ID: nht89-1.83

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 04/28/89

FROM: THOMAS A. COZ -- SENIOR ATTORNEY NORTH AMERICAN VAN LINES

TO: OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

TITLE: HIGH-MOUNTED TRAILER STOP LAMPS/TURN SIGNALS

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 08/24/89 FROM STEPHEN P. WOOD -- NHTSA TO THOMAS A. COZ -- NORTH AMERICAN VAN LINES; REDBOOK A34; STANDARD 108; LETTER DATED 01/13/88 FROM L.F. ROLLIN -- DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL TO THOMAS A. COZ -- NORTH AMERICAN VAN LINES

TEXT: Dear Sir or Madam:

The purpose of this letter is to request an opinion regarding North American Van Lines, Inc. ("NAVL") use of high-mounted stop lamps/turn signals on some of our interstate highway trailer fleet. I raise this question in light of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 ("FMVSS 108") which specifies mounting heights for brake lights and turn signals on interstate motor carrier equipment.

To assist you in rendering your opinion, I enclose a photograph of a NAVL trailer which has been retrofitted with high-mounted stop lamps/turn signals on both sides of the trailer. In addition, I enclose a copy of "Final Specs," dated January 19, 198 7, pursuant to which NAVL ordered 50 trailers from the Kentucky Manufacturing Company. NAVL has received these new trailers from Kentucky Manufacturing, and they all have the high-mounted stop lamps/turn signals specified in Item 14 of the three-page "F inal Specs" sheets. Finally, I enclose a copy of a VHS-type videocassette which shows the operation of high-mounted stop lamps/turn signals on the highway.

NAVL believes these supplemental high-mounted stop lamps/turn signals are permitted under FMVSS 108. For purposes of clarity, however, NAVL hereby requests your written opinion on this question. Please send your written opinion in response to this l etter to me at the address listed above.

If you have any questions or if you need further clarification of what NAVL is asking you to do, please contact me directly. My telephone number is (219) 429-2224.

Thank you for your assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,

ENCLOSURES

ID: nht74-2.15

DATE: 03/20/74

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; R. B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Kelsey-Hayes Company

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your February 1, 1974, request for interpretation of the language "maximum temperature of 500 +/- 50 degrees F" appearing in S6.1.8.1 of Standard No. 121, Air brake systems, 49 CFR 571.121.

The language is intended to specify a temperature range within which to conduct the burnishing procedure in the event brake applications cause the hottest brake on a vehicle to reach 500 degrees F. The word "maximum" is inappropriate and will be deleted in an upcoming notice responding to petitions that raised the same point.

Yours truly,

ATTACH.

KELSEY-HAYES COMPANY

February 1, 1974

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

Attention: Lawrence Schneider -- Chief Counsel

RE: Request for Interpretation FMVSS-121; Air Brake Systems Docket 73-13; Notice 3 @ 6.1.8.1 Brake Burnish Procedure

Gentlemen:

We would appreciate an interpretation of the following sentence which appears in the above cited section of Standard 121:

"If during any of the brake applications specified in Table IV, the hottest brake reaches 500 degrees F, make the remainder of the 500 applications from that speed except that a higher or lower speed shall be used as necessary to maintain a maximum temperature of 500 degrees F +/- 50 degrees F."

We believe the meaning of this sentence to be that the temperature of a brake may not exceed 550 degrees F at any time during a brake application and that the speed limitations specified in Table IV may be waived to maintain the temperature below 550 degrees F only if the temperature of the hottest brake reaches 500 degrees during any stop.

We are puzzled by the words ". . . maintain a maximum of 500 degrees F +/- 50 degrees F", as the tolerance appears to be inappropriate if our interpretation is correct. Conversely, if the intent is to limit the temperature range to 500 degrees F +/- 50 degrees F once a temperature of 500 degrees F is reached, the word "maximum" is inappropriate.

A prompt reply would be very much appreciated.

Very truly yours,

John F. McCuen -- Attorney

cc: W. T. Birge; D. Renner

ID: nht93-6.3

DATE: August 5, 1993

FROM: P. J. Harrington -- Assistant Chief, Northern Division, Dept. of California Highway Patrol

TO: Superintendent -- Potter Valley Community Unified School Dist.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 2/9/94 from John Womack to Maurice Hannigan (A42; Std. 205) and letter dated 3/31/93 from John Womack to W. C. Burke

TEXT:

This is to inform you that California Highway patrol has received a written interpretation from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regarding the marking requirements for replacement window glass in school buses. As you are aware, California has adopted the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard for safety glass used in motor vehicles.

In their letter (copy enclosed), NHTSA states a person who cuts a section of glass to size for installation in a motor vehicle is considered a manufacturer and is, therefore, required to mark the glass. The only exception to this is if the cut section of glass still contains the original markings, in which case remarking that piece of glass is not necessary.

The markings required must contain the following information: (1) the words "American National Standard" or the characters "AS"; (2) a number identifying the item of glazing; (3) a model number assigned by the manufacturer identifying the type of construction of the glass; and (4) the manufacturer's trademark.

It is recommended you contact the installer of your glass to notify them of these findings and have the glass in your school buses inspected for the proper markings. To obtain a number as required by this Federal Standard, your installer should contact Mr. John Messcra of the NHTSA at (202) 366-5300.

We are allowing an extended period of time by which the glass must be properly marked and in compliance with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 205. The new compliance date is January 1, 1994. All school buses inspected by the California Highway Patrol after that date will not be certified if any of the glass is found not to comply with FMVSS 205.

Attached is an acknowledgement form. We would appreciate your Superintendent/Director, or designated alternate, completing and returning it to our office by September 1, 1993, in the addressed, postage paid envelope provided.

If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact the Northern Division Motor Carrier Safety Unit at (916) 225-2098.

ID: nht75-6.17

DATE: 11/10/75

FROM: FRANK A. BERNDT -- ACTING CHIEF COUNSEL NHTSA

TO: JOHN B. WHITE -- ENGINEERING MANAGER TECHNICAL INFORMATION DEPT. MICHELIN TIRE CORPORATION

TITLE: N40-30

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 12/09/88 FROM ERIKA Z. JONES -- NHTSA TO LANCE E. TUNICK, REDBOOK A33, STANDARD 208; LETTER DATED 09/04/85 FROM JEFFREY R. MILLER TO STEPHEN T. WAIMEY AND DEAN HANSELL, STANDARD 208; LETTER DATED 10/20/88 FROM LANCE E. TUNICK TO ERIKA Z. JONES, REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION OF FMVSS 208, OCC 2696

TEXT: Dear Mr. White:

This is in response to your letter of October 17, 1975, concerning the importation into the United States of tires that will be mounted on trucks intended for export from the United States.

49 CFR Part 571.7(d) and Section 108(b)(5) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 specify that no Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) apply to

a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment intended solely for export, and so labeled or tagged on the vehicle or item itself and on the outside of the container, if any, which is exported.

Therefore, tires which Michelin manufactures for sale directly to a truck manufacturer who will mount them on trucks which are intended solely for export need not comply with Standard No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other than Passenger Cars. When imported and shipped to the truck manufacturer, the tires must bear a label or tag indicating intent to export. Such a label must also appear on the outside of the container, if any, in which the tires are shipped. Importation of such tires is permitted by 19 CFR 12.80(b)(1)(ii), provided they are so labeled. A label need not remain on the tires after they have been mounted on the trucks, provided that the trucks bear similar labels.

Because these tires are not subject to any FHVSS and are beyond the scope of any expected defect notification and remedy program, Michelin Tire Corporation is not subject to the requirements of 49 CFR Part 574, Tire Identification and Recordkeeping, with respect to them.

Sincerely,

ID: nht95-4.91

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: December 4, 1995

FROM: K.J. Sato -- President & CEO, Tekno - Info Corporation

TO: Kenneth O. Hardie -- Office of Rulemaking, NHTSA

TITLE: Request of Clarification for FMVSS No. 108 Requirements, S. 5.1.2

ATTACHMT: 2/1/96 letter from Samvel J. Dubbin to K.J. Sato (A44; Std. 108)

TEXT: This is to request you to clarify the interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108; Lamps, Reflective Devices, and associated equipment, paragraph S5.1.2.

Federal Register, September 5, 1995 Vol. 60, No. 171, page 46064 - 46067, announced the final rule to amend S5.1.2, effective from March 1, 1996. We would like to have your comments to clarify the requirement of S5.1.2(b).

Question on S5.1.2(b):

1) When plastics materials tested per SAE J576 JUL 91, and passed every criteria including the haze (and loss of surface luster) less than 30% (e.g. 10%) but failed to one of the appearance requirements (e.g. delamination) per J576 JUL 91, paragraph 4.2. 4 which says". . . shall not show physical changes affecting performance such as color bleeding, delamination, crazing, or cracking.", we need clarification whether or not the plastics materials are considered in compliance with S5.1.2(b) and can be used for lenses (other than those incorporating reflex reflectors). (We understand from S5.1.2(c) that the materials mentioned above cannot be used for reflex reflectors or lenses used in front of reflex reflectors since the materials failed to comply with the haze that exceeded 7%, and failed to comply with one of the the appearance requirements mentioned in S5.1.2(c)(("delamination")). But our question is asking if the materials can be used for lenses other than reflex reflectors or lenses used in front of, or incorporating, reflex reflectors). The reason for this question is that S5.1.2(b) does not mention those appearance requirements specifically but only mentions J576 JUL 91, although S5.1.2(c) specifically mentions those appearance requirements.

2) Since the final rule's S5.1.2(b) basically the same as the current S5.1.2(b), are we correct in assuming that your clarification of the above question 1) also applies to the current S5.1.2(b)?

I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.

ID: nht72-5.46

DATE: 09/18/72

FROM: JOSEPH S. GORMAN FOR FRANCIS ARMSTRONG -- NHTSA

TO: Pleasure Industries Inc.

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of August 4, 1972, in which you ask for information in regard to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) and Certification regulations that would apply to a combination boat trailer/water cruiser that you describe in your letter and brochure.

The trailer depicted on the last page of your brochure is considered to be a "boat trailer" as defined in paragraph 571.3(b) of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations which states, ". . ." Boat trailer' means a trailer designed in cradle-type mountings to permit launching of the boat from the rear of the trailer . . . ."

The "water cruiser" is considered to be cargo and not an integral part of the trailer. Therefore, it would not, nor would any part of it be regulated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

If you are not already aware of the Coast Guard regulations that might apply to the water cruiser you might wish to contact the United States Coast Guard, Office of Boating Safety, 400 - 7th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590.

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 is the only FMVSS that applies to trailers at this time. Regulations that apply are as follows:

Part 566 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations - Manufacturer Identification

PART 567 - CERTIFICATION

Part 573 - Defect Reports

Part 574 - Tire Identification

Copies of the above are enclosed with a copy of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act and a Notice of Publications Change.

In regard to tongue weight and proper distribution, you might be interested in reviewing the "Recommended Practices and Standards Covering Boat Trailer Practices" in the American Boat and Yacht Council, Inc., publication "Safety Standards for Small Craft." The address of that organization is American Boat and Yacht Council, 15 E. 26th Street, Room 1603, New York, New York 10010.

If you have further questions, I will be pleased to answer them.

ID: nht87-1.56

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 03/30/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: J. C. Glasgow

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. J. C. Glasgow 777 Royal Palm Drive Kissimmee, FL 32743

Dear Mr. Glasgow:

This responds to your November 10, 1986 letter seeking information concerning federal regulations and standards for custom made automotive and van bodies.

Your letter indicates that you plan to design and make fiberglass automobile and van bodies for sale to the public. Although there are no specific safety regulations concerning fiberglass bodies, you should be aware of the federal regulation; and standar ds that may apply to your business.

By way of background information, our agency is authorized, under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended (Vehicle Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 1391 et. seq.) to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicle; and items of motor vehicle equipment. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Instead, the Vehicle Safety Act establishes a "self-certification "process under which each manufacturer is re sponsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards.

If there is a safety-related direct or noncompliance, you would be obligated to notify purchasers of your product and remedy the problem without charge. Manufacturers who fail to provide notification of or remedy for a defect or noncompliance may be subj ect to a civil penalty of up to $1,000 per violation. That penalty is separate from and in addition to the one for the noncompliance itself. (A general information sheet describing the responsibilities under the Vehicle Safety Act is enclosed.)

It is unclear from your letter whether you plan to alter finished automobiles and vans or whether you plan to perform manufacturing operations on incomplete vehicles. If it is your plan to alter finished vehicles, then you would be considered an "alterer " and subject to the requirements of 49 Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) Part 567.7, Requirements for persons who alter certified vehicles.

An alterer is a person who alters previously certified vehicles by means other than the addition, substitution, or removal of readily attachable components, or minor finishing operations, or in such a manner the vehicle's stated weight ratings are no lon ger valid. If the alteration is performed before the first purchase of the vehicle for purposes other than resale, the alterer must supplement the certification label by affixing an additional label stating that the vehicle as altered conforms to all app licable Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) and also stating the firm or individual name of the alterer.

An alterer is also considered a "manufacturer" for the purposes of notification and recall for defects or noncompliance under the Act and is subject to the requirements of 49 C.F.R. Part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Reports.

Further, you must make sure that any conversions you make to certified vehicles do not harm the vehicles' safety features. Under S108(a)(2)(A) of the Vehicle Safety Act, a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business must not knowi ngly render inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design which is installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. Commercial businesses tha t violate this section are subject to a civil penalty of $1,000 per violation.

If you are performing manufacturing operations on an incomplete vehicle, as that term is defined in 49 C.F.R. Part 568.3 so that it becomes a completed vehicle, then, you must meet the requirements in Part 563, Vehicles manufactured in two or more stages . Under Part 568.3, if you are a "final-stage manufacturer" you would be required to complete the vehicle in such a manner so that it conforms to all applicable safety standards. Also, you must affix a label to the completed vehicle in accordance with th e certification requirements set forth in Part 567.5, Requirements for manufacturers of vehicles manufactured in two or more stages.

Your letter does not indicate the nature of the work that you expect to do on the vehicles. Therefore, this agency cannot adequately identify which of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) set forth in 49 C.F.R. 571 will apply. I suggest tha t you examine the safety standards to decide how each could apply to your fiberglass design for automotive and van bodies. You should make special note of the following safety standards which may apply toward your design. Safety Standard No. 107, Reflect ing Surfaces; Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment; Safety Standard No. 205, Glazing materials: Safety Standard No. 206, Door locks and door retention components; Safety Standard No. 214, Side door strength; Safety Standard No. 216, Roof crush resistance-passenger cars; Safety Standard No. 219, Windshield zone intrusion. You should be aware that additional federal safety standards may apply.

If you have any questions or seek additional information, please feel free to contact this office.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

Mr. JC Glasgow 777 Royal Palm Drive Kissimmee, FL 32743

November 10, 1986

Dept. of Transportation Washington D.C.

Re: Regulations and Standards for the Performance of Auto and Van Bodies.

Subject: Custom Made Auto and Van Bodies for sale to the general public.

I am currently designing a fiberglass auto van body foe sale to the public. I need to know what federal regulations govern fiberglass auto and van bodies for public safety. When one of my vehicle bodies is in an accident I want to have followed existing federal regulations so that I cannot be sued for not doing so. Please rush. Thank you.

Sincerely,

JC Glasgow

ID: 24257ownermodifying

Paul Wagner, President
Bornemann Products Incorporated
402 Industrial Drive
P.O. Box 427
Bremen, IN 46506

Dear Mr. Wagner:

This responds to your March 27, 2002, and April 29, 2002, letters to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) asking about Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 225, Child Restraint Anchorage Systems (49 CFR 571.225). I regret the delay in responding. Before addressing your specific questions, we would like to note that several of your questions have been raised in petitions for reconsideration of the final rule establishing Standard No. 225 (March 5, 1999) (see Docket No. 98-3390, Notice 2). We indicate where the answers to those questions will be addressed by NHTSA in responding to the petitions for reconsideration. We anticipate that the response will be issued shortly.

Question 1.

Standard No. 225 requires vehicles to be equipped with a certain number of child restraint anchorage systems and tether anchorages, depending on the number of designated seating positions in the vehicle (S4.4 of the standard). The standard also specifies the location of the anchorage systems. ^[1]

You ask about a vehicle owner modifying his or her own vehicle (specifically, a vehicle that has three rows of seating), after the vehicles purchase, to suit his or her needs or preferences. You ask:

[I]f a vehicle purchased by a consumer complies with the Standard at the time of purchase (as in Diagram A) [two child restraint anchorage systems in the second row, and a tether anchorage in the third row], and the consumer later makes revisions as illustrated in Diagrams 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Attachment A, would the vehicle be deemed as non-compliant due to these modifications? Please consider that any revisions indicated as made by the consumer did not create any other non-compliant issue with any other FMVSS codes.

Diagrams 1, 2 and 4 show the second and/or the third rows removed. Diagram 3 shows the second row removed from the vehicle and the third row moved to where the second row was.

There are two parts to our answer. Normally, consumer modifications do not affect the compliance of a vehicle. The FMVSSs apply to new motor vehicles, i.e., until the vehicles first purchase in good faith other than for resale (see 30112(b)(1) of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, the Vehicle Safety Act). The Vehicle Safety Act prohibits persons from manufacturing or selling any new motor vehicle that does not comply with all applicable FMVSSs until the first purchase of the vehicle by a consumer. After the vehicle is purchased, the vehicle manufacturer is not responsible for modifications that vehicle owners may make to the vehicle.^[2]

However, an issue raised by your letter concerns whether the vehicle is designed so consumers can easily change seating arrangements by simple operations such as releasing a latch or removing easily accessible mounting hardware. Where a manufacturer designs a vehicle in this manner and alerts consumers of the flexibility of the seating arrangements, e.g., through advertising or an entry in the owners manual, should the manufacturer be responsible for designing the vehicle so that these simple operations cannot be used to create configurations that do not comply with S4.4 of Standard No. 225? This issue was raised in petitions for reconsideration of the final rule. We will respond to it in the context of the rulemaking proceeding.^[3]

Question 2.

S9.1.1(c) of Standard No. 225 specifies that the lower anchorages must be not less than 25 mm, but not more than 40 mm in length. You ask whether the not less than 25 mm but not more than 40 mm language refers to the inside opening of the anchorages (bars), or to the overall length of the bar including the 6 mm steel material. The answer is the inside opening of the bar, and not the overall length of it. We plan to amend S9.1.1(c) to clarify the meaning of the text, in accordance with this interpretation.

Question 3.

S9.1.1(f) of Standard No. 225 requires that the lower bars must be an integral and permanent part of the vehicle or vehicle seat. You ask whether the bars can be bolted or otherwise attached without the use of a tool. This issue has been raised in petitions for reconsideration and will be answered by us in the upcoming response.

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

Sincerely,
Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel
ref:225
d.6/28/02

^[1] Among other issues, petitions for reconsideration have asked that the number of tether anchorages required for certain vehicles (multipurpose passenger vehicles with seating capacity of 5) be reduced from three to two. Petitions have also asked that NHTSA reconsider the requirement that a tether anchorage must be placed in a center rear seating position, if such a position exists. See Docket No. 98-3390, Notice 2.

^[2] If a motor vehicle were modified by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business, 30122 of the Vehicle Safety Act limits the modifications that may be made. That section prohibits those entities from knowingly making inoperative any part of a device or element of design installed on in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard. Section 30122 does not apply to individual owners modifying their own vehicle.

^[3] The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers asked for clarification that providing a user-ready tether anchorage at a seat that can be used at either an outboard or a non-outboard (center) seating position meets the subject requirement. Petitioner stated that some vehicles are now equipped with vehicle seats that can be moved from an outboard position to a non-outboard position. Petitioner wanted to know how the agency would position such a movable seat in determining compliance with the requirement that a tether anchorage must be provided in a center seating position.

ID: 10628

Mr. Richard Kreutziger
Executive Director
NYSBDA
1111 Lac De Ville Boulevard
Apartment No. 309
Rochester, NY 14618

Dear Mr. Kreutziger:

This responds to your letter of January 3, 1995, telefaxed to Walter Myers of my staff in which you asked whether the bottom edge of a flip-up school bus seat, when in the vertical position, could extend past the rearward edge of a side emergency exit door a maximum of 3/4 inch. The short answer to your question is no.

You enclosed with your letter a copy of Figure 5B of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 217, Bus emergency exits and window retention and release, which shows the permitted positions of the seats forward and rearward of a school bus side emergency exit door. You drew in a depiction of the flip-up seat bottom showing the seat bottom extending into the access aisle a maximum of 3/4 inch. You stated that even with such intrusion, 11.75 inches of clear aisle space remains without obstruction of the door release mechanism.

Paragraph S5.4.2.1(a)(2)(i) of FMVSS No. 217 provides that no seat or restraining barrier shall be installed within the area bounded by a vertical transverse plane tangent to the rearward edge of the door opening frame and a vertical transverse plane parallel to that plane at a distance of 30 centimeters forward of that plane. Paragraph S5.4.2.1(a)(2)(ii) then provides:

A seat bottom may be located within the area described in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section if the seat bottom pivots and automatically assumes and retains a vertical position when not in use, so that no portion of the seat bottom is within the area described in paragraph (i) when the seat bottom is vertical. (See Figure 5B). (Emphasis added).

This requirement for a specific minimum aisle space leading to side emergency exit doors on school buses was contained in the final rule issued by this agency on November 2, 1992 (57 FR 49413) to permit bus occupants unobstructed access to the emergency exit door. The language is very clear. No variation from that requirement is permitted.

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

Sincerely,

Philip R. Recht Chief Counsel

ref:217 d:2/13/95

ID: 10673

Mr. Paul Pinoski
Project Engineer
SLP Engineering, Inc.
1501 Industrial Way North
Toms River, NJ 08755

Dear Mr. Pinoski:

This responds to your letter to me in which you requested an interpretation of the term "vehicle capacity weight," as defined in Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) No. 110, Tire selection and rims (49 CFR 571.110). I apologize for the delay in our response.

FMVSS No. 110 applies to passenger cars. Section S4.3 of the standard requires a placard to be placed on the door of the glove compartment or other accessible place on which shall be displayed, among other things, the "vehicle capacity weight." This term is defined in S3 as meaning "the rated cargo and luggage load plus 150 pounds times the vehicle's designated seating capacity." You asked how to obtain the "rated cargo and luggage load," so that you can calculate vehicle capacity weight.

The agency does not define the term "rated cargo and luggage load" or otherwise regulate how that load is determined. The term simply refers to the vehicle manufacturer's determination of the cargo and luggage carrying capacity of the vehicle. The choice of methodology to be used in making that determination is left to the discretion of the vehicle manufacturer.

From a safety standpoint, the important issue is the overall value specified by the vehicle manufacturer as the loaded weight of a vehicle. That value is also known as the gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR). The GVWR informs a vehicle owner how heavily he or she can load a vehicle. The only express regulatory limitation on the GVWR manufacturers may assign to their vehicles is set forth in 49 CFR 567.4(g)(3), which provides that the assigned GVWR "shall not be less than the sum of the unloaded vehicle weight, rated cargo load, and 150 pounds times the vehicle's designated seating capacity." (Emphasis added.) "Rated cargo load" and "rated cargo and luggage load" are interchangeable terms.

I hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have further questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact Walter Myers of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Philip R. Recht Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosure ref:110#567#571 d:4/24/95