ID: nht93-6.1

DATE: August 5, 1993

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA; signature by Kenneth N. Weinstein

TO: Cary Klingner -- Trison Inc.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 7/12/93 from Cary Klingner to John Womack (OCC-8874)

TEXT:

We have received your letter of July 12, 1993, with respect to Trison's "Daytime Running Lights" module. You have heard that "federal regulations were modified earlier this year that may affect this concept", and ask whether the device "complies with the regulations."

As you have described it, the product activates the lower beam headlamps whenever the engine is running, and may be overridden by the vehicle's headlamp switch. The module "can be installed by any car owner."

On January 11, 1993, we amended Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment to permit motor vehicles to be manufactured with front lamps (other than parking and fog lamps) wired to operate automatically during daytime. Before the amendment, paragraph S5.5.3 of Standard No. 108 required taillamps to be activated when the headlamps are activated. However, the amendment modified this requirement to state that taillamps "need not be activated if the headlamps are activated at less than full intensity" when in use as daytime running lamps. I enclose a copy of the amendment for your information. We have received petitions for reconsideration of aspects of the rule other than S5.5.3, and it is possible that the standard will eventually be amended in response to them.

The amendment does not establish requirements for aftermarket equipment such as your module. There is no Federal restriction on the sale of the module, but there are restrictions on its installation on new vehicles. A manufacturer, distributor, and dealer of a new motor vehicle must deliver it in full compliance with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. As we understand it, your module would activate the lower beam headlamps at their full intensity, and the taillamps would not be activated until the main headlamp switch was used. This would create a noncompliance with S5.5.3, since the taillamps must be activated when the headlamps are activated at full intensity. In addition, the module also impairs the effectiveness of the taillamps within the meaning of a prohibition imposed by S5.1.3. For these reasons, a manufacturer or dealer could not legally install the module on a new motor vehicle before its sale to its first purchaser for purposes other than resale.

With respect to installation of the module in a vehicle after its first sale, under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the Act), no manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business may "render inoperative, in whole or in part," lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108. Because the taillamps apparently will not operate when

the lower beam headlamps are activated at full intensity by the module, in our opinion, the taillamps have been rendered inoperative within the meaning of the statutory prohibition.

However, the module can be installed by the vehicle owner. The statutory prohibition does not apply to the vehicle owner, and modifications by the owner are subject only to State law. We are unable to advise you on State laws and recommend that you seek an opinion from the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22203.

We do not understand your remark that "Minnesota law only requires that the headlamps be on so with our module no other lights or markers will be illuminated," and believe that your interpretation must be incorrect. Under the Act, if a State has a standard on lighting performance, it must be identical to the Federal standard.

I hope that you find this information helpful.

ID: 8874

Mr. Cary Klingner
Trison Inc.
1414 Merryview Lane
Hibbing, MN 55746

Dear Mr. Klingner:

We have received your letter of July 12, 1993, with respect to Trison's "Daytime Running Lights" module. You have heard that "federal regulations were modified earlier this year that may affect this concept", and ask whether the device "complies with the regulations."

As you have described it, the product activates the lower beam headlamps whenever the engine is running, and may be overridden by the vehicle's headlamp switch. The module "can be installed by any car owner."

On January 11, 1993, we amended Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment to permit motor vehicles to be manufactured with front lamps (other than parking and fog lamps) wired to operate automatically during daytime. Before the amendment, paragraph S5.5.3 of Standard No. 108 required taillamps to be activated when the headlamps are activated. However, the amendment modified this requirement to state that taillamps "need not be activated if the headlamps are activated at less than full intensity" when in use as daytime running lamps. I enclose a copy of the amendment for your information. We have received petitions for reconsideration of aspects of the rule other than S5.5.3, and it is possible that the standard will eventually be amended in response to them.

The amendment does not establish requirements for aftermarket equipment such as your module. There is no Federal restriction on the sale of the module, but there are restrictions on its installation on new vehicles. A manufacturer, distributor, and dealer of a new motor vehicle must deliver it in full compliance with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. As we understand it, your module would activate the lower beam headlamps at their full intensity, and the taillamps would not be activated until the main headlamp switch was used. This would create a noncompliance with S5.5.3, since the taillamps must be activated when the headlamps are activated at full intensity. In addition, the module also impairs the effectiveness of the taillamps within the meaning of a prohibition imposed by S5.1.3. For these reasons, a manufacturer or dealer could not legally install the module on a new motor vehicle before its sale to its first purchaser for purposes other than resale.

With respect to installation of the module in a vehicle after its first sale, under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the Act), no manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business may "render inoperative, in whole or in part," lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108. Because the taillamps apparently will not operate when the lower beam headlamps are activated at full intensity by the module, in our opinion, the taillamps have been rendered inoperative within the meaning of the statutory prohibition.

However, the module can be installed by the vehicle owner. The statutory prohibition does not apply to the vehicle owner, and modifications by the owner are subject only to State law. We are unable to advise you on State laws and recommend that you seek an opinion from the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22203.

We do not understand your remark that "Minnesota law only requires that the headlamps be on so with our module no other lights or markers will be illuminated," and believe that your interpretation must be incorrect. Under the Act, if a State has a standard on lighting performance, it must be identical to the Federal standard.

I hope that you find this information helpful.

Sincerely,

John Womack Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosure ref:108#VSA

ID: 9115

Mr. Cary Klingner
Trison Inc.
1414 Merryview Lane
Hibbing, MN 55746

Dear Mr. Klingner:

We have received your letter of July 12, 1993, with respect to Trison's "Daytime Running Lights" module. You have heard that "federal regulations were modified earlier this year that may affect this concept", and ask whether the device "complies with the regulations."

As you have described it, the product activates the lower beam headlamps whenever the engine is running, and may be overridden by the vehicle's headlamp switch. The module "can be installed by any car owner."

On January 11, 1993, we amended Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment to permit motor vehicles to be manufactured with front lamps (other than parking and fog lamps) wired to operate automatically during daytime. Before the amendment, paragraph S5.5.3 of Standard No. 108 required taillamps to be activated when the headlamps are activated. However, the amendment modified this requirement to state that taillamps "need not be activated if the headlamps are activated at less than full intensity" when in use as daytime running lamps. I enclose a copy of the amendment for your information. We have received petitions for reconsideration of aspects of the rule other than S5.5.3, and it is possible that the standard will eventually be amended in response to them.

The amendment does not establish requirements for aftermarket equipment such as your module. There is no Federal restriction on the sale of the module, but there are restrictions on its installation on new vehicles. A manufacturer, distributor, and dealer of a new motor vehicle must deliver it in full compliance with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. As we understand it, your module would activate the lower beam headlamps at their full intensity, and the taillamps would not be activated until the main headlamp switch was used. This would create a noncompliance with S5.5.3, since the taillamps must be activated when the headlamps are activated at full intensity. In addition, the module also impairs the effectiveness of the taillamps within the meaning of a prohibition imposed by S5.1.3. For these reasons, a manufacturer or dealer could not legally install the module on a new motor vehicle before its sale to its first purchaser for purposes other than resale.

With respect to installation of the module in a vehicle after its first sale, under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the Act), no manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business may "render inoperative, in whole or in part," lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108. Because the taillamps apparently will not operate when the lower beam headlamps are activated at full intensity by the module, in our opinion, the taillamps have been rendered inoperative within the meaning of the statutory prohibition.

However, the module can be installed by the vehicle owner. The statutory prohibition does not apply to the vehicle owner, and modifications by the owner are subject only to State law. We are unable to advise you on State laws and recommend that you seek an opinion from the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22203.

We do not understand your remark that "Minnesota law only requires that the headlamps be on so with our module no other lights or markers will be illuminated," and believe that your interpretation must be incorrect. Under the Act, if a State has a standard on lighting performance, it must be identical to the Federal standard.

I hope that you find this information helpful.

Sincerely,

John Womack Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosure ref:108#VSA

ID: steffy

Mr. J. L. Steffy
Triumph Designs Ltd.
Jacknell Road
Dodwells Bridge Industrial Estate
Hinckley, Leics. LE10 3BS
England

Dear Mr. Steffy:

This responds to your FAX of May 5, 1994, to Taylor Vinson of this Office, requesting an interpretation of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.

You enclose a motorcycle headlamp design that "contains asymmetrical shaped lenses." The headlamp itself is a symmetrical unit mounted on the motorcycle's vertical centerline. It is your interpretation that this lamp is permitted under Standard No. 108 "as long as we do not create an asymmetric lighting arrangement physically where dipped beam is on one side only and main beam on one side only."

I enclose a copy of a recent interpretation to Kawasaki Motors Corp. U.S.A. with respect to a headlamp similar to yours. If this does not answer your question, we shall be pleased to consider the matter further.

Sincerely,

John Womack Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosure ref:108 d:6/28/94

ID: aiam0071

Dear Mr. Hammerstein: Thank you for your letters of March 7 and May 15, 1968, to Mr. Georg C. Nield, concerning the requirements for motorcycle headlamps as specified in Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.; On motorcycles, Standard No. 108 permits the use of unsealed headlamp conforming to SAE Standard J584. You will note that this SAE standard does not reference bulb sockets conforming to SAE Standard J567, which is intended to insure functional compatibility between bulb sockets and the bulbs listed in SAE Standard J573. Therefore, the bulbs used in motorcycle headlamps conforming to SAE Standard J584 need not conform to SAE Standard J573.; Thank you for writing. Sincerely, David A. Fay, Office of Standards on Accident Avoidance Motor Vehicle Safety Performance Service;

ID: aiam4540

Dear Mr. Arisaka: This is in reply to your letter of July 7, 1988, wit respect to a motorcycle lighting device called the 'rolling headlamp.' The headlamp is designed to have its vertical plane always perpendicular to the ground regardless of the inclination of the motorcycle. You have asked whether such a device is legally permissible. Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 does not prohibit alteration of the mounting angle of a headlamp. Although paragraph S4.3.1 requires each lamp to 'be securely mounted on a rigid part of the vehicle,' your lamp appears to be 'securely mounted' even if it is able to rotate. I hope this answers your question. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel;

ID: 1983-3.20

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 11/17/83

FROM: FRANK BERNDT -- NHTSA CHIEF COUNSEL

TO: PEKKA SUURONEN -- PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT MANAGER RACEMARK INTERNATIONAL, INC.

TITLE: NOA - 30

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 07/27/83 FROM PEKKA SUURONEN TO NHTSA

TEXT: Dear Mr. Suuronen:

This is in reply to your letters of July 27, 1983, and October 6, 1983, asking whether a sealed headlamp with "replaceable European H4 bulb," or "Ford bulb (6 standard sizes)" are considered "legal," (like Cibie BOBI) "provided it meets with all the applicable SAE standards."

Cibie certifies that its "BOBI" headlamp complies with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, pursuant to Section 114 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. Thus far, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has not contested that certification.

We do not understand your reference to the Ford bulb in "6 standard sizes." The only size of that bulb that may be used in the new replaceable bulb headlamp systems is the one specified in the recent amendment to Standard No. 108. However, Volkswagen has petitioned for rulemaking to allow the H4 bulb.

Sincerely,

ID: nht73-3.20

DATE: 02/07/73

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; R. L. Carter; NHTSA

TO: Michael J. Long

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of January 30, 1973, concerning acrylic headlamp covers.

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Incorporates Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Standard J580a, which prohibits the use of acrylic headlamp covers as original equipment. The requirements of SAE Standard J580a have also been incorporated in a number of State regulations, which are applicable to vehicles in use. Copies of Standard No. 108 and SAE Standard J580a are enclosed for your information.

A Notice of Proposed Rule Making (Docket 69-19; Notice 3) on Standard No. 108 was issued on October 16, 1972. This Notice includes a provision for optional use of headlamp covers which conform to certain performance requirements. Such requirements are specified in paragraph S7.9 of the Notice (copy enclosed). Acrylic Industries Pty. Ltd. may be interested in commenting on this proposed revision of Standard No. 108. The closing date for comments is April 18, 1973.

If you have any questions on the enclosed documents, please do not hesitate to contact me.

ID: aiam2439

Dear Mr. He: This is in reply to your letter of September 27, 1976, to the Nationa Highway Traffic Safety Administration, concerning lighting requirements for mopeds.; The headlamp must be designed to conform to SAE Standard J584 'Motorcycle and Motor Driven Cycle Headlamps,' April 1964. This Standard does not require a sealed beam headlamp, nor is a minimum wattage specified. Obtaining an AAMVA certificate is probably the best way of insuring that a State raises no obstacles to registry of your vehicle.; There is no minimum wattage for the taillamp or stop lamp. These tw lamps may be combined. There is no Federal requirement for SAE identification, however, most lamps are so identified, because of the requirements in the state of Virginia.; Sincerely, E. T. Driver, Director, Office of Crash Avoidance, Moto Vehicle Programs;

ID: 17360.ztv

S. L. Law, Optical Design Manager
Magneti Marelli UK Ltd.
Lighting Division
Walkmill Lane, Cannock
Staffordshire WE11 3LP
England

Dear Mr. Law:

This is in reply to your fax of February 13, 1998, with reference to a proposed design for a tamperproof vehicle headlamp aiming device (VHAD).

Paragraph S7.8.5.2(c) requires, in pertinent part, that "each headlamp equipped with a VHAD that is manufactured for use on motor vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 1998, shall be manufactured with its calibration permanently fixed by its manufacturer." General Motors seeks assurance from Magneti Marelli, therefore, that the VHAD on a headlamp it intends buying from the company is sufficiently tamperproof so that the calibration can be regarded as permanently fixed.

Your intent is to prevent the removal of the VHAD covering window, thus denying access to the adjustment screw. In the current design, the covering is applied with a clockwise rotation and is removable by a counterclockwise motion. In the proposed design, once the covering is applied with a clockwise rotation, it cannot be removed by a counterclockwise motion.

We have concluded that this design makes the VHAD sufficiently tamperproof that the calibration of the VHAD will comply with the requirement of S7.8.5.2(c) that it be permanently fixed.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
ref:108
d.5/22/98