ID: nht91-2.12

DATE: March 6, 1991

FROM: Mark A. Pacheco -- Vice President, Innovative Industries of Tampa, Inc.

TO: Department of Transportation, NHDSA

TITLE: Re Subj: Ruling on Motorized Scooter

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 4-1-91 from Paul Jackson Rice to Mark A. Pacheco (A37; VSA S 102(3))

TEXT:

On behalf of our client Walk Machine Corporation, 17690 South Dixie Hwy (US-1), Miami, FL 33157, Florida USA. We would like to obtain a ruling from you regarding their "Walk Machine". Attached for your reference is a brochure on the product.

These are being manufactured in Brazil by Hatsuta Industrial S.A., Av. Monteiro Lobato, 2700 - CEP: 07190 - Guarulhos - SP - Brazil and imported.

From our study it does not fail under any federal regulations and since this is designed for off road use, we would like to get a confirmation from you that no other approvals are required.

If you should have any questions or comments or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Attachment

WALK MACHINE (Graphics omitted) The Walk Machine is a new concept for pedestrian's mechanization. Safe and easy to drive, after few minutes of training, you will be ready to move economically along at speeds up to 16 MPH.

SUPER ECONOMIC

It is very economical - 37cc and 1 HP engine goes up to 50 miles with one liter of gas. Its 0,3 gallons fuel tank can take you for up to 62 miles. It is easier to handle than a bike, a motorcycle, or a car. Due to its extremely safe.

EASY TRANSPORT

The Walk Machine is light (40 pounds) and has a foldable handle - bar - you can transport in a car trunk - or on a car rack. You can take with you on a trip or on a day out without any problems!

SPECIFICATIONS

Engine......................... 2 strokes Cylinder capacity.............. 37 cc (2,25 cu. inches)

o Piston x Stroke.............. o 1,4 x 1,5 inches Maximum Power.................. 1 HP at 5.500 RPM Refrigeration.................. Air, "Ram - Air" flaps Ignition....................... Magnet and secondary coil Carburetor..................... Ventury piston type o 0,55 inches lubrification.................. 2 stroke oil 25:1 Traction....................... Pulleyes and belts Net Weight..................... 40 pounds Fuel Tank...................... 0.3 gallons Maximium Speed................. 16 miles p/ hr. Normal Speed................... 7,5 miles p/ hr. Maximium load.................. 220 pounds Tires.......................... 3.25 x 6 (special) Tire gauge..................... 18 to 20 lbs.

NOTE: The technical characteristics of this vehicle might be changed by the manufacturer without prior notice.

Walk Machine is a trade mark registered in USA and other countries Walk Machine is patented in USA and other countries.

WALK MACHINE CORPORATION HATSUTA INDUSTRIAL S.A. 17690 South Dixie Hwy (US - 1) Av. Monteiro Lobato, 2700 - CEP: 07190- Miami FL 33157, Florida USA Guarulhos - SP - Brazil Phone.: (305) 378-4564 / 378-4531 Tel.: (011) 209-2133 - Telex: 1165033 HABR - Fax.: (305) 378-9318 Fax: (011) 209-2593

ID: nht87-1.60

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 04/03/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Leon Pauksta -- Traffic Manager, Nichimen America, Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Leon Pauksta Traffic Manager Nichimen America, Inc. 225 North Michigan Avenue Suite 2322 Chicago, IL 60601-5983

This responds to your February 20 and March 18, 1987 letters requesting guidance on the information which you should provide us so that we can issue an opinion whether a particular vehicle is considered to be a motor vehicle. You explained that this requ est was made with reference to a mini pickup truck your company is considering importing from Taiwan, and that the truck would be used as "off-the-road utility conveyances." have set forth below the factors this agency considers in making determinations of whether a particular vehicle is a motor vehicle.

Section 102(3) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended (15 U.S.C. 1391(3)) defines a "motor vehicle" as

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

We have interpreted this language as follows. On the one hand, 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. In additi on, vehicles intended 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.

On the other hand, vehicles which use the public highways on a necessary and recurring basis are motor vehicles. For instance, jeep-type utility vehicles are plainly motor vehicles, even though they are equipped with special features to permit off-road o peration. NHTSA has interpreted the definition of "motor vehicle" to include vehicles whose on-road use is substantial, even though use on the public roads is not the vehicles' greatest intended use. 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 the vehicle's owners, NHTSA has held that the vehicle is a "motor vehicle". This finding was made in the case of dune buggies and regardless of the manufacturer's stated intent rega rding the terrain on which the vehicles were to be operated.

Between these fairly clear areas are the cases the agency has previously characterized as "borderline" cases. These cases typically involve vehicles that have off-road operating capability, but also have on-road operating capability, and about which ther e is little or no evidence about the extent of the vehicle's on-road use. In previous letters of interpretation, this agency has set forth some of the factors it considers to determine whether borderline case vehicles should be classified as motor vehicl es. These factors include:

1. Whether States or foreign countries have permitted or are likely to permit the vehicle to be registered for on-road use;

2. Whether the vehicle is or will be advertised for use on-road as well as off-road, or whether it is or will be advertised exclusively for off-road use;

3. Whether the vehicle's manufacturer or dealers assist or will assist vehicle purchasers in obtaining certificates of origin or title documents.

4. Whether the vehicle is or will be sold by dealers also selling vehicles that are indisputably classified as motor vehicles; and

5. Whether the vehicle has or will have affixed to it a warning label stating that the vehicle is not intended for use on public roads.

If you wish to submit information relevant to the factors discussed above, we would be pleased to consider it and offer you an opinion regarding your vehicle.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

March 18, 1987

NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION 400 - 7th Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Attn.: Chief Counsel

SUBJECT: Application for Ruling As to Whether a Motor Vehicle is For Primary Use on Public Thoroughfares.

Dear Counsel:

Attached is a copy of our February 20th inquiry. Although it was sent to you almost one month ago we have not received a reply from you.

Because this subject is an active business project for us which is being researched, we do require instructions from your office.

Could you please send instructions as to what kind of information we are required to submit to your office in order to obtain a ruling.

Yours very truly,

NICHIMEN AMERICA INC.

Leon Pauksta, Traffic Manager

cc: Mr. Hattori

February 20, 1987

NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION 400 - 7th Street. S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Attn.: Chief Counsel

SUBJECT: Application for Ruling As to Whether a Motor Vehicle is Considered for Primary Use on Public Thoroughfares.

Dear Counsel:

We have been researching the feasibility of importing mini pickup-truck type motor vehicles from Taiwan for use in the U.S. as off-the-road ultility conveyances.

Would you kindly provide instructions as to what kind of information we must submit to your office and any formal application format we should use. It would also be helpful if you could give an estimated time-frame such ruling procedure would involve.

Your prompt response and assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Yours very truly,

NICHIMAN AMERICA, INC.

Leon Pauksta. Traffic Manager

cc: Mr. Hattori

ID: nht95-7.12

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: October 3, 1995

FROM: Ken Van Sciver -- President, Sciver Corporation

TO: Chief Counsel -- NHTSA

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: 12/8/95 letter from Samuel J. Dubbin to Ken Van Sciver (A43; Std. 206; VSA 102)

TEXT: Safety Administration:

The Sciver Corporation has developed a new product, the Auto Bib, hereafter known as product. We have already began the development and marketing of this new product. The reason for this letter is to familiarize ourselves to any local, state, or governing agency with regards to the consumers safety standards if applicable with this product.

After speaking with Walter Meyers in one of your departments, he suggested we submit drawings and describe our product to the New Product Safety Committee for review. We have enclosed a promotional sheet that gives detailed instructions of it's uses and installation of this product. The intentions of this product are to provide the consumer a way of protecting their vehicle's door from the abuse caused by their small pets, the sun, and children.

If you could please forward any information and findings at your earliest convenience it will be appreciated.

Enclosures: product description product installation instructions

(Enclosures omitted.)

ID: nht94-4.86

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: November 22, 1994

FROM: P. Binder -- ITT Automotive Europe

TO: John Womack -- Office of the Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: New Development of a Rearlamp

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 12/7/94 FROM PHILIP R. RECHT TO HERR P. BINDER (A42; REDBOOK 2; STD. 108)

TEXT: We have the following problem regarding the new development of a rearlamp:

The rearlamp will be fixed on a car which will be produced in Germany and exported to the USA.

The car manufacturer wants to have a yellow bulb for the function "turn signal lamp". Planned is the bulb type PY 21W. This is a yellow bulb (12V/21W) registered under ECE-R37 with a base BAU 15 (TEC-Publ. 61, Page 7004-19-1)-a data sheet is attached!

As far as we know there is only one comparable yellow bulb available in USA - the bulb Trade No. 1156 NA. This one has, however, a base S.C. Bayonet.

(GRAPHICS OMITTED)

May we ask you therefore to answer the following questions:

1) Is it allowed in USA that new rearlamps are fitted with such "Europe"-bulbs?

2) Do spare bulbs of the same type (PY 21W) have to be freely available in USA (e.g. supermarket, station, etc.)?

3) Would it be sufficient if the car manufacturer offers this bulb (PY 21W) as a spare part within his service stations in USA?

4) Is there any specification or law regarding the use of bulbs in USA? If so, please inform us about these specifications.

5) Is the use of bulbs treated differently in the single states?

As there is the possibility of changes in design of the rearlamp we would be grateful for an answer as soon as possible.

Thank you very much in advance for you help.

ID: nht75-1.48

DATE: 09/30/75

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Transcraft Corp.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: I am writing to confirm your telephone conversation of September 9, 1975, with Mark Schwimmer of this agency, concerning the testing of brake hose assemblies pursuant to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 106-74.

As Mr. Schwimmer explained, the standard does not specify the testing which you must conduct; it does specify the criteria which the assemblies must meet when tested by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) for compliance. While the surest way for you to be confident of compliance would be to follow the procedures in every detail, you are not legally obligated to do so. Section 108 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended (the Act), requires you to assure yourself that, when tested by the NHTSA according to the procedures set out in the standard, your assemblies will meet the specified criteria. In addition, you are required to repair or replace without charge noncomplying assemblies. In the event of noncompliance or failure to remedy the noncompliance, the Act specifies a civil penalty not to exceed $ 1000 for each violation (and not to exceed $ 800,000 for any related series of violations). The exercise of due care in ensuring that the assemblies comply with the standard is a defense to an action for civil penalties for noncompliance. In such a situation, however, the Act nevertheless requires you to remedy the noncompliance.

If you manufacture brake hose assemblies and install them in vehicles which are also manufactured by you, then those assemblies are exempted by S5.2.4 of the standard from the requirement that assemblies be labeled by means of a band.

ID: nht94-4.44

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: October 4, 1994

FROM: Brigitte Neifer -- Safety Standards/Certifications, Sekurit Saint-Gobain Deutschland

TO: Dan Colhen -- Safety Compliance, NHTSA

TITLE: 1) Docket 89-15; 2) AAMVA activities

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO 2/17/95 LETTER FROM PHILIP R. RECHT TO BRIGITTE NEIFER (A43; STD. 205)

TEXT: 1) [Illegible Words] Please inform me if NHTSA is planning further activity on this docket. I have not heard of further activities - published in the FR - since July 1992.

2) AAMVA: I have been informed that AAMVA have given up involvement in the Safety Equipment Compliance Program, which has obviously lost importance, due to the increasing preemption of state regulations by the federal government. I therefore intend to limit our a ctivities to having our products tested by ANSI standard in independent laboratories such as ETL in Cortland or other European labs. I understand that the 5-year rhythm of renewal was an AAMVA procedure and not an official requirement. Am I right?

I nevertheless intend to have our products regularly tested by independent laboratories and think DOT inspectors in USA will accept (cars equipped with) our glazings when accompanied only with a test report. Is this correct?

I would appreciate any comment, information, advice and warning of NHTSA concerning my evaluation of the situation. I know rather little about US legal requirements of showing compliance of production with ANSI Z26.1 apart from test reports.

ID: 3142o

Robert L. Ripley, President
Knaack Manufacturing Co.
420 East Terra Cotta Avenue
Crystal Lake, IL 60014

Dear Mr. Ripley:

This is a response to your letter asking this agency to review three product catalogs you submitted with your letter, and tell you whether your company is required to furnish information pursuant to 49 CFR Part 566, Manufacturer Identification. Based on the information you supplied with your letter, your company is required to file information under Part 566 for the warning devices shown in one of the catalogs, but not for any of the other items shown in the three catalogs.

As specified in the Application section of Part 566 (/566.3), Part 566 applies to (1) all manufacturers of motor vehicles and (2) manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment, other than tires, to which a safety standard applies. The only item advertised in the three catalogs that is motor vehicle equipment to which a safety standard applies is the "Safety Reflector Kit" shown on page 6 of the catalog entitled "weather guard For Full-Size and Mini Vans." These devices are subject to Standard 125, Warning Devices (49 CFR /571.125). Accordingly, your company, as the manufacturer of these devices, must furnish the information specified in /566.5 within the time period specified in /566.6.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have further questions, please contact Joan F. Tilghman of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

ref:VSA#566 d:l0/3l/88

ID: nht88-3.90

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 11/03/88 EST

FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: W. E. BALDWIN -- PRESIDENT, K-R INDISTRIES

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: MEMO DATED 9-1-88, FROM W. E. BALDWIN, TO ERIKA Z. JONES, OCC-2512

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of September 1, 1988, asking for an interpretation of paragraph S4.5.11(e) of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.

You have developed a center highmounted stop lamp "containing 5 bulbs, where each bulb is illuminated in sequential order." You state that the "time between each lamp illumination is less than 250 ms, providing a steady photometric value, meeting S4.1.1. 41(c)", and that "the red lens of the lamp is steadily illuminated, with the illuminated area moveing (sic) in a back and forth motion." In your opinion, the invention meets the requirement of S4.5.11(e) that lamps, other than those enumerated be steady- burning.

We cannot provide the interpretation you seek. Under paragraph S4.5.4, "the stop lamps on each vehicle shall be activated upon activation of the service brakes." This means that all bulbs providing the center stop lamp signal must be simultaneously acti vated, not sequentially. In addition, we do not consider a lamp with a moving illuminated area to be one that is steady-burning within the meaning to S4.5.11(e).

ID: nht94-4.95

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: December 6, 1994

FROM: David O'Neil -- Manager, Product Development, Hehr International Inc.

TO: Philip R. Recht -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: FMVSS 205 requirements for glass - plastic side windows installed on transit buses.

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO 2/14/95 LETTER FROM PHILIP R. RECHT TO DAVID O'NEIL (A43; STD. 205)

TEXT: Hehr International has received a contract to supply 196 bus sets of windows to Neoplan USA Corporation. The buses will enter service with the Los Angeles County MTA.

The passenger and driver side window glazing will be a glass - plastic composite consisting of 1/4 inch tempered glass with DuPont Spallshield 307 laminated to the interior surface.

Hehr requests your interpretation of FMVSS 205 with respect to the following:

1) Certification and Marking - Must the glazing be certified and marked as Item 15B/16B or is it possible to certify and mark the glazing as Item 2/3?

2) Cleaning Instructions - Does a label containing all required instructions which is taped to the glazing satisfy the requirements of paragraph S5.1.2.10?

Production is scheduled to begin by March 1995. We would appreciate receiving your response prior to that time.

If you have any questions regarding this request, I may be reached at (213) 663-1261. Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter.

ID: nht88-3.70

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 10/14/88

FROM: DANIEL F. WIECHMANN

TO: RALPH HITCHCOCK -- NHTSA

TITLE: THE STATE OF IOWA VS. BARRY LYNN SPEICH FRANKLIN COUNTY CRIMINAL NO. WD488435; NO. 24.432.0788 (@ 321.424) OF THE CODE OF IOWA

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 07/05/89 FROM JEFFREY R. MILLER -- NHTSA TO FRED GRANDY, REDBOOK A33 (3); STANDARD 108; LETTER DATED 05/09/89 FROM FRED GRANDY -- CONGRESS TO JERRY CURRY -- NHTSA; LETTER DATED 05/05/89 FROM DANIEL F. WIECHMANN TO ROBER T A. DETERMAN, RE THE STATE OF IOWA VS. BARRY LYNN SPEICH; LETTER DATED 09/23/88 FROM DANIEL F. WIECHMANN TO RUTH SKLUZACEEK, RE THE STATE OF IOWA VS. BARRY LYNN SPEICH, FRANKLIN COUNTY CRIMINAL NO. WD488435; NO 24.432.0788 [321.424] OF THE CODE OF IOWA; LETTER DATED 10/10/88 FROM JODY JOHNSON -- IOWA DOT TO DANIEL F. WIECHMANN, REF NO 911.2

TEXT: Dear Mr. Hitchcock:

Please be advised I represent the above named Defendant, who was charged with the violation of Section 321.424 of the Code of Iowa, which is Sale of Lights-Approval, which basically states that no person shall have for sale, sell or offer sale for use upon or as a part of the equipment of a motor vehicle, trailer, or semitrailer, or use upon any such vehicle any headlight, auxilary or fog lamp, rear lamp, signal lamp, or relfector, which reflector is required hereunder, or parts of any of the foregoi ng which tend to change the original design or performance, unless of a type which has been submitted to the director and approved by the director.

The bottom line herein is the above named Defendant had headlight covers such as described in the information I have enclosed, which is pages 210 and 211 from an auto parts catalog.

On September 23, 1988, I wrote to Ruth Skluzaceek, Director of Vehicle Registration Office, Lucas State Office Building, Des Moines, Iowa 50319 to inquire whether or not the headlight covers above described are approved by the State of Iowa, as Sectio n @ 321.428 of The Code of Iowa authorizes the Director to approve or disapprove lighting devices and to issue and enforce rules establishing standards and specifications for the approval of such lighting devices, their installation, adjustment and aimin g. This matter was taken up with the department on October 10, 1988, I received response from the Iowa Department of Transportation, Jody Johnson, Administrative Officer, Vehicle Registration, Motor Vehicle Division, citing Chapter 450 of the Iowa Admin istrative Code, Rule 450.1(321) which states that whenever the Code of Iowa requires the Department to establish standards for motor vehicle equipment or to approve types of motor vehicle equipment, the Department shall consider the item approved or stan dard established if it complies with applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and 49CFR Parts 501-590 (October 1, 1987), stating that the headlight covers in question met Federal Standards then they would qualify under Iowa Law.

Ms. Johnson further went on to suggest that I contact you concerning my question, a copy of Jody Johnson's letter of October 10, 1988, being enclosed for your reference.

Therefore, I am wondering as to whether or not these headlights or covers are approved by the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Standards, and, if so, would you please be so kind as to set forth the fact these headlight covers are an approved device. If they are not so approved, please kindly so state.

I await your response.

Thank you very much.

Yours very truly,

Enclosures

[AUTO PARTS CATALOG FOR HEADLIGHT COVERS FROM BOWDOIN PRODUCTS INCORPORATED DELETED]