ID: 15085.mls

Mr. Randall Carroll
ASTEC Industries
4101 Jerome Avenue
Chattanooga, TN 37407

Dear Mr. Carroll:

This responds to your inquiry to Mr. David Coleman of this agency's Safety Assurance Office asking whether construction equipment you manufacture, asphalt plants and soil incineration systems, are motor vehicles that would have to comply with the applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Your letter was referred to my office for reply.

Before addressing your question, I would like to note that our answer is limited to the "asphalt plants" and "soil incineration systems" whose attributes you describe in your letter, and to other of your vehicles with similar attributes. We cannot ascertain whether our answer applies to all of your "other miscellaneous construction equipment" without knowing more about the equipment, such as their intended use of the highways. The 10 sketches you provided of several types of your equipment are incomplete in this respect. If you are interested in an opinion on a product other than asphalt plants or soil incineration systems, please provide a full description of the equipment.

You state that the equipment is intended for off road use and has axles and king pins attached to enable the equipment to be transported between job sites. You further state that the equipment stays at one job site from a few months to several years and is thus infrequently transported over public roads. As explained below, we believe that the types of equipment you describe would not be "motor vehicles" under Federal law.

As way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) interprets and enforces the laws under which the Federal motor vehicle safety standards are promulgated. NHTSA's statute defines the term "motor vehicle" as follows:

"Any vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways, except any vehicle operated exclusively on a rail or rails."

In the past, we have concluded that this statutory definition does not encompass mobile construction equipment, such as cranes and scrapers, which use the highway only to move between job sites and which typically spend extended periods of time at a single job site. In such cases, the on-highway use of the vehicle is merely incidental and is not the primary purpose for which the vehicle was manufactured. Other construction vehicles, such as dump trucks, frequently use the highway going to and from job sites, and stay at a job site for only a limited time. Such vehicles are considered motor vehicles, since the on-highway use is more than "incidental."

Based on the available information, it appears that the two types of construction equipment you describe are not "motor vehicles" within the meaning of the statutory definition. This conclusion is based on statements in your letter that the equipment typically spends extended periods of time at a single site and only uses the public roads infrequently to move between job sites. Thus, the agency would consider the use of the construction equipment on the public roads to be merely incidental. Since these types of construction equipment are not motor vehicles, they would not be subject to the Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

If NHTSA were to receive additional information indicating that your construction equipment used the roads more than on an incidental basis, then the agency would reassess this interpretation. If your equipment were found to be a motor vehicle, you would be a motor vehicle manufacturer, and would be required to submit identification information to this agency in accordance with 49 CFR Part 566, Manufacturer Identification. You would also be required to certify that each vehicle complies with all applicable Federal safety standards. This certification procedure is set out in 49 CFR Part 567.

Please note that since a State may require an off-road vehicle to be registered, you may wish to contact the Department of Motor Vehicles in any state in which your products will be sold or used about requirements for the use of the vehicles.

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

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
ref:VSA
d.7/8/97

ID: 15088.ztv

Mr. Jeff Hymer
President & CEO
Safety Hi-Lites
P.O. Box 13053
Ann Arbor, MI 48113

Dear Mr. Hymer:

This is in reply to your letter of March 12, 1997, which, inexplicably, did not reach our office until April 21. I apologize for the delay.

You wish to market your "Safety Hi-Lites" lamp system as an aftermarket accessory, and, eventually, as original equipment. You wish to know if there are any Federal laws or restrictions against marketing the lamps, which you say "currently meet SAE #J1395 and SAE #J1398."

From the illustrations you provided, it appears that the "Safety Hi-Lites" lamp system comprises two red lamps that operate as stop lamps, plus a third amber lamp in the shape of an arrow that serves as a turn signal. The illustrations show the system mounted at the upper corners of large trucks, truck tractors, and trailers which have a rectangular configuration when viewed from the rear. The system will also flash automatically if a truck tractor separates from a trailer, and if the vehicle rolls over, jackknifes, or is impacted from the rear.

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 requires large commercial vehicles of the types shown in your illustrations (i.e., those with an overall width of 80 inches or more) to be equipped with clearance lamps, to indicate the overall width of the vehicle and to be located as near the top as practicable. Your illustrations do not show clearance lamps (or identification lamps for that matter) on the configurations depicted. In order to conform with Standard No. 108, a truck's clearance lamps will occupy the space where the illustrations have located the Safety Hi-Lites. Thus, for sale as an aftermarket accessory, the lamp system will have to be located adjacent to the clearance lamps, that is to say, either inboard of them or under them, and far enough away as not to prevent photometric compliance of the clearance lamps.

Your letter is unclear whether you wish to sell "Safety Hi-Lites" as an original equipment accessory, or as equipment fulfilling the requirements of Standard No. 108 for original equipment stop lamps and turn signal systems. We are pleased to see that the stop and turn signal functions have been designed to conform to SAE standards, however, of the two, only SAE J1395 APR85 is incorporated by reference in Standard No. 108. The other, SAE J1398 MAY95 is a newer version than the standard that is incorporated by reference. The correct version is SAE J1398 MAY 85. However, Table II of Standard No. 108, which applies to the vehicles you foresee using "Safety Hi-Lites," prescribes a maximum mountingheight of 72 inches from the road for stop lamps, and 83 inches for turn signal lamps. In all likelihood, the "Safety Hi-Lites" system will be mounted above 83 inches, which means that the vehicle manufacturer could use the system only as an original equipment supplement to the stop and turn signal lamps required to conform with the mounting height requirements of Standard No. 108.

Because "Safety Hi-Lites" are supplementary stop and turn signal lamps, Standard No. 108 prescribes no requirements for them. Original lighting equipment that supplements lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108 is not permissible if it impairs the effectiveness of the required lighting equipment, and there is a prohibition of similar effect covering installation of aftermarket lighting equipment. From the information available, it does not appear that "Safety Hi-Lites" would have an impairing effect on original lighting equipment if properly located.

Since it appears that some of the vehicles on which your system is placed may be subject to regulation by the Federal Highway Administration, we have asked the Office of Motor Carrier Research and Standards for its opinion, and it has advised that the system is acceptable under its laws.

You have also asked the requirements involved to receive DOT approval. We have no authority to approve or disapprove items of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment; we simply provide interpretations as to the relationship of supplementary lighting systems to the statutes and regulations that we administer.

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

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
ref:108
d.6/16/97

ID: 15091.ogm

Mr. Jerry Roberts
Application Specialist
Vehicle Safety Systems
601 N.W. 25th Avenue
Ocala, FL 34475

Dear Mr. Roberts:

This responds to your letter of April 21, 1997, concerning a seat belt system you have designed. You asked us to evaluate whether the design would comply with S7.1.2.1 of Standard No. 208.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under 49 U.S.C. chapter 301, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that its vehicles or equipment comply with all applicable standards. The opinion provided below is based on the facts provided in your letter.

As described in your letter, the seat belt assembly at issue is a Type 2 assembly intended for use in forward-facing rear seats in conversion vans. The lower end of the belt is attached to the vehicle floor and the upper end is attached to a retractor mounted on the roof support. The belt itself is fed through a crescent shaped slot in a mounting plate fixed to the roof rail. This crescent shaped slot allows the belt to assume different positions relative to a seat occupant depending on the height at which the belt is latched when fastened. The arc described by the crescent shaped slot is "preferably at least 5 cm longer than the width of the webbing."

Standard No. 208 was amended in a final rule published on

August 3, 1994, (59 FR 39472) to improve the fit and increase the comfort of safety belts for a variety of different sized occupants. S7.1.2.1 of Standard 208 reads as follows:

As an alternative to meeting the requirement of S7.1.2, a Type 2 seat belt assembly shall provide a means of automatically moving the webbing in relation to either the upper anchorage, or the lower anchorage nearest the intersection of the torso belt and the lap belt. The distance between the midpoint of the webbing at the contact point of the webbing and the anchorage at the extreme adjustment positions shall be not less than five centimeters, measured linearly.

According to your letter, the crescent-shaped slot located in the guide plate near the upper anchorage automatically moves the webbing in relation to the upper anchorage when the belt is latched around different sized users. This guide plate, which attaches to vehicle structure at the roof rail, is also an anchorage. S3 of Standard No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages, defines a seat belt anchorage as "...any component, other than the webbing or straps, involved in transferring seat belt loads to the vehicle structure, including, but not limited to, attachment hardware ..."

If the distance, measured linearly, between the midpoint of the webbing at the contact point with the guide plate at the extreme adjustment positions is greater than five centimeters, it appears that your design would meet the requirement of S7.1.2.1. However, as an alternative means of providing the adjustment specified in S7.1.2, S7.1.2.1 requires that a Type 2 assembly shall provide a means of automatically moving the webbing in relation to the upper anchorage or the lower anchorage nearest the intersection of the torso and lap belts. If, in operation, the system you have designed does not automatically move the webbing in relation to the upper anchorage to accommodate occupants, the system you have designed would not meet S7.1.2.1. I note, however, that NHTSA is not able to make such a determination from looking at your drawings. Any determination of compliance would require testing of the system as installed in a vehicle.

NHTSA compliance testing has also revealed that guide plates, d-rings and other guiding devices can tear or sever webbing under the severe loads experienced in an impact. The guide plates incorporated in your design should therefore be constructed in a fashion which will minimize this risk.

You should also be aware that under 49 U.S.C. 30118-30122, each motor vehicle manufacturer must ensure that its vehicles are free of safety-related defects. If NHTSA or the manufacturer of a vehicle determines that the vehicle contains a safety-related defect, the manufacturer must notify purchasers of the defective vehicle and remedy the problem free of charge. Compliance with applicable standards does not relieve the manufacturer of responsibility in the event a defect exists.

I hope this information has been helpful. If you have any other questions, please contact Otto Matheke of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-5253.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
ref:208
d:7/10/97

ID: 15100.ztv

Mr. Lawrence Rucker
3924 O'Bannon Drive, Apt. A
Jackson, Mississippi 39213

Dear Mr. Rucker:

This is in reply to your recent undated letter that arrived in this office on May 5. You write requesting a manufacturer identification number for your "new style of high-mounted brake lights." You have been told "that everything seems to be within the federal code of 108."

This refers to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment.

My letter is based on the assumption that you intend these lamps to replace the center high-mounted stop lamp rather than to be mounted as pairs to supplement a vehicle's two lower-mounted stop lamps. As you say, your stop lamps are unique because of their design and shape, to judge by the dollar sign and cocktail glass drawings that you enclosed. As replacement equipment, your lamps would have to meet the appropriate requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 and be certified as meeting them.

Standard No. 108 does not specify permissible shapes for the center stop lamp but it does require the lamp to comply with minimum and maximum photometric (light output) values measured at certain identified test points, as set out in Table 10 of the standard. The test points are, in essence, a grid and control to some extent the design of the lamp. For example, it appears to us unlikely that stylized lamps such as yours can meet the requirements of Table 10, or the requirement that the effective projected luminous area not be less than 4 square inches. If you intend the lamp to be located on the parcel shelf, it will have to conform when photometered through the rear glass and at the orientation in which it is installed, and minimize reflections from the light on the rear window that might be visible in the rear view mirror to the driver.

You may obtain a copy of Standard No. 108 and the agency's other regulations by placing an order with the U.S. Government Printing Office, whose telephone number is (202) 512-0133. The volume is "Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 400-999." You will find Standard No. 108 at Section 571.108. The portions that apply to center high-mounted stop lamps are paragraphs S3, S5.1.1.27, S5.3.1.8, and S5.4, Tables III and IV, and Figure 10 (photometrics).

If any lamp design does not conform, it cannot be manufactured and sold as replacement equipment without violating Title 49, United States Code, Section 30112(a). A civil penalty of up to $1,100 may be imposed for each lamp sold, up to a maximum of $880,000.

However, Standard No. 108 does not apply to center stop lamps sold for use on vehicles that were never required by Standard No. 108 to have them in the first place. The center lamp has been required on passenger cars manufactured beginning September 1, 1985, and on light trucks and vans manufactured beginning September 1, 1993. Thus you would not be in violation of Federal law by selling your lamps as presently designed, for use on vehicles produced before these dates. However, they might not be allowed under the laws of Mississippi or other states where you may want to sell them. We aren't conversant with local laws and suggest you ask the Department of Motor Vehicles in your state for advice.

We have no "manufacturer identification number" for producers of lighting equipment, but we do require manufacturers of replacement lighting equipment to file a simple identification statement with us not later than 30 days after beginning manufacture of their products. This regulation is known as 49 CFR Part 566, and can be found in the same volume as Standard No. 108, reference above..

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

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
ref:108
d:6/11/97

ID: 15103.wkm

Mr. R. C. Brown
9030 Congressional Parkway
Potomac, MD 20854

Dear Mr. Brown:

This responds to your April 28, 1997 telephone conversation with Walter Myers of my staff and to your follow-up letters, in which you ask whether you may have a vehicle modifier move the seat in your 1996 Cadillac two inches farther to the rear to make it physically possible for you to operate the vehicle.

Modifiers are permitted to modify vehicles without obtaining this agency's permission, but are subject to certain regulatory limits on the type of modifications they may make. In certain limited situations, we have exercised our discretion in enforcing our requirements to provide some allowances to a repair business which cannot conform to our requirements when making modifications to accommodate the special needs of persons with disabilities. Because your situation is among those given special consideration by NHTSA, this letter should provide you with the relief you seek.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized by law to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) that establish performance requirements for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Federal law further provides that manufacturers must certify that their products conform to all applicable FMVSSs before those products can be offered for sale. In addition, Federal law prohibits manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and commercial repair businesses from knowingly "making inoperative" any device or element of design installed on or in a vehicle in compliance with an applicable FMVSS. In general, the "make inoperative" provision requires repair businesses to ensure that they do not remove, disconnect, or degrade the performance of safety equipment installed in a vehicle in compliance with an applicable FMVSS. Violations of this prohibition are punishable by civil fines up to $1,100 per violation.

In this case, moving a seat, whether or not the seat belts are also moved, could affect compliance with four standards: No. 207, Seating Systems; No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection; No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies; and No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages. In situations such as yours, however, where the modification must be made to accommodate a disability, we have been willing to consider violation of the "make inoperative" provision a purely technical one justified by public need. Accordingly, this agency will not institute enforcement proceedings against a repair business that modifies the seat on your vehicle to accommodate your condition.

We caution, however, that only necessary modifications should be made to the seat, and the person making the modifications should consider the possible safety consequences of those modifications. For example, in moving a seat, it is essential that the modifier ensure that the seat is solidly anchored in its new location. You should also be aware that the occupant of a seat that has been moved rearward may have less protection in a crash if the seat is too far rearward relative to the anchorages of the safety belts for that seat. Finally, if you sell your vehicle, we strongly encourage you to advise the purchaser of the modifications you have made to the vehicle.

I hope this information is helpful to you. If you have any questions or need further information, please feel free to contact this office at this address or by fax at (202) 366-3820.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
ref:207
d:6/24/97

ID: 15104.ogm

Mr. Jurgen Babirad
Rehabilitation Technology Associates
P.O. Box 540
Kinderhook, N.Y. 12106

Dear Mr. Babirad:

This responds to your letter of April 16, 1997, requesting information regarding modification of a motor vehicle for a driver with physical disabilities. Specifically, you request a waiver of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, as the modifications proposed for this particular vehicle will replace the driver's seat with a wheelchair restraint system and remove the driver from the vicinity of the air bag originally installed in the vehicle.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)is authorized under Title 49, Chapter 301 of the U.S. Code to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards that apply to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Chapter 301 prohibits any person from manufacturing, introducing into commerce, selling, or importing any new motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment unless the vehicle or equipment item is in conformity with all applicable safety standards. NHTSA does not approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products. Instead, Chapter 329 establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards.

One of the standards established by NHTSA, Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection (49 CFR 571.208) requires some type of occupant protection system to be installed at all designated seating positions in all passenger cars. Different installation requirements apply depending on the seating position within the vehicle and the date of manufacture.

For passenger cars manufactured on or after September 1, 1989, but before September 1, 1996, Standard No. 208 requires automatic crash protection at every front outboard seating position.

Automatic crash protection systems protect their occupants by means that require no action by vehicle occupants. Compliance with the automatic crash protection requirements of Standard No. 208 is determined in a dynamic crash test. That is, a vehicle must comply with specified injury criteria, as measured on a test dummy, in a 30 mph barrier crash test. The two types of automatic crash protection used to satisfy this requirement are automatic safety belts (which help to assure belt use) and air bags (which supplement safety belts and offer some protection even when safety belts are not used). For passenger cars manufactured on or after September 1, 1996 and before September 1, 1997, 95 percent of a manufacturer's production must have air bags at the forward outboard seating positions.

Trucks and multipurpose passenger vehicles (with a GVWR of 8,500 pounds or less)manufactured after September 1, 1994 and before September 1, 1997 are required to provide either automatic crash protection or safety belts at the front outboard seating position. During this period, manufacturers must equip certain percentages of their vehicles with automatic crash protection systems. However, section S4.2 of Standard No. 208 contains an exclusion from the automatic protection requirement for trucks and multipurpose passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000 pounds or less. The exclusion applies to "vehicles manufactured for operation by persons with disabilities," defined as:

vehicles that incorporate a level change device (e.g., a wheelchair lift or a ramp) for onloading or offloading an occupant in a wheelchair, an interior element of design intended to provide the vertical clearance necessary to permit a person in a wheelchair to move between the lift or ramp and the driver's position or to occupy that position, and either an adaptive control or special driver seating accommodation to enable persons who have limited use of their arms or legs to operate a vehicle. For purposes of this definition, special driver seating accommodations include a driver's seat easily removable with means installed for that purpose or with simple tools, or a driver's seat with extended adjustment capability to allow a person to easily transfer from a wheelchair to the driver's seat.

In general, repair businesses are permitted to modify vehicles without obtaining permission from the NHTSA to do so, but are subject to certain regulatory limits on the type of modifications they may make. Manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and repair businesses are prohibited from "knowingly making inoperative" any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable standard. In general, the "make inoperative" prohibition would require repair businesses which modify motor vehicles to ensure that they do not remove, disconnect, or degrade the performance of safety equipment (such as an air bag) installed in compliance with an applicable standard. Violations of this prohibition are punishable by civil penalties of up to $1,100 per violation.

Removing a seat, and replacing the seat belts for the seat with a wheelchair tiedown and restraint system, could affect compliance with four standards: Standard No. 207, Seating Systems, Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies, and Standard No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages.

In situations such as yours where a vehicle must be modified to accommodate the needs of a particular disability, we have been willing to consider any violations of the "make inoperative" prohibition a purely technical one justified by public need. In your situation, NHTSA will not institute enforcement proceedings >against the business that modifies the vehicle to accommodate the condition you describe.

We caution, however, that only necessary modifications should be made, and the person making the modifications should consider other safety issues that might arise from the modification. For example, in installing a wheelchair tiedown and restraint system, it is critical that the modifier ensure that the driver's wheelchair will be solidly anchored in its new location. In addition, you should consult with the manufacturer to determine how to deactivate the air bag. The manufacturer should be able to provide information on how the modification can be safely performed. Finally, if the vehicle is sold, we encourage the owner to advise the purchaser of the modifications.

Your letter does not contain enough information to indicate conclusively whether your situation falls within the exclusion for vehicles manufactured for operation by persons with disabilities found in Standard No. 208. However, you may nonetheless rely on non-enforcement of the "make inoperative" prohibition for the reasons I described above.

If you have other questions or need some additional information, please contact Otto Matheke of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-5253.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel

ref:208

d.9/22/97

ID: 15105.drn

Norman A. Shubert, Esq.
Much Shelist Freed Denenberg
Ament Bell & Rubenstein, P.C.
200 North LaSalle Street, Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60601-1095

Dear Mr. Shubert:

This responds to your request for an interpretation whether a new corporation (your client, Great Dane Limited Partnership, "G.D. Ltd."), may use the world manufacturer identifiers (WMI) of two companies it has acquired (Pines Trailer Limited Partnership, "Pines Trailer," and Great Dane Trailers, Inc., "Great Dane Trailers"). Our answer is G.D. Ltd. may continue to use the WMIs that had been assigned to Pines Trailer and Great Dane Trailers.

Your letter stated that Pines Trailer and Great Dane Trailers were each assigned a WMI "effective for the 1981 model year." After G.D. Ltd. was formed in January 1997, it "acquired the manufacturing plants, equipment and proprietary rights to manufacture and distribute truck trailers" under both the Pines Trailer and Great Dane names and logos.

In a telephone conversation with Dorothy Nakama of my staff, you explained that G.D. Ltd. does not manufacture motor vehicles, has no intention of manufacturing motor vehicles, and is not assigned a WMI. You further stated that all Pines Trailer and Great Dane Trailers rights to manufacture motor vehicles were transferred when G.D. Ltd bought the rights and property of both entities. Your letter stated that G.D. Ltd. intends to maintain the unique product line and product design of Pines Trailer and Great Dane Trailers as separate divisions. Your letter stated that G.D. Ltd. does not presently intend to merge "the manufacturing facilities or product lines of the separate divisions."

NHTSA's regulation at 49 CFR Part 565, Vehicle Identification Number Requirements, states that the WMI shall "uniquely identify the manufacturer, make and type of the motor vehicle if its manufacturer produces 500 or more motor vehicles of its type annually." (49 CFR section 565.6(a)) In past interpretation letters, NHTSA has interpreted "uniquely identify" to mean that the same WMI cannot be used for two corporate entities if there is a possibility the two entities will be confused.

We agree that the facts of G.D. Ltd.'s case are similar to those in our March 20, 1997 letter to Monaco Corporation. As was the case in Monaco, in G.D. Ltd.'s case, no WMI is assigned to the parent company (G.D. Ltd.), but a division (in G.D. Ltd.'s case, each division, Pines Trailer and Great Dane Trailers) has a WMI. NHTSA was assured in the Monaco case that there are no plans for the parent company, Monaco, to manufacture motor vehicles (which would require assigning a WMI). Similarly, in your letter to NHTSA, you assure us that G.D. Ltd. itself will not manufacture truck trailers or any other motor vehicles. You have also assured us that Pines Trailer and Great Dane Trailers will remain separate divisions, and advertised as separate trade names.

Because the relevant facts in your client's case and Monaco's are similar, we arrive at the same decision in your case as we did in Monaco's. Since G.D. Ltd. itself is not assigned a WMI, but its two divisions have separate WMIs, we agree that G.D. Ltd. may continue to use the WMIs that were assigned to Pines Trailer and Great Dane Trailers. Under the facts described, there would be no confusion as to which corporate entity manufactured the motor vehicle.

A copy of this letter will be sent to the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), which has a contract to administer the WMI system for NHTSA. The SAE will make appropriate notations in its records about G.D. Ltd., Pines Trailer, and Great Dane Trailers, and may contact you if it needs further information.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please contact Dorothy Nakama at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel

cc: Ms. Cathy Douds
Society of Automotive Engineers
400 Commonwealth Drive
Warrendale, PA 15096

ref:565
d:6/4/97

ID: 15108.drn

Dennis L. Pool, Administrator
School Finance and Organization Services
Nebraska Department of Education
301 Centennial Mall South
P. O. Box 94987
Lincoln, NE 68509-4987

Dear Dr. Pool:

This responds to your April 14, 1997, letter requesting an opinion concerning the use of "coach type commercial mass transit buses (Greyhound, etc.)." You state that Nebraska is considering amending its regulations to permit the use of these vehicles on activity trips of long distances.

You first ask "May a coach type mass transit bus be used by a school for trips outside of the regular school route use in light of the definition of school bus found at 49 U.S.C. 30124(a) and the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards?"

NHTSA's regulations apply to persons manufacturing and selling or leasing new school buses, and not to the schools or school districts operating the buses. Issues regarding the use of vehicles by school districts are governed by State or local law. As to whether a dealer or leasing company may lease a coach bus for extracurricular trips, the answer depends on whether the bus is new or used, and on the extent of use as a school vehicle.

Our statute at 49 U.S.C. 30112(a) requires any person selling or leasing a new vehicle to sell or lease a vehicle that meets all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Accordingly, persons selling or leasing a new "school bus" must sell or lease a vehicle that meets the safety standards applicable to school buses. Under 49 U.S.C. 30101, et seq., a "school bus" is any vehicle that is designed for carrying 11 or more persons and which is likely to be "used significantly" to transport students to or from school or related events. 49 U.S.C. 30125. A new coach bus that is likely to be used significantly to transport students is a "school bus."

If a new coach bus is sold or leased for use as a school bus (e.g., leased on a regular or long-term basis to a school), the vehicle is a "school bus" and must meet the school bus standards. New Greyhound-type buses as currently manufactured cannot be certified as doing so, and therefore, cannot be sold or leased as school buses. Conversely, if the new coach bus were leased only on a one-time or very occasional basis, such use would not constitute "significant use" as a school vehicle. In the latter situation, the vehicle would not be a "school bus" and thus may be leased to the school for the special event.

The requirement to sell or lease complying school buses applies only to new vehicles. If the school district wishes to buy or lease a used coach bus on a long-term basis, the seller or lessor is not required to sell or lease a school bus. However, NHTSA believes that school buses are one of the safest forms of transportation in this country, and therefore strongly recommends that all buses that are used to transport school children be certified as meeting the school bus safety standards.

Your second question asks "If a coach type bus may be used in the above case, would a school be required to contract or charter it, or may a school own such a vehicle for this purpose?"

As stated above, a dealer or leasing company may lease (charter) a new coach bus on a one-time or very occasional basis, or may sell or lease a used bus for long-term use. A new coach bus cannot be leased for significant use as a school bus or sold for pupil transportation purposes.

I hope this information is helpful. I have enclosed a question-and-answer sheet on "Frequently Asked Questions About Federal School Bus Safety Requirements." If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
Enclosure
ref:VSA#571.3
d.6/16/97

ID: 15110bel.low

Mr. Robert E. Karoly
Director
AD-EX Agency
1847 Fourteenth Avenue
Vero Beach, FL 32960

Dear Mr. Karoly:

Thank you for your letter regarding your device, the Saflex Booster, which is designed to elevate a child above the vehicle seat. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) appreciates your interest in child passenger safety.

The objective of increasing safety for children is also a goal of the agency. The agency is deeply concerned about children, and about infants in rear-facing child safety seats who have been seriously injured or killed by deploying air bags. NHTSA recently issued a final rule which will allow manufacturers to quickly begin depowering air bags to reduce the injuries and fatalities from deploying air bags. A final rule also has been issued to require warning labels in all vehicles with air bags and on rear-facing child seats. These warning labels alert occupants about hazards associated with deploying air bags and also strongly recommend that parents put children in the rear seat, especially infants in a rear-facing child safety seat.

We believe that the message that children belong in the rear seat cannot be overemphasized, especially for infants in rear-facing child seats.

Your Saflex Booster is designed to elevate the child (sitting alone or in a child seat) to possibly reduce hazards of air bag deployment for some air bag designs. We are concerned that not enough is known about air bags and their effect on children to know whether the risk to children would be reduced by your product. Many air bag and child seat designs would need to be tested to evaluate these risks. Further, as explained below, elevating the child as the Saflex Booster does could expose the child to other potential risks of fatality or serious injury.

NHTSA has the authority under 49 U.S.C. 30101 et seq. ("the Safety Act"), to issue motor vehicle safety standards for vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. The agency has used this authority to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 213, Child Restraint Systems ("Standard 213").

Standard No. 213 specifies requirements for child restraint systems used in motor vehicles and aircraft, to reduce the number of children killed or injured in motor vehicle crashes and in aircraft. The term "child restraint system" is defined in S4 of the standard as "any device except Type I or Type II seat belts, designed for use in a motor vehicle or aircraft to restrain, seat, or position children who weigh 50 pounds or less." As described in your letter, the Saflex Booster meets the child restraint system definition, since it is designed to seat a child in a motor vehicle. Under the Safety Act, each child restraint system that is sold in the United States must be certified as complying with Standard 213, including the Saflex Booster.

NHTSA does not approve or certify any vehicles or items of equipment. Instead, under the Safety Act, each manufacturer is responsible for "self-certifying" that its products meet all applicable safety standards. Accordingly, any person manufacturing your booster seat would have to certify that the seat complies with the requirements of Standard 213.

We are unable to determine whether a particular seat design would meet the requirements of the standard, short of testing the seat in an actual compliance proceeding. However, we would like to raise the following concerns about your booster seat design.

Your booster appears to be a "belt-positioning seat" under Standard 213. Belt-positioning seats are required by Standard 213 to be restrained against forward motion by the vehicle's lap/shoulder belt system. Your booster seat is held in place by a strap which goes around the vehicle's seat back and is supplied with the Saflex Booster. If your seat cannot meet Standard 213's requirements with only a lap/shoulder belt, it could not be certified as complying with the standard and thus may not be sold.

The second concern relates to the possibility that a child positioned on the Saflex Booster could be ejected under the lap belt portion of the seat belt assembly (feet first) in a crash. We raise this concern because the booster seat can elevate a child four to 12 inches off the vehicle seat. Crash forces could compress the booster, which could result in excessive slack in the vehicle belt system. Standard 213 requires booster seats to limit head and knee excursions of a restrained test dummy. If the Saflex Booster does not meet the excursion limits, it cannot be certified as complying with Standard 213.

We have enclosed a copy of Standard 213 for your information. We have also enclosed as an information sheet that briefly describes manufacturers' responsibilities under Federal law for manufacturing vehicles and items of equipment, such as the responsibility to ensure these products do not have any safety-related defects.

We strongly encourage the marketplace development of any system that can increase safety. While we are concerned that your device may not keep children from being injured by air bags and may not comply with FMVSS No. 213, we encourage your continued interest.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
Enclosures
ref:213
d:6/2/97

ID: 15117.ztv

Mr. Ben Reginella, P. Eng.
Algonquin Automotive
1 Crescent Road
Huntsville
Ontario P1H 1Z6
Canada

Dear Mr. Reginella

This is in reply to your letter of April 29, 1997, requesting an interpretation of the term "overall width" as the phrase is used in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.

You have asked whether "the painted flexible flares" you describe qualify as "flexible" and hence may be excluded from the calculation of overall width. You are developing a trim kit for the Dodge T300 Ram Truck which includes painted flexible flares along with running boards, and have enclosed photos of the flare in question..

"Overall Width" is defined in Note 1 to Standard No. 108 as "the nominal design dimension of the widest part of the vehicle, exclusive of signal lamps, marker lamps, outside rearview mirrors, flexible fender extensions, and mud flaps, determined with doors and windows closed and the wheels in the straight-ahead position." We confirm that the "flexible flare" shown in your photographs is a "flexible fender extension" within the meaning of the term as used in Standard No. 108's definition of overall width, and may be excluded from the calculation of the overall width of any vehicle upon which it is installed.

If you have any questions, you may call Taylor Vinson of this Office (202-366-3820).

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
ref:108
d:5/22/97