ID: 8162

7

Mr. David H. B. Lee President, Lee Family, Inc. 701 East 30th Hutchinson, KS 67502

Dear Mr. Lee:

This responds to your letter of December 29, 1992, with respect to a "Third Brake Light Conditions Sensor", for which you have requested a review and testing. You have also asked for our comments and advice on the sale and promotion of this product. We assume that you would like to sell it in the aftermarket to vehicle owners.

We have reviewed the videotape you enclosed, and are able to advise you on this basis. The tape shows that the device is intended for installation by the owner of the vehicle, and, when installed, causes the center highmounted brake lamp to flash in proportion to braking effort (i.e., a panic or quick stop produces a higher flash rate than a stop made at a slower vehicle deceleration).

Motor vehicle lighting in the United States is subject to both Federal and State requirements. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act and Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment are the Federal requirements to which I refer. Standard No. 108 prescribes requirements for center highmounted stop lamps that must be followed by the manufacturer of the vehicle, and met at the time the vehicle is sold by the dealer to its first owner. One of these requirements is that the center highmounted stop lamp be steady burning when it is in use. Because the Sensor creates a flashing light, a vehicle manufacturer would not be able to use it as original equipment on a vehicle subject to Standard No. 108's requirements for center lamps. These vehicles are passenger cars manufactured on and after September 1, 1985, and light trucks and vans manufactured on and after September 1, 1993.

The Safety Act governs modifications to vehicles after their initial sale. This Act does not prohibit a vehicle owner from modifications that affect compliance with Standard No. 108 (or any other Federal motor vehicle safety standard). Thus, a vehicle owner may install the Sensor without violation of Federal requirements. However, we interpret the Safety Act as prohibiting the installation of the Sensor by a manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or motor vehicle repair business. Under the Act, these persons shall not "render inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed in accordance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard." In our view, this forbids the installation of equipment that would take a vehicle out of compliance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard. However, the Act does not forbid the sale of componentry such as the Sensor which creates a noncompliance once it is installed. In summary, under Federal law, any person may sell your device, but only a person other than a manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or motor vehicle repair business may install it.

We are unable to advise you as to whether the laws of any State prohibit the use of a flashing center highmounted stop lamp, and recommend that you consult the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators for an opinion. Its address is 4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Va. 22203.

We are returning your videotape and sample Sensors.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel

Enclosures ref:108 d.1/26/93

ID: nht93-1.20

DATE: January 26, 1993

FROM: John Womack --Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: David H.B. Lee -- President, Lee Family, Inc.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 12/29/92 from David H.B. Lee to Paul J. Rice (OCC 8162)

TEXT:

This responds to your letter of December 29, 1992, with respect to a "Third Brake Light Conditions Sensor", for which you have requested a review and testing. You have also asked for our comments and advice on the sale and promotion of this product. We assume that you would like to sell it in the aftermarket to vehicle owners.

We have reviewed the videotape you enclosed, and are able to advise you on this basis. The tape shows that the device is intended for installation by the owner of the vehicle, and, when installed, causes the center highmounted brake lamp to flash in proportion to braking effort (i.e., a panic or quick stop produces a higher flash rate than a stop made at a slower vehicle deceleration).

Motor vehicle lighting in the United States is subject to both Federal and State requirements. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act and Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment are the Federal requirements to which I refer. Standard No. 108 prescribes requirements for center highmounted stop lamps that must be followed by the manufacturer of the vehicle, and met at the time the vehicle is sold by the dealer to its first owner. One of these requirements is that the center highmounted stop lamp be steady burning when it is in use. Because the Sensor creates a flashing light, a vehicle manufacturer would not be able to use it as original equipment on a vehicle subject to Standard No. 108's requirements for center lamps. These vehicles are passenger cars manufactured on and after September 1, 1985, and light trucks and vans manufactured on and after September 1, 1993.

The Safety Act governs modifications to vehicles after their initial sale. This Act does not prohibit a vehicle owner from modifications that affect compliance with Standard No. 108 (or any other Federal motor vehicle safety standard). Thus, a vehicle owner may install the Sensor without violation of Federal requirements. However, we interpret the Safety Act as prohibiting the installation of the Sensor by a manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or motor vehicle repair business. Under the Act, these persons shall not "render inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed in accordance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard." In our view, this forbids the installation of equipment that would take a vehicle out of compliance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard. However, the Act does not forbid the sale of componentry such as the Sensor which creates a noncompliance once it is installed. In summary, under Federal law, any person may sell your device, but only a person other than a manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or motor vehicle repair business may install it.

We are unable to advise you as to whether the laws of any State prohibit the use of a flashing center highmounted stop lamp, and recommend that you consult

the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators for an opinion. Its address is 4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Va. 22203.

We are returning your videotape and sample Sensors.

ID: 16695.jeg

Erika Z. Jones, Esq.
Mayer, Brown & Platt
2000 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20006-1882

Dear Ms. Jones:

This responds to your letter asking about our regulation implementing the American Automobile Labeling Act (AALA), 49 CFR Part 583, as it pertains to an electric vehicle that has no gasoline or diesel-fueled engine. You ask several questions about the manner in which country of origin of engine parts and country of origin of transmission parts should be determined for electric vehicles.

In asking these questions, you note that many of the components used in electric vehicles are not the same as those used in a gasoline-powered vehicle. By way of example, you note that an electric vehicle does not have an "engine" in the traditional sense; rather it has an electric motor. Your questions are addressed below.

1. What is the "engine" in an electric car for AALA purposes? Is any component other than the electric motor to be included in the AALA determination of country of origin for engines with respect to an electric car?

The term "engine" is not defined by either the AALA (now codified as 49 U.S.C. 32304) or Part 583. We note that Ford, in a submission dated November 19, 1997, took the following approach in applying the provisions of Part 583 to electric vehicles:

In applying these provisions to electric vehicles, we sought to employ a common-sense approach. Since the motor is the component of an electric vehicle most analogous to the engine in a gasoline-powered vehicle, we are indicating the country of origin of the motor on labels affixed to electric vehicles. In order to make it clear to consumers that the label is referring to the motor rather than to an engine, the word "motor" will be inserted in parentheses after the country of origin. For example, the relevant portion of the label for a motor originating in Germany would look roughly as follows:

COUNTRY OF ORIGIN:

ENGINE: Germany (motor)

We concur with the basic approach adopted by Ford. However, we note that 583.5 specifies the use of the term "engine parts" on the label, rather than just "engine." Also, for purposes of clarity, we would suggest placing the word "motor" in parentheses directly after "engine," the term it is explaining, rather than after the country of origin. Thus, in the example provided by Ford, we would suggest the following:

COUNTRY OF ORIGIN:

ENGINE (MOTOR) PARTS: Germany

No component other than the motor would be included in the AALA determination of country of origin for engines with respect to an electric car.

2. How should a manufacturer determine whether electric car "engines" are "of the same displacement" for purposes of aggregating data for "engines of the same displacement produced at the same plant" as required by 583.8(a)?

Section 583.8(a) specifies in relevant part:

Each supplier of an engine or transmission shall determine the country of origin once a year for each engine and transmission. The origin of engines shall be calculated for engines of the same displacement produced at the same plant. . . .

The term "engines of the same displacement produced at the same plant" is taken directly from the AALA. The purpose of the provision is to provide a specification to ensure that all engines of the same type, produced at the same plant, are grouped together in making country of origin determinations for engines. However, just as the term "engine," in its traditional sense, does not apply to electric vehicles, the term "displacement" does not apply to motors. We believe that a common-sense way of ensuring that all motors of the same type, produced at the same plant, are grouped together is to make calculations for motors with the same power rating and same physical dimensions that are produced at the same plant.

3. What parts are considered components of the "transmission" in an electric car for AALA purposes?

The term "transmission" is not defined by the AALA or Part 583, and we realize that not all electric vehicles have transmissions. As to the meaning of the term, we note that the Random House Compact Unabridged Dictionary defines "transmission," in definition 4, as follows:

Mach. a. transference of force between machines or mechanisms, often with changes of torque and speed. b. a compact, enclosed unit of gears or the like for this purpose, as in an automobile.

We would consider definition 4b to reasonably apply to transmissions for electric vehicles. We note that, assuming an electric vehicle has a transmission, it would generally include the components between the motor and the differential.

4. How should a manufacturer determine whether electric car "transmissions" are "of the same type" for purposes of aggregating data for "transmissions of the same type" as required by 583.8(a)?

The AALA specifies that "transmissions of the same type produced at the same plant" are grouped together for determining country of origin of transmissions. Section 583.8(a) defines the term "transmission of the same type" as follows:

. . . Transmissions are of the same type if they have the same attributes including: Drive line application, number of forward gears, controls, and layout. . . .

So far as we know, this definition can be applied directly to the transmissions of electric vehicles.

5. Is the electric battery part of the engine, transmission or neither for AALA purposes?

It is our opinion that the electric battery is neither part of the engine nor the transmission for AALA purposes.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please feel free to call Edward Glancy of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
ref:583
d.3/5/98

ID: 17557.drn

Mr. Harry C. Gough, P.E.
Automotive Engineering Professional Specialist
Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles
60 State Street
Wethersfield, CT 06161

Dear Mr. Gough:

This responds to your request for an interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 217's retroreflective tape requirements for school bus rear emergency doors.

You enclose a photograph of a school bus rear exit door which shows that the retroreflective tape above the door opening is interrupted by the words "Emergency Door." Your letter states that the gap caused by the words is 16 inches (40 centimeters) long. In the retroreflective tape outlining each of the two sides of the emergency door, there also are gaps in each of the four corners that would have been formed had the two horizontal tapes and two vertical tapes met. You ask three questions, restated below, about whether gaps are permitted in the tape.

Question 1: Is there an interpretation of the language in S5.5.3 of FMVSS 217 allowing the gap retroreflective tape as heretofore described?

Standard No. 217, Bus emergency exits and window retention and release, specifies emergency exit identification requirements at S5.5. School bus emergency exit identification requirements are at S5.5.3, and state:

(a) Each school bus emergency exit ... shall have the designation "Emergency Door" or "Emergency Exit," as appropriate, in letters at least 5 centimeters high, of a color that contrasts with its background. For emergency exit doors, the designation shall be located at the top of, or directly above, the emergency exit door on both the inside and outside surfaces of the door....

 * * *

(c) Each opening for a required emergency exit shall be outlined around its outside perimeter with a retroreflective tape with a minimum width of 2.5 centimeters and either red, white, or yellow in color ...

In previous NHTSA compliance tests conducted on school buses manufactured by Thomas Built Buses and by Blue Bird Body Company, the agency found gaps in the retroreflective tape similar to what you describe in your letter. NHTSA's Safety Assurance office determined in those tests that the requirements of Standard 217 were not violated. The agency determined that there was not enough space at the top of the exit to place the words "Emergency Door" and the 2.5 centimeter tape without either: (a) taping part of the upper door trim and rivets; or (b) taping over the "School Bus" designation. Both of these alternatives were deemed undesirable. Taping over trim and rivets would likely reduce the wearability of the tape, and taping over the school bus designation would reduce the clarity of the sign. Thus, the gaps were permitted.

Without knowing the exact measurements of your school bus, we cannot make a determination that placement of the tape, as you described, is acceptable. However, if the space is limited as it was on the buses that NHTSA evaluated, then interrupting the tape with the "Emergency Door" designation is an acceptable means for a manufacturer to try to meet both S5.5.3(a) and (c). You can send us the measurements of the vehicle if you wish, for us to further review the matter.

Question 2: If the gaps are allowed then how large of a percentage of a given perimeter edge would be acceptable.

In July 7, 1993 and June 8, 1994 letters to Blue Bird and Van-Con, respectively, NHTSA permitted interruptions in the tape necessary to avoid and/or accommodate curved surfaces and functional components, such as rivets, rubrails, hinges, handles and tail lights. However, NHTSA said that the tape must be able to identify the location of emergency exits to rescuers and increase the on-the-road conspicuity of the bus. Also, the tape must be applied as near as possible to the exit perimeter.  In these letters, NHTSA did not establish a specified "percentage" of an exit perimeter or of a side of a perimeter that must be outlined to be deemed acceptable.

In the school bus emergency door in your photograph, I note that there are gaps in the tape at the four corners where the two horizontal tapes and the two vertical tapes should meet. If there are no rivets or curved surfaces or other impediments to placement of the tape, as described in the July1993 letter to Blue Bird, tape must be applied so that the horizontal tapes and the vertical tapes meet, forming corners.

Question 3: If the size of the gap at the top edge of the rear door, as previously indicated, is interpreted as excessive then can the words "Emergency Door" be relocated to the top half of the door or alternately can a section of retroreflective tape be located immediately above the words "Emergency Door."

As noted in our answer to Question 1, it is possible that the gap is permitted, depending on the measurements of your bus. Concerning your specific question about possibly relocating the emergency door identification, NHTSA has a longstanding interpretation that the emergency door identification can be on the top half of the emergency exit door. (See, September 22, 1978, letter to Mr. Tydings, Thomas Built Buses.)

I note that in a March 16, 1995, letter to you, then-Chief Counsel Philip Recht enclosed copies of our June 8, 1994, letter to Van-Con, Inc., and March 28, 1994, and July 7, 1993, letters to Blue Bird Body Company. For your convenience, I am again enclosing copies of those letters.

I hope this information is helpful. In the future, it would help us in responding to you if you would provide a telephone number at which you can be reached. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Dorothy Nakama at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosures (4 letters)
ref:217
d.9/2/98

ID: nash.ztv

Mr. Rod Nash
Vice President of Engineering
Collins Industries, Inc.
15 Compound Drive
Hutchinson, KS 67502-4349

Dear Mr. Nash:

This is in reply to your two letters of June 23, 2003, received in this Office on July 16.

In one letter, you wrote on behalf of Capacity of Texas (Capacity), which you identified as a "wholly-owned subsidiary" of Collins Industries, Inc. (Collins). You related that "Collins has other subsidiaries that build school buses, commercial buses, and ambulances." You commented that only a portion of Capacitys total production of "spotter trucks" is certified for use on the public roads, less than 500 vehicles a year, but that the total number of vehicles manufactured by all subsidiaries of Collins will be more than 500 a year. You have asked whether Capacity may report as a small volume manufacturer under the early warning reporting (EWR) regulation (i.e., under 49 CFR 579.27 rather than under 49 CFR 579.22).

In the other letter, you have written on behalf of Wheeled Coach Industries (Wheeled Coach), another wholly-owned Collins subsidiary. Wheeled Coach produces both light vehicles and medium-heavy vehicles (all ambulances). You reported that you were told by a panelist at the public meeting of June 19, 2003, that if production of either of these types "within a years time" was under 500, Wheeled Coach would only have to report about deaths involving that type. You have written for confirmation that Wheeled Coach can report as a small volume manufacturer "in years the production volume is less than 500 ambulances" of each type.

Collins presents itself as a specialty vehicle manufacturer with seven subsidiaries. See www.collinsind.com. In addition to Capacity and Wheeled Coach, these subsidiaries include Collins Bus Corp., World Trans. Inc., Mid Bus Corporation, Waldron Equipment and Lay-Mor. Collins most recent release of financial information states that Collins

Industries is a leading manufacturer of ambulances, North Americas largest manufacturer of Type "A" small school buses, the nations second largest manufacturer of terminal trucks and a leader in the road construction and industrial sweeper markets. These products are made by its various subsidiaries. Similarly, Collins Industries most recent SEC 10-K filing states that the Company, Collins, manufactures the products referred to above. Collins presents its financials in consolidated statements that include its subsidiaries.

As we explained in a recent interpretation to Jason Cavallo of the Halcore Group, "[u]nder the EWR regulation, the definition of "manufacturer" at 49 CFR 579.4(c) includes parents, subsidiaries, and affiliates. For purposes of determining whether the production of vehicles meets or exceeds the 500 vehicles per year threshold in Section 579.21 et seq., the production of the divisions, parent, subsidiaries and affiliates must be aggregated. However, under Section 579.3(b), the parent may report collectively or the incorporated entities may report separately, provided that all vehicles are covered by the reporting."

The determinant between full and limited (i.e., small volume manufacturer under Section 579.27) reporting is the total annual aggregate production for each type of vehicle defined by the EWR regulation. With respect to vehicles manufactured by Collins, these types would appear to be "medium-heavy vehicle and bus," and "light vehicle," which is defined as any vehicle (other than a bus, motorcycle, or trailer) with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less. If the aggregate number of either light vehicles or medium heavy vehicles and buses is less than 500, Collins (or its individual subsidiaries) would only have to report limited information required by Section 579.27 for that type of vehicle.

With regard to your second letter, as explained above, Collins must report according to the aggregate production of each vehicle type. For example, assume that Wheeled Coach produces less than 500 medium-heavy vehicles and another subsidiary of Collins produces less than 500 buses. If the aggregate production by both subsidiaries (and all other subsidiaries of Collins) of medium-heavy vehicles and buses is 500 or more, Collins (and/or its individual subsidiaries) must report as required by Section 579.22. By the same token, if Wheeled Coach is the only subsidiary of Collins producing light vehicles and its production is less than 500, Wheeled Vehicles (or Collins itself) would report with respect to those vehicles under Section 579.27. However, to report under Section 579.27, the production of light vehicles must be less than 500 "during the calendar year of the reporting period or during each of the two prior calendar years" (Section 579.21). Moreover, if Collins anticipates that Wheeled Coachs total production of light vehicles will exceed 500 before the end of a calendar year, Collins would file its quarterly reports as required by Section 579.21, even if its production was below 500 in each of the prior two calendar years.

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

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

ref:579
d.8/20/03

ID: nht88-4.54

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 12/30/88

FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL NHTSA

TO: FRANK J. TRECY -- GENERAL MANAGER - MANUFACTURING MILLER STRUCTURES, INC.

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 11/14/88 FROM F. J. TRECY TO ERIKA Z. JONES, OCC 2811; LETTER DATED 10/04/88 FROM FRANK J. TRECY TO ERIKA Z. JONES

TEXT: Dear Mr. Trecy:

I am writing in response to your request for an interpretation of whether Standard No. 115; Vehicle Identification Number - Basic Requirements (49 CFR @ 571.115) would apply to your company's portable commercial use structures. In your letter to me, you stated that Miller Structures, Inc. manufactures offices, storage buildings, classrooms, laboratories, branch banks, medical clinics, and other related commercial buildings on axles. This allows the structures to be transported to the desired location by attaching them to a truck tractor and moving them over the roads. You state that a "considerable" amount of your units go to a location and are placed there permanently. You inform us that other buildings are placed on a location "for varying length s of time" and are then relocated.

In a subsequent television conversation with Dorothy Nakama of my office, you stated that the structures are not self-propelling but must be towed by a semi-trailer or truck. Some of these structures have removable running gears. You also stated that th e structures are constructed very much like mobile homes, and that the structures are intended to go on the public roads at least once, in order to get to their designated sites. You also stated that your structures are not regulated by the U.S. Departm ent of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) because they are not homes.

Standard No. 115, and all of our safety standards, apply only to vehicles that are "motor vehicles," within the meaning of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.). The term "motor vehicle" is defined at section 102(3) of the Safety Act as follows:

"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.

We have interpreted this language as follows. Vehicles that are equipped with tracks or are otherwise incapable of highway travel are plainly not motor vehicles. Agricultural equipment, such as tractors, are not motor vehicles. Further, vehicles design ed and sold solely for off-road use (e.g., airport runway vehicles and underground mining vehicles) are not considered motor vehicles, even though they may be operationally capable of highway travel. Vehicles, such as mobile construction equipment, that use the public roads only to travel between job sites and which typically spend extended periods of time at a single job site are not considered motor vehicles. In such cases, the use on the public roads is merely incidental, not the primary purpose for which the vehicle was manufactured.

On the other hand, vehicles that use the public highways on a necessary and recurring basis are motor vehicles. For instance, utility vehicles like the Jeep are plainly motor vehicles, even though they are equipped with special features to permit off-ro ad operation. If a vehicle's greatest use will be off-road, but it will spend a substantial amount of time on-road, NHTSA has interpreted the vehicle to be a "motor vehicle." Further, if a vehicle is readily usable on the public roads and is in fact use d on the public roads by a substantial number of owners, NHTSA has found the vehicle to be a motor vehicle. This finding was made with respect to dune buggies and regardless of the manufacturer's stated intent regarding the terrain on which the vehicles were to be operated.

Based on the information you have provided, it appears that your mobile structures are not "motor vehicles" within the meaning of the Safety Act and, therefore, are not subject to the requirements of Standard No. 115 or any other of our safety standards. This conclusion is based on our judgment that the vehicles seem analogous to mobile construction equipment -- i.e., the on-road use of the vehicles appears to be incidental and not the primary purpose for which the vehicles are manufactured. Please no te that this conclusion is based solely on the facts presented in your letter. We may reexamine this conclusion if additional information becomes available that would warrant a reexamination.

Additionally, you should note that this interpretation applies only to Federal requirements. The individual States may establish their own identification requirements for vehicles that are not subject to the Federal identification requirements, such as your mobile structures. Thus, the State of South Dakota could establish identification requirements applicable to your mobile structures sold in that State.

I hope the information provided is useful. If you need further information on this subject, please contact Dorothy Nakama at (202) 366-2992 or write to me again.

Sincerely,

ID: 3328o

Mr. Frank J. Trecy
General Manager - Manufacturing
Miller Structures, Inc.
58120 C. R. 3 South
P. O. Box 1283
Elkhart, Indiana 46515

Dear Mr. Trecy:

I am writing in response to your request for an interpretation of whether Standard No. 115; Vehicle Identification Number - Basic Requirements (49 CFR 571.115) would apply to your company's portable commercial use structures. In your letter to me, you stated that Miller Structures, Inc. manufactures offices, storage buildings, classrooms, laboratories, branch banks, medical clinics, and other related commercial buildings on axles. This allows the structures to be transported to the desired location by attaching them to a truck tractor and moving them over the roads. You state that a "considerable" number of your units go to a location and are placed there permanently. You inform us that other buildings are placed on a location "for varying lengths of time" and are then relocated.

In a subsequent telephone conversation with Dorothy Nakama of my office, you stated that the structures are not self-propelling but must be towed by a semi-trailer or truck. Some of these structures have removable running gears. You also stated that the structures are constructed very much like mobile homes, and that the structures are intended to go on the public roads at least once, in order to get to their designated sites. You also stated that your structures are not regulated by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) because they are not homes.

Standard No. 115, and all of our safety standards, apply only to vehicles that are "motor vehicles," within the meaning of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.). The term "motor vehicle" is defined at section 102(3) of the Safety Act as follows:

"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. We have interpreted this language as follows. Vehicles that are equipped with tracks or are otherwise incapable of highway travel are plainly not motor vehicles. Agricultural equipment, such as tractors, are not motor vehicles. Further, vehicles designed and sold solely for off-road use (e.g., airport runway vehicles and underground mining vehicles) are not considered motor vehicles, even though they may be operationally capable of highway travel. Vehicles, such as mobile construction equipment, that use the public roads only to travel between job sites and which typically spend extended periods of time at a single job site are not considered motor vehicles. In such cases, the use on the public roads is merely incidental, not the primary purpose for which the vehicle was manufactured.

On the other hand, vehicles that use the public highways on a necessary and recurring basis are motor vehicles. For instance, utility vehicles like the Jeep are plainly motor vehicles, even though they are equipped with special features to permit off-road operation. If a vehicle's greatest use will be off-road, but it will spend a substantial amount of time on-road, NHTSA has interpreted the vehicle to be a "motor vehicle". Further, if a vehicle is readily usable on the public roads and is in fact used on the public roads by a substantial number of owners, NHTSA has found the vehicle to be a motor vehicle. This finding was made with respect to dune buggies and regardless of the manufacturer's stated intent regarding the terrain on which the vehicles were to be operated.

Based on the information you have provided, it appears that your portable structures are not "motor vehicles" within the meaning of the Safety Act and, therefore, are not subject to the requirements of Standard No. 115 or any other of our safety standards. This conclusion is based on our judgment that the vehicles seem analogous to mobile construction equipment - i.e., the on-road use of the vehicles appears to be incidental and not the primary purpose for which the vehicles are manufactured. Please note that this conclusion is based solely on the facts presented in your letter. We may reexamine this conclusion if additional information becomes available that would warrant a reexamination.

Additionally, you should note that this interpretation applies only to Federal requirements. The individual States may establish their own identification requirements for vehicles that are not subject to the Federal identification requirements, such as your mobile structures. Thus, the State of South Dakota could establish identification requirements applicable to your mobile structures sold in that State.

I hope the information provided above is useful. If you need further information on this subject, please contact Dorothy Nakama at (202) 366-2992 or write to me again.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

/ref:VSA#115 d:l2/30/88

ID: nht95-3.36

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: July 1, 1995 EST

FROM: Michael A. Nappo

TO: Chief counsel -- NHTSA

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO: 9/11/95 LETTER FROM JOHN WOMACK TO MICHAEL A. NAPPO (A43; STD. 108); 6/8/93 LETTER FROM JOHN WOMACK TO SHAWN SHIEH; 5/10/91 AND 3/21/91 LETTERS FROM PAUL JACKSON RICE TO CHRIS LAWRENCE; 8/17/89 LETTER FROM STEPHEN P. WOOD (VSA 108 (A)(2)(A) TO ALAN S. ELDAHR; 7/8/85 LETTER FROM JEFFREY R. MILLER TO DON BENFIELD

TEXT: Dear Sirs:

Enclosed is some information on a new product that our company will be trying to market in the near future. Could you please send us any information on how this product might effect local and national laws?

Product Name: AUTO AD

Concept: To offer the consumer a better way to advertise with great exposure and less cost.

Operation: The AUTO AD is a portable advertising unit that is designed with a flexable screen that can be secured to a window with suction cups. This screen has LED's (lights) which will be controlled by a processing unit that will be attached to the sc reen with a cable. The processing unit will then be controlled by a key pad that will be mounted close to the automobile driver. The whole unit will run off the power from the car battery through the cigaret lighter or hardwired in.

NOTE: An adaptor will be made so the AUTO AD can also be used in the home or business using a 120v outlet.

Uses: * selling the auto * advertising the business * as a safety device when the auto breaks down one can signal for help * general advertising

Need: With the high cost of advertising through radio, tv, signs, papers, etc., the consumer is looking for a cheaper way to advertise more effectively.

THANK YOU. (Diagrams omitted.)

ID: nht95-5.15

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: July 1, 1995 EST

FROM: Michael A. Nappo

TO: Chief counsel -- NHTSA

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO: 9/11/95 LETTER FROM JOHN WOMACK TO MICHAEL A. NAPPO (A43; STD. 108); 6/8/93 LETTER FROM JOHN WOMACK TO SHAWN SHIEH; 5/10/91 AND 3/21/91 LETTERS FROM PAUL JACKSON RICE TO CHRIS LAWRENCE; 8/17/89 LETTER FROM STEPHEN P. WOOD (VSA 108 (A)(2)(A) TO ALAN S. ELDAHR; 7/8/85 LETTER FROM JEFFREY R. MILLER TO DON BENFIELD

TEXT: Dear Sirs:

Enclosed is some information on a new product that our company will be trying to market in the near future. Could you please send us any information on how this product might effect local and national laws?

Product Name: AUTO AD

Concept: To offer the consumer a better way to advertise with great exposure and less cost.

Operation: The AUTO AD is a portable advertising unit that is designed with a flexable screen that can be secured to a window with suction cups. This screen has LED's (lights) which will be controlled by a processing unit that will be attached to the screen with a cable. The processing unit will then be controlled by a key pad that will be mounted close to the automobile driver. The whole unit will run off the power from the car battery through the cigaret lighter or hardwired in.

NOTE: An adaptor will be made so the AUTO AD can also be used in the home or business using a 120v outlet.

Uses: * selling the auto * advertising the business * as a safety device when the auto breaks down one can signal for help * general advertising

Need: With the high cost of advertising through radio, tv, signs, papers, etc., the consumer is looking for a cheaper way to advertise more effectively.

THANK YOU. (Diagrams omitted.)

ID: nht90-1.56

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 02/26/90

FROM: STEPHEN P. WOOD -- ACTING CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: JIM EVANS -- QUALITY CONTROL DEPARTMENT, THE BARGMAN COMPANY

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 12-13-89 TO STEPHEN P. WOOD, NHTSA, FROM JIM EVANS, THE BARGMAN CO., ATTACHED; [OCC 4250]

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of December 13, 1989, with respect to whether the installation of "yellow" reflex reflectors on the rear of motor vehicles is permissible under Standard No. 108. Because the standard uses the term "amber" instead of "yell ow", I shall refer to yellow as amber also.

As you note, the standard requires two red reflex reflectors to be mounted on the rear, but is silent as to whether additional reflectors, amber in color, are permitted. One of your customers has asked you to manufacture an amber turn signal lens that w ould have an amber reflex reflector area around the outer edge. The turn signal lamp would be adjacent to a lamp of apparently identical size and shape with a red lens and reflex reflector area, providing stop and tail lamp functions. The State of Mich igan apparently allows only red reflex reflectors on the rear. You have asked whether reflectors of other colors may be mounted on the rear as long as the required red ones are present, and if it is illegal, whether Standard No. 108 may be amended to el iminate the confusion.

Because an amber reflector is not a required item of lighting equipment that Standard No. 108 specifies to be installed on the rear of a motor vehicle, its acceptability is subject to the general provisions of section S5.1.3. This states, in pertinent p art, that no additional reflective device may be installed that impairs the effectiveness of lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108. It does not appear to us that an amber taillamp lens with an amber reflector would create an impairment. Under Standard No. 108, amber is a permissible color for rear turn signal lamps, and its presence on a reflector surrounding the lamp should not create confusion. Therefore, manufacture, sale, and installation of an amber taillamp lens with an amber reflecto r would not constitute a noncompliance with Standard No. 108.

However, an interpretation by NHTSA that its lighting standard does not forbid the installation of an amber reflex reflector does not mean that a State could not adopt and enforce a law prohibiting such a reflector. Under section 103(d) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, a State may impose its own safety requirements covering any aspect of performance that is not covered by Standard No. 108. We construe this provision narrowly, as allowing a State to regulate all lighting equipment that is not specifically required by Standard No. 108. Noting that Section CI 257.691 of the Michigan vehicle lighting code that you enclosed specifies that reflectors "mounted on the rear shall reflect a red color to the rear", the appropriate remedy w ould be to seek an amendment of the Michigan law. This agency presently has no plans to specify yellow as an alternate color for rear reflex reflectors.