ID: aiam2391

Dear Mr. Johnson: This is in response to your letter of August 16, 1976, in which you as about our regulations concerning the modification of 'vans' to make them suitable for camping. The modifications you propose to make include the installation of plumbing, water, electricity, and additional seating.; The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. SS1381 *et seq*.) prohibits the manufacture, offer for sale, sale, introduction in interstate commerce or importation of a motor vehicle that does not comply with all applicable standards in effect on the date of its manufacture. This prohibition does not apply (except for importation) after the first purchase of the vehicle in good faith for purposes other than resale. Under these provisions, you are responsible for the compliance of any vehicle that you modify up to and including the time of first purchase for purposes other than resale.; The manufacturer must comply with all applicable safety standard established by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). His certification appears on a completed vehicle. It would be your responsibility to ensure that the vehicle continues to comply with all applicable safety standards after your modifications. Under Part 567 of our regulations, you must attach a label to the vehicle that states that, as altered, the vehicle continued to conform to the standards.; From the description of the modifications you describe, it appears tha you might affect the compliance of the vehicle with the following standards: Standard No. 207, *Seating Systems*, Standard No. 208, *Occupant Crash Protection*, Standard No. 210, *Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages*, and Standard No. 302, *Flammability of Interior Materials*. It should be noted that any additional weight created by your modifications or a change in the distribution of weight could also affect the vehicle's compliance with other safety standards whose test procedures require a barrier crash test.; We also would point out that if you modify a Ford 'Econoline' in al probability you would change the vehicle classification from a truck to a multipurpose passenger vehicle. This should be noted on the certification label that you attach to the vehicle.; I have enclosed an information sheet that explains where you may obtai copies of these regulations.; Sincerely, Frank A. Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel

ID: aiam2390

Dear Mr. Johnson: This is in response to your letter of August 16, 1976, in which you as about our regulations concerning the modification of 'vans' to make them suitable for camping. The modifications you propose to make include the installation of plumbing, water, electricity, and additional seating.; The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. SS 1381 *et seq*.) prohibits the manufacture, offer for sale, sale, introduction in interstate commerce or importation of a motor vehicle that does not comply with all applicable standards in effect on the date of its manufacture. This prohibition does not apply (except for importation) after the first purchase of the vehicle in good faith for purposes other than resale. Under these provisions, you are responsible for the compliance of any vehicle that you modify up to and including the time of first purchase for purposes other than resale.; The manufacturer must comply with all applicable safety standard established by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). His certification appears on a completed vehicle. It would be your responsibility to ensure that the vehicle continues to comply with all applicable safety standards after your modifications. Under Part 567 of our regulations, you must attach a label to the vehicle that states that, as altered, the vehicle continued to conform to the standards.; From the description of the modifications you describe, it appears tha you might affect the compliance of the vehicle with the following standards: Standard No. 207, *Seating Systems*, Standard No. 208, *Occupant Crash Protection*, Standard No. 210, *Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages*, and Standard No. 302, *Flammability of Interior Materials*. It should be noted that any additional weight created by your modifications or a change in the distribution of weight could also affect the vehicle's compliance with other safety standards whose test procedures require a barrier crash test.; We also would point out that if you modify a Ford 'Econoline' in al probability you would change the vehicle classification from a truck to a multipurpose passenger vehicle. This should be noted on the certification label that you attach to the vehicle.; I have enclosed an information sheet that explains where you may obtai copies of these regulations.; Sincerely, Frank A. Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel

ID: nht91-2.26

DATE: March 12, 1991

FROM: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Hiroshi Ozeki -- Executive Vice President, Mazda Research & Development of North America, Inc.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 8-8-90 from Hiroshi Ozeki to Paul Jackson Rice (OCC 5108)

TEXT:

This responds to your letter of August 8, 1990 requesting an interpretation of Standard No. 214. You state that one of Mazda's future models has a door design in which the door moulding extends below the door itself by approximately 15 millimeters. You asked whether, for purposes of positioning the loading device used in the quasi-static test of side door strength, the "lowest point of the door" referred to in S4(c)(2) of the standard would be the bottom of the door moulding or the bottom of the door itself when the moulding extends lower than the door itself.

For the quasi-static test of side door strength under Standard No. 214, S4(c)(2) currently provides that the loading device must be positioned so that ". . . (2) Its longitudinal axis is laterally opposite the midpoint of a horizontal line drawn across the outer surface of the door 5 inches above the lowest point of the door." Under the current standard, we believe that door moulding should be considered part of the door. Therefore, the "lowest part of the door" would be the lowest part of an attached door moulding. Under the current standard, that would be the reference point to be used in making the five-inch measurement. For your further information, the agency is considering proposing for public comment a possible amendment to the standard concerning the positioning of the test device.

I hope that this information is helpful. If you have any questions, please contact John Rigby at 202-366-2992.

ID: aiam1972

Dear Mr. Reichel: This is in response to your letter of June 27, 1975, inquiring as t the permissibility under Standard No. 111, *Rearview Mirrors*, of offering for sale new vehicles equipped with louvers affixed to the outside of the rear window without installing a rearview mirror on the passenger side.; Standard 111 requires that an outside rearview mirror of substantiall unit magnification be installed on the passenger side of a vehicle where the field of view provided by the inside rearview mirror is obscured by objects other than seated occupants or head restraints. Based upon the information contained in your letter, it appears that the louver affixed to the rear window obstructs the view to the rear provided by the inside mirror. Since this louver does not fall within the two exceptions named in S3.1.1 of the standard (seated occupants and head restraints), a passenger side rearview mirror would be necessary to comply with the requirements of the standard.; The fact that the obstruction is only slight does not affect thi determination, since the standard is clear on the point that the only obscurity allowable is that caused by occupants or head restraints.; Sincerely, James C. Schultz, Chief Counsel

ID: aiam0303

Dear Mr. Peterson: This is in reply to a letter dated February 10, 1971, that was receive from Mr. William V. Reynolds of the National Association of School Bus Contract Operators asking that we send our reply to you. The letter asks two questions concerning Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 213, which are restated below with our response.; >>>1. Is the standard applicable to a school bus operator who install seat belts (not presently required) at the behest of a school board for use when transporting children attending Special Education Classes?<<<; The answer to this question is no. Standard No. 213 applies only t child seating systems, and not to seat belts or persons who install seat belts. In addition, there are no other Federal requirements applicable to one who installs seat belts for passengers in either a new or used bus. There is, however, a Federal standard (No. 209) that requires all seat belt assemblies manufactured after March 1, 1967, to meet certain performance requirements. We strongly recommend that you examine the seat belts you wish to install to determine whether they were manufactured to comply with this standard. This can be done by examining the belt assembly, particularly its label or buckle assembly, for the date of manufacture, which may appear in an abbreviated fashion. Also, many seat belt assemblies manufactured after March 1, 1967, will be labeled with a specific statement that they comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. This statement may alternatively appear on the box in which the belt assembly is delivered.; For your information, I have enclosed a copy of a Bureau of Moto Carrier Safety regulation concerning requirements for seat belt assemblies at the driver's position, in buses under that agency's jurisdiction, which became effective August 1, 1970. These requirements would be applicable to you if the buses in question are subject to the Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety Regulations.; >>>2. Is the standard applicable to devices designed by the schoo physiotherapy department and built in the school carpentry shop for use in transporting handicapped children with a handicap that is peculiar to that one child? (This includes both regular and van-type buses.)<<<; The answer to this question is yes. Standard No. 213 applies to al child seating systems for use in motor vehicles, including buses, regardless of whether the child seating system is manufactured by a company for sale or whether it is manufactured for persons for their own use, as in your case. If the standard poses a particular hardship in the situation you describe, however, we will be glad to discuss the matter further with the persons involved.; Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Acting Chief Counsel

ID: aiam4987

Dear Mr. Love: This responds to your letter of April 3, 1992 requesting concurrence by this Office in your interpretation of the requirements of Standard No. 108 for the location of center highmounted stop lamps. Porsche wishes to install a center lamp on the movable spoiler of its 911 Carrera, a configuration previously approved by this Office providing that all photometric and visibility requirements are met. However, S5.3.1.8 of Standard No. 108 requires that 'If the lamp is mounted below the rear window, no portion of the lens shall be lower than 6 inches below the rear window on convertibles, or 3 inches on other passenger cars.' Although Porsche's intended center lamp meets this requirement with the spoiler in the extended position (when the car reaches 45 to 55 mph and slows to 9 to 12 mph), at other times, when the spoiler is lowered, the center lamp would be 7.5 inches below the window on the coupe, and 9.5 inches for the convertible. Nevertheless, you believe that this may be acceptable. You cite an opinion rendered Mazda in which NHTSA did not object to center lamps mounted on tailgates because, as we advised Mazda, the center lamp is a 'supplementary' lamp, and that 'Even if the deck, hatch, or tailgate upon which it is mounted should be open, following drivers may still observe the signals of the primary stop lamps. . .' You further quote NHTSA's frequently repeated advisory that 'Compliance of a vehicle is determined with respect to its normal driving position. . . ,' and argue that Porsche's design 'fulfills the spirit of the height requirements under all conditions' and the height requirement itself 'under a majority of 'normal driving conditions.'' You further argue that even in the down position the triangular relationship between the center lamp and the stop lamps is retained. Finally, you argue that the proposed lamp conforms with NHTSA's philosophy to make Standard No. 108 more performance-oriented 'by fulfilling the photometric requirements at all positions.' I am sorry that we cannot concur in your interpretation. When we judge whether a vehicle meets the location and visibility requirements of Standard No. 108, we determine compliance of the vehicle in what appears to us to be its normal operating or driving position. The fact that the vehicle may not comply under all conditions of operation is, of course, of concern to us, but we try to weigh the realities of vehicle design and usage against the need of the public for safety. In the Mazda interpretation, there was no question that the vehicle as manufactured would comply with the locational requirement for center lamps when the tailgate was closed. The 'normal driving position' of a vehicle with a tailgate is with the tailgate in the closed position, and use of a vehicle with the tailgate not closed is likely to be infrequent compared with its use with the tailgate closed. In another interpretation, rendered years ago, the fact that a vehicle with hydraulic suspension would not meet the minimum height requirements for headlamps with the vehicle at rest was considered a technical noncompliance only because by the time the vehicle was in its normal operating condition (with the engine running and the car ready to move into the stream of traffic), the suspension had raised the vehicle to a height where the headlamps exceeded the minimum height requirements. By contrast, the center lamp on the Carerra will not meet the locational requirements from a state of rest up to a minimum of 45 mph, that is to say, under low-speed urban driving conditions where the center lamp is most likely to achieve its purpose of reducing the frequency and severity of rear end impacts. This, to us, is the 'normal operating position' of the Carerra with respect to the location of the proposed center lamp. I would like to close by pointing out that the agency went to a considerable extent in considering the comments of manufacturers before adopting the requirements of S5.3.1.8, in order to minimize design restrictions consistent with safety. NHTSA proposed three alternative locations, and adopted one that was less restrictive than any of the alternatives. Subsequently, pursuant to petitions for reconsideration by vehicle manufacturers, NHTSA relaxed the location requirements of S5.3.1.8 even further. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel;

ID: aiam5651

"Dear Dr. Arnold: This responds to your letter asking whether the ai bags in your car can be disconnected. You explained that you are physically impaired by the effects of osteomyelitis, a disease of the bones, cannot use a seatbelt with comfort, and were granted dispensation from such usage several years ago. In a telephone conversation with Richard Reed of this agency, you indicated that you are 74 years old, 5 feet, three inches tall, and must sit close to the steering wheel because of your medical condition. As explained below, our answer is that NHTSA will not institute enforcement proceedings against a repair business that disconnects an air bag on your vehicle to accommodate your condition. Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, requires that cars be equipped with automatic crash protection at the front outboard seating positions. The air bags in your car were installed as one means of complying with that requirement. The removal or deactivation of one of those air bags by a vehicle dealer is governed by a provision of Federal law, 49 U.S.C. 30122. The section provides that: A manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business may not knowingly make inoperative any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard. However, in limited situations in which a vehicle must be modified to accommodate the needs of a person with a particular disability or a person's special medical needs, NHTSA has in the past stated that it would consider violations of the 'make inoperative' prohibition as purely technical ones justified by public need, and that it would not institute enforcement proceedings. I would like to caution you that both safety belts and air bags are very important items of safety equipment. Safety belts are the primary means of occupant restraint, and work in all types of crashes. NHTSA estimates that in 1994, safety belts saved almost 9,200 lives and prevented more than 211,000 moderate to critical injuries. The combination of wearing safety belts and having an air bag installed at a seating position provides vehicle occupants with maximum safety protection in all types of crashes. Also, air bags are designed to offer some protection even when safety belts are not used. Since 1987, air bags are estimated to have saved 911 lives. NHTSA strongly encourages vehicle occupants to wear their safety belts, since we are concerned about the much higher safety risk faced by unbelted occupants. We understand, however, that you cannot wear your safety belt for medical reasons, and that you are concerned about a possible safety risk from the air bag in such a situation. While air bags have an impressive overall performance record and are designed to provide some protection even for unbelted occupants, NHTSA has become aware of situations in which current air bags have undesired side effects. These include situations in which an air bag appears to have contributed to serious injuries and even death to vehicle occupants, in minor-to-moderate severity crashes. Information indicates that an air bag might pose a risk of serious injury to unrestrained small statured and/or older people, in particular. I note that NHTSA has recently issued a request for comments (copy enclosed) concerning the agency s actions to minimize the adverse side effects of air bags and to invite the public to share information and views with the agency. Since your disability prevents you from wearing your safety belt, and given your age and size, the disability places you in a situation where there may be a risk of serious injury from the air bag. While this particular risk can be addressed by disconnecting the air bag, there are trade-offs: Disconnecting the air bag subjects you to a higher risk in crashes, especially higher-speed crashes, where the air bag would provide protection. We urge you to carefully weigh the trade-offs in making your decision. If you decide that the risk to you from the air bag offsets the potentially life-saving benefits of the air bag, and you wish to have your air bag deactivated, we would regard the deactivation a purely technical violation of the 'make inoperative' prohibition justified by public need. Accordingly, we would not institute enforcement proceedings against any person listed in section 30122 who deactivated the air bag. I would recommend that the manufacturer of the vehicle and/or air bag be consulted on the safest way to disconnect the air bag. I also note that the air bag should only be disconnected from a position where you would be seated. In addition, I strongly encourage you to ensure that every person in your vehicle who can use his or her safety belt does so. I want to add a caution. The purpose of the 'make inoperative' prohibition is to ensure, to the greatest degree possible, current and subsequent owners and users of your vehicle are not deprived of the maximum protection afforded by the vehicle as newly manufactured. Accordingly, if you were to sell your vehicle later, we urge that the air bag be reactivated for the subsequent driver. I hope that this letter resolves your problem. If you have any other questions, please contact Edward Glancy of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel Enclosure";

ID: 21083-2.drn

[

        ]

Dear [           ]

This responds to your request for an interpretation of requirements for heating/venting/air conditioning controls specified in Standard No. 101, Controls and Displays. Our answers are provided below.

Your request for confidentiality is being addressed in a separate letter. However, in an e-mail exchange between [        ], your legal counsel and Dorothy Nakama of this office, it was agreed that the following description of the system can be made public:

The vehicle's instrument panel has a row of several push button switches, each of which has two positions. This same set of push button switches operates several different vehicle systems. The system to be operated by the switches at a given time is selected by the driver or passenger.

Above the push button switches is a video screen that shows an image of the switches. The video screen also shows the functions of the switches, which vary depending upon the system selected. There is a one-to-one correspondence between each switch and its image on the video screen.

One of the vehicle systems operated by the push button switches is the air conditioning system. In order to select this system, the driver or passenger pushes a separate button labeled "PUSH A/C." There are two such buttons, each of which is located away from the row of push button switches. There is an outer ring around each of these buttons which is used to adjust the interior temperature. This function is identified by blue and red lines on the buttons. The selected interior temperature is shown in digital format on the video screen. Rotating the outer ring (as indicated by blue and red lines on the buttons) raises or lowers the interior temperature. Each outer ring can be rotated to either the right or the left indefinitely. However, since there are limits on the extreme hot and cold interior vehicle temperatures which can be selected, rotating the button past certain points will have no effect on the selected temperature.

When the air conditioning system is selected, identification for the functions of the various push button switches is provided on the video screen, on the images of the switches and/or directly above the images of the controls. For example, the fan speed is controlled by one switch. The speed is increased by pressing the top of the switch and decreased by pressing the bottom of the switch. The four-bladed fan symbol appears on the image of this switch. An upward arrow appears on the image of the top of the switch, and a downward arrow appears on the image of the bottom of the switch. The relative speed of the fan is shown by illuminated bars on the screen above the switch. The fan speed is indicated by the number of bars that are illuminated.

In another case, a switch controls the opening of various vents. Certain identification is provided on the image of the switch, and a pictogram showing the vents relative to an occupant appears above the switch. As the switch is pressed, the pictogram changes to show the vents which are selected.

Your first question concerns whether the identification for the push button switches is considered "on or adjacent" to the controls, as required by S5.2.1(a) of Standard No. 101.

The answer is yes. The video screen that shows the images corresponding to the switches, and identification for the switches, is directly above the switches. Although there is a small unavoidable break between the video screen and the switches, no control, display or other potential source of distraction appears between the video screen and switches. For these reasons, we conclude that the proximity between the switches and the images/identification is so close that they are "adjacent" to each other.

Your second question concerns whether the system meets the requirement in S5.2.2 that identification be provided for each function of any heating and air conditioning control, and for the extreme positions of any such control that regulates a function over a quantitative range. So far as we can tell, it appears that identification is provided for each function of the various controls.

You asked about the requirement for identification of the extreme positions of any such control that regulates a function over a quantitative range in connection with the fan controls and temperature controls. We note that when this particular requirement was written, fan controls and temperature controls of the type provided in your system were not contemplated. While these controls regulate a function over a quantitative range, they do not have extreme positions in the traditional sense of a lever or button that moves only within a limited range, where the ends of the range represent the extreme positions. In the case of the two fan controls, the top of a switch is pressed to increase fan speed and the bottom of the switch button is pressed to decrease fan speed. A display indicates the relative fan speed, including the extremes. In the case of the temperature controls, a display indicates the selected temperature, including the extremes, but the outer rings can be rotated indefinitely.

Applying S5.2.2 to the type of control in your system, it is our opinion that the requirement to identify the extreme positions is met so long as there is a means by which the driver can know when the extreme positions have been reached. We believe your system provides such a means for both the fan and temperature controls. In the case of the fan controls, the driver can know when the extreme positions have been reached by viewing the display which indicates the relative fan speed. In the case of the temperature controls, the driver can know when the extremes have been reached by viewing the display of the selected temperature. When a driver rotates the outer ring of the temperature control to increase or decrease temperature, the selected temperature will increase or decrease up to the point where the extreme has been selected, at which point further movement of the outer ring in the same direction will not change the selected temperature.

Your third question was whether the identification of the heating/air conditioning system controls meets the requirement in S5.3.3 that means be provided for making controls and their identification visible to the driver under all conditions. You asked about this given the fact that identification of the heating/air conditioning controls may not be visible unless one of the knobs marked "PUSH AC" is pressed.

The answer to this question is yes. Standard No. 101 specifies at S5.3.3(a) that "means shall be provided for making controls ... and the identification of those items visible to the driver under all driving conditions." Although the images are not always displayed, the heating/air conditioning controls would meet this requirement because the images providing identification appear when the knob marked "PUSH AC" is pressed. ⁽¹⁾

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,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:101
ref.101
d.6/8/00

1. I note that for purposes of this answer,[          ] has confirmed that the brightness of the video screen can be adjusted by the driver "to provide at least two levels of brightness, one of which is barely discernible to a driver who has adapted to dark ambient roadway conditions."

[        ] also confirmed that the air conditioning control is illuminated at night.

ID: aiam3589

Dear Mr. Tydings: This responds to your June 28, 1982, letter asking several question about the remanufacture of school buses using old chassis and new bodies.; In general, the use of a new body on an old chassis does not constitut the manufacture of a new motor vehicle. Accordingly, your responsibility as the individual making this modification would simply be to make sure that you do not render inoperative the compliance of the pre- existing vehicle with any of the safety standards with which it complied when it was manufactured and with which it complies at the time of your modifications, i.e., the new body (and the chassis) would have to comply with the same standards with which the old body complied (15 U.S.C. 1397).; In your first hypothetical, you would use a pre-April 1, 1977 chassis In this case the body that you would use would not have to comply with the school bus safety standards that became effective on that date. Seat spacing could be determined by the customer.; Secondly, you would use a post-April 1, 1977 chassis. In this case th vehicle would be required to continue to comply with those standards applicable to it at the time of its manufacture, which includes the school bus safety standards. Seat spacing would be limited in accordance with Standard No. 222.; Your third and fourth hypotheticals are the same as the two noted abov except that the buses involved are not school buses. Once again, the general rule prevails that the buses need not comply with new motor vehicle safety standards, but simply must not have their previous compliance with standards rendered inoperative by you.; Finally, as you indicated in your letter, you should transfer th certification label from the old vehicle to the modified vehicle if you are replacing the vehicle's body.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel

ID: FREIGHTLINER.CRS

Mr. Bob Johnson
Senior Compliance Analyst
Freightliner LLC
4747 N Channel
Portland, OR 97208-3849





Dear Mr. Johnson:

This responds to your letter of April 16, 2001, requesting the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to approve an alternate location for placement of the certification label on the new Freightliner Sprinter vehicle.

NHTSA's regulations at 49 CFR 567.4(c) prescribe specific locations for the installation of vehicle certification labels, and provide that if none of those locations are practicable, the manufacturer may suggest an alternate location for the agency's approval. Your letter states that DaimlerChrysler engineers in Germany attempted to position the label in one of the locations specified in section 567.4, but were not successful owing to the size of the label, the lack of available space to accommodate the label at some of those locations, and the presence of removable padding on the surface at other of those locations.

The alternate location for which you have requested approval is below the driver's seat on an outward facing portion of the mounting pillar. You state that the pillar is a permanent part of the vehicle's floor structure, and that at this location, the label can be easily read and is well protected from weathering and abrasion.

In specifying locations for the placement of vehicle certification labels, NHTSA's objective is to ensure that those labels may be easily read. The location that you have proposed for the new Freightliner Sprinter would meet this objective. NHTSA therefore approves your request.

If you have any further questions regarding vehicle certification requirements, feel free to contact Coleman Sachs of my staff at 202-366-5238.

Sincerely,

John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel

ref:567
d.6//21/01