ID: 1984-3.49

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 12/07/84

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Transportation Manufacturing Corporation -- Robert Zeaton, Director of Engineering

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Robert Zeaton Director of Engineering Transportation Manufacturing Corporation P.O. Box 5670 (R.I.A.C.) Roswell, New Mexico 88201

This responds to your October 11, 1984, letter to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration asking for permission to use an alternative location for certification labels required by Part 567, Certification.

According to your letter, you are requesting permission to use an alternative location because the locations specified in S567.4(c) are not practicable in your new "MCI" series of intercity buses. The label could not be legible when affixed to areas surrounding the driver's seating position without removing some permanently attached items, such as the driver's seat or steering column cover. You propose, as an alternative, the installation of the labels on the vertical left hand face of the entrance door stepwell. You state that this panel assembly is not removable for servicing and is readily visible in the entrance door and stepwell area.

In consideration of the problems of installing the certification labels on the new MCI buses in the positions specified in S567.4(c) and since the agency desires that these labels be easily readable, we grant your request to install your labels in these new "MCI" series of intercity buses in the alternative locations that you suggested, provided that all the other requirements of S567.4 are met.

Sincerely,

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel October 11, 1984 "4 PAGES INSERT HERE"

Administrator NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION 400 Seventh Street S.W. Washington DC 20590 Gentlemen:

This letter is being sent to you to address the requirements for the location of the VIN plate in a motor vehicle as outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations under Title 49 - Transportation, Part 567 -Certification. In S567.4 - Requirements For Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles, the requirements for the location of the VIN plate in the vehicle are specified. There is a general requirement outlined that locates the VIN plate in the immediate vicinity of the driver's seat position.

Attached please find several photographs illustrating the problems with locating the VIN plate in the immediate area of the driver' s compartment on our new (MCI) series of intercity bus. The 'MCI' bus will go into production late this year with first vehicle deliveries scheduled for the end of 1984 or early 1985. A considerable amount of time has been spent reviewing possible locations for the VIN plate. The panel areas to the immediate left side, rear, and right side (driver's console) were all considered. As can be seen in the attached photos, there is no available location where the plate can be permanently installed and still be legible without removing some permanently attached items such as the driver's seat or steering column cover. From the standpoint of federal, state, and local inspections, as well as access to information for customer warranty purposes, this would of course not be practical.

Our present production vehicle (model MC-9) has the VIN plate located in the overhead ceiling cap to the left of the driver's seat (photo #5). As can be seen in photo #6, the new 'MCI' series of buses has the parcel rack extended over the driver's area, eliminating the ceiling cap mounting area. The lower dash area of the vehicle was also investigated, but there is not a practical location available.

After all of our investigations, the location that was found to be the most suitable on the new 'MCI' series was the vertical left hand face of the entrance door stepwall. This is shown in photos #4 and #6. In this location, the VIN plate is permanently rivetted to a stainless steel panel that forms an integral part of the bus. This panel assembly is not removable for servicing and is readily visible in the entrance door and stepwell area.

This proposed location in the front stepwell is by far the most practical one. We would therefore request that this proposal be reviewed and approved at your earliest possible convenience.

Very truly yours,

Robert Zeaton Director of Engineering

Attachments: 4 pages of photos

RZ/jsi

ID: nht90-2.6

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: APRIL 9, 1990

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

TO: JOSEPH PERRY

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 11-7-89 TO STEPHEN P. WOOD FROM JOSEPH PERRY ATTACHED; (OCC-4134) TEXT:

This is in reply to your letter with respect to the rules and regulations pertaining to the importation of a kit car. Your letter indicates that the vehicle will utilize both new and used components, some of them imported from England, and the remainder supplied in the United States. I regret the delay in responding.

Specifically, the components you wish to import from England are described as "the body chassis unit, possibly two boxes of used and reconditioned suspension parts and interior seats and trim in other boxes." You would like to know "if it is acceptable to have all window glass and doors fitted to the body unit before shipping to best assure its arrival in one piece; at this point "the interior, suspension, dash, wiring and steering and wheels will not be installed.

Under the fact situation you outline, it is immaterial under our regulations whether or not you install the window glass and doors before shipping, or after importation into the United States. If you prefer to install these components before shipping, t hat is acceptable to us. Those components, such as windshield glazing, that are covered by an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard must comply with such standard upon importation, whether or not they are attached to a larger assemblage of mo tor vehicle equipment. With respect to windshield glazing, the manufacturer's marking of "AS1" and "DOT" Will provide the necessary assurance to a Customs inspector that the glazing conforms.

Although you mention no other covered equipment except lighting, if you are importing as part of the kit brake hoses, brake fluid, tires, seat belt assemblies, or other glazing for use in the vehicle, these must also be marked as conforming with DOT requ irements.

If you have any further questions, we shall be happy to answer them.

ID: 2393y

Mr. Joseph Perry
27 Shady Lane
Nashua, NH 03062

Dear Mr. Perry:

This is in reply to your letter with respect to the rules and regulations pertaining to the importation of a kit car. Your letter indicates that the vehicle will utilize both new and used components, some of them imported from England, and the remainder supplied in the United States. I regret the delay in responding.

Specifically, the components you wish to import from England are described as "the body chassis unit, possibly two boxes of used and reconditioned suspension parts and interior seats and trim in other boxes." You would like to know "if it is acceptable to have all window glass and doors fitted to the body unit before shipping to best assure its arrival in one piece; at this point "the interior, suspension, dash, wiring and steering and wheels will not be installed."

Under the fact situation you outline, it is immaterial under our regulations whether or not you install the window glass and doors before shipping, or after importation into the United States. If you prefer to install these components before shipping, that is acceptable to us. Those components, such as windshield glazing, that are covered by an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard must comply with such standard upon importation, whether or not they are attached to a larger assemblage of motor vehicle equipment. With respect to windshield glazing, the manufacturer's marking of "ASl" and "DOT" will provide the necessary assurance to a Customs inspector that the glazing conforms.

Although you mention no other covered equipment except lighting, if you are importing as part of the kit brake hoses, brake fluid, tires, seat belt assemblies, or other glazing for use in the vehicle, these must also be marked as conforming with DOT requirements.

If you have any further questions, we shall be happy to answer them

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Wood Acting Chief Counsel ref. Import d:4/9/90

ID: nht89-2.20

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 06/26/89

FROM: STEPHEN P. WOOD -- NHTSA

TO: MELANIE TURNER -- QUALITY CONTROL DIAMOND-STAR MOTORS

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 08/31/84 FROM FRANK BERNDT -- NHTSA TO TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION; STANDARD 205; LETTER DATED 04/13/78 FROM JOSEPH J. LEVIN -- NHTSA TO MOE PARE; NOA 30; STANDARD 205; LETTER DATED 11/03/88 FROM MELANIE TURNER TO ERIKA Z. JONES -- NH TSA; OCC 2777

TEXT: Dear Ms. Turner:

This responds to your letter requesting an interpretation of Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials (49 CFR 571.205). I apologize for the delay in this response.

You were particularly interested in the marking requirements set forth in Standard No. 205. Before I address your specific questions, it might be helpful to provide some background information on the origin and purposes of those marking requirements. D ifferent marking requirements apply depending upon whether your company is a "prime glazing material manufacturer" or simply a manufacturer that cuts sections of glazing material to which Standard No. 205 applies. Section S6.1 of Standard No. 205 define s a "prime glazing material manufacturer" as one who fabricates, laminates, or tempers the glazing material.

Sections S6.1 through S6.3 of Standard No. 205 set forth marking requirements for prime glazing material manufacturers. Section S6.1 requires prime glazing material manufacturers to mark each item of glazing material in accordance with section 6 of Amer ican National Standard "Safety Code for Safety Glazing Materials for Glazing Motor Vehicles Operating on Land Highways," Z-26.1-1977, January 26, 1977, as supplemented by Z26.1a, July 3, 1980 (ANS Z-26). One of the requirements of S6 of ANS Z-26 is that a manufacturer mark its glazing with its own "distinctive designation or trademark." Section S6.2 of Standard No. 205 requires prime glazing material manufacturers to mark each item of glazing material designed to be used in a specific vehicle with the symbol "DOT" and a manufacturer code mark that is assigned by this agency. Section S6.3 requires prime glazing material manufacturers to certify compliance with Standard No. 205 for each piece of its glazing material to which Standard No. 205 applies th at is designed to be cut into components for use in motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment.

Sections S6.4 and S6.5 of Standard No. 205 set forth marking requirements that apply to each manufacturer or distributor who cuts a section of glazing material to which Standard No. 205 applies for use in a motor vehicle or camper. Section S6.4 requires the manufacturer or distributor to mark that material in accordance with section 6 of ANS Z26. Section S6.5 requires the manufacturer or distributor to certify that its product complies with Standard No. 205.

The purpose of these marking requirements is to help the agency identify the actual manufacturer of the glazing material for the purpose of defect and noncompliance recall campaigns. The difference in the marking requirements was designed to help the ag ency distinguish between glazing in a motor vehicle that had been manufactured by a prime glazing material manufacturer specifically for use in that vehicle and glazing that had been cut, shaped, or otherwise altered before installation.

With this background, I will now address your specific questions. Your first question was whether the required markings must be located in any specified position on the glass, particularly the side door glass. No provision in either Standard No. 205 or ANS Z26 requires the manufacturer markings to appear in any specific position or area of the glazing. Hence, those required markings may appear anywhere on the glazing.

Your second, third, and fourth questions were all concerned with the issue of whether the required markings must be visible after the glazing has been installed in a vehicle. The answer to this question is no.

We first responded to this issue in an April 13, 1978 letter to Mr. Moe Pare, Jr. Mr. Pare had asked whether the certification markings required on glazing materials by Standard No. 205 must remain visible from the interior or exterior of a vehicle afte r installation. We replied that: "There is nothing in the certification requirements of section S6 of Standard No. 205 that requires the markings to remain visible after installation on the vehicle." I have enclosed a copy of our letter to Mr. Pare for your information.

We elaborated on our interpretation of this issue in an August 31, 1984 letter to Mr. K. Yamada of Toyota Motor Corporation (copy enclosed). In that letter, we said:

The certification requirements of section S6 of Standard 205 do not require the markings to remain visible after installation of the glazing on a vehicle. As long as the glazing manufacturer has certified and marked its glazing in accordance with the standard and as long as the markings are not removed by the vehicle manufacturer, there is no prohibition against covering the markings.

Your fifth question asked about specifications for the height of the lettering, point size, and dimensions for the required markings on glazing. As noted above, section S6.1 of Standard No. 205 requires each prime glazing material manufacturer to mark g lazing materials it manufactures in accordance with section 6 of ANS Z26. Section S6.4 of Standard No. 205 requires each manufacturer or distributor that cuts a section of glazing material for use in a motor vehicle or camper to mark

the material in accordance with section 6 of ANS Z26. Section 6 of ANS Z26 states that:

. . . all safety glazing materials manufactured for use in accordance with this code shall be legibly and permanently marked in letters and numerals at least 0.070 inch (1.78 mm) in height, with the words "American National Standard" or the characters AS, and, in addition, with a model number that will identify the type of construction of the glazing material. They shall also be marked with the manufacturer's distinctive designation or trademark.

Footnote 27 in Section 6 of ANS Z26 reads: "The model number shall be assigned by the manufacturer of the safety glazing material and shall be related by the manufacturer to a detailed description of a specific glazing material."

Your sixth and final question asked about the required content of the manufacturer certification and marking requirements for items of glazing. As noted above, the marking requirements for prime glazing material manufacturers are set forth in sections S 6.1 through S6.3 of Standard No. 205. The marking requirements for manufacturers and distributors that cut a section of glazing material for use in a motor vehicle or camper are set forth in section S6.4 and S6.5 of Standard No. 205.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions or need any additional information about the topic, please feel free to contact Ms. Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Enclosures

ID: 2654o

Martin Chauvin
Chief, Carrier Safety Bureau
State of New York
Department of Transportation
Albany, NY 12232

Dear Mr. Chauvin:

This is a response to your letter of last year where you asked us to address a statement allegedly made by an unidentified school bus manufacturer that a school bus driver's seat equipped with an upper torso restraint or shoulder harness violates "head impact protection" requirements contained in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. I apologize for the delay in this response. Nothing in our Federal standards prohibits a manufacturer from installing a seat belt assembly that includes a lap belt and upper torso restraint at the driver's seat of a school bus.

Standard 208, Occupant Crash Protection, specifies occupant protection requirements for the driver's seat of all buses. Section S4.4 of that standard gives a manufacturer the choice of equipping a bus driver's seat either with a complete automatic restraint system, a Type 1 seat belt assembly (which consists of a lap belt), or a Type 2 seat belt assembly (which consists of a lap and shoulder belt). There are no "head impact protection" requirements in Standard No. 208 for the driver's seating position in a bus. Thus, the driver's seat of all buses may be equipped with a lap and shoulder belt if the manufacturer chooses to do so.

Standard 222, School Bus Passenger Seating and Crash Protection, sets forth additional requirements for occupant crash protection for school buses. Section S5.3 of Standard 222 refers to a "head protection zone," and establishes head impact requirements within the head protection zones. However, the head protection zones are established with respect to passenger seats in the school bus. Standard 222 does not contain any head impact protection requirements for the driver's seat in school buses.

I hope you find this information helpful.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel ref:208#222 d:2/11/88

ID: nht91-4.36

DATE: July 1, 1991

FROM: David R. Stepp -- Stein Shostak Shostak & O'Hara

TO: Paul Jackson Rice -- General Counsel, NHTSA

COPYEE: Greg Long -- Escargot Motor Cars, Inc.

TITLE: Escargot Motorcars, Inc. - Reimportation of Previously Imported Automobiles

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 8-12-91 from Paul Jackson Rice to David R. Stepp (A38; Part 591; VSA 108(a)(2)(A))

TEXT:

On behalf of our client, Escargot Motorcars, Inc. (Escargot) of Toronto, Canada, we hereby request written approval for the reimportation into the United States of Volkswagen Beetles previously imported into the United States in their respective years of manufacture which have been sent to Mexico for refurbishment. This processing operation is prospective in nature and Escargot will not proceed until written assurances are received from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

FACTS:

In the United States, Escargot intends to purchase titled Volkswagen Beetles, last available in 1979, which were previously imported into the United States by Volkswagen of America. At the time of original purchase, each automobile complied with all laws and regulations applicable to that year of manufacture.

The automobiles will be shipped to Mexico for refurbishment after having been registered by Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) at the border with the United States Customs Service by a licensed customhouse broker. In Mexico, each automobile will be completely stripped of all damaged original parts and the frames will be restored and repainted. The engine will be replaced with an original Volkswagen replacement engine of 1,600 cc displacement. The body, all sheet metal, interior, bumpers, and lights will be restored or replaced with replacement parts and will be exactly as those original to the Volkswagen Beetles for their respective years of manufacture. A catalytic converter will be installed to meet or surpass U.S. emission standards in effect for the particular vehicle's year of manufacture.

Upon reimportation into the United States, all applicable customs duties will be paid. During the refurbishment in Mexico, the original frame/chassis is preserved on each automobile. The original VIN, which is physically stamped onto the frame/chassis, is also preserved and is easily readable for Customs inspection. Some of the original Volkswagen as exported to Mexico will possess the manufacturer's certification disk on the door post which shows the year of manufacture and confirms the satisfaction of all requirements of that date. In other automobiles whose bodies are worn or damaged, the entire bodies may be replaced and/or painted and this manufacturer's certification may be damaged or removed.

For certain vehicles with extensively damaged bodies, Escargot is contemplating stripping the bodies from the chassis in the United States prior to exportation to Mexico.

Escargot will keep detailed records of all restoration processes and will take photographs to confirm the processing performed in Mexico.

LAW & DISCUSSION:

The Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) for passenger cars and equipment are applicable to automobiles manufactured on or after the dates of the various provisions (49 C.F.R. Part 571). Thus, any previously imported Volkswagen Beetle will be required to meet all FMVSS for its respective model year, i.e., a 1968 Volkswagen Beetle must satisfy FMVSS 101-107, 109-11, 116, 201, 203-11, and 301.

For automobiles where the FMVSS apply, a manufacturer's certification must be permanently affixed to the motor vehicle. Under 49 C.F.R. Sec. 567, this certification must contain the name of the manufacturer, month and year of manufacture, "Gross Vehicle Weight Rating," "Gross Axle Weight Rating," the VIN, the type classification of the vehicle, and a statement that the vehicle conforms to all applicable FMVSS in effect on the date of manufacture.

In addition, an importer must file a declaration in accordance with 49 C.F.R. 591.5. In particular, Sec. 591.5(b) provides that the declaration must state that the imported vehicle conforms with all applicable safety standards, bumper, and theft prevention standards. A certification label or tag to that effect must be permanently affixed by the original manufacturer to the vehicle. See also 19 C.F.R. Sec. 12.80(b)(1), where Customs states its procedures for implementing the NHTSA declaration requirements.

Against this background, the Volkswagen Beetles which Escargot proposes to refurbish in Mexico and reimport into the United States should be allowed reentry by NHTSA. The automobiles will be restored to a point which actually exceeds the standards necessary for the model years of the motor vehicles. For example, a Volkswagen Beetle imported in 1968 will be fitted with a catalytic convertor, a device originally not required for that model year. Where the manufacturer's certification on the doorpost is preserved after restoration in Mexico, the vehicles clearly should be allowed to enter the United States without further certification.

In addition, we maintain that further certification is also not necessary for motor vehicles which may require body restoration so extensive that the doorpost which contains the manufacturer's certification may be damaged or removed. Since the original frame and VIN is retained throughout the restoration process, the refurbished Volkswagen Beetle will be recognized as a motor vehicle by its title which was previously imported and which complied with all applicable laws and regulations. The fact that a doorpost containing the certification is replaced or repainted should not nullify the manufacturer's certification. NHTSA, through the U.S. Customs recordation of the VIN at the border, has sufficient means to insure that a vehicle which is sent from the United States to Mexico will

be the same one returned to the United States after restoration. Similarly, vehicles which are stripped of their bodies prior to shipment to Mexico should be allowed entry without further certification since the chassis will be preserved and registered.

Although not controlling in the United States, Transport Canada's enforcement position with respect to the importation of restored Volkswagen Beetles into Canada is relevant. Under the Canadian Motor Vehicle Act, vehicles manufactured or rehabilitated on used chassis or floor pans are not subject to its provisions. This position is based on the concept that the chassis is the integral part of the vehicle and is thus the only component which must be retained.

In conclusion, NHTSA should determine that Volkswagen Beetles previously imported into the United States and restored in Mexico should be allowed entry into the United States without further certification. The proposed restoration performed in mexico is no different than that which is currently done in the United States with original Volkswagen Beetles. The original chassis of each Volkswagen is retained and the VIN is preserved throughout the refurbishment operations. The registration of the vehicles by VIN at the Mexican border provides a sufficient method to insure the integrity of the automobiles upon reimportation. Accordingly, we respectfully request NHTSA's approval for the reimportation of Escargot's refurbished vehicles.

We look forward to your earliest possible response to this inquiry. Should you need any additional information or have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

ID: aiam0218

Dear Mr. Hart: We have received your petition of March 10 for temporary exemption fro Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 201 (Occupant Protection in Interior Impact). The petition raises several questions.; Standard No. 201 does not, as you appear to assume, pertain only t instrument panels. It also covers seat backs, interior compartment doors, sunvisors, and armrests. Please explain whether your are seeking an exemption from the entire Standard, or only from S3.1.; The comment on p. 6 of the petition, 'two of the standards loom highe than the rest as problems', raises the question whether you are still requesting an exemption from Federal Standard No. 103 (Defrosting and Defogging Systems). If so, then you should submit a supplemental petition containing the information we requested on February 19 in returning to you your petition of February 13.; The signature 'Melvin Hart Owner' does not fulfill the requirement (4 C.F.R. S 355.5(b)913)) that the application be signed 'by an officer of the petitioner and state his authority and area of responsibility'.; If you will explain the scope of your request for exemption fro Standard No. 201, whether an exemption from Standard No. 103 is still needed, and your corporate position with Transer, Inc. we shall consider your petition further.; In closing permit me to suggest that it would be to your advantage t submit as much information as possible on the safety characteristics of the T6.A, including relevant drawings and photographs. An exemption is based in part upon a finding that it is 'consistent with the public interest and the objectives of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act'. Since an exemption is, in effect, a license to manufacture motor vehicles, the Administrator must more (sic) data than the written assurances of a manufacturer that it will produce a 'safe' vehicle before he can find that the exemption is 'consistent with the public interest'. This is especially true concerning a new vehicle produced by a new company which has not manufactured motor vehicles before. If you would like to discuss the T6.A with our engineers we shall be happy to arrange such a meeting.; Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Assistant Chief Counsel fo Regulations;

ID: nht95-1.59

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: February 11, 1995

FROM: Richard Kreutziger -- EXEC DIR. NYSBDA

TO: Walter Myers -- STAFF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO 4/26/95 LETTER FROM JOHN WOMACK TO RICHARD KREUTSIGER (A43; PART 565)

TEXT: MR. MYERS; I DID TRY TO REACH YOU BY PHONE ON FRIDAY (2/10/95) PERTAINING TO THE LONG STANDING QUESTION RELATING TO THE INTRUSION OF THE LEFT SIDE EMERGENCY DOOR ON A SCHOOL BUS OF THE FOLDING SEAT, UNDER PROVISIONS OF FMVSS 217 AMENDED, WHEN THERE IS VERY DISTINCT ILY DEPICTED A 30 CENTIMETER AISLE (CLEAR) EVEN THOUGH THERE IS FROM 1/4" TO 3/4" INTRUSION BY THE FOLD UP SEAT FRAME.

I WILL BE ATTENDING A MEETING MONDAY (2/13/95) AT WHICH I AM CONFIDENT THAT THIS QUESTION WILL ONCE AGAIN ARISE - AND I WOULD BE MOST GRATEFUL ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF ACTION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER FOR YOU TO CONTACT ME AT 607-722 - 7575

I AM NOT NOT TRYING TO PICK ON YOU BUT ANOTHER QUESTION HAS DEVELOPED WHICH IN MY RESEARCH OF THE CFR FOR TRANSPORTATION HAS NOT PROVIDED ME WITH MUCH OF AN ANSWER.

THE "QUESTION" PERTAINS TO "MODEL YEAR" DATING. I HAVE FOUND UNDER THE SECTION RELATING TO "VIN" THAT THE MODEL YEAR IS TO BE INCLUDED AT A SPECIFIED POINT - BUT MY DIRECT QUESTION - IS THERE ANY FEDERAL MANDATE STATUTE - REGULATION - LAW - THAT PROVIDE S A SPECIFIC DATE OR TIME FRAME IN WHICH A MANUFACTURER HAS TO CHANGE MODEL YEAR DATING - PROVIDING ESPECIALLY IF THERE IS NO CHANGE IN THE VEHICLE PRODUCTION MAKE-UP OR DESIGN FEATURE. I AM AWARE THAT MOST OF THE BIG THREE AUTO COMPANY'S MAKE ANNUAL CH ANGES, BUT THEY ARE ALWAYS ADDING OR DELTING A "WIDGET". ANY INFORMATION YOU MIGHT HAVE WOULD BE MOST APPRECIATED. THANK YOU.

ID: 7681

Mr. Robert N. Moore
No. 203048
Iowa State Penitentiary
P.O. Box 316
Ft. Madison, IA 52627

Dear Mr. Moore:

This responds to your letter of August 16, 1992 to former Administrator Curry. Specifically, your letter asks whether the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq., the Safety Act) and Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection (49 CFR 571.208) create a right which is enforceable under the authority of 42 U.S.C. 1983. You have raised this issue in a law suit concerning injuries you received while being transported in a passenger van that had been converted into a "paddy wagon." The vehicle was not equipped with safety belts for the passengers. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain for you the Safety Act and the Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

Let me begin by making clear that I have no special knowledge or expertise with respect to the civil rights provisions of 42 U.S.C. 1983. My answer will address only the requirements of the laws and regulations administered by this agency.

The Safety Act authorizes this agency to issue motor vehicle safety standards that apply to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA has exercised this authority to establish Standard No. 208, which requires seat belts to be installed at all designated seating positions in most vehicles. However, different belt installation requirements apply depending on the vehicle type, seating position within the vehicle, and the GVWR of the vehicle. Accordingly, I cannot identify the specific belt installation requirements for the vehicle in which you were transported without knowing the date of the vehicle's manufacture, the vehicle's seating capacity, and gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of the vehicle.

The Safety Act provides that no person shall manufacture, import, or sell any new vehicle unless it complies with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, including the seat belt installation requirements in Standard No. 208. See 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1)(A). The requirement that a vehicle comply with all applicable safety standards applies only until the vehicle's first purchase in good faith for purposes other than resale. See 15 U.S.C. 1397(b)(1). After such first purchase, the only provision in Federal law that affects modifications that can be made to the vehicle is set forth in 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A). That section provides that:

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 ... in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard.

Please note that this prohibition applies only to the commercial entities identified in the section, not to individual vehicle owners. Vehicle owners may alter their own vehicles and operate them on the highways without violating Federal law, even if the owner's modifications cause the vehicle to no longer comply with the seat belt installation requirements of Standard No. 208.

Thus, I cannot offer an opinion about whether there may have been a violation of the Safety Act without knowing if the passenger van was modified into a "paddy wagon" before or after its first purchase for purposes other than resale and who performed the modifications. If the State purchased the vehicle and made the modifications itself, there would have been no violation of Federal law, even if the modified vehicle did not comply with the seat belt installation requirements of Standard No. 208. Such modifications may, however, violate the laws of the State of Iowa. You may wish to contact the State of Iowa to learn if it has adopted any laws or regulations pertaining to owners' modifications to their vehicles.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any further questions or need some additional information, please contact Mary Versailles of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel ref:208 d:9/28/92

ID: nht92-3.39

DATE: September 28, 1992

FROM: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Robert N. Moore -- No. 203048, Iowa State Penitentiary

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 8/16/92 from Robert N. Moore to Mr. Curry (OCC-7681)

TEXT:

This responds to your letter of August 16, 1992 to former Administrator Curry. Specifically, your letter asks whether the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. S1381 et seq., the Safety Act) and Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection (49 CFR 571.208) a right which is enforceable under the authority of 42 U.S.C. S1983. You have raised this issue in a law suit concerning injuries you received while being transported in a passenger van that had been converted into a "paddy wagon." The vehicle was not equipped with safety belts for the passengers. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain for you the Safety Act and the Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

Let me begin by making clear that I have no special knowledge or expertise with respect to the civil rights provisions of 42 U.S.C. 1983. My answer will address only the requirements of the laws and regulations administered by this agency.

The Safety Act authorizes this agency to issue motor vehicle safety standards that apply to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA has exercised this authority to establish Standard No. 208, which requires seat belts to be installed at all designated seating positions in most vehicles. However, different belt installation requirements apply depending on the vehicle type, seating position within the vehicle, and the GVWR of the vehicle. Accordingly, I cannot identify the specific belt installation requirements for the vehicle in which you were transported without knowing the date of the vehicle's manufacture, the vehicle's seating capacity, and gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of the vehicle.

The Safety Act provides that no person shall manufacture, import, or sell any new vehicle unless it complies with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, including the seat belt installation requirements in Standard No. 208. See 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1)(A). The requirement that a vehicle comply with all applicable safety standards applies only until the vehicle's first purchase in good faith for purposes other than resale. See 15 U.S.C. 1397(b)(1). After such first purchase, the only provision in Federal law that affects modifications that can be made to the vehicle is set forth in 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A). That section provides that:

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 ... in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard.

Please note that this prohibition applies only to the commercial entities identified in the section, not to individual vehicle owners. Vehicle owners may alter their own vehicles and operate them on the highways without violating Federal law, even if the owner's modifications cause the vehicle to no longer comply with the seat belt installation requirements of Standard No. 208.

Thus, I cannot offer an opinion about whether there may have been a violation of the Safety Act without knowing if the passenger van was modified into a "paddy wagon" before or after its first purchase for purposes other than resale and who performed the modifications. If the State purchased the vehicle and made the modifications itself, there would have been no violation of Federal law, even if the modified vehicle did not comply with the seat belt installation requirements of Standard No. 208. Such modifications may, however, violate the laws of the State of Iowa. You may wish to contact the State of Iowa to learn if it has adopted any laws or regulations pertaining to owners' modifications to their vehicles.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any further questions or need some additional information, please contact Mary Versailles of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992.