ID: aiam5025

Dear Mr. Brown: This responds to your letter of May 6, 1992, wit respect to your 'quad beam' product. You point out that, in normal operation, the headlamp lower beam is extinguished when the upper beam is activated, 'quad beam' ensures that the lower beam remains activated when the upper beam is used. We advised you on July 2, 1990, that installation of 'quad beam' would be acceptable on certain types of four-lamp headlighting systems. You have now asked whether the device can 'legally be used on two headlamp systems, either sealed beam or replaceable bulb type?' Paragraph S5.5.9 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 states that ' except for certain four-lamp systems enumerated in S5.5.8 the wiring harness or connector assembly of each headlamp system shall be designed so that only those light sources intended for meeting lower beam photometrics are energized when the beam selector switch is in the lower beam position, and that only those light sources intended for meeting upper beam photometrics are energized when the beam selector switch is in the upper beam position.' This would preclude installation of the 'quad beam' on two lamp headlamp systems. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel;

ID: aiam0019

Gentlemen: This is in reply to your letter of February 16, 1967. Motor Vehicle Safety *Standard No. 209* applies to seat belt assemblie manufactured after February 28, 1967, for use in passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses. Since Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208, which provides that a Type 1 or Type 2 seat belt assembly that conforms to Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 209 shall be installed in each passenger car seat position, has an effective date of January 1, 1968, until that date seat belt assemblies installed in passenger cars need not conform to Standard No. 209 unless the seat belt assemblies have been manufactured after February 28, 1967.; Please do not hesitate to call upon us if we can be of further servic to you.; Sincerely, William Haddon, Jr., M.D., Administrator

ID: nht89-2.67

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: August 10, 1989

FROM: William Shapiro -- Manager, Regulations and Compliance, Volvo Cars of North America

TO: Stephen P. Wood -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: Re Request for Interpretation FMVSS 213 - Child Restraint Systems

ATTACHMT: Attached to drawing of child booster cushion (graphics omitted); Also attached to letter dated 9-14-90 from P.J. Rice to W. Shapiro (A36; Std. 213)

TEXT:

Volvo has designed and developed a "built-in" child booster cushion for use in a future model vehicle. It will be integrated into the center rear seat arm rest such that the arm rest will split in half to form the booster cushion. The child using this "built-in" booster cushion will utilize the center rear 3-point seat belt for their restraint.

Because the agency has stated in the preamble to the final rule, that sets forth the requirements for "built-in" child seats, that "...S5.4.3.3 allows child restraint systems other than a 5-point harness...", Volvo believes that a "built-in" booster cush ion that utilizes the adult 3-point center rear seat belt and is designed with due care to meet all the requirements of FMVSS 213, as they apply to "built-in" child seats, is in compliance with FMVSS 213. Volvo believes that by meeting all the labeling, instruction and performance requirements set forth by FMVSS 213 - Child Restraint Systems, this "built-in" booster cushion can be marketed in the U.S. We ask that the agency confirm this as soon as possible.

Some illustrative sketches are attached. If you need any additional information, or would like to see the seat, please feel free to contact me.

Drawings of child booster cushion are attached (graphics omitted).

ID: 04-003303Suzuki_benchseat

Kenneth M. Bush, Regulations Manager
American Suzuki Motor Corporation
3251 E. Imperial Highway
P.O. Box 1100
Brea, CA 92822-1100

Dear Mr. Bush:

This responds to your letter asking about the procedures set forth in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard(FMVSS) No. 214, "Side Impact Protection," for positioning a test dummy in the rear seat of vehicles. Different positioning procedures are specified in S7.1.3 of FMVSS No. 214 for bench seats and for bucket or contoured seats. You ask whether the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration would consider two particular vehicle rear seats as bench seats or as bucket or contoured seats. Our answer is that we would consider both as bench seats.

The first rear seat you ask about is shown in photograph 1 of your letter. You describe the seat as: "a bench-type seat with split folding seatbacks, but without fore/aft seat adjustment. The seat has three seating positions with stitching and contours that outline two rear outboard passenger seating positions".

The second seat, shown in photograph 2 of your letter, is "the rear seat of a sport-utility vehicle". This seat is also a bench-type seat that has three seating positions. The seat is split 60%/40%, and the two sections have independent fore/aft and seatback adjustments".

FMVSS No. 214 does not define the terms "bench seats," "bucket seats" or "contoured seats". However, seats are commonly considered bench seats when their separate sections are side-by-side, as shown in your photographs, even when they are separately adjustable. While the seat in photograph 1 is slightly contoured, we do not believe that it is contoured to a degree that it should be regarded as a contoured seat. Since we regard the seat you ask about as a bench seat, the dummy positioning procedures specified in S7.1.3(a) would apply.

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

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

ref:214
d.8/16/04

ID: aiam0148

Dear Mr. Debesson: This is in reply to your letter of January 21, 1969 requesting the 'actual state of affairs' concerning State requiring a V-1 marking on tires. #You are correct in your understanding that the Federal tire standard (No. 109)(sic) preempts or supersedes any State regulation applicable to the same aspect of performance. The Federal tire standard does not require tires to be marked with the 'V-1' symbol. H wever(sic), it does not prohibit such marking. Our understanding is that American Tire manufacturers have continued marking their product with 'V-1' symbol although not required to do so by the Federal standard. #Sincerely, Robert M. O'Mahoney, Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations;

ID: aiam0030

Dear Mr. Paxton: This is in reply to your letter of August 4, 1967, to Mr. Donald H Schwentker in which you request confirmation that the Japanese-made CONY Models AF-11SVH and AF- 7SVH compact trucks are multipurpose passenger vehicles under the new Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.; You state that the CONY line is primarily a line of commercia truck-type vehicles and that the Models AF-11SVH and AF-7SVH, although providing for four persons, are built on the same truck chassis as the purely commercial models.; A 'multipurpose passenger vehicle' is defined in section 255.3 as ' motor vehicle with motive power, except a trailer, designed to carry 10 persons or less which is constructed either on a truck chassis or with special features for occasional off-road operation.'; Therefore, the CONY Models AF-11SVH and AF-7SVH are multipurpos passenger vehicles, since they are designed to carry 10 persons or less and are constructed on a truck chassis.; Sincerely, William Haddon Jr., M.D., Director

ID: Maxzone Interpretation EPLLA 571.108_(002) signed

October 4, 2024

VIA EMAIL

Ms. Penny Chiu 

Product Marketing Coordinator 

Maxzone Auto Parts Corp. 

mkt1363@maxzone.com

Dear Ms. Chiu, 

This responds to your email, dated July 7, 2023, seeking a legal interpretation regarding the proper calculation of the “effective projected luminous lens area” (EPLLA) under Federal Motor Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment, and the inclusion of a “diffusion element,” as well as the “distinctive water wave pattern” on your product. You also submitted additional information via email to NHTSA staff, such as diagrams of your product and other supporting information, on June 28, 2023, and July 12, 2023, which was taken into consideration in developing this response. 

In responding to this request, NHTSA notes that the contents of this letter do not have the force and effect of law and are not meant to bind the public in any way. This letter is only intended to provide clarity regarding existing requirements under the law at the time of signature. 

Based on the information you have provided and for the reasons explained below, our answer is that the area you describe as the “diffusion element” and the area you describe as having a “distinctive water wave pattern” can be included in the calculation of the EPLLA of your lamp under FMVSS No. 108 only if those elements are not transparent and direct light toward the photometric test pattern. However, based on the information you have provided, we are unable to state whether such elements do or do not perform such a function. 

Background 

NHTSA is authorized by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act, 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301) to issue FMVSS that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. 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 FMVSSs that are in effect on the date of manufacture before the products can be offered for sale. In so doing, manufacturers must have some independent basis for their certification that a product complies with all applicable safety standards, and they must ensure that the vehicle would comply when tested by NHTSA.1 This requirement does not necessarily mean that a manufacturer must conduct the specific tests set forth in an applicable standard, in this case FMVSS No. 108. Certifications may be based on, among other things, engineering analyses, actual testing, and computer simulations. Whatever the basis for certification, however, the manufacturer must certify that the product complies with a standard as it is written, i.e., that the vehicle will pass all applicable requirements if it is tested exactly according to the standard’s test conditions and other specifications. Manufacturers must also ensure their products are free of safety-related defects. This letter represents NHTSA’s opinion concerning how your product, as you describe it, would be analyzed under FMVSS No. 108. It is not an approval of your product. 

In your July 7, 2023, email, you ask whether the EPLLA of your lamp, as defined in FMVSS No. 108, should include the area you describe as the “diffusion element,” or only the area you describe as the “refractive element.”2 You note that what you describe as the “diffusion element” of your product includes scattering structures as well as a “distinctive water wave pattern,” which you state “serves the purpose of diffusing light” and which you believe contributes to spreading the light emitted from the lamp. Your June 28 email includes two diagrams of the product which you state show the product’s EPLLA3 and the impact of the scattering structures on the surface. Finally, your July 12 email includes an image identifying the elements of your lamp. We note that although your question is regarding your product, which is a turn signal lamp, you have not asked about the EPLLA requirements applicable to a specific type of motor vehicle lamp. Therefore, your question, and this response, may be applicable to multiple lamp types. 

FMVSS No. 108, S6.4.1 states that “[e]ach turn signal lamp, stop lamp, high-mounted stop lamp, and school bus signal lamp must meet the applicable effective projected luminous lens area requirement specified in Tables IV–a, IV–b, and IV–c.” Furthermore, the lens area certification and compliance option in S6.4.3(a) states that “[w]hen a vehicle is equipped with any lamp listed in Table V–b each such lamp must provide not less than 1250 sq mm of unobstructed effective projected luminous lens area in any direction throughout the pattern defined by the corner points specified in Table V–b for each such lamp.” Table V-b includes turn signal lamps, stop lamps, taillamps, and parking lamps. Turn signal lamps certified under the lens area option must provide unobstructed minimum effective projected luminous lens area of 1250 sq mm at a horizontal angle of 45° and a vertical angle of 15°. 

As defined in FMVSS No. 108, EPLLA “means the area of the orthogonal projection of 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.”

1 Letter to Helen A. Rychlewski, responding to letter received June 7, 1995, available at https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/aiam5591.
2 Your submission also cites to the definition of “Diffusion Element” in Society of Automotive Engineers standard J2999. This definition is not incorporated into FMVSS No. 108.
3 The image submitted appears to indicate that your calculated EPLLA is 5648.159 sq mm.

FMVSS No. 108 also defines “effective light-emitting surface” as “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 ½° radius around a test point.” 

The definition of “effective light-emitting surface” was added to FMVSS No. 108 in a final rule published on August 11, 2004 (2004 final rule).4 This action 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 and to improve the visibility of these lamps. In the 2004 final rule, NHTSA responded to comments on the proposed amendments and definitions. In so doing, we noted that “transparent lenses cannot be included in the determination of the effective light-emitting surface.”5 Furthermore, we also stated the following:

“[T]here does not appear to be any substantive change in determining the effective projected luminous lens area. However, the proposed definition clearly stated that only the portion of the lamp that directs light to the photometric test pattern may be included in the determination of the effective light-emitting surface. … we believe that transparent lenses do not direct light to the photometric test pattern and may not be included in the calculation. However, portions of translucent lenses intended to deliberately scatter the beam pattern within the allowable photometry (e.g., frosted or stippled lenses), are permissible as part of the effective projected luminous lens area.”6 

This statement makes clear that EPLLA does include translucent structures that direct light to the photometric test pattern by diffusing or scattering light, even if such structures are on otherwise transparent lenses. 

Discussion 

We now turn to your questions regarding your product. We understand you to be asking two distinct but related questions. First, whether the area that you describe as the “diffusion element” may be included for EPLLA? Second, does the presence of what you describe as the “distinctive water wave pattern” allow an area to be included in the EPLLA? We take these questions in turn. 

Regarding the first question, the definition of effective light-emitting surface makes clear that the area of transparent lenses may not typically be included in the calculation of the effective light

4 69 FR 48805 (Aug. 11, 2004). See also Letter to Dennis Moore, Nov. 15, 2006, at https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/06-003601as.
5 69 FR 48805, 48811 (Aug. 11, 2004). This statement was consistent with a June 14, 2000, letter of interpretation in which we stated that the transparent lens covering a large lamp assembly was not the “outer lens surface” of a turn signal lamp that is part of that assembly for the purposes of calculating its visibility requirements. Letter to Shigeyoshi Aihara, June 14, 2000, at https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/20836ztv.
6 69 FR 48805, 48811 (Aug. 11, 2004).

emitting surface. As explained in the 2004 final rule, such elements do not direct light toward the photometric test pattern. 

However, as we have stated in the past, areas of otherwise transparent lenses that incorporate scattering structures, such as frosted or stippled lenses, as well as certain cuts such as prism or pillow cuts and other similar structures, are not “transparent” for purposes of determining the effective light-emitting surface. Rather, these areas are “translucent” and may be included in the calculation of EPLLA, so long as such elements direct the light to the photometric test pattern. Based on the submitted materials, it appears that the area of the “diffusion element” you describe on the lens on your product has such cuts. If these cuts direct light toward the photometric test pattern, then the area of these cuts may be counted as part of your product’s EPLLA. 

We now turn to your second question regarding the “distinctive water wave pattern.” Similarly, if the “distinctive water wave pattern” has the effect of scattering light and directing the light toward the photometric test pattern, then its area may be included in the calculation of the effective light-emitting surface (and therefore, EPLLA). We note, however, that we are unable to determine whether the wave pattern has such an effect based on the information you have provided. As previously stated, the manufacturer must certify the product as compliant with the applicable standards and must exercise reasonable care in making such a certification. 

I hope this information has been helpful. If you have further questions, please contact Eli Wachtel of my staff at (202) 366-2992. 

Sincerely,
ADAM RAVIV
Adam Raviv Chief Counsel

Dated: 10/4/24
Ref: Standard No. 108

ID: nht74-3.28

DATE: 09/24/74

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: B.F. Goodrich Tire Company

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is to respond to the draft defect notification letter submitted by B. F. Goodrich at a meeting with NHTSA personnel on September 4, 1974. While we provided you with some preliminary comments at that time, our position regarding your notification is as stated in this letter.

We believe your letter fails to comply with 49 CFR, Part 577, "Defect Notification" in several respects. Some of our comments are also directed at what we view as a lack of clarity in your letter arising, it seems to us, from some disorganization in the text.

The first sentence in your second paragraph does not follow satisfactorily the requirements of @ 577.4(b)(1). This requirement should be met by simply stating, "The B. F. Goodrich Tire Company has determined that a defect which relates to motor vehicle safety exists in its Space Saver Spare tire."

Section 577.4(c) requires the notification to describe the defect by including specified information. We believe your letter confuses the items of information and presents them in an order which clouds an understanding of the safety problem. As we understand your presentation of the facts, the item of motor vehicle equipment affected (@ 577.4(c)(1)) is the tire; the malfunction that may occur (@ 577.4(c)(2)) is an explosion of the tire; and the operating or other conditions that may cause the malfunction to occur (@ 577.4(c)(3)) are damaged beads, excessive air pressure, and beads not seated properly on the rim. With respect to this letter requirement, we find the reference to the "combination" of factors in your second paragraph, and your fourth paragraph, in which you state that "some or all" of the causal conditions listed can produce the defect, to be inconsistent and too imprecise to conform to the requirement. In addition to describing factors which can singly cause an explosion, if certain combinations of factors must exist in order for the defect to occur these combinations should not be stated generally as you have done, but should be specifically described. Moreover, we indicated to you at the September 4 meeting that we disagree that broken beads and excessive pressure must exist in combination in order for an explosion to occur.

Most importantly, we cannot agree upon your characterization of the bolting of the tire to the wheel before inflation as a precaution the owner can take to reduce the chance that the malfunction will occur under @ 577.4(c)(4). Both literally and by implication your second and fourth paragraphs read that if the tire is bolted to the vehicle before inflation, an explosion will not occur. The malfunction, however, is an explosion of the tire, not only those explosions which cause injury. While we agree that bolting the tire to the vehicle before inflation can potentially reduce the chance of injury, it should be characterized only in this fashion. Therefore, both on page 1 of your letter and in the instructions which you begin on page 3 for persons who have need of the tire before its inspection by Goodrich, you must make it absolutely clear that bolting the tire to the vehicle has no effect whatever on whether the tire will explode, but that bolting will serve only to reduce the chance of injury if an explosion occurs.

We have the following points with respect to the remaining provisions of your letter. On page 2, in the first complete paragraph, beginning "In the majority of usage situations . . . etc" we find the use of the word "majority" confusing. The implication to us is that in a minority of situations the danger is not reduced at all. This should be clarified.

The third complete paragraph on page 2 is also confusing. There is no apparent connection between its first and second sentences. If you are attempting to say that despite what earlier labels may say that the instructions provided in this letter should be followed, then this can be stated more clearly.

The use of the word "solely" in the fourth paragraph on page 2 is a disclaimer, prohibited by section 577.6, and should be stricken.

On page 3, we believe the requirements of section 577.4(e)(1) call for more detail than you have provided in the third paragraph on page 3. We suggest you include a description of the inspection and test cycle. As we indicated to you on September 4, the second and third paragraphs could be combined for clarity. Finally, the second sentence in your second paragraph on page 3 should be reworded to indicate more clearly that the date you have inserted is the date by which repair facilities will have necessary parts and instructions. In its present wording the meaning of the sentence is unclear.

Apart from these deficiencies, we believe your letter conforms to 49 CFR Part 577. At the same time, we believe your letter unnecessarily obscures the safety problem, and hope that, apart from literal compliance with Part 577, this is eliminated in the letter sent to purchasers. You should note that our determination of the conformity of the letter to Part 577 does not in any way indicate our agreement with Goodrich's analysis of the safety defect. We will continue to look into this matter, as appropriate, in order to determine whether Goodrich's analysis of the defect, and its consequent remedy, are fair and accurate statements of the safety problem. You should be aware that if subsequent events do show that attributing the safety defect to a mounting problem does not adequately describe the defect, further notification may be required.

Yours Truly,

PROPOSED DRAFT

9/4/74

DEAR CUSTOMER:

This notice is sent to you in accordance with the requirements of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act.

The B.F. Goodrich Tire Company, a division of The B.F. Goodrich Company, has determined that a defect which relates to motor vehicle safety is caused when its Space Saver Spare tire is improperly mounted or subsequently remounted on the rim and is not properly seated on the rim. When the wheel is not securely bolted to the axle at the time the tire is inflated, the combination of broken tire beads and excessive air pressure can cause the tire to burst or erupt in which case serious personal injury or death can result.

Since the introduction of the Space Saver Spare in 1967, approximately 1,000,000 tires have been produced and provided to automobile manufacturers. During this period a total of nineteen injury cases, including two fatalities, have been reported.

Bursting or eruption of the Space Saver Spare tire assembly which has the potential of causing injury can only occur when some or all following three conditions are present:

1) A broken tire bead caused by improper mounting or remounting of the tire exists.

2) The tire is not securely bolted to the axle of the vehicle before inflation is started.

3) Excessive air pressure, from a high pressure air supply is forced into the tire.

In the majority of usage situations when the caution and warning labels are followed in a step by step fashion, the danger or potential of injury or serious accidents is greatly reduced. It is extremely important that at all times the Space Saver Spare tire is inflated with the approved canister (inflator) provided for road use of the tire.

Your Space Saver Spare tire was designed to be carried in a deflated condition, while being stored in the trunk of your vehicle. Its unique folding sidewall configuration permits the saving of considerable space in your trunk.

Many Space Saver Spare tires have been furnished with caution and/or warning labels. When the spare tire assembly is securely bolted to the axle of your vehicle before inflating with the canister bottle, and the tire is only inflated with the canister inflator, maximum safety will be achieved.

The above statements are made solely to comply with the notice procedures of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 49 CFR, Part 577.4, and does not constitute an admission of liability or wrong doing on the part of the B.F. Goodrich Company, but is made to the public at large for the general purpose of improving highway safety.

Our review of the use of the Space Saver Spare has proven that unless specific instructions for installing and inflating the tire are followed, it could burst or erupt.

The B.F.Goodrich Tire Company is presently completing arrangements for conducting an inspection and inflate/deflate test cycle of your Space Saver Spare. Final details along with distribution of anticipated replacement components will be completed by

Date

Enclosed with this letter you will find a listing of all B.F.Goodrich Regional Service Departments. You are urged to contact the Service Department located most conveniently to your area, by collect phone call, and make arrangements to take your Space Saver Spare tire assembly to a designated service facility for inspection and test cycling. Inspection, test cycling and any necessary tire replacement will be provided at no charge to you. Since inspection and test cycling can take approximately one hour, we urge you to call the phone number listed above in order to make an appointment thereby avoiding long delays on your part.

If, prior to the time the inspection and test cycle have been completed you have need of your Space Saver Spare tire, it is important that follow these procedures:

1) Before inflating, bolt spare on car axle making sure that all lugs are securely fastened.

2) Rotate spare tire/wheel assembly so that the valve is down

3) Use only the canister inflator to inflate the tire. Inflate by holding canister bottle on tire valve approximately one minute after sound of gas flow stops.

4) This tire is designed for emergency use only. Return it to the spare tire position in the trunk of your vehicle as soon as possible.

5) When the Space Saver Spare is in use, do not exceed 50 MPH.

6) Do not remove Space Saver Spare tire from the wheel. Tire is not remountable. Do not use wheel cover on Space Saver Spare wheel as it may not be retained.

NOTE: If the canister inflator has been used, a replacement canister should be obtained.

Present this letter and enclosed form "Authorization for Space Saver Spare Inspection - Test Cycle" as authority for no charge inspection, test cycle and replacement of any malfunctioning compon

This is an important safety matter to you. We urge that you take action as described in this letter.

(Signed)

ID: nht89-1.63

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 04/03/89

FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL NHTSA

TO: KARL H. MAYER -- RULES AND REGULATIONS, DR. ING.H.C.F.PORSCHE AG STUTTGART

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: CONFIDENTIAL LETTER DATED 06/28/88 FROM KARL H. MAYER TO ERIKA Z. JONES, REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION -- CLARIFICATION FMVSS 101 AND FMVSS 102; LETTER DATED 06/28/88 FROM KARL H. MAYER TO ERIKA Z. JONES -- NHTSA, REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMEN T; LETTER DATED 08/15/88 FROM DEAN HANSELL TO KATHLEEN DEMETER -- NHTSA, RE PORTCHE'S JUNE 28 REQUEST FOR REGULATORY INTERPRETATION FMVSS 101 AND 102

TEXT: Dear Mr. Mayer:

This responds to your request for an interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards No. 101, Controls and Displays, and No. 102, Transmission Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect. You asked about the standar ds in connection with a new transmission and related gear shift mechanism that you are considering producing. I note that your accompanying request for confidentiality was withdrawn by an August 15, 1988 letter signed by your attorney, effective Septemb er 30, 1988.

You stated that the new transmission is characterized by two functions, a manual gear shift and an automatic gear shift, combined in a single unit. A motor vehicle incorporating the transmission does not have a clutch pedal. Operation of the transmissi on is entirely dependent on the position selected for the gear shift lever. The shift lever is located in the middle console, where it can be moved along either of two slots which are located essentially parallel to the longitudinal axis of the vehicle. The left slot (automatic function) is essentially the same as a conventional automatic transmission gear shift lever, with the following positions (in order): P R N D 3 2 1. At the D position (only) of the left slot, the gear shift can be transferred to the M (manual) position of the right slot (manual function). The right slot consists of the following positions (in order): + M -. When the gear shift lever is in the right slot, the driver can select a higher gear (+) or lower gear (-) by tapping t he shift lever. The shift lever always returns to the "M" position after being tapped. You plan to provide two shift displays, one on the middle console and the other on the instrument panel.

You stated that you believe that a dual function transmission of the type described in your letter is permitted if it meets the various requirements of Standards No. 101 and 102 and asked whether we agree with

your interpretation. You also asked three questions related to certain aspects of the transmission and related gear shift lever and shift displays. Your questions are responded to below.

By way of background information, as noted in your letter, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that its vehicles meet applicable requirements. The following represents our opinion based on the facts provided in your letter.

I agree with your basic contention that a dual function transmission of the type described in your letter is permitted if it, and the accompanying gear shift lever and shift displays, meet the various requirements of Standards No. 101 and 102. The perfo rmance requirements specified in the two standards do not prohibit dual function transmissions.

I have one primary comment concerning how you should evaluate Standards No. 101 and 102 with respect to the compliance of a vehicle equipped with the transmission. In some instances, these standards specify different requirements depending on whether a vehicle is equipped with a manual transmission or an automatic transmission. Thus, a critical issue is which of these requirements would need to be met by a vehicle equipped with your planned transmission. While you characterize the transmission as havi ng two functions, a manual gear shift and an automatic gear shift, combined in a single unit, it is our opinion that the transmission is an automatic transmission for purposes of Federal motor vehicle safety standards. It is possible, of course, to manu ally control most conventional automatic transmission, at least to some extent, by means of the gear shift lever, e.g., by shifting the lever from D to L. Your transmission would differ from a conventional automatic transmission primarily in having an a dditional means of manual control. However, the transmission would still be an automatic transmission. Vehicles equipped with the transmission would thus need to meet the requirements specified by Standards No. 101 and 102 for vehicles equipped with an automatic transmission, and not the requirements specified for vehicles equipped with a manual transmission.

I will not address your three specific questions. You stated that it appears to you that when the shift lever is in the manual slot, it is permissible to have the lever, after tapping to shift up or down, return to the original middle position, and aske d for our interpretation on this point. We agree that this basic design is permitted under Standards No. 101 and No. 102.

Your second and third questions, which I will address together, concern the shift displays. You stated that you believe that it is permissible for both of the dual shift pattern displays, i.e., the one on the middle console and the one on the instrument al panel, to be constantly visible so that the driver can simultaneously see the currently used shift mode and also the alternative, and asked for our evaluation of the point. You

also asked about he permissibility of two alternative instrument panel displays.

I will begin my discussion of these questions by identifying the relevant requirements of Standards No. 101 and 102. Section S3.2 of Standard No. 102 states that the "(i)dentification of shift lever positions of automatic transmissions . . . shall be pe rmanently displayed in view of the driver." NHTSA has previously interpreted "position" to mean the shift lever positions in relation to each other and the position that the driver has selected at the time of selection. Therefore, the display of a gear lever sequence and a gear position indicator is required for automobiles equipped with automatic transmissions. NHTSA has previously interpreted the requirement for permanent display as requiring a display that can be seen regardless of the operating mo de of the engine. Thus, it is not permissible for the required display to be visible (e.g., in the case of an electronic display, be activated) only when the key is in the ignition switch. (I note that on August 25, 1988, NHTSA published a notice of pr oposed rulemaking to amend the requirement for permanent display. A copy is enclosed.)

Standard No. 101 specifies requirements for the location, identification and illumination of automatic gear position displays. Section S5.1 requires that gear position displays must be visible to the driver under the conditions of S6. Section S6 provide s that the driver is restrained by the crash protection equipment installed in accordance with Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, adjusted in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. Section S5.3.1 and Table 2 of the standard together r equire that automatic gear position displays be illuminated whenever the ignition switch and/or the headlamps are activated. The entry in Table 2 concerning the automatic gear position display references Standard No. 102.

Your design includes the following ten shift lever positions: P R N D 3 1 2 + M -. Under section S3.2 of Standard No. 102, all of these positions must be permanently displayed, i.e., there must be a display of the 10 positions in relation to each other and there must be an indication of the position that the driver has selected. As indicated above, Standard No. 101 specifies requirements for the location, identification and illumination of automatic gear position displays.

The fact that your design would include more than one gear position display raises several issues, including (1) whether more than one display is permitted, (2) whether each display (where multiple displays are provided) must meet all of the requirements specified by Standards No. 101 and No. 102, and (3) whether multiple displays can be used to meet the requirements of the standards for gear position displays where no single display meet the requirements. It is our opinion that more than one display i s permitted. It is also our opinion that if one display meets all of the requirements of Standards No. 101 and No. 102, the additional display(s) provided voluntarily by the manufacturer need not meet any particular requirements (except for section S5.3 .5. of Standard No. 101, which specifies requirements for sources of

illumination not otherwise regulated by that standard). We have not previously found it necessary to address the issue of whether multiple displays can be used to meed the requirements of the standards for gear position displays where no single display meets the requirements. However, one commenter on the August 25, 1988 notice cited above asked whether two displays could be used together to demonstrate compliance with section S3.2 of Standard No. 102. We plan to address that specific issue in the co ntext of that rulemaking.

While is is not entirely clear from you letter, the display on the middle console may provide permanent display (including items when the ignition is not on) of the shift lever positions, i.e., a display of the 10 positions in relation to each other and an indication of the position selected by the driver. It appears, however, that illumination is not provided for this display. Given the reference in Standard No. 101 to Standard No. 102, it is our opinion that where multiple gear position displays are provided and one complies with Standard No. 102 and others do not, the requirements of Standard No. 101 must be met for the display which complies with Standard No. 102.

If the display on the console fully met the requirements of Standards No. 101 and No. 102, it would be unnecessary for the additional display on the instrument panel to also meet the standards (with the exception of section S5.3.5 of the Standard No. 101 , as noted above). I note that either of the alternative instrument panel displays shown in your letter show all of the shift lever positions. While the displays do show P R N D 3 2 1, they show either 4 3 2 1 or 4 3 M 2 1 instead of + M -. If the ins trument panel display, rather than the console display, was to be used to meet the requirements of section S3.2 of Standard No. 101, it would be necessary for the display to show the 10 actual shift lever positions, including + M -. I also assume that t he instrument panel display is not activated when the ignition is not on and thus does not provide a permanent display.

I would like to note that the discussion in the preceding paragraph should not be read as a suggestion that you change the instrument panel display to show + M - instead of 4 3 2 1 or 4 3 M 2 1. One consequence of your design is that, in the manual mode , the driver would not know what gear the car was in from either observing the location of the gear shift lever or by knowing the shift lever position (+ M or -). Your design takes care of this, however, by providing an indication of actual gear positio n on the instrument panel display. Assuming that you can meet the requirements of Standards No. 101 and No. 102 by means of the console display, we believe that it would be a desirable feature of your design to indicate actual gear position on the volun tarily provided instrument panel display.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions concerning this matter, please contact me.

Sincerely,

ID: 2700y

Mr. Don James
Contracts
Stone Bennett Corporation
l4l9 Upfield Drive
Carrollton, Texas 75006

Dear Mr. James:

This responds to your letter concerning Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. l02, Transmission Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect. You asked about the standard's display identification requirements for automatic transmission vehicles without a gear shift lever park position. Your questions are addressed below.

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

Standard No. l02 sets forth the following display identification requirements for automatic transmission vehicles without a gear shift park position:

S3.l.4 Identification of shift lever positions. . . .

S3.l.4.2 Except as specified in S3.l.4.3, if the transmission shift lever sequence does not include a park position, identification of shift lever positions, including the positions in relation to each other and the position selected, shall be displayed in view of the driver at all times when a driver is present in the driver's seating position.

S3.l.4.3 Such information need not be displayed when the ignition is in a position that is used only to start the vehicle. You asked about several similar designs for shift control consoles. In addition to including a mechanism for shifting the transmission (push buttons or toggle levers), the consoles incorporate a display which lists the particular gear position which has been selected, e.g., "R" for reverse. No other gear positions are shown. In at least some of the designs, the display is an electronic one. You asked about the "acceptability" of providing a label indicating the gear position sequence on the body of the shift control console, e.g., "1 2 D N R." Drawings provided with your letter indicate that the label would be provided directly adjacent to the gear position display.

As indicated above, section S3.l.4.2 requires identification of shift lever positions, including the positions in relation to each other and the position selected, to be displayed in view of the driver. While your designs do identify the gear position selected, they do not, in the absence of an added label, identify the shift lever positions in relation to each other. The additional label would, however, provide such information.

Section S3.l.4.2 also requires that the specified information be displayed in view of the driver at all times when a driver is present in the driver's seating position (except when the ignition is in a position that is used only to start the vehicle). The times when display is required includes situations in which the ignition is "off." Since your designs use electronic technology to identify the gear position selected, a vehicle equipped with your design might not meet this requirement, at least in the absence of a device which activates the display whenever a driver is present. It is our understanding that "permanent" display is not possible with electronic technology, due to battery drain. However, if the gear position display is turned off with the ignition (the most obvious means of avoiding battery drain), this requirement would not be met. This is because the display would not function when a driver is in the driver's seating position (before leaving the vehicle or upon entering the vehicle at a later time) while the ignition is "off."

As you are aware, NHTSA has proposed new requirements for the purpose of facilitating the use of electronic technology. See 55 FR l226, January l2, l990. If amendments are adopted based on that proposal, the analysis presented above could change.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel

Enclosure ref:l02 d:l0/l2/90