ID: nht92-2.21

DATE: November 18, 1992

FROM: L. J. Sharman

TO: NHTSA, Department of Transportation

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 3-23-93 from John Womack to L. J. Sharman (A40; Std. 302)

TEXT: Recently, two questions have arisen concerning the procedure to be followed when conducting the flammability test method specified in Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302. Each of the questions, the writers answer and rationale are given on the attached sheets. I am writing to request an advisory opinion as to whether these answers are correct, if not what the correct interpretation should be.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE FLAMMABILITY TEST PROCEDURE SPECIFIED IN MVSS-302

QUESTION 1.

MVSS-302, in Section S5.3(e), states that the timing for each specimen be started when the flame from the burning specimen reaches a point 1.5 inches from the open end of the specimen and, in Section S5.3(f), is stopped when the flame progresses to a point 1.5 inches from the clamped end of the specimen. Further, the Standard, in Section S5.2.2, states the specimen is oriented so that the surface closest to the occupant compartment air space faces downward on the test frame. The question that has been raised is whether the timing is started and stopped when the flame reaches the designated points on the surface of the specimen closest to the occupant compartment air spaces (the surface facing down during the test), or when the flame reaches the designated points on the surface of the specimen facing away from the occupant compartment air space (the surface facing up during the test).

ANSWER

Timing of the flame should start when the flame from the burning specimen reaches the 1.5 inch point on the surface facing up during the test and stopped when the flame progresses to a point 1.5 inches from the clamped end of the specimen on the surface facing up during the test.

RATIONALE

The Standard states that the bunsen burner and the specimen are positioned so that the center of the bottom edge of the open end of the specimen. While the Standard does not specify how far above the cabinet floor the specimen must be located, the bunsen burner and flame height specified above effectively define this distance. At that height, it is extremely difficult if not impossible to observe the flame front underneath the specimen. If the intent of the standard was to observe the flame front test cabinet floor or some other means of

observing the flame front. Since NHTSA did not make such requirements, the logical location points for starting and stopping the timing are on the surface facing up during the test.

QUESTION 2.

MVSS-302, in Section S5.3(f), states that the flame progression be measured to a point 1.5 inches rom the clamped end of the specimen under test. The standard does not specify actions to be taken after timing has stopped. Some laboratories put out the flame using a small amount of water from a spray bottle. The question has been raised as to whether using a small amount of water from a spray bottle to put out the flame is an acceptable procedure.

ANSWER

The use of a small amount of water from a spray bottle is believed to be acceptable.

RATIONALE

The primary concern with the use of water to put out the flame is whether the water would affect the humidity in the test chamber and, therefore, the test results. MVSS 302 states in Section S5.1.2 that prior to testing each specimen be conditioned at a temperature of 70 degrees F. and a relative humidity of 50 percent, and the test be conducted under those ambient conditions. The Standard does not specify the humidity limits within which the test must be conducted. Considering the short time the specimen is in the chamber before burning and the small amount of water used it is believed that the humidity would not be significantly affected and therefore the procedure to be both acceptable and a good safety precaution.

ID: nht92-2.22

DATE: 11/17/92

FROM: PAUL JACKSON RICE -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: SHIRLEY A. STEWART -- PRESIDENT SAS ELECTRICAL SERVICE, INC.

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 10-16-92 FROM SHIRLEY A. STEWART TO NHTSA CHIEF COUNSEL (OCC 7866)

TEXT: This responds to your letter of October 16, 1992, to this office regarding the installation of a "silent monitor" on school buses. You stated in your letter that you made a presentation to Mr. Maurice Hicks and Mr. Rich Van Iderstine of this agency at a meeting on October 2, 1992, and you asked how our standards apply to installation of this device on school buses.

You described the silent monitor as a six-inch cube of welded steel designed to house a video camera to monitor the interior of school buses. You explained that the device is installed in the interior access panel above the bus windshield facing the passenger compartment. The box protrudes into the interior of the bus by three to four inches. The front of the box, which swings open for installation of a video camera, contains a reflective solar glass window to prevent glare on the inside of the box.

By way of background information, NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act), it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that its motor vehicles or equipment comply with applicable Federal safety standards. The following represents our opinion based on the facts provided in your letter.

NHTSA does not have any safety standards specifically covering silent monitors. However, it is possible that the installation of a silent monitor could affect the compliance of a vehicle with some safety standards.

All new motor vehicles manufactured for sale in the United States must be certified by their manufacturers as complying with the applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

If your silent monitor is installed in a new school bus prior to its first sale to a customer, the person making the installation would be considered a vehicle alterer. Under our certification regulation (49 CFR Part 567), a vehicle alterer must certify that the vehicle as altered continues to comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

Manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or motor vehicle repair businesses modifying a used vehicle are prohibited by Section 108 (a) (2) (A) of the Safety Act from knowingly rendering inoperative any safety device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. Thus, if your silent monitor is installed in a used school bus, any businesses, including your own, making such installations cannot render inoperative the vehicle's compliance with any of our standards.

We also note that manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment have responsibilities under the Safety Act regarding safety defects. Under Sections 151, et seq., of the Safety Act, such manufacturers must notify purchasers about safety-related defects and remedy the product free of charge.

In order to determine how installation of your silent monitors could affect the compliance of school buses with applicable Federal safety standards, you should carefully review each standard, including but not limited to those addressing school bus body joint strength, crash protection, and windshield intrusion. In that regard, I am enclosing for your information a fact sheet entitled Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment, and a booklet entitled Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations.

As indicated above, you stated that your silent monitor would be installed in the interior access panel above the bus windshield facing the passenger compartment. Given the added weight that would be on the panel, we suggest that you carefully evaluate whether additional securement of the panel is needed to ensure that the panel and silent monitor do not come loose during a crash. We also note that the silent monitor appears to have sharp edges. You may wish to consider adding padding to prevent injury to an occupant who comes in contact with the monitor.

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

ATTACHMMENTS (FACT SHEET AND BOOKLET OMITTED.)

ID: nht92-2.23

DATE: 11/16/92

FROM: PAUL JACKSON RICE -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: WOLDGANG W. KLAMP

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 10-28-92 FROM WOLFGANG W. KLAMP TO PAUL J. RICE (OCC 7919)

TEXT: This responds to your letter of October 28, 1992, with respect to problems encountered by your wife in her use of a 1992 Canadian Ford Tempo passenger car.

Your letter indicates that your wife works in Canada, and uses the Ford, a company car owned by her employer, to travel to and from her home in the United States. Because the vehicle is not certified as meeting the U.S. Federal motor vehicle safety standards, she has been informed by U.S. Customs officials at the border that it may not be admitted in the future without going through the formal entry process for conversion to the U.S. standards. You have asked for our consideration of this matter.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act prohibits the importation into the United States of motor vehicles that do not conform, and that are not certified by their manufacturers to conform, to all applicable U.S. Federal motor vehicle safety standards. As a legal matter, each time the Ford crosses the border from British Columbia to Washington, it is being imported into this country. It has been the policy of this agency for many years to regard Canadian and Mexican-registered vehicles engaged in daily cross-border traffic as subject to the importation prohibitions of the Act, and to require their compliance with the U.S. Federal motor vehicle safety standards. This is the reason why your wife is encountering difficulties at the border.

We have several suggestions. If the ford is equipped with automatic occupant protection such as an air bag or automatic belts, it may, in fact, comply with all the U.S. standards. If this is the case, then Ford of Canada may be willing to provide your wife with a letter certifying its compliance to the U.S. standards which she could present at the border.

Customs should honor such a letter, and allow the vehicle to proceed with no further delay. If this is not the case, perhaps her employer could provide her with a Canadian-manufactured car that does meet, and is certified as meeting, the U.S. standards. Otherwise, your wife may have to use a U.S. -registered and certified vehicle and seek reimbursement for travel expenses from her Canadian employer.

ID: nht92-2.24

DATE: 11/16/92

FROM: PAUL JACKSON RICE -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: MICHAEL J. VACANTI

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 10-1-92 FROM MICHAEL J. VACANTI TO NHTSA OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COUNSEL (OCC 7823)

TEXT: This responds to your letter seeking information on how the laws and regulations administered by this agency would apply to a device you have designed. According to your letter, this device is an aftermarket accessory. The accessory is a polyurethane device that latches onto the lap/shoulder belt and changes the angle at which the shoulder belt crosses a child's torso. The device is intended to improve shoulder belt fit for children that have outgrown child safety seats. I am pleased to have this chance to explain our laws and regulations to you.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seg.; the Safety Act) authorizes this agency to issue motor vehicle safety standards for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. We have exercised this authority to establish Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection (49 CFR @ 571.208). This standard requires new motor vehicles to be equipped with safety belts and requires that those belts meet specified fit and comfort requirements, as set forth in S7 of the standard. However, Standard No. 208 does not apply to aftermarket items that seek to alter belt fit and/or comfort. Hence, you are not required to certify that this device complies with Standard No. 208 before offering the device for sale.

In addition, you are not required to get some sort of "approval" from this agency before offering this device for sale. NHTSA has no authority to "approve" motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products. Instead, the Safety Act establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. As stated above, this device is not subject to any safety standard, so you do not have to make any certification.

Although none of our safety standards directly apply to this device, there are several provisions in the Safety Act that are relevant. Manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment such as your belt positioning device are subject to the requirements in sections 151-159 of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1411-1419) concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects related to motor vehicle safety.

In addition, use of your product could be affected by section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A)). That section prohibits manufacturer, distributors, dealers, and repair shops from knowingly "rendering inoperative," in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed on or in a vehicle in compliance with an applicable safety standard. There are two elements of design in a vehicle that might be "rendered inoperative" by the use of your belt positioning device. One is the occupant protection afforded by belts that meet the specified fit and comfort requirements. The other element of design that could be rendered inoperative by the use of your belt positioning device is the burn resistance required by Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials (49 CFR @ 571.302). The materials used in the interior of vehicles, including the seat belts, seat backs and cushions, trim panels, and headliner must comply with the burn resistance requirements of Standard No. 302 to reduce deaths and injuries in the event of a fire in the vehicle's interior. If your belt positioning device renders inoperative the belt fit and comfort requirements specified in Standard No. 208 or does not comply with burn resistance requirements, it could not be installed in a vehicle by any manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair shop.

I have enclosed a general information sheet for new manufacturers that gives a thumbnail sketch of NHTSA's regulations and provides information on how to obtain copies of those regulations.

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

ID: nht92-2.25

DATE: 11/16/92

FROM: PAUL JACKSON RICE -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: FREDD SCHEYS -- PRESIDENT, S.C.C. CARAT INC.

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 10-2-92 FROM FREDD SCHEYS TO TAYLOR VINSON AND PAUL J. RICE (OCC 7842)

TEXT: This responds to your letter of October 2, 1992, asking for an explanation of how this agency's regulations would affect two types of vehicle conversions your company plans to undertake.

In the first situation, a customer in California wishes to send two "U.S. spec" cars that he presently owns to Europe for a 39-inch stretch conversion. In the second situation, the customer would take delivery of a "U.S. spec car" in Europe, use it for tourist purposes, and leave it at your factory for conversion, and subsequent shipment to the United States. You also ask for "advice for the case where we have to convert a car into an armoured car." I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our laws and regulations for you.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the Safety Act) provides generally that no person shall manufacture, sell, or import into the United States any motor vehicle unless that vehicle is in conformity with all applicable U.S. motor vehicle safety standards and is covered by a manufacturer's certification to that effect. The certification requirements are set forth in 49 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 567. The certification requirements apply to persons and entities that perform some manufacturing or conversion activities to a vehicle before that vehicle's first sale for purposes other than resale. This means that the original manufacturer of a vehicle (Mercedes-Benz, for instance) must certify that each of its completed vehicles conforms to all applicable U.S. safety standard and permanently affix a label with that statement on each such vehicle. For the purposes of this letter, I am assuming that the cars you call "U.S. spec" cars are cars to which the original manufacturer has affixed its certification label.

If any party performs conversion operations on a certified vehicle before the initial purchase of the vehicle, the party would be an "alterer" and required to affix its own label identifying itself and certifying that the converted vehicle continues to conform to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. See 49 CFR 567.7. However, in the situations posited in your letter, the conversions to be performed in Europe by your company would be performed on vehicles after the first purchase of the vehicle for purposes other than resale. This agency does not require any certification to be made or certification label to be affixed by entities that perform conversions on vehicles after the first purchase of those vehicles. Thus, your company need not make its own certification nor affix its own label. Instead, your company must leave in place the original manufacturer's certification label.

The only provision in U.S. law that applies to conversion operations performed on vehicles after the first purchase in good faith for purposes other than resale is set forth in Title 15, United States Code, section 1397(b)(2). That section of the law forbids 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 in accordance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard." This means that your company must ensure that your conversion operations do not cause the converted vehicle to no longer comply with the U.S. motor vehicle safety standards. Pursuant to this responsibility, the agency would, for example, expect that, if the vehicle's weight ratings and tire inflation pressures shown on its original certification labels were no longer valid after conversion, a converter would install new labels showing the correct weight ratings and tire inflation pressures.

Assuming your company leaves the original manufacturer's certification label in place on the converted vehicles, the owner of the vehicles should not encounter any difficulties when the converted vehicles are imported into the United States. The importer would simply file a declaration stating that the vehicle conforms to the applicable safety standards and bears an original manufacturer's certification label to that effect, pursuant to 49 CFR @ 591.5(b).

For your information, I have enclosed a copy of an information sheet for new manufacturers that briefly explains our regulations and tells how to obtain copies of those regulations. I hope this information is helpful.

ID: nht92-2.26

DATE: 11/16/92

FROM: PAUL JACKSON RICE -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: JESS R. THURMAN

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 10-01-92 FROM JESS R. THURMAN TO MARY VERSAILLES (OCC 7822)

TEXT: This responds to your letter of October 1, 1992 requesting information on whether certain modifications can be made to a van to make room for a wheelchair to enter the vehicle. You explained that you currently own a 1993 Ford van with a lift. The passenger seats behind the front seats were moved back in your 1983 van to make room for the wheelchair lift. You are currently trying to purchase a new Ford van with the same modifications but have been told that federal law no longer permits moving seats or safety belts. As explained below, there is no federal requirement that expressly prohibits moving seats and safety belts, provided that the relocated seats and belts continue to comply with the applicable safety standards.

Section 103 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the Safety Act; 15 U.S.C. 1392) authorizes NHTSA to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Manufacturers are required to certify that their products meet all applicable safety standards. Thus, if a vehicle were originally manufactured in the manner you have described, the manufacturer would be required to certify that the vehicle complies with all applicable safety standards. If some party were to modify a vehicle along the lines described in your letter before the vehicle's first sale to a consumer like yourself, that party would be required to leave the original manufacturer's certification in place and add its own certification that the vehicle as altered continues to comply with all applicable safety standards.

Moving the rear seats and the seat belts for those seats could affect compliance with four safety standards: Standard No. 207, Seating Systems, Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies, and Standard No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages. Standard No. 207 establishes strength and other performance requirements for vehicle seats. Standard No. 208 sets forth requirements for occupant protection at the various seating positions in vehicles. Based upon the information in your letter, it appears that the vehicle you wish to have modified would be classified as a multipurpose passenger vehicle (MPV) for purposes of NHTSA's regulations. Standard No. 208 requires an MPV to have a lap/shoulder belt at every rear outboard seating position, and either a lap belt or a lap/shoulder belt at every other rear seating position. Standard No. 209 sets forth strength, elongation, webbing width, durability, and other requirements for seat belt assemblies. Standard No. 210 establishes strength and location requirements for seat belt anchorages.

Any manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair business that modifies a van for you along the lines described in your letter after you have purchased the van would be subject to the requirement of the Safety Act (at 15 U.S.C. 1397 (a) (2) (A) that: No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle . . . in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard.

Since the rear seats and their safety belts are devices or elements of design installed in the van in compliance with applicable safety standards, this section prohibits any of the named commercial entities from making any modification or repair to the rear seats and/or their accompanying safety belts if such modification or repair would cause the vehicle no longer to comply with an applicable safety standard.

As you can see, there is nothing in Federal law that prohibits persons from moving rear seats and their accompanying safety belts. Instead, Federal law requires that modifications to a van that include moving the rear seats and the safety belts be done in such a way that the repositioned seats and safety belts continue to provide the safety protection mandated by the safety standards.

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

ID: nht92-2.27

DATE: November 16, 1992

FROM: Terry W. Wagar -- Technical Services Bureau, State of New York, Department of Motor Vehicles, Division of Vehicle Safety Services

TO: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Council, NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 1/22/93 from John Womack to Terry Wagar (A40; Std. 205)

TEXT:

I am writing to you regarding the repair of automotive safety glazing. I would like to know what the NHTSA's legal position is on the repair of glazing on in service motor vehicles that were originally designed to comply with FMVSS 571.205.

The company "Ultra B-0-N-D, Inc.", 11151 Pierce Street, Riverside, CA 92505 (1-800-347-2820) requests that the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles establish that windshield glazing repair be accepted and repaired glass meet New York State inspection criteria.

The Ultra B-0-N-D repair process is applied to line cracks small bruises and star cracks. Equipment is attached to the glass with suction cups to open the crack. A liquid is injected through the entire crack. Equipment is removed. A lamp is used to cure the chemical. Finally the repaired area is scraped with a razor blade then cleaned with window cleaner. When repaired, the crack is "not as visible".

Please guide us with your agencies opinion in this matter. If you have any questions, you may reach me at (518) 474-5176.

ID: nht92-2.28

DATE: November 16, 1992

FROM: Bill Dobberteen -- Product Launch Engineer, Prince Corporation

TO: Office of the Chief Council -- NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 2/4/93 from John Womack to Bill Dobberteen (A40; Part 576; VSA 102)

TEXT:

We are developing an overhead storage compartment for a utility vehicle. The bin will be secured to the headliner in back of the rear seat. We are requesting to know all regulations this product must meet. Enclosed is a sketch of product placement and function.

(Graphics omitted.)

ID: nht92-2.29

DATE: 11/16/92

FROM: DONALD RAY MCCRAY -- 620694, DARRINGTON UNIT

TO: ANDREW H. CARD -- SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 2-9-93 FROM JOHN WOMACK TO DONALD RAY MCCRAY (A40; STD. 207)

TEXT: MY NAME IS DONALD RAY MCCRAY, I HOPE THIS LETTER FINE YOU WITH A LITTLE TIME TO READ AND UNDERSTAND WHY THIS LETTER HAVE BEEN ADDRESS, TO-WIT IN MAKING YOU AWARE OF THE VIOLATION AND BRAKING OF STATE AND FEDEROL LAW: BY THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT, OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, TRANSPORATION, DIVISION. ON THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1992, THE DAY I WAS TRANSFERED FROM THE WALLS UNIT IN HUNTSVILLE, TEXAS TO THE DARRINGTON UNIT IN ROSHARON, TEXAS. I WAS TRANSFERED IN BUS UNIT #51261, LIC 501-900, TO-WIT HAD N SEAT COVERS OR PADS, THE SEATS WARE MADE OF MEDAL AND COOL, THIS UNIT PROVIDED NO HEAT. I AND OTHER INMATES WAS TRANSPORTED IN THIS UNIT AT A SPEED OF 70 TO 80 MILES PER HOURS, FOR THREE (3) HOURS OR MORE. IN THE EVENT OF AN ACCIDENT, THIS UNIT #51261, LIC #501-900, WOULD IMMEDIATELY BECOME A KNIFE TO-WIT A DEADLY WEAPON.

WEREFORE IN CLOSING: DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRANSPORTATION DIVISION IS IN VIOLATION OF STATE AND FEDEROL LAWS, AND HOUSE BILL 2335, STATE POLICY. I HAVE TAKING THE LIBERTIE IN NOTIFYING THE STATE GOVERNMENT CONCERNING THIS MATTER. AFTER RIDEING IN THIS UNIT, I EXPERIENCE (BUTT AND LOW BACK [Illegible Words] HAVING STATEMENT OF INFORMATION CONCERNING[Illegible Word]

[Illegible Word] COULD INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:

OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR [Illegible Word] OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE AUSTIN, TEXAS

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION HUNTSVILLE, TEXAS

THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY (DPS) AUSTIN, TEXAS

ID: nht92-2.3

DATE: 11/25/92

FROM: PAUL JACKSON RICE -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: THOMAS PRICE -- ABAS MARKETING, INC.

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 9-23-92 FROM THOMAS D. PRICE TO PAUL J. RICE (OCC 7812)

TEXT: This responds to your letter asking about requirements for a device you call a "noncomputerized antilock braking assist system," for brakes installed on trucks and trailers. You stated that your device can be installed on vehicles equipped with air brake, electric brake, air over hydraulic brake, and vacuum/hydraulic brake systems. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our regulations to you.

You asked what the agency's policy is regarding the approval, disapproval, or certification of any particular antilock brake system product. NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act ("Safety Act"), it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that its vehicles or equipment comply with applicable standards issued by this agency. A manufacturer then certifies that its vehicles or equipment comply with applicable standards.

You also asked for a listing of the various standards and regulations with which you should be conversant, given your product, and an explanation of the responsibilities under the Safety Act of three types of parties: an original equipment manufacturer, an alterer of a previously certified new motor vehicle prior to its first sale, and an installer of an ABS device on a used motor vehicle.

NHTSA has issued two standards about brake systems: Standard No. 105, Hydraulic Brake Systems and Standard No. 121, Air Brake Systems. Standard No. 105 specifies requirements for hydraulic service brake and associated parking brake systems, and applies to new passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses equipped with hydraulic brake systems. Standard No. 121 establishes performance and equipment requirements for braking systems on vehicles equipped with air brake systems, and applies to almost all new trucks, buses, and trailers equipped with air brake systems. The agency does not have a regulation specifically covering a device such as a "noncomputerized antilock braking assist system" which is added to a brake system. However, since your device would be tied into a vehicle's brake system, it could affect a vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 105 and Standard No. 121.

If one of your devices is installed as original equipment on a new vehicle, the vehicle manufacturer is required to certify that, with the device installed, the vehicle satisfies the requirements of all applicable safety standards, including Standard No. 105 and Standard No. 121. (See 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1) and 49 CFR Part 567.) If the device is added to a previously certified new motor vehicle prior to its first sale, the person who modifies the vehicle would be an alterer of a previously certified motor vehicle and would be required to certify that, as altered, the vehicle continues to comply with all of the safety standards affected by the alteration. (See 49 CFR Part 567.7.)

If the device is installed on a used vehicle by a business such as a garage, the installer would not be required to attach a certification label. However, it would have to make sure that it did not knowingly render inoperative, in whole or 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 Federal motor vehicle safety standard. (See 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A).)

You should also be aware of the requirements of Safety Standard No. 106, Brake Hoses, which specifies requirements for motor vehicle brake hose, brake hose assemblies, and brake hose end fittings. That standard applies to new motor vehicle equipment as well as to new motor vehicles. You should check to see if any parts of your devices are subject to the requirements of Standard No. 106.

I also note that manufacturers of aftermarket equipment are subject to the Safety Act's defect provisions. Should a safety-related defect be discovered in your device, whether by the agency or yourself, you as the manufacturer would be required to notify purchasers and dealers and provide a cost-free remedy for the defect.

Enclosed is a copy of an information sheet entitled "Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment," which further explains a manufacturer's responsibilities under NHTSA's regulations. You may also wish to review the Federal Highway Administration's Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, which set forth requirements for commercial motor vehicles. The address of the Office of Motor Carrier Standards is included in the enclosed information sheet.

Finally, you asked how you could secure or have access to the complete Docket No. 92-29-01. This docket includes responses to an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) in which NHTSA announced that it is considering proposing additional requirements that might require medium and heavy duty vehicles to be equipped with antilock brake systems. The complete docket, including all the responses to the ANPRM, can be reviewed at the agency's Docket Section, room 5109, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington D.C. 20590. Docket hours are 9:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. A complete copy of the docket is also available for a fee to cover search and copying costs by contacting the agency's technical reference division at (202) 366-4949.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.