ID: 0869

Mr. Scott E. Mack
Senior Product Manager
Philips Lighting Company
200 Franklin Square Drive
Somerset, NJ 08875

Dear Mr. Mack:

This is in reply to your letter of April 24, 1995, requesting a confirmation of your interpretation that "Philips Color Clear (TM) Halogen Headlights . . . are in compliance with FMVSS-108."

The product in questions "appears to be colored when not in use" but "when lighted it produces white light as defined by J579C." You have provided a report from ETL Testing Laboratories which "indicates that the color of the light is identical to that of a standard halogen headlight."

There is no definition of white light in SAE J579c Sealed Beam Headlamp Units for Motor Vehicles, December 1978. We believe you mean SAE J578d Color Specification for Lighting Devices, September 1978 which does contain a definition expressed in chromaticity coordinates. The report you supplied indicates that the Philips lamp provides a light within the color coordinates for white when equipped with a red, black, blue, or white insert. As Standard No. 108 contains no requirements for the color of glass lamp lenses or bulbs, only the light emitted from the lamp, we confirm your conclusion that the Philips Color Clear (TM) headlamp has been designed to conform to the color requirements of Standard No. 108.

We appreciated your visit to NHTSA on April 26 to demonstrate the lamp with its various inserts. I understand that the light produced by the lamp, and by a standard headlamp, appeared identical to the naked eye in a side by side comparison.

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

Sincerely,

John Womack Acting Chief Counsel ref:108 d:5/11/95

ID: 9181

Mr. James E. Walker III
Manager, LSI Laboratories
Lighting Sciences, Inc.
7830 E. Evans Road
Scottsdale, AZ 85260

Dear Mr. Walker:

We are replying to your letter of October 4, 1993, with respect to the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 for taillamps.

You believe that a discrepancy exists because paragraph S5.1.1 "requires equipment to be designed to Tables I, II [you mean III], and S7, which references SAE J585e for the Tail Lamp," whereas paragraph S5.1.1.11 "requires Table 1 of this specification to be substituted for the values achieved by Figures 1a and 1b, and in addition, to substitute Table 1 of SAE J585e by the values achieved by multiplying the percentages of Figure 1a by Table 1 and 3 of SAE J588 NOV84 Turn Signal Lamps."

You assume that the photometric requirements are those of Figure 1a, 1b, and 1c. Your assumption is correct. However, there is no discrepancy in the standard. The requirements for motor vehicle lighting equipment are set forth in Section S5. Paragraph S5.1.1 requires lighting equipment to comply with the SAE materials contained in the tables, except as may be provided in succeeding paragraphs of Paragraph S5.1.1. Tables I and III incorporate by reference SAE Standard J585e, Tail Lamps, September 1977. However, on March 3, 1993, NHTSA redesignated Paragraph S5.1.1.11 (with its references to Figures 1a and 1b) as S5.1.1.6, and revised it to include, among other things, the reference in paragraph S5.1.1.12 to Figure 1c. The same notice removed paragraph S5.1.1.12 from the standard. New Paragraph S5.1.1.6 states that instead of the photometric values specified in Table 1 of SAE J585e, taillamps shall comply with those of Figures 1a, 1b and 1c.

I enclose a copy of the amendment for your information, and hope that this answers your question.

Sincerely,

John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure ref:108 d:11/16/93

ID: nht91-6.26

DATE: October 16, 1991

FROM: Frank Vestergaard -- M-CO Denmark

TO: NHTSA -- Department of Transport

TITLE: Request fore statement.

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 12-10-91 from Paul Jackson Rice to Frank Vestergaard (A38; Std. 125)

TEXT:

When we in your country as well as in the rest of the world, in 1992 are planing to sell a new - patentet warning triangle, fore the precence of halted vehicles, under the name Warn-Mill.

The means with this request, is to get establish, if there is some lawful legal obstructions - fore the use of Warn-Mill.

Warn-Mill is intended at this stage, as supplements to the stateutory warning triangle.

As shown on the enclosed pictures,the mill is a strong reflecting triangle,mounted at a magnetfoot.

To improve the visibility there is bild-in a bearing,so that the triangle rotates, even with weak winds.

The strongness at the magnet is adapted, so that the mill falls of if the vehicle drives without dismount.

In case of further questions, i would be at your services.

Further vocher: Copy of the Danish authorities approval in Denmark.

Attachments

Warn-Mill. Description:

(Picture omitted)

Strong reflecting white triangle, surrounded by red frame, monted at a magnetfoot, to be placed at the roof of a halted vehicle. The warning sign rotates with even weak winds, which in daylights means that the warning sign is presented from all angles. And in the elucidate the sign.

Letter dated 4-23-91.

Photos of the Warn-Mill.

Letter from Henrik Waaben dated 5-23-90.

(Text and graphics omitted)

ID: nht93-5.34

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: July 27, 1993

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Bob Davis -- Quality Control Manager, Horton Emergency Vehicles

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 4/13/93 from Bob Davis to David Elias

TEXT:

This is in response to your letter of April 13, 1993, requesting an interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 206 as it affects the rear doors of ambulances that your company manufactures. I apologize for the delay in responding.

You state that your ambulances have two rear doors, and that each has locking mechanisms that can be operated both from the outside and inside of the doors. Your specific question is whether you can eliminate the inside locking mechanism on one of the rear doors without violating Standard No. 206. The language in S4.1.3 of Standard No. 206 that you noted in your letter (i.e., "Each door shall be equipped with a locking mechanism with an operating means in the interior of the vehicle.") refers to side doors, but not to rear doors. Thus, your company's ambulances need not be equipped with locking mechanisms on each rear door.

I hope this information has been helpful. If you have any further questions feel free to contact David Elias of my office at the above address or by phone at (202) 366-2992.

ID: 15088.ztv

Mr. Jeff Hymer
President & CEO
Safety Hi-Lites
P.O. Box 13053
Ann Arbor, MI 48113

Dear Mr. Hymer:

This is in reply to your letter of March 12, 1997, which, inexplicably, did not reach our office until April 21. I apologize for the delay.

You wish to market your "Safety Hi-Lites" lamp system as an aftermarket accessory, and, eventually, as original equipment. You wish to know if there are any Federal laws or restrictions against marketing the lamps, which you say "currently meet SAE #J1395 and SAE #J1398."

From the illustrations you provided, it appears that the "Safety Hi-Lites" lamp system comprises two red lamps that operate as stop lamps, plus a third amber lamp in the shape of an arrow that serves as a turn signal. The illustrations show the system mounted at the upper corners of large trucks, truck tractors, and trailers which have a rectangular configuration when viewed from the rear. The system will also flash automatically if a truck tractor separates from a trailer, and if the vehicle rolls over, jackknifes, or is impacted from the rear.

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 requires large commercial vehicles of the types shown in your illustrations (i.e., those with an overall width of 80 inches or more) to be equipped with clearance lamps, to indicate the overall width of the vehicle and to be located as near the top as practicable. Your illustrations do not show clearance lamps (or identification lamps for that matter) on the configurations depicted. In order to conform with Standard No. 108, a truck's clearance lamps will occupy the space where the illustrations have located the Safety Hi-Lites. Thus, for sale as an aftermarket accessory, the lamp system will have to be located adjacent to the clearance lamps, that is to say, either inboard of them or under them, and far enough away as not to prevent photometric compliance of the clearance lamps.

Your letter is unclear whether you wish to sell "Safety Hi-Lites" as an original equipment accessory, or as equipment fulfilling the requirements of Standard No. 108 for original equipment stop lamps and turn signal systems. We are pleased to see that the stop and turn signal functions have been designed to conform to SAE standards, however, of the two, only SAE J1395 APR85 is incorporated by reference in Standard No. 108. The other, SAE J1398 MAY95 is a newer version than the standard that is incorporated by reference. The correct version is SAE J1398 MAY 85. However, Table II of Standard No. 108, which applies to the vehicles you foresee using "Safety Hi-Lites," prescribes a maximum mountingheight of 72 inches from the road for stop lamps, and 83 inches for turn signal lamps. In all likelihood, the "Safety Hi-Lites" system will be mounted above 83 inches, which means that the vehicle manufacturer could use the system only as an original equipment supplement to the stop and turn signal lamps required to conform with the mounting height requirements of Standard No. 108.

Because "Safety Hi-Lites" are supplementary stop and turn signal lamps, Standard No. 108 prescribes no requirements for them. Original lighting equipment that supplements lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108 is not permissible if it impairs the effectiveness of the required lighting equipment, and there is a prohibition of similar effect covering installation of aftermarket lighting equipment. From the information available, it does not appear that "Safety Hi-Lites" would have an impairing effect on original lighting equipment if properly located.

Since it appears that some of the vehicles on which your system is placed may be subject to regulation by the Federal Highway Administration, we have asked the Office of Motor Carrier Research and Standards for its opinion, and it has advised that the system is acceptable under its laws.

You have also asked the requirements involved to receive DOT approval. We have no authority to approve or disapprove items of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment; we simply provide interpretations as to the relationship of supplementary lighting systems to the statutes and regulations that we administer.

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

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
ref:108
d.6/16/97

ID: nht67-1.5

DATE: 09/21/67

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; George C. Nield; NHTSA

TO: Fire Apparatus Manufacturers Association Incorporated

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of July 17, 1967, requesting clarification of several requirements specified in Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.

In answer to question No. 1 of your letter, the addition of a side mounted ladder would not be considered as an extension of the length of the vehicle.

Question No. 2 concerns the requirement for use of front identification lamps on open-cab fire trucks and trucks equipped with rotating red lights. We agree that the front identification lights might be slightly obscured while the emergency red lights are flashing. However, when these lights are not flashing, the identification lights would clearly identify a vehicle that is more than 80 inches in overall width. Therefore, identification lights will be required on the fire trucks which are depicted on the photographs enclosed with your letter.

With respect to question No. 3 regarding possible locations for rear identification lamps on fire trucks, it should be noted that Standard No. 108 does not specify a height requirement for location of these lamps. Therefore, a possible location for the lamps would be along the edge or under the edge of the rear step. In any event, the problem of providing the lamps does not appear to be a major one.

Question No. 4 relates to possible locations for clearance lamps on the front and rear of fire trucks. Standard No. 108 requires that clearance lamps be mounted as near as practicable to the upper left and right extreme edges of the vehicle. A provision is also included for mounting the rear clearance lamps at an optional height, when the rear identification lamps are mounted at the extreme height of the vehicle. We note from your photographs that (Illegible Word) lamps are normally mounted at approximately the extreme edges of the vehicle. It appears that a similar arrangement could be provided for mounting the clearance lamps.

Thank you for your interest in the motor vehicle safety standards.

Sincerely,

ATTACH.

FIRE APPARATUS MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION, INC.

July 17, 1967

George C. Nield, Acting Director -- Motor Vehicle Safety Performance Service, U.S. Department of Transportation

Dear Mr. Nield: The Technical Committee of our Association has reviewed the requirements of "Initial Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, Volume 32, Number 23, Federal Register of February 3, 1967. The following questions have arisen and we request clarification.

1. Standard 108, Par. S3.1.1.2, page 2411. Your paragraph refers to 30 ft. overall length. The industry builds many pumpers that are less than 30 ft. length but occasionally the addition of a side mounted ladder will extend beyond the rear step and will increase the overall length beyond 30 ft. The Pirsch picture 5904 enclosed illustrates a ladder so mounted.

The question is - would this ladder addition be interpreted to mean a length greater than 30 ft.?

2. Standard 108, Par. S3.1.1.3, page 2411. Almost every fire truck will include a rotary type flashing red light and other flashing red lights which of necessity will impair the effectiveness of the front identification lights and would seemingly make (Illegible Word) lights (Illegible Word). Will these three front identification (Illegible Words) on a fire truck? See Pirsch picture 622 enclosed as (Illegible Words) please note Pirsch picture 6124 enclosed showing an (Illegible Words) is commonly used and advise if identification lights (Illegible Words) on this type.

3. Standard 108, page 2411, Trucks I and II. The (Illegible Words) lights do not appear to be (Illegible Word) to fire truck picture 5904, a rear step is included on the average fire truck with (Illegible Word) riding the rear step. As it is readily seen, there is no place for the three identification lights that could possibly be effective. We definitely feel that rear identification lights are not feasible on a fire truck.

4. The side clearance lights are specified to be mounted as near as possible to the upper right and left front edges and the upper right and left rear edges. Our pictures illustrate the problem of the extreme edges and we would like to know where lights should be placed on this type of vehicle.

Very truly yours, E. L. Koepenick -- Secretary-Treasurer

Encls.

ID: 22403.ztv

Mr. Paul Michelotti
PM Technology
2850 Banyan Blvd. Circle NW
Boca Raton, FL 33431





Dear Mr. Michelotti:

This is in reply to your letter of November 27, 2000, with respect to your system that activates hazard warning system lamps. You have asked for an interpretation that the system "does not conflict with existing regulations."

Your system automatically activates "vehicle hazard warning lights under circumstances of heavy braking or sudden stoppage." A substantially similar system was brought to our attention recently in which the hazard warning system lamps would be activated when a vehicle's anti-lock braking system (ABS) was engaged. We replied that this would not be permitted under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated equipment. In order that you may understand the reason for our opinion, I enclose copies of our letters of October 7, 1999, to Mark Steele, and of May 9, 2000, to Senator Richard Lugar who expressed an interest in Mr. Steele's invention.

As you might imagine, the agency is frequently presented with new lighting ideas intended to enhance safety. Many of these are not allowable under Standard No. 108 because of deviations from the performance of the lighting equipment mandated by the standard. Virtually all these ideas are submitted without proof of their effectiveness. On December 13, 1996, we published a Federal Register notice that articulated the agency's general policy regarding new signal lighting ideas and how that policy would apply in the case of four specific brake signaling ideas (61 FR 65510). In a subsequent notice, published on November 4, 1998, (63 FR 59482) we expressed our intent to participate in efforts to develop an international consensus of how to handle new signaling ideas. We went on to say that, until a new international consensus emerges, we will follow the policy described in the December 1996 notice. I enclose a copy of both the 1996 and 1998 notices.

Sincerely,

Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel

Enclosures

ref:108
d.1/05/01

ID: nht95-2.69

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: May 4, 1995

FROM: Paul David Wellstone -- United States Senator

TO: Regina Sullivan -- Director, Office of Congressional Affairs, U.S. DOT

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO 7/25/95 LETTER FROM JOHN WOMACK TO PAUL DAVID WELLSTONE (PART 571)

TEXT: Dear Ms. Sullivan:

I have been contacted by a constituent of mine, Kris Solberg, about the problem The Grace Christian School is having with the federal government's definition of what constitutes a school bus. I have enclosed a copy of their letter for your review.

The Grace Christian School does not understand why the federal law does not allow the use of 15 passenger vans to transport students to school events.

I would appreciate it if you would review their situation and address their concerns. Please advise me of your findings and direct your response to Scott Adams, a member of my staff, at:

2550 University Avenue W., # 100N St. Paul, MN 55114 612/645-0323

Thank you for your assistance.

Enclosure

GRACE BAPTIST CHURCH

January 31, 1995

Senator Paul Wellstone Hart Office Bldg Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Wellstone:

A large number of schools are facing a difficult legal situation with regards to transportation, for which we need your help.

LEGAL SITUATION: The federal government, since the 1970's, has defined a school bus as "a passenger motor vehicle which is designed or used to carry more than 10 passengers in addition to the driver, . . . for the purpose of transporting . . . school stu dents . . .". For years, this definition was largely overlooked. Recently, the federal government has increased pressure on state legislatures to certify state statutes concerning school buses to comply with federal laws.

In 1992, Minnesota passed laws (MN statutes 1992, section 124.225) which comply with the federal definition of a school bus. Our Minnesota laws make it illegal to use a 15 passenger van to transport school students because: 1) it is classified as a bus, but 2) it does not meet all the requirements of a school bus.

HARDSHIP CREATED: 1) Some schools are being forced out of participation in extra-curricular, and even co-curricular activities, because they cannot afford to purchase and operate an official school bus. A small private school from our area, which has a nice van, announced last week that they will have to cancel their winter athletics programs, because they cannot afford to purchase a school bus. 2) The requirement is grossly wasteful. When we send, as we frequently do, sports teams, quiz teams, debat e teams etc., of 5 to 10 students, operating a bus is many times more costly than operating a van.

INEQUITIES OF THE LAW: We have been told that these laws have been passed in the name of safety. However:

1) A 15 passenger van is deemed safe enough for the legal transportation of Sunday School children.

2) A 15 passenger van is safe enough for churches to use in transporting "youth groups".

3) Youth camps, daycares, and youth clubs may use 15 passenger vans.

4) Airports, casinos, motels, etc., may transport passengers, including children, in passenger vans.

5) Station wagons, 7 passenger vans, and automobiles may legally be used to transport school students. These vehicles are not safer than 15 passenger vans.

Conclusion: The 15 passenger van is not an unsafe vehicle. It is, rather, the unfortunate victim of a law written before the 15 passenger van's existence. It is excluded by an unjustified technicality.

PROPOSAL

I. Amend the federal definition of a school bus to read "a vehicle which is designed to transport more than 15 passengers, including the drive . . ." rather than the current," 10 passenger, not including the driver.

II. Require that vehicles designed to transport 15 passengers or less, including vans, wagons, and automobiles, which are used to transport school students be required to be inspected annually, as school buses currently are.

We appreciate your attention to this matter. Please let us know what can be done to improve this.

Sincerely,

Kris Solberg, Principal GRACE CHRISTIAN SCHOOL 600 Lind St. Mankato, MN 56001

ID: nht93-3.33

DATE: May 5, 1993

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, U.S. Department of Transportation, NHTSA

TO: Patrick P. Radice -- Director of Operations, Electronics Division, Tridon

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 4-23-93 EST from Patrick P. Radice to NHTSA (OCC 8578)

TEXT: We have received your undated letter with respect to certification of aftermarket flashers.

You understand that manufacturers of aftermarket turn signal flashers and hazard warning signal flashers must certify that the flashers comply with the applicable requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 prior to sale. However, when a vehicle is equipped with a combination turn signal/hazard warning signal flasher, you ask whether the manufacturer of the replacement flasher must certify compliance with requirements for both flashers, or can certify the flasher to "meet either the turn signal flasher or hazard warning signal flasher of FMVSS-108 but not both?"

Paragraph S5.8.1 (formerly S5.7.1) of Standard No. 108 requires that each item of lighting equipment manufactured to replace any item of lighting equipment on any vehicle to which Standard No. 108 applies shall be designed to conform to Standard No. 108. Therefore, a combination turn signal/hazard warning signal flasher that is manufactured to replace a combination turn signal/hazard warning signal flasher must be designed to conform to requirements applicable to both turn signal flashers and hazard warning signal flashers.

Paragraph S5.8.2 permits replacement lighting equipment to be labelled with the symbol DOT, constituting a certification of compliance to applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards (although the manufacturer may certify by a label or tag affixed to the flasher or the container in which it is shipped). The "applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards" for a combination turn signal/hazard warning signal flasher are those portions of Standard No. 108 that specify requirements for turn signal flashers and hazard warning signal flashers. The manufacturer's certification must therefore cover both.

I hope this explains the matter for you.

ID: nht87-2.43

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 07/09/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Marzia Puccioni Jones

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Marzia Puccioni Jones Alpex Manufacturing Company 10926 "J" Street Omaha, Nebraska 68137

Dear Ms. Jones:

This letter responds to your letter enclosing a prototype horn/light and requesting information on its "legality". The horn/light is intended to be installed on the roof of a pickup truck or van. The light is located on the rear of the horn and would be visible to following drivers. The light comes on when the driver presses the horn button to sound the horn and goes off when the horn button is released. I regret the delay in this response.

You asked whether the horn complies with safety and other pertinent regulations; whether the light at the back of the horn must be red or amber; whether it is permissible to mount the horn on the cab of a pick-up truck or van roof; and whether the horn is "DOT-approved," or if it would be in violation.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issues safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment pursuant to its authority under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. However, N HTSA does not approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor does it endorse any commercial products. Instead, the vehicle safety act establishes a "self-certification" process under which manufacturer must certify that its product meets applicab le safety standards. Periodically, NHTSA tests whether vehicles or equipment comply with these standards, and may investigate alleged safety-related product defects.

There is only one standard which may apply to your product if it is installed on new vehicles. Standard 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, applies to vehicle lighting. As we understand your product, its light is not intended to ser ve as any of the lights required by the standard on a van or pickup. Therefore, the requirements directed to those types of lights would not be applicable. However, there is a general requirement that might affect your horn/light. S4.1.3 prohibits the in stallation of any light that would impair the effectiveness of any required light. The activation of the light on your product could lead following drivers to believe incorrectly that the vehicle equipped with your light is stopping. Repeated false stopp ing signals might reduce the driver's responsiveness to the activation of the vehicle's brake lights.

If your product is installed as aftermarket equipment, it would not be subject to any requirement in Standard No. 108. Standard No. 108 covers aftermarket lighting equipment only to the extent that the aftermarket light replaces required original lightin g equipment. Because there is no original equipment for the kind of light you described, the standard does not apply to your aftermarket product.

Regardless of whether your product is affected by any of our standards, please be aware that if you or the agency finds your product to contain a safety-related defect after you market the product, you are responsible for conducting a notice and recall c ampaign under S154 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 USC 1414).

Further, you should be aware that State law may apply to produce such as your horn/light. You may wish to consult the State and local transportation authorities in the areas you intend to market your horn.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones

Department of Transportation 12-18-86 Office of the Chief Counsel Ms. Erika Jones RM 5219 Nassif Bldg. 400 7th St. S.W. Washington. D.C. 2051O

Dear Ms. Jones:

Enclosed is a sample of a new born model prototype we would like to manufacture and market.

As the sample indicates the horns incorporates a light at the posterior of the horn. This light comes on only when the horn is sounded and stays on until the horn button is released.

We need some information from your office as to the legality of this horn. Would this horn comply with safety and other pertinent regulations? What color must the light be if in compliance red or amber? Where would you allow mounting of the horn as it is intended to be mounted on the cab of a pick-up truck or van roof? Is this horn DOT approved and would it be any violation?

In speaking to Mr. Roman Brooks of the Vehicle Safety Compliance Office, he indicated to submit a sample or drawing immediately for your prompt review. We would appreciate a swift reply as everything is in waiting pending your information. Thank you for your assistance.

Best Regards

Marzia Puccioni Jones ALPEX MANUFACTURING COMPANY