ID: 1985-03.39

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 09/04/85

FROM: JEFFREY R. MILLER -- CHIEF COUNSEL NHTSA

TO: STEPHEN T. WAIMEY, DEAN HANSELL, LAW OFFICES OF DONOVAN, LEISURE, NEWTON & IRVINE

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 12/09/88 FROM ERIKA Z. JONES -- NHTSA TO LANCE E. TUNICK, REDBOOK A33, STANDARD 208; LETTER DATED 11/10/75 FROM FRANK A. BERNDT TO JOHN B. WHITE, N40-30, SECTION 108(B)(5); LETTER DATED 10/20/88 FROM LANCE E. TUNICK TO ERIKA Z. JONES, REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION OF FMVSS 208, OCC 2696

TEXT: Dear Mr. Waimey and Mr. Hansell:

Thank you for your letter of April 15, 1985, concerning the automatic restraint requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection. I regret the delay in our reply.

You asked about the requirement in S4.1.3 of the standard concerning the minimum annual production of passenger cars that must be equipped with automatic restraints. You stated your assumption that the standard applies only to vehicles produced for sale in the United States and asked how a manufacturer is to determine if a vehicle is a part of its annual production for the United States. You pointed out that there are a number of possible sales transactions, beginning with the sale of a vehicle by Porsche to the U.S. importer and ending with the first sale to a consumer in the U.S. that can be used in determining at which point a vehicle becomes part of Porsche's annual production for the United States. I hope the following discussion answers your question.

As discussed in the agency's April 12, 1985, (50 FR 14596) notice on Standard No. 208, your assumption that the term "average annual production" refers only to cars manufactured for sale in the United States is correct. S4.1.3 specifies that percentages of production are to be based on the number of cars manufactured between discrete dates. In the case of foreign cars, as in the case of domestic ones, "manufactured" means produced or assembled. Part 567 Certification (49 CFR Part 567) of the agency's regulation requires all vehicles manufactured for sale in the United States to have a tag affixed to them certifying that they meet all Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Therefore, in determining which vehicles are to be counted as the manufacturer's average annual production, the manufacturer should determine how many vehicles were produced and certified in accordance with our regulation during the applicable time period. Using production and certification provides the agency and manufacturers with an easily verifiable event to determine which cars are to be counted.

I hope this information is of assistance to you. If you have further questions, please let me know.

Sincerely,

ID: 1985-04.38

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 11/25/85

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Ron Marion -- Specification Engineer, Thomas Built Buses, Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Ron Marion Specification Engineer Thomas Built Buses, Inc. P.O. Box 2450 1408 Courtesy Road High Point, N.C. 27261

This responds to your October 1, 1985 letter to this office asking whether each state has the discretion to determine whether vehicles purchased for Head Start programs should be school buses. While the memorandum you intended to enclose from Commissioner Hodges was excluded from your letter, we are able to answer your questions directly. Your first question asked, "Are Head Start Programs considered schools or school related events for preprimary students?" This agency has consistently stated that a Head Start facility is considered a preprimary school for the purpose of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. Your second question asked, "Are Head Start Agencies required to provide school buses when transporting 10 or more students?: As you know, the requirements under the Vehicle Safety Act apply to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles, and not to motor vehicle use. The Vehicle Safety Act does not require schools to use school buses that comply with our motor vehicle safety standards for school buses. Instead, given that Head Start facilities are "schools" within the meaning of the Vehicle Safety Act, each person selling a new bus (i.e., a motor vehicle designed to carry more than 10 persons) to such a facility is required to sell a bus that complies with NHTSA's school bus safety standards. Your final question asked about state discretion to determine whether Head Start centers must provide complying school buses. The requirements governing the use of a motor vehicle after it is sold is a matter of state law. While NHTSA has issued recommendations to states regarding school bus operation in Highway Safety Program Standard No. 17, Pupil Transportation Safety (copy enclosed), this agency has no requirement that Head Start centers must use complying school buses. On the other hand, the responsibility of school bus sellers to comply with the requirements of the Vehicle Safety Act, and to sell a vehicle that complies with all applicable safety standards, including the school bus safety standards, is a Federal requirement. Accordingly, the states have no discretion to permit persons to sell new buses to Head Start centers if those buses do not comply with the motor vehicle safety standards for school buses. For your future reference, Mr. Tilton is no longer with this agency. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, Original Signed By Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Enclosure

ID: 1985-04.43

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 12/14/85

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Daniel J. Wacek

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Daniel J. Wacek Quality Control Supervisor Viracon, Inc. 800 Park Drive Owatonna, MN 55060

Dear Mr. Wacek:

Thank you for your letter of September 30, 1985, to Stephen Oesch of my staff concerning the application of Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials, to a street sweeper.

As with all our safety standards, Standard No. 205 applies only to vehicles classified as motor vehicles by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. Section 102(3) of the Vehicle Safety Act defines the term "motor vehicle" as "any vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways, except any vehicle operated exclusively on a rail or rails."

There are some vehicles which are excepted from this classification despite their use on the highway. Vehicles such as highway lane strippers, self-propelled asphalt pavers, and other vehicles which have a low maximum speed capability and whose unusual configuration distinguishes them from the traffic flow are not considered motor vehicles. Enclosed is a copy of an information sheet prepared by the agency which discusses additional factors we consider in determining whether a vehicle meets the statutory definition of "motor vehicle." In your phone conversation of October 25, 1985, with Mr. Oesch you explained that you currently do not have definite information on the configuration, speed capability and other design characteristics of the street sweeper. We cannot provide you with an answer about whether we would consider the sweeper to be a motor vehicle without that information.

I hope this background information is of assistance to you. We would be glad to provide you with a specific interpretation concerning your vehicle after we receive more information about its design characteristics. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

September 30, 1985 Mr. Steve Oesch Legal Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 Seventh St. Southwest Washington, D C 20590

Dear Mr. Oesch:

We have come up with some questions recently regarding the application of safety glazing standards for motor vehicles. We are a glass fabricator and would like to know what criteria are used to determine whether ANSI Z26.1 is applicable. Specifically this came up regarding an unlicensed street sweeper.

I am looking forward to your reply.

Respectfully, Daniel J. Wacek Q.C. Supervisor DJW:si

ID: 1985-04.48

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 12/22/85

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Susan B. House -- House Enterprises

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Ms. Susan B. House House Enterprises 1450 Woodscliff Drive Anderson, IN 46011

Thank you for your letter of November 7, 1985, inquiring about the Federal safety standards that apply to two solar glare shading products you have developed. You described the first product as an 8" diameter acrylic dish which is of optical quality and tinted. The second products is a 4" x 4" sheet of opaque plastic. You explained that both products are designed to be attached to a vehicle's windows by suction cups. The following discussion explains how our safety standards apply to your products.

Pursuant to the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, we have issued Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials, which specifies performance and location requirements for glazing used in vehicles. These requirements include specifications for minimum levels of light transmittance (70% in areas requisite for driving visibility, which includes all windows in passenger cars).

No manufacturer or dealer is permitted to install solar films and other sun screen devices, such as the ones described in your letter, in new vehicles without certifying that the vehicle continues to be in compliance with the light transmittance and other requirements of the standard.

After a vehicle is first sold to a consumer, modifications to a vehicle are affected ny section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Vehicle Safety Act. That section prohibits commercial businesses from tampering with safety equipment installed on a vehicle in compliance with our standards. Thus, no dealer, manufacturer, repair business or distributor can install a sun screen device for the owner of the vehicle, if the device would cause the window not to meet the requirements of Standard No 205. Violation of section 108(a)(2)(A) can result in Federal civil penalties of up to $1,000 for each violation.

Section 108(a)(2)(A) does not affect vehicle owners, who may may themselves alter their vehicles as they please, so long as they adhere to all State requirements. Under Federal law, the owner may install sun screening devices regardless of whether the installation adversely affects the light transmittance. Individual States govern the operational use of vehicles by their owners and therefore it is within the authority of the States to preclude owners from using sun screens in their vehicles.

If you need further information, please let me know. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

ID: 86-1.23

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 02/06/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Mr. D. Black

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

February 6, 1986 Mr. D. Black Director, U.S. Engineering Alfa Romeo, Inc. 250 Sylvan Avenue Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632 Dear Mr. Black: This responds to your letter to Mr. Barry Felrice, our Associate Administrator for Rulemaking, requesting an interpretation of Part 541, Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard. You stated that you plan to begin production of a 1987 carline in March 1986. This particular carline has been selected as one that will be subject to the requirements of Part 541. However, Part 541 does not become effective until April 24, 1986. You stated your belief that the introduction of the 1987 carline before the effective date of Part 541 means that none of the 1987 vehicles would be required to comply. Your belief is essentially correct. As you noted, the effective date for Part 541 is April 24, 1986. This effective date means that Part 541 applies to all selected carlines beginning with the 1987 model year. However, the legislative history for Title VI of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act (15 U.S.C. 2021 et seq.), which Title requires that Part 541 be promulgated, expressly states: "The theft prevention standard cannot apply to a car in the middle of the model year." H. R. Rep. No. 1087, 98th Cong., 2d Sess. at 11 (1984). For the purposes of Title VI of the Cost Savings Act, NHTSA believes that the model year for a carline begins on the day on which a vehicle in that carline is introduced into commerce in the United States, the start of production does not constitute an introduction into commerce in the United States when the first vehicle is imported into the customs territory of the United States. Assuming that one of the 1987 vehicles in this carline is imported, and thus introduced into commerce, before April 24, 1986 (the effective date for Part 541), the 1987 model year for that carline would have begun prior to the effective date of the theft prevention standard. Obviously, the requirements of any standard do not apply before the effective date. Given the clear expression of Congressional intent that this theft prevention standard cannot apply to a carline in the middle of its model year, NHTSA concludes that a 1987 model year version of a carline introduced into commerce before the effective date of the theft prevention standard during the 1987 model year. It would, of course, be subject to the requirements during the 1988 model year. If you have any further questions or need more information on this subject, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Original Signed By Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

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: 86-4.1

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 06/25/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Roger Pezzulich

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Roger Pezzulich Parts Mgr. Friendly Honda House 549 Dutchess TurnPike Poughkeepsie, N.Y. 12603

Dear Mr. Pezzulich:

This is in reply to Your letter of April 2B, 1986, to Mr. Vinson of this Office pointing out that a center high-mounted stop lamp may be obscured when a luggage rack is in use, and asking for the legal ramifications involved in such use.

Compliance with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, under which such lamps are now mandatory on new passenger cars, is judged with the luggage rack in place, but not in use. We are not aware of any State restrictions on use of a luggage rack if it would interfere with the output from a center high-mounted stop lamp.

You may have noted that the lamp is placed between the rack and the deck on the rear of some cars on which racks have been installed as standard equipment, and not behind the rack in the parcel shelf area. This appears to be an effective solution to the problem posed by luggage racks.

I hope that this answers your question.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

Mr. Taylor Vinson April 28, 1986 Legal Council Room 5214 N.H.T.S.A.

U.S. Dept. of Transportation 400 7th Street S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Dear Mr. Vinson,

This letter is in regard to a legal matter that has been brought to my attention. I am the Parts Manager at a Honda dealership located in Poughkeepsie, New York. One of the accessories offered with our car is a luggage rack that mounts to the trunk of the vehicle. Now, with the new requirement of a 3rd brake light in the rear window, any luggage stored in this rack would obstruct the view of this light.

I would like to know what, if any, are the legal ramifications involved in the use of this luggage rack.

Thank you for your time and help in this matter.

Very truly yours, Roger Pezzulich Parts Mgr.

Very truly yours,

Roger Pezzulich Parts Mgr.

ID: 86-4.43

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 08/18/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Mr. William H. Spain

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letter of May 20, 1986, asking how our regulations would apply to a wooden steering wheel you manufacture. You explained that you use a standard steering wheel with a steel outer rim. The steel outer rim is then veneered with wood, which is covered with a protective finish. The finished wheel will then be use as an item of original equipment by a vehicle manufacturer. I hope the following discussion answers your question.

The agency has issued two Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that set occupant crash protection performance requirements for vehicle steering systems, which includes the steering wheel. Those standards are Standard No. 203, Impact Protection for the Driver from the Steering System, and Standard No. 204, Steering Column Rearward Displacement. Those two standards do not regulate the types of material that may be used in the steering wheel, but instead set performance requirements that the steering systems must meet under certain test conditions. Therefore, a manufacturer may use any material in its steering wheel, as long as the steering system still complies with the performance requirements of Standard Nos. 203 and 204.

If you have any further questions, please let me know.

Sincerely,

NATIONAL MANAGEMENT, INC.

May 20, 1986

Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Dear Ms. Jones,

Confirming our telephone conversation of May 20, 1986 with your Mr. Steve Oesch, we have a tenative inquiry from a small manufacturer of automobiles for the purchase of wood steering wheels.

The steering wheels would be installed by the manufacturer as original equipment. We would use a standard steering wheel with a steel outer rim. The steel outer rim would be veneered with wood and then covered with protective coats of clear polyeutherene finish. There would be no modification to the steering wheel hub itself.

The manufacturer asked if there would be any problems with your office on this approach. I have discussed this briefly with your testing and engineering people and their first impression is that the material of which the rim is constructed is of no consequence so long as the steering assembly complies with the applicable regulations.

We would appreciate your taking the time to confirm whether or not we should anticipate any difficulties with your department using this approach.

Your department's time and courtesy are appreciated.

NATIONAL INDUSTRIES

William H. Spain

ID: 86-4.5

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 06/30/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Vincent H. Rose -- President, HI-Q Technology, Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Vincent H. Rose President HI-Q Technology, Inc. Box 4836 Walnut Creek, Calif. 94596

This will confirm your understanding, as expressed in your letter of June 3, 1986, that Federal requirements for center high-mounted stop lamps (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, do not apply to an aftermarket lamp that "will not replace parts originally governed by regulations".

It is not quite correct, however, to say that "no regulations apply"; a manufacturer of aftermarket lighting equipment to which no standard applies is nevertheless subject to the notification and remedy provisions of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act if either it or this agency determines that a safety related defect exists in the product.

Finally, even though Standard No. 108 does not cover an aftermarket center high-mounted stop lamp such as you propose to market, we encourage manufacturers to design their products as closely as possible to Federal specifications so that the full benefit of the device may be realized.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

June 3, 1986 Ref: 20nhtsa3

Ms Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Room 5219 400 7th St. SW Washington DC 20590

Dear Ms Jones:

We are planning to market a lighting product for passenger cars in the United States and wish to comply with pertinent regulations and safety standards.

The product is a high-mounted stoplamp. It will be sold in the aftermarket and is intended to be added by the consumer to older automobiles not originally equipped with this device. It is not intended for replacement of high-mounted stoplamps installed by the vehicle manufacturer in newer automobiles.

We need your advice regarding U.S. Government regulations, if any, that must be complied with. It is our understanding that perhaps no regulations apply because this product is an add-on and will not replace parts originally governed by regulations.

Your comments will be most helpful and appreciated.

Very truly yours,

Vincent H. Rose President HI-Q Technology, Inc.

ID: 86-5.16

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 09/12/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: David M. Wise -- Gary Precision Products

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. David M. Wise Gary Precision Products 530 Old Post Road #3 Greenwich, CT 06830

This is in reply to your letter of August 7, 1986( asking if Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, or any other Federal regulation applies to a plastic ice scraper with a reflector on it that you may manufacture.

Although the title of Standard No. 108 is "Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment," the reflective devices covered by the standard are those that are mounted on the rear and side of a motor vehicle, which are necessary for signaling and the safe operation of vehicles during darkness and other times of reduced visibility. It does not apply to ice scrapers. Nor does the other Federal motor vehicle safety standard dealing with reflectivity, Standard No. 125 "Warning Devices," or any other regulation of this Department.

I hope this answers your question.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

August 7, 1986

Ms. Erika Z. Jones Chief Council National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Room 5219 400 7th St. S.W. Washington, DC 20590

Dear Ms. Jones:

Gary Precision Products manufactures a line of injection molded plastic ice scrapers and snow brushes . We are considering the manufacture of an ice scraper with a reflector on it. The reflector will be on the blade portion of the ice scraper.

We would like to know if there are any laws, rules or regulations governing the manufacture or sale of such a product. I specifically refer to U.S. Dept of Transportation Motor Vehicle Safety Standard # 108.

In my conversation with Mr. Taylor Vincent, the law only refers to motor vehicles themselves, not to portable automotive devices used on them.

We would like something in writing stating that there are no regulations or laws we need to comply with in manufacturing this product.

We thank you for your assistance in this matter.

Very truly yours,

GARY PRECISION PRODUCTS

David Wise