NHTSA Interpretation File Search
Overview
NHTSA's Chief Counsel interprets the statutes that the agency administers and the standards and regulations that it issues. Members of the public may submit requests for interpretation, and the Chief Counsel will respond with a letter of interpretation. These interpretation letters look at the particular facts presented in the question and explain the agency’s opinion on how the law applies given those facts. These letters of interpretation are guidance documents. They do not have the force and effect of law and are not meant to bind the public in any way. They are intended only to provide information to the public regarding existing requirements under the law or agency policies.
Understanding NHTSA’s Online Interpretation Files
NHTSA makes its letters of interpretation available to the public on this webpage.
An interpretation letter represents the opinion of the Chief Counsel based on the facts of individual cases at the time the letter was written. While these letters may be helpful in determining how the agency might answer a question that another person has if that question is similar to a previously considered question, do not assume that a prior interpretation will necessarily apply to your situation.
- Your facts may be sufficiently different from those presented in prior interpretations, such that the agency's answer to you might be different from the answer in the prior interpretation letter;
- Your situation may be completely new to the agency and not addressed in an existing interpretation letter;
- The agency's safety standards or regulations may have changed since the prior interpretation letter was written so that the agency's prior interpretation no longer applies; or
- Some combination of the above, or other, factors.
Searching NHTSA’s Online Interpretation Files
Before beginning a search, it’s important to understand how this online search works. Below we provide some examples of searches you can run. In some cases, the search results may include words similar to what you searched because it utilizes a fuzzy search algorithm.
Single word search
Example: car
Result: Any document containing that word.
Multiple word search
Example: car seat requirements
Result: Any document containing any of these words.
Connector word search
Example: car AND seat AND requirements
Result: Any document containing all of these words.
Note: Search operators such as AND or OR must be in all capital letters.
Phrase in double quotes
Example: "headlamp function"
Result: Any document with that phrase.
Conjunctive search
Example: functionally AND minima
Result: Any document with both of those words.
Wildcard
Example: headl*
Result: Any document with a word beginning with those letters (e.g., headlamp, headlight, headlamps).
Example: no*compl*
Result: Any document beginning with the letters “no” followed by the letters “compl” (e.g., noncompliance, non-complying).
Not
Example: headlamp NOT crash
Result: Any document containing the word “headlamp” and not the word “crash.”
Complex searches
You can combine search operators to write more targeted searches.
Note: The database does not currently support phrase searches with wildcards (e.g., “make* inoperative”).
Example: Headl* AND (supplement* OR auxiliary OR impair*)
Result: Any document containing words that are variants of “headlamp” (headlamp, headlights, etc.) and also containing a variant of “supplement” (supplement, supplemental, etc.) or “impair” (impair, impairment, etc.) or the word “auxiliary.”
Search Tool
NHTSA's Interpretation Files Search
Interpretations | Date |
---|---|
search results table | |
ID: 19844.ztvOpenMr. Glenn Panes Dear Mr. Panes: This is in reply to your e-mail of April 7, 1999. You are interested in buying an aftermarket combination stop/turn signal lamp which has a clear lens and red and amber bulbs. You ask whether the lamps are legal to use. Apparently your local police do not object, but you are concerned about being stopped somewhere else. The answer to your question depends on a number of factual issues, as well as the laws of local and state jurisdictions. Therefore, this is not a question we can fully answer for you. We establish the Federal motor vehicle safety standards that apply to new motor vehicles and vehicle equipment from the time of manufacture until time of first sale. One of these, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment specifies the lighting equipment a vehicle must have when manufactured, and the performance of this original equipment and the aftermarket equipment intended to replace it. We can tell you how this standard relates to the aftermarket lamp you describe. Aftermarket replacement equipment is required to comply with Federal new-equipment requirements, and be certified as complying. We are unable to tell whether the combination stop/turn signal lamp you describe complies but would like to make a few comments on it. Under Standard No. 108, a turn signal lamp is permitted to emit amber light. The amber light may be provided by either an amber lens and clear bulb, or an amber bulb and a clear lens. The question, then, is whether the turn signal lamp meets Standard No. 108's photometric specifications. Standard No. 108 has incorporated by reference the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) specifications for amber turn signal lamps. SAE specifications for stop lamps are also incorporated by reference in Standard No. 108. These specifications require the use of special bulbs for testing purposes. However, SAE has no specifications for red bulbs. Thus, it may not be possible for manufacturers to certify that a lamp meets all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Nevertheless, if the manufacturer has marked the replacement lamp with a "DOT" symbol (or certified its conformance on its container), you may regard that as its representation that the lamp meets all applicable Federal requirements. This certification, however, does not mean that the original equipment lamp can be removed and the new, different one substituted without causing a noncompliance with Standard No. 108. The standard requires vehicles to have two red reflex reflectors on their rear, and one on each side at the rear. In many instances, these reflectors are incorporated into red rear combination lamp lenses. Thus, depending on the location of red reflex reflectors on the side and rear of the car, substitution of a white-lensed stop lamp might remove this desirable safety feature. Even if the lamp were certified as complying, if installation of the lamp you are interested in would result in removal of the only reflex reflectors on the side and/or rear, there would be a violation of Federal law if this work was performed by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business, and if the modifier did not add two reflex reflectors to the rear of the car. However, this prohibition does not apply to you, if you, the vehicle's owner, substitutes the lamp. Nevertheless, it is possible that you could be cited somewhere for a violation of local laws if the vehicle lacks rear reflex reflectors. As a general rule, we urge caution in replacing any lighting equipment with novelty items. Some new motor vehicles may be equipped with original equipment rear combination lamps that have clear lenses, but the red color of the light emanating from these lamps is produced by a clear bulb projecting through a red inner plastic lens. Such lamps do not use red bulbs and are certified as complying. If you have any further questions, you can contact Taylor Vinson of this Office, either by phone (202-366-5263), or by e-mail (Tvinson@nhtsa.dot.gov). Sincerely, |
1999 |
ID: 20674.ztvOpenMr. Vann H. Wilber Dear Mr. Wilber: We are replying to your letter of September 10, 1999, with reference to marking headlamps with the symbol "DOT." Paragraph S7.2(a) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment, requires the lens of each headlamp and beam contributor to be marked with the symbol "DOT" to certify its compliance with all applicable requirements. You state that "lens" can be interpreted on some contemporary headlamp designs to "include several elements on the reflector or other interior components that contribute to the photometric performance of the forward light." You ask that we interpret S7.2(a) to allow the DOT symbol to be located on internal optical elements "as long as it is visible from the front when installed on the vehicle without removal of any part." You reference our interpretation of April 25, 1996, to Guy Dorleans "that could appear to conflict with the interpretation we are seeking here," and you seek to distinguish it "on the basis that the question addressed by the agency in that letter apparently presumed that the only 'lens' in the headlamp assembly at issue there was the 'clear lens' in the front of the headlamp housing, whereas the advanced designs we are asking you to consider here include optical elements ('lens') on the interior of the lamp." In the event we cannot distinguish it, you ask that we "reverse the conclusions in that interpretation to the extent they would preclude marking the 'DOT' symbol on interior optical elements." I am sorry to say that we cannot distinguish your request from the Dorleans letter or reverse the conclusions to the extent that we can allow certification to be placed on interior optical elements. As you pointed out, the DOT marking requirement originated as a certification applied to the lenses of sealed beam headlamps. You are correct that Standard No. 108 does not define the word "lens." In the absence of a definition, we believe that the word "lens" has been clearly understood over the years to refer to the glass or plastic front of the headlamp housing through which light is emitted, and not to the other components of a headlamp, the reflector and the light source. Thus, whether a headlamp is sealed beam, replaceable bulb, integral beam, its lens has been clearly identifiable as such for purposes of affixing the DOT marking. We cannot interpret the word "lens" in a manner that departs from the common understanding of the word. However, we intend to address the concern of your members by rulemaking to amend Standard No. 108 to adopt a definition of "lens" broad enough to encompass interior optical elements where the certification symbol could be placed . Sincerely, |
1999 |
ID: 11552ZTVOpen M. Guy Dorleans Dear M. Dorleans: We have received your letter of January 31, 1996, asking for confirmation that certain motor vehicle equipment being manufactured by Valeo is considered a replaceable headlamp lens for purposes of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108. You have enclosed drawings to assist us in this interpretation. The drawings show that the "replaceable lens" as you term it is a bonded assembly of an opaque device and a translucent device. The translucent device seems intended to be placed in front of two unidentified light sources (we assume that at least one of these provides headlighting). The opaque device serves as the spacer to locate the translucent device as just stated. We confirm that this equipment is a "replaceable lens" within the meaning of Standard No. 108 even though it does contain opaque material. You have stated that the markings required by S7.2(e) (for a replacement headlamp lens with seal are "placed on the upper flange of the opaque part." In this position, it appears that the markings will not be visible when the headlamp is installed. Paragraph S7.2(a) requires that the lens of each replacement equipment headlamp be marked with the symbol "DOT" which constitutes the manufacturer's certification of compliance with all applicable standards. For purposes of complying with S7.2(a), and to reassure the public of the compliance of the headlamp, we urge that Valeo ensure that the DOT marking is applied to the front of the lens where it will be visible to an observer after it has been installed. If you have any questions, you may refer them to Taylor Vinson of this Office (202-366-5263). Sincerely, Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel ref:108 d:3/14/96
|
1996 |
ID: 19023.ztvOpenHerr Olaf Schmidt Dear Herr Schmidt: We apologize for the delay in answering your letter of March 27, 1998, on headlamp labels, but this Office did not receive a copy of it until November 3. If you wish to communicate with us by fax, we recommend that you mail a hard copy at the same time to minimize the possibility of lost correspondence. You report that "modern headlamp designs have the approval markings for the USA as well as for the European market on the lens as it is required by the relevant laws." In order to minimize confusion as to whether a headlamp has been designed to conform to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, or to conform with ECE requirements, Hella would like to place the words "Not D.O.T. approved" or "Not D.O.T. certified" on the bottom line of the labels that the company places on the rear of the headlamp housing of ECE headlamps. You have asked that we agree with your plan. We cannot agree with your plan. We understand that, under this plan, the "DOT" symbol would appear on each lens. S7.2(a) of Standard No. 108 requires that the lens of each original and replacement headlamp manufactured for sale in the United States must be marked with the symbol "DOT." This symbol is the certification required by 49 U.S.C. 30115 that the headlamp meets Standard No. 108. It cannot be qualified by a disclaimer placed on a label on the rear of the headlamp housing. A manufacturer must not mark a headlamp lens with the DOT symbol if the headlamp does not comply with Standard No. 108. A manufacturer who applies the DOT symbol to the lens of a headlamp that meets ECE requirements but does not comply with Standard No. 108, in our view, has provided certification that is materially false and misleading, and the manufacturer may be liable for a civil penalty. The maximum civil penalties authorized are $1,100 for importation of a single noncomplying headlamp, and $1,100 for each instance of false and misleading certification. We may impose a penalty up to a total of $880,000 for any related series of violations. Should it come to our attention that noncomplying headlamps with dual ECE/DOT markings are being imported into the United States, we will investigate the matter with a view towards seeking a civil penalty from any responsible headlamp manufacturer doing business in the United States. In addition, if nonconforming headlamps with dual ECE/DOT markings have previously been imported and sold, our laws require the importer to notify purchasers of the noncompliance, and to remedy the noncompliance at no charge. Sincerely, |
1999 |
ID: nht79-1.14OpenDATE: 10/04/79 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA TO: The Grote Manufacturing Co. TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION TEXT: October 4, 1979 Mr. C. J. Newman Vice President, Engineering The Grote Manufacturing Company State Rt. 7 - P.O. Box 766 Madison, Indiana 47250 Dear Mr. Newman: This in reply to your letter of August 23, 1979, to the former Chief Counsel Joseph J. Levin, Jr. You have asked whether a double-faced turn signal front side marker lamp "meets the intent" of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, and you enclosed a sample of the lamp for our inspection. You have quoted paragraph 3.4 of SAE Standard J588e, September 1970, which states "the flashing signal from a double faced signal lamp shall not be obliterated when subjected to external light rays from either in front or behind at any and all angles." It is not possible to make a definitive statement about your lamp without actually subjecting it to a representative external light source such as the headlamps of a vehicle in proximity to the vehicle to which the lamp is mounted, but its design appears adequate to meet the intent of paragraph 3.4. Any changes in design of the lenses or baffling from that of the sample lamp submitted, however, might transmit more light from external sources and may not meet paragraph 3.4. We would also like to observe that since the side marker signal uses the front and rear lenses of the turn signal in a single compartment a high intensity ratio of turn signal to side marker signal will be needed if the steady burning light from the side marker lamp is not to obscure the darker portion of the turn signal lamp. Sincerely, Frank Berndt Chief Counsel Mr. Taylor Vinson Office of the Chief Counsel NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATlON 400 Seventh Street S W WASHINGTON DC 20590 September 24, 1979 Dear Mr. Vinson Request for Interpretation In the case of a motorcycle headlamp, Table III of FMVSS 108 cites SAE J584, which in turn specifies that for photometric tests, the "bulb or unit shall be operated at its rated voltage during the test." Where the material bulb is an H1, H2, H3 or H4 halogen bulb that bears the E-mark signifying that it is in compliance with E/ECE/TRANS/505/Rev.1/Add.36, that is to say in compliance with Regulation 37 of the Geneva Agreement of 20 March 1958 as adopted by the general European governments, is the rated voltage required by SAE J584 the same rated voltage of ECE Regulation 37? Yours sincerely H J T YOUNG Vice President - Technical Affairs E/ECE/324 ) E/ECE/TRANS/505 )Rev.1/Add.36 Regulation No. 37 Annex 1 page 21/22 CATEGORY H4 Sheet H4/2 Characteristics Lamps of normal production Standard lamps *Insert chart here 1/ Where a yellow outer bulb is used, "m" and "n" denote the maximum dimensions of this bulb; where there is no outer bulb "m" denotes the maximum length of the lamp. 2/ It must be possible to insert the lamp into a cylinder of diameter "s" concentric with the reference axis and limited at one end by a plane parallel to and 20 mm distant from the reference plane and at the other end by a hemisphere of radius S/2. 3/ The obscuration must extend at least as far as the cylindrical part of the bulb. It must also overlap the internal shield when the latter is viewed in a direction perpendicular to the reference axis. The effect sought by obscuration may also be achieved by other means. 4/ The values indicated in the left-hand column relate to the driving beam. Those indicated in the right-hand column relate to the passing beam. August 23, 1979 U. S. Department of Transportation NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION Attn: Mr. J. J. Levin, Jr. Chief Counsel Dear Sir: We are considering certain revisions to our line of front double-faced pedestal mount turn signal lamps. Before making any commitment to our customers or before making any tool changes, we need your opinion as to whether the lamp meets the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 108. In the past, double-faced turn signal lamps having side marker devices have normally been manufactured with two bulbs -- a 1156 or 32 candle power bulb functioning as the turn signal system, and a 2 or 3 candle power bulb functioning as the side marker device. In this case, having an yellow lens to the front and a red lens to the rear. Our proposed change is to use one 1157 bulb, dual function 32 - 3 candle power filaments where the 32 candle power filament is used as the turn signal function and the 3 candle power is used as the side marker device. In order to do this, a yellow lens to the front, yellow lens to the rear is required and also the baffling inside of the double-faced lamp has to be reduced in order to meet the side marker requirements. With this particular design, all three lenses -- the lens to the front, to the rear and to the side -- function as part of the side marker device.
The question that we have is the intent of rulemaking covering turn signal lamps. The turn signal lamp, SA J588e, last revised September, 1970, includes Item 3.4 which states, "The flashing signal from a double-faced signal lamp shall not be obliterated when subjected to external light rays from either in front or behind at any and all angles." With the baffling area reduced inside of the lamp as indicated by the sample, and since the requirements are very subjective, we need an opinion as to whether the lamp does or does not meet the intent of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 108. Would you please review the sample and give us your opinion as soon as possible. Yours very truly, THE GROTE MANUFACTURING COMPANY C. J. Newman Vise President, Engineering CJN/aj |
|
ID: 11698.ZTVOpen M. Guy Dorleans Dear M. Dorleans: We have received your letter of March 19, 1996, asking for an interpretation of paragraphs S7.2(a) and S7.5(g) of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108. These paragraphs require that lenses of replaceable bulb headlamps be marked with the DOT symbol and the HB-type of light source used in the headlamp. Your engineers contemplate a clear-lensed headlamp, and would like to engrave these markings on a visible area of the inner bezel where they are easily seen from the outside. You ask for confirmation that this would meet the "spirit" of the requirement even if the definition of lens doesn't apply to an interior part. The Federal motor vehicle safety standards specify objective requirements. Failure to mark the lens in the manner specified by Standard No. 108 would create a noncompliance with the standard. Paragraphs S7.2(a) and S7.5(g) are very specific in their requirements that the lens be marked, and do not allow alternative marking of the bezel if the lens is clear. If you have any questions, you may refer them to Taylor Vinson of this Office (FAX 202-366-3820). Sincerely, Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel ref:108 d:4/25/96 |
1996 |
ID: aiam2930OpenMr. R. L. Ratz, P.E., Product Safety Engineering, Grumman Flxible, 970 Pittsburgh Drive, Delaware, OH 43015; Mr. R. L. Ratz P.E. Product Safety Engineering Grumman Flxible 970 Pittsburgh Drive Delaware OH 43015; Dear Mr. Ratz: This is in reply to your letter of December 8, 1978, asking whether th front and rear clearance lamps on your Model 870 Urban transit coach comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.; The front clearance lamps on the Model 870 are combined with the tur signal lamps, side marker lamps, and side reflex reflectors. The units are located 'on line with and just outboard of each rectangular headlamp,' with lens center 32 inches above the road surface, at a point that appears to be at the vehicle's overall width. The rear clearance lamps are combined with the stop lamps and rear side marker lamps, their horizontal center lines 64 inches above the road surface, at approximately the vehicle's overall width. Front and rear identification lamps are mounted at the top of the vehicle.; The general rule expressed by Table II of Standard No. 108 is tha clearance lamps must be mounted 'to indicate the overall width of the vehicle ... and as near the top thereof as practicable.' But a partial exception is provided by S4.3.1.4.: When the rear identification lamps are mounted at the extreme height of the vehicle, rear clearance lamps need not meet the requirement of Table II that they be located as close as practicable to the top of the vehicle.'; This means that the mid-body location of the rear clearance lamp i acceptable since the rear identification lamps are at the extreme height of the vehicle. But the exception does not extend to the front clearance lamps. While Standard No. 108 allows the manufacturer to determine what location is 'as close as practicable to the top of the vehicle', there will be instances when the overall width of the vehicle will not be indicated by the highest location. In such instances the best location will be the one that most closely approximates the intent behind the requirement - to indicate the overall width.; Specifically with reference to the Model 870, it appears to us that th close proximity of the combination lamp to the headlamp may result in the effectiveness of the clearance lamp being impaired by the brightness of the headlamp, and that the most practicable location sufficiently indicating the overall width of the vehicle, would be at the outer edges of the body directly below the windshield.; Sincerely, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Chief Counsel |
|
ID: nht78-2.15OpenDATE: 03/15/78 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; J. J. Levin, Jr.; NHTSA TO: Vetter Fairing Company TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of February 1, 1978, on motorcycle headlighting. You have asked whether the prohibition in SAE J580a Sealed Beam Headlamp against headlamp covers applies to a motorcycle. You have also asked the reason for the prohibition. SAE J580a Sealed Beam Headlamp is incorporated by reference in Table III of Standard No. 108 as one of the standards applicable to headlamps for use on passenger cars, and on multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses whose overall width is less than 80 inches. One of the SAE standards incorporated by reference for motorcycle headlighting is J584 which, as an option, allows motorcycles to be equipped with headlamps "meeting the requirements of SAE J579" (i.e. passenger car sealed beam headlamps). There is no reference in J579a to J580a, and we therefore do not read the prohibition against headlamp covers as applying to motorcycles equipped with sealed or unsealed headlamps. The reason for the prohibition is the degradation in Light output that can result from condensation under unsealed glass covers or from obscuration by grilles in front of the lens. SINCERELY, Vetter Fairing Company February 1, 1978 Office of Chief Council Joseph J. Levin, Jr. National Highway Traffic Safety Admin. Dear Sir: After reviewing Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations 571.108, Motor Vehicle Safety Standard Number 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment, I find a need to have several points of this regulation, relevant to our business, clarified and interpreted per your office. Table III, Required Motor Vehicle Lighting Equipment, Item - Headlamps, references the applicable SAE standard or recommende practice for passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks and buses to be, in part, SAE J580a, June 1966. Contained within SAE J580a, sealed beam headlamp, under General Requirements it states "A headlamp, when in use, shall not have any styling or other feature, such as a glass cover or grille in front of the lens." Is it correct to assume that this prohibition does not apply to a motorcycle or to a motorcycle with attached side car? Also would you please state the reason/s why passenger cars are prohibited from having any styling or other feature, such as a glass cover or grille in front of the lens when a headlamp is in use? Table III, Required Motor Vehicle Lighting Equipment, Item - Headlamps, references the applicable SAE standard or recommended practice for motorcycles to be, in part, SAE J584, April 1964. Standard SAE J584, motorcycle and motor driven cycle headlamps makes no mention of any prohibition of having any styling or other feature, such as a glass cover or grille in front of the lens when a headlamp is in use. Is it correct to infer that it is legal and within the scope of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard Number 108, to have styling or other feature, such as a glass cover, or plastic cover or grille in front of the lens when a headlamp is in use on a motorcycle or on a motorcycle with attached side car? It is in the intent of Vetter Fairing Company as a manufacturer of motorcycle accessories to conceive, research, design, produce, manufacture and market motorcycle accessories which meet or exceed all Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation. Your review of any and all applicable regulations relevant to our business is appreciated and your interpretation of such regulations pertaining to the above questions is requested so that we can meet our obligations, to consumers, to manufacturer motorcycle accessories which are safe and which comply with all Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. W. W. Schwartz Technical Engineer Research & Development Dept. cc: C. VETTER C. PERETHIAN
|
|
ID: nht74-1.39OpenDATE: 02/25/74 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; James B. Gregory; NHTSA TO: Ford TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of January 24, 1974, asking for an interpretation as to whether a rear lamp assembly design that Ford demonstrated to NHTSA representatives conforms to the location requirements of Standard No. 108. The assembly consists of three units which, from outboard to inboard, as a rear lighting assembly, comprise the tail lamp/stop lamp, backup lamp, and turn signal lamp. Standard No. 108 specifies that stop lamps, tail lamps, and turn signal lamps be "as far apart as practicable." The standard does not specify a minimum separation distance of lamps, a maximum permissible location inboard, or location of one system relative to another. The determination of practicability in lamp spacing is to be made by the vehicle manufacturer, and the agency has generally afforded manufacturers some latitude in this interpretation. Therefore, the configuration you have described and demonstrated would not violate Standard No. 108. It should be noted, however, that it would be in conflict with the requirements for rear turn signals and stop lamps as proposed in Docket 69-19, Notice 3. Sincerely, ATTACH. January 24, 1974 James B. Gregory -- Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Dear Dr. Gregory: On January 14 Ford demonstrated a rear lamp design that it plans to use on one of its 1975 models. The purpose of the demonstration was to display the design and make sure there were no misunderstandings as to the lamp's conformance with the location requirements of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108. Ford pointed out that the various functions of the lamp were "as far apart as practicable" for the rear end design of the vehicle and for the separation of signal functions by space and color in which both the NHTSA and Ford are interested. For the record the lamp assembly may be described as follows: Red White Amber Left side shown (Approximately to scale) * The outboard pod has a red lens and wraps around the quarter panel, thus serving as a rear side market, taillamp and stop lamp and as side and rear reflex reflectors. * The center pod has a white lens and serves as the backup lamp. * The inboard pod has an amber lens and serves as the turn signal lamp. While it is our impression that NHTSA technical personnel who examined this lamp design agreed that it fully meets the location requirements of Standard No. 108, we should appreciate formal confirmation that the Administration concurs in our interpretation. Respectfully submitted, J. C. Eckhold -- Director, Automotive Safety Office, FORD MOTOR COMPANY |
|
ID: nht89-3.54OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: 12/13/89 FROM: JIM EVANS -- QUALITY CONTROL DEPT., THE BARGMAN COMPANY TO: STEVEN P. WOOD -- ACTING CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA TITLE: NONE ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 02-26-90 TO JIM EVANS, THE BARGMAN CO., FROM STEPHEN P. WOOD, NHTSA; (REDBOOK) A35; VSA 103(D); STD. 108 TEXT: My company manufactures lighting products for the recreational vehicle industry and we are in need of an interpretation of the rules in FMVSS 108 concerning the use of reflex reflectors on the rear of vehicles. I can find in this standard where two (2) red reflex reflectors are required on the rear of a vehicle (Tables I, II, III, IV) but I cannot find anything in the standard that would prohibit the use of any other color reflectors that could be used in addition to the red reflectors. Specifically, we manufacture a red taillight lens that has a reflex reflector area around the outer edge of the lens. The stop, turn and tail, as well as the reflex functions all exceed the minimum requirements for these functions. One of our customers has asked us to mold this same lens in yellow so that it could be used for the turn signal function. It would be mounted side by side with the red unit which would now be used for only stop and tail functions. The problem now arise s where both the yellow and red lens would be visable to traffic approaching from the rear. I checked with a local State Police Post here in Michigan, and they were able to find a section in the State Code that clearly states that reflectors mounted on the rear of a vehicle shall reflect a red color (I am enclosing a copy of this section for your reference). As I stated in my opening paragraph, I cannot find an equivalent ruling in the National standard. I am hoping that your office may have already addressed this problem in the past and that a ruling is already in effect. My questions are two-fold: First, is it legal to put any other color reflector on the rear of a vehicle as long as the red reflectors are also present? Secondly, if in fact this situation is illegal (which I believe it probably is), could the National st andard be amended to show this fact and eliminate future confusion? Whichever way is correct, I would like to request a written statement to that effect as well as any supporting documentation for the ruling. I am looking forward to hearing from you as soon as possible so that we can clear this matter up once and for all. Thank you. Enclosure (d) On every trailer or semitrailer having a gross weight in excess of 3,000 pounds: On the front, 2 clearance lamps, 1 at each side. On each side, 2 side marker lamps, 1 at or near the front and 1 at or near the rear. On each side, 2 reflectors, 1 at or near the front and 1 at or near the rear. On the rear, 2 clearance lamps, 1 at each side, also 2 reflectos, 1 at each side, and 1 stop light. (e) On every poletrailer: On each side, 1 side marker lamp and 1 clearance lamp which may be in combination, to show to the front, side or rear. On the rear of the poletrailer or load, 2 reflectors, 1 on each side. (f) On every trailer or semitrailer weighing 3,000 pounds gross or less: On the rear, 2 reflectors, 1 on each side if any trailer or semitrailer is so loaded or is of such dimensions as to obscure the stop light on the towing vehicle, then such vehicle shall (Illegible Words) with 1 stop light (g) When operated on the highway, every vehicle which has a maximum potential speed of 25 miles an hour implement of husbandry, farm tractor or special mobile equipment shall be identified with a reflective device as follows: An equilateral triangle in shape, at least 16 inches wide at the base and at least 14 inches in height, with a dark red border, at least 1 3/4 inches wide of highly reflective beaded material; A center triangle, at least 12 1/4 inches on each side of yellow orange fluorescent materials. The device shall be mounted on the rear of the vehicle, broad base down, not less than 3 feet not more than 5 feet above the ground and as near the center of the vehicle as possible. The use of this reflective device is restricted to use on slow movi ng vehicles specified in this section, and use of such reflective device on any other type of vehicle or stationary object on the highway is prohibited. On the rear, at each side, red reflectors or reflectorized material visible from all distances within 500 to 50 feet to the rear when directly in front of lawful upper beams of headlamps. Am. 1988, Act 383. CI 257.689 Clearance and marker lamps and reflectors; color. [MSA 9.2389] Sec. 689. (a) Front clearance lamps and those marker lamps and reflectors mounted on the front or on the side near the front of a vehicle shall display or reflect an amber color. (b) Rear clearance lamps and those marker lamps and reflectors mounted on the rear or on the sides near the rear of a vehicle shall display or reflect a red color. (c) All lighting devices and reflectors mounted on the rear of any vehicle shall display or reflect a red color, except the stop light or other signal device, which may be red or amber, and except that the light illuminating the license plate-shall be white. CI 257.690 Same; mounting [MSA 9.2390] Sec. 690. (1) Reflectors shall be mounted at a height not less than 15 inches and not higher than 60 inches above the ground on which the vehicle stands, except that if the highest part of the permanent structure of the vehicle is less than 15 inches , the reflector at such point shall be mounted as high as that part of the permanent structure will permit. (2) The rear reflectors on a pole-trailer may be mounted on each side of the bolster or load. (3) Any required red reflector on the rear of a vehicle may be incorporated with the tail lamp, but such reflector shall meet all the other reflector requirements of this chapter. (4) Clearance lamps shall be mounted on the permanent structure of the vehicle in such a manner as to indicate its extreme width and as near the top thereof as practicable. Clearance lamps and side marker lamps may be mounted in combination if illumi nation is given as required herein with reference to both. Am. 1988, Act 383. CI 257.691 Same; visibility. [MSA 9.2391] Sec. 691. (a) Every reflector upon any vehicle referred to in section 689 of this chapter shall be of such size and characteristics and so maintained as to be readily visible at nighttime from all distances within 500 to 50 feet from the vehicle when directly in front of lawful upper beams of headlamps. Reflectors required to be mounted on the sides of the vehicle shall reflect the required color of light to the sides, and those mounted on the rear shall reflect a red color to the rear. (b) Front and rear clearance lamps shall be capable of being seen and distinguished under normal atmospheric conditions at the times lights are required at a distance of 500 feet from the front and rear, respectively, of the vehicle. (c) Side marker lamps shall be capable of being seen and distinguished under normal atmospheric conditions at the times lights are required at a distance of 500 feet from the side of the vehicle on which mounted. CI 257.692 Combination vehicles obstructed lights. [MSA 9.2392] Sec. 692. Whenever motor and other vehicles are operated in combination during the time that lights are required, any lamp (except tail lamps) need not be lighted which, by reason of its location on a vehicle of the combination, would be obscured by another vehicle of the combination, but this shall not affect the requirement that lighted clearance lamps be displayed on the front of the foremost vehicle required to have clearance lamps, nor that all lights required on the rear of the rearmost vehicl e of any combination shall be lighted. |
Request an Interpretation
You may email your request to Interpretations.NHTSA@dot.gov or send your request in hard copy to:
The Chief Counsel
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, W41-326
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE
Washington, DC 20590
If you want to talk to someone at NHTSA about what a request for interpretation should include, call the Office of the Chief Counsel at 202-366-2992.
Please note that NHTSA’s response will be made available in this online database, and that the incoming interpretation request may also be made publicly available.