ID: nht90-1.25

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: JANUARY 26, 1990

FROM: KENT D. SMITH

TO: OFFICE CHIEF COUNCIL -- NHTSA

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 3-22-90 TO KENT D. SMITH FROM STEPHEN P. WOOD, NHTSA; [REDBOOK A35; STD. 108]

TEXT: I recently submitted an invention on a safety device to the Office of Crash Avoidance Research in the U.S. Department of Transportation. William A. Leasure, Jr., the Director of this office, responded to my letter but referred me to your office because there were some legal questions involved.

I believe that vehicles need some way of signaling following drivers if the headlamps of their vehicles are blinding you. I am a Driver Education teacher and whenever my students confront me with this problem there is no solution that up to now is ef fective. My invention, which is designed to deal with this problem is this: A button on the dashboard is attached to the backup lights. When the button is pushed the backup lights will go on and off in a matter of a second or less. The lights would not come back on again unless the button was pressed a second time. If necessary the button could be hooked up to only one of the backup lights. This would eliminate any confusion on the part of the driver of the following vehicle as to which direction th e car may be going. An alternative could be to hook the button up to the license plate lights. If this were done a double filament light would have to be installed so that the increase in intensity would be immediately observable by the driver of the f ollowing vehicle. This method of installation would not violate the SAE Standard for backup lights but I dont feel that it would be as effective as having the backup lights momentarily activated. I firmly believe that this new innovative concept would give the driver an effective means of informing the driver of the following vehicle that you were being blinded by his inconsiderate action.

I'm aware of the Federal law that states that the backup lights should not be on when the car is going in a forward direction. I believe that the intent of the law is to force people to make repairs so that those lights will not stay on and therby co nfuse people into thinking that the car is backing up rather than going forward. It would seem to me that this new concept could be added to an automobile without violating the intent of the federal law concerning backup lights.

I explained my idea to a gentleman from the Utah Department of Public Safety. He felt the idea was good enough that it should be pursued even if it meant making a revision in the Federal law that governed backup lights.

Would you please offer me any recommendations, either positive or negative, in regards to this invention. I thank you for your time and look forward to hearing from you in the very near future.

Please send your reply to: Kent D. Smith 12249 S. 1565 E. Draper Utah 84020

ID: nht90-1.26

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: January 26, 1990

FROM: Pat Crahan -- Director, U-Haul International

TO: A. L. Burgett -- NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 7-9-90 to Pat Crahan from Paul J. Rice; A35; Std. 115 TEXT:

I had the pleasure of hearing you speak and meeting you during the AAMVA Engineering and Vehicle Inspection workshop at Lake Buena Vista, Florida in December.

I was particularly interested in the portion of your talk relating to VIN requirements for trailers. As I recall you stressed that a seventeen digit VIN was required even if a person made a trailer himself and sold it; however if it was not sold the VIN was not required.

I asked you if U-Haul was required to have the seventeen digit VIN on our trailers since we make them ourselves and they are never sold? You asked that I write to you, which is the reason for this letter.

LPDS 1989

ID: nht90-1.27

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: January 29, 1990

FROM: W.A. Jacques -- Ford Rent-A-Car System., Dealer Fleet Operations Manager

TO: All Ford Rent-A-Car System Members

TITLE: Rental of Ford Club Wagons and Super Wagons for Student Transportation

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 5-25-90 To Lloyd Bentsen and From Stephen P. Wood (A35; VSA 102(14), 108(a)(1)(a), 108(b)(1); Also attached to letter dated 3-8-90 To Jerry Ralph Curry and From Lloyd Bensen; Also attached to letter dated 2-12-90 To Llo yd Bentsen and From Johannah Bonewald

TEXT:

Prupose This letter is intended to help remedy confusion that apparently exists among some dealers as to what vehicles may be lawfully rented for student transportation. Both Federal and state motor vehicle safety laws and regulations apply to such vehicles.

Legal Requirements The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended, and related regulations specify that school buses offered for sale shall meet certain unique requirements .

"School bus" is defined in the regulations as "a bus that is sold, or introduced into interstate commerce, for purposes that include carrying students to and from school or related events, but does not include a bus designed and sold for operation as a c ommon carrier in urban transportation.

"Bus," in turn, is defined as "a motor vehicle ... designed for carrying more than 10 persons." 49 Code of Federal Regulations S571.3.

Units Having More Than Ten Seating Positions Because Ford Club Wagons and Super Wagons having more than ten designated seating positions do not comply with the requirements of Federal standards specifically applicable to school buses, they should not be rented for transportation of preprimary, prim ary, or secondary school students to and from school or related events.

Ford sells incomplete vehicles (Econoline Vans and Cutaways with School bus Prep Packages and B-Series Chassis Cowls) to be completed as school buses by specialized school bus manufacturers.

Units Having Ten or Fewer Seating Positions The Federal school bus standards do not apply to Ford 5, 7 and 8 passenger Club Wagons as these vehicles are not "designed for carrying more than 10 persons"

There may be, however, state or local regulations requiring special equipment or identification that must be satisfied before the lower capacity Club Wagons may be used for student transportation. It is the responsibility of the dealer and the rental cus tomer to determine whether any state or local regulations are applicable.

Units for Transportation of College or University Students Questions sometimes arise concerning rental of Club Wagons and Super Wagon to colleges and universities to transport students on field trips or to athleticevents.

An opinion from the Office of the Chief Counsel of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator indicates that vehicles used for such purposes are not considered to be "school buses" in determining applicability of Federal motor vehicle safety stand ards.

However, as the opinion points out, individual states are free to regulate vehicles used to transport college and university students if they chose to do so.

Dealer Responsibilities Because the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has indicated that it considers the provider of a vehicle to be the person most likely to know its intended use, Ford Motor Company recommends that all dealers who rent a Club Wagon or a Super Wa gon as manufactured by Ford Motor Company with more than 10 designed seating positions obtain for his files a signed statement from the rental customer that the vehicle is not being used for carrying students to and from school or related events. If a de aler rents such a vehicle and knows or has reason to know that the rental customer intends to use the vehicle as a school bus, the dealer may be subject to a civil penalty of up to $1,000 per vehicle under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Ac t.

As stated above, it is the responsibility of the dealer and the rental customer to determine whether any state or local regulations apply to vehicles sold or leased for student transportation.

If you have any questions concerning this bulletin, please contact your Regional office.

ID: nht90-1.28

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 01/29/90

FROM: TIMOTHY A. KELLY -- SALEM VENT INTERNATIONAL

TO: DAVID A GREENBURG -- NHTSA CHIEF COUNSEL

TITLE: SALEM BUS VENTILATOR/ESCAPE HATCH - FMVSS 217

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 05/30/90, FROM STEPHEN P WOOD -- NHTSA TO TIMOTHY A. KELLY; REDBOOK A35; STANDARD 217; LETTER DATED 01/29/90 FROM TIMOTHY A. KELLY TO DAVID A. GREENBURG -- NHTSA; RE SALEM BUS VENTILATOR/ESCAPE HATCH - FMVSS 217

TEXT: (Illegible Word) you for the courtesies extended to the writer during my visit with (Illegible Word) Thursday afternoon January 25th, following my previous discussions (Illegible Word) Delarm. As we discussed, Salem Vent International already manufactur es a roof ventilating panel as shown on print #4220-001 attached. As (Illegible Word), the 4220-001 lacks a mounting frame which is supplied as part (Illegible Word) bus. To complete our program, we will need to design our own mounting frame and also a method by which the cover can swing free to provide an (Illegible Word) hatch. My concern was that we design the proper size to conform FMVSS 217.

(Illegible Word) said that his reading of the spec was that the opening had to (Illegible Word) an ellipsoid having 20" as its major axis and 13" as its minor (Illegible Word) and that this ellipsoid had to be able to fit through the escape (Illegible Wo rd) in the horizontal position. It looks to me that our existing tool(Illegible Word) accomodate this ellipsoid with ease.

Further discussed the specification as to what type of busses 217 (Illegible Word) covers and you pointed out that school busses were specifically covered by 217. While a roof escape hatch/ventilator is undoubtedly a (Illegible Word) option, it is not m andatory and does not allow the builder to (Illegible Word) any other methods of egress by its presence.

(Illegible Word), on other types of busses (transit, inter-city, airport, etc.) if builder elects to use an escape hatch/ventilator in the roof, they are (Illegible Word) to delete the rear exit door.

(Illegible Word) I left you I began to wonder what would happen if a bus builder put (Illegible Word) than one ventilator/escape hatch in the roof. Would the builder be (Illegible Word) to delete other specified methods of egress other, than the rear (I llegible Word) or would the additional ventilator/escape hatches really only serve purpose of additional ventilation to the bus.

2

You said that if I wanted an official opinion from the Office of the Chief Counsel, that I ought to request it in writing. John Machey suggested the same thing when I talked with him this morning and so attached hereto is a formal request for your opini on on my questions. I have tried to make this as simple as possible and I would be happy to hear from you if you have any questions as to my request.

Again it was my pleasure to meet you.

Sincerely,

Enclosure

ID: nht90-1.29

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 01/29/90

FROM: TIMOTHY A. KELLY -- SALEM VENT INTERNATIONAL, INC.

TO: DAVID A. GREENBURG -- NHTSA CHIEF COUNSEL

TITLE: SALEM BUS VENTILATOR/ESCAPE HATCH - FMVSS 217

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 05/30/90; FROM STEPHEN P WOOD -- NHTSA TO TIMOTHY A. KELLY; REDBOOK A35; STANDARD 217; LETTER DATED 01/29/90, FROM TIMOTHY A. KELLY TO DAVID A. GREENBURG -- NHTSA; RE SALEM BUS VENTILATOR/ESCAPE HATCH - FMVSS 217; OCC 4 382

TEXT: Pursuant to our meeting of Thursday, January 25, 1990, I respectfully request a written opinion on the following questions regarding FMVSS 217.

1. Size of Escape Hatch: The only size specification mentioned is that the hatch must accomodate an ellipsoid with a major axis of 20" and a minor axis of 13" pushed horizontally through the escape hatch opening.

Is this correct?

2. Application of Specification: A. FMVSS 217 does not address the use of escape hatches/ventilators in the roof of school busses.

B. FMVSS 217 does address the use of an escape hatch/ventilator in the roof of busses other than school busses, and further states that if such a device is used (and it conforms to the ellipsoid spec) then a rear exit door may be deleted on vehicles other than school busses.

Are A and B above correct?

3. Further Possible Deletions: If the non-school bus manufacturer applies more than one roof escape hatch/ventilator, do any further deletions (other than the rear exit door) accrue to the manufacturer under FMVSS 217. My reading shows that no furth er deletions are available to the manufacturer and that more than one escape hatch/ventilator simply serves the function of additional roof top ventilation.

Is the above correct?

Thank you for your prompt attention to these questions - I will await your response.

Sincerely,

[DRAWING OMITTED]

ID: nht90-1.3

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: 01/01/90 EST

FROM: Charles T. Thomas -- Prestige Travel

TO: Chief Counsel -- NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 7-3-90 to Charles T. Thomas from P. J. Rice; (A35; Part 591) TEXT:

In September, 1988, I returned to the United States after working in Saudi Arabia for a period of approximately twelve (12) years. While in Saudi Arabia and during November 1987, I purchased a 1985 Jaguar from a Saudi national with the intent to ship th e car to the United States for my own personal use when I decided to return to the United States.

When I was preparing to return, I was advised by the American Consulate in Dhahran that I would not be able to ship the car to the States because of the EPA pollution restrictions and because there were no agencies approved by the EPA to convert the car to U.S. pollution safeguard standards. As I did not want to give up the car, I shipped it to Germany to have it held until I could arrange to have it shipped to the States. On arrival in the United States in September 1988, I contacted the EPA and was t old that there were no agencies approved to convert the car. The car is still in Germany.

During March 1990, I was told that the EPA had changed their requirements that required mandatory conversion of imported vehicles if certain conditions were met regarding the purchase of the vehicle. I applied for a waiver for having to have the car con verted to EPA standards and my application was approved.

When preparing to have the car shipped, I was informed that the DOT has set forth certain requirements for importing cars. I have received a copy of DECLARATION OMB 2127-0002 and, under Section 10 of the Declaration, I find that my "assigned place of em ployment has been outside the United States at all times between October 31, 1988 and the Custom entry date listed". This is the only condition I cannot meet and I request a formal waiver of this requirement for my circumstance.

I need my car for my own personal use and I cannot afford to purchase a car at this time. Also, I am a professional engineer and have spent approximately 30 years of my career in resident in foreign countries. I have already made arrangements to have m y car converted to DOT safety standards at my expense. I feel that a consideration to waiver the above requirement is warranted.

Thank you for your consideration and I look forward to your prompt decision regarding my request.

ID: nht90-1.30

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: January 29, 1990

FROM: Cal Karl -- District 4700 - Commercial Vehicle Section, State of Minnesota, State Patrol Division

TO: Marvin Shaw -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 1-18-90 from R. E. Meadows; Also attached to letter dated 1-8-90 from R. Marion to C. Karl; Also attached to memo dated 11-28-8? from C. Karl to All School Bus LCR II's; Also attached to letter dated 11-27-90 from P.J. Rice to C. Karl (A36; Std. 217); Also attached to letter dated 12-7-82 from F. Berndt to M.B. Mathieson

TEXT:

I am in charge of the school bus inspection program for the Minnesota State Patrol. In that capacity I am asking for your interpretation of 49 CFR 571.217 S5.2.3.2 regarding vandal locks.

I have become aware of vandal locks by some bus body manufacturers that I feel do not meet the requirements of 217. My interpretation is disputed by the manufacturers and therefore I ask for your interpretation.

We are finding many of the vandal locks that even though they are unlocked, and the bus can start and run, the lock may be relocked by a student while the bus is running. Granted, it would not kill the bus engine but would render the starting mechanism inoperable if the engine is shut off or would die. This situation appears loaded with potential danger if the driver finds himself in a precarious situation and kills the engine only to find it won't restart.

Some manufacturers combat that by incorporating an interlock that activates a buzzer in the driver compartment if the lock is locked. This warns the driver that lock has been locked but doesn't prevent him from getting into a predicament before he is ab le to cause the door to be unlocked.

While standard 217 prohibits a bus from starting if the vandal lock is locked, can the lock be relocked after the bus is running or should it be locked in the open position?

While standard 217 requires that a key or special information by the driver is required to unlock the device, may it then be relocked without the key or special information?

I have enclosed copies of Minnesota minimum standards and letters from Wayne Bus Co. and Thomas Built Bus Co.

I appreciate your consideration.

Attachment

Minnesota Minimum Standards for School Bus 3520.5010 Doors

The emergency door must be equipped with a slide-bar cam-operated lock. The slide bar must have a minimum stroke of one inch. The emergency door lock must be equipped with a suitable electric plunger type switch connected with a buzzer located in the dr iver's compartment. The switch must be enclosed in a metal case, and the wires leading from the switch must be concealed in the bus body. The switch must be installed so that the plunger contacts the farthest edge of the slide bar so that any movement of the slide bar immediately closes the circuit on the switch and sets off the buzzer.

The emergency door lock must be equipped with an interior handle that extends approximately to the center of the emergency door. The handle shall lift up to release the lock.

The service door and the emergency door (side or rear) may be equipped with vandal locks if the locks comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard Number 217, Code of Federal Regulations, title 49, part 571.

MS s 169.45

13 SR 1860

3520.5020 (Repealed, 13 SR 1860)

3520.5100 (Repealed, 13 SR 1860)

3520.5110 (Repealed, 13 SR 1860)

3520.5111 FIRE EXTINGUISHER.

A minimum of one 2-1/2 pound dry chemical type fire extinguisher, with not less than a 10-B-C rating, is required. It must be approved by underwriters Laboratories, Inc. or an equivalent testing laboratory.

The extinguisher must be mounted in a bracket, located in the driver's compartment and readily accessible to the driver and passengers. A pressure indicator is required and must be easily read without removing the extinguisher from its mounted position.

MS s 169.45

13 SR 1860

3520.5120 FIRST AID KIT.

The bus must carry a removable Grade A metal, or other material of equal strength, dust-proof first aid kit, mounted in full view or in a labeled accessible place in the driver's compartment.

The first aid kit must have the following units and packages per unit:

ID: nht90-1.31

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 01/30/90

FROM: TILMAN SPINGLER -- ROBERT BOSCH GMBH

TO: RICHARD VAN IDERSTINE -- OFFICE OF RULEMAKING, NHTSA

TITLE: TELEFAX

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 3-23-90 TO TILMAN SPINGLER, ROBERT BOSCH GMBH, FROM STEPHEN P. WOOD, NHTSA; [REDBOOK A35; INTERP. STD. 108]; ALSO ATTACHED TO LETTER TO TAYLOR FROM RICH VAN IDERSTINE DATED 2-13-90; [43880]

TEXT: For some future projects I ask you to answer the following questions

1) To turn the adjusting screws of a HB2-headlamp it will be necessary to remove two snap on covers without the use of any tool. Will this be legal?

2) A combination of HB2-headlight (low- + high-beam) and auxiliary driving beam in one unit shall be equipped with only vertical adjusting screws for the driving beam. The beampattern will be so wide, that even bulbs with extreme tolerances will allow t o meet all photometric requirements without horizontal adjustment. Will this be legal?

3) When will the 9007 bulb be legal? Date of final rule?

Thanks for a quick answer

ID: nht90-1.32

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: January 31, 1990

FROM: Earl W. Dahl -- Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company., Vice President

TO: Stephen P. Wood -- Acting Chief Counsel., NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 5-2-90 To Earl W. Dahl and From Stephen P. Wood; (A35; Part 574); Also attached to letter dated 5-31-89 To Garry Gallagher and From Erika Z. Jones

TEXT:

This letter is related to the tire identification and recordkeeping requirements of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations Part 574. Section 574.5 defines the tire identification number, the fourth grouping of which consists of three numerals which identif y the date of manufacture. The first two numerals identify the week of the year, and the third numeral identifies the year. For example, date code "439" identifies the 43rd week of 1989. But that same date code also identifies the 43rd week of 1979. And therein lies the reason for this letter.

For various reasons, the European tire industry, including the European operations of The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, believes it is necessary to be able to distinguish the date of manufacture in an interval longer than one decade. To that end, it is the intent of the European manufacturers to add a symbol immediately following the fourth grouping of the tire identification number to identify tires produced in the decade from 1990 through 1999. The predominant symbol will be an isosceles right trian gle, with the right angle pointed toward the tire identification number.

NHTSA has been consistent in allowing information to be stamped on tires, in addition to that required by the regulations, so long as the additional information did not obstruct or confuse the meaning of the information required by the regulations. Attac hed is an example serial number showing the proposed "decade symbol." In this case, the symbol is about 3/4 inch away from the last character of the date code. However, in some cases the symbol will directly follow the date code, with no more than 1/8 in ch spacing between the date code and the symbol.

We request an opinion that the addition of such a symbol is permissible. Encl. 1 (Graphics not included)

ID: nht90-1.33

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 1990

FROM: HERBERT E. STOEL

TO: JOHN WOMACK -- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 4-8-90 TO HERBERT E. STOEL FROM STEPHEN P. WOOD; (A35; STD. 108). ALSO ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 12-30-87 TO KEN SIKKEMA FROM HERBERT E. STOEL. TEXT:

For quite some time, I have been deeply concerned about the need for greater safety on our highways. Back in August 1971, I gave a letter to former President Gerald R. Ford who was then a United States Congressman, stating the need for a change in the t aillights on all cars and trucks. The change would be green taillights and red stoplights. RED should mean only one thing, STOP.

Then on December 30, 1987, I gave a letter to Michigan State Representative Mr. Ken Sikkema (see letter enclosed), and now I feel inclined to bring this matter to your attention, because you have the authority to act on it. We have a law demanding the u se of seat belts or air bags on all cars, but it is more important to go even further and get to the origin of the problem. (A better warning of impending danger up front.)

So if we had Green taillights and Red stoplights, it would carry out the same system as our traffic lights, thus the idea would be received without confusion.

May it be found in your good pleasure and authority to enact this change before Japan or some other foreign nation forces us into it.

Enclosure