

[ENC. OMITTED]

ID: 77-2.44

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 06/01/77 EST

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; J. J. Levin, Jr.; NHTSA

TO: National School Transportation Association

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: In reply to your letter to Fred Vetter of May 6, 1977, concerning the knee room required for passengers in a small school bus, I think it is essential for your members to understand that the terms "Type I" and "Type II" are meaningless in the context of the motor vehicle safety standards. There is a difference in the seat spacing requirements for large buses and small buses, but in deciding which spacing a particular bus must meet, the manufacturers must use the criteria of the standards under 49 CFR Part 571, and not the Type I/Type II distinction.

In dealing with the motor vehicle safety standards applicable to school buses, two criteria determine the applicability of various requirements: seating capacity and vehicle weight. The seating capacity of a vehicle determines whether a vehicle is to be considered a school bus. Under the definitions of bus and school bus in 49 CFR @ 571.3, the critical number of passengers is 10. If a motor vehicle is designed to carry "more than 10 persons," it is a bus. If a bus is sold "for purposes that include carrying students to and from school or related events" it is a school bus. All school buses must conform to the applicable requirements of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 222, School Bus Passenger Seating and Crash Protection.

Standard No. 222, however, makes the criterion of weight relevant in determining the spacing between seats. In a bus with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of more than 10,000 pounds, section 5.2 of the standard requires each passenger seat to have either a seat back or a restraining barrier within 20 inches of the "seating reference point," a design point that is roughly 5.2 inches forward of the seat back. Measured from the seat back, therefore, all school buses with GVWR's of more than 10,000 pounds must provide "knee room" of not more than about 25.2 inches. School buses with GVWR's of 10,000 pounds or less do not have to meet the spacing requirements.

Any school buses that your members purchase will therefore have to meet the spacing requirements of Standard No. 222 if they weigh more than 10,000 pounds. This weight corresponds roughly to a bus with a seating capacity of 14-17 persons, so that most "Type I" school buses would have to meet the spacing requirements, and most "Type II" buses would not. Always keep in mind that it is the school bus's weight, not its seating capacity, that determines the applicability of the spacing requirement.

Sincerely,

ATTACH.

National School Transportation Association MAY 6, 1977

Fred Vetter -- Associate Administrator, NHTSA Safety programs

Dear Mr. Vetter:

RE: Type II Buses

It seems appropriate to bring you up to date on the Type II Bus Saga . . . . . . .

Further discussions with Bob Kure from Wayne and finally with Tim Hoyt of the NHTSA did bring out the fact that the knee room is not a problem in the Type II Buses as earlier stated by our Association.

There are still problems in that Dodge has now dropped out of the market and Chevrolet has yet to certify their chassis. At the moment there is no chassis available to the Type II market. (Ford has not been involved since the April 1 regulations came into being).

The frustration we feel at this time is indeed great. In dialogue with 4 manufacturers of these vehicles and many state directors, the notion that the 25.2" knee room applies to Type II School Buses still abounds. In fact, one Regional Highway Administrator is telling all of his states that 25.2" is fact for both Type II and Type I school buses.

When I first raised the question at the Motor Vehicle Programs Sector, this was told to me as being the truth after I was asked the question by a State Director. That day Tim Hoyt was not in, but someone of his superiors did take the call and confirm that Type II buses need 25.2" knee room and the seat belts. I fussed at this and indicated it would not work and was told "Congress gave us this short time constraint and we did the best we could . . . and we spent a lot of thought about these matters . . . . even if you think we did not". Based on that conversation, I went forth concerned and upset that the Special Education buses would not fit the needs of the children being transported.

We still have concerns and will be reponding to the Activity Bus problems and others as they develop. Your time and attention during our distress is appreciated. If only we could get better answers when we need them!

Sincerely,

BILLIE REYNOLDS

ID: 77-2.45

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 06/03/77

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; J. J. Levin, Jr.; NHTSA

TO: Krystal Glass Co.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your March 11, 1977, question whether the stained glass portholes manufactured by your company for use on van vehicles have to comply with Safety Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials. You contend that since the portholes are backed by complying safety glazing the intent of Standard No. 205 is met, even though the stained glass itself is not safety glazing.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) cannot agree with your interpretation. Standard No. 205 specifies performance requirements for glazing material for use in specified locations in motor vehicles. All parts of your stained glass porthole windows must comply with the requirements of the standard. The safety glazing that backs your portholes could be damaged during a crash and the vehicle occupants could be exposed to the noncomplying stained glass. The NHTSA, therefore, disagrees with your conclusion that the intent of Standard No. 205 is met by the Krystal Glass porthole windows.

You should be aware that paragraph S6.2 of the standard requires a prime glazing material manufacturer to certify each piece of glazing material that is designed as a component of any specific motor vehicle or camper pursuant to Section 114 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended, (15 U.S.C. @ 1381, et. seq.), and by marking the glazing with the "DOT" symbol and a manufacturer's code mark. A prime glazing material manufacturer is defined as one who fabricates, laminates, or tempers the glazing material. A manufacturer's code mark is assigned by the NHTSA upon the written request of a manufacturer.

Enclosed is a copy of the ANS Z26 standard, as requested in your telephone conversation with Hugh Oates of this office.

Sincerely,

ATTACH.

MARCH 11, 1977

Frank Berndt

Subject: Stained Glass Portholes, with safty glass backing.

Dear sir,

In our research to insure that Stained Glass Portholes were a safe and legal product, we have met and discussed the product with both State and Federal officials. Our first step was directed toward approval from the California Division of Highway Patrol - Engineering Division. Stained Glass Portholes, backed with safety glazing, (AS-2) were shown to a Mr. Robert Sheppard. He held the Portholes for inspection by his department until he was assured that we had a safe product, (one that complies with the safety codes). He telephoned Krystal Glass Co. on 3, March 1977 and gave an assurance that we had a safe product and that it was ok to go ahead with manufacturing.

We proceeded to manufacture and market our windows until 8, March 1977. On this day a Federal Official, Mr. Joseph Zamaitas, contacted our company and informed us we were required to meet Federal Safety Standard #205, also that we possibly needed a manufactures code number. Therefore would you please consider our question. If we install Automotive Safety Glazing (AS-4) or Laminated Safety Glass (AS-2) on the inside portion of the unit, towards the passenger compartment, does this comply with the intent of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard #205?

Besides protecting the passenger compartment with an approved Safety Glazing, we were concerned with the shattering effects of our Stained Glass Plate. After testing the evidence, it is quite clear that the shattered glass was contained within the leaded channels.

We have submitted the Stained Glass Porthole that we tested for your inspection, also included are two undamaged protholes for your inspection.

Your rapid reply to our question in regards to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard #205, would be greatly appreciated.

Thank You,

John Watson -- Krystal Glass Co.

ID: 77-2.46

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 06/03/77

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Joseph J. Levin Jr.; NHTSA

TO: E.D. Etnyre & Co.

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your March 30, 1977, letter asking whether the rebuilding of a motor vehicle with all new running gear and an old body constitutes the manufacture of a new motor vehicle requiring compliance with Federal regulations.

In the rebuilding operation you describe, you retain the old body tank structure while replacing the entire running gear assembly. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has determined by regulation in 49 CFR 571.7(f) that the rebuilding of a motor vehicle using old running gear with a new body does not constitute the manufacture of a new motor vehicle. The vehicle will be considered newly manufactured unless, at a minimum, the trailer running gear assembly is not new and was taken from an existing trailer whose identity is continued with respect to the Vehicle Identification Number. In addition, the trailer must be owned or leased by the same party both before and after the remanufacture. Since the running gear with which you plan to equip your vehicle is new, your operation constitutes the new manufacture of a vehicle.

You ask secondly what portion of the running gear can be replaced as normal repairs without such replacement being considered the manufacture of a new vehicle. You may replace any part of the running gear assembly that breaks or malfunctions during operation of the motor vehicle. The NHTSA would consider this to be normal maintenance of the vehicle, not subject to the requirements applicable to vehicle manufacture.

SINCERELY,

E.D. ETNYRE & CO.

March 30, 1977

U.S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Attention: Legal Counsel

We are manufacturers of tank type truck bodies and trailers with running gear.

On a somewhat irregular basis, we receive requests from users of this equipment to perform certain repairs.

Our specific question at this time relates to repairs done to the running gear of trailers and whether an involvement with 49CFR 571.7(f) concerning new and used components is incurred.

1. If the present tank structure and upper fifth wheel coupler are reused in conjunction with a totally new running gear assembly, is the vehicle still a used vehicle for the purpose of the applicability ruling regarding conformance to federal regulations?

2. If the preceding answer is no, what portion of the running gear - wheels, axles, brakes and suspension - can be replaced as normal repairs without changing the status to "new"?

For the purpose of this inquiry the vehicle identification is continued and ownership is retained.

Jackson Decker Chief Product Engineer

ID: 77-2.47

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: June 3, 1977

FROM: Joseph J. Levin, Jr. -- Chief Counsel

TO: Larry J. Stroble

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 12-3-90 from P.J. Rice to R.B. Roden (A36; Std. 205); Also attached to letter dated 7-19-90 from R.B. Roden to P.J. Rice (OCC 5036)

TEXT:

This responds to your April 20, 1977, letter asking whether your client, a manufacturer of radiator cooling fans and air conditioner/heater fans, must comply with the requirements for certification found in Section 114 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1968 (the Act) (15 U.S.C. 1381 et sec.).

Section 114 of the Act requires manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment to certify that each such vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment conforms to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Since there are no safety standards in effect which regulate the items of equipment to which you refer, your client would not be required to perform the certification outlined in Section 114 and in the regulation promulgated thereunder (49 CFR Part 567).

You should note that as an equipment manufacturer your client might have some responsibilities under the Act with respect to defect notifications and recalls if he were to manufacture an item of equipment that contained a defect related to motor vehicle safety. These responsibilities are outlined in the Act in Section 151 et seq.