ID: 20702.ogm

Mark W. Peterson, Esq.
Suite 900
88 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402

Dear Mr. Peterson:

This responds to your letter regarding the manufacture of motorcycles. You indicate that your client intends to manufacture and sell custom motorcycles. You ask that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration confirm your understanding that no certificate of authority or other similar document from the United States government is necessary before your client can hold itself out as a manufacturer of these vehicles.

Your understanding is correct. There is no requirement that a manufacturer of vehicles obtain a certificate of authority before it can represent itself as a manufacturer of motor vehicles. There are, however, other requirements applicable to new manufacturers of motor vehicles which are addressed below.

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized by Congress (49 U.S.C. Chapter 301) to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and new items of equipment. NHTSA does not approve or certify any motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Instead, our statute establishes a "self certification" process under which each manufacturer has the responsibility to certify that its product meets all applicable standards.

The following Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (49 CFR Part 571) apply to motorcycles: Standard No. 106, Brake hoses; Standard No. 108, Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment; Standard No. 111, Rearview mirrors; Standard No. 116, Motor vehicle brake fluids; Standard No. 119, New pneumatic tires for vehicles other than passenger cars; Standard No. 120, Tire selection and rims for motor vehicles other than passenger cars; Standard No. 122, Motorcycle brake systems; and Standard No. 123, Motorcycle controls and displays. In addition, each motorcycle must have a unique vehicle identification number (VIN) in accordance with 49 CFR Part 565.

Each motorcycle must be certified by its manufacturer as meeting all applicable safety standards. The certification must be made in accordance with 49 CFR Part 567, Certification. In addition, if a vehicle contains a safety-related defect, the vehicle manufacturer must notify all owners, purchasers, and dealers of the defect and provide a remedy without charge.

A new manufacturer of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment must submit information identifying itself and its products to NHTSA not later than 30 days after it begins manufacture (49 CFR Part 566, Manufacturer Identification). I am, for your information, enclosing an information sheet, "Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment" and another sheet that describes how you may obtain copies of NHTSA's standards.

In addition, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established motor vehicle noise and emission standards. For information on EPA's requirements, please contact:

Office of Transportation and Air Quality
401 M Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20460
Mail Code 6401A
Telephone (202) 564-1682
Fax (202) 564-1686

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Otto Matheke of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-5263.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:567
d.6/14/00

ID: nht81-2.24

DATE: 05/12/81

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Stephen P. Wood for F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Severy, Inc.

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

May 12, 1981 NOA-30

Mr. James J. Schultz Severy, Incorporated 2233 El Segundo Boulevard El Segundo, California 90245

Dear Mr. Schultz:

This responds to your recent letter asking whether a 4-wheel drive pickup truck must comply with Safety Standard No. 216, Roof Crush Resistance. You also ask whether the definitions of vehicle classifications under Federal regulations are mutually exclusive.

The application section of Safety Standard No. 216, section 3, specifies that the standard applies to passenger cars. This means that the standard applies only to passenger cars. Therefore, the standard does not apply to a pickup truck.

The definitions of the basic vehicle classifications found in 49 CFR Part 571.3 are mutually exclusive. If a vehicle falls within the definition of a "truck," the vehicle is not also within the definition of a "passenger car." The definition of a passenger car does not specifically exclude trucks because the definition is based on the function of the vehicle. Thus, a passenger car is defined as a motor vehicle designed for carrying persons. A truck, on the other hand, is defined as a vehicle designed primarily for the transportation of property or special purpose equipment. Since a pickup is designed primarily for carrying property and not persons, it is a truck and not a passenger car. Each motor vehicle has a certification label attached to its door which specifies the vehicle's classification.

I hope this has clarified any questions you had concerning vehicle classification under the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.

Sincerely,

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel

April 15, 1981

Chief Council NHTSA 400 7th St. S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590 ATTENTlON: MR. OATES

Gentlemen:

We have been retained in numerous instances in litigation which involve the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and in particular their application. The issues usually involve the definitions of various vehicle types ad to what category a given vehicle belongs. Currently we are working on a case that involves a 4-wheel drive pickup truck with bucket seats. The allegations being made are that this vehicle must conform with FMVSS 216 since the definition of passenger car does not exclude this type of pickup. In order to satisfy that question and others, please send me a letter of interpretation that is specific for this instance and also general to cover other such questions. These questions are:

(1) Does federal law require a 4-wheel drive pickup with either bucket seats or a bench seat to conform to FMVSS 216?

(2) Are the definitions of vehicles in the act mutually exclusive and if so, how does one determine which category applies to any given vehicle.

Please have the letter of interpretation made official and certified.

Very truly yours,

James J. Schultz

JJS:ln

ID: nht93-3.42

DATE: May 12, 1993

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, U.S. Department of Transportation, NHTSA

TO: Bryan D. Patton -- International Automobile Enterprises, Inc., ERA Replica Automobile

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 12-16-92 from Bryan D. Patton to Paul Jackson Rice (OCC 8200)

TEXT: This responds to your letter requesting information on Federal regulations for "tubing" you use for hydraulic brake lines in replica cars. I apologize for the delay in responding. We understand that you informed Mr. John Messera of NHTSA's Enforcement Office by telephone that the tubing is steel tubing.

The answer to your inquiry is that there is no Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) that applies to metal brake tubing. FMVSS No. 106, "Brake Hoses" applies to new motor vehicles and to "brake hoses" (which include plastic tubing), brake hose end fittings, and brake hose assemblies. "Brake hose" is defined in S4 of the standard as "a flexible conduit, other than a vacuum tubing connector, manufactured for use in a brake system to transmit or contain the fluid pressure or vacuum used to apply force to a vehicle's brakes." NHTSA's longstanding position is that the term "flexible" used in the definition excludes steel tubing. (SEE, E.G., NHTSA's response to petitions for reconsideration, 39 FR 7425, February 26, 1974.) Thus, based on the information you provided by telephone, Standard No. 106 does not appear to apply to the tubing you use in manufacturing your replica cars.

You should be aware, however, that under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, your product is considered to be an item of motor vehicle equipment. As a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment, you are subject to the requirements in SS 151-159 of the Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with safety related defects. I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes those responsibilities. In the event that you or NHTSA determines that your steel tubing contains a safety-related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge.

You also ask whether "(t)he SAE standard would be used to determine such suitability in the absence of a specific federal code or regulation." Since there is no FMVSS that applies to your tubing, under federal law you are only responsible under the Safety Act for ensuring that your product is free from safety-related defects. As to your potential liability under State law, we suggest that you consult a private attorney for questions about this matter. A private attorney would also be able to answer your query as to whether, under State law, an SAE standard could be used to determine the suitability of your product.

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

ID: nht76-4.44

DATE: 09/27/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Joseph G. Bishop -- U.S. Coach Corp.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your July 7, 1976, request for information regarding the applicability of Federal motor vehicle safety standards to "rumble seat kits" for installation in passenger cars. The answers to your questions are as follows:

(1) "Is there any Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards or Regulations that would preclude the installation of rumble seats in passenger cars?"

The answer to your question is no.

(2) "What are the current Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations that would be specifically applicable to the installation of rumble seats in passenger cars?"

Installation of the rumble seats could affect compliance of the vehicle with the following safety standards: Standard No. 207, Seating Systems; Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection; Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies; Standard No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages; and Standard No. 110, Tire Selection and Rims.

We are assuming that the rumble seats would be installed in completed vehicles that are already certified, in which case the alterer would be required to meet the requirements of 49 CFR Part 567. Section 567.7 requires one who alters a previously certified vehicle, prior to its first sale, (by other than readily attachable components) to affix an additional label to the vehicle, stating that the vehicle remains in compliance with all applicable safety standards after the alteration. It should be noted that any additional weight created by the rumble seats 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 49 CFR Part 575 requires manufacturers to provide consumer information regarding vehicle stopping distance, tire reserve load, and acceleration and passing ability, at the point of first sale of the vehicle and along with the purchased vehicle. The increased weight created by the rumble seats could require modification of the information that would have to be provided.

(3) "Is there any State or Local Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that to your knowledge may preclude the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?"

We are not aware of any State or local regulations that would preclude installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles.

(4) Can you furnish a list of Government approved independent testing facilities for FMVSS compliance testing?" The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not approve independent testing facilities, nor will it recommend that any particular testing center be utilized. You might wish to contact the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators concerning this subject, at 1201 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.

(5) "Can the NHTSA make any design recommendations related to the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?"

The NHTSA does not provide engineering expertise regarding the manufactuer of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. However, the agency will answer specific questions that a manufacturer might have concerning the basis for a particular performance requirement.

(6) "Is there any future or pending legislation that may be related to the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?"

At the present time there is no pending Federal legislation relating to the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles, nor is any such legislation anticipated by the NHTSA in the immediate future.

The statements made above are directed primarily to the situation in which rumble seats would be installed prior to first sale of the vehicle, and in which the vehicle would have to be certified as being in compliance with all applicable motor vehicle safety standards. Please note, however, that the aftermarket installation of rumble seats might also be subject to Federal requirements.

Section 108(a)(2)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 provides that, with one exception, "no manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall 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 . . ." Therefore, no manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair business may install the rumble seats in a motor vehicle if he knows that such installation would alter the vehicle's compliance with any safety standard. For example, installation of rumble seats could possibly affect components of the vehicle that are subject to the requirements of safety standards such as Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, or Standard No. 301, Fuel System Integrity.

SINCERELY,

U.S. COACH CORP.

July 7, 1976

Robert L. Carter Associate Administrator - Motor Vehicle Programs National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Re: Request for FMVSS Information Covering Automotive Accessories

U.S. Coach Corporation designs, engineers and manufactures automotive accessory items for installation on passenger car vehicles at distribution centers throughout the United States. Several of our products are installed on vehicles prior to sale to the original owner at the dealer level and are therefore considered O.E.M. products requiring our certification that structural modifications are in compliance with all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.

We are currently designing and developing a "Rumble Seat Kit" that will accomodate two passengers in a seat located in the trunk or luggage compartment of passenger vehicles. My review of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 as amended, did not reveal any preclusion of the use of a 'Rumble Seat Option' in passenger vehicles.

It is our intent to proceed with our program to meet the passenger restraint requirements of Standards 208, 209 and 210 with Type 1 seat belts and installed in a manner that compliance with all Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards is preserved.

Since our Corporate intent is to manufacture and sell products that not only meet or exceed all existing Federal Safety Standards but will also afford the highest level of protection to the consumer, we are very interested in any recommendations the N.H.T.S.A. may offer pertaining to occupant protection in open vehicle passenger accomodation specifically in the "Rumble Seat" application.

Would you please respond to the following questions as well as making any comments or suggestions relating to our program:

1. Is there any Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards or Regulations that would preclude the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?

2. What are the current Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations that would be specifically applicable to the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?

3. Is there any State or Local Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that to your knowledge may preclude the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?

4. Can you furnish a list of Government approved independent testing facilities for FMVSS compliance testing?

5. Can the N.H.T.S.A. make any design recommendations related to the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?

6. Is there any furture or pending legislation that may be related to the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?

We sincerely appreciate any assistance you may provide in the above matter.

Joseph G. Bishop President

ID: 10405

Mr. Alberto Negro
Chief Executive Officer
Fiat Auto R&D U.S.A.
39300 Country Club Drive
Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3473

Dear Mr. Negro:

This responds to your letter concerning 49 CFR Part 583, Automobile Parts Content Labeling. I apologize for the delay in our response. Section 583.5(g) provides that "a manufacturer that produces a total of fewer than 1000 passenger motor vehicles in a model year" need not provide the U.S./Canadian Parts Content or Major Foreign Sources items on the vehicle label required by that regulation. You asked whether the 1000 unit threshold applies to the Alfa Romeo and Ferrari marques separately or collectively, as those marques are both owned by Fiat S.p.A. You stated that Fiat S.p.A. is the stockholder of Fiat Auto S.p.A., which produces Alfa Romeo cars, and of Ferrari S.p.A. which produces Ferrari cars. As discussed below, the 1000 vehicle threshold applies to Alfa Romeo vehicles and Ferrari vehicles separately, since they are produced by different companies.

Part 583 incorporates the statutory definition of "manufacturer" (see section 583.4(a) and 49 U.S.C. 32304(a)(7)), which reads as follows:

"Manufacturer" means a person--

(A) engaged in manufacturing or assembling new passenger motor vehicles;

(B) importing new passenger motor vehicles for resale; or

(C) acting for and under the control of such a manufacturer, assembler, or importer in connection with the distribution of new passenger motor vehicles.

The term "person" is defined at section 583.4(b) as "an individual, partnership, corporation, business trust, or any organized group of persons."

Under these definitions, both the European producer and the importer are considered manufacturers of Alfa Romeo and Ferrari passenger motor vehicles. Therefore, both the producer and the importer are subject to Part 583.

In applying section 583.5(g) in the context of your question, we would focus on the European producer rather than the importer. This is because that section provides that "a manufacturer that produces a total of fewer than 1000 passenger motor vehicles in a model year" need not provide the U.S./Canadian Parts Content or Major Foreign Sources items on the vehicle label required by that regulation. Since Alfa Romeo vehicles and Ferrari vehicles are produced by different European companies, the 1000 vehicle threshold applies to them separately. I note that, as discussed in the final rule preamble, only passenger vehicles manufactured for sale in the United States are counted toward the 1000 vehicle threshold.

This interpretation is limited to section 583.5(g). The statutory provisions for other programs administered by NHTSA have different purposes and different definitions of "manufacturer." Also, the CAFE statute has special provisions concerning manufacturers that are within a control relationship. Therefore, this interpretation should not be applied outside the context of section 583.5(g).

I hope this information has been helpful. If you have any other questions or need some additional information in this area, please contact Edward Glancy of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Philip R. Recht Chief Counsel

ref:583 d:3/14/95

ID: 17688.wkm

Mr. Sunarto Vanani
Quality Assurance Manager
P. T. Elangperdana Tyre Industry
J1n Elang, Desa Sukahati - Citeureup
Bogor 16810, Indonesia

Dear Mr. Vanani:

Please pardon the delay in responding to your inquiry to this office in which you request interpretation of regulations and standards regarding manufacture of new tires, particularly 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 569, 571, and 574. You stated that as new tire manufacturers you intend to go into the export business and you need to know the applicable standards.

For your information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has the statutory authority to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment, including tires. The law establishes a self-certification system in which vehicle and equipment manufacturers themselves certify that their products comply with all applicable FMVSSs. NHTSA enforces the standards by purchasing and testing vehicles and equipment. NHTSA also investigates safety-related defects. Each manufacturer is responsible for ensuring that its products are free of safety-related defects. If a vehicle or item of equipment is found not to comply with applicable standards or is found to have a safety defect, the manufacturer is responsible for remedying the noncompliance or defect at no charge to the customer. The manufacturer may also be subject to substantial civil penalties for violations of these requirements.

As you requested, please find enclosed copies of the following standards and regulations pertaining to the manufacture and importation of new tires:

• 49 CFR Part 569, Regrooved Tires
• 49 CFR 571.109 (Standard No. 109), New pneumatic tires
• 49 CFR 571.110 (Standard No. 110), Tire selection and rims
• 49 CFR 571.119 (Standard No. 119), New pneumatic tires for vehicles other than passenger cars
• 49 CFR 571.120 (Standard No. 120), Tire selection and rims for motor vehicles other than passenger cars
• 49 CFR Part 574, Tire Identification and Recordkeeping
• 49 CFR 575, Consumer Information Regulations

I am also enclosing 49 CFR Part 551, Procedural Rules, subpart D of which requires each importer of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, which includes tires, to designate a permanent resident of the United States as its agent for the service of legal process, notices, orders, decisions, and other applicable requirements. The resident agent must be designated and this agency so advised before tire codes can be assigned in accordance with Part 574.

For your additional information, I am enclosing copies of fact sheets entitled Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment, and Where to Obtain NHTSA's safety Standards and Regulations.

I hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have further questions or need additional information, feel free to contact Walter Myers of my staff at this address or at 001 801 10 (202) 366-2992, fax 001 801 10 (202) 366-3820.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosures
ref:109
d.6/5/98

ID: 86-5.17

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 09/12/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Davis Thekkanath

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

SEP 12 86

Mr. Davis Thekkanath Oshkosh Truck Corporation P.O. Box 2566 2307 Oregon St. Oshkosh, WI 54903-2564

Dear Mr. Thekkanath:

This responds to your letter dated May 9, 1984, regarding the placement of the vehicle identification number (VIN) on heavy duty vehicles. You asked whether a heavy duty truck must have a VIN that meets the location requirement of S4.6 of the standard or whether the VIN for such a vehicle can be located on the vehicle certification plate. As discussed below, the VIN for a truck with a gross vehicle weight ratings (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds or more can be located on the vehicle certification plate.

Standard No. 115. Vehicle Identification Number - Basic Requirements, requires passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, buses, trailers, incomplete vehicles, and motorcycles to have a VIN. S4.5 of the standard requires the VIN to appear indelibly on a part of the vehicle which is not designed to be removed except for repair or upon a separate plate which is permanently affixed to the vehicle. S4.6 of the standard specifies the location of the VIN inside the passenger compartment for passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, and trucks of 10,000 pounds or less GVWR. However, the VIN location requirement of S4.6 does not apply to vehicles with a GVWR over 10,000 pounds.

As you correctly noted, Part 567, Certification, requires the VIN to be located on the certification label of motor vehicles. Since S567.4(b) requires the certification label to be permanently affixed to the vehicle, the agency considers providing the VIN in this location as complying with the requirement of S4.5 of Standard No. 115.

I hope this information is helpful to you.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

May 9, 1986

Office of Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 7th St. S.W. Washington. D.C. 20590

Subject: Placement of Vehicle Identification Number

Gentlemen:

We are manufacturers of heavy duty vehicles of GVWR of over 10,000 lbs. In our effort to find the exact federal requirement of the placement of the vehicle identification number, we scanned through FMVSS 115 for an answer. It specifically addresses in paragraph 4.6. vehicles of GVWR 10,000 lbs or less. Does this requirement apply for us also?

We currently have the certification label of which "VIN" is a part, placed inside the cab per 49 CFR 567 paragraph 4. Does this satisfy the "VIN" placement requirement? Does the regulation require that "VIN" be placed on any other part of the vehicle in addition to that on the certification label placed inside the cab?

We would appreciate your responding in writing to us as soon as possible.

Sincerely, OSHKOSH TRUCK CORPORATION

Davis Thekkanath Sr. Supervising Engineer

DT:ks

ID: 1984-2.11

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 06/19/84

FROM: FRANK BERNDT -- NHTSA CHIEF COUNSEL

TO: JOHN S. CUCHERAN -- VICE PRESIDENT DESIGN & ENGINEERING JAC PRODUCTS, INC.

TITLE: NONE

TEXT: Dear Mr. Cucheran:

This is in reply to your letter of February 8, 1984, addressed to Mr. Vinson of this office requesting an interpretation of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108. The reply that Mr. Vinson had drafted was misplaced while being circulated for comment, and we greatly regret any inconvenience that this may have caused you. We are also replying to a telephone call Mr. Vinson made to you on June 14.

You have informed us, in essence, that there appear to be certain vehicle configurations in which photometric requirements for the center high-mounted stop lamp, at the 5 degree down position, will not be met when such vehicles are equipped with a deck-mounted luggage rack of the type manufactured by JAC Products. You have asked for an interpretation "exempting deck rack cross rails from compliance to the 5 degree down cone area"; alternatively, you request that we "consider a new rule exempting the 5 degree down cone requirements for vehicles supplied with deck mounted luggage carriers". You have also informed us that General Motors intends to use the new lamp on some of its 1985 model lines, and that because of this requirement the company will drop the rack as an optional accessory.

General Motors petitioned the agency to reconsider this requirement, asking for a modified level of performance if a vehicle is unable to meet the original values and test points at 5 degrees down. The agency denied this petition on May 17, 1984 (copy enclosed).

Absent a change in the language of the standard, we have no authority to exempt, on our own motion, "deck rack cross rails from compliance". Temporary exemptions are granted only to manufacturers of vehicles, upon their petition, and only for a limited purpose, after a period of public comment. Given the rule concerned and the factual situation you present, we see no viable basis for such an exemption petition.

We understand that your company is a manufacturer of luggage racks for motor vehicles, and General Motors intends to offer these racks on certain of its 1985 J-model passenger cars, which will be equipped with the new stop lamp as standard equipment. The J-cars will meet all the requirements in Standard No. 108 with the luggage rack installed. However, you have received inquiries as to the permissibility of blockage of the lamp by a duffel or other load on the luggage rack.

A manufacturer certifies conformance of a vehicle with Standard No. 108 in the state that it is sold to the consumer and not on the basis of how the consumer may use it. This means that the vehicle must meet Standard No. 108 with any factory option installed, or dealer option installed before sale. For example, if GM offered the J-car with both a luggage rack and a duffel, a car would have to meet center high-mounted lamp requirements with both rack and duffel in place. But there is no Federal requirement that the lamp meet requirements if the duffel is supplied by the vehicle owner. If there is any prohibition, it would be contained in a State law or municipal ordinance.

If you have any further questions, we shall be happy to answer them.

Sincerely,

ID: nht91-7.9

DATE: November 14, 1991

FROM: Edward F. Conway, Jr. -- Assistant General Counsel, Recreation Vehicle Industry Association

TO: Jerry R. Curry -- Administrator, NHTSA

TITLE: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Occupant Crash Protection; Docket No. 89-22; Notice 03

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 1/17/92 from Paul Jackson Rice to Edward F. Conway Jr. (A39; Std. 216)

TEXT:

The purpose of this letter is to request clarification and guidance concerning the roof crash resistance test procedures and pass/fail criterion for van conversions and motor homes with a raised roof, which are prescribed in the subject notice.

In its comments in response to Notice 01 of Docket No. 89-22, RVIA pointed out that the roof crash resistance test procedures and pass/ fail criterion for van conversions and motor homes should not be the same as those for a passenger car and urged NHTSA to develop special test procedures and a separate pass/fail criterion for these vehicles, which take into account their dissimilar physical characteristics.

For example, the prescribed roof crush resistance test device cannot be applied in the manner shown in figure 1 of standard 216 on many van conversions and motor homes that have a raised roof. Instead of impacting solely on the prescribed point, the device will also impact or "foul" the leading edge of the raised roof above and behind that point.

Also, the roof crash test pass/fail criterion for van conversions and motor homes should not be the same as that prescribed for a subcompact and other passenger cars.

In a typical full size passenger car, the floor to roof height is approximately 45 inches and distance between the head of a 50th percentile male seated in the driver's seat and the roof interior surface is approximately 6 inches. In smaller passenger cars, there is often considerably less head room.

However, in a van conversion or a motor home, the floor to roof height may be as much as 76 inches and the head of the 50th percentile male could be as much as 36 inches from the roof. Nevertheless, the roof crash resistance test device still may not depress the roof structure of these vehicles more than the FIVE INCHES allowed for a passenger car roof structure.

Thus, a van conversion or motor home with a roof elevated sufficiently to allow occupants to stand upright would fail the roof crush resistance test if its roof structure was depressed more than five inches, despite the fact its depressed roof structure remains well above the heads of seated occupants!

In the subject Notice, NHTSA did not resolve these issues. Instead, it merely acknowledged that these and other issues raised by commentators concerning alternative test procedures and requirements merit further consideration. NHTSA also stated that it will analyze these issues further and may propose amendments to the test procedure.

In the meantime, we respectfully request that NHTSA provide clarification and guidance concerning the roof crush resistance test procedures and the pass/fail criterion for van conversions and motor homes with a raised roof.

ID: nht95-1.100

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: March 14, 1995

FROM: Philip R. Recht -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Alberto Negro -- Chief Executive Officer, Fiat Auto R&D U.S.A.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO 9/29/94 LETTER FROM ALBERTO NEGRO TO JOHN WOMACK (OCC 10403)

TEXT: This responds to your letter concerning 49 CFR Part 583, Automobile Parts Content Labeling. I apologize for the delay in our response. Section 583.5 (g) provides that "a manufacturer that produces a total of fewer than 1000 passenger motor vehicles in a model year" need not provide the U.S./Canadian Parts Content or Major Foreign Sources items on the vehicle label required by that regulation. You asked whether the 1000 unit threshold applies to the Alfa Romeo and Ferrari marques separately or collectiv ely, as those marques are both owned by Fiat S.p.A. You stated that Fiat S.p.A. is the stockholder of Fiat Auto S.p.A., which produces Alfa Romeo cars, and of Ferrari S.p.A. which produces Ferrari cars. As discussed below, the 1000 vehicle threshold ap plies to Alfa Romeo vehicles and Ferrari vehicles separately, since they are produced by different companies.

Part 583 incorporates the statutory definition of "manufacturer" (see section 583.4 (a) and 49 U.S.C. 32304 (a) (7)), which reads as follows:

"Manufacturer" means a person --

(A) engaged in manufacturing or assembling new passenger motor vehicles;

(B) importing new passenger motor vehicles for resale; or

(C) acting for and under the control of such a manufacturer, assembler, or importer in connection with the distribution of new passenger motor vehicles.

The term "person" is defined at section 583.4 (b) as "an individual, partnership, corporation, business trust, or any organized group of persons."

Under these definitions, both the European producer and the importer are considered manufacturers of Alfa Romeo and Ferrari passenger motor vehicles. Therefore, both the producer and the importer are subject to Part 583.

In applying section 583.5 (g) in the context of your question, we would focus on the European producer rather than the importer. This is because that section provides that "a manufacturer that produces a total of fewer than 1000 passenger motor vehicles in a model year" need not provide the U.S./Canadian Parts Content or Major Foreign Sources items on the vehicle label required by that regulation. Since Alfa Romeo vehicles and Ferrari vehicles are produced by different European companies, the 1000 vehi cle threshold applies to them separately. I note that, as discussed in the final rule preamble, only passenger vehicles manufactured for sale in the United States are counted toward the 1000 vehicle threshold.

This interpretation is limited to section 583.5(g). The statutory provisions for other programs administered by NHTSA have different purposes and different definitions of "manufacturer." Also, the CAFE statute has special provisions concerning manufactu rers that are within a control relationship. Therefore, this interpretation should not be applied outside the context of section 583.5(g).

I hope this information has been helpful. If you have any other questions or need some additional information in this area, please contact Edward Glancy of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992.