ID: GPScrashsensor.rtf

Mr. Ralph Longton
Application Engineer
LoJack Corp.
15 Commercial Circle
Dedham, MA 02026





Dear Mr. Longton:

This responds to your letter of June 1, 2001. In that letter, you inquire about a system that LoJack is currently developing. This system will be located in the passenger compartment of a vehicle. In the event the vehicle is in a crash, the system will rate the crash as minor or major, alert a G.P.S. locator, and contact a clearinghouse. The clearinghouse will attempt to contact the driver or send assistance. You would like to know whether there are any regulatory obligations you may need to meet in the deployment and operation of such a device.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) cannot speak to all of your regulatory obligations, but only to Federal requirements in the area of automotive safety. We do not have any Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) for this type of device. However, the FMVSS could be relevant to your device if the device affects a vehicle's compliance with any of the standards. We do not have sufficient information about your system to comment on whether it would likely affect a vehicle's compliance with the FMVSS.

I have enclosed a copy of a paper titled "Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment" which identifies relevant Federal statutes and NHTSA standards and regulations affecting motor vehicle and motor vehicle equipment manufacturers.

I hope this answers your question. Should you have any more questions, please contact Edward Glancy of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosure

NCC-20:Eglancy:mar:6/26/01:62992:OCC23204
Cc: NCC-01 Subj./Chron
Redbook (2), interp. Part 571
U:\ncc20\interp\gpscrashsensor.doc

ID: 04-004216drn

Mr. Larry Medina
101 East Whipple Extension St.
Prescott, AZ86301

Dear Mr. Medina:

This responds to your request for an interpretation concerning National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) requirements that your product, the "Emergency Vehicle Warning," must meet. Your product is designed to provide to drivers visual warning of the approach of emergency vehicles.

Your letter describes the "Emergency Vehicle Warning" as follows:

The concept is simple, sensors are placed on the outside of a car, sensors detect the sound of a siren (emergency vehicle), sensors then transmit a signal to a receiver, this receiver is placed on the instrument panel or rear view mirror or visor. The receiver is approximately 2 inches long and 1/12 wide with two or more light emitting diodes (lights). Its placement can be clipped or mounted with adhesive tape. Once the receiver detects a signal from the sensors, the lights flash giving the driver a visual alert of an approaching emergency vehicle.

In a telephone conversation with Dorothy Nakama of my staff, you stated that you intend the "Emergency Vehicle Warning" to be provided on new motor vehicles and to be installed as aftermarket equipment. In my response to you, I will assume that the outside sensors described in your letter do not incorporate any type of lighting.

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.

We have previously addressed motor vehicle equipment similar to the "Emergency Vehicle Warning."Enclosed is an interpretation letter of May 4, 2000 to Mr. Lou McKenna (McKenna letter).

The McKenna letter addressed a system inside the vehicle that consisted of an audible alarm and a flashing red display of the words "Emergency Vehicle." The alarm and the red display are triggered by a signal from an emergency vehicle. We make clear in the McKenna letter that:

None of the laws and regulations that we administer preclude a flashing red message on the instrument panel or an audible siren in or on a motor vehicle. This means that the legality of such devices must be determined under state and local laws.

Similarly, in your case, none of NHTSAs laws or regulations would preclude a receiver with light-emitting diodes to be placed on an instrument panel, interior rearview mirror or visor, if installed in such a way that it would not interfere with any required safety function. NHTSA has not issued any FMVSSs that are directly applicable to your product. However, something placed on the reflective surface of a mirror could affect its compliance with the field of view requirements of FMVSS No. 111, Rearview mirrors.

If your "Emergency Vehicle Warning" were installed by a vehicle manufacturer as original equipment, i.e., on a new vehicle, the vehicle manufacturer would have to certify that the vehicle with the product installed complies with all applicable FMVSSs. Also, if your product were installed by a motor vehicle manufacturer, distributor, dealer or repair business on a new or used vehicle, that commercial entity would be prohibited by 49 U.S.C. 30122 from knowingly making inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in the vehicle in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. When your product is installed by the vehicle owner, our safety standards would not affect the sale or installation of your product.

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. 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 entitled "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:VSA102(4)
d.7/21/04

ID: 11064

Mr. Curt Stiede
BICS Manufacturing
P.O. Box 2424
Columbia Falls, MT 59912

Dear Mr. Stiede:

This responds to your letter to Walter Myers of my staff, and to subsequent telephone conversations with Mr. Myers, about this agency's standards for the product you manufacture. At Mr. Myers' request, you provided detailed schematics of your product and several pictures of it connected to various types of towed vehicles. It appears from these that the product is a trailer converter dolly.

You stated that your product is intended as a towing device for a variety of trailers, such as "gooseneck flatbed, equipment, utility, farm equipment, horse trailers, along with 5th wheel recreational vehicles." You further stated that it has a combined load range of 3,500 to 15,000 pounds, depending on the trailer weight and engine power of the towing vehicle. You stated that there may be some state restrictions applicable to your trailer dolly, and suggested that some Federal regulations may have to be amended to address such a vehicle.

By way of background information, this agency has the authority under Federal law to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) and related regulations applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Vehicle and equipment manufacturers are responsible for "self- certifying" that their products comply with all applicable FMVSSs. They must also ensure that their products are free of safety-related defects. Once the vehicle or equipment is sold to the first retail customer, the product is no longer subject to the FMVSSs.

The first question you raise is whether your trailer dolly is a "motor vehicle." The answer is yes. "Motor vehicle" is defined in 49 U.S. Code (U.S.C.) '30102 as:

[A] vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and highways, but does not include a vehicle operated only on a rail line.

Your trailer dolly clearly meets the definition of a motor vehicle since the dolly is designed to be drawn by mechanical power on the streets, roads, and highways. It is referred to in NHTSA regulations (49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), section 571.3) as a "trailer converter dolly," which is defined as "a trailer chassis equipped with one or more axles, a lower half of a fifth wheel and a drawbar."

We note that a trailer converter dolly, although fabricated on a trailer chassis, is not a trailer. It is a motor vehicle designed to tow another vehicle rather than carry persons or property itself.

The following standards and regulations apply to your manufacture of the trailer converter dolly. As a manufacturer of a motor vehicle, you must submit certain identifying information to NHTSA in accordance with 49 CFR Part 566, Manufacturer Identification (copy enclosed). You must also ensure that a dolly with a hydraulic braking system must meet FMVSS No. 116, Motor vehicle brake fluids (49 CFR 571.116). You must also comply with the requirements of 49 CFR Parts 567, Certification. In addition, in the event that you or NHTSA determines that your product contains a safety- related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. The enclosed information sheet briefly describes those responsibilities.

As Mr. Myers discussed with you, since your trailer dolly is designed and intended for interstate marketing and transport, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) may have requirements applicable to your product. Accordingly, I will forward a copy of your letter to Mr. James Scapellato, Director, Office of Motor Carrier Research and Standards, FHWA, this address, for further response. In the alternative, you may contact Mr. Larry Minor of Mr. Scapellato's staff at this address or at (202) 366-4012 to discuss pertinent FHWA regulations.

Finally, you mentioned in your letter that some states may have certain restrictions or requirements for your trailer dolly. NHTSA does not have information on those state requirements. However, you may be able to obtain such information from:

American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators 4200 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1000 Arlington, VA 22203 (703) 522-4200

I hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any further questions or seek additional information, please feel free to contact Mr. Myers at this address or at (202) 366-2992, or by fax at (202) 366-3820.

Sincerely,

John Womack Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosures

ref:116#571#566#567 d:10/16/95

ID: 17843.wkm

Mr. Martin Fluss
International Import Export M.E.F., Inc.
7402 Kildare Road
Montreal, Quebec
Canada H4W-1C3

Dear Mr. Fluss:

This responds to your letter to Mr. John Womack of my staff and refers to your telephone conversation of May 6, 1998 with Walter Myers of my staff regarding your "Flat Tire Emergency Helper" (FTEH). You asked for a letter from us indicating that FTEH is an accessory to a vehicle. From your description of the item in your letter and the picture you sent in response to Mr. Myers' May 6 telephone call, the FTEH is an accessory to a vehicle.

By of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has the authority under U. S. law to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. The law establishes a self-certification system in which vehicle and equipment manufacturers certify that their products comply with all applicable FMVSSs. NHTSA enforces the FMVSSs by purchasing vehicles and equipment and testing them for compliance with applicable standards. NHTSA also investigates defects relating to motor vehicle safety. If a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a noncompliance or a safety-related defect exists, the manufacturer must notify purchasers of that product and remedy the problem free of charge. Any manufacturer that fails to provide notification of or remedy for a noncompliance or defect may be subject to a civil penalty of up to $1,100 per violation. In view of the self-certification system described above, NHTSA neither approves, disapproves, endorses, nor grants clearances for motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment.

Turning now to the FTEH, we would classify it as an item of motor vehicle equipment, which is defined in 49 U.S. Code (U.S.C.), 30102(a)(7) (A) and (B) as:

(A). any system, part, or component of a motor vehicle as originally manufactured; [or]

(B). any similar part or component manufactured or sold for replacement or improvement of a system, part, or component, or as an accessory or addition to a motor vehicle; . . .

Under prior NHTSA interpretations, in order to be considered an accessory, the FTEH must meet two tests:

a. A substantial portion of its expected uses are related to the operation or maintenance of motor vehicles; and

b. It is purchased or otherwise acquired, and principally used, by ordinary users of motor vehicles.

After reviewing the information you provided regarding your product, we conclude that the FTEH is an item of motor vehicle equipment and in particular, an accessory. It was designed and is or will be marketed with the expectation that a substantial portion of its expected use will be with motor vehicles. Further, your information indicates that the FTEH is intended to be purchased and principally used by ordinary users of motor vehicles, as opposed to professional vehicle repair businesses, since its stated purpose is to provide a way to drive a vehicle with a flat tire to a place where the tire can safely be changed or repaired.

While we find that the FTEH is an item of motor vehicle equipment, NHTSA has not issued an FMVSS establishing performance standards applicable to this product. However, you as the importer are subject to the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 30118 - 30121 (copy enclosed) which set forth the notification and remedy procedures for products with defects related to motor vehicle safety. As noted above, in the event that you or NHTSA determines that the product contains a safety-related defect, you would be responsible for remedying the problem free of charge to the purchasers of the product.

One final point. Before you can market the FTEH in the United States, 49 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 551 at Subpart D (copy enclosed) requires that you appoint a permanent resident of the United States as your agent for the service of legal process, notices, orders, decisions, and other applicable requirements. The agent can be an individual, firm, or a domestic corporation.

For your additional information, I am enclosing a copy of an interpretative letter we issued to Mr. Jan Peter Kryger of Quickwheel, Inc., regarding a product similar to yours. Also enclosed are copies of information papers entitled Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment, and Where to Obtain NHTSA's Safety Standards and Regulations.

I hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any questions or need additional information, feel free to contact Mr. Myers at this address or at (202) 366-2992, fax (202) 366-3820.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosures
ref:vsa
d.6/30/98

ID: 11561MLV

Mr. Juergen Babirad
ORSC Consultant
Rehabilitation Technology Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 540
Kinderhook, NY 12106h

Dear Mr. Babirad:

This responds to your letter of February 5, 1996, requesting "a waiver of FMVSS 208 in regards to the air bag deployment system." You explained that you have

been asked to advise a consumer with regards to installing an aftermarket six way power seat base into his 1995 Dodge Ram Van. This power seat base installation mounts in an area which requires the relocation of one of the air bag deployment sending units found under the driver's seat. The instructions provided by the OEM specifically prohibit relocation of this unit.

You further explained that the van owner "is permanently disabled and requires a wheelchair for all of his mobility." Because of the special design of this seat base, he is able to transfer into the seat.

In summary, our answer is that the vehicle may be modified. NHTSA will not institute enforcement proceedings against a repair business that modifies the seat on a vehicle to accommodate a condition such as you describe. A more detailed answer to your letter is provided below.

I would like to begin by noting that repair businesses are permitted to modify vehicles without obtaining permission from NHTSA to do so, 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. Since the situation you describe is among those given special consideration by NHTSA, this letter should provide you with the relief you seek.

Our agency is authorized to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. Manufacturers are required to certify that their products conform to our safety standards before they can be offered for sale. 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 FMVSS. 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 FMVSS. Violations of this prohibition are punishable by civil fines up to $1,000 per violation.

Moving a seat, and presumably moving the seat belts for the seat, could affect compliance with four safety 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. Your letter provides information that the modification to the vehicle cannot be done in a way that would not violate the make inoperative prohibition.

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. As I have already noted above, NHTSA will not institute enforcement proceedings against a repair business that modifies the seat on the vehicle to accommodate the condition you describe.

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 the modifications. For example, in moving a seat, it is critical that the modifier ensure that the seat is solidly anchored in its new location. In addition, you should consult with the manufacturer to determine the effect of moving the air bag deployment sending unit. The modification may cause the air bag to deploy, and 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.

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

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel

ref:VSA#208 d:3/21/96

ID: nht80-2.20

DATE: 04/24/80

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: White Motor Corporation

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

April 24, 1980

Mr. James W. Lawrence White Motor Corporation 35129 Curtis Boulevard Eastlake, Ohio 44094

Dear Mr. Lawrence:

This responds to your letters dated March 11, 1980, and March 21, 1980, asking several questions about Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 115, Vehicle identification number.

Your first question relates to the number sequentially assigned to the vehicle by the manufacturer as required by S5.5.3.3 of the standard. You wish to know whether after assigning a number to a vehicle prior to its manufacture, the number may be cancelled if the vehicle is not actually manufactured. The answer is yes. This is permissible under the standard so long as the number is not reassigned to another vehicle, thereby destroying the sequence.

You also wish to know if White may assign a vehicle identification number to glider kits which it manufactures. Section 571.7(e) and (f) of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations set forth the criteria for determining whether the vehicle created from a glider kit is to be considered a new vehicle or the original vehicle. If the vehicle is considered new, it must comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, including the requirement that a new vehicle identification number be assigned (Standard No. 115). If, however, the vehicle is not considered new, the vehicle identification number originally issued for the vehicle must be the one that is assigned. (See section 108(a)(2)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended.)

Sincerely,

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel

March 11, 1980 Mr. Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Admin. 400 Seventh Street, SW Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: FMVSS-115 Request for Interpretation - S 4.5.3.3 Sequential Assignment of Serial Numbers

Dear Mr. Berndt:

White Motor Corporation sequentially assigns serial numbers by customer to enhance problem reporting, repair parts purchasing, vehicle licensing and defect recall. When a customer orders 50 vehicles, the attributes of which are identical, the 50 serial numbers will be sequential and assigned only to those vehicles. During the manufacturing process, if all or part of the order is cancelled, the serial numbers assigned to the unbuilt vehicles are cancelled and not reissued for any other vehicle. The remaining numbers as well as those in preceeding and subsequent customer orders are therefore sequential even though not every number is used.

The preamble discussion on page 36451 of the August 17, 1978 Federal Register addressing the issue of some manufacturers desiring to keep confidential the total number of vehicles manufactured is, in our opinion, a corrolary to this condition. White believes, and requests confirmation that, the requirement for sequential assignment does not also require the use of every number in the sequence.

Sincerely,

WHITE MOTOR CORPORATION

James W. Lawrence, Manager Engineering Reliability & Government Standards Dept.

JWL/cjb

March 21, 1980

Mr. Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Admin. 400 Seventh Street, SW Washington, D.C. 20590 Re: FMVSS-115 Request for Interpretation Vehicle Identification Numbers for Glider Kits

Dear Mr. Berndt:

White Motor Corporation manufactures Glider Kits which are sold through its Service Department for use in rebuilding used and wrecked vehicles. FMVSS-115 does not apply to these kits because they are not new vehicles as manufactured.

There are, however, some states which allow the rebuilt vehicle to carry the identity of the kit, rather than that of the scrapped vehicle. To facilitate the registration of these vehicles, White issues a Manufacturers' Statement of Origin and a vehicle identification number. Registration as a White also provides traceability for recall should the need arise.

White believes, and requests confirmation that, although the standard does not apply to these vehicles, the standard does not prohibit the application of VIN to a Glider Kit.

Sincerely,

WHITE MOTOR CORPORATION

James W. Lawrence, Manager Engineering Reliability & Government Standards Dept.

JWL/cjb

ID: nht75-4.22

DATE: 04/03/75

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; J. C. Schultz; NHTSA

TO: Ventline, Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of February 27, 1975, regarding the use of rubber-modified polypropylene plastic in a roof ventilator which you manufacture. You enclose a sample of the material.

A plastic material used in the roof ventilator of a motor home must meet the requirements of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205 (49 CFR @ 571.205). Our conclusion is based on the fact that ANS Standard Z26.1-1966, which is incorporated into the Federal standard, includes ventilators and openings in the roof of motor vehicles as locations in which glazing materials meeting the requirements of the standard are directed to be used. Any of the materials specified in ANS Z26, and the plastic materials added to the standard (items 12 and 13) on November 11, 1972, may be used in a roof ventilator of a motor home. We would consider such a ventilator to be a "window" of the motor home.

The NHTSA has in the past amended Standard No. 205 to permit the use of new materials in vehicle locations following a manufacturer's petition for such an amendment. It appears from your letter that the use of polypropylene in roof ventilators would not create a safety hazard. However, in order for us to consider a change in the standard it will be necessary for you to provide us with information on the performance of this material. One way that manufacturers have provided us this information in the past is to have the material tested to the least restrictive requirements of the standard for any material which the standard permits to be used in the location desired.

I have enclosed a copy of NHTSA procedural rules (49 CFR Part 523) containing information on submitting a petition for rulemaking. Such a petition should contain the information I have referred to regarding the performance of polypropylene.

In your letter you ask for a code number should we determine that the material must conform to Standard No. 205. A code number, however, is issued only to a prime glazing material manufacturer, who is one who either fabricates, laminates, or tempers the glazing material. The request for such a code number must be made directly by the prime glazing material manufacturer.

Sincerely,

ATTACH.

February 27, 1975

Chief Counsel -- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Ref: F.M.V.S.S. 205

Gentlemen:

Ventline, Inc. is a manufacturer of roof ventilators for motor homes and campers. We are trying to determine if F.M.V.S.S. #205 applies to our product. (literature enclosed.)

The purpose of this standard mentions, (1) injuries from impact with glazing surfaces, (2) ensurance of driver visibility in motor vehicle windows, (3) minimize possibility of occupants being thrown through windows in collisions.

(1 & 3) As far as injuries from impact go, the possibility of contact with the dome in a collision is very remote since the opening in the unit is only 12 inches square and that area is blocked by a heavy gage steel bar across the opening which makes it most difficult to come into direct contact with the plastic dome.

(2) The concern of transparency and driver visibility is completely unrelated to the intent of the vent. It is installed in the roof of the vehicle, not one of the adjacent sides to areas occupied by persons, and is used primarily for ventilation. It also allows a limited amount of light through the "TRANSLUCENT" not transparent dome. It's intent was not to provide visibility through the roof.

The material used in this dome is a rubber modified polypropylene plastic which has superior impact resistance. As you can see by the small sample I have enclosed, it also has a good degree of flexibility to resist breakage.

To the best of our knowledge, there isn't any glazing being done with polypropylene because of the difficulty of obtaining good transparency, so it doesn't seem to us that our dome should be considered glazing material and shouldn't have to comply with F.M.V.S.S. #205.

If in your opinion, after considering these points, you feel that we must comply with #205, please consider this our application for a manufacturers code mark.

We are eagerly awaiting your decision on this matter.

Sincerely,

VENTLINE, INC. -- Dave Bickel, Product Engineering

enclosure

cc: Harry Hunt; Ernie Baker

ID: 04-003303Suzuki_benchseat

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

Dear Mr. Bush:

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

ref:214
d.8/16/04

ID: 13720.mls

Mr. Gunnar Almen
AB Svensk Bilprovning
Business and Technical Department
Mail Box 508
S-162 15 Vallingby
Sweden

Dear Mr. Almen:

This responds to your request for an interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 105, Hydraulic Brake Systems (49 CFR 571.105). You stated that as the national testing agency for vehicles imported into Sweden, you need to know U.S. regulations for asbestos free brake linings.

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 FMVSSs that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not approve or certify any vehicles or items of equipment, as is the practice in Europe. Instead, Chapter 301 establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards.

The agency has used this authority to issue FMVSS No. 105, which specifies requirements for hydraulic service brake and associated parking brake systems. This Standard does not contain any provision requiring or prohibiting asbestos free brake linings.

While most brake linings are asbestos free, some brake linings sold in the aftermarket have asbestos.

Please note that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued rules prohibiting the use of asbestos brakes. We have forwarded your letter to Mr. Mike Matthiesen, Chemical Management Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, EPA, 401 M Street, SW, Washington DC 20460. He should be able to explain how EPA's rules apply to asbestos brakes.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any other questions, please contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel

cc: Mr. Mike Matthiesen
Chemical Management Division
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, EPA,
401 M Street, SW,
Washington DC 20460

ref:105
d:5/6/97

ID: 15215.wkm

Mr. Carlos Fracaroli
Pirelli
Av. Alexandre de Gusmâo
487-09110-900
Santo André, SP Brasil

Dear Mr. Fracaroli:

Please pardon the delay in responding to your letter in which you inquired about tolerances in the ambient temperature requirements of Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars (49 CFR 571.119), and 49 CFR 575.104, Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards. You stated that you found no such tolerances in the standards and asked how you should calibrate your laboratory if none exist, since ambient temperatures can oscillate 5 degrees Fahrenheit (F).

You are correct that the above standards do not provide for tolerances with respect to the testing temperatures of tires. All of our FMVSSs specify minimum performance requirements. Thus, manufacturers must design and build the products to meet or exceed the specified performance. Since increased temperature is generally detrimental to tire performance, manufacturers must ensure that each tire meets the required performance at the temperature specified in the standard, in this case, 95 degrees F. Given the variability in laboratory equipment as you correctly noted, however, the agency allows an ambient temperature tolerance in our compliance testing of +0F-10F. The +0F ensures that the actual temperature will never oscillate above 95F. That upper limit ensures that we do not exceed the requirements of the standard, which would invalidate the test. For your information, please find enclosed extracts from this agency's Laboratory Procedures for Tire Testing and Data Reporting, DOT publication No. TP-119-04, May, 1988, applicable to FMVSS No. 119, and Laboratory Procedures for Tire Temperature Resistance Testing, DOT publication No. TP-UTQG-H-01, May 25, 1979, applicable to the UTQGS. Both publications are available from this agency, ATTN: NAD-40.

I hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any further questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact this office at this address or by Fax at 011-202- 366-3820.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
Enclosures
ref:119#575
d.10/8/97