ID: nht93-1.35

DATE: 02/16/93

FROM: JOHN WOMACK -- ACTING CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: J. C. TOWNLEY -- JAY TOWNLEY & ASSOCIATES

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 11-24-92 FROM JAY C. TOWNLEY TO PAUL J. RICE

TEXT: This is in further response to your letter of November 24, 1992, asking for "an advisory opinion that the Yamaha Pedal Assisted Bicycle is not a 'motor vehicle' or 'motor driven cycle' within the meaning of the Safety Act and regulations promulgated thereunder." Previously, we had acknowledged your withdrawal of your request for confidentiality.

The Yamaha is "a bicycle equipped with a battery powered pedal assist system that engages when the system senses 'kicking' torque between 5 Kg and 50 Kg, such as when the bicycle is starting from a stop, or climbing hills." It is intended to facilitate standing starts in traffic, assist in climbing hills, and to "keep up the pace when a rider becomes fatigued while commuting, running an errand or exercising. The system is designed to engage when the driver is actively pedaling, and to disengage when the speed is less than 1.24 mph or more than 15 mph, when torque at the pedals is less than 11 lbs or more than 110 lbs, and when the braking system is activated. The photographs you have enclosed show, in all important respects, vehicles configured as conventional bicycles.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.), defines a "motor vehicle," in pertinent part, as "any vehicle that is driven or drawn by mechanical power, manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways." (15 U.S.C. 1391(3)). On November 6, 1974, the Consumer Product Safety Commission asked the agency whether a "motorized bicycle" was a "motor vehicle" if it utilized mechanical power to propel it "only some of the time." NHTSA replied on December 6 of that year that it considered motorized bicycles to be motor vehicles subject to its jurisdiction (specifically classified as motor-driven cycles), and that it did "not find it relevant to the question of safety standards' applicability that a particular vehicle, fully equipped to operate as a motor vehicle within the meaning of our Act, may also have the capability of operating in some other mode." Earlier that year, the agency had rejected arguments by Peugeot and Motobecane on behalf of their "mopeds" that vehicles which produce no more than 1.5 horsepower deserved a categorization other than as motor-driven cycles (motorcycles developing 5 horsepower or less), but it did amend the motorcycle lighting and braking standards to modify performance requirements for motor-driven cycles with a top speed of 30 mph or less, and to allow placement of the rear brake control on the left handlebar. Subsequently, on October 28, 1976, NHTSA informed Ohio Bikes, Inc. that a bicycle, even if used, became a newly manufactured motor vehicle when an engine was attached to it.

At first blush, it might appear that this line of interpretations should lead to a conclusion that the Yamaha is a "motor vehicle." However, we believe there is a significant difference between the Yamaha pedal assisted bicycle and motorized bicycles and mopeds. The propulsion systems of the latter vehicles enable them to operate on power without pedaling. However, the power assist of the Yamaha disengages when torque at the pedals is less than 11 pounds, which means that the system will not operate on its own, in the absence of muscular effort.

NHTSA has also stated in many prior interpretations that vehicles that will regularly be used on the public roads will not be considered "motor vehicles" for purposes of the Safety Act, if the vehicles have an abnormal body configuration that readily distinguishes them from other highway vehicles and a maximum speed of 20 mph or less. While the Yamaha has a maximum speed of 20 mph or less, its body configuration does not distinguish it from motorized bicycles and mopeds. However, the vehicles that NHTSA addressed under this line of interpretations operated solely on power.

The Yamaha does not easily fit into our previous analyses concerning whether particular vehicles are considered "motor vehicles." After carefully considering the question, we have concluded that, in light of the combination of a low maximum speed while operating on power (the power of the Yamaha disengages when speed is more than 15 mph) and the fact that power is only provided if the operator is providing muscular effort (by continuously pedalling), the Yamaha is not a "motor vehicle" under the Safety Act. We note that, even with power assist, the operation of the Yamaha is essentially the same as that of a bicycle, i.e., the operator must pedal under the same circumstances as a traditional bicylist and the speed of the Yamaha does not differ from the speed of traditional bicycles.

Since the Yamaha is not a "motor vehicle," it is not subject to the jurisdiction of this agency. Vehicles that are not motor vehicles are subject to the regulations of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and you should consult the Commission for further information as to whether there are regulations that the Yamaha must meet.

ID: nht74-3.20

DATE: 11/04/74

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Car and Truck Renting and Leasing Association

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your July 25, 1974, letter and our subsequent discussions which raise the question whether the construction of a truck using the power train (rear axle, suspension, drive line, and engine) of a damaged 1972 truck and all or part of a new glider kit constitutes the manufacture of a new motor vehicle, subject to Federal motor vehicle safety standards, including Standard No. 121 after March 1, 1975.

Re-use of components from an existing vehicle in the construction of another vehicle may or may not result in the manufacture of a new vehicle. The NHTSA has established that the addition of new components (such as a truck body) to the chassis of a used vehicle does not constitute the manufacture of a new vehicle. Conversely, the addition of used components to a new chassis constitutes the manufacture of a new vehicle, subject to the safety standards in effect for that vehicle class on the date of manufacture. This criterion has been relied on in the area of chassis-cab multistage manufacture.

Typically a "glider kit" is a truck chassis on which a cab and front axle system are mounted, which is purchased to permit the re-utilization of a power train from another vehicle. Since a glider kit typically incorporates a new chassis (as well as a new cab and front suspension), the NHTSA finds that the use of such a glider kit in the construction of a motor vehicle constitutes the manufacture of a new motor vehicle. To conclude otherwise would mean that a vehicle composed entirely of brand new components except the rear axle and perhaps the engine, would qualify as a used vehicle.

If answer to your question on the use of a portion of the kit: if the kit's chassis portion is used, we would consider the resultant vehicle to be a new motor vehicle. Conversely, use of only the cab portion would not be the manufacture of a new motor vehicle.

A new motor vehicle must conform to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. If it is not manufactured in two or more stages, the applicable standards are those in effect for the vehicle type as of the date of completion of the vehicle (15 U.S.C.@ 1397(a)(1)) (49 CFR 567.4). If the vehicle has been manufactured in two or more stages in accordance with part 568-(Vehicles manufactured in two or more stages, 49 CFR Part 568), it may be certified as of any date between the date of manufacture of the "incomplete vehicle" and the date of manufacture of the completed vehicle. For example, a truck-tractor constructed of a 1972 power train and a glider kit on some date prior to March 1, 1975, may be certified as of the date that it reaches the "incomplete" stage although its completion (such as by fifth-wheel installation) occurs after March 1, 1975.

The manufacturer responsible for certification under part 567 (49 CFR Part 567) will in many cases be the person who combines the used components with the glider kit. However, if he has manufactured only an "incomplete vehicle" as that term is defined in Part 568, he would provide documentation with the vehicle required under @ 568.4.

Although a glider kit manufacturer may use several serial numbers (e.g., body, engine) the NHTSA only requires one vehicle identification number to appear on the certification plate (@ 567(4)(g)(6)). The manufacturer may use the serial number on the glider kit or may create his own vehicle identification number. It is my understanding that the States have established various practices for the registration of a vehicle which is partially constructed from a formerly registered vehicle. These practices vary greatly and you should check with the individual States regarding them.

ID: 04-005908drn

Mr. Clemens Kaiser
President and CEO
Exatec, LLC
31220 Oak Creek Drive
Wixom, MI 48393




Dear Mr. Kaiser:

This responds to your request for an interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 205, Glazing Materials. You ask us whether the Exatec 900, a "coated plastic glazing material", may be used in vehicle areas specified for Item 2 glazing (safety glazing material for use anywhere in a motor vehicle except windshields) if it meets the prescribed groups of tests in the standard. The answer to your question is yes.

FMVSS No. 205 specifies at S5.1:"Glazing materials for use in motor vehicles must conform to ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 unless this standard provides otherwise".ANSI Z26 specifies performance requirements for various types of glazing (called "Items"), and specifies the locations in vehicles in which each item of glazing may be used. Section 4 of ANSI Z26 states: "The groups of tests listed in this subsection and shown in Table 1, item by item, are deemed adequate for determining the locations in the motor vehicle for which the various safety glazing materials that qualify under this standard may be suitable."The section further states: "Safety glazing materials in motor vehicles shall comply with the applicable requirements listed in this subsection and shown in Table 1, item by item, in definite groupings of tests that are appropriate for the safety glazing material in question, and the location in the motor vehicle in which it is intended to be used. (Emphasis added. )

For Item 2 glazing, Table 1 specifies the following safety glazing materials: laminated glass, tempered glass, class 1 multiple glazed unit and class 2 multiple glazed unit. However, in the "Note:" at the bottom of Table 1, the following is stated:

For convenience, each column on this table (as well as the text of the tests that follow) designates the specific type of material that will meet the enumerated tests if it is of satisfactory quality. If and when other materials are developed that possess properties so that they also meet one or another of the prescribed groups of tests, they may be used interchangeably with the corresponding materials specified in this table. (Emphasis added.)

The second sentence in the "Note:" to Table 1 permits Exatecs certifying the Exatec 900 as AS-2. It provides that if another material such as plastic glazing can be shown to "meet one or another of the prescribed groups of tests," the plastic glazing may be used interchangeably with the corresponding materials (i.e. , laminated glass) specified in Table 1.

We note, however, there are issues--including weathering, chemical resistance, and flammability--particular to the use of a "coated plastic glazing material" such as the Exatec 900 that are not addressed in the grouping of tests for the certification of AS-2 glazing. Thus, the second sentence in the "Note:" to Table 1 results in removing the consideration of weathering for plastics being used for the first time in locations critical to visibility as substitutes for laminated glass. This is a concern because the loss of visibility due to haze caused by weathering is a typical failure mode of polycarbonate plastics under exposure to sunlight that does not occur at all in glass glazing.

However, we also note that Exatec 900 is an advanced glazing material consisting of a core layer of polycarbonate which is surrounded by multiple layers of plasma deposited materials designed specifically to provide protection from the effects of solar radiation. Exatec states that the advanced technology incorporated into its Exatec 900 material provides significant weathering resistance protection that results in a useful life span of at least 10 years. The weathering resistance of EXATEC 900 has been independently evaluated by Batelle Laboratories of Columbus, Ohio. Batelle concurred with Exatecs predicted life span for its glazing material.

We plan to undertake rulemaking to propose additional tests for polycarbonate glazing. We request that Exatec provide details for its accelerated aging test methodology for public comment in the rulemaking proceeding.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Wood
Acting Chief Counsel

ref:205
d.9/23/05

ID: 1985-03.21

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 07/24/85

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Jeffrey R. Miller; NHTSA

TO: Thomas J. Moravec -- President, Tow-All, Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Thomas J. Moravec President Tow-All, Inc. 10501 E. Bloomington Freeway Bloomington, MN 55420

This responds to your letter of May 20, 1985, concerning Federal requirements applicable to the motorized hitch or "Supplemental Power Unit" (SPU) being developed by your company.

This agency administers the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 1391 et seq. (the Act). Under the Act, a motor vehicle is defined as "any vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads and highways." Your letter states that the SPU is a motorized single axle unit with an automatic transmission. In addition, your letter, the accompanying photographs, and descriptive material indicate that the SPU could be attached between a small car and a large trailer to permit the small car to safely pull the trailer long distances at highway speeds.

Based on this information, the agency concludes that the SPU is a motor vehicle and falls within the trailer classification. Under 49 CFR Part 571.3, a trailer is defined as "a motor vehicle with or without motive power, designed for carrying persons or property and for being drawn by another vehicle." An information sheet for manufacturers is enclosed.

The following regulations and Federal motor vehicle safety standards are applicable to trailers:

49 CFR Part 565, Vehicle Identification Number Content Requirements 49 CFR Part 566, Manufacturer Identification 49 CFR Part 567, Certification (see S567.4 for trailers) Standard No. 106, Brake Hoses Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment Standard No. 115, Vehicle Identification Number Basic Requirements Standard No. 116, Motor Vehicle Brake Fluids Standard No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Tires Standard No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Tires Standard No. 121, Air Brake System

Copies of these regulations and standards can be obtained by writing to: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. An information sheet for ordering copies is also enclosed.

State regulations applying to trailers and their use on the roads should be checked for any State in which your company's trailers are to be sold.

I hope this information is helpful to you.

Sincerely,

Jeffrey R. Miller Chief Counsel

Enclosures

May 20,1985

Office of Chief Council National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Dear Sirs:

This letter is a formal request for the evaluation as to which federal statutes of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration are applicable to a new motorized road vehicle product that we are developing at TOW-ALL, Inc. As I discussed recently over the phone with Mr. Ralph Hitchcock of the Office of Vehicle Safety Standards, we are developing a revolutionary new product: the Supplemental Power Unit (SPU) or "Motorized Hitch". Inclosed are brochures which describe this concept, our first working prototype, and pictures of this prototype. Also inclosed are copies of two patents we own on this concept which may be helpful in understanding the operation of the SPU.

Basically, the SPU is a motorized single axle unit that attaches between a small car (e.g. a Chevette) and a large trailer (e.g. a 24 foot camper trailer) that allows the small car to safely pull the trailer for long distances at freeway speeds. This is explained in detail in the attached documents. I realize that this is a new idea and thus may not fall directly under specific legislation. The purpose of this letter is to determine which federal laws will be interpreted as being applicable.

We intend to manufacture the SPU out of new parts manufactured in the United States and market the unit worldwide. If you have further questions, please contact me at (612)-8818996 or write me at the above address.

Sincerely yours,

Thomas J. Moravec President TOW-ALL, Inc.

THE SUPPLEMENTAL POWER UNIT "MOTORIZED HITCH"

A vehicle of any size, particularly small, could be enabled to tow a large trailer if this trailer could become self propelled. This note describes a novel method for providing this ability for towing the desired trailer. There are at least two primary requirements for pulling all trailers. First, the towing vehicle must have sufficient power to propel both vehicles, and second, the towing vehicle must be able to carry the tongue weight of the trailer. Few automobiles manufactured today and almost no small cars can meet these requirements.

The novel method that this paper is suggesting for solving this problem is what is called the supplemental power unit (SPU). It is also referred to as a "motorized hitch". This SPU is a small motorized trailer which is attached between the towing vehicle and the trailer that is desired to be moved. The motorized SPU has an automatic transmission and a gas or diesel engine. The synchronization of movements of the vehicle combination is provided by the hitching and towing system for the SPU.

The SPU is rigidly attached to the trailer that is to be pulled and pivoted or articulated vertically about the hitch between these two trailers. The SPU now carries all of the pulled trailer's tongue weight and provides the power to pull this trailer combination. The SPU can be manufactured in a number of sizes to meet the range of towing and tongue weight requirements of the consumer, commercial, and agricultural markets.

The rigid connection between the two trailers permits the tongue of the SPU to be hinged about a horizontal axis so no tongue weight or braking or acceleration moments are applied to the lead vehicle. A portion of the physical weight of the tongue (25-40 lbs.) is all the weight the tongue applies. The operation of the control mechanism of the SPU can also easily be reversed to give power and braking in the reverse direction. When towing a trailer, the tongue weight is generally added to the rear of the towing vehicle. This loading can be distributed over the whole vehicle by "load leveling hitches". These are complicated to couple and disconnect. If no "load leveling" is used and tongue weight is high, the traction of the front wheels and steering can become effected particularly in rough terrain. The SPU applies a very small load (25-40 lbs.) to the rear of the towing vehicle and is very easy to couple and uncouple. In general the towing vehicle does not sense the load being pulled with the SPU attached.

Attachment of the SPU to the load trailer is relatively simple. The patented control arm is hooked to the trailer ball of the front vehicle. No other connections are required. Once attached, the load trailer can be moved using the SPU to another location if desired using just its own power if the terrain is not too irregular. The power disc brakes on the SPU greatly aid in stopping the load trailer due to the method of attachment between the trailers and because of the load transfer which is automatically produced by the braking process.

The tongue of the SPU is hinged about a horizontal axis. This feature prevents the transfer of any of the tongue weight during transit and greatly facilitates coupling. Also, when this tongue is detached from the towing vehicle and allowed to hang down, it applies the brakes of the SPU. This feature is particularly useful if using the SPU to move the load trailer by hand.

ID: 1984-3.28

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 09/14/84

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: William E. Hedenberg -- President, Comfort Crew Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. William E. Hedenberg President Comfort Crew, Inc. 716 South Milwaukee Avenue Wheeling, Illinois 60090

This responds to your August 13, 1984, letter to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) concerning the certification requirements for the air suspension systems you manufacture. According to your letter, your suspension systems are retrofitted to medium and light duty trucks by your dealers and by "special equipment" aftermarket manufacturers. In a subsequent telephone call with Ms. Deirdre Hom of my staff, you clarified your question by stating that your air suspension systems would be added to new vehicles prior to their first sale. Also, you stated that the installation of an air suspension system on a vehicle would not affect the vehicle's Gross Vehicle Weight Rating.

There is no requirement at present that air suspension systems be certified. The certification label is a manufacturer's representation that a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment conforms to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, and there are no standards that presently apply to air suspension systems. However, if your system is installed by a dealer on a new vehicle before its sale to its first purchaser for purposes other than resale, then under Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 467.7, Requirements For Persons Who Alter Certified Vehicles,the person installing the suspension system on the new vehicle would have to certify that the vehicle, as altered, continues to comply with all of the safety standards affected by the alteration. You should refer to 49 CFR Part 567.7 for the specific certification requirements for alterers.

As stated above, you as the manufacturer of the air suspension system would have no certification requirements. However, an alterer would probably require information from you in order to make the necessary certification. Should a noncompliance be discovered as result of an alterer's modification, the alterer would be liable for a civil penalty unless he could establish that he did not have actual knowledge of the noncompliance, and that he did not have reason to know in the exercise of due care that the vehicle did not comply. (12 U.S.C. 1397(b)(2)).

Regardless of whether there is a Federal motor vehicle safety standard which applies to your air suspension systems, you should be aware that the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act imposes general responsibilities on manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment regarding safety defects. Under Section 151 et seq., manufacturers must notify purchasers about safety-related defects and remedy such defects free of charge. Section 109 imposes a civil penalty upon any person who fails to provide notification of or remedy for a defect in motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Further, in addition to the provisions of Federal law discussed above, you should consider the possibility for liability in tort should your products prove to be unsafe in operation. You may wish to discuss this matter with your attorney and insurance company.

As you requested, we have previously returned to you the "Ride and Handling Evaluation" that you submitted with you letter.

Sincerely, Original Signed By Frank Berndt Chief Counsel

August 13, 1984

Ref: Air Suspension Certification

Dear Mr. Berndt:

In regard to the above, I have been referred to you by Ms. Dedra Hom of your office.

We have completed approximately two years of research and development, testing and market studies of an air suspension system for medium to light duty trucks. Although we are manufacturing the system, our dealers, and aftermarket manufactures such as R.V., ambulance, and special equipment firms will be retrofitting the removal of the O.E.M. steel spring suspension, and 100% bolt on retrofit of our system..

Enclosed is a Ride Handling Evaluation report, conducted by Bendix Automotive Proving Grounds, an independent testing firm. You will please note two areas of comparisons, Page 2, Item 4.3, HANDLING LANE CHANGE, and on Page 7, and Item 7.5, DISCUSSION OF TEST RESULTS. These test were without a rear stabilizer bar. We have now designed a rear bar, and have returned our vehicle to Bendix for comparisons. We cannot at this time provide any results, but through many demonstration rides by unbiased drivers, all opinions are that the vehicle roll on cornering is much less than the O.E.M. equipment. Bendix has also completed an accelerated durability of the design. Their report is in the compiling stage at this time. If you would, please return the RIDE and HANDLING REPORT at your earliest convenience.

We hav exhausted a considerable amount of investigating throughout N.H.T.S.A., D.O.T., F.M.V.S.S., and G.S.A. and cannot seem to locate any specifications which are written for suspensions. We are confident that you system will be beneficial to the consumer, and we do wish to comply to any Federal Standards. I you would please forward any requirments of suspensions as to certification, vehicle labeling, etc.

We request that our inquiry be expedited as our first units are scheduled to be shipped by September 7, 1984.

Thank you for your attention regarding this matter.

Sincerly yours, William E Hedenberg President WEH:sc enclosure

ID: nht94-3.50

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: June 30, 1994

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Blair Abraham -- Biomedical Manager, Mersco Medical

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 2/22/94 from Blair Abraham to NHTSA Public Affairs Office

TEXT: This responds to your letter requesting information about "the steps to take to certify a vehicle for a higher weight rating than what is issued by the manufacturer." I apologize for the delay in our response. As discussed in your letter and in a teleph one conversation with Edward Glancy of my staff, your company owns a 1989 or 1990 Chevy van which it uses to deliver products. You indicate that the GVWR assigned to the vehicle is 5,600 pounds. You modified the suspension to enable the vehicle to hand le an additional 1,000 pounds and "would like to certify the vehicle for 6,600 pounds." You asked us to send the information required for increasing the GVWR and also ask, if you cannot increase the GVWR, whether you are liable for noncompliance of a DOT regulation.

By way of background information, under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issues safety standards for new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle equipment. Manufacturers are requir ed to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable safety standards.

Under NHTSA's certification regulations, manufacturers must assign a GVWR to new vehicles. The term GVWR is defined in 49 CFR Part 571.3 as "the value specified by the manufacturer as the loaded weight of a single vehicle." The GVWR informs vehicle owne rs how heavily the vehicle may safely be loaded. It also affects the vehicle's loading and other test conditions for the performance tests to ascertain whether the vehicle complies with applicable safety standards. NHTSA expects the GVWR to reflect a m anufacturer's good-faith evaluation of the vehicle's size, weight, load carrying capacity, and intended use.

NHTSA's regulation on GVWR only addresses the GVWR of new vehicles. This is because the agency's safety standards apply only to new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle equipment. There is a provision, @ 108(a)(2)(A), in the Vehicle Safety Act

2

that prohibits manufacturers, distributors, dealers and motor vehicle repair businesses from knowingly rendering inoperative in whole or in part any device or element of design installed in accordance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard. These parties would be subject to this provision if they were to modify your vehicle's suspension. However, the provision does not apply to individual owners modifying their own vehicles.

Because we do not regulate how individuals modify their own vehicles (and thus do not prohibit you from modifying your vehicle's suspension), we are unable to advise you about the specific modifications that must be made to a vehicle for it to safely car ry an additional 1,000 pounds. Among other things, however, you should carefully evaluate whether the vehicle's axles, brakes, tires, and frame can adequately handle the additional load. We suggest that you consult with the original vehicle manufacture r about this question. You may also wish to consult a local attorney concerning possible liability in the event your vehicle is involved in an accident.

Also, the individual states have the authority to regulate used vehicles, and changes in the GVWR of used vehicles may be addressed by state law. State law may also address the operation of a vehicle loaded above GVWR.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's regulations, please feel free to contact Mr. Glancy at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

ID: nht94-1.50

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: February 10, 1994

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: David Shapiro -- RV Designer Collection, Woodbridge, Inc.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 11/17/93 from David Shapiro to NHTSA Chief Counsel (OCC-9358)

TEXT:

This responds to your inquiry about the applicability of Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials to aftermarket products. You state that you are planning to market fabric window coverings such as drapes and fabric bedding such as bedspreads for use in recreational vehicles. In response to your request for confirmation that Standard No. 302 does not apply to aftermarket products, I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our regulations to you.

By way of background information, NHTSA is authorized to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not, however, approve or certify any vehicles or items of equipment. Instead, the Safety Act establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The agency periodically tests new vehicles an d items of equipment for compliance with the standards.

In response to your question, there are currently no Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS's) that directly apply to the products you wish to manufacture. Under the authority of the Safety Act, NHTSA has issued Standard No. 302, which specifies requirements for the flammability resistance of materials in the occupant compartment of new vehicles. However, Standard No. 302 would not apply to your products because that standard applies to new motor vehicles and not to aftermarket items of motor ve hicle equipment.

I note, however, that there are other Federal requirements that indirectly affect the manufacture and sale of your products. Under the Safety Act, your products are considered to be items of motor vehicle equipment. As a manufacturer of motor vehicle e quipment, you are subject to the requirements in S151-159 of the Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with safety related defects. I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes those responsibilities. In the event that you or NHTSA determines that your products contain a safety-related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. I note that even though Standard No. 302 would not apply t o your product, the product's flammability characteristics could be relevant to whether it contained a safety related defect.

Manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and motor vehicle repair businesses are subject to S108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act, which states: "No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative...any vehi cle or item of motor vehicle

equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard...." This section would prohibit any manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair business from installing your product in used vehicles if the effect of such installation was to render inoperative the compliance of the vehicle with any safety standard, including Standard No. 302.

The "render inoperative" prohibition of S108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to the actions of vehicle owners in adding to or otherwise modifying their vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment. Thus, if your products were placed in vehicles by the vehicle o wners, your products would not need to meet any FMVSSs. Nevertheless, in the interest of safety, we suggest you consider conforming your product to a flammability resistance standard equivalent to Standard No. 302.

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

ID: 9730

Mr. Blair Abraham
Biomedical Manager
Mersco Medical
P.O. Box 5061
Sioux Falls, SD 57117

Dear Mr. Abraham:

This responds to your letter requesting information about "the steps to take to certify a vehicle for a higher weight rating than what is issued by the manufacturer." I apologize for the delay in our response. As discussed in your letter and in a telephone conversation with Edward Glancy of my staff, your company owns a 1989 or 1990 Chevy van which it uses to deliver products. You indicate that the GVWR assigned to the vehicle is 5,600 pounds. You modified the suspension to enable the vehicle to handle an additional 1,000 pounds and "would like to certify the vehicle for 6,600 pounds." You asked us to send the information required for increasing the GVWR and also ask, if you cannot increase the GVWR, whether you are liable for noncompliance of a DOT regulation.

By way of background information, under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issues safety standards for new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle equipment. Manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable safety standards.

Under NHTSA's certification regulations, manufacturers must assign a GVWR to new vehicles. The term GVWR is defined in 49 CFR Part 571.3 as "the value specified by the manufacturer as the loaded weight of a single vehicle." The GVWR informs vehicle owners how heavily the vehicle may safely be loaded. It also affects the vehicle's loading and other test conditions for the performance tests to ascertain whether the vehicle complies with applicable safety standards. NHTSA expects the GVWR to reflect a manufacturer's good-faith evaluation of the vehicle's size, weight, load carrying capacity, and intended use.

NHTSA's regulation on GVWR only addresses the GVWR of new vehicles. This is because the agency's safety standards apply only to new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle equipment. There is a provision, '108(a)(2)(A), in the Vehicle Safety Act

that prohibits manufacturers, distributors, dealers and motor vehicle repair businesses from knowingly rendering inoperative in whole or in part any device or element of design installed in accordance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard. These parties would be subject to this provision if they were to modify your vehicle's suspension. However, the provision does not apply to individual owners modifying their own vehicles.

Because we do not regulate how individuals modify their own vehicles (and thus do not prohibit you from modifying your vehicle's suspension), we are unable to advise you about the specific modifications that must be made to a vehicle for it to safely carry an additional 1,000 pounds. Among other things, however, you should carefully evaluate whether the vehicle's axles, brakes, tires, and frame can adequately handle the additional load. We suggest that you consult with the original vehicle manufacturer about this question. You may also wish to consult a local attorney concerning possible liability in the event your vehicle is involved in an accident.

Also, the individual states have the authority to regulate used vehicles, and changes in the GVWR of used vehicles may be addressed by state law. State law may also address the operation of a vehicle loaded above GVWR.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's regulations, please feel free to contact Mr. Glancy at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

John Womack Acting Chief Counsel

ref:567 d:6/30/94

ID: nht94-8.20

DATE: February 10, 1994

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: David Shapiro -- RV Designer Collection, Woodbridge, Inc.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 11/17/93 from David Shapiro to NHTSA Chief Counsel (OCC-9358)

TEXT:

This responds to your inquiry about the applicability of Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials to aftermarket products. You state that you are planning to market fabric window coverings such as drapes and fabric bedding such as bedspreads for use in recreational vehicles. In response to your request for confirmation that Standard No. 302 does not apply to aftermarket products, I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our regulations to you.

By way of background information, NHTSA is authorized to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not, however, approve or certify any vehicles or items of equipment. Instead, the Safety Act establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The agency periodically tests new vehicles and items of equipment for compliance with the standards.

In response to your question, there are currently no Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS's) that directly apply to the products you wish to manufacture. Under the authority of the Safety Act, NHTSA has issued Standard No. 302, which specifies requirements for the flammability resistance of materials in the occupant compartment of new vehicles. However, Standard No. 302 would not apply to your products because that standard applies to new motor vehicles and not to aftermarket items of motor vehicle equipment.

I note, however, that there are other Federal requirements that indirectly affect the manufacture and sale of your products. Under the Safety Act, your products are considered to be items of motor vehicle equipment. As a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment, you are subject to the requirements in S151-159 of the Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with safety related defects. I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes those responsibilities. In the event that you or NHTSA determines that your products contain a safety-related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. I note that even though Standard No. 302 would not apply to your product, the product's flammability characteristics could be relevant to whether it contained a safety related defect.

Manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and motor vehicle repair businesses are subject to S108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act, which states: "No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative...any vehicle or item of motor vehicle

equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard...." This section would prohibit any manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair business from installing your product in used vehicles if the effect of such installation was to render inoperative the compliance of the vehicle with any safety standard, including Standard No. 302.

The "render inoperative" prohibition of S108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to the actions of vehicle owners in adding to or otherwise modifying their vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment. Thus, if your products were placed in vehicles by the vehicle owners, your products would not need to meet any FMVSSs. Nevertheless, in the interest of safety, we suggest you consider conforming your product to a flammability resistance standard equivalent to Standard No. 302.

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

ID: 2619y

Mr. Michael O'Donnell
P.O. Box 127
Skaneateles, NY 13152

Dear Mr. O'Donnell:

This is in response to your letter to this office asking whether NHTSA's safety standards apply to vehicles in service on the public roads. Specifically, you were interested in the applicability of NHTSA requirements to a 1977 school bus that was converted to a "recreational vehicle/house coach" that is now only for personal and family use.

The Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) promulgated by this agency apply to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. The requirement that a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment comply with all applicable FMVSS applies only until the product is first sold to a consumer. Both before and after a vehicle or item of equipment is first sold to a consumer, any modifications to that product are affected by section 108(a)(2)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A), which states:

No manufacturer, distributor, dealer or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard . . . .

If any of the commercial entities identified in section 108(a)(2)(A) were to make modifications that resulted in a "render inoperative" violation, the violating commercial entity would be liable for a civil penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation. Please note that this "render inoperative" provision does not apply to a vehicle owner. The vehicle owner may modify his or her vehicle without violating any Federal requirements, irrespective of whether the modification affects the vehicle's compliance with a safety standard.

Please note also that the individual States have the authority to regulate the operation and use of motor vehicles within their borders. Additionally, the individual States have the authority to regulate the modifications that may be made to a vehicle by its owner. You may wish to contact the Department of Motor Vehicles for the State of New York to learn if the State has established any requirements applicable to your use or registration of this vehicle in New York.

I hope you have found this information helpful.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel /ref: VSA d:7/l8/90