Ms. Amanda Reyes

Daniel Boone & Company

1180 N. Fountain Way #B

Anaheim, CA 92806

Dear Ms. Reyes:

This responds to your letter concerning whether your motorcycle parts must meet the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) applicable to motorcycles or any other National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) requirements. Our answer is provided below. As explained below, since your products are motor vehicle equipment, your company, Daniel Boone & Company, is subject to certain NHTSA requirements as the manufacturer of the equipment.

NHTSA is authorized to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs) for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Unlike the practice in many countries, NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Instead, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable standards.

Billet Wheels Must Meet FMVSS No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of More than 4,536 Kilograms (10,000 Pounds)

You write that your company manufactures billet wheels. FMVSS No. 120, Tire selection and rims for motor vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536 kg (10,000 pounds) applies to:

motor vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of more than 10,000 pounds and motorcycles, to rims used on those vehicles, and to non-pneumatic tire spare tire assemblies for use on those vehicles. (See S3. Application.)

Your billet wheels would be considered rims used on those vehicles (i.e., motorcycles). Thus, FMVSS No. 120 would apply to your billet wheels. Therefore, the billet wheel must be marked with the DOT symbol, as well as with other required information specified in S5.2.

S5.2(c) of FMVSS No. 120 requires that the symbol DOT be stamped on the rim, which constitutes a certification by the manufacturer of the rim that the rim complies with all applicable motor vehicle safety standards. NHTSA does not assign a DOT number or identification mark for rim manufacturers.

Since FMVSS No. 120 applies to billet wheels that your company manufactures, your company must also meet 49 CFR Part 566, Manufacturer Identification. Part 566 requires that a manufacturer of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment to which a motor vehicle safety standard applies, submit information identifying itself and its products to NHTSA not later than 30 days after it begins manufacture. This information must be mailed to the Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St., S.W., Washington, D.C. A sample Manufacturer Identification Submission is attached.

Forward Controls, Calipers and Rotors for Motorcycles are Motor Vehicle Equipment

You also wish to know whether any FMVSSs apply to forward controls, calipers and rotors for motorcycles. The answer is no. NHTSA has FMVSSs applicable to motorcycles (i.e., FMVSS No. 122, Motorcycle brake systems, and FMVSS No. 123, Motorcycle controls and displays), but not to forward controls, calipers and rotors. However, since the parts your company manufactures are motor vehicle equipment, they are subject to various provisions of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, Motor Vehicle Safety. Motor vehicle equipment is defined at 49 U.S.C. Section 30102(a)(7) as:

(A) any system, part, or component of a motor vehicle as originally manufactured;

(B) any similar part or component manufactured or sold for replacement or improvement of a system, part, or component, or as an accessory or addition to a motor vehicle; or

(C) any device or an article or apparel (except medicine or eyeglasses prescribed by a licensed practitioner) that is not a system, part, or component of a motor vehicle and is manufactured, sold, delivered, offered, or intended to be used only to safeguard motor vehicles and highway users against risk of accident, injury or death.

Clearly, since the billet wheels, forward controls, calipers and rotors are parts of motorcycles as originally manufactured, or are sold as replacement parts of motorcycles, these parts are motor vehicle equipment.

Manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment must ensure that their products are free of safety-related defects. If the manufacturer or NHTSA should determine that a product contains a safety-related defect, the manufacturer is responsible for notifying NHTSA and purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. (See Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 573, Defect and Non-Compliance Responsibility and Reports.)

In addition, the States regulate the use of vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. Each State in which you sell your products can provide information on whether there are any requirements in that State for the billet wheels, forward controls, calipers or rotors that are to be used with motorcycles.

I am enclosing a copy of our July 2006 publication, Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Anthony M. Cooke

Chief Counsel

Enclosure

ref:VSA102(4)

d.3/28/06

Mr. Dennis G. Moore

President

Sierra Products Inc.

1113 Greenville Road

Livermore, CA 94550

Dear Mr. Moore:

This responds to your letter requesting interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. Specifically, you asked several questions relating to the standards requirements for effective projected luminous lens area, including the permissibility of using light-emitting diodes (LEDs) to meet those requirements. Our responses to those questions are set forth below. We note that your letter also raised concerns regarding the agencys enforcement of these requirements of Standard No. 108. We are referring the enforcement-related aspects of your letter to our Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, which will respond to those questions in a separate letter.

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is authorized to issue FMVSSs that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment (see 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301). This agency does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products. Instead, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable standards. Also, it is unlawful for dealers to sell motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment that do not meet applicable standards.

Your first question seeks clarification of the legal definition of Effective Projected Luminous Lens Area or Effective Light Emitting Surface including whether there have been any recent amendments or interpretations to that aspect of the standard. Both terms are defined in 49 CFR 571.108 S4.

Effective light-emitting surface means that portion of a lamp that directs light to the photometric test pattern, and does not include transparent lenses, mounting hole bosses, reflex reflector area, beads or rims that may glow or produce small areas of increased intensity as a result of uncontrolled light from an area of degree radius around a test point.

Effective projected luminous lens area (EPLLA) means the area of the orthogonal projection or the effective light-emitting surface of a lamp on a plane perpendicular to a defined direction relative to the axis of reference. Unless otherwise specified, the direction is coincident with the axis of reference.

These definitions were most recently updated in a final rule published in the Federal Register (69 FR 48805) on August 11, 2004. That rule amended the standard for turn signal lamps, stop lamps, taillamps, and parking lamps to increase compatibility with the requirements of the Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) and to improve the visibility of these lamps. In that rulemaking, the definition for effective light-emitting surface was added to the standard, and the definition of effective projected luminous lens area was modified to its current state (69 FR 48814).

In your letter, you also asked if the EPLLA requirements for stop or turn signal lamps are 7 inches (50 cm/sq) for vehicles less than 80 inches wide and 11 5/8 inches (75 cm/sq) for vehicles over 80 inches wide. The answer to this question is that these are the minimum requirements.

In relevant part, S5.1.1.26 of the standard provides:

On a motor vehicle whose overall width is less than 80 inches:

(a)            The effective projected luminous lens area of a single compartment stop lamp, and a single compartment rear turn signal lamp, shall be not less than 50 square centimeters (7 square inches).

(b)            If a multiple compartment lamp or multiple lamps are used to meet the photometric requirements for stop lamps and rear turn signal lamps, the effective projected luminous lens are of each compartment or lamp shall be at least 22 square centimeters, provided the combined area is at least 50 square centimeters (7 square inches).

With regard to vehicles over 80 inches wide, S5.1.1 of FMVSS No. 108 refers to Table I of the standard (Required Motor Vehicle Lighting Equipment Other Than Headlamps), which in turn refers to SAE J1395 (rev. April 1985) (Turn Signal Lamps for Use on Motor Vehicles 2032 mm or More in Overall Width). Paragraph S5.3.2 of SAE J1395 states that the functional lighted lens area of a single lamp shall be at least 75 cm sq.

You also asked whether there are EPLLA requirements for taillamps, side marker lamps, clearance lamps, and identification lamps. Specifically, you asked whether a manufacturer could use one or two Red Dots of LED light to fulfill FMVSS #108 requirements. The answer is that there is no minimum EPLLA for these lamps. We note, however, that under S5.3 of the standard, these lamps must meet the visibility requirements specified in paragraph S5.3.2, which includes meeting the area requirements listed in Figure 19 or the candela requirements listed in Figure 20. Alternatively, paragraph S5.3.2.4 permits lamps to be located such that they meet the visibility requirements specified in any applicable SAE Standard. The applicable SAE Standards are listed in FMVSS No. 108 in Tables I and III. These tables incorporate by reference SAE J585e (rev. Sept. 1972) with regard to tail lamps, and SAE J592e (rev. July 1977) with regard to side marker, clearance, and identification lamps. Paragraph S3.6 of SAE J585e (rev. Sept. 1977) specifies the photometric requirements for tail lamps, and paragraph S3.4 of SAE J592e (rev. July 1977) specifies the photometric requirements for the other lights. If the photometric requirements of the respective SAE standards incorporated by reference are met by one or more LEDs, then such a lamp would meet the relevant requirements of FMVSS No. 108.

If you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact Ari Scott of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Anthony M. Cooke

Chief Counsel

ref:108

d.11/15/06

Gerald Plante, General Manager

Fuji Heavy Industries U.S.A., Inc.

c/o Subaru of America

Subaru Plaza

P.O. Box 6000

Cherry Hill, NJ 08034-6000

Dear Mr. Plante:

This is in response to your letter regarding Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 201, Occupant protection in interior impact, as applied to interior compartment doors. You ask whether the top segment of an L-shaped center console would be considered an interior compartment door for the purposes of Standard 201, paragraph S5.3. As discussed below, our analysis of the description and photographs of the console you provided in your letter leads us to conclude that it would be considered a door for purposes of paragraph S5.3.

FMVSS No. 201 sets forth, among other things, requirements for interior compartment doors (S5.3). S5.3 states: Each interior compartment door assembly located in an instrument panel, console assembly, seat back, or side panel adjacent to a designated seating position shall remain closed when tested with the demonstration procedures in the standard.

49 CFR 571.3(b) defines interior compartment door as any door in the interior of the vehicle installed by the manufacturer as a cover for storage space normally used for personal effects. You state in your letter that the console incorporates a cup holder and space for other objects such as CDs, etc. On top of the console is an armrest which can pivot to either cover the storage space in the console (as shown in photograph #1 of your letter) or expose it (as shown in photograph #2).

You ask if the armrest is an interior compartment door which must comply with the requirements in paragraph S5.3. Our answer is yes. First, as the center console is designed for the storage of personal effects, the lift-up armrest which serves as a cover would be considered an interior compartment door. Second, as this is part of the console

assembly, it is subject to paragraph S5.3 as it is located in an instrument panel, console assembly, seat back, or side panel adjacent to a designated seating position. Therefore, it is subject to the requirements of S5.3 of FMVSS No. 201.

If you have any additional questions, contact Ari Scott of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Anthony M. Cooke

Chief Counsel

ref:201

d.11/2/06

Mr. Randy Lee Newton, #1241748

P.O. Box 16, Eastham Unit

Lovelady, TX 75851-0016

Dear Mr. Newton:

This responds to your letter to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) asking for a description of the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 302, Flammability of interior materials, and whether the standard applied to the 1995 Chrysler LeBaron components you described.

By way of background, NHTSA is authorized to issue FMVSSs that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not approve or certify any vehicles or items of equipment. Instead, Congress has established a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards.

Standard 302 (copy enclosed) applies to new completed vehicles, and sets forth burn resistance requirements for materials used in the occupant compartment in order to reduce deaths and injuries associated with vehicle fires, especially those originating in the interior of the vehicle.

The standard mandates that certain listed components and materials, when included as original equipment with the vehicle, be burn-resistant. These items covered under the standard are (see S4.1 of Standard 302):

Seat cushions, seat backs, seat belts, headlining, convertible tops, arm rests, all trim panels including door, front, rear, and side panels, compartment shelves, head restraints, floor coverings, sun visors, curtains, shades, wheel housing covers, engine compartment covers, mattress covers, and any other interior materials, including padding and crash-deployed elements, that are designed to absorb energy on contact by occupants in the event of a crash.

Of those items, the standard specifies that not just the outer surfaces, but any portion of material that is within 13 mm of the occupant compartment must comply with the burn-resistant requirements (S4.2).

In your letter, you ask if the front seats, dash-board, inside door panels, and the canvas-type convertible top of a 1995 Chrysler LeBaron were made of fire-retardant materials. As all of those portions of the car are listed in S4.1 of the standard, they were subject to the burn-resistant requirements of Standard 302 if they were installed as original equipment. The original manufacturer of the vehicle had to certify that the vehicle met all applicable FMVSSs, including Standard 302. Standard 302 applied to the vehicle because the standard has been in effect since the early 1970s. Under our statute, each vehicle manufactured on or after the effective date of a standard must comply with the requirements of the standard. Further, S3 of Standard 302 makes its requirements applicable to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses, and your vehicle is a passenger car.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any further questions, please contact Ari Scott at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Anthony Cooke

Chief Counsel

Enclosure

ref:302

d.11/2/06

C. Timothy Parker, Assistant Director

Department of Facilities and Transportation Services

Office of Transportation Services

Fairfax County Public Schools

8101 Lorton Road

Lorton, VA 22079

Dear Mr. Parker:

This responds to your request for an interpretation as to whether additional optional red and amber warning lights for the left and right sides of a school bus you are considering for the Commonwealth of Virginia would be allowed on new school buses. Our answer is no.

In your letter, you state that Fairfax County Public Schools is seeking state approval in Virginia to test the additional warning lights. You explain that there are a high number of bus stops at or near intersections where motorists approaching from the right or left of a school bus do not see the warning lamps or stop sign on the school bus. You note that lamps currently specified for school buses are all aimed towards the traffic approaching from the front and rear only.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA has used this authority to issue FMVSS No. 108, Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment. This agency does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products. Instead, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable standards. Also, it is unlawful for dealers to sell motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment that do not meet applicable standards.

FMVSS No. 108 specifies motor vehicle lighting equipment required for all motor vehicles. FMVSS No. 108 requires at S5.1.4 that school buses (other than multifunction school activity buses) shall meet one of two options. The first option is to have a system of four red signal lamps designed to conform to SAE Standard J887,

School Bus Red Signal Lamps, July 1964, and installed in accordance with that standard. The second option is to have the four red signal lamps designed to conform to SAE Standard J887 (July 1964) plus four amber signal lamps designed to conform to SAE Standard J887 except for their color and a candlepower at least 2 times that specified for red signal lamps. Both the red and amber lamps are installed in accordance with SAE Standard J887, with exceptions specified at S5.1.4(b)(i) and (ii).

We have addressed the issue of optional red and amber warning lights for the left and right sides of a school bus in an interpretation letter of May 22, 2003, to Mr. J. Adam Krugh, IV, inventor of the ALLSTOP (copy enclosed). The ALLSTOP is a traffic control device developed for school buses, intended to be used to warn drivers at intersections of the presence of children. In that letter, we stated that:

As we have said before, traffic safety is enhanced by the familiarity of drivers with established lighting schemes, which facilitates their ability to instantly and unhesitatingly recognize the meaning lamps convey and respond to them. The required school bus signal lamp system provides an important and standardized message. It is our opinion that the addition of a novel signal lamp that rises at the same time as the school bus signal lamp system activates would divert a drivers attention from the required signal lamps and cause confusion with respect to their meaning, and thereby impair the effectiveness of the required lamps.

Under Standard No. 108, non-standard lighting equipment is prohibited on new vehicles if it impairs the effectiveness of lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108 (See S.5.1.3). In addition, with respect to the aftermarket, 49 U.S.C. 30122 has the effect of requiring that the installation of any aftermarket vehicle lamp, by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business, must not knowingly make inoperative any part of a device or element of design installed on a vehicle in accordance with Standard No. 108.

With regard to the additional left and right side lights you ask about, we believe that they could similarly divert a drivers attention from the required signal lamps and confuse drivers as to whether they are meant to stop, partly because the lights would add an unfamiliar dimension to a standardized system. Also, the placement of the red lights near the front of the bus (as depicted in your letter) could cause confusion as to the orientation of the vehicle, thus impairing the effectiveness of the color code of the required side marker lamps.

Please note that the make inoperative provision does not apply to owners making changes to their vehicles. Thus, changes made by Fairfax County employees to school buses owned by the County would not be affected by the make inoperative provision. However, we would urge owners not to degrade the safety features of their vehicles.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any questions, please contact Dorothy Nakama at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Anthony M. Cooke

Chief Counsel

Enclosure

ref:108

d.10/4/06

Patrick Boyd, Head Mechanic

Manchester Local Schools

6075 Manchester Road

Akron, OH 44319

Dear Mr. Boyd:

This responds to your request for a ruling or clarification on the extent to which diodes on school bus light emitting diode (L.E.D.) lighting must be burned out for the school bus to be taken out of service. Our answer is provided below.

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 to issue and enforce safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products. Each State has the authority to regulate the operation and use of motor vehicles, including school buses, which travel on the public roads of that State.

The question you pose relates not to the manufacture and/or sale of a new school bus but to operational requirements (i.e, which lights or diodes on the school bus must function) for school buses to be permitted to travel on Ohio roads. The agency notes that L.E.D. lamps are certified to our lighting standard (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment) by manufacturers at the time of sale with a full one hundred percent of the diodes operating.

However, the determination of when a school bus is taken out of service is entirely up to State law. Further, your State motor vehicle administration should be able to tell you which State official has the final authority in making decisions about which school buses will be permitted to be used on Ohio roads.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please contact Ms. Dorothy Nakama at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Anthony M. Cooke

Chief Counsel

ref:VSA

d.9/5/06

Dean Rose, Founding Partner

Transportation Safety Products, Ltd.

6797 N. High Street, Suite 214

Worthington, OH 43085

Dear Mr. Rose:

This responds to your letter asking about Federal requirements that apply to a voice alarm system that, according to the advertising pamphlet you enclosed, actually talks to and alerts the children with three distinct, clear and loud voice messages. There is also a panic button that verbally warns pedestrians and/or children that a car is moving around the school bus stop arm by announcing: Danger! Get back! A car is coming!

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 to issue and enforce Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs) applicable to new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products. Instead, our statute establishes a self-certification process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The agency periodically tests vehicles and equipment items for compliance with the standards, and also investigates reports of safety-related defects.

There is no FMVSS that applies to a child safety alarm system such as you have described. However, as a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment, you are subject to the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 30118-30121 concerning the recall and remedy of products with safety-related defects. I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes those and other manufacturer responsibilities. In the event the manufacturer or NHTSA determines that the product contains a safety-related defect, the manufacturer would be responsible for, among other things, notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. (Note that this responsibility is borne by the vehicle manufacturer in cases in which your device is installed on a new vehicle by or with the express authorization of that vehicle manufacturer.)

In addition, Section 30122 of our statute (49 U.S.C. 30101 et seq.) prohibits a motor vehicle manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or repair business from making modifications that

make inoperative any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard Any person in the aforementioned categories installing your device on a new or used school bus or transit bus must take care with the safety systems required of the vehicles. For example, FMVSS No. 217, Bus emergency exits and window retention and release, establishes requirements for school bus emergency exit release. Section S5.3.3.1 requires, among other things, an audible warning at the school bus drivers seating position and in the vicinity of the emergency exit door if the release mechanism is not in the position that causes the emergency exit door to be closed and the vehicles ignition is on. In addition, FMVSS No. 131, School bus pedestrian safety devices, has a requirement in section 5.5 for a warning audible to the driver when an optional device that prevents the automatic extension of a stop signal arm is activated. Your device must not negatively affect the operation of either of these required warning systems.

The make inoperative provision does not apply to a vehicle owner making changes to his or her own vehicle. However, NHTSA urges owners not to degrade the safety of their vehicles.

We also note that this child safety alarm system appears to shift some of the burden of responsibility to child pedestrians. The responsibility for looking out for children should, first and foremost, be on the adults (i.e., the school bus driver and the drivers of vehicles around the school bus). This product should not be viewed as a substitute for vigilance on the part of drivers to look out for children. In addition, the talking bus should not distract children, especially when they are crossing the street. We are also concerned that the bus may attract the curious child, encouraging approaching the bus and seeking out the source of the voice.

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) may have requirements that affect the placement of your child safety alarm system on transit buses. I would suggest you contact them directly for a legal opinion about the applicability of FTA requirements to your product.

Note also that States have the authority to regulate the operation and use of vehicles. If you wish to know whether State law permits the installation of your child safety alarm system in school buses or other motor vehicles, you should contact State officials with your question.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please contact Ms. Dorothy Nakama at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Anthony M. Cooke

Chief Counsel

Enclosure

ref:VSA

d.11/3/06

Mr. Terrill J. Blair, Sr.

7013 86^th Street, NW

Gig Harbor, WA 98332

Dear Mr. Blair:

This responds to your letter asking whether a used car with deployed air bags must have its air bags reinstalled before sale. As discussed below, Federal law does not require replacement of a deployed air bag in a used vehicle. However, individual State laws may require such reinstallation before a used car is sold.

You explain that you recently purchased a 1996 Buick LeSabre from a private party. You state your belief that the vehicles air bags have been deployed, and the air bags were not reinstalled. You write to ask whether this car [can] be sold without the air bags (safety equipment) being reinstalled.

I am enclosing two letters that explain legal obligations to replace air bags which have been deployed as a result of a crash. The first letter, dated January 19, 1990, is to Ms. Linda L. Conrad. The second letter, dated March 4, 1993, is to Mr. Robert A. Ernst. As explained in those letters, Federal law does not require replacement of a deployed air bag in a used vehicle. In addition, there is no Federal law that prohibits selling a used vehicle with an air bag that is inoperable because of a previous deployment. However, our agency strongly encourages dealers and repair businesses to replace deployed air bags whenever vehicles are repaired or resold, to ensure that the vehicles will continue to provide maximum crash protection for occupants.

Despite the absence of any requirement in Federal law, State law may require replacement of deployed air bags. You may wish to contact the Attorney General of the State of Washington to learn if there are any applicable laws or regulations:

Office of the Attorney General

State of Washington

1125 Washington, St., S.E.

P.O. Box 40100

Olympia, WA 98504-0100

The Washington State Attorney General has branch offices that might be closer to you.

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

Sincerely,

Anthony M. Cooke

Chief Counsel

Enclosures

ref:208

d.12/13/06

Mr. Kiminori Hyodo

Deputy General Manager, Regulation & Certification

Koito Manufacturing Co., Ltd.

4-8-3, Takanawa

Minato-Ku Tokyo

Japan

Dear Mr. Hyodo:

This responds to your letter requesting clarification regarding the luminous intensity requirements for front turn signal lamps under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment (FMVSS No. 108). Specifically, you asked whether the multiplier in paragraph S5.3.1.7 of Standard No. 108 applies to the minimum luminous intensities listed in Figure 20, Visibility of Installed Lighting Devices (Luminous Intensity Measurement Method). As discussed below, it does not.

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized to issue FMVSSs that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment (see 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301). On August 11, 2004, NHTSA published a final rule updating FMVSS No. 108 to increase compatibility with the relevant standards of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) and the Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) pertaining to a variety of lighting requirements (see 69 FR 48805).

The luminous intensity multiplier referred to in paragraph S5.3.1.7 of Standard No. 108 applies to the photometric requirements of turn signal lamps. Paragraph S5.3.1.7 specifies that the multiplier applied to obtain the required minimum luminous intensities shall be 2.5. The multiplier referred to in paragraph S5.3.1.7 supersedes the luminous intensity multiplier described in paragraph 5.1.5.4 of SAE J588 (rev. Nov. 84), which has been incorporated by reference into FMVSS No. 108 via paragraph S5.1.1 and Table III of the standard. (S5.1.1 refers to Table III, which references SAE J588 (rev. Nov. 84) as the applicable standard for turn signal lamps.) To explain more fully, paragraph 5.1.5.4 of SAE J588 (rev. Nov. 84) specifies numerous luminous intensity multipliers dependent on the lamp separation distance. Paragraph S5.3.1.7 overrides this SAE specification by requiring that turn signal lamps mounted within 100mm of the lighted edge of a headlamp shall use 2.5 as the multiplier. Thus, the luminous intensity multiplier referred to in FMVSS No. 108 paragraph S5.3.1.7 applies to the SAE J588 (rev. Nov. 84) photometric requirements of turn signal lamps.

We note that the minimum luminous intensities referred to in Figure 20 of FMVSS No. 108 are visibility requirements, not photometric requirements. The origin of these requirements is FMVSS No. 108 paragraph S5.3.2(b). This paragraph states that a manufacturer must certify compliance of each lamp to one of the following visibility requirement options, with one option being that each such lamp must provide a luminous intensity not less than that specified in Figure 20. Because this refers to visibility requirements, referencing the light seen by the human eye, as opposed to photometry requirements, referencing the output of light from the lamp (and which was the subject of the luminous intensity multiplier), the multiplier does not apply to the values in Figure 20.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please contact Ari Scott of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Anthony M. Cooke

Chief Counsel

ref:108

d.2/7/07

Mr. Kiminori Hyodo

Deputy General Manager, Regulation & Certification

Koito Manufacturing Co., Ltd.

4-8-3, Takanawa

Minato-Ku Tokyo

Japan

Dear Mr. Hyodo:

This responds to your letter, in which you seek clarification as to the definition of the optical axis for a lower beam headlamp using light-emitting diodes (LEDs) under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. Specifically, you asked how one would determine the optical axis for a LED lower beam headlamp, where respective LEDs provide different light intensities or beam configurations. As discussed below, it is our opinion that the optical axis for a visual/optical aim headlamp is the reference axis necessary to assure proper horizontal and vertical alignment of the optical aiming equipment. It is up to the manufacturer to decide how to determine that axis and to select the location of the required marking. This interpretation would apply to any visually/optically aimed headlamp regardless of light source type.

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized to issue FMVSSs that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment (see 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301). NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment.  Instead, manufacturers are required to self-certify that their products conform to all applicable safety standards that are in effect on the date of manufacture. FMVSS No. 108 specifies requirements for original and replacement lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment.  NHTSA selects a sampling of new vehicles and equipment each year to determine their compliance with applicable FMVSSs.  If our testing or examination reveals an apparent noncompliance, we may require the manufacturer to remedy the noncompliance, and may initiate an enforcement proceeding if necessary to ensure that the manufacturer takes appropriate action.

Your letter asked what constitutes the location of the optical axis in a situation in which LEDs of varying intensity are used in a headlamp. You described a situation in which one LED from an array of LEDs serves to provide the dominant intensities toward the center of the beam pattern and determines a major characteristic of a cut-off. You asked if it would be appropriate to use that element to determine the optical axis. You also ask this question assuming a condition where respective LEDs are directed differently to constitute respective parts of the low-beam illumination. These questions caused the agency to closely examine the meaning of optical axis in order to assure proper headlamp aiming.

In your letter, you cited a prior agency interpretation (December 21, 2005 letter to Mr. Takayuki Amma) regarding lower beam headlamps using several LEDs of equal light intensities, and our conclusion that the optical axis shall always correlate to the actual photometric output of the lamp. In view of your latest inquiry, we reexamined our 2005 interpretation relative to the determination of the optical axis. In our 2005 interpretation, we expressed agreement that the optical center would serve as an optical axis of a lower beam headlamp. We also agreed with your recommended approach and said that for LED lower beam headlamps, the optical center should be determined as the geometric center of the portion of the lens that is illuminated by the LED light sources. While we continue to believe this could be a valid approach, manufacturers may choose other methods as well. For example, with LED light sources of varying intensity, a manufacturer could conclude that the geometric center of the illuminated lens might not be accurate for marking the lamp for aiming purposes.

The agency notes that the term optical axis as used in FMVSS No. 108 may be inconsistent with the encyclopedic definition of the phrase. For visually/optically aimed headlamps, the term optical axis, as it is used in Standard No. 108, refers to the reference axis (a.k.a. mechanical axis) of the headlamp. Given this, we have reexamined a second point from the 2005 letter, in which we stated that the center of the emitted light is always taken to be the center of the optical axis. In saying this, we were quoting a January 14, 1976 letter of interpretation to the Department of California Highway Patrol. Upon closer examination, the 1974 letter addressed the optical axis (i.e., the mechanical or reference axis) in turn signals, not headlamps. As turn signals are symmetrical, the center of light emitted should always constitute the reference axis. However, as headlamps are asymmetrical, the quoted portion of the 1974 letter does not apply to headlamps.

Paragraph S7.8.5.3(f) of FMVSS No. 108 requires that a visually/optically aimed headlamp include a mark or markings identifying the optical axis of the headlamp. The location of this mark or markings is to be determined by the headlamp manufacturer. Once chosen, the mark establishes the reference axis that will be used to assure proper horizontal and vertical alignment of the aiming screen or optical aiming equipment with the headlamp being aimed. NHTSA will use this mark to identify the reference axis, and will conduct its compliance testing accordingly.

Finally, we note that this interpretation broadens flexibility for manufacturers under the rule and, as such, does not amount to a change implicating compliance issues for manufacturers currently relying on the opinions in our previous letters.

If you have any further questions, please contact Ari Scott of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Anthony M. Cooke

Chief Counsel

ref:108

d.5/25/07