ID: 18911.ztv

Mr. Bill Carpenter, Jr.
The Carpenter Group
514 Chestnut Street
Pacific Grove, CA 93950-3916

Dear Mr. Carpenter:

This is further reply to your letter of August 3, 1998, in which you submitted a request for an interpretation, subject to a claim of confidentiality. This Office informed you on October 13, that your request was granted subject to the exceptions noted therein.

Your company has developed an automotive aftermarket "security accessory" that "provides a highly visual reference for a vehicle's audible alarm device." You wish to ensure that the device does not violate any Federal safety requirements. When the audible alarm device is operating, your device provides a visual signal consisting of "a series of bright white flashes provided by an oscillating xenon strobe circuit." The unit is mounted inside the vehicle, permanently attached to the windshield and/or back window (recommended mounting location is "centered left-to-right at the highest possible point"). The unit will not operate when the ignition is on or when the vehicle is moving under its own power.

The manufacture and sale of this accessory is not subject to any Federal motor vehicle safety standard. However, the accessory is considered "motor vehicle equipment," and in the event that either its manufacturer or this agency determines that it incorporates a safety-related defect, the manufacturer must notify and remedy according to Federal law.

The installation of the accessory has the theoretical potential of affecting compliance with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 111 Rearview Mirrors. This standard specifies a field of view of a level road surface that the inside rearview mirror must provide. Mounting the accessory at a location below the recommended "highest possible point" could compromise the view of the road surface, resulting in a noncompliance with the field of view requirements. If the vehicle as originally manufactured or sold fails to meet the field of view requirement, its manufacturer or dealer must provide an outside rearview mirror on the passenger side of the vehicle. We believe that virtually all new motor vehicles are now equipped with a passenger side rearview mirror as standard equipment, and that a vehicle would continue to conform with Standard No. 111 even if the field of view of the interior rearview mirror was compromised by mounting the accessory at other than the "highest possible point."

If you have any questions, you may call Taylor Vinson of this Office (202-366-5263).

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:111
d.11/20/98

ID: 18912.ztv

Mr. Bill Cox
President
Monte Carlo Minis Limited, Inc.
2011 Pleasant Hill Church Road
Shelby, NC 28152

Dear Mr. Cox:

After you received our letter of September 29, 1998, you faxed Taylor Vinson of this Office several additional questions on October 6, 7, and 9.

You previously informed us that you were building Minis for export to Japan. On October 6 you asked "Do you want copies of the export shipping documents for proof that the new Minis are not being sold in the USA?" We appreciate your offer, but the export shipping documents would prove only that those particular Minis were not being sold in the United States. The documents would not cover any Minis that were not being exported.

You also asked "We assume that for compliance in the USA the rebuilt Minis have to be a rolling chassis, is this correct." In a second fax on the 6^th you explained that "A rolling chassis is one that rolls by itself and stops with brakes. It also has steering rack, brakes, engine and transmission and can be driven." We are not sure what your question is. As I explained on September 29:

"the agency's opinions over the years have been premised upon the fact situation of a vehicle in use being modified to incorporate a new body on its original chassis and one which retained its original title. We have said that the resulting vehicle would not be considered a new motor vehicle subject to the FMVSS."

You seem to be asking "We assume that, to excuse compliance in the USA, the rebuilt Minis have to use an original chassis with steering rack, brakes, engine and transmission." That is essentially correct. The vehicle must also retain its original title, i.e., must continue to be registered with its original model year designation.

You also asked "Why can the tires not be replaced [if they have] DOT markings?" We think you mean to ask whether a rolling chassis whose tires have DOT markings needs to have new tires when a new body is placed on the chassis. If the vehicle that results when a new body is placed on a rolling chassis is not considered a new vehicle that must comply with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards that apply to new vehicles, then it need not have new tires but may retain its old ones.

Your October 7 fax is the first indication we have had that you intend to rebuild Minis for the American market. You ask:

"If we retain the rear brakes, drums, can we upgrade to 8.4 discs in the front, which will greatly help stopping distance, but this would require upgrade to 12 inch wheels and tires for the 8.4 inch discs will not fit over the 10 inch rims."

If your "rebuilt" Mini is a "new" vehicle, it must conform with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 105, "Hydraulic Brake Systems," no matter how it is designed, as well as with all other applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

Finally, on October 9 you faxed us asking whether a statement had changed that was made to you in a letter of March 24, 1997, from this Office. That statement was "Because vehicles more than 25 years old are exempt from compliance with Federal motor vehicle safety standards, you are free to make modifications without violating our regulations." This remark was made with reference to pre-1973 Minis that you import. This remains true: a motor vehicle that is at least 25 years old at the time of importation, and which was not originally manufactured for the U.S. market, is not required to be brought into conformance with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:571
d.12/29/98

ID: 18948.ztv

Mr. Dennis G. Moore
President
Sierra Products, Inc.
1113 Greenville Road
Livermore, CA 94550

Dear Mr. Moore:

This is in reply to your letter of October 15, 1998, calling our attention to what you believe may be a violation of Federal regulations.

Specifically, you believe that two items of lighting equipment sold in the aftermarket (a turn signal lamp, a combination stop, tail, and turn signal lamp) are being marketed as suitable for use on all vehicles when, in fact, their lens area does not comply with the specifications for these lamps on vehicles whose overall width is 80 or more inches. You believe that the product and its packaging should indicate "what vehicle width these lights can legally be used on."

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 does not specify any labeling requirements for replacement lighting equipment such as that which you have brought to our attention. However, replacement lighting equipment must be certified as conforming to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. For purposes of this discussion, we shall assume that the lamps bear a DOT symbol, or that the cartons in which they are shipped bear an appropriate certification of compliance. That certification would cover conformance of replacement lamps on vehicles whose overall width is less than 80 inches. We agree that an indication of appropriate use would be helpful to the buyer, but we do not believe that the failure to do so is a violation of any Federal regulation.

There is a possibility that the lamps could be bought by a vehicle manufacturer for use as original equipment on vehicles whose overall width is 80 or more inches. If this occurs, the vehicles would fail to conform to Standard No. 108, its certification of compliance would be false and misleading, and the manufacturer would have to conduct a notification and remedy campaign. Further, to avoid a civil penalty, the manufacturer would have to demonstrate to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that it had no reason to know of the noncompliance in the exercise of reasonable care. To avoid these expenses and sanctions, manufacturers as a general rule, are familiar with Standard No. 108 and other Federal safety regulations. For this reason, we also believe it unlikely that the lamps would be used as original equipment on wider vehicles.

However, if you find any such OEM applications on vehicles whose width is 80 inches or more, please let us know about them.

If you have any questions, you may call Taylor Vinson of this Office (202-366-5263).

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:108
d.11/18/98

ID: 1983-1.19

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 02/24/83

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Koito Mfg. Co.; Shizuoka Works -- M. Iwase, Manager, Technical Administration Dept.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. M. Iwase, Manager Technical Administration Department Koito Mfg. Co., Shizuoka Works 500, Kitawaki Shimizu-Shi, Shizuoka-Ken

Dear Mr. Iwase:

This is in reply to your letter of January 27, 1983, to Mr. Elliott of this agency asking whether your "lighting device with 1 bulb and 2 functions" is permissible under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.

The front combination lamp design (parking lamp and side marker lamp functions) is permissible provided that, as you note, all color and photometeric requirements for the respective functions are met.

Sincerely,

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel

ID: 1983-1.2

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 01/07/83

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Stanley Electric Co. Ltd.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of November 23, 1982, to Mr. Elliott of this agency asking whether you may distinguish between U.S. and Japanese-manufactured lighting equipment subject to Federal Standard No. 108 by marking the lenses "U.S.A. DOT" and "JAPAN DOT", rspectively.

As you know, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has not adopted the SAE standard on equipment marking, J759c. This means that the only marking subject to Standard No. 108 is that which certifies compliance to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, the DOT symbol. We believe that the intended proximity of the words "Japan DOT" in your Japanese-manufactured equipment might create the impression that Stanley was certifying compliance to the requirements of the Japanese Ministry of Transport, rather than to those of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Therefore, we suggest that you place the word "Japan" at the end of the line rather than adjacent to the "DOT" symbol.

SINCERELY,

STANLEY ELECTRIC CO., LTD.

November 23, 1982

Att.: Marx Elliott Office of Rulemaking

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Dear Mr. Elliott,

We, Stanley Electric Co., Ltd. corporated in Japan (hereafter reffered to as STANLEY-JPN) have estblished Stanley Electric U.S. Co., Inc. corporated in London, Ohio (hereafter reffered to as STANLEY-US) with 100 % investments, and we are in process of preparing to start producing, beginning with the lighting equipments for 1984 model vehicles.

In the work we are proceeding, we are faced with a problem, the first case for us, which relates to the identification marking to be indicated on the lighting devices. So, we would like to ask you whether or not our view is right.

Honda Motor Co., LTD. (Japan) will manufacture the same type of vehicles both in Japan and in U.S.A (HONDA OF AMERICA). Therefore, their lighting devices of the same design will be manufactured by STANLEY-JPN and by STANLEY-US, and supplied to the Honda plant in each area.

Because these lighting devices are of the same design (STANLEY-JPN keeps the original drawings. And only STANLEY-JPN takes proceedings for their modifications.), we intend to indicate the same indentification making to the products made in Japan and made in U. S. A. However, in order to make a country of origin clear, it is our intention to add the marking "JAPAN" or U.S.A." to the identification marking, though it is not explained in Lighting Identification Code-SAE J759c.

The following is an example:

For products made in Japan : "STANLEY 043-6371 SAE AIST 80 JAPAN DOT"

For products made in U.S.A.: "STANLEY 043-6371 SAE AIST 80 U.S.A. DOT"

Please let us know whether or not the above view has no problem.

Thanking you in advance,

H. Miyazawa Director, Automotive Lighting Engineering Dept.

ID: 1983-1.20

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 02/24/83

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Garvin-Fram Inc. -- Jack Garvin

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Jack Garvin Vice President-Operations Garvin-Fram, Inc. 817 Albion Avenue Schaumburg, Illinois 60193

Dear Mr. Garvin:

This responds to your recent letter to Mr. Kratzke of my staff requesting information concerning any regulations applicable to the salvage and sale of farm implement tires exposed to a warehouse tire. This agency has no such regulations, and I am not aware of any Federal regulations.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended 1974 (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.), gives this agency authority to regulate motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Tires for use on motor vehicles are subject to regulation as motor vehicle equipment. Section 102(3) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C 1391(3)) defines a motor vehicle as "any vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways.." Farm implements have been determined not to be motor vehicles because they are not manufactured primarily for use on public roads. Therefore, tires for use on farm implements are not considered motor vehicles equipment, and are not regulated by this agency. The inventory sheet attached to your letter shows that these tires are of a size and strength that were designed for use on farm implements. Accordingly, you may conduct the salvage and sale of these farm implement tires as you wish without violating any of this agency's regulations.

In your telephone conversation with Mr. Kratzke, you mentioned that some tires for use on passenger cars were also involved in the fire and asked about any agency requirements for subsequent sale of these tires. With respect to those tires, the manufacturer that has certified the tires as complying with our safety standards ( by molding the letters "DOT" on the sidewall) must make a determination of whether the certification is still valid. If the manufacturer determines that the certification is still valid, the tires may be sold. If, on the other hand, the certification is not still valid, the manufacturer must remove its DOT symbol from the sidewall of the tires, and those tires coud not be sold. The means by which the manufacturer determines whether or not its certification is still valid is left completely to the discretion of the individual manufacturer. I have enclosed a 1981 interpretation explaining this more fully. I appreciate your concern for tire safety and for complying with our safety regulations.

Sincerely,

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel Enclosure

January 18, 1983

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Office of the Chief Council 400 7th St. S.W., Room 5219 Washington, D.C. Attn: Mr. Steve Kratzke

RE: Farm Implement Tires

Dear Mr. Kratzke:

Enclosed is an inventory of the farm implement tires I referred to in our phone conversation on January 18, 1983.

Basically, what we would like to know is are there any Federal regulations, particularly through the NHTSA, regarding the salvage and sale of distressed farm implement tires. In this case, the tires were involved in a fire in Zealand, Michigan, however these particular tires were approximately 50 to 75 feet away from the fire area. Additionally, there were approximately 1000 passenger tires between the fire area and implement tires, acting as an insulator from the heat.

I will await your reply in writing before disposing of the tires. Additionally, after receiving your letter, I will again contact the manufacturer to see if they would like to run tests on these tires for quality control purposes, which they have to date refused to do.

Very truly yours,

Garvin-Fram, Inc.

Jack Garvin Vice President-Operations

ID: 1983-1.21

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 03/04/83

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: E- Z- Go Textron

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of February 4, 1983, telling of your wish to build a four-wheeled light weight traffic enforcement vehicle similar to a three-wheeled machine manufactured by Cushman. You have asked whether you have to meet passenger car safety standards "or can we obtain a waiver for this vehicle only to comply with motorcycle safety standards?" You have enclosed a brochure on the vehicle you propose to modify, Textron's GX-800.

I am sorry to say that only vehicles with three wheels or less are defined as "motorcycles" for purposes of compliance with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Years ago, the agency totally excluded from the application of those standards four-wheeled vehicles with a curb weitht of 1000 pounds or less such as the GX-800. However, that exclusion was terminated in the early 1970's.

A manufacturer of 10,000 vehicles or less per year may petition for a temporary exemption from any safety standard where immediate compliance would cause substantial economic hardship. However, he must make a good faith effort to bring the vehicle into compliance during the exemption period. Although this would appear impossible with your vehicle because of its physical limitations, the agency has in the past exempted replicas of 1900-style vehicles where full compliance was manifestly not feasible. I enclose a copy of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations Part 555 which sets out the exemption procedures. If your planned vehicle would have a cargo box, similar to the one on the Cushman vehicle, your vehicle could be considered a "truck" for compliance purposes.

As a car or truck, your vehicle would also have to comply with Federal fuel economy and emissions standards. Exemptions from fuel economy standards may be sought under 49 CFR Part 525. As to the emissions standards, you should write the Environmental Protection Agency.

ENC.

February 4, 1983

Ed Glancy Office of Chief Council National Highway Traffic Safety Adm.

Dear Mr. Glancy:

I have proposed that E-Z-Go Division of Textron Inc. build and market a traffic enforcement vehicle similar to the Cushman police vehicle (see enclosure).

I also propose that this vehicle should be a four wheeled vehicle for greater stability rather than a three wheeled vehicle.

This vehicle would be a modification of one of our current vehicles with the addition of a cab, rear bed enclosure, four wheel brakes, hand parking brake, larger diameter "DOT" tire, complete "DOT" lighting package, windshield wipers, seat belts, and a top speed of 35 M.P.H. (see our brochure).

My question is: Do we have to comply with automobile safety standards or can we obtain a waiver for this vehicle only to comply with motorcycle safety standards?

This vehicle would be sold primarily to city governments.

Thank you very much for your attention to this proposal.

John C. Dobbs Project Engineer

EZ-GO TEXTRON

Police Vehicle GASOLINE/ON-ROAD *

To the police officer or security patrolman, productivity takes on a more significant meaning. To provide security, the patrol vehicle must not only save steps and work, but it must be reliable enough to assure that the officer is in the right place at the right time. It must be responsive, maneuverable, and easy to get in and out of.

That's why thousands of hardworking Cushman Police Vehicles are currently in use across the nation. Police Vehicles are a natural for sufficiently mobilizing the patrolman, marking tires, transporting emergency and or just providing weatherproof comfort for traffic control officers.

The tight 17-foot (5.2m) clearance circle and narrow 48" (1219mm) width allow the Police Vehicle-mounted officer to park and go places conventional vehicles could never go. It easily maneuvers in cramped quarters or congested traffic.

And the 18-hp air-cooled OMC engine is specially designed to handle a full day of demanding stop-and-go driving on regular gas.

There's a big 16-cubic-foot (0.45m(3)) cargo box for carrying traffic cones, warning signs or other law enforcement or first aid equipment. The power-assisted, lockable steel lid provides easy access to all enclosed contents. And there is additional open storage space between the box and the cab.

Even when the weather is bad, the Police Vehicle is ready. It has a big 15" (381 mm) wiper, an optional heater/defroster and optional cloth or lockable steel doors to provide operator visibility and comfort, even in cold climates.

The Police Vehicle comes in Police blue and white. For municipal, military or private security patrol, the Cushman Police Vehicle is the proven productivity booster. It makes the most of every manhour on any force.

(Graphics omitted) SPECIFICATIONS/MODEL 434 POLICE VEHICLE

STANDARD EQUIPMENT/DIMENSIONS/ACCESSORIES/MODIFICATIONS (Illegible Text)

** NOTE: This vehicle complies with U.S. Dept. of Transportation Motor Vehicle Safety Standards applicable to motorcycles. Operators should wear helmets which meet Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 218 and are marked with symbol "DOT" Certain states laws require wearing of helmets and special license for motorcycle operators.

Drawbar Pull

(Level Ground Maximum Speed 39 MPH) 4.2:1 Axle Ratio Speed Drawbar Speed Drawbar Engine MPH Lbs. km/h kg RPM 1st 1st 1st 1st 2000 39 430 143 195 2400 107 490 172 222 2800 124 425 200 193 3200 142 400 229 181 3600 160 360 257 163

(Maximum Speed 29 MPH) 6.5:1 Axle Ratio Speed Drawbar Speed Drawbar Engine MPH Lbs. km/h kg RPM 1st 1st 1st 1st 2000 54 500 103 272 2400 77 615 124 279 2800 89 595 143 270 3200 102 560 164 254 3600 115 500 185 227

Gradeability ** Gross Gross 4.2:1Axle 6.5 to 1 Axle Weight Weight Gradeability % Gradeability % Lbs. kg 1st 2nd 3rd 1st 2nd 3rd 1200 544 39 23 14 50 33 20 1300 590 36 21 13 50 30 18 1400 635 33 19 12 49 28 17 1500 680 31 18 11 46 26 16 1600 726 29 17 10 42 24 15 1700 771 27 16 10 40 23 14 1800 616 25 15 9 37 21 13 1900 562 24 14 9 35 20 12 2000 907 23 13 8 33 19 11 2100 953 22 12 8 31 18 10 2200 998 20 11 7 29 17 9

* Gross vehicle weight equals weight of the vehicle, plus operator, plus payload.

** Calculated equivalent based on available power efficiency and axle ratio.

(Graphics omitted)

THE E-Z-GO GX-800. THE LASTING IMPRESSION IT LEAVES WON'T BE ON YOUR TURF.

E-Z-GO introduces a new concept in landscape maintenance. The light-turf vehicle that's perfect when you need a utility car, and a truck is too much.

It's as strong as an ox, but gentle as a lamb.

The E-Z-GO GX-800 is the perfect utility vehicle for landscaping. It's light and gentle on your valuable grounds. Yet it's strong enough to carry loads, climb hills, and ride in bad weather. The body is constructed of Galvanneal, steel plating that's treated with rust preventive zinc Oxide. So they drive the fairway longer than any other utility vehicle. The chassis is welded high-yield tubular steel. It features a protective vinyl bumper strip, and a four-way diamond pattern treadplate design on the bed makes the GX-800 stronger all around. (Loadbed is not Galvannealed).

Put all your garden tools to bed.

The GX-800 has a 44" x 40" x 8" loadbed in the back that's deep enough to carry all your turf tools. It carries up to 800 lbs., and heavy duty springs and shocks make the ride smooth and comfortable, no matter how tough the rough. The loadbed tilts for complete access to drive package. And the sides and tailgate are easily removed.

This beast is a beauty on your budget.

You can afford three GX-800 vehicles for the price of one heavy-duty pickup truck. It's light enough so that it's economical on fuel and requires only standard maintenance. And it'll last years and years because it's engineered by E-Z-GO.

The GX-800 is suited for anything.

From the electronic ignition, to the dual rear brake, to the hypoid ring and pinion differential, the E-Z-GO GX-800 light turf vehicle is strong enough for any landscaping job. Yet it is light enough so it won't be a landscraper. It's perfect for golf courses, cemeteries, public parks, office grounds-keeping, or large, private residential landscaping.

The GX-800 is especially a utility runabout. It's a tremendous timesaver for the superintendant who has to get around the grounds to oversee his crew. It can take the shortest route to its destination. For more information, call your nearest E-Z-GO representative.

E-Z-GO GX-800 LIGHT TURF VEHICLE.

CHASSIS/POWERTRAIN SPECIFICATIONS.

Engine: 2 cycle, 244CC single cylinder air cooled, oil injected with electronic ignition. Drive Train/Transmission: Variable speed, fully automatic, forward and reverse. Torque Converter: Automatic, variable speed, dry type. Differential: Hypoid ring and pinion, 12.25 to 1 ratio.

Brakes: Mechanical, drum type, dual rear wheel brakes with over 47 square inches swept area. Foot operated parking brake with automatic release. Electrical System: External starter/generator, 12 volt negative ground system, with forward and reverse starting. Speed: Governed at 12 MPH, adjustable. Air Cleaner: Dry, replaceable cartridge. Carburetor: Fixed jet, float bowl with separate fuel pump. Suspension: Front: Heavy duty leaf springs with shocks. Rear: Heavy duty coil springs with heavy duty shocks. Steering: Rack and pinion. Fuel System: 6 gallon capacity. DIMENSIONAL SPECIFICATIONS. Weight: 810 lbs, dry. Fuel capacity 42 lbs. Length: 106 inches. Width: 48 inches (at rear wheels). Height: 47 inches (at steering wheel). Floor Height: 11 inches. Load Bed Height: 24 inches. Ground Clearance: 5 inches (at differential). Seat Height: 29 inches. Wheel Base: 71 inches. Front Tread Centers: 32-1/2 inches.

Rear Tread Centers: 39 inches. Turning Clearance Diameter: 23 feet Tires: 18 X 8:50 X 8 Softrac. Load Capacity: 800 lbs. (including operator and passenger). Load Bed Size: 44 inches wide, 40 inches long, 8 inches deep. Capacity: 8 cubic feet. FEATURES AND OPTIONS. Features: 1. Load Bed: Tilts for complete access to drive package. Removeable sides and tailgate. 2. Chassis: Welded high yield tubular steel. 3. Body: Galvanneal body and heavy duty four-way diamond pattern treadplate truck bed. 4. Body Protection: Wrap-around vinyl bumper/rub strip, chrome front bumper, and flexible rear fenders. 5. Battery: Delco Freedom II, maintenance free. 6. Safety: Key switch and electric horn. OPTIONS: Lighting Package Chrome Hubcaps Hour Meter Turn Signals Specifications subject to change without notice.

ID: 1983-1.22

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: MARCH 4, 1983

FROM: HOUTAN MOSTAGHIM -- VICE PRESIDENT, PAN UNITED

TO: CHIEF COUNSEL -- NHTSA

TITLE: DOG CLIP.

ATTACHMT: MEMO DATED 3-21-83, FROM FRANK BERNDT, FROM HOUTAN MOSTAGHIM, NOA-30

TEXT: The purpose of this letter is to request official legal interpretation on a piece of safety device which, this company is currently intending to import and distribute in the territories of the United States.

This device refers to a so called "complimentory buckle component" of a seat belt, which is engaged and secured in a seat buckle component.

This device is designed to be attached and secured to the collar or homes of a pet in any vehicle with seat belt buckle component, in order to protect the driver from the pet's sudden and gross moves inside the vehicle.

For further clarification and explanation of this device, I am enclosing a copy of respective patent document for your kind review. This document is accompanied with a picture of the device in actual size, plus some other informative material and pictures.

What we need to find out are: 1-) Does this device apply to any of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety regulations? 2-) Do we need to obtain any kind of import permit from your organization to proceed with the importation of the device? 3-) Based on the regulations, does the device require any testing and licensing prior to actual commencement of importation? 4-) What types product liabilities should our company entertain, as the sole importer and distributor of this device? 5-) Can these liabilities be covered through appropriate insurance coverages. And if so, please kindly, supply us with a list of insurance companies that are currently involved in such underwritings. After the review of the material, you would realize that, this device is primarily designed to increase safety for the driver and other passengers, rather than the pet's. Therefore, we believe the prompt promotion and marketing of this device in the U.S., would directly contribute to relative improvement in highway and traffic safety concerns of your respected organization.

We would strongly entertain your suggestions, comments and advise on this matter. I am looking forward to your kind response, mean while I remain. ENCLS: AS STATED IN TEXT

ID: 1983-1.23

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 03/11/83

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Anton Ostermeier

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letter of February 4, 1983, supplying the further information we requested on January 28.

The 1955 Mercedes replica which you contemplate building is a hybrid of new and old parts. The body is of your construction and consists of new parts. You fabricate the chassis using new tubing; however, its front cross member may be either a new replacement Mustang part (1974-1978 models) or one actually taken from a vehicle in use. Similarly, the front suspension, differential and rear suspension, and transmissions may be new replacement parts or taken from vehicles in use. You will employ used rear wheel cylinders in the braking system and used engines (either a 1964 Chrysler Slant 6 or a 1969 Chevrolet V-8). Any equipment that has previously been used will be rebuilt to the manufacturer's specifications, and new parts will be incorporated where necessary.

As a general rule, the agency has no requirements for "used" vehicles. Whether a vehicle is treated as new or used depends on the origin of its parts. For example, we regard an assemblage consisting of a new body on the chassis of a vehicle previously registered for use on the public roads as a "used" motor vehicle and therefore not subject to the Federal motor vehicle standards. On the other hand, the agency will consider a truck newly manufactured when an old cab is replaced with a new one unless at least the engine, transmission, and drive axle of the assembled vehicle are not new and at least two of these components were taken from the same vehicle.

The vehicle you propose to manufacture is somewhat different from either of these examples, but we have concluded that it is a "new" motor vehicle and must comply with Federal motor vehicle safety standards applicable to new passenger cars. Not only do previously unused parts appear to predominate in your plans, but, in addition, the old parts that are used will be rebuilt with new parts where necessary, to the manufacturer's original specifications. With the exception of the 1964 engine, the rebuilt components were originally used in vehicles manufactured to meet the Federal motor vehicle safety standards and there appears no reason why your product may not also be manufactured to comply, even though it is a replica of a 1955 car.

Use of the 1964 engine could raise problems of compliance with Safety Standard No. 124, Accelerator Control Systems, and with Safety Standard No. 301, Fuel System Integrity. However, in that event, we believe that you (as a producer of less than 10,000 vehicles a year) would be eligible to apply for a temporary exemption from those standards, or any other standard where immediate compliance would cause you substantial economic hardship. I enclose an information sheet which tells you where you may obtain a copy of our regulations, including the standards and temporary exemption petition procedures.

If you have further questions, we would be happy to assist you.

ENC.

U.S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel

February 4, 1983

Dear Mr. Berndt,

General Description of the products used in the construction of the 300SL Mercedes Replica by Gullwing Car, Inc. 19240 South Vermont Avenue, Gardena, Calif. 90248. (213) 324-9847 as follows.

Frame;

The frame is of square steel tubing construction, using new tubing. Sizes are as follows;

1" x 1" x .065

1" x 1" x .090

.75 x .75 x .065

.75 x .75 x .125

3" x 2.5" x .375

3/16" flat stock

The front cross member is 1973 to 1979 Mustang 11. This assembly is purchased both new old stock and used. It is welded into our frame assembly using original weld points, angles, forward aft locations and ground clearances. Even the axel weight has been maintained as prescribed for the 1973 to 1979 Mustang 11 manufacturing specifications. This unit is assembled and jig built as shown by previously supplied pictures the Dept. of the Chief Counsel, this insures the product uniformity.

Bumpers both front and rear;

Bumpers are constructed of stamped nickel chrome plated steel as orginally manufactured for the 1953 thru 1957 Gullwing 300SL. It is bolted to the frame through spring steel brackets as was the original production car.

Front Suspension;

The front suspension used is the 1973 to 1979 Mustang 11 and is used in its entirety. This suspension is purchased both new old stock and used. When purchased used, units are completely disassembled. Basic units are inspected to assure conformity to the original manufacturers specifications, then reassembled using new parts. i.e. all new bushings, all new bearings, bearing races and seals. The stearing gear is stock 1973 to 1979 Mustang 11 rack and pinion and is installed as prescribed for the 1973 to 1979 Mustang 11 by the manufacturer. Front end alignment as to Caster, Camber, Toe-in, suspension travel and clearances are maintained as originally designed.

Differential and Rear Suspension;

The products used is the 1979 to 1983 Ford Fairmont rear suspension and differential, it is used in its entirety unaltered. It is installed in our frame to the exact same specifications as it would be installed in the 1979 to 1983 Ford Fairmont frame, i.e. clearance, mounting points, angles and travel. These specifications and locations are maintained by the jig building of our frame. These units are purchased both new old stock and used. When purchased used they are disassembled, inspected and rebuilt to original manufacturer specifications using new bearings, bearing races, seals, gaskets and gears where ever necessary.

Brakes;

The rear brakes are drum type 10" x 1 and 3/4" hydraulicly operated. They are the original brakes for the 1978 to 1983 Ford Fairmont. They are installed unaltered and in there entirety. New brake lining and wheel cylinders are used and assembled to the original manufacturers specifications. The front brakes are of Disc type and are used in there entirety as prescribed for the 1972 to 1979 Mustang 11. The lining is new and the wheel cylinders are rebuilt with new parts to original manufacturers specifications.

Brake Lines;

Flexible brake lines both front and rear are original equipment type.

Master Cylinder;

Master cylinder is the duel type vacuum boosted as used in 1979 to 1983 Ford Fairmont. Hydraulics to wheels is supplied through compatable differential valve and andoized double flared steel tubing and is of the sizes and routing using the practices of the manufacturers. note: Vehicle weight is between 2,050 lbs and 2,500 lbs.

The brakes system employed is capable of handling a 3,200 to 3,800 lb vehicle and is more than adequate.

Engines;

Two engines are available in our Gullwing Replica. They are 1964 225 cubic inch slant 6 Chrysler engine and the 1969 350 cubic inch V-8 Chevrolet engine. The engines are purchased used and rebuilt to the original manufactures specifications, using new parts where ever necessary.

Transmission;

The transmission selections are as follows, for the Chrysler slant 6 the Borge Warner 4 speed standard shift transmission and the aluminum automatic 3 speed torque flight transmission. For the Chevrolet V-8 engine the 4 speed Munci transmission and 350 hydromatic transmission are used. These units are purchased both new old stock and used. When purchased used they are completely disassembled, inspected and reassembled to manufacturers specifications, using new parts when ever necessary.

Body;

Body is constructed of four layers, first layer of epoxy, second layer of 2oz fiberglass matting and epoxy, third layer 4oz fiberglass matting and epoxy, fourth and inside final layer of 2oz fiberglass cloth and epoxy. Fiberglass sequence is layed up in a female mold and Kiln dried for optimum cure and strength. Through temperature control. note: enclosed in the windshield frame is a 3/4" x 3/4" x .090 square tubing. Center section of roof contains steel support and hinge box, a rear window support also of 3/4" x 3/4" x .090 square tubing. The center hinge box assembly is bolted to front and rear window support tubing. When completely assembled driver and passenger are protected 360 degrees with steel bolted to frame assembly. On both left and right sides by no less than 8 inches of bridged frame work, not to mention inner and outer epoxied fiberglass panels and padded leather upholstery.

Lights;

Headlights are seal beam type, rear tail light lens are the reflector type required. Fully automatic signal and hasard lights are incorperated.

Glass;

All glass is new. Front windshield is two layered safety glass as prescribed by D.O.T.S. Door glass left and right is of the tempered type required by D.O.T.S. Left and right 1/4 windows, is also of tempered type required by D.O.T.S. As is the back window glass.

Rims and Tires;

Rims and tires are both 14" and 15", customers obtion. They will be supplied new old stock and new only.

The above is a summary of my replica's construction. I hope this supplies you with the information you requested to assist me with my list of requirements. Please contact me for any further information you may require.

ID: 1983-1.24

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 03/11/83

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: J.V.R. Enterprises -- Robert A. Wirffel

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Robert A. Wirffel J.V.R. Enterprises 8511 No. Canterbury Avenue Sun Valley, California 91352

Dear Mr. Wirffel:

This in reply to your letter of February 6, 1983, to Mr. Vinson of my staff regarding the legality under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 of your "Safe-T-Signal" directional indicator. The signal, and 8-inch amber arrow, is located under the right side of a semi-trailer, approximately at mid point, and is intended to warn vehicles in the adjacent right traffic lane that the semi-trailer makes wide right turns. The system supplements the trailer's existing turn signal, as we understand it.

There is nothing in Standard No. 109 that prohibits use of your system as it does not appear to impair the effectiveness of the lighting equipment, such as turn signals, required by Standard No. 108 as original equipment. However, you must insure that it is permitted in States in which the device is likely to be used.

We note the statement in your letter that the amber arrow is "D.O.T. approved" and in your descriptive sheet as well, plus the statement that is "conforms to applicable federal motor vehicle standards (C.H.P approved) ." This is legally incorrect, as the U.S. Department of Transportation does not "approve" lighting equipment , nor does Standard No. 108 specify requirements with which a supplementary turn signal system must conform. If you wish to assure prospective purchasers that Federal requirements as "Permissible under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard NO., 108."

Sincerely,

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel