ID: nht91-2.37

DATE: March 18, 1991

FROM: Arthur H. Neill -- Chief, Crash Avoidance Division, Vehicle Safety Standards, NHTSA

TO: Anthony J. Lalikos -- Project Engineer, Titeflex Corporation

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 5/12/94 from John Womack to Nicholas S. Copass (A42; Std. 106), letter dated 9/29/93 from Nicholas S. Copass to David Elias (OCC-9161), and letter dated 3/6/91 from Anthony J. Lalikos to Vernon G. Bloom

TEXT:

The designation that you recently submitted in accordance with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 106, BRAKE HOSES,

(x) Has become accepted and recorded. Thank you. (Reference: Your letter dated March 6, 1991; your symbol "Stylized Logo" (=T with hose tail)).

( ) Cannot be recorded because another company has previously submitted the same or a very similar designation. Please submit a different one.

ID: nht87-1.20

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 01/15/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Adam A. Jorgensen

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Adam A. Jorgensen Consultant to Advance Products and Training Company 915 Middle River Drive, Suite 415 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33304

Dear Mr. Jorgensen:

This is in response to your letter of November 4, 1986, to this Office on behalf of your client, Advanced Products and Trading Company.

Your client wishes to develop a device "to be placed in the rear window of a motor vehicle." It consists of four lighted letters, arranged to spell the word "STOP." When the brake pedal is depressed, or the hazard warning signal flashers are on, the lett ers are lit, in sequence rather than simultaneously. This cycle is repeated as long as the brake is activated, or the hazard warning signals are activated. You have asked if the device is legal, and if so, whether there are any limitations on its use of sale as a product for the automotive market.

There are two relevant automotive markets, one for original equipment, and one for aftermarket equipment. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment specifies requirements for original motor vehicle lighting equipment and equipment manufactured to replace original lighting equipment. Because there is a Federal requirement that a passenger car manufactured on or after September 1, 1985, be equipped with a center highmounted stop lamp, which is genera lly placed in the rear window area, a replacement lamp must meet the original equipment specifications of Standard No. 108. As Standard No. 108 makes no provision for sequential flashing of letters in the third stop lamp, your client's lamp does not conf orm to original equipment specifications , and therefore could not be legally sold as an intended replacement for third stop lamps on vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 1985. Further, any person other than the vehicle owner who removed an ori ginal equipment lamp and installed your client's device could be in violation of a prohibition of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act against rendering safety equipment inoperative.

We assume that your client intends his device for the aftermarket, for installation on vehicles which were not originally equipped with the third stop lamp. Standard No. 108 does not cover this type of aftermarket equipment, and its legality would be det ermined under the laws of any State in which it would be sold or used.

If you have further questions we would be pleased to consider them.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 407 Street S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Attn: Office of Chief Counsel

Dear Sir/Madam:

Would you kindly advise me on a traffic-related highway safety question, that is important for one of my clients, Advanced Products and Trading Company.

The client is pursuing as a business venture to develop a special brake-warning signal to be placed in the rear window of a motor vehicle. The special brake warning signal consists of four red lighted letters "S","T","O","P", arranged as the word "STOP". The letters are connected to a small light-flashing control unit that operates such that, when the brake pedal is activated, and/or the warning flashers are on, the lighted letters are turned on one at the time in the following rapid sequence of steps: Step 1, "S"; Step 2,"ST";Step 3 "STO"; and Step 4, "STOP"; after which the sequence is repeated again and again as long as the brake remains activated. The signal is intended to be seen clearly visible from the rear of the vehicle.

My client has a patent application pending on this product and has invested a not insignificant amount of money on this invention.

The question is, is such a sign legal, and if so, are there any special limitations on its use or sale as a pro- duct for the automotive market?

The question may alternatively be asked as follows: If such a signal is prima facie, not legal, are there any conditions that might mitigate its introduction as a new product?

An early response to that inquiry would be very much appreciated.

Yours very truly,

Adam A. Jorgensen Consultant to Advance Products and Trading Company

ID: GF006496

Mr. Merrill Sutton
Tie Down Engineering, Inc.
5901 Wheaton Drive
Atlanta, GA 30336

Dear Mr. Sutton:

This responds to your facsimile and subsequent phone conversation with George Feygin of my staff regarding the possibility of placing your companys name on "side two" of brake hoses manufactured by Meiji Rubber and Chemical, Ltd. (Meiji). You indicated that Meiji is duly registered with the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) as a brake hose manufacturer. Further, Meiji is prepared to place your name, as a distributor, on "side two" of the brake hose.

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable requirements. The issues raised by your letter are addressed below.

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 106 (FMVSS No. 106) has certain labeling requirements. S5.2.1 of the standard states:

S5.2.1 Each hydraulic brake hose shall have at least two clearly identifiable stripes of at least one-sixteenth of an inch in width, placed on opposite sides of the brake hose parallel to its longitudinal axis. One stripe may be interrupted by the information required by S5.2.2, and the other stripe may be interrupted by additional information at the manufacturer's option." (Emphasis added.)

Based on the language of the standard, Meiji, as a manufacturer of brake hoses, is permitted to enter "additional information" on the other side of the brake hose at its option. Such "additional information" can include, among other things, the name of your company.

We note that one side (or "side one") of the brake hose must contain information as required by S5.2.2. Specifically, the one side of the brake hose must include: (a) the symbol DOT; (b) a designation that identifies the manufacturer of the hose; (c) the nominal inside diameter of the hose; (d) the month, day and year of manufacture; [1] and (e) either "HR" to indicate regular-expansion hydraulic hose or "HL" to indicate low-expansion hydraulic hose.

I hope this information is helpful. If you need further assistance, please contact George Feygin of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

Enclosure
ref:106
d.10/9/03





---

[1] Your facsimile contained drawings of the brake hose in question. We note that the drawing of "side one" of the brake hose contains only the month and year of the manufacture but not the date.

ID: nht78-1.2

DATE: 12/08/78

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; J. J. Levin, Jr.; NHTSA

TO: Wesco Truck & Trailer Sales

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Eugene D. Sambucetti Wesco Truck & Trailer Sales P.O. Box 626 1960 E. Main Street Woodland, California 95695

Dear Mr. Sambucetti:

This responds to your October 30, 1978, request to know how the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) expects a trailer manufacturer to provide the lateral stability necessary to remain within a 12-foot-wide lane while stopping from 60 mph in the absence of antilock installation. Your question follows from an interpretation of the recent Ninth Circuit ruling in which the agency stated its view that trailers are still required to stop from 60 mph within the 12-foot-wide lane, but without the capability of "no lockup" performance.

In interpreting the court's ruling that "no lockup" performance on trailers was invalid, the NHTSA recognized that the 12-foot-wide lane requirement would probably also be invalid if the requirement for 90 p.s.i. air pressure in the trailer control line during the stop remained effective. As you know, there is no stopping distance for trailers that would otherwise require a strong brake application and resulting loss of lateral stability. The agency therefore concluded that the 90 p.s.i. requirement was invalidated, stating in its October 19th interpretation,

It does appear that the requirement for 90 p.s.i. air pressure in the trailer control line during the stop constitutes a portion of the "no lockup" requirement and is therefore invalidated by the court.

Sincerely,

Joseph J. Levin, Jr. Chief Counsel

October 30, 1978

Mr. Tad Herlihy Office of Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington D.C. 20590

Dear Mr. Herlihy:

In looking over the interpretation of your department's views of what is valid and what was invalidated by the decision rendered by the Ninth District Court we have one question to present to you for an answer;

How can we, a trailer manufacturer, comply with the law when you state as valid "Remaining within a 12 foot lane while stopping" without "antilock" which you state has been invalidated?

We look forward to your prompt reply so we can assure ourselves to be in compliance.

Very truly yours,

WESCO TRUCK & TRAILER SALES

Eugene D. Sambucetti President

EDS:bw

ID: 15877.ztv

Mr. Wayne Glenn
Vice President
Glenncorp, Inc.
3211 East Kingshighway
Paragould, AK 72450

Dear Mr. Glenn:

This is in reply to your letter of August 8, 1997, to Donald Trilling of the Office of the Secretary. You wrote asking for DOT approval of your lighting kit.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is the unit of the Department of Transportation that is responsible for the issuance of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. These include standards for motor vehicle lighting.

You have told us that your small business involves the occasional towing of equipment. Since "it is not feasible to wire lights on each piece of equipment," you developed a light kit. Your kit appears to consist of lamps that are intended for temporary use on vehicles that are intended to be towed and which otherwise lack lighting equipment. The examples you cite are a trailer used for a hayride, "farm equipment, house trailers, modular homes, or any piece of equipment that needs to be towed."

All trailers that are manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads and highways are "motor vehicles" subject to our jurisdiction, and must be equipped with lamps and reflectors that comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflectors and Associated Equipment. Because the equipment that your business tows appears to lack lighting equipment, we surmise that these are trailers whose use of the public roads is only incidental to their primary use as farm implements or mobile homes, and hence not "motor vehicles." Under this circumstance, your light kit would not be "motor vehicle equipment" because it is not intended for use on a "motor vehicle," and therefore not subject to our regulation.

Even if the kit were considered to be "motor vehicle equipment," NHTSA has no authority to approve or disapprove items of motor vehicle equipment. Therefore, we could not grant your request for approval. We do advise, however, as to the relationship of motor vehicle equipment to our regulations. In your case, NHTSA has no safety standards that apply to temporary lighting kits of the nature you have described. The acceptability of these kits is determined by local laws, the laws of the places where the kit is being used. We are unable to tell you how local laws might affect the use of your kit, but local Departments of Motor Vehicles might be able to help.

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

Sincerely,

John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel

ref:108
d.11/14/97

ID: nht93-9.4

DATE: December 6, 1993

FROM: Tilman Spingler -- Automotive Equipment Div. 2, Robert Bosch GmbH

TO: Chief Counsel -- NHTSA

TITLE: Petition for an "Exemption for Inconsequential Noncompliance" to FMVSS 108, S7.8.5.2 (On Vehicle Aiming)

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 1/26/94 from John Womack to Tilman Spingler (A42; Std. 108; Part 573)

TEXT:

FMVSS 108 requires in the above mentioned paragraph a graduation of not larger than 0.19 degree for the scale of the vertical and 0.38 degree for the scale of the horizontal aim indicator. To make the scales more clearly legible and to avoid confusions we kindly ask for the permission to use scales with graduations of 0.2/0.4 degree.

We principally prefer scales with numbers indicating the graduation.

It is our opinion that there is no influence on the accuracy of aim because 1/100 degree is less than the width of the graduation-lines on bubble vials and scales used on headlamps.

ID: nht68-2.11

DATE: 05/27/68

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; David A. Fay; NHTSA

TO: FWD Corporation

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letter of January 11, 1968, Dr. William Haddon, Jr., concerning the location of headlamps on vehicles which are used for snow plow service. I regret that a clerical error resulted in this late reply to your inquiry.

Snow plows are motor vehicles and subject to regulatory actions as established by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966.

Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 requires that vehicles to which the standard is applicable be equipped with headlamps that are located not less than 24 inches nor more than 54 inches above the road surface (see Table II of the standard). This requirement does not prohibit the use of additions) headlamps located at greater heights as illustrated by the photographs enclosed with your referenced letter.

Thank you for writing.

ID: nht93-7.21

DATE: October 12, 1993

FROM: Kathy Rose -- Account Executive, FitzGerald Corporation

TO: Glen Beck -- U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Office of Motor Carriers

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 1/21/94 from John Womack to Kathy Rose (A42; Std. 108)

TEXT:

I called your office today and spoke to Bill Poole. I have a question regarding the "trailer conspicuity" ruling, enclosed is a copy of the first and last page of this ruling.

The FitzGerald Corporation is producing a "trailer skirting" aerodynamic product for van trailers (please see the enclosed literature piece for this product). In regards to the conspicuity ruling, we often have questions from our customers regarding whether it is legal to have the retroreflective tape that is regulated to be applied to the length of the trailer be placed below the trailer, on the trailer skirting (please see drawing enclosed on last page).

We appreciate your help on this and look forward to hearing from you.

Attachments: (Federal Register and Aero Flair brochure omitted.)

- - - -

11/8/93 letter from Joseph N. Cindrich (NHTSA) to Kathy Rose:

Your letter dated October 12, 1993 regarding Final Rule, Docket No. 80-9 associated with 49 CFR Part 571, Standard No. 108 was referred to us by Federal Highway Administration.

By copy of this letter, your request has been forwarded to our Washington Office of Enforcement (NEF-01), NHTSA Headquarters, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C., 20590. You should be hearing directly from them regarding any further contact.

We suggest you call our Auto Safety Hotline to get additional information on specific defects, crash tests, recalls, tire quality grading, odometer complaints, and other auto safety questions. (See enclosed pamphlet) The toll-free number is 1-800-424-9393.

Sincerely,

Craig Miller for Joseph N. Cindrich, Regional Administrator, NHTSA

- - - -

10/15/93 letter from Glenn R. Beck (Federal Highway Administration) to Joseph Cindrich:

The attached correspondence was received at our division office from the FitzGerald Corporation who is seeking an interpretation of your Final Rule, Docket No. 80-9 associated with 49 CFR Part 571, Standard No. 108. It is being forwarded to your office for whatever action you deem appropriate.

Thank you for your interest in motor carrier and highway safety.

Sincerely,

Robert Frank for Glenn R. Beck, State Director, U.S. DOT, Federal Highway Administration, Region Nine

ID: nht92-5.46

DATE: June 24, 1992

FROM: Kenneth Lenz -- HME Incorporated

TO: Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated July 1, 1992 (est.) from Paul J. Rice to Kenneth Lenz (A39; Std. 206)

TEXT:

I have been reviewing Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) for applicability to fire trucks, specifically certain provisions of FMVSS 206.

There have been requests from fire departments to eliminate the interior and exterior door locks required by FMVSS 206, S4.1.3. The fire company's reasons for eliminating all door locks is that "the vehicle is used in emergency situations and a door that has been locked accidently may hinder the ability of the apparatus to respond".

I would appreciate and interpretation of FMVSS 206 on whether or not fire trucks are required to comply with this regulation or if an exemption from compliance with S4.1.3 can be obtained for fire trucks.

Thank you.

ID: nht93-1.2

DATE: 01-01-93 EST

FROM: Joseph G. Wilson -- President, The Monmouth Corporation

TO: John Womack -- NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 5-21-93 from John Womack to Joseph G. Wilson (A41; Std.108)

TEXT: The Monmouth Corporation has developed a system, which protects a vehicle driver from the threat of rear-end collision. With BLU-LITE installed in your vehicle, you are able to signal the driver behind you instantly while braking suddenly to avoid an accident.

We would welcome an opportunity to demonstrate our system to you and your staff at your earliest convenience. Until that time we are sending you a brochure describing the advantages of the BLU-LITE SYSTEM FOR YOUR PERUSAL.

I look forward to hearing from you soon. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Attachment: Copy of Blu-Lite brochure "Drive Safely with Blu-Lite." (Text omitted.)