ID: nht75-1.13

DATE: 05/16/75

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

TO: Toyo Kogyo Co., Ltd.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your April 16, 1975, question whether the test procedure of S7.7.1 of Standard No. 105-75, Hydraulic brake systems, permits reapplication of the parking brake if the vehicle fails to hold on the required grade after the first application of a force or series of forces. You also ask whether a brake warning indicator which signals a short-lived loss of pressure during a spike stop brake application would conform to S5.3.1(a)(1).

Section S7.7.1 directs (in part) application of the parking brake with a force or series of forces, release of the service brake which has been holding the vehicle on the required grade, and indicates that in release of the service brake, "it may be necessary to reapply it, if the vehicle moves slightly, to take up the parking brake system slack." (emphasis added).

The word "it" refers to the service brake system, and not the parking brake system. This sentence permits application of the service brake only, which has the effect of taking up parking brake system slack due to rotation of the brake shoes and drum prior to bottoming against the anchor pin. This service brake application is intended to provide the best opportunity for a static test of the parking brake.

You state that a differential pressure can occur within the Mazda master cylinder during a spike stop brake application because the piston travels beyond the outlet port to the rear wheel brake lines. This pressure differential causes momentary activation of the brake warning indicator lamp.

The NHTSA would consider in this case that, as a technicality, momentary failure of the rear wheel subsystem has occurred because continued braking pressure cannot be applied to the rear wheels. You point out that the system corrects immediately and the signal lamp is extinguished.

From your description of the Mazda system, NHTSA concludes that the activation of the signal lamp conforms to the requirements of S5.3.1(a)(1) as long as it is designed to extinguish as soon as the system corrects and continued brake force could be applied to the rear wheels.

Yours truly,

Enclosure

April 16, 1975

James C. Schultz -- Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Admin.

Dear Mr. Schultz: In determining the final system for meeting MVSS 105-75, we are having some trouble in following some of the test requirements. We would highly appreciate it if we could have your view on the following questions until April 25, 1975 in order to relief them.

1. Re: Parking Brake Test Procedure in S7.7.1

When we run the test according to this section, we understand the following sequence (a) through (h) acceptable.

a) Bring the vehicle on the grade and hold it by applying the service brake.

b) Apply the parking brake by keeping the service brake working with specified force.

c) Release the service brake.

d) Check the movement.

e) If moved slightly, reapply the service brake and hold it.

f) Then reapply parking brake with the specified force to take up its slack without releasing it.

g) Release service brake again.

h) Check the movement.

2. Re: Brake Indicator Lamp

During the spike stop test on our model, it was observed that the "brake indicator lamp" lit while the test driver kept depressing the service brake pedal. We studied this problem and found that as shown in the drawing its master cylinder piston can travel beyond the hole which supplies brake fluid to the rear brake cylinder, that generates the difference in the pressure of front and rear.

As the brake indicator lamp works by sensing the difference in pressure of the front and rear, this lamp becomes "on" accordingly.

(Graphics omitted)

However, this piston does not travel beyond its hole under normal operation. If this lamp should light during spike stop, this will not give any problem to the drivers because this lamp will turn out after releasing pedal force.

We would like to have your view on the acceptability of the above condition.

Sincerely yours,

H. (Speedy) Hirai -- Technical Representative, Toyo Kogyo Co., Ltd. (Mazda), Representative office

cc: V. Bloom; T. Herliny

ID: nht75-3.8

DATE: 09/16/75

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: The Hardy Heater Company

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your letter of July 30, 1975, in which you inquire as to any rules and regulations to which you may be subject with respect to your pre-heater defroster. Your letter was referred to this office by the Environmental Protection Agency.

We assume, from the material submitted with your letter, that your pre-heater is sold for installation in used cars and supplements the vehicle's existing defrosting system. If our assumption is incorrect, please advise us. If your pre-heater is installed in a motor vehicle prior to its first purchase or if it replaces an existing defrosting system, you will be subject to regulations in addition to those mentioned in this letter.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act provides that a manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or repair shop may not render inoperative any safety device or design in a motor vehicle after its first purchase by the owner. This means that the installation of the pre-heater must not take the vehicle out of compliance with an applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard. The standard with which you will likely be most concerned is Standard No. 103, Windshield Defrosting and Defogging Systems (copy enclosed).

(Graphics omitted)

In addition, if the fuel used in your pre-heater has a boiling point greater than 32 degrees F, you must ensure that the pre-heater fuel system complies with Standard No. 301, Fuel System Integrity (copy enclosed).

Thank you for your interest in motor vehicle safety.

YOURS TRULY

THE HARDY HEATER COMPANY

July 30, 1975

Director E. P. A.

I am having manufactured and will market a pre-heater defroster for auto's as shown in the attached documents which are a part of my (Illegible Words).

Please advise me if I am required by rules, regulations or otherwise to obtain any (Illegible Word)) permits to prior to marketing my heater nationwide.

As you (Illegible Words) cylinder of L. P. (Illegible Words) am primarily concerned with any legal requirement with respect its use in automobiles.

I will appreciate any information on the subject.

Frank Hardy

Teddy's drivers in cold climates are not satisfied each day entering a miserably cold auto, with limited or no vision because of condensation, frost, ice, snow, build-up on the glassed areas.

A majority of the over 80 million cars on our highways, and the over 10 million being built each year, need this heater to provide a warm, safe comfortable car from the start. This device fills a gap that has been completely overlooked in automotive engineering.

Please note how many vehicles you see on the highway, especially in the morning, in cooler climates, driving virtually blind, until the standard heater defroster clears the glass area. My heater eliminates this dangerous condition, and provides a comfortable temperature inside the car from the start.

A common cold weather practice is to start the auto engine on cold mornings and let it set and run until the conventional heating process warms and defrosts the car. This practice causes excessive engine wear and long periods of cold engine idle, which is a major factor in air pollution by automobiles. This inconvenience, wear, and pollution can be eliminated with the use of my heater.

Volume sales will be to gasoline powered vehicles; however, it will be a natural as an inducement for all who are thinking of conversion or have converted to propane from gasoline as a motor fuel, as certain basic components such as fuel tank controls, etc., could serve both installations.

Attached is information on a unique gas fired auxiliary and independent automobile heater, that will eliminate the misery and danger of a cold automobile, with frosted glass area, when you first enter it in cold weather. It can provide home-like comfort 24 hours a day, or may be shut off to automatically come on several hours before returning to the car, at which time it will be heated and frost free for safe and comfortable driving from the start.

I have a patent pending for this heater, and am interested in working with a manufacturer for mutual benefits in the production and sale of this item.

I am available for an interview to discuss any ideas or interest you might have concerning my situation.

Warren Frank Hardy

(Graphics omitted)

(Graphics omitted)

ID: 125-24268.drn

Mr. Arthur W. Uher
Director, Export Sales
Systematic Home Products Industrial Co., Inc.
9610 Honeysuckle Drive
Frisco, TX 75035

Dear Mr. Uher:

This responds to your letter of March 27, 2002, asking for confirmation that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 125, Warning devices (Standard No. 125) applies only to warning devices designed to be carried in buses and trucks over 4536 kg (10,000 pounds) gross vehicle weight rating. You are correct in your understanding of the applicability of Standard No. 125. As explained below, Standard No. 125 does not apply to warning devices, such as your company's product, designed to be carried in passenger automobiles and light trucks.

We are unable, however, to provide you with "recognition," as you requested, that your product "would be acceptable for use in passenger vehicles and trucks whose weight is less than 10,000 lbs" or "is of sound design and offers the user additional safety." The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, manufacturers are required to ensure that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable requirements. Even if no Federal motor vehicle safety standard applies to an item of motor vehicle equipment, the equipment manufacturer must ensure that its product is free of safety-related defects.

Standard No. 125 Does Not Apply to Your Product

At S3, Application, Standard No. 125 states:

This standard applies to devices, without self-contained energy sources, that are designed to be carried in buses and trucks that have a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 10,000 pounds. These devices are used to warn approaching traffic of the presence of a stopped vehicle, except for devices designed to be permanently affixed to the vehicle.

The standard had at one point applied to all warning devices that do not have self-contained energy sources and that are designed to be carried in motor vehicles. However, S3 was amended in a final rule published in the Federal Register on September 29, 1994 (see 59 FR 49586, copy enclosed). In that final rule, we amended Standard No. 125 to apply only to those warning devices that do not have self-contained energy sources and that are designed to be carried in buses and trucks that have a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds (or 4536 kg). The amendments made in the final rule took effect on October 31, 1994.

A warning device that is subject to Standard No. 125 must be permanently marked with "the symbol DOT, or the statement that the warning device complies with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards." (See S5.1.4(c).) If your warning devices are not covered under Standard No. 125 (i.e., are not designed to be used by commercial vehicles with GVWRs greater than 10,000 pounds (or 4,536 kg), and have self-contained energy sources), they must not be marked with the DOT symbol and must not contain any statement about compliance with Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

You Must Ensure Your Product Is Free of "Safety-Related Defects"

Please note, however, that even if not covered by Standard No. 125, a warning device designed to be carried in motor vehicles 4536 kg and under is an item of "motor vehicle equipment," and is subject to various provisions of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, "Motor Vehicle Safety." Manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment must ensure that their products are free of safety-related defects. If a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that the product contains a safety-related defect, the manufacturer is responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. (This responsibility is borne by the vehicle manufacturer in cases in which a device is installed on or in a new vehicle by or with the express authorization of that vehicle manufacturer.) I have enclosed an information sheet that describes these and other responsibilities.

State Law May Regulate Your Product

Finally, some states may regulate warning devices that vehicles with a GVWR of 4536 kg or less may or must use when the vehicle is stopped. Each state in which you sell your product can provide information on whether there are any requirements in that state for warning devices to be used with vehicles with a GVWR of 4536 kg or less.

I hope this information is helpful. If you need further assistance, please contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

Enclosures
ref:125
d.5/2/02

ID: 77-2.42

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/27/77

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; J. J. Levin, Jr.; NHTSA

TO: Volvo of America Corporation

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your March 24, 1977, request for an interpretation concerning the requirements for attachment hardware specified in Safety Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies. You ask about the force requirements that would be applicable to attachment hardware that is common to the left and right front safety belts and also common to the pelvic and upper torso restraints.

You are correct in your assumption that the subject attachment hardware (designated part "14" in your diagram) would be required to withstand a force of at least 6,000 pounds or 2720 kilograms without fracture of any section. However, the pertinent section is paragraph S4.3(c)(2) of the standard rather than paragraph S4.4(b)(3), as you stated. Paragraph S4.3(c)(2) specifies that attachment hardware designed to receive the ends of two seat belt assemblies shall withstand a tensile force of at least 6,000 pounds. The agency concludes that the Volvo attachment part "14" is hardware designed to receive the ends of two seat belt assemblies.

The attachment bolt, part "17", for part "14" would be required to withstand a force of 9,000 pounds or 4080 kilograms under paragraph S4.3(c)(1) of the standard.

Sincerely,

ATTACH.

March 24, 1977

Frank Berndt -- National Highway Traffic Safety Adminstration

Re: Interpretation of FMVSS #209

Dear Mr. Berndt:

Volvo requests a clarification of the applicability of the following section of FMVSS #209 to certain specific items:

Paragraph S.4.3(c)(1) states: "Eye bolts, shoulder bolts or other bolts used to secure the pelvic restraint of a seat belt assembly to a motor vehicle shall withstand a force of 9000 pounds or 4080 kilograms when tested by the procedure specified in S.5.2.(c)(1), except that attachment bolts of a seat belt assembly designed for installation in specific models of motor vehicles in which the ends of two or more seat belt assemblies cannot be attached to the vehicle by a single bolt, shall have a braking strength of not less than 5000 pounds or 2070 kilograms".

Paragraph S.4.3(c)(2) states: "Other attachment hardware designed to receive the ends of two seat belt assemblies shall withstand a tensile force of at least 6000 pounds or 2720 kilograms without fracture of any section when tested by the procedure in S.5.2(c)(2)".

Paragraph S.4.4(b)(3) states: "The structural components in the assembly that are common to pelvic and upper torso restraints shall withstand a force of not less than 3000 pounds or 1360 kilograms".

Volvo uses a front seat belt assembly where certain components are common to the pelvic and upper torso restraints for both front seats. Thus, we interpret paragraph S.4.4 (b)(3) to require that the attachment hardware which is common to the left and right front safety belts and also common to the pelvic and upper torso restraints to withstand 2 x 3000 pounds or 6000 pounds. Furthermore, because a seat belt assembly is defined as all hardware designed for installing the assembly in a motor vehicle, we interpret this requirement to include the attachment bolts. Enclosed for your information is a drawing of the Volvo safety belt system.

Are these interpretations correct? If there are any questions on this matter, please contact the undersigned.

In advance, thank you for your cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely,

VOLVO OF AMERICA CORPORATION -- Product Engineering and Development;

William Shapiro P.E. -- Pegulatory Analysis Engineer

[Enclosure Omitted]

ID: 2671o

Mr. William B. Huber
Senior Vice President
Nuvatec/Inc.
3ll0 Woodcreek Drive
Downers Grove, Illinois 605l5

Dear Mr. Huber:

This responds to your letter requesting an interpretation of Standard No. 101, Controls and Displays. You stated that you manufacture an electronic instrument cluster for use with van conversions and class "A" motorhomes and other vehicles. The gauges are of a bar graph type, and associated with each graph is an icon or symbol to indicate the graph function. During normal operation, the icons are illuminated to the same light intensity as the graphs. You stated that as an added feature, the icons blink when, and only when, that function becomes critical or dangerous, such as for low fuel, high temperature, low oil pressure, and low battery. You stated that some of your customers have expressed concern about using your instrument cluster because it may not comply with Standard No. 101, and you requested a formal opinion. The issues raised by your letter are addressed below.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Vehicle Safety Act), it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that its vehicles or equipment comply with applicable requirements.

The Vehicle Safety Act authorizes NHTSA to issue safety standards for new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle equipment. All motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment manufactured or imported for sale in the United States must comply with all applicable safety standards set forth in 49 CFR Part 571. Manufacturers of motor vehicles must certify compliance of their products in accordance with Part 567, Certification. Persons altering a new vehicle prior to its first sale to a consumer are considered vehicle alterers under NHTSA's certification regulation. Part 567.7, Requirements for Persons who Alter Certified Vehicles, requires alterers to certify that the vehicle, as altered, complies with all applicable safety standards. Manufacturers, distributers, dealers, or motor vehicle repair businesses modifying a used vehicle are prohibited by section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Vehicle Safety Act from knowingly rendering inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard.

Standard No. 101 (49 CFR Part 571.101) specifies requirements for the location, identification, and illumination of motor vehicle controls and displays. The standard's requirements for displays are applicable only to vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of less than 10,000 pounds. See section S5. For these vehicles, the gauges identified in your letter (fuel, temperature, oil pressure, and electrical charge) are displays regulated by the standard.

The primary issue raised by your letter is whether the identification of gauges may flash. As discussed below, Standard No. l0l does not prohibit such flashing.

Section S5.3.3 states:

S5.3.3(a) Means shall be provided for making controls, gauges, and the identification of those items visible to the driver under all driving conditions.

(b) The means for providing the required visibility--

(l) Shall be adjustable, except as provided in S5.3.3(d), to provide at least two levels of brightness, one of which is barely discernible to a driver who has adopted to dark ambient roadway conditions.

(2) May be operable manually or automatically, and

(3) May have levels of brightness at which those items and their identification are not visible.

(c) Effective September l, l989, if the level of brightness is adjusted by automatic means to a point where those items or their identification are not visible to the driver, a means shall be provided to enable the driver to restore visibility.

(d) For a vehicle manufactured before September l, l989, the requirements of S5.3.3(b)(l) shall not apply to any gauge during the actuation of a telltale which shares a common light source with the gauge.

Under section S5.3.3(a), means must be provided for making the identification of gauges, i.e., the icons or symbols in your design, visible to the driver under all driving conditions. The on-and-off cycling of the identification occurring during flashing would create momentary periods of time when the identification is not visible. However, it is our opinion that a flashing identification or other item is considered visible so long as it is visible during the on part of the cycle.

This opinion is limited to the specific issue addressed above and does not constitute an opinion as to whether your electronic instrument cluster complies with Standard No. l0l.

As you may know, several amendments were made to Standard No. l0l during l987. Enclosed for your information is a copy of the current standard.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

Enclosure

/ ref:101 d:2/23/88

ID: aiam0791

Dear Mr. Milby: This is in reply to your letters of July 5 and July 18, 1972. In you letter of July 5, you ask whether manufacturers of school buses may delete any reference to seating capacity in establishing the gross vehicle weight rating in complying with the Certification regulations (49 CFR Part 567).; The definition of gross vehicle weight rating, for school buses requires the value used to include 120 pounds times the vehicle's designated seating capacity. 'Designated seating capacity' is defined to mean 'the number of designated seating positions provided,' while 'designated seating position' means 'any plan view location intended by the manufacturer to provide seating accommodation while the vehicle is in motion, for a person at least as large as a 5th percentile adult female, except auxiliary seating accommodations such as temporary or folding jump seats' (49 CFR 571.3). While the definition refers to the manufacturer's intent as the determinant of the number of designated seating positions, the actual test, as in other legal determinations of 'intent,' is how that intent is objectively manifested. Because it is obvious that school buses, due to their anticipated use, must have positions where children will sit while riding, a school bus manufacturer could not successfully argue that his vehicles do not have designated seating positions. Accordingly, his failure to include the designated seating capacity in his computation of GVWR would be a violation of the Certification regulations and of section 108(a)(3) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(3)). Violations of that section are subject to a civil penalty of up to $1,000 per violation, up to a maximum of $400,000, and other sanctions (sections 109 & 110 of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 1398, 1399).; Your letter of July 18 asks whether a vehicle will be in complianc with the Certification regulations if the axle load exceeds the front or rear GAWR, but the total load does not exceed the GVWR. Because the regulations do not specify minimum criteria for GAWR, a vehicle whose actual weight on an axle system exceeds the stated value will not fail to conform to the Certification requirements. It may, however, be considered to contain a safety-related defect, depending on the actual circumstances involved, and if so, the manufacturer would be responsible for notifying owners pursuant to section 113 of the Act (15 U.S.C. 1402).; We will consider the possibility of establishing minimum requirement for GAWR (as we have for GVWR), in light of the facts you have presented.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel

ID: aiam0790

Dear Mr. Milby: This is in reply to your letters of July 5 and July 18, 1972. In you letter of July 5, you ask whether manufacturers of school buses may delete any reference to seating capacity in establishing the gross vehicle weight rating in complying with the Certification regulations (49 CFR Part 567).; The definition of gross vehicle weight rating, for school buses requires the value used to include 120 pounds times the vehicle's designated seating capacity. 'Designated seating capacity' is defined to mean 'the number of designated seating positions provided,' while 'designated seating position' means 'any plan view location intended by the manufacturer to provide seating accommodation while the vehicle is in motion, for a person at least as large as a 5th percentile adult female, except auxiliary seating accommodations such as temporary or folding jump seats' (49 CFR 571.3). While the definition refers to the manufacturer's intent as the determinant of the number of designated seating positions, the actual test, as in other legal determinations of 'intent,' is how that intent is objectively manifested. Because it is obvious that school buses, due to their anticipated use, must have positions where children will sit while riding, a school bus manufacturer could not successfully argue that his vehicles do not have designated seating positions. Accordingly, his failure to include the designated seating capacity in his computation of GVWR would be a violation of the Certification regulations and of section 108(a)(3) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(3)). Violations of that section are subject to a civil penalty of up to $1,000 per violation, up to a maximum of $400,000, and other sanctions (sections 109 & 110 of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 1398, 1399).; Your letter of July 18 asks whether a vehicle will be in complianc with the Certification regulations if the axle load exceeds the front or rear GAWR, but the total load does not exceed the GVWR. Because the regulations do not specify minimum criteria for GAWR, a vehicle whose actual weight on an axle system exceeds the stated value will not fail to conform to the Certification requirements. It may, however, be considered to contain a safety-related defect, depending on the actual circumstances involved, and if so, the manufacturer would be responsible for notifying owners pursuant to section 113 of the Act (15 U.S.C. 1402).; We will consider the possibility of establishing minimum requirement for GAWR (as we have for GVWR), in light of the facts you have presented.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel

ID: aiam1823

Dear Mr. Zajic: This responds to your February 19, 1975, request for confirmation tha the building of a trailer with some used components constitutes the manufacture of a new vehicle for purposes of meeting all applicable safety standards, unless the running gear and bottom rails, at a minimum, are from an existing trailer. You also ask for confirmation that parking brakes are not required on a steerable front axle of a full trailer.; The answer to both of your questions is yes. I enclose a copy of letter interpretation which sets out our position on the extent to which a vehicle can be 'repaired' before it becomes the manufacture of a new vehicle.; In answer to your second question, a full trailer, like all othe air-braked trailers, must meet the requirements of S5.6 *Parking brake system*. Section S5.6 permits the manufacturer the option of meeting the requirements of S5.6.1, *Static retardation force*, or S5.6.2, *Grade holding*.; If you choose to meet S5.6.1, you are not required to equip the fron steerable axle with a parking brake system. If you choose to meet S5.6.2, you may use whatever combination of parking brake systems will meet the grade-holding requirement, and such a combination may or may not include a parking brake system on the front steerable axle.; Because Standard No. 121 does not specify a secondary means of brakin on the steerable axle, the Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety requirement for automatic application of the brakes upon breakaway remains applicable to the axle (49 CFR S 393.42(d)).; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel

ID: nht72-6.44

DATE: 05/17/72

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Lawrence R. Schneider; NHTSA

TO: Automotive Service Industry Association

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of April 21, 1972, in which you request clarification as to the application of the Tire Identification and Recordkeeping regulations (49 CFR Part 574) to your members under various circumstances described therein.

Generally persons other than tire manufacturers who have obligations under the Tire I.D. regulations are motor vehicle manufacturers and tire distributors and dealers. A person adding tires to a vehicle of which he is either an incomplete vehicle manufacturer, intermediate manufacturer, or final-stage manufacturer, as those terms are defined in 49 CFR 574.10. Those persons adding tires as part of modifications to used vehicles will be tire dealers, and subject to the requirements of 574.8.

With respect to the three situations you list, in those cases where the tires have already been installed on the vehicle when your member receives it (Case #1), your member would not be adding tires to the vehicle and would not be responsible for compliance with the Tire I.D. requiremts In these cases where the tires are added or changed by an independent tire dealer, if the independent dealer is actually doing business with your member rather than with the owner of the vehicle, and if your member is an incomplet, intermediate, or final-stage manufacturer, he must comply with 574.10. If he does not fall within any of these categories he will be a tire dealer subject to 574.8. If the tire dealer is dealing independently with the owner of the vehicle, your member will not be the party adding tires to the vehicle, and will not be subject to the requirements. With regard to the situation where your member puts tires on a frame or vehicle as part of a package deal (Case #3), if he is either an incomplete vehicle, intermediate or final-stage manufacturer he will be required to comply with the requirements of 574.10. If he does not fall within these categories, he will be a tire dealer and subject to section 574.8.

Assuming your member must record the name of the first purchaser as a manufacturer or dealer, you have asked whether he may use the name of the dealer to whom he delivers the vehicle as the first purchaser, when that is the case, as he frequently does not know the name of the first purchaser for a purpose other than resale. You refer to our March 14, 1972, letter to you in which we stated that a dealer's name could be used in meeting the "Owner's List" requirement of the Defect Reports regulations (49 CFR Part 573) when the name of the dealer was the only name which the manufacturer had. For the purposes of the Tire I.D. requirements, the manufacturer must obtain and use the name of the actual purchaser for a purpose other than resale. It is not sufficient under this requirement for the name of the dealer to be used. Section 113(f) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1402(f)), which became effective November 18, 1970. provides that. "Every manufacturer of motor vehicles or tires shall maintain records of the names and addresses of the first purchaser (other than a dealer or distributor) of motor vehicles or tires produced by that manufacturer." In our view this provision requires the manufacturer of a multi-stage vehicle who adds the tires to the vehicle to obtain the names of such purchasers, even if the names must be obtained from dealers. Our letter of March 14 should not be read to absolve your members who are such manufacturers from meeting this requirement. What that letter allows is simply that in those cases where manufacturers have not, at the time they must compile an owner list, obtained the names of first purchasers, they may use the name of the dealer and not be in violation of the "Owner's List" requirement. This may be done, however, only until they can obtain the actual first purchaser's name. We regret that this point was not made clear in our March 14 letter, and that letter is hereby modified in this regard.

Concerning your question as to the conditions under which automotive wholesalers and warehouse distributors must keep Tire Identification records, if the automotive wholesaler or warehouse distributor is not selling tires directly to the user of the vehicle he need only ensure that the dealer or distributor to whom he sells the tires has a means of recording the required information so that it may be forwarded to the tire manufacturer (section 574.8(c)). In the event the automotive wholesaler or warehouse distributor sells tires to a user, then he must record the information specified in @ 574.7(a) and forward that information to the tire manufacturer.

ID: nht75-6.22

DATE: 08/19/75 EST

FROM: RICHARD B. DYSON -- NHTSA ASSISTANT CHIEF COUNSEL

TO: BYRON CRAMPTON -- BODY AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATION INC

COPYEE: MARTIN; ROGERS; OYLES; P.W MAURER

TITLE: N40-30

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 03/21/75 FROM BYRON CRAMPTON TO NHTSA

TEXT: Dear Mr. Crampton:

This is in response to your letter of March 21, 1975 inquiring whether a State may require a motor vehicle to be equipped with lights not required under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.

In your phone conversation of March 28 with Mr. Robert Donin of this office you indicated that the vehicle in question was an ambulance outfitted with a raised roof designed to enable medical personnel to stand inside. The raised top increases the height of the vehicle to 9 feet. You stated that although you could not identify the specific State statute involved, it was your understanding that Virginia requires clearance lights near the top of all vehicles over 7 feet in height. The law to which you apparently were referring is Virginia Motor Vehicle Code@46.1-265. A copy is enclosed. It states in part:

(a) All motor vehicles, trailers or semitrailers exceeding seven feet in height or in width or the widest portion of which extends four inches beyond the front fender extremes shall be equipped with lamps mounted at the extreme right- and left-hand front top corners of such vehicle, each of which lamps shall be capable of projecting an amber light visible in clear weather for a distance of at least five hundred feet to the front of such vehicle, and shall be equipped with lamps mounted at the extreme right-and left-hand rear top corners of such vehicle, each of which lights shall be capable of projecting a red light visible in clear weather for a distance of at least five hundred feet to the rear of such vehicle; ***

(b) In addition to the lamps required herein, each such vehicle shall be equipped with amber reflectors located on the side thereof, at or near the front. Red reflectors shall be used on the rear of each such vehicle. Such reflectors shall be securely fastened to the vehicle not less than twenty-four inches and not more than sixty inches from the ground, provided that in the case of a vehicle which is less than twenty-four inches in height such reflectors shall be securely fastened thereto at the highest point the structure of the vehicle will permit. The reflectors required therein shall be of a type that have been approved by the Superintendent. ***

It is important to note that the Virginia Motor Vehicle Code also provides in$46.1-267: ***

No motor vehicle shall be operated on any highway which is equipped with any lighting device other than lamps required or permitted in this article or required or approved by the Superintendent or required by the Federal Department of Transportation.

As you may know, section 103(d) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. 1392(d) provides that no State or political subdivision of a State may promulgate or continue in effect safety standards applicable to an aspect of motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment performance covered by a Federal motor vehicle safety standard, unless the standards are identical. By virtue of this provision, the Federal government is said to "preempt" the field of regulation with respect to any aspect of performance for which there is a Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard.

The key question, therefore, is whether Federal Standard No. 108 and Virginia Motor Vehicle Code @ 46.1-265 regulate the same "aspect of performance." If so, Virginia may not apply its requirement unless the Federal and Virginia requirements are identical. From a comparison of the two laws, it is evident that both address the same aspect of performance and that they are not identical:

* Both the Federal and Virginia laws apply to ambulances. An ambulance is a multipurpose passenger vehicle, under Federal Standard No. 108 and a "motor vehicle" under Virginia Code 46.1-265.

* Both laws require that the vehicle be equipped with lights at certain specified locations to facilitate recognition of its dimensions.

* The configuration and color of the lights required by the two laws differ.

Consequently Federal Standard No. 108 is preemptive, and to the extent that they differ from the Federal requirements the state clearance lamp and reflector requirements quoted are void. The language of Virginia Code @ 46.1-267, to the effect that lighting devices may conform to Virginia or Federal standards, is incorrect.

ENCLOSURE

Sincerely,