ID: 1984-3.34

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 10/31/84

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHSTA

TO: Yea-tung Hung, Esq.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your recent letter to this office, asking for information on the necessary steps for certifying that a rim complies with applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. You were particularly interested in how to obtain "authorization" to place the required markings on rims. Markings are only required by Standard No. 120 to appear on rims for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars. However, to be certain that I answer your request fully, I will explain our requirements for both passenger car rims and rims for use on other motor vehicles.

The two applicable standards are No. 110, Tire Selection and Rims -- Passenger Cars (49 CFR @ 571.110), and No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars (49 CFR @ 571.120). I have enclosed copies of both these standards for your information. For passenger car rims, section S4.4 of Standard No. 110 specifies two requirements. First, the rim must be constructed to the dimensions of one of the rims that is listed under the definition of a test rim in Standard No. 109. This means that the rim must comply with the dimensional requirements shown for that rim size in the current publications of specified standardization organizations, such as the Tire and Rim Association, the European Tyre and Rim Technical Organisation, or the Japan Automobile Tire Manufacturers Association. Second, in the event of a rapid loss of inflation pressure with the vehicle traveling in a straight line at 60 miles per hour, the rim must retain the deflated tire until the vehicle can be stopped with a controlled braking application. No markings are required on rims subject to Standard No. 110.

For rims for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars, Standard No. 120 also specifies two requirements. The first requirement, set forth in section S5.1.1, is that the rims on a vehicle must correspond with the size tire on the vehicle, i.e., be listed as suitable for use with that tire size by the tire manufacturer, pursuant to either Standard No. 109 or No. 119. This would be done in the publications of the standardization organizations, as explained above. This requirement is the responsibility of the vehicle manufacturer, not the rim manufacturer, since only the vehicle manufacturer knows what size tires will actually be mounted on the rim.

The second requirement, set forth in S5.2, is that the rim be marked with five specified items of information. These are:

(1) A specified designation indicating the source of the rim's published nominal dimensions;

(2) The rim size designation and, in the case of multipiece rims, the rim type designation;

(3) The symbol DOT, which constitutes a certification by the rim manufacturer that the rim complies with the applicable requirements of the safety standards;

(4) A designation identifying the rim manufacturer by name, trademark, or symbol; and

(5) The month and year in which the rim was manufactured.

You specifically asked how to obtain "authorization from D.O.T." to engrave the symbol on the rim which indicates that it complies with the standards and regulations. As explained in Standard No. 120, this symbol is the letters "DOT". The United States does not use a certification process similar to the European countries, in which the manufacturer delivers the rims to be certified to the governmental entity, and that entity tests the rims to determine if it can be certified as complying with the applicable standards. Instead, in the United States, the individual manufacturer must certify that its rims comply with all applicable standards. Once the manufacturer determines that its rims do meet the requirements of Standard No. 120, it stamps the symbol "DOT" into those rims, without any authorization from this agency.

Should you have any further questions regarding the requirements applicable to rims, please feel free to contact me.

ENCLS.

OCC-1208

September 18, 1984

U.S. Department of Transportation Office of Chief Counsel NHTSA

Dear Sir,

This is to inquire that how to obtain the authorization from D.O.T. to engrave the symbol or words on the rim which shall indicate the quality of the rim is manufactured in accordance with the regulation set forth by the D.O.T.

On behalf of Shinn Fu Company of Taiwan, I have discussed this matter with Mr. Casanova and was told that there is not necessary to get special authorization for the rim except for the tire.

Please confirm this advice or advise us otherwise.

I am looking forward to hearing from you as soon as possible.

Yea-tung Hong

cc: SHINN FU CO.

ID: aiam4076

Dear Mr. Trimarchi: This responds to your letter seeking information about the Federa requirements applicable to automotive wheels that are to be imported into the United States. There are two Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that apply to wheel rims, one for rims for passenger cars and the other for rims for other types of motor vehicles. It is not clear whether your reference to 'automotive wheels' is limited to passenger car wheels, so I have included a discussion of the requirements for both types of wheels.; None of our standards set requirements for the parts of the whee assembly other than the rim.; The two potentially applicable standards are No. 110, *Tire selectio and rims - passenger cars*, and No. 120, *Tire selection and rims for motor vehicles other than passenger cars*. I have enclosed copies of both standards, along with Standards No. 109 and 119, which are applicable to tires and are referenced in the rim standards. For those passenger car rims you wish to import, section S4.4 of Standard No. 110 specifies two requirements. First, the rim must be constructed to the dimensions of one of the rims that is listed under the definition of a test rim in Standard No. 109. This means that the rim must comply with the dimensional specifications shown for that rim size in the current publications of specified standardization organizations, such as the Tire & Rim Association or the European Tyre and Rim Technical Organisation. Second, in the event of a rapid loss of inflation pressure with the vehicle travelling in a straight line at 60 miles per hour, the rim must retain the deflated tire until the vehicle can be stopped with a controlled braking application.; For those rims you import for use on vehicles other than passenge cars, Standard No. 120 also specifies two requirements. The first requirement, set forth in section S5.1.1, is that the rims on a vehicle must correspond with the size tire on the vehicle, i.e., be listed as suitable by the tire manufacturer, pursuant to either Standard No. 109 or No. 119. This would be done in the publications of the standardization organizations, as explained above. This requirement is the responsibility of any vehicle manufacturer that uses your rims as original equipment, since only it would know what size tires will be installed on the vehicle. The second requirement, set forth in section S5.2, is that the rim be marked by the rim manufacturer with five specified items of information. These are:; >>>1. A specified designation indicating the source of the rim' published nominal dimensions,; 2. The rim's size designation and, in the case of multipiece rims, th rim type designation,; 3. The symbol DOT, which constitutes a certification by the ri manufacturer that the rim complies with the applicable requirements of the safety standards,; 4. A designation identifying the rim manufacturer by name, trademark o symbol, and; 5. The month and year in which the rim was manufactured.<<< You stated that you wanted to learn if the rims were subject to an tests by the Department of Transportation. The United States does not use a certification process similar to the European countries, in which the manufacturer delivers the rims to be certified to a governmental entity, and that entity test the rims to determine if they can be certified as complying with the applicable standards. Instead, in the Untied States, the individual rim manufacturer must certify that its rims comply with all applicable standards. The certification need not be based on actual tests, the only requirement is that the manufacturer exercise due care in making the certification. Obviously, with respect to the requirements for rims, a manufacturer as defined below is not expected to test if the rims have the necessary markings and if the rim size is listed in one of the standardization organization publications.; You should also be aware of the fact that section 102(5) of th National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1391(5)) treats both the actual manufacturer *and* the importer of a wheel as its manufacturer. If either the manufacturer or this agency determines that the imported rims do not comply with the above- described safety standards or determine that the rims contain a defect related to motor vehicle safety, the manufacturer would be required to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Section 154 (a)(2)(B) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1414(a)(2)(B)) specifies that, if the rims fail to comply with an applicable safety standards or contain a safety- related defect, the manufacturer must notify purchasers of the safety-related defect of noncompliance and must either:; >>>1. repair the rim so that the defect or noncompliance is removed, or 2. replace the rim with an identical or reasonably equivalent rim tha does not have a defect or noncompliance.<<<; Whichever of these options is chosen, the rim manufacturer must bea the full expense and cannot charge the rim owner for the remedy if the rim was first purchased less than 8 years before the notification campaign.; In the event that neither the importer nor the actual manufacture satisfied an obligation imposed on a 'manufacturer' by the Act or our regulations, the agency would consider taking enforcement action against both parties. Any such obligation, however, may be completely satisfied by either party.; Additionally, I am enclosing copies of two procedural rules which appl to all parties subject to the regulations of this agency. The first is 49 CFR Part 566, *Manufacturer Identification*. This requires either the actual manufacturer of the rims or your company as the importer to submit your name, address, and a brief description of the items of equipment you manufacture to the agency within 30 days of the date these wheels arrive in the United States.; The other regulation is 49 CFR Part 551, *Procedural Rules*. Thi regulation requires that actual manufacturer of these rims to designate a permanent resident of the United States as the manufacturer's agency for service of process in this county. Your company may be designated as the agent, if the manufacturer so chooses. Part 551 specifies that the designation of agency must contain the following six items of information:; >>>1. A certification that the designation is valid in form and bindin on the manufacturer under the laws, corporate by-laws, or other requirements governing the making of the designation at the time and place where it is made,; 2. The full legal name, principal place of business, and mailin address of the manufacturer,; 3. Marks, trade names, or other designations of origin of any of th manufacturer's wheels and rims that do not bear its name,; 4. A statement that the designation shall remain in effect unti withdrawn or replaced by the manufacturer,; 5. A declaration of acceptance duly signed by the agent appointed b the manufacturer, and that agent may be an individual, firm, or U.S. corporation, and; 6. The full legal name and address of the designated agent.<<< This designation must be received by this agency before these wheel and rims are imported into the United States.; If you need further information, or a clarification of any of th information set forth herein, please contact Steve Kratzke of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 426-2992.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel

ID: aiam4031

Dear Mr. Pertz: I regret the delay in replying to your letter of July 12, 1985 regarding interpretations of Standard No. 111, *Rearview Mirrors*. You asked whether the agency has issued any interpretations concerning S5.1.2 of the standard. In addition, you asked whether Ford Motor Company had submitted to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) any interpretations of paragraph S5.1.2 of Standard No. 111, regarding requirements for mounting inside rearview mirrors in passenger cars.; This agency administers the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safet Act of 1966. As part of its responsibilities, this office issues interpretations of safety standards, upon written request. This agency has issued two interpretations of S5.1.2 of Standard No. 111. Copies of these interpretations are enclosed.; In addition, NHTSA's Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance investigate the compliance of different makes of passenger cars with Standard No. 111 between 1977 and 1981. The Ford passenger car models tested were the Ford LTD, Econoline, and Fiesta and the Mercury Zephyr and Cougar. As part of its submission to the agency in these investigations, Ford provided information on its compliance with S5.1.2. The files are available on microfiche from the Technical Reference Office, Room 5108 (202-426-2768) at the address shown above, and the file numbers are CIR Nos. 1708, 2062, 2063, 2064, and 2245.; Your request in your letter of September 3, 1985, for comments by For on notices of proposed rulemaking on Standard No. 111 has been referred to the Docket Section. They will reply directly to you regarding this information.; I hope this information is helpful to you. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel

ID: nht90-2.57

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/30/90

FROM: STEPHEN P. WOOD -- ACTING CHIEF COUNSEL NHTSA

TO: MICHAEL S. KMIECIK

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER FROM MICHAEL S. KMIECIK TO NHTSA, DATED 11/21/89

TEXT: This responds to your letter with respect to vehicle modification kits you wish to purchase and use in the conversion of used Datsun cars. You asked about the Part 581 Bumper Standard and Safety Standard No. 215 with respect to using Datsuns produced be fore September 1, 1978. You asked whether the kit would meet the requirements of Safety Standard No. 215. I regret the delay in responding. (I note that you sent a separate letter asking about the safety standards that apply to 1974-78 convertibles, an d whether the conversion kit meets those standards. I am responding to that letter separately).

We appreciate your efforts to meet the requirements of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. A provision of the Act requires, in essence, that vehicle alterations by a motor vehicle manufacturer, distributor, dealer or repair business must not render wholly or partially inoperative any device or element of design installed on that vehicle in accordance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard. This means that a vehicle at the end of its conversion process must continue to meet the sta ndards that applied at the time that it was first manufactured.

As you may know, the Part 581 Bumper Standard became applicable to passenger cars manufactured on or after September 1, 1978. It replaced Safety Standard No. 215, Exterior Protection, which applied to passenger cars manufactured from September 1, 1972 t o August 30, 1978.

In converting a car to which Standard No. 215 originally applied, care must be taken to ensure that the changes do not affect the ability to conform to the applicable performance requirements of that standard (copy enclosed). We regret that we are unabl e to advise you of the effect that any specific modifications would have on the performance of the vehicle as converted. The manufacturer of the kit may be able to provide information on this subject.

2

You also requested a copy of Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. I have enclosed a copy of that standard revised as of October 1, 1989. I have also enclosed an information sheet which provides information for n ew manufacturers, and includes information concerning how to obtain copies of safety standards.

I hope this information is helpful.

ENCLOSURES

ID: 2508y

Mr. Michael S. Kmiecik
5601 Western Avenue
Omaha, Nebraska 68132

Dear Mr. Kmiecik:

This responds to your letter with respect to vehicle modification kits you wish to purchase and use in the conversion of used Datsun cars. You asked about the Part 58l Bumper Standard and Safety Standard No. 2l5 with respect to using Datsuns produced before September l, l978. You asked whether the kit would meet the requirements of Safety Standard No. 2l5. I regret the delay in responding. (I note that you sent a separate letter asking about the safety standards that apply to l974-78 convertibles, and whether the conversion kit meets those standards. I am responding to that letter separately).

We appreciate your efforts to meet the requirements of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. A provision of the Act requires, in essence, that vehicle alterations by a motor vehicle manufacturer, distributor, dealer or repair business must not render wholly or partially inoperative any device or element of design installed on that vehicle in accordance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard. This means that a vehicle at the end of its conversion process must continue to meet the standards that applied at the time that it was first manufactured.

As you may know, the Part 58l Bumper Standard became applicable to passenger cars manufactured on or after September l, l978. It replaced Safety Standard No. 2l5, Exterior Protection, which applied to passenger cars manufactured from September l, l972 to August 30, l978.

In converting a car to which Standard No. 2l5 originally applied, care must be taken to ensure that the changes do not affect the ability to conform to the applicable performance requirements of that standard (copy enclosed). We regret that we are unable to advise you of the effect that any specific modifications would have on the performance of the vehicle as converted. The manufacturer of the kit may be able to provide information on this subject. You also requested a copy of Safety Standard No. l08, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. I have enclosed a copy of that standard revised as of October l, l989. I have also enclosed an information sheet which provides information for new manufacturers, and includes information concerning how to obtain copies of safety standards.

I hope this information is helpful.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Wood Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosures

ref:58l:VSA

ID: nht79-1.7

DATE: 10/24/79

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: VDO-ARGO Instruments Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

NOA-30

Mr. H. A. Ritzenthaler VDO-ARGO Instruments Inc. 980 Brooke Road P.O. Box 2630 Winchester, Virginia 22601

Dear Mr. Ritzenthaler:

This is in response to your letter of January 25, 1979, in which you stated your interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 127, Speedometers and Odometers, and asked that we advise you if action taken in accordance with this interpretation would place your company in violation of the standard. This letter is to confirm that your interpretation is correct.

According to your interpretation of Safety Standard 127, those provisions which become effective for new motor vehicles on September l, 1979 and September 1, 1980 are not applicable to speedometers and replacement parts produced for use in motor vehicles manufactured before those dates. This is correct because Safety Standard 127 is a vehicle standard and an equipment standard which applies to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, motorcycles, and buses manufactured after the standard's effective dates and to speedometer and odometers for use in such vehicles. (Section 3, Safety Standard 127).

Sincerely,

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel

U.S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Admin. 300 Seventh Street S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590 January 25, 1979

ATT: Mr. Richard B. Dyson, Acting Chief Counsel

Dear Mr. Dyson:

We are a manufacturer of automotive instruments, including speedometers. The changes required on speedometers for new cars after the effective dates September 1979 and September 1980 are clearly defined in Regulation 127, and our original equipment speedometers will be in compliance with this regulation.

We also have an obligation toward the automotive industry to supply original replacement parts for a period of ten years after manufacture of a particular vehicle model has ceased. These replacement parts for cars manufactured before the effective dates of Regulation 127 would, of course, not embody the changes called for in Regulation 127, nor does the regulation itself require such modifications in reference to replacement parts.

This is our interpretation of the applicability of Regulation 127. Should you feel that this interpretation would put us in violation of Regulation 127, please advise us accordingly.

Sincerely, VDO-ARGO INSTRUMENTS, INC.

H. A. Ritzenthaler Manager, Engineering

HAR/nf

ID: 21508retaillabelneb

Mr. Harold Schapiro
1709 Sulgrave Avenue
Baltimore, Maryland 21209

Dear Mr. Schapiro:

This responds to your April 10, 2000, correspondence requesting an opinion as to your proposal to "add, at the retail level, a sticker to the wall of the tire that indicates the retailer (e.g. Sears, Wal-Mart, Mr. Tire, NTB, etc...)." You further state that the sticker would be "non-obtrusive" and ask this office to advise you if there is any regulation that would prohibit this action.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has the statutory authority to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Standards (FMVSS) applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor equipment. Federal law establishes a self-certification system under which motor vehicle and equipment manufacturers themselves certify that their products comply with all applicable standards. For that reason, NHTSA neither tests, approves, disapproves, endorses, nor grants letters of approval of products prior to their introduction into the retail market. Rather, we enforce compliance with the standards by purchasing vehicles and equipment and testing them. We also investigate safety-related defects.

It is not clear from your letter whether you are interested in labeling replacement passenger car tires or replacement tires for use on other motor vehicles. To ensure that you receive the information that is of concern to you, I will discuss identification requirements for replacement tires for use on both passenger cars and on other motor vehicles.

All new passenger car tires must satisfy the requirements of Standard No. 109, New Pneumatic Tires (49 CFR 571.109), and be labeled in accordance with Part 574, Tire identification and recordkeeping (49 CFR Part 574). This is true whether the new passenger car tire is a mud and snow tire, all-season tire, high speed-rated tire, temporary spare tire, or a normal highway service tire. Section S4.3.2 of Standard No. 109 explicitly requires each tire to be labeled with the manufacturer's name or a brand name and the identification number assigned to the manufacturer. The "brand name" refers to the name under which a tire is sold at retail, whether it is identical to the manufacturer's name (e.g., Firestone), a name owned by the manufacturer and used in place of its corporate name (i.e., a house brand, such as Falls that is manufactured by Cooper), or a name owned by someone other than the manufacturer (i.e., a private brand such as Atlas that is made by several manufacturers). Section S4.3.2 uses the singular form to identify the name that must appear on the sidewall (name of manufacturer or the brand name) and connects the alternative with the disjunctive "or." This grammatical structure indicates that only one name, either that of the actual manufacturer or the brand name owner, shall be labeled on the tire. The agency chose this grammatical structure to ensure that consumers would not be confused about the identity of the brand name or manufacturer of the tire.

The marking requirements for tires subject to Standard No. 119, New pneumatic tires for vehicles other than passenger cars (49 CFR 571.119), are set forth in section S6.5 of the standard. Section S6.5(b) requires that each tire be marked with "the tire identification required by part 574 of this chapter." Section 574.5, Tire identification requirements, specifies that "[e]ach tire manufacturer shall conspicuously label on one sidewall of each tire it manufactures, except tires manufactured exclusively for mileage contract purchasers, or non-pneumatic tires of non-pneumatic tire assemblies, by permanently molding into or onto the sidewall, in the manner and location specified in Figure 1, a tire identification number (TIN) containing the information set forth in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section." Both section S6.5(b) of Standard No. 119 and section 574.5 use the singular form to identify the identification number that must appear on the sidewall. This grammatical structure indicates that identification number, representative of a single manufacturer, shall be labeled on the tire. The agency chose this grammatical structure to ensure that consumers would not be confused about the identity of the manufacturer of the tire.

As discussed above, Standards Nos. 109 and 119 are intended to provide the tire purchaser with necessary information for the safe operation of those tires on the purchaser's vehicle. Although the situation described in your letter is not specifically addressed by the language of these standards, needless confusion could result from the attachment of a retailer's name to a tire which is, as required by our regulations, marked with a manufacturer's name, a brand name, or a manufacturer's TIN. NHTSA believes that this confusion would impair the purpose of tire information labels. Therefore, this agency interprets Standards Nos. 109 and 119 to prohibit the attachment of a retailer's name, through any means, to replacement tires for passenger cars and motor vehicles other than passenger cars.

For your further information, I am enclosing a fact sheet we prepared entitled Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment, and Where to Obtain NHTSA's Safety Standards and Regulations.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any questions or need additional information, feel free to contact Nancy Bell of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosures
ref:109#119
d.6/19/00

ID: nht73-6.15

DATE: 04/09/73

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Takata Kojyo Co., Ltd.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letter of February 24, 1973, to Mr. Francis Armstrong, requesting various interpretations of Standards No. 208 and No. 209, with respect to safety belt systems.

Your first question, referenced to Figure No. 1 of the enclosure with your letter, relates to the required strength of the webbing in the case where two widths are connected together in an upper torso assembly. Under the webbing strength requirements of S4.2(b) of Standard No. 209, both pieces of webbing in the upper torso restraint must, individually, meet a 4,000 pound strength test. Under the assembly performance requirements of S5.3(b) of Standard NO. 209, a common pelvic and upper torso restraint must meet a 3,000 pound strength test. The latter would be true regardless of whether sewing or other means is used to make the belt assembly.

Your second question, referenced to Figure 2 of the enclosure, relates to the bolt strength required in the belt assembly anchorage. Under the provisions of S4.1(f), "equivalent hardware" is permissible in lieu of the 7/16" bolts. In such a case, the tests required under S4.3(c), as prescribed under S5.2(c), would be performed on the entire equivalent hardware, rather than or the individual components (bolts).

With respect to your third question, concerning the acceptability of belts that do not conform to the elongation requirements of Standard No. 209, our reply is that under the present circumstances such webbing would not conform to either Standard No. 208 or

Standard No. 209. As a result of the decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Ford v. NHTSA, belts installed under Standard No. 208's third option in 1973 (S4.1.2.3) will have to conform to Standard No. 209. Unless Standard No. 209 is amended with respect to its elongation requirements, therefore, energy absorbing webbing of the type you describe will not be permitted in 1974 cars.

TAKATA KOJYO CO., LTD.

February 24, 1973

Francis Armstrong Director, Office of Compliance Motor Vehicle Program National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Attention to; Mr. J. Gilkey Mr. G. Hunter

This is to request you to enlighten us upon the under-mentioned questions of ours so as to let us manufacture right seat belts assembly conforming to MVSS.

Please note, in this connection, that we have been manufacturing seat belts successfully for many years for installation in the cars destined to the United States.

Question # 1. (Please refer to the Figure # 1)

As shown on the Fig. #1, we made one shoulder belt connecting one webbing of 2" wide with another of 1" wide by pattern-stitching as the Figure. In this case, what breaking strength is required under S4.2(b) of MVSS 209? Is our belt taken as an assemblied webbings in spite of its connection by stitching? In other words, is 3,000 lbs. the required breaking strength for the said belt? How about in case the 2" webbing is connected with the 1"one with hardwares? Please clarify this case too.

Question # 2. (Please refer to the Figure # 2)

In compliance with the request of our customers, auto-manufacturers, we are preparing to use two bolts of smaller diameter than 7/16" for fastening to the anchorage. In this case, is each bolt is required to withstand the breaking strength of 5,000 lbs or more?

Question # 3.

We are planning to use an Energy Absorbent belt for 1974 cars. Our Energy Absorbent belt conforms to the requirement of MVSS 208's S.I. 1,000, but extends more than 40% at 2,500 lbs. In other words, the belt does not conform to MVSS 209. Can our belt be accepted by you, the U.S. authorities when shipped to the U.S. installed in the cars destined to the U.S. markets? Are we right in understanding that MVSS 208 takes precedence of MVSS 209 in this particular case?

Thanking you in advance for your kind guidance at your earliest convenience,

T. Hiramine, DIRECTOR

Enclosed.

(Graphics omitted)

(Graphics omitted)

TAKATA KOJYO CO., LTD.

February 26, 1973

Francis Armstrong, Director

Office of Standards Enforcement National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Attention to; Mr. J. Gilkey Mr. G. Hunter

Enclosed please find the two copies of sketches numbered as Figure # 1 and Figure # 2.

Kindly take a trouble to check whether the two sheets of copied sketches attached to our letter to you dated February 24, 1973 were numbered as Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, respectively.

We are afraid if we attached two copies of same number by mistake. If so, please replace the wrong ones by the correct ones enclosed herewith. Provided our originally attached ones were correct ones, please just destroy these copies enclosed herein.

Expressing our apologies for inconvenience caused by our oversight,

Sincerely yours

T. Hiramine

Enclosure.

(Graphics Omitted)

(Graphics Omitted)

ID: 86-3.1

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/01/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Mr. William F. Slye

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. William F. Slye 51 Stebbins Ave. Brockton, Mass. 02401

Dear Mr. Slye:

This is in reply to your letter of March 31, 1986, to the Department of Transportation with reference to whether the 1985 Buick Century that you purchased on September 18, 1985, should have been equipped with a center high-mounted stop lamp.

The requirement for the new lamp applies only to passenger cars manufactured on or after September 1, 1985 (regardless of model year designation), and therefore would not apply to a vehicle which was sold after that date but was manufactured earlier. The manufacturer's certification located in the driver door post area of your car will indicate the month and year of its manufacture, which we assume was earlier than September 1985. If our assumption is correct, your dealer was correct in informing you that it need not install the lamp at its expense. However, because of the demonstrable value of the lamp in reducing the frequency and severity of rear end collisions, you may nevertheless wish to have the lamp installed.

Sincerely,

Original Signed By

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

51 Stebbins Avenue Brockton, Mass. 02401 March 31,1986

U.S. Dept. of Transportation Washington, D.C.

Gentlemen:

According to the March/April, 1986 issue of the American Automobile Association magazine, "The U.S. Department Transportation requires the third brakelight on all cars made or sold in the United States after Sept. 1, 1985." This statement appears in an article entitled "Car Light, Car Bright", authored by Leslie Janet Woolf.

I purchased my new 1985 Buick Century on Sept. 18, 1986. It does not have the extra light. The dealership says that the rule applies only to 1986 cars, and that the statement "sold after Sept. 1, 1985 does not apply, or is in error. Based on this interpretation, the agency will not install the light at its expense. If their interpretation is incorrect, I don't feel that I should have to pay for their error.

I would appreciate a ruling on this matter as soon as possible. Thank you.

Very truly yours,

William F. Slye

ID: 86-3.28

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/21/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Ivan Chien -- President, Friendship Over Water, Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

May 21, 1986 Mr. Ivan Chien President Friendship Over Water, Inc. 8F-6, No. 9, San-Min Road Taipei, Taiwan REPUBLIC OF CHINA Dear Mr. Chien: This responds to your letter seeking information about our requirements applicable to "hub covers and wheel covers". The only applicable requirement for those items is set forth in Standard No. 211, Wheel Nuts, Wheel Discs, and Hub Caps (49 CFR 571.211; copy enclosed. That standard specifies that wheel nuts, hub caps, and wheel discs for use on passenger cars and multipurpose passenger cars and multipurpose passenger vehicles shall not incorporate winged projections. Hub covers and wheel covers that you manufacture for use on vehicles other than passenger cars and multipurpose passenger vehicles are not subject to any standards issued by this agency. However, as a manufacturer of hub caps and wheel covers, you incur statutory responsibilities under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.; "the Safety Act"), even for those hub caps and wheel covers not subject to Standard No. 211. If either your company or this agency determines that some of your wheel covers subject to Standard No. 211 do not comply with that standard or determines that any of you wheel covers contain a defect related to motor vehicle safety, you would be required to notify your distributors, dealers, and purchasers of the noncompliance or defect and remedy the noncompliance or defect. In the case of wheel covers, section 154(a)(2)(B) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1414(a)(2)(B)) requires that, if there is a determination of a noncompliance or defect and remedy the noncompliance or defect, the manufacturer must notify distributors, dealers, and purchasers of the noncompliance or defect and must either: 1. repair the wheel cover so that the defect or noncompliance is removed; or 2. replace the wheel cover with an identical or reasonably equivalent wheel cover that does not have a defect or noncompliance. Whichever of these options is chosen, the manufacturer of the wheel covers must bear the full expense of the recall campaign and cannot charge the purchaser for the remedy if the wheel cover was first purchased less than 8 years before the notification campaign began. We have several regulations relating to defect and noncompliance notification and remedy campaigns. Those regulations are identified in the enclosed information sheet for new manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment. That sheet also gives you a broad overview of our statutory and regulatory requirements applicable to manufacturers. You also asked about obtaining necessary "approvals" before selling these products in the United States. For those items subject to Standard No. 211, NHTSA does not use a certification process similar to the European countries, in which the manufacturer delivers the products to be certified to a governmental entity and that entity tests the products to determine if they can be certified as complying with the applicable standards. Instead, in the United States the manufacturer of the product must certify that its products comply with all applicable safety standards. The manufacturer's certification need not be based on actual tests; the only requirement is that the manufacturer exercise due care in making the certification. Once you have determined that your wheel covers comply with Standard No. 211, section 114 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1403) requires you to furnish to each of your distributors and dealers at the time of delivery of the wheel covers a certification that those wheel covers conform to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. That section further provides that your certification "may be in the form of a label or tag on such item or on the outside of a container in which such item is delivered." You also asked how you apply for the approval of the SAE, AAMVA, and CHP. The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) is a private group that issues recommended practices for the design and performance of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. You are not required by the Vehicle Safety Act to obtain the approval of SAE prior to marketing your products in the United States. You obtain information about the SAE standards by contacting that group at the following address: Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096, USA. The group may be contacted by telephone at (412) 776-4841. Various States may also have requirements concerning wheel covers. However, section 103(d) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1392(d)) provides that "(w)henever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard established under this title is in effect, no State or political subdivision of a State shall have any authority to establish, or to continue in effect, with respect to any motor vehicle or time of motor vehicle equipment, any safety standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of such safety standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of such vehicle or item of equipment which is not identical to the Federal standard. Nothing in this section shall be construed as preventing any State from enforcing any safety standard which is identical to a Federal safety standard." Thus, any non-identical State safety standard covering the same aspect of performance as Standard No. 211 would be preempted by the provisions of the Safety Act, making it leagally unenforceable. States do have authority to enforce identical standards related to the same aspect of performance as Standard No. 211, and some may exercise that authority. To learn more about this issue, you should contact the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 1201 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 910, Washington, D.C. 20036, USA. Their telephone number is (202) 296-1955. The Department of California Highway Patrol may be contacted at the following address: Enforcement Services Division, P.O. Box 898, Sacramento, CA 95804, USA. Their telephone number is (916) 445-1865. For your information, I an enclosing copies of two procedural rules that apply to all parties subject to the standards and regulations of this agency. The first is 49 CFR Part 566, Manufacturer Identification. This requires each manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment subject to one of our safety standards to submit its name, address, and a brief description of the items of motor vehicle equipment it manufactures to this agency within 30 days of the date the motor vehicle equipment is imported into the United States. The other regulation is 49 CFR Part 551, Procedural Rules. This regulation requires all manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment headquartered outside of the United States to designate a permanent resident of the United States as the manufacturer's agent for service of process in this country. Part 551 specifies that the designation of agent must contain the following six items of information: 1. A certification that the designation is valid in form and binding on the manufacturer under the laws, corporate by-laws, or other requirements governing the making of the designation at the time and place where it is made; 2. The full legal name, principal place of business, and mailing address of the manufacturer; 3. Marks, trade names, or other designations of origin of any of the manufacturer's products that do not bear its name; 4. A statement that the designation shall remain in effect until withdrawn or replaced by the manufacturer; 5. A declaration of acceptance duly signed by the agent appointed by the manufacturer, and that agent may be an individual, firm, or U.S. corporation; and 6. The full legal name and address of the designated agent. This designation must be received by this agency before your wheel covers are imported into the United States. If you need further information or a clarification of our regulations, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Original Signed By Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Enclosures