ID: nht91-2.24

DATE: March 11, 1991

FROM: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Anne Lombardi -- Acting Director, Office of Passenger Enforcement and Facilitation, Department of the Treasury

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 2-14-91 from Anne Lombardi to Paul Jackson Rice (OCC 5710)

TEXT:

This is in reply to your letter of February 14, 1991, asking for an opinion on kit cars.

Specifically, military and DOD civilian employees stationed on the Philippines

"frequently purchase automobiles which are composites of old chassis and engines, of U.S. manufacture, and new bodies and interiors, fabricated and attached to the chassis by local Filipino car shops.

Normally, the chassis and engines were not taken abroad by the importers, but were purchased in the Philippines from other sources.

In most cases the chassis are said to have been manufactured prior to January 1, 1969."

You have asked which DOT regulations apply to these automobiles, those applicable to the year the chassis was manufactured, or those applicable to the year the body was attached.

This is a question of first impression with us. Under the opinions of this Office relating to the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, if a person meeting the definition of a "manufacturer", "distributor", "dealer", or motor vehicle repair business" removes a body from the chassis of a motor vehicle and installs a new one, the resulting vehicle must continue to meet the Federal motor vehicle safety standards that were in effect at the time that the vehicle was originally manufactured. If a person other than the above installs the new body, the vehicle is simply a used vehicle to which no Federal motor vehicle safety standards are applicable (but which must meet State standards for vehicle registration). However, these interpretations apply only to modifications that occur within a "State" as defined by the Act. The Philippines is not included in the definition of "State."

Where such modifications have occurred outside a "State", and the modified vehicle is offered for importation into the United States, the vehicle is treated under the importation regulations (49 CFR Part 591) as a used vehicle which must be brought into conformity with Federal safety and bumper standards in effect at the time of its manufacture. We regard the date of manufacture of the original vehicle (i.e., chassis) as the appropriate date, because it may not be feasible to conform the assemblage to vehicle standards in effect at the later date on which the body was manufactured. If the original vehicle were manufactured before January 1, 1968 (the effective date of the original safety standards), then no Federal motor vehicle safety standards apply to the vehicle.

I must add an important caveat here. There are two types of Federal motor vehicle safety standards: those that apply to the vehicles as a whole (such as the so-called crash standards), and those that apply to individual equipment items. The equipment standards apply regardless of the date of manufacture of the vehicle. Thus, the tires, brake fluid, brake hoses, glazing, seat belt assemblies, and lamps and reflectors on any modified vehicle imported into the United States must meet the standards in effect at the time the items were manufactured, regardless of whether the modified vehicle must meet the Federal safety standards applicable to vehicles.

I must also add two other caveats. The Imported Vehicle Safety Act of 1988, which has been implemented by 49 CFR Parts 591-594, forbids the importation of a vehicle not originally manufactured to conform to the Federal motor vehicle safety standards (e.g., this would apply to an assemblage of a new body placed upon a chassis manufactured on or after January 1, 1968) unless this agency has determined that the vehicle is capable of modification to comply with all applicable safety standards. This determination is made pursuant to a petition submitted by a "Registered Importer," who will undertake to conform the vehicle if a favorable determination is made. The second caveat is that the owner can import the vehicle only if (s)he has a contract with a Registered Importer to perform conformance work.

However, there is a limited exception to the two caveats of the preceding paragraph. They do not apply to any vehicle that will be imported into the United States on or before October 31, 1992, if its importer owned the vehicle (or had a contract to acquire it) before October 31, 1988, was employed outside the United States at all times between those two dates, and had never before imported a nonconforming motor vehicle. Under this exception, the owner may import the vehicle without the necessity of a determination or the intervention of a Registered Importer. (S)he must then bring the vehicle into compliance with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety and bumper standards, and present evidence of conformance to this agency. Under any circumstances of importation of a noncomplying vehicle to be conformed, its owner must acquire a performance bond to ensure that the work is, in fact, completed.

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

ID: 004609-as

ID: 04-004377drn

Jock Marlo, Esq.
Hart, King & Coldren
P.O. Box 2507
Santa Ana, CA 92707

Dear Mr. Marlo:

This responds to your request for an interpretation concerning National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) requirements that your clients product, the "Smart Shift," must meet. The "Smart Shift" permits drivers to shift gears by a push button system, replacing transmission shift gear levers.

You described the "Smart Shift" as follows:

The Smart Shift is an automotive aftermarket product. It is sold to vehicle owners for installation by the vehicle owner or his designee. The Smart Shift is an electronically controlled shifter that attaches to an automatic transmission which allows the user to shift the transmission gears by the touch of a button, thereby eliminating the transmission gear selector rod or cable. It features a neutral safety device, a built in reverse light relay, a safety button to prevent accidental shifts, and back lit buttons and LCD display for positive gear selection.

You also provided a copy of the "Smart Shift Preliminary Users Manual." The manual shows, on page 5, a schematic of the "Smart Shift" system that includes the shift position keyboard. From left to right, in a row, the buttons are: "P," "R," "N." Slightly above this row is a button, "D+." Slightly below the row is a button, "D-." I will assume that "P" stands for "park," "R" for "reverse," "N" for "neutral," "D+" for a higher drive and "D-" for a lower drive. The schematic also includes a "Display" which you explained in your letter displays the "positive gear selection."

By way of background information, NHTSA is authorized to issue the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) for new motor vehicles and new items of motor

vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Instead, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable standards.

NHTSA has issued FMVSS No. 102, Transmission shift lever sequence, starter interlock, and transmission braking effect, which specifies requirements for the transmission shift lever sequence, a starter interlock, and for a braking effect of automatic transmissions, to reduce the likelihood of shifting errors, starter engagement with vehicle in drive position, and to provide supplemental braking at speeds below 40 kilometers per hour. FMVSS No. 102 applies to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses.

Among FMVSS 102s provisions are the following:

• a neutral position must be located between forward drive and reverse drive positions (see S3.1.1);
• the engine starter must be inoperative when the transmission shifting device is in a forward or reverse drive position (see 3.1.3);
• for a transmission shift sequence that includes a park position, identification of the shift positions, including the positions in relation to each other and the position selected, must be displayed in view of the driver whenever any of the following conditions exist: (a) the ignition is in a position where the transmission can be shifted; (b) the transmission is not in park (see S3.1.4.1); and
• the information required to be displayed by S3.1.4.1 must be displayed in view of the driver in a single location (see S3.1.4.4).

Although the standard makes references to "transmission shift levers," no provision in FMVSS No. 102 would preclude a device that allows the user to shift the transmission gears by the touch of a button.

Since FMVSS No. 102 applies to motor vehicles, not to aftermarket automatic transmission shifting devices, your client would not be required to certify compliance with FMVSS No. 102. However, if the "Smart Shift" is installed by certain parties, 49 U.S.C. Section 30122 would be relevant. Section 30122 provides that:

A manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business may not knowingly make inoperative any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard.

Section 30122 would prohibit any of the above-named commercial entities from installing a "Smart Shift" if such installation makes inoperative the compliance of the vehicle with any applicable safety standard, including FMVSS No. 102. For example, if the "Smart Shift" caused the vehicle to no longer comply with any of the requirements noted under the bullets above, installation of the system would make inoperative compliance of the vehicle with that standard.

You also write that your clients product may be installed by vehicle owners. In this situation, our safety standards would not affect the sale or installation of the product. The "make inoperative" provision does not prohibit owners from modifying their vehicles, even if the modification adversely affects the compliance of the vehicle with the FMVSSs. However, we encourage all persons to avoid making vehicle modifications that have an adverse effect on safety.

Beyond compliance with relevant Federal safety standards, manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment have additional responsibilities, including a requirement to notify purchasers about safety-related defects and to provide a remedy free of charge, even if their equipment is not covered by a safety standard. 49 U.S.C. 30118-30120.

In addition, you should be aware that other governmental entities may have authority over your product. For example, the States have the authority to regulate the use and licensing of vehicles operating within their jurisdictions. Therefore, you may wish to check with the Department of Motor Vehicles in any State in which the equipment will be sold or used regarding any such requirements.

I have enclosed a fact sheet titled "Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment." I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

Enclosure
ref:102#VSA102(4)
d.8/11/04

ID: 11116a

Mr. Robert R. Brester
Director of Product Engineering
Velvac Inc.
2900 South 160th Street
New Berlin, WI 53151

Dear Mr. Brester:

This responds to your request for an interpretation concerning how Standard No. 105, Hydraulic Brake Systems, affects the brake products you sell. According to your letter:

Velvac Inc. manufactures and sells brake components and power braking systems for trailers and truck tag axles. These brake systems are not part of the primary vehicle braking system. In the case of a tag axle, our customers are retrofitting a standard vehicle with an additional axle to increase its load carrying capacity. In the case of a trailer, our system may be the only source of braking.

The brake components Velvac supplies generally include control valving, brake boosters and various types of hoses and fittings. These items can be sold both as components and as complete power brake kits. (See attached catalogue drawings . . . .)

You stated that Mr. Richard Carter of this agency advised you that different combinations of braking components may be used to achieve the braking performance requirements of Standard No. 105, and that the responsibility of certifying vehicles to Standard No. 105 lies in the hands of your customers. This information is correct. However, you should be aware that some of the components listed in your catalogue are covered by Standard No. 106, Brake Hoses, and must be certified by their manufacturer as complying with that standard. A further discussion of the issues raised by your letter is provided below.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards for new motor vehicles and new

motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA has exercised this authority to issue several vehicle and/or equipment standards related to braking performance. These standards include the aforementioned Standards No. 105 and No. 106, as well as ones on air brake systems, motorcycle brake systems, and motor vehicle brake fluids.

You specifically asked about Standard No. 105. That standard specifies requirements for hydraulic service brake and associated parking brake systems, and applies to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses with hydraulic service brake systems.

If your brake products are installed as original equipment on a new vehicle subject to Standard No. 105, the vehicle manufacturer is required to certify that, with the products installed, the vehicle satisfies the requirements of that standard (as well as all other applicable safety standards). If your brake products are added to a previously certified new motor vehicle prior to its first sale, the person who modifies the vehicle would be an "alterer" under our regulations, and would be required to certify that, as altered, the vehicle continues to comply with all of the safety standards affected by the alteration.

If your products are installed on a used vehicle by a business such as a repair shop, the repair shop would not be required to attach a certification label. However, it would have to make sure that it did not knowingly make inoperative any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable safety standard, such as the hydraulic brake system.

Assuming you do not manufacture or alter new vehicles, you do not have a responsibility to certify a vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 105. However, I note that some of the brake products listed in your catalogue are covered by Standard No. 106. That standard specifies requirements for motor vehicle brake hose, end fittings and assemblies. Standard No. 106 applies not only to new vehicles, as is the case with Standard No. 105, but also to brake hoses, end fittings and assemblies that are sold individually or in kit form. Manufacturers of these items must certify that the equipment complies with Standard No. 106, and persons selling these items must sell only certified items.

NHTSA also has the authority to investigate safety- related defects. Manufacturers of motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment are subject to statutory requirements concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects related to motor vehicle safety. If a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a safety-related defect exists, the manufacturer must notify purchasers of its product and remedy the problem free of charge. (This responsibility is borne by the vehicle manufacturer in cases in which your products are installed on a new vehicle by or with the express authorization of that vehicle manufacturer.) Any manufacturer that fails to provide notification of or remedy for a defect may be subject to a civil penalty of up to $1,000 per violation.

I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes various responsibilities of motor vehicle manufacturers under our regulations, and information on how you can obtain copies of our standards.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please call Edward Glancy of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

John Womack Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosure

ref: 105, 106 NCC-20 EGlancy:mar:9/29/95:62992:OCc 11116 cc: NCC-0l Subj/Chron concurrence: NPS, NSA U:\ncc20\interp\105\1116a.jeg The "make inoperative" provision does not apply to individual vehicle owners who alter their own vehicles. Thus, under our requirements, individual owners may install any item of motor vehicle equipment regardless of its effect on compliance with the FMVSSs. However, NHTSA encourages vehicle owners not to degrade the safety of their vehicles.

ID: 06-007683rls

ID: 16805.ztv

Mr. A. Dorian Challoner
311 Carriage Place
Manhattan Beach, CA 90266

Dear Mr. Challoner:

Representative Jane Harmon has asked us to address the problem you reported to her office about your mother's car.

According to the information you provided Ms. Harmon, the car is a 1990 Dodge Dynasty manufactured for the Canadian market. Since 1990, your mother has driven the car in the United States under Ontario registration. She has become a permanent resident of the United States, specifically, California. However, California will not register the car until you obtain a letter from its manufacturer saying that the vehicle is identical in all material respects to one that was manufactured to conform to all applicable U.S. Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Further, it requires that you contact this Department "for the proper clearance letter."

You have attempted to obtain such a letter from Chrysler Corporation. However, the company has informed you that it cannot grant your request because the Canadian-market car fails to comply with the requirement of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208 that a 1990 model car must be equipped with either an automatic seat belt system, or an air bag. It also advises that modification is not feasible, due to the cost.

Your mother's situation is similar to that experienced by a number of others in California who have tried to register a Canadian car. I would like to explain how the importation process was supposed to have worked in your mother's case. As a general rule, a motor vehicle must conform to the U.S. Federal motor vehicle safety standards, and be certified as meeting those standards, in order to be imported permanently into the United States. Non-residents of the United States are permitted to enter their non-conforming vehicles into the United States for a continuous period of up to one year, provided that they declare in writing that they will not sell the car in the United States and that they will export it at the end of that time. If the vehicle remains in the United States for longer than a year, there is a technical violation of the importation regulations. If your mother made yearly trips to Canada in her car, there would appear to be no violation of this regulation if the successive re-importations were for periods of a year or less.

There is a substantial similarity between Canadian and U.S. passenger car safety standards, so much so that the agency admits Canadian vehicles on a permanent basis if their manufacturer provides a letter to the owner attesting to the vehicle's compliance. However, if a manufacturer will not provide such a letter, the owner must follow the procedure established by statute. This procedure was established by Congress and requires the Administrator of this agency to have made a decision that the vehicle in question is capable of being conformed to comply with the U.S. Federal motor vehicle safety standards. This decision is made on the Administrator's motion, or after a petition by a Registered Importer. A Registered Importer is a person that the agency recognizes as capable of modifying and certifying noncomplying vehicles to meet the U.S. Federal motor vehicle safety standards, and who has agreed with the importer to modify and certify the car. If the Administrator finds that the particular vehicle model is capable of being so modified, the vehicle may be imported under bond. Conformance work would be performed by a Registered Importer, who then certifies the car to NHTSA. When the agency is satisfied with the Registered Importer's certification, it issues the bond release letter that California requires for registration. Thus, had your mother followed the course prescribed by law for permanent importations, she would have contracted with a Registered Importer, who would have petitioned on her behalf. If such a petition had been granted (no decisions have ever been made regarding 1990 Canadian Dodge cars), the Registered Importer would have brought the vehicle into compliance with Standard No. 208, and the vehicle then could have been registered in California.

At this point, your mother has two options. The first is to return the vehicle to Canada (or export it to Mexico, which is closer to you). Second, she may contract with a Registered Importer for the petition/modification and certification procedure described in the previous paragraph. The closest Registered Importer to you is G & K Automotive Conversions, 3231 South Standard Avenue, Santa Ana, CA 92705 (phone: 714-545-9503; fax: 714-545-7667). While this procedure may seem to be unduly burdensome for the owner of a vehicle that has been operated in the United States for some years, there are benefits to following it. If Chrysler Corporation, which manufactured the car, recalls 1990 Dodge Dynasty vehicles for safety or emissions reasons, the Registered Importer is required to notify your mother of the recall and provide an appropriate remedy. In addition, the presence of the certification label on the vehicle should relieve future owners of the car of the need to re-satisfy registration authorities in California or elsewhere that the vehicle meets all U.S. requirements, and thus make possible resale easier.

If your mother chooses to sell the car rather than to arrange for it to be brought into compliance with Standard No. 208, she would not be violating Federal law if she sold it in the United States. However, it would be in the best interest of motor vehicle safety if the sale of this nonconforming vehicle took place in Canada, its country of origin, where it conforms to local standards, or in Mexico, where the U.S. Federal motor vehicle safety standards are not in effect.

We regret that we cannot be of greater assistance. If you have any additional questions, please contact Taylor Vinson of this Office at phone number 202-366-5263.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
cc: Representative Jane Harmon
Torrance, CA Office
ref:591
d.2/18/98

ID: 1116a

Mr. Robert R. Brester
Director of Product Engineering
Velvac Inc.
2900 South 160th Street
New Berlin, WI 53151

Dear Mr. Brester:

This responds to your request for an interpretation concerning how Standard No. 105, Hydraulic Brake Systems, affects the brake products you sell. According to your letter:

Velvac Inc. manufactures and sells brake components and power braking systems for trailers and truck tag axles. These brake systems are not part of the primary vehicle braking system. In the case of a tag axle, our customers are retrofitting a standard vehicle with an additional axle to increase its load carrying capacity. In the case of a trailer, our system may be the only source of braking. The brake components Velvac supplies generally include control valving, brake boosters and various types of hoses and fittings. These items can be sold both as components and as complete power brake kits. (See attached catalogue drawings . . . .)

You stated that Mr. Richard Carter of this agency advised you that different combinations of braking components may be used to achieve the braking performance requirements of Standard No. 105, and that the responsibility of certifying vehicles to Standard No. 105 lies in the hands of your customers. This information is correct. However, you should be aware that some of the components listed in your catalogue are covered by Standard No. 106, Brake Hoses, and must be certified by their manufacturer as complying with that standard. A further discussion of the issues raised by your letter is provided below.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards for new motor vehicles and new

motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA has exercised this authority to issue several vehicle and/or equipment standards related to braking performance. These standards include the aforementioned Standards No. 105 and No. 106, as well as ones on air brake systems, motorcycle brake systems, and motor vehicle brake fluids.

You specifically asked about Standard No. 105. That standard specifies requirements for hydraulic service brake and associated parking brake systems, and applies to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses with hydraulic service brake systems.

If your brake products are installed as original equipment on a new vehicle subject to Standard No. 105, the vehicle manufacturer is required to certify that, with the products installed, the vehicle satisfies the requirements of that standard (as well as all other applicable safety standards). If your brake products are added to a previously certified new motor vehicle prior to its first sale, the person who modifies the vehicle would be an "alterer" under our regulations, and would be required to certify that, as altered, the vehicle continues to comply with all of the safety standards affected by the alteration.

If your products are installed on a used vehicle by a business such as a repair shop, the repair shop would not be required to attach a certification label. However, it would have to make sure that it did not knowingly make inoperative any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable safety standard, such as the hydraulic brake system.

Assuming you do not manufacture or alter new vehicles, you do not have a responsibility to certify a vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 105. However, I note that some of the brake products listed in your catalogue are covered by Standard No. 106. That standard specifies requirements for motor vehicle brake hose, end fittings and assemblies. Standard No. 106 applies not only to new vehicles, as is the case with Standard No. 105, but also to brake hoses, end fittings and assemblies that are sold individually or in kit form. Manufacturers of these items must certify that the equipment complies with Standard No. 106, and persons selling these items must sell only certified items.

NHTSA also has the authority to investigate safety- related defects. Manufacturers of motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment are subject to statutory requirements concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects related to motor vehicle safety. If a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a safety-related defect exists, the manufacturer must notify purchasers of its product and remedy the problem free of charge. (This responsibility is borne by the vehicle manufacturer in cases in which your products are installed on a new vehicle by or with the express authorization of that vehicle manufacturer.) Any manufacturer that fails to provide notification of or remedy for a defect may be subject to a civil penalty of up to $1,000 per violation.

I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes various responsibilities of motor vehicle manufacturers under our regulations, and information on how you can obtain copies of our standards.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please call Edward Glancy of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

John Womack Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosure

ref:105#106 d:10/17/95 The "make inoperative" provision does not apply to individual vehicle owners who alter their own vehicles. Thus, under our requirements, individual owners may install any item of motor vehicle equipment regardless of its effect on compliance with the FMVSSs. However, NHTSA encourages vehicle owners not to degrade the safety of their vehicles.

ID: 15208.og

Mr. Brent Gruenig
Crow River Industries
850 State Highway 55
P.O. Box 70
Brooten, MN 56316

Dear Mr. Gruenig:

This is in response to your letter regarding a seating system which Crow River Industries is developing for the purpose of adapting vehicles for use by less-abled individuals. As described in your letter, the seat rotates on a pivot, allowing the seat to face out of the car, and two sets of slide tracks. One set of slide tracks is used for adjustment in the vehicle. The second set of slide tracks is used for exiting the vehicle after rotation. You are concerned about the legal implications of this design. In particular, you state that you understand that Crow River Industries cannot "make the vehicle inoperable or 'out of specification' with the replacement of the OEM seat with our seat." You wish to know what exactly is "out of specification."

I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our regulations to you. Some background information on Federal motor vehicle safety laws and regulations may be helpful. Our agency is authorized under 49 U.S.C. 30101 et seq. to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), however, does not approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products. Instead, each manufacturer is responsible for "self-certifying" that its products meet all applicable safety standards.

NHTSA has exercised its authority to establish five safety standards that may be relevant to your seat design. The first is Standard No. 207, Seating Systems, which sets forth strength requirements for all "occupant seats" in passenger cars. The second is Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, which sets forth requirements for occupant protection at the various seating positions in vehicles. The third is Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies, which sets forth strength, elongation, webbing width, durability, and other requirements for seat belt assemblies. The fourth is Standard No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages, which establishes strength and location requirements for seat belt anchorages. The final relevant safety standard is Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials. This standard specifies burn resistance requirements for materials used in the occupant compartment of motor vehicles.

Because Federal law operates differently depending on when the installation of the seat occurs, I will separately discuss three possible scenarios.

Installation as Original Equipment

Standards No. 207, No. 208, No. 210, and No. 302 apply, with certain exceptions that are not relevant to your product, to vehicles and not directly to items of equipment. Thus, the vehicle manufacturer, and not the equipment manufacturer, would be responsible for certifying that the vehicle complies with these standards with the adaptive seat installed in the vehicle.

Installation Prior to First Sale

If an adaptive seat were added to a new vehicle prior to its first sale, e.g., by the dealer, the person who modified the vehicle would be an alterer of a previously certified motor vehicle and would be required to certify that, as altered, the vehicle continues to comply with all of the safety standards affected by the alteration.

Installation After First Sale

After the first purchase of a vehicle for purposes other than resale, the only provision in Federal law that affects the vehicle's continuing compliance with an applicable safety standard is set forth in 49 U.S.C. 30122. That section provides that:

A manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business may not knowingly make inoperative any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard.

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 installed in compliance with an applicable safety standard. Any violation of this prohibition is subject to a potential civil penalty of up to $1,100 for each violation.

In situations involving a potential violation of 30122, where a vehicle must be modified to accommodate the needs of a particular disability, we have, where appropriate, been willing to consider certain unavoidable violations of the "make inoperative" prohibition as purely technical ones justified by public need. However, it is often possible to make modifications in a way that does not degrade the performance of safety equipment installed in compliance with an applicable standard.

If a company believes that certain modifications must be made to accommodate the needs of a particular disability, and that the modifications cannot be made without violating the "make inoperative" provision discussed above, it may write to us and request a letter stating that we will not enforce that provision. The letter should identify the specific facts at issue and why it is not possible to avoid violating that provision. It should also demonstrate that the proposed modifications minimize the safety consequences of the noncompliances.

For your information, NHTSA is considering proposing a regulation establishing conditions under which a vehicle may be modified to accommodate a person's disability so that the modifier will not be subjected to the make inoperative requirements of 30122. Enclosed is a copy of page 22101 of the agency's April 25, 1997 regulatory agenda where this possible rulemaking is described (entry number 2266).

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

Sincerely,

John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosure

ref:208
d.11/14/97

ID: nht87-2.8

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 06/11/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Laurel Osborne -- Regional Coordinator, National Coalition for Seatbelts on School Buses

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Ms. Laurel Osborne Regional Coordinator National Coalition for Seatbelts on School Buses P.O. Box 225 Galena, Alaska 99741

Dear Ms. Osborne:

This responds to your January 29, 1987 letter to Mr. Barry Felrice, NHTSA Associate Administrator for Rulemaking, asking about our agency's position on safety belt use in small school buses (i.e., school buses with gross vehicle weight ratings (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds or less). Your letter has been referred to me for reply.

In your letter, you explain that you and the Alaska School Bus Safety Committee are interested in Alaska's implementation of Highway Safety Program Standard No. 17, Pupil Transportation Safety. You request clarification of NHTSA's position on safety belt use in small school buses because members of the committee believe that safety belts are provided on those buses only for the use of special education students. You also request information on safety belt education programs that schools could use to enc ourage the proper use of safety belts by student passengers in small school buses.

As you might know, NHTSA has two sets of regulations for school buses. The first set, issued under the authority of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, applies to the manufacture and sale of new school buses and includes our motor vehicle safety standards for school buses. One of these safety standards is Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 222, School Bun Passenger Seating and Crash Protection, which required the safety belts for passengers on small school buses. The second set of regulations, issued under the Highway Safety Act, includes Highway Safety Program Standard No. 17 and relates to the use of School vehicles. Because requirements for the use of school buses are set by the states, Standard No. 17 sets forth recommendation s to the station for the pupil transportation aspect of their highway safety programs. We encourage states to consider Standard No. 17's recommendations but do not insist on compliance with every aspect of the standard.

As you are aware, NHTSA does not believe that a Federal requirement for safety belts on large school buses (GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds) is necessary because large school buses are very safe vehicles due to their mass, seating configuration and "comp artmentalized" seating positions. However, because small school buses experience greater force levels in a crash, Passengers on these vehicles need the added safety benefits of the belts to mitigate against injuries and fatalities. Of course, the belts o n small school buses provide safety benefits only if they are properly used. We thus recommend they be used by all pupils whenever the children are transported. This recommendation is consistent with Program Standard No. 17, which states, "Passengers in Type II school vehicles equipped with lap belts shall be required to wear them whenever the vehicle is in motion." (IV.C.3.d(5).)

With regard to your question about belt education programs, NHTSA and the National PTA have put together a "Safety Belt A/V Resource Kit" and a "Children's Training Kit" as part of our 1986 safety belt awareness campaign. The kit contains materials geare d toward increasing safety belt use by children in passenger cars, and might be helpful in promoting belt usage in small school buses. I am sending you the resource kits by separate cover.

Further, some states have developed their own safety belt education program; for school children. The person in your state who might be able to provide you with more information on the programs available in Alaska is:

Ms. Romayne Kareen Pupil Transportation Officer Pouch F State Office Building Juneau, Alaska 99811 (907) 465-2890

Also, enclosed in this letter is a February 1986 NHTSA report entitled, "School Bus Safety Belts: Their Use, Carryover Effects and Administrative Issues." The report describes an exploratory study of the experiences of various school districts with safet y belt programs for school buses. You might find the discussion of administrative and educational components of bus belt programs helpful.

I hope this information is of assistance. Please contact us if you have further questions.

Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Enclosure

P.O. Box 225 Galena, Alaska January 20. 1987

Barry Felrice Associate Administrator for Rulemaking National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street S.W. Washington. D.C. 20590

Dear Mr. Felrice:

I have been trying to work with the Alaska School Bus Safety Committee in an effort to implement Standard 17 in the State of AlasKa. Members of this committee feel that seatbelts are provided on small school buses only for the use of special education st udents.

In one school district the belts are buckled under the seats when the buses ate used on regular routes. In another district students must buckle up only if they have been misbehaving. The contractor reports a high rate of belt vandalism in this district.

I would appreciate a clarification concerning NHTSA s position on seatbelt use in small school buses. I would also appreciate any suggestions on seatbelt education programs which could be used in schools to encourage the responsible use of belts by stude nts in their small buses. Thank you very much.

Sincerely yours. Laurel Osborne, Regional Coordinator National Coalition For Seatbelts on School Buses

ID: 2350y

Mr. Hank Kmiecik
Steerable Carriages
P.O. Box 211
Little York, NJ 08834

Dear Mr. Kmiecik:

This responds to your January 5, 1990 letter requesting our review of your rear wheel steering system for trucks, buses and special application vehicles. This system is intended to replace one rear axle on these vehicles, and when activated, enables the axle to rotate slightly on its vertical axis. It is intended to improve the maneuverability of these vehicles in low-speed situations such as making sharp turns.

During a February 9, 1990 telephone conversation with David Greenburg of this office, you explained that, while your product uses air from the vehicle's compressed air suspension system to operate the axle, it is isolated from the air brake system. You also explained that, as a result of this design, a failure in the air system connected to your product would not affect the operation of the vehicle's braking system.

By way of background information, NHTSA has no authority to approve, endorse or offer assurances of compliance for any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 makes manufacturers of motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment responsible for certifying that each of its products conforms with all applicable safety standards.

In this instance, there are no specific provisions in the safety standards that set forth requirements for steerable rear axles. Thus, your company as the manufacturer of such a product would not have to certify that a steerable rear axle complies with any safety standard before offering it for sale to the public. However, the addition of a steerable rear axle to a vehicle before its first sale to the public could affect the vehicle's compliance with various safety standards. In such a case, the manufacturer or alterer that installed this product on a new vehicle would have to certify that the vehicle, with the steerable rear axle installed, complied with all applicable safety standards. For example, installation of the steerable axle could affect the vehicle's compliance with the applicable braking standard (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 121; Air brake systems) or the tire and rim selection standard (FMVSS No. 119; New pneumatic tires for vehicles other than passenger cars).

Of course, you will need to consider other safety effects that operation of the steerable axle system could have. Among these considerations would be ensuring that the trailer's gross axle weight rating (GAWR) is not exceeded when the steering system is in operation and the the trailer is supported by only the steerable axle instead of by both the steerable and fixed axles.

Although we do not have any standards that directly apply to your product, we do have several statutory provisions that could affect it. Manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment such as your steerable rear axle are subject to the requirements in sections 151-159 of the Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1411-1419) concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects related to motor vehicle safety. The Safety Act specifies that if either your company or this agency determines that a safety-related defect exists in your product, your company as the manufacturer must notify purchasers of the safety-related defect and must either:

(1) repair the parts so that the defect is removed; or

(2) replace the parts with identical or reasonably equivalent parts which do not have a defect.

Whichever of these options is chosen, the manufacturer must bear the full expense and cannot charge the owner for the remedy if the equipment was purchased less than 8 years before the notification campaign.

In addition, the use of your product could be affected by section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A)). That section prohibits any manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or repair business from knowingly "rendering inoperative" any device or element of design installed on or in a vehicle to comply with an applicable safety standard. To avoid a "rendering inoperative" violation, the above-named parties should examine the proposed installation instructions for the steerable rear axle and compare those instructions with the requirements of our safety standards, to determine if installing the steerable rear axle in accordance with those instructions would result in the vehicle no longer complying with the requirements of the safety standards. If the installation of the steerable rear axle would not result in a rendering inoperative of the vehicle's compliance with the safety standards, the product can be installed by dealers, distributors, and repair shops without violating any Federal requirements.

The Safety Act places the initial responsibility for determining whether the installation of this steerable rear axle on vehicles would result in a "render inoperative" violation on your company. This agency may reexamine your determination in the context of an enforcement action. For your information, I have enclosed a copy of an information sheet for new manufacturers of motor vehicles and new motor vehicle equipment. This sheet gives a brief description of our regulations and explains how to obtain copies of those regulations. You should also be aware that State laws may apply to your product.

I hope this information is helpful. Please feel free to contact this office if you have any further questions or need additional information.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Wood Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosure /ref:VSA d:3/l5/90