ID: nht75-6.33

DATE: 07/10/75

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Cooney Equipment Company

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Your letter of June 17, 1969, to Mr. Donald Morrison of the Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety, concerning switching arrangements for running lamps, has been transferred to this Office for consideration and reply.

Enclosed for your information is a copy of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 on lighting requirements for motor vehicles. This standard is applicable to new vehicles manufactured on or after the effective date of January 1, 1969. Special wiring requirements, such as lamp switching arrangements, are included in paragraphs S3.4 through S3.4.7 of the standard.

We do not completely understand your usage of the term "running lights." If you are referring only to tail lamps, your attention is invited specifically to paragraph S3.4.3 of the standard which is quoted as follows: "As a minimum the tail lamps shall be illuminated when the headlamps are illuminated except when the headlamps are being flashed." The switching arrangements for other "running lights," such as clearance lamps and identification lamps, are at the option of the vehicle manufacturer.

Thank you for writing.

ID: nht75-6.34

DATE: 09/16/75

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Bergman & Hicks

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of September 14, 1970, to Mr. Rodolfo A. Diaz, Acting Associate Director for Motor Vehicle Programs, National Highway Safety Bureau concerning clearance lights on mobile homes.

A mobile home towed on its own wheels is a "motor vehicle" under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, and is categorized as a "trailer".

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 103 requires clearance lamps to be installed on trailers 80 or more inches in overall width. In transit a mobile home towed on its own wheels must therefore be equipped with clearance lamps; however, these lamps may be temporarily installed and removed when the mobile home has reached its destination.

We would appreciate your providing us, if possible, with the names of manufacturers of mobile homes whom you believe to be towing these vehicles without equipping them with lighting devices meeting Standard No. 108. This will assist us in our efforts to insure that all manufacturers meet their obligations under the Act.

ID: nht75-6.35

DATE: 09/05/75

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank A. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Zimmer Homes Corporation

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Robert Aubuchon of this agency has asked us to respond to your recent inquiry whether the Solex motor bicycle is a "motor vehicle" under our regulations, and, if so, how we would categorize it. You are also interested in knowing how our views affect South Carolina's proposed redefinition of bicycle.

Since the Solex is manufactured primarily for use on the public roads, it is a "motor vehicle" as defined by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, specifically a "motorcycle". As such, it must meet all Federal motor vehicle safety standards applicable to "motorcycles", and be so certified by its manufacturer. The only such standard currently in effect is No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment, but standards on controls (No. 122) and braking (No. 123) will become effective January 1, 1974 and September 1, 1974 respectively.

While the proposed South Carolina redefinition of "bicycle" appears to encompass the Solex, the State by so doing could neither relieve the manufacturer from the obligation of complying with Federal motorcycle safety standards, nor impose requirements different from Standards Nos. 108, 122, and 123 as to those aspects of performance covered by the Federal standards.

I hope this answers your questions.

ID: nht75-6.36

DATE: 10/15/75

FROM: FRANK BERNDT -- ACTING CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: CITY AUTO SALES

TITLE: NONE

TEXT: It has come to the attention of this agency that you failed to complete an odometer disclosure statement in compliance with Federal law at the time you transferred ownership of a 1972 Chevrolet Camaro to Mrs. Connie Murphy on July 2, 1975.

Section 408 of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act (Pub. L. 92-513) requires that a written disclosure of a vehicle's correct mileage be provided by the seller to the purchaser at the time ownership of a vehicle is transferred. If the correct mileage is unknown, the Act requires a statement to that effect to be furnished in written form to the buyer.

Violation of either of the above requirements or a fraudulent completion of an odometer statement may subject the violator to civil liability. The Act makes available to the buyer a remedy in the amount of $ 1,500 or treble damages, whichever in greater. In addition to the private civil remedy, section 410 of the Act gives the U.S. Attorney General power to institute suits for injunctive enforcement of the odometer provisions.

If you are in violation of the Act, I strongly suggest that you take immediate steps to comply with its provisions. A copy of the relevant portions of the Act and the odometer disclosure requirements have been enclosed for your information.

ID: nht75-6.37

DATE: 09/05/75

FROM: BARBER B. CONABLE -- HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

TO: HONORABLE WILLIAM T. COLEMAN -- SECRETARY U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED OCTOBER 10, 1975 FROM WILLIAM T. COLEMAN, SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION, TO HON. BARBER B. CONABLE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

TEXT: This letter is written in the interest of Mr. F. J. Guppenberger of Batavia, New York, to express his concern about the traffic safety hazard posed by automobiles which have been modified for racing or other purposes.

I recently received a letter about this from Mr. Guppenberger, describing the increased dangers of a collision with a car having a raised rear bumper such as is sometimes done with racing cars. Mr. Guppenberger feels that either the modifying of cars in this way or the driving of them on highways should be made illegal.

A copy of Mr. Guppenberger's letter to me on this is enclosed for your information and consideration. I will greatly appreciate a careful evaluation of the issues raised by this enclosure, including whether there are existing federal authorities in this area.

ID: nht75-6.38

DATE: 10/10/75

FROM: WILLIAM T. COLEMAN -- SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION

TO: HONORABLE BARBER B. CONABLE -- HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 5, 1975 FROM BARBER CONABLE TO HON. WILLIAM T. COLEMAN; LETTER DATED AUGUST 7, 1975 FROM F. J. GUPPENBERGER TO REP. BARBER CONABLE

TEXT: This is in response to your letter of September 5, 1975, requesting information concerning an inquiry from one of your constituents, Mr. F. J. Guppenberger, relating to the permissibility of raising cars' rear bumpers.

Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 215, Exterior Protection, imposes performance requirements on automobile bumper systems. One of these requirements specifies impacts at certain heights, and has the effect of requiring bumpers to be manufactured at fairly uniform heights.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Pub. L. 89-563), as recently amended (Pub. L. 93-492), prohibits any manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business from knowingly rendering inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard (@ 108(a) (2) (A)). Therefore, if the bumper were raised by one of the above classes of persons causing it no longer to comply with the Standard No. 215 requirements, a violation of the Act would have occurred. That law does not, however, prohibit an individual from altering the bumper on his own car.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the agency that administers the Traffic Safety Act, is not authorized by that Act to prohibit vehicles with raised bumpers from operating on the highways. Except for certain limited areas such as motor carriers in interstate commerce, the regulation of vehicles operating on the highways is within the authority of the States.

ID: nht75-6.39

DATE: 05/09/75

FROM: James B. Gregory -- Administrator, NHTSA

TO: J. C. Carruth -- President, Canadian Trucking Association

TITLE: NONE

TEXT: The Secretary has asked me to respond to your letter of March 17 (F-50-A) requesting relief from a provision of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. @ 1391 et seq.) that prevents operation in the United States of Canadian vehicles which were not manufactured in conformity with Standard No. 121, Air brake systems. You request a temporary exclusion from the standard for Canadian-based commercial vehicles operating in the United States, whether or not they are manufactured in Canada.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act provides that no person shall import into the United States a motor vehicle manufactured on or after the date any applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard takes effect unless it is in conformity with the standard (@ 1397(a)(1)(A)). Sections 1397(b)(3) and (b)(4) specifically address importation:

@ 1397

(3) A motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment offered for importation in violation of paragraph (1)(A) of subsection (a) of this section shall be refused admission into the United States under joint regulations issued by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary.

(4) The Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary may, by joint regulations, permit the temporary importation of any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment after the first purchase of it in good faith for purposes other than resale.

The only exception to these laws is promulgated in Part 12 of the customs regulations (19 CFR @ 12.80). One exception permits temporary importation for personal use, but it does not apply to commercial use of U. S. highways.

Section 1392(g) of the Act also mandates that the Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety (referred to in the section as the Interstate Commerce Commission) "not adopt or continue in effect any safety standard which differs from" our standards unless it is a higher standard of safety. The Bureau has indicated its intent to adopt Standard No. 121 as its performance standard in the regulation of U. S. and foreign motor carriers on U. S. highways.

I conclude that any exclusion of Canadian vehicles from Standard No. 121 would be an evasion of the Act's prohibition on importation of noncomplying vehicles. Such an exclusion would reduce the expected benefits of Standard No. 121 and would discriminate against U. S. manufacturers and carriers. For those reasons, your request is denied.

For clarification, I note that the standard applies (with limited exceptions) to air-braked trailers manufactured after January 1, 1975, and air-braked trucks and buses manufactured after March 1, 1975. I am unaware of the significance of the March 31, 1975, date to which you refer.

ID: nht75-6.4

DATE: 03/31/75

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Oshkosh Truck Corporation

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of February 25, 1975, requesting our review of certain sections of the "Part 568" document Oshkosh wishes to use for all its vehicles.

We believe you may use a rubber stamp which states, "Standard No. 121 Not Applicable" over the part of the document regarding conformity with Standard No. 121, for vehicles to which the standard does not apply. We would, however, add the words, "to this vehicle."

Your statement in the document regarding Standard No. 116 also conforms to the requirements of Part 568.

Finally, you are correct with respect to the language of @ 568.4(a)(7). The reference to "(7)" in that section should be "(6)."

ID: nht75-6.40

DATE: APRIL 16, 1975

FROM: MR. SICKS; MR. PETZOLDT -- FACHNORMENAUSSCHUSS

TO: NHTSA, DOCKET SECTION

TITLE: BURNING BEHAVIOUR OF INTERIOR MATERIALS FOR MOTOR VEHICLES

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 5-9-75 TO MR. SICKS FROM RICHARD B. DYSON

TEXT: In March 1975 the ISO Central Secretariat has published DRAFT INTERNATIONAL STANDARD

ISO/DIS 3795 - Road vehicles - Determination of burning behaviour of interior materials for motor vehicles

Please find enclosed the English version of this Draft International Standard. As mentioned in our letter of September 3, 1974 Sub-Committee 16 decided to require in this Draft International Standard the presence of supporting wires in all cases in order to avoid subjective interpretations of sample behaviour by the test personnel. As it is essential that laboratories charged with flammability tests conduct these tests according to the same procedure, we ask you to take into consideration the specifications of ISO/DIS 3795. We would appreciate it very much, if you could modify MVSS 302 so that also this standard requires the presence of supporting wires in all tests. We look forward to receiving your reply.

(Attachment Omitted)

ID: nht75-6.41

DATE: MAY 09, 1975

FROM: RICHARD B. DYSON -- ASSISTANT CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: MR. SICKS -- FACHNORMENAUSSCHUSS KRAFTFAHRZEUGE - FAKRA

COPYEE: F. W. SCHWARTZ

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 4-16-75 TO NHTSA DOCKET SECTION FROM MR. PETZOLDT AND MR. SICKS, FACHNORMENAUSSCHUSS KRAFTFAHRZEUGE

TEXT: This is in response to your Petition for Reconsideration of the amendments to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302 promulgated in the Federal Register on March 31, 1975.

We shall advise you of our decision in this matter after reviewing your petition.