ID: 1982-2.35

DATE: 08/10/82

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: MMC Services Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Masakatsu Kano Executive Vice-President MMC Services, Inc. 3000 Town Center Suite 1960 Southfield, MI 48075

Dear Mr. Kano:

This responds to your letter of July 15, 1982, concerning the application of Standard No. 201, Occupant Protection in Interior Impact, to a passenger "assist grip" provided in your vehicles. You asked whether the instrument panel impact test of the standard must be conducted both with and without the passenger grip mounted on the instrument panel.

The head impact test should be conducted with the passenger "assist grip" mounted in place. It should not be necessary to test the panel with the grip removed. Section 5.3.1 of the Standard provides that if an area of the instrument panel is within the head impact zone, it must meet the performance requirements of the standard. In using the term "instrument panel", the agency intended to include the basic engineering drawing shows that the grip is solidly mounted on top of the panel as an integral part. You stated that the grip is a standard design feature on all the vehicles you intend to manufacture. Because the grip is a standard design feature which is securely affixed to the instrument panel, the agency considers it an integral part of the panel. Thus, the performance requirements of the standard would be applicable with the grip mounted in place.

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

Sincerely,

Original Signed By Frank Berndt Chief Counsel

Mr. Frank A. Berndt, Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Room 5219 Washington, D.C. 20590

Dear Mr. Berndt:

MMC Services, Inc. on behalf of Mitsubishi Motor Corporation, we would like to have your confirmation of an interpretation we believe to be appropriate regarding the test procedure used in MVSS 201, Occupant Protection in Interior Impact.

Standard 201 requires that areas of the vehicle instrument panel which are within a specifically defined head impact area, be impacted by a 6.5 inch diameter head form. The test impact conditions are specified, as are the performance criteria which must be met. There is, however, no absolute definition of instrument panel--this is the area in which we feel an interpretation would be helpful.

On one of our multipurpose passenger vehicles, we provide a passenger assist grip, mounted on top of, and as part of, the instrument panel. We enclosed a picture showing this passenger assist grip. The grip is solidly mounted to the instrument panel, as shown by Section M-M on the enclosed engineering assembly drawing; and does fall within the MVSS 201 head impact area. The passenger assist grip is standard equipment on all models of this vehicle type.

Since all models will be manufactured with this passenger assist grip, we feel it is appropriate to conduct MVSS 201 certification test with the grip installed, and that it is not necessary to duplicate such tests on the instrument panel with the assist grip removed. We would very much appreciate your confirmation that this is an appropriate interpretation.

Because of the fact that we are working very hard to bring this vehicle model to the U.S. market as soon as possible, we would appreciate it very much if you could expedite your handling of this request to whatever extent possible. Thank you very much for your kind assistance in this regard.

Very truly yours,

Masakatsu Kano Executive Vice-President MMC Services, Inc.

ID: 1983-2.38

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 08/04/83

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: TOPAC International Trading Company -- Robert J. Ainsworth

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Robert J. Ainsworth President TOPAC International Trading Company 325 N. Baldwin Park Blvd. City of Industry, California 91746

Dear Mr. Ainsworth:

This is in response to your letter of July 12, 1983, with respect to UTQGS requirements and tires you intend to import from Shanghai, China. You have asked whether it is permissible, as an interim step to cover your initial order, if the factory affixes a label stating the traction and temperature ratings assigned to its "Warrior" tires; subsequent tires will have this information molded into the sidewalls.

We understand from Mr. Vinson's phone conversation with you on July 26 that the tires have not been imported for sale previously and indeed are the product of a new factory which has recently opened. According to the UTQGS regulation, a tire need not have information molded into its sidewalls if it is "a tire of a new tire line, manufactured within the first six months of production of the tire line" (49 CFR 575.104(d)(1)(i)(A)). We interpret this time frame as meaning within six months of the initial production of the tire line for export to the United States. Therefore, your initial shipment would appear to come within the exception established by the regulation.

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

Sincerely,

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel

July 12, 983

USA Importation Re: "Warrior" Brand Tires

Dear Attorney Berndt,

My company has entered into negotiations with China National Chemicals Import and Export Corporation, Shanghai Branch, China toward the purchase and importation of "Warrior" brand steel belted radial tires, manufactured by TSEN TAI Rubber Factory, Shanghai, China.

My company has already signed two (2) sales contracts and issued Letters of Credit for the following quantities of tires on our initial order. These orders represent the 1st shipment (1983) of "Warrior" brand tires that will be imported into the USA market.

(1) Sales Contrart 834SA-191 - (5,284 units) Highway tread passenger steel belted tires.

(2) Sales Contract 834SA-192 - (5,000 units) Mud/Snow passenger steel radial tires.

The "Warrior" brand tires produced by Tsen Tai factory are in strict compliance with D.O.T. FMVSS No 109-119 standards. Please reference the attached letter received from Tsen Tai rubber factory for confirmation.

My question relates yo the present U.T.Q.G. requirements for labeling these "Warrior" tires specifically on the initial order/shipments to Topac International Trading Company as described above.

(1) Is it permissable for Tsen Tai factory as, an interim step only to cover our initial order, to affix a tire label clearly stating the traction and temperature ratings assigned to their "Warrior" brand tires, and effect shipment of this initial tire order to the U.S.A. market for Topac International Trading Company. The Tsen Tai rubber factory will, I understand, undertake to begin engraving their existing tire molds in order to incorporate their assigned U.T.Q.G. traction and temperature values on the "Warrior" tire sidewall and be in full compliance with the U.S.A. U.T.Q.G. requirements immediately after this initial order/shipment. Enclosed for your reference, please find the following reference documents.

(1) Two (2) Tsen Tai "Warrior" catalogs. (2) Copies of Topac Int'l Trading Co. P/D RJA-001C (3) Copies of two (2) Sales Contracts 834SA-191/192 (4) Letter from Tsen Tai Factory regarding U.S.A. D.O.T. compliance.

I would appreciate your earliest comment on this matter since the facthoy has now scheduled delivery to Topac before August 1, 1983 Very Truly yours,

Robert J. Ainsworth President

Encl.

RJA:ws

ID: 1983-3.15

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 10/27/83

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: State Purchasing and General Services Commission; Texas

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Troy C. Martin Specifications Chief State Purchasing and General Services Commission Lyndon Baines Johnson State Office Building P.O. Box 13047 Capitol Station Austin, Texas 78711-3047

Dear Mr. Martin:

This responds to your letter to Mr. Kratzke of my staff seeking an interpretation of Standard No. 222, School Bus Passenger Seating and Crash Protection (49 CFR S 571.222). You indicated that you have been informed that section S5.1.2 of that standard requires that 90 percent of the total projected area of the seat backs on school buses must lie between a horizontal plane passing through the seating reference point and a parallel horizontal plane 20 inches above the seating reference point, and that this requirement appeared to be a geometric impossibility. The information you received about the requirements of section S5.1.2 is erroneous.

Section S5.1.2 does not specify any requirements for the total projected area of the seat back. It simply mandates that the projected area of the seat back between the two planes you described be at least 90 percent of the width of the seat multiplied by 20. This requirement is very simple to satisfy geometrically by using a rectangle. If the seat back were rectangular, the area between the two planes would be 100 percent of the width of the seat multiplied by 20. The agency allows the width of the seat back to be multiplied by 90 percent so as to permit the use of seat backs which taper up at the top, but which still provide an adequate level of safety protection for the occupants.

The reason for specifying a requirement for the amount of area a seat back must have between these two planes is to ensure that "compartmentalization" is not compromised. Compartmentalization is the term for protecting the occupants in the event of a crash by confining them within an area of sturdy, well-padded seats. If the seat back in front of a school bus occupant occupied less than 90 percent of the area between the two planes (the area that occupant is most likely to contact in case of a crash), the padded area to cushion the blow of that occupant might not be sufficient.

If you have any further questions or need further information on this subject, please feel free to contact Steve Kratzke at this address and at (202) 426-2992.

Sincerely,

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel

August 11, 1983

Mr. Steve Kratzke, Attorney Office of Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 7th Street SW, Room 5219 Washington, DC 20590

Dear Mr. Kratzke:

As you requested during our recent telephone conversation, I am asking for an interpretation of Paragraph S5.1.2. of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 222, "School Bus Seating and Crash Protection." I understand that the value

90% X Seat Width X 20

to be the projected area in square inches of the seat back (in a vertical plane) that lies between two horizontal planes, one going through the seating reference point (SRP), and the other through a point 20 inches above the SRP.

I have been informed by one of the engineers at a school bus body plant that 90% of the total projected area of the seat back must lie within these two planes. It appears to me that this is a geometric impossibility!

Your consideration of this request would be appreciated.

Sincerely yours,

Troy C. Martin Specifications Chief

TCM/dh

ID: 1983-1.20

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 02/24/83

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Garvin-Fram Inc. -- Jack Garvin

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Jack Garvin Vice President-Operations Garvin-Fram, Inc. 817 Albion Avenue Schaumburg, Illinois 60193

Dear Mr. Garvin:

This responds to your recent letter to Mr. Kratzke of my staff requesting information concerning any regulations applicable to the salvage and sale of farm implement tires exposed to a warehouse tire. This agency has no such regulations, and I am not aware of any Federal regulations.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended 1974 (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.), gives this agency authority to regulate motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Tires for use on motor vehicles are subject to regulation as motor vehicle equipment. Section 102(3) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C 1391(3)) defines a motor vehicle as "any vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways.." Farm implements have been determined not to be motor vehicles because they are not manufactured primarily for use on public roads. Therefore, tires for use on farm implements are not considered motor vehicles equipment, and are not regulated by this agency. The inventory sheet attached to your letter shows that these tires are of a size and strength that were designed for use on farm implements. Accordingly, you may conduct the salvage and sale of these farm implement tires as you wish without violating any of this agency's regulations.

In your telephone conversation with Mr. Kratzke, you mentioned that some tires for use on passenger cars were also involved in the fire and asked about any agency requirements for subsequent sale of these tires. With respect to those tires, the manufacturer that has certified the tires as complying with our safety standards ( by molding the letters "DOT" on the sidewall) must make a determination of whether the certification is still valid. If the manufacturer determines that the certification is still valid, the tires may be sold. If, on the other hand, the certification is not still valid, the manufacturer must remove its DOT symbol from the sidewall of the tires, and those tires coud not be sold. The means by which the manufacturer determines whether or not its certification is still valid is left completely to the discretion of the individual manufacturer. I have enclosed a 1981 interpretation explaining this more fully. I appreciate your concern for tire safety and for complying with our safety regulations.

Sincerely,

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel Enclosure

January 18, 1983

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Office of the Chief Council 400 7th St. S.W., Room 5219 Washington, D.C. Attn: Mr. Steve Kratzke

RE: Farm Implement Tires

Dear Mr. Kratzke:

Enclosed is an inventory of the farm implement tires I referred to in our phone conversation on January 18, 1983.

Basically, what we would like to know is are there any Federal regulations, particularly through the NHTSA, regarding the salvage and sale of distressed farm implement tires. In this case, the tires were involved in a fire in Zealand, Michigan, however these particular tires were approximately 50 to 75 feet away from the fire area. Additionally, there were approximately 1000 passenger tires between the fire area and implement tires, acting as an insulator from the heat.

I will await your reply in writing before disposing of the tires. Additionally, after receiving your letter, I will again contact the manufacturer to see if they would like to run tests on these tires for quality control purposes, which they have to date refused to do.

Very truly yours,

Garvin-Fram, Inc.

Jack Garvin Vice President-Operations

ID: 1984-2.47

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 08/03/84

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: T.F. Palomba -- National Sales Manager, Empco Industries

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your recent letter to me seeking information on the applicability of certain Federal requirements to "non-highway tires." Specifically, you asked if the manufacturer of such tires is required to identify itself on the sidewall of those tires by molding a DOT identification number thereon, and whether such tires are subject to the Federal excise tax on tires. The DOT identification number must appear on all tires for use on motor vehicles, as explained below. The Department of Transportation has nothing to do with the collection of the Federal excise tax on tires. If you need further information on that subject, you should contact the Internal Revenue Service.

49 CFR Part 574, Tire Identification and Recordkeeping, sets forth certain marking requirements which must be met by all manufacturers and retreaders of tires, including the requirements in section 574.5 that a DOI identification number be molded on all new and retreaded tires. However, section 574.1 specifies that the requirements of Part 574 apply only to new and retreaded tires for use on motor vehicles. Hence, the question which must be answered to determine if the manufacturer must put a DOT identification number on a tire is whether the tire is for use on motor vehicles.

"Motor vehicle" is defined at 15 U.S.C. 1391(3) 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." If the tires you might import are for use on forklifts, earthmovers, or other types of mobile construction equipment intended and sold primarily for off-road use, the manufacturer is not required to mold a DOT identification number on the tires, since the tires would not be for use on motor vehicles. This is true even if these sorts of vehicles are incidentally used for highway travel from one job site to another.

If, on the other hand, the vehicles on which the tires are to be mounted are conventional on-road trucks simply being used off-highway, the manufacturer would be required to mold a DOT identification number onto the tires. The determination of whether the tires are for use on motor vehicles must be made initially by the manufacturer, but that determination is subject to review by this agency.

Should you have any further questions or need more information on this subject, please contact Mr. Steve Kratzke of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 426-2992.

SINCERELY,

May 15, 1984 OCC 598

Office of Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Adm. Attn: Frank A. Berndt

This letter is being written to you pursuant to my recent phone conversation with Mr. T.L. Moore of your office.

We at Empco Industries, through Nissho Iwai American Corporation in Los Angeles, are negotiating with Rekord Rubber products factory, Beograd, Yugoslavia, to import their line of tractor, farm, industrial and earthworks tires. (See attached brochure) on file in Chief Counsel's office.

Rekord is now exported to 30 countries and plans to expand into the United States market. In addition to no F.E.T. it is our understanding that a D.O.T. number is also not applicable to non-highway tires.

Would you please confirm this in writing, to my attention, that we are correct in our interpretation of these important factors pertaining to F.E.T. and D.O.T. requirements. In the event we consummate this agreement with Rekord Rubber Factory it would be necessary to have this information as a permanent record in our file.

EMPCO INDUSTRIES

T.F. Palomba Nitto National Sales Mgr.

CC: K. HIRATA; NISSHO IWAI

ID: 1984-3.5

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 08/17/84

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Terralab Engineers

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Douglas MacGregor Terralab Engineer 3585 Via Terra Salt Lake City, Utah 84115

Dear Mr. MacGregor:

The Administrator has asked me to respond to your letter of June 6, 1984, regarding the modification of fuel systems conforming to Standard No. 301, Fue1 System Integrity. You were concerned about the installation of motor vehicle accessories, such as cab and engine block heaters, which utilize fuel from the fuel system of the vehicles. You are concerned that if the installation of those accessories invalidates the manufacturer's certification as to Standard No. 301, the installer would have to do crash testing to verify the installed system conforms with the standard.

You requested the agency to set requirements for "interconnection systems" which would allow the accessories to be connected to the primary fuel line and the fuel tank and to permit the use of those interconnection systems in lieu of crash testing. We do not believe it is necessary to set requirements for "interconnection systems" since a person altering a fuel line or fuel tank can recertify the system without having to do a crash test.

I have enclosed an information sheet which provides a detailed discussion of the implications of installing auxiliary fuel tanks and systems in vehicles under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. Please note that Standard No. 301 does not require testing; it only requires that the vehicle meet the performance requirements that are specified. The test procedures do, however, state how the agency will test a vehicle to determine compliance. A vehicle alterer's legal responsibility is to exercise due care to ascertain that a vehicle it has altered does in fact comply with these performance requirements. An alterer can rely upon such things as engineering analyses and computer simulations, rather than crash testing, in making the determination that the vehicle meets the specified performance requirements.

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

Sincerely, Frank Berndt Chief Counsel

Enclosure

6 June 1984 Diane Steed National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street SW Washington, D.C. 20590

REQUEST FOR RULING

Dear Administrator Steed:

A problem which needs to be solved by a ruling by the Administration is that of interraction of two fuel systems in a single vehicle.

Specifically, motor vehicle accessories such as cab heaters and engine block heaters which utilize fuel from the fuel system of the vehicle are installed by manufacturers other than the vehicle manufacturer.

An example would be the installation of an engine block heater or a cab heater by an OEM who has purchased a chassis certified to MVSS301.

Even though the block or cab heater may be certified to 301, the insertion of a "T" in the fuel line, or the addition of a second dip tube into the gas tank, invalidates the vehicle manufacturer's 301 certification.

The expense of crash testing to 301 is extreme, and presents a serious burden to manufacturer, the heater manufacutrer of the OEM is difficult to determine.

We therefore request that the Administration determine allowable interconnection systems whereby the primary fuel line may be entered as a fuel source for accessories, and also an allowable method for entry into a fuel tank for a fuel line to such an accessory, and proper test procedures for the acceptability of such connections, and issue, based upon its findings, a ruling which would allow the use of conforming interconnections without the necessity of crash testing.

Sincerely,

Douglas MacGregor DMG:hm

ID: 1984-4.7

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 12/18/84

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Tennant Company -- Russell D. Schantz, District Manager

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Russell D. Schantz District Manager Tennant Company 1080 North Kraemer Place P.O. Box 66066 Anaheim, CA 92B06

This responds to your letter regarding the industrial power sweeper manufactured by your company. You stated that the California Department of Motor Vehicles is insisting that your sweepers have a 17-digit VIN when an owner attempts to register and license them.

The VIN requirements in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 115, Vehicle Identification Number--Basic Requirements, apply only to "motor vehicles," which are manufactured primarily for use on the public roads. According to the sales literature and specification sheets you submitted, your product is a small sweeper, with a top speed of 8.5 mph, which is sold for use on off-road industrial sites. Some of the vehicles may incidentally use public roads to move from site to site. Based on this information, we have concluded that your low-speed sweeper is not a motor vehicle and is therefore not required to have a VIN.

This office has contacted the California Department of Motor Vehicles and learned that the form letter concerning the VIN was sent to you in error. Walt Steuben of that office said that there is an exception for vehicles which are "incidentally operated on road" between work sites. He said that the sweeper would need license plates and a sticker. He also requested that you contact him at (916) 445-2961.

Sincerely, Frank Berndt Chief Counsel cc: Mr. Joe Kasper Tennant Company 701 North Lilac Drive P.O. Box 1452 Minneapolis, MN 55440

October 15,1984 Tennant Company P.O. Box 931 Minneapolis, MN 55440

Gentlemen:

An application for registration of the above described vehicle is being held.

The application submitted by your franchised dealer does no include a 17 position vehicle identification number (VIN)

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 115 requires that manufacturers assign a 17 position alpha numeric vehicle identification number (VIN) to passenger vehicles, trucks, buses, motorcycles, trailers and incomplete vehicles (cab and chasses) operated on roads beginning September of 1980. This VIN must be supplied and approved by:

World Manufacturer Identifier Repository (WMI) 400 Commonwealth Drive Warrendale, PA 15086 Phone: (412) 776-4841

The State of California is enforcing this standard beginning with 1983 year model vehicles. To complete the application, we will require the following: 1. If the vehicle has 17 position VIN approved by the WMI, complete the enclosed Statement of Facts identifying the full, true VIN. When we receive the Statement of Facts, the registration application will be processed.

2. If this vehicle does not have a WMI approved VIN, but you have recent begun assigning a WIM approved VIN, complete the enclosed Statement of Facts so stating. Also return a sample, e.g. photocopy, of the WMI approved VIN configuration. When we receive the Statement of Facts and sample, the registration application will be processed.

3. If this vehicle does not have a WMI approved VIN and your company has not applied for an approved WMI VIN configuration, contact the WMI at the above listed address and telephone numbers.

Upon receipt of your WMI VIN configuration, send a copy of your WMI configuration to us and complete the enclosed Statement of Facts stating the date you will begin the assignment of the new VIN.

When we receive the Statement of Facts and copy of your WMI configuration, the registration application will be processed.

Please refer all correspondence or inquiries to the above file number.

R. Toney TD 2/3 MP Enc cc : Schultz Building Company INSERT ATTACHMENT

ID: 1985-01.36

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 02/26/85

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Bernt Svensson -- Marketing Director, Viskafors Gummifabrik AB

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Bernt Svensson Marketing Director Viskafors Gummifabrik AB Box 2059 S-515 02 Viskafors SWEDEN

This responds to your letter to Ms. Kathleen DeMeter of my staff, asking for information on how to get a new temporary spare tire size included in the tire tables following Standard No. 109 New Pneumatic Tires --Passenger Cars (49 CFR S571.109). The agency rescinded tire tables in Standard No. 109 in a final rule published at 46 FR 61473; December 17, 1981. I have enclosed a copy of that rule together with a current copy of Standard No. 109 for your records.

Section S4.4.1 requires tire manufacturers to provide a listing of the rims that may be used with each tire size it produces. Section S4.2.1(c) requires a tire's load rating to be the load rating for that size specified in a submission under S4.4.1. This may be provided by the manufacturer in a document furnished to each of the manufacturer' s dealers, to this agency, and to the public upon request. Alternatively, the manufacturer may use the data for that tire size shown in a current publication of one of the standardization organizations listed in S4.4.1(b). Your company will have to use one of these two means of complying with this requirement, instead of relying on the tire tables, as was formerly done.

The current publication of the American standardization organization (the Tire & Rim Association) shows no listing for the tire size about which you inquired. It is possible that the size is listed by one of the other standardization organizations. If not, you should either get the size listed by the standardization organization of your choosing or submit the data directly to this agency, all your dealers and the public, upon request.

Should you have any further questions on this matter, please contact Mr. Stephen Kratzke of my staff at this address.

Sincerely,

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel

Enclosures

1985-02-01 U.S. Department of Transportation M/MA2 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 Seventh St. S.S. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590 U S A

Att.: Mrs. Kathleen DeMeter

Dear Mrs. DeMeter,

From your files you may record that we are a producer of tires having the plant code VV.

We are in the process of manufacturing a spare tire for one of our clients in Sweden and would kindly ask for your advice and information as to the following points:

In the MVSS 109 regulation there are several sizes listed under the heading "T-series" 60 psi tires.

Due to various technical reasons we are considering one particular size which as far as we know is not listed namely T 125/90 R 15. (We understand that "D"-bias and "R"-radial are equal alternatives.

In connection with this we have the following questions:

Is T 125/90 "D" alt. "R" 15 now recorded in the latest edition of MVSS 109. If so could you please send us this edition showing all required data or alternatively the specific data for this tire as a complement to the MVSS 109 needed to consider and meet the USA legal requirements.

If you are not familiar with this particular size in the "T-series" range could you please advise us how we should proceed to have this tire recorded and recognized.

We would appreciate your consideration of this matter and look forward to your early response.

Very truly yours, VISKAFORS AB

Bernt Svensson Marketing Director

ID: 1985-02.41

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 06/10/85

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Jeffrey R. Miller; NHTSA

TO: Russ L. Bomhoff

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letter of April 18, 1985, concerning the applicability of our safety standards to a passenger van you are designing. Specifically, you asked whether you can install a stationary, side-facing passenger seat with lap safety belts. As discussed below, you can use such a seat with a lap safety belt, but its use would be affected by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard Nos. 207, Seating Systems, 208, Occupant Crash Protection, 209, Seat Belt Assemblies, and 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages. A copy of each of those standards is enclosed.

Standard No. 207 specifies performance requirements for seats, their attachment assemblies, and their installation, to minimize the possibility of seat failure resulting from crash forces. This standard is applicable to seats installed in vehicles including vans, but section 4.2 of Standard No. 207 excludes side-facing seats from the general seat strength requirements of the standard. However, there are other requirements in the standard which may apply to side-facing seats. For example, paragraph S4.3 requires a restraining device if the seat has a hinged or folding seat or seat back.

Standard No. 208 sets requirements for the installation of safety belts in motor vehicles. You stated that the vehicle you are designing is a passenger van that carries under 10 passengers. If your vehicle carries a total of 10 persons (9 passengers and a driver) it would be considered either a multipurpose passenger vehicle (MPV), if it is manufactured on a truck chassis or has special features for occasional off-road use, or a passenger car.

If your vehicle is a passenger car, section 4.1.2.3(c) of the standard provides that each designated seating position for rear passengers can have a Type 1 (lap) or Type 2 (lap/shoulder safety belt) that conforms with Standard 209 and the adjustment and latch mechanism requirements of S7.1 and S7.2 of Standard No. 208. If your vehicle is a MPV, then S4.2.2, for MPV's with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds or less, or S4.3, for MPV's with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds, provides that each designated seating position for rear passengers can have a Type 1 or Type 2 safety belt that conforms to Standard No. 209.

Standard No. 210 sets performance requirements for safety belts anchorages in passenger cars, MPV's, trucks, and buses. The standard exempts side-facing seats from its strength requirements specified in S4.2, but all other requirements of the standard apply to side-facing seats. We strongly recommend that belt anchorages for side-facing seats be of at least equivalent strength to the anchorages for forward and rearward facing seats, since the strength specifications are only minimum performance requirements.

ENCLS.

PRECISION PATTERN INC.

April 18, 1985

Office of Chief Counsel NHTSA

Dear Sir:

This letter is a request for a ruling concerning a safety standard as applicable to passenger van seating. Specifically, I need to know if putting a stationary side facing seat, with lap seat belts is legal and acceptable.

This side facing seat would be equipped with lap seat belts if necessary. It would be located at the rear of the vehicle, behind the drivers seat.

The vehicles in question are for under 10 passengers, and are of 15', 17', and 20' lengths.

We are in the middle of a design project on this and your prompt attention to this matter would be greatly appreciated. Please call 316/ 942-0905 if you have any questions. Thank you.

Mr. William Smith in your engineering dept. requested that I consult you for a permanent ruling. His interpretation of the rules would allow the use of this side facing seat.

Russ L. Bomhoff

(Graphics omitted)

ID: 1985-02.48

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 06/24/85

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Jeffrey R. Miller; NHTSA

TO: Pat Reese -- Mannesmann Pipe and Steel Corp.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

June 24, 1985 Mr. Pat Reese Mannesmann Pipe & Steel Corp. 1900 Post Oak Blvd., 18th Floor Houston, TX 77056

This responds to your letter to Steve Kratzke of my staff, asking for an interpretation of the requirements of Standard No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars (49 CFR 571.120). Specifically, you indicated you were writing on behalf of Mannesmann Kronprinz, a German branch of your company which manufactures wheels. You noted that section S5.2(d) of Standard No. 120 requires rims for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars to be marked with the name, trademark or symbol identifying the rim manufacturer, and asked if this requirement meant that the German branch of your company had to register its logo or trademark with this agency. Standard No. 120 does not require manufacturers to register trademarks whose vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment are imported into the United States to file a designation of agent with NHTSA, and this designation must include a listing of the marks, trade names or other designations of origin used by the manufacturer on its products. A check of our files shows that no such designation has ever been filed by Mannesmann Kronprinz. Section S5.2 of Standard No. 120 sets forth the rim marking requirements applicable to all rims for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars. One of the items of information required to be marked on such rims is "a designation that identifies tha manufacturer of the rim by name, trademark, or symbol;" S5.2(d). This information allows the agency and the public to identify the manufacturer of the rim if there is some problem with it. The use of a trademark or symbol is allowed, instead of the manufacturer's name, because the agency can easily determine the identity of the manufacturer from the trademark or symbols would be registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. In the case of foreign manufacturers, 49 CFR 551.45 requires them to file a designation of agent with this agency. One of the items of information required to be included in the designation agent is a listing of the marks, trade names, or other designations of origin" which appear on any of the manufacturer's products in lieu of its legal name. Both 49 CFR 551.45 and 15 U.S.C. 1399(e) require all foreign manufacturers to file a designation of agent with NHTSA before importing motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment, including wheels, into the United States. I have enclosed copies of the regulation and the statute for your reference. As you will see 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 Mannesmann Kronprinz 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 for Mannesmann Kronprinz; 3. Marks, trade names, or other designations of origin for any of Mannesmann Kronprinz's products which do not bear its name; 4. A statement that the designation shall remain in effect until withdrawn or replaced by Mannesmann Kronprinz; 5. A declaration of acceptance duly signed by the agent appointed by Mannesmann Kronprinz, and the agent may be an individual, firm, or U.S. corporation; and 6. The full legal name and address of the designated agent. Further, 49 Cfr Part 566, Manufacturer Identification (copy enclosed) requires manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment covered by our standards to provide certain information to NHTSA. The required information is simply the manufacturer's full name, address, and a brief description of the motor vehicle equipment it manufactures. Should you have any further questions in this area, please contact Mr. Kratzke at this address or by telephone at (202) 426-2992. Sincerely, Original Signed By Jeffrey R. Miller Chief Counsel Enclosures