ID: nht94-4.24

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: September 7, 1994

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: David L. Clark -- Aquilino & Welsh, P.C., Arlington, VA

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 08/10/94 from David L. Clark to Office of Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TEXT: This responds to your letter of August 10, 1994, asking for "information necessary for obtaining Federal approval and/or meeting Federal safety standards for an add-on seat belt device." In a August 23 phone call with Mary Versailles of my staff, you exp lained that the device is intended to alter the fit of the safety belt.

I am enclosing three letters which explain how Federal laws administered by this agency apply to such devices (3/16/94to Ms. Angela R. Caron; 4/26/93 to Mr. Brett J. Higgins; and 11/16/92 to Angela R. Caron; 4/26/92 to Mr. Michael J. Vacanti). If you ha ve any other questions, please contact Mary Versailles of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992.

ID: nht89-2.16

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 06/21/89

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

TO: JOHN WOODDELL -- BRUER & WOODDELL, P.C.

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 04/28/89 FROM JOHN WOODDELL TO NHTSA, RE INTERPRETATION OF STANDARD 208 AS APPLIED TO 1978 DODGE RAMCHARGER; OCC 3474

TEXT: Dear Mr. Wooddell:

This responds to your letter asking whether a 1978 Dodge Ramcharger was required to have lap/shoulder belts installed in it.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq., the Safety Act) authorizes this agency to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. We have exercised this authority to es tablish Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection (49 CFR @ 571.208). As Mr. Hunter of our Rulemaking Division indicated in his telephone conversation with you, section S4.2.2 of Standard No. 208 set forth applicable requirements for 1978 multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPVs) with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds or less.

The requirements that apply to the particular 1978 Dodge Ramcharger in question depend on its configuration. In your letter, you identified the 1978 Dodge Ramcharger in question as "a two door vehicle with a hard top and enclosed sides." Assuming that t he hardtop on the vehicle was not removable, the 1978 Ramcharger in question would have been required to be equipped with either:

a. an automatic occupant protection system, such as air bags or automatic safety belts, or

b. lap/shoulder belts at both front outboard seating positions and either lap belts or lap/shoulder belts at all other seating positions.

If the hardtop on the vehicle was removable, the Ramcharger in question could qualify as a "convertible" or an "open-body type vehicle." Any 1978 MPVs with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less that qualified as a convertible or an open-body type vehicle were permitted to meet the requirements of S4.2.1.2 of Standard No. 208. Section S4.2.1.2 required subject MPVs to have either lap belts or lap/shoulder belts installed at each designated seating position, including front outboard ones. If the 1978 Ramcharg er in question qualified as a "convertible" or "open-body

type vehicle," the vehicle would have been permitted to have lap belts installed at the front outboard seating positions.

Section 108(a)(1)(A) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1)(A)) provides that no person shall "manufacture for sale, sell, offer for sale, or introduce or deliver for introduction in interstate commerce, or import into the United States, any motor vehic le . . . manufactured on or after the date any Federal motor vehicle safety standard takes effect under this title unless it is in conformity with such standard except as provided in subsection (b) of this section." This language prohibited any person fr om manufacturing, delivering, selling or importing any 1978 Dodge Ramcharger that did not have the required occupant protection system installed at both front outboard seating positions.

However, section 108(b)(1) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(b)(1)) provides that the prohibitions in section 108(a)(1)(A) "shall not apply to the sale, offer for sale, or the introduction or delivery for introduction in interstate commerce of any motor vehicle after the first purchase of it in good faith for purposes other than resale." In other words, once the 1978 Ramcharger was sold and delivered to its first retail purchaser, the vehicle was no longer required by Federal law to comply with Standard No. 208.

After the first purchase of a vehicle in good faith for purposes other than resale, the only provision in Federal law that refers to a vehicle's continuing compliance with an applicable safety standard is set forth in section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety A ct (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A)). That section provides that:

No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle . . . in compliance with an applicable Federal motor veh icle safety standard, . . .

This section would prohibit any manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair business from removing a lap/shoulder belt that was originally required to be installed in the motor vehicle, unless the business replaced the safety belt with another lap/shoul der belt. Please note that this statutory language does not impose any obligations on individual vehicle owners to avoid "rendering inoperative" their vehicle's compliance with a safety standard. Thus, any person may remove the safety belts from his or her own vehicle without violating Federal law.

Further, the "render inoperative" provision does not impose an affirmative duty on the listed commercial entities to replace equipment that was previously removed by someone else. Thus, if a car dealer purchases, as a used vehicle, a 1978 Dodge Ramcharg er that was originally required to be equipped with lap/shoulder belts and if those belts are not present at the time of such purchase, Federal law does not require the dealer to install safety belts in the vehicle before reselling it.

The individual States have authority to regulate the modifications that can be made to vehicles by individual owners and to require that used vehicles have certain equipment, such as safety belts, installed when they are sold. You may wish to contact th e appropriate State Department of Motor Vehicles to learn if any applicable laws or regulations were violated in this instance.

I hope this information is useful. Please feel free to contact this office if you have any further questions on this topic.

Sincerely,

ID: nht89-2.77

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 08/23/89

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

TO: ROLF DUERR -- PROJECT ENGINEER VOITH TRANSMISSIONS, INC.

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 02/10/89 FROM ROLF DUERR -- VOITH TO DOT; RE DOT APPROVAL OF SWAGELOK FITTING; OCC 3123

TEXT: Dear Mr. Duerr:

This is in response to your letter requesting Department of Transportation "approval" of a fitting to be used in air brake systems in conjunction with your company's product, a driveline brake retarder. I apologize for the delay in this response. Your letter explained that your company's brake retarder is designed to be attached to the air brake system on trucks or buses by means of a fitting, and enclosed a sample of the fitting you plan to use. You asked for DOT approval of the fitting. As explain ed below, whether the fitting and associated air hoses are subject to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) depends upon how the fittings are attached to the vehicle's air brake system.

This agency has the authority under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. We have exercised this authority to establish Standard No. 106 , Brake Hoses (49 CFR @ 571.106; copy enclosed), which applies to motor vehicle brake hoses, brake hose assemblies, and brake hose end fittings.

Your letter did not provide sufficient information for us to offer an opinion as to whether or not the air lines and end fittings used with your product would be considered "brake hoses" and "brake hose end fittings" subject to the requirements of Standa rd No. 106. It has been NHTSA's long-standing position that accessory air lines and end fittings, such as those used in your product, are "brake hoses" and "brake hose end fittings" only if a failure of the line or fitting would result in a loss of pres sure in the vehicle's brake system. (See the enclosed June 5, 1987 letter to Albert Schwarz, and the August 3, 1984 letter to Terry Teeter).

Accordingly, if a failure of the accessory lines or fittings used with your product could result in a loss of pressure in the brake system, the hoses and fittings are subject to all the provisions of Standard No. 106. In this case, the Safety Act specif ies that no person shall

"manufacture for sale, sell, offer for sale, or introduce or deliver for introduction in interstate commerce, or import into the United States" any of those hoses or end fittings unless those hoses and end fittings comply with all of the applicable requi rements in Standard No. 106.

NHTSA has no authority to certify, endorse, or approve in advance any motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, including the hoses and end fittings used for this product. Instead, under the Safety Act, the manufacturer is responsible for certifying th at its products meet 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 when making the certification. Once your company has determined th at these hoses and end fittings comply with the requirements of Standard No. 106, the Standard requires you to make these products with the symbol "DOT" to show your company's certification of compliance.

This agency enforces the requirements of Standard No. 106 by randomly purchasing brake hoses and end fittings that have been certified as complying with Standard No. 106. The certified products are then tested by the agency according to the procedures s pecified in the standard. If the products pass these tests, no further actions are taken.

On the other hand, if the accessory air line running to your product is isolated from the air brake system by means such as a check valve, the hoses and fittings used with your product are not subject to the requirements of Standard No. 106. In this case , your company would not be required to certify that the hoses and fittings used with your product comply with the applicable requirements of Standard No. 106. You would, however, be considered a "manufacturer" of motor vehicle equipment for the purpose s of the Safety Act and our regulations. The Safety Act specifies that if either your company or this agency determines that a safety-related defect exists in your product, your company as the manufacturer must notify purchasers of the safety-related de fect and must either:

(1) repair the parts so that the defect is removed; or

(2) replace the parts with identical or reasonably equivalent parts which do not have a defect.

Whichever of these options is chosen, the manufacturer must bear the full expense and cannot charge the owner for the remedy if the equipment was purchased less than 8 years before the notification campaign. Similarly, if this product were subject to St andard No. 106, your company would be required to notify owners and remedy without charge to those owners any noncompliance of your product with the requirements of Standard No. 106, as well as remedying any safety-related defect.

For your information, I have enclosed a copy of an information sheet for new manufacturers of motor vehicles and new motor vehicle equipment.

This sheet gives a brief description of our regulations and explains how to obtain copies of those regulations. I hope this information is helpful. Please feel free to contact this office if you have any further questions or need additional information .

Sincerely,

ENCLOSURE

ID: 1985y

Mr. Rolf Duerr
Project Engineer
Voith Transmissions, Inc.
P.O. Box 712
York, PA 17405

Dear Mr. Duerr:

This is in response to your letter requesting Department of Transportation "approval" of a fitting to be used in air brake systems in conjunction with your company's product, a driveline brake retarder. I apologize for the delay in this response. Your letter explained that your company's brake retarder is designed to be attached to the air brake system on trucks or buses by means of a fitting, and enclosed a sample of the fitting you plan to use. You asked for DOT approval of the fitting. As explained below, whether the fitting and associated air hoses are subject to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) depends upon how the fittings are attached to the vehicle's air brake system.

This agency has the authority under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. We have exercised this authority to establish Standard No. 106, Brake Hoses (49 CFR 571.106; copy enclosed), which applies to motor vehicle brake hoses, brake hose assemblies, and brake hose end fittings.

Your letter did not provide sufficient information for us to offer an opinion as to whether or not the air lines and end fittings used with your product would be considered "brake hoses" and "brake hose end fittings" subject to the requirements of Standard No. 106. It has been NHTSA's long-standing position that accessory air lines and end fittings, such as those used in your product, are "brake hoses" and "brake hose end fittings" only if a failure of the line or fitting would result in a loss of pressure in the vehicle's brake system. (See the enclosed June 5, 1987 letter to Albert Schwarz, and the August 3, 1984 letter to Terry Teeter).

Accordingly, if a failure of the accessory lines or fittings used with your product could result in a loss of pressure in the brake system, the hoses and fittings are subject to all the provisions of Standard No. 106. In this case, the Safety Act specifies that no person shall "manufacture for sale, sell, offer for sale, or introduce or deliver for introduction in interstate commerce, or import into the United States" any of those hoses or end fittings unless those hoses and end fittings comply with all of the applicable requirements in Standard No. 106.

NHTSA has no authority to certify, endorse, or approve in advance any motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, including the hoses and end fittings used for this product. Instead, under the Safety Act, the manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet 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 when making the certification. Once your company has determined that these hoses and end fittings comply with the requirements of Standard No. 106, the Standard requires you to mark these products with the symbol "DOT" to show your company's certification of compliance.

This agency enforces the requirements of Standard No. 106 by randomly purchasing brake hoses and end fittings that have been certified as complying with Standard No. 106. The certified products are then tested by the agency according to the procedures specified in the standard. If the products pass these tests, no further actions are taken.

On the other hand, if the accessory air line running to your product is isolated from the air brake system by means such as a check valve, the hoses and fittings used with your product are not subject to the requirements of Standard No. 106. In this case, your company would not be required to certify that the hoses and fittings used with your product comply with the applicable requirements of Standard No. 106. You would, however, be considered a "manufacturer" of motor vehicle equipment for the purposes of the Safety Act and our regulations. The Safety Act specifies that if either your company or this agency determines that a safety-related defect exists in your product, your company as the manufacturer must notify purchasers of the safety-related defect and must either:

(1) repair the parts so that the defect is removed; or

(2) replace the parts with identical or reasonably equivalent parts which do not have a defect.

Whichever of these options is chosen, the manufacturer must bear the full expense and cannot charge the owner for the remedy if the equipment was purchased less than 8 years before the notification campaign. Similarly, if this product were subject to Standard No. 106, your company would be required to notify owners and remedy without charge to those owners any noncompliance of your product with the requirements of Standard No. 106, as well as remedying any safety-related defect.

For your information, I have enclosed a copy of an information sheet for new manufacturers of motor vehicles and new motor vehicle equipment. This sheet gives a brief description of our regulations and explains how to obtain copies of those regulations. I hope this information is helpful. Please feel free to contact this office if you have any further questions or need additional information.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Wood Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosures

/ref:106 d:8/23/89

ID: 1983-2.35

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 07/27/83

FROM: SENATE

TITLE: SENATE BILL NO. 684; CHAPTER 410

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 11/28/89 FROM STEPHEN P WOOD -- NHTSA TO WILLIAM E. ALKIRE -- BRAKELIGHT ENHANCER, REDBOOK A34, STANDARD 108; LETTER DATED 08/24/89 FROM WILLIAM E. ALKIRE TO TAYLOR VINSON -- NHTSA, OCC 3876; SENATE BILL NO 1317, AMENDED IN SENATE MARCH 8, 1982; INTRODUCED BY SENATOR JOHNSON ON 01/07/1982

TEXT: An act to amend Sections 25251, 25251.3, and 25251.5 of the Vehicle Code, relating to vehicles.

[Approved by Governor July 26, 1983. Filed with Secretary of State July 27, 1983.]

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

SB 684, Seymour. Vehicle: lighting.

(1) Existing law regulates the use of flashing lights for vehicles, but does not contain a special authorization for funeral processions.

This bill would authorize vehicles in a funeral procession to simultaneously flash turn signal lamps on both sides of the vehicle to warn other motorists of the procession. No civil liability would attach for the use or nonuse of that warning method.

(2) Under existing law, it is unlawful to sell, offer for sale, or use any device which is intended to modify the original performance of vehicle lighting equipment, unless the device has been tested and complies with requirements of the California Highway Patrol.

This bill would expressly authorize the use of stoplamps and supplemental stoplamps equipped to flash not more than 4 times within the first 4 seconds after actuation by application of the brakes.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1. Section 25251 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read:

25251. (a) Flashing lights are permitted on vehicles as follows:

(1) To indicate an intention to turn or move to the right or left upon a roadway, turn signal lamps and turn signal exterior pilot indicator lamps and side lamps permitted under Section 25106 may be flashed on the side of a vehicle toward which the turn or movement is to be made.

(2) When disabled upon the roadway or when disabled or parked off the roadway but within 10 feet thereof, turn signal lamps may be flashed as warning lights if the front turn signal lamps at each side are being flashed simultaneously and the rear turn signal lamps at each side are being flashed simultaneously.

(3) To warn other motorists of accidents or hazards on a roadway, turn signal lamps may be flashed as warning lights while the vehicle is approaching, overtaking, or passing the accident or hazard on the roadway if the front turn signal lamps at each side are being flashed simultaneously and the rear turn signal lamps at each side are being flashed simultaneously.

(4) For use on authorized emergency vehicles.

2

(5) To warn other motorists of a funeral procession, turn signal lamps may be flashed as warning lights on all vehicles actually engaged in a funeral procession, if the front turn signal lamps at each side are being flashed simultaneously and the rear turn signal lamps at each side are being flashed simultaneously.

(b) Side lamps permitted under Section 25106 and used in conjunction with turn signal lamps may be flashed with the turn signal lamps as part of the warning light system, as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3) of subdivision (a).

(c) Required or permitted lamps on a trailer or semitrailer may flash when the trailer or semitrailer has broken away from the towing vehicle and the connection between the vehicles is broken.

SEC. 2. Section 25251.3 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read:

25251.3. No civil liability shall attach to any person for the use or nonuse of turn signal lamps in the manner permitted by paragraph (3) or (5) of subdivision (a) of Section 25251, except for such civil liability as would attach for the use or nonuse of any other device required by this article or Article 8 (commencing with Section 25300).

SEC. 3. Section 25251.5 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read:

25251.5. (a) Any motor vehicle may also be equipped with a system in which an amber light is center mounted on the rear of a vehicle to communicate a component of deceleration of the vehicle, and which light pulses in a controlled fashion at a rate which varies exponentially with a component of deceleration.

(b) Any motor vehicle may be equipped with two amber lamps on the rear of the vehicle which operate simultaneously with not more than four flashes within four seconds after the accelerator pedal is in the deceleration position and which are not lighted at any other time. The lamps shall be mounted at the same height, with one lamp located on each side of the vertical centerline of the vehicle, not higher than the bottom of the rear window, or if the vehicle has no rear window, not higher than 60 inches. The light output from each of the lamps shall not exceed 200 candlepower at any angle horizontal or above. The amber lamps may be used either separately or in combination with another lamp.

(c) Any stoplamp or supplemental stoplamp required or permitted by Section 24603 may be equipped so as to flash not more than four times within the first four seconds after actuation by application of the brakes.

ID: nht75-5.29

DATE: 09/16/75

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Allam Kam; NHTSA

TO: Memorandum to interpretations file

COPYEE: R. B. DYSON; M. SCHWIMMER

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: SUBJECT: TELEPHONE CALL FROM SPEEDY HIRAL OF MAZDA ON AUG. 28, 1975, CONCERNING MEANING OF COURT ORDER STAYING UTQGS

The subject telephone call was referred to my by Mark Senwimmer. I explained the same information to him as was given to Yokohama Tire Corp. and Transportation Testing, Inc. (Aug. 27 memo). The caller stated that his company must prepare for "the worst," which, he concluded, would be the Court lifting the stay without extending the effective dates, and therefore should commerce testing at San Angelo. I responded that while that may be his company's business judgment, the agency had taken no position in this regard subsequent to the issuance of the stay order.

ID: nht94-3.8

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: May 26, 1994

FROM: Eric T. Stewart -- Engineering Manager

TO: Office of Chief Counsel -- NHTSA

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: Attached to a letter dated 7/14/94 from John Womack to Eric T. Stewart (A42; STD 217)

TEXT: REFERENCE: Notice of proposed rule making, response to petition for reconsideration published in the Federal Register December 1, 1992 (Docket 88-21 notice No. 7) and Final rule; technical amendment to FMVSS 571.217 published in the Federal Register Dece mber 2, 1992 (Docket 88-21 notice No. 5)

The background to docket 88-21 notice no 7, Federal register page number 63324, states that "the agency believes that ALL existing exits should be subtracted before determining if additional exits will be required. The agency also notes that the front s ervice door of a non school bus can be counted as an emergency exit if it complies with the performance requirements in standard No. 217."

The above comment by NHTSA raises a question in the minds of the engineering personnel at Mid Bus, because we are currently in the process of designing a unique bus for the school and commercial bus market. This bus could have a capacity of 48 children or 40 adults. The chassis will use the chassis manufacturers cab that has an existing left hand drivers door. Can the daylight opening of this existing door to the left of the drivers seat be used in the calculations of required emergency exit area if it meets the performance requirements of standard No. 217?

I am requesting written clarification indicating how NHTSA interprets standard No. 217 with regard to this existing left hand exit. If you have any questions, please call me at (419) 221-2525.

ID: nht92-4.2

DATE: 09/17/92

FROM: MARK W. RUSSO

TO: WALTER MYERS -- NHTSA

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 12-7-92 FROM PAUL J. RICE TO MARK W. RUSSO (A40; STD. 222); ALSO ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 7-14-92 FROM PAUL RICE TO MICHAEL F. HECKER (STD. 222)

TEXT: Thank you for discussing the R-Bar subject with me. As I mentioned in our conversation, I am very concerned over the "applicability" issue regarding the R-Bar and FMVSS 222. I fear that a device not covered by a "Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard" may be installed in a school bus that will be transporting my children!

In addition to our conversation, I want to stress one area where I believe this device creates a condition that could be considered in non compliance with the objectives of FMVSS 222, section S5.1.4 (c). With reference to a NHTSA letter from Mr. Rice to Mr. Hecker (Micho, Ind.) dated May 14, 1992, which indicates that Mr. Hecker claims the device incorporates a design that allows it to "move upward, and away, from the adjoining seat which would thus allow the minimum clearance as intended". Being familiar with the operating principle of this device, I tend to agree in theory. However, what Mr. Hecker fails to mention is that the device also incorporates a "drop down" feature (by nature of a positive mechanical action) which is activated by forward movement of the device! Thus, if a passenger is "recoiled" forward, or if a subsequent frontal collision occurs, impact with the bar should activate this approximate 2 inch drop down feature. So, if there is any concern regarding minimum clearance in accordance with section S5.1.4 (c), it appears the operating principle of this device complicates the problem. Further, I also believe this "drop down" mechanism, in the above scenario, could create the potential for the bar to become jammed against a passenger's legs as a result of this "roller and track" drop down mechanism.

I would also like to know if there has been any further developments at NHTSA regarding the R-Bar subject since Mr. Rice responded to Mr. Hecker of Micho (May 14 letter from NHTSA). The N.J. Department of Pupil Transportation is under the impression that Micho Industries had planned to write to NHTSA again to suggest that only a different "interpretation" of their test data would resolve this issue.

I have a list of questions I am sending to Micho Industries covering many of the things you and I had discussed. I will keep you advised as to their response to these questions and any other new developments. I would appreciate any comments you may have regarding this R-Bar subject.

ID: 1982-3.27

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 12/07/82

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Performance Vehicles Inc.

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of November 15, 1982, to Mr. Fairchild of this office, asking how the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration classifies the "Trihawk" three-wheeled motor vehicle for purposes of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards and other regulations.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.) defines a motor vehicle, in pertinent part, as "any vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways . . . ." (1391(3)). From the brochure you enclosed, the Trihawk appears to be manufactured for use on the public roads and, hence, is subject to the Federal safety standards, and to other regulations such as those requiring notification and remedy in the event the vehicle fails to comply with any applicable safety standard or incorporates a safety-related defect (1411 et seq.).

Agency regulations (49 CFR Part 571.3(b)) define a "motorcycle" as "a motor vehicle with motive power having a seat or saddle for the use of the rider and designed to travel on not more than three wheels in contact with the ground." The standards applicable to "motorcycles," therefore, are those that the three-wheeled Trihawk must meet.

SINCERELY,

ATTACH.

PERFORMANCE VEHICLES INC.

November 15, 1982

Roger Fairchild -- Council, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Mr. Fairchild,

Please recall our telephone conversation of 11/16/82. In that exchange we discussed the state of Illinois' view on the classification of our Trihawk motor cycle.

Enclosed you will find Trihawk sales brochures for your inspection.

This letter is written in request of you, on behalf of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, to state the classification of our vehicle with respect to existing F.M.V.S.S. and other applicable statutes.

Our hearing date is 12/13/82 in Springfield, I1. Please attend to our request at your soonest possible convenience, as our attorney needs preparation time with your document and others.

Please telephone me if there are any questions or problems with this request.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely yours,

Richard M. Kleber -- Engineering Manager

ID: 20159.ztv

Ms. Tammy Ruff
Sandrail Mfg. Co.
231 E. Alessandro Blvd 344
Riverside, CA 92508-8963

Dear Ms Ruff:

The Federal Highway Administration has forwarded to us for reply your letter of May 5, 1999. Your letter has been supplemented with information obtained from a telephone call to your office on June 23, 1999, by the agency's Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, as well as from your website on June 22, 1999.

You ask for a list of "the necessary equipment to enable the street legal construction of dune buggies to be driven in Hawaii" as rental vehicles.

Under the laws that we administer, a vehicle that is "street legal," i.e., which is manufactured primarily for use on the public roads, is required to comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Your website information describes the Sandrail as "designed to be driven on soft sand, the beach and tall hills." Thus, the Sandrail has not been designed primarily for on road use and, in its present configuration, is not a "motor vehicle" subject to our jurisdiction.

However, your present intent is to construct "street legal" Sandrails. We shall consider those vehicles as manufactured primarily for use on the public roads and therefore "motor vehicles" which must comply with our laws regulating motor vehicles and their manufacturers.

Our Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance learned from your company on June 23, 1999, that the vehicles that Sandrail intends to manufacture will be capable of speeds of more than 25 miles per hour. The on-road Sandrail will be required to meet the same Federal motor vehicle safety standards as "multipurpose passenger vehicles" (assuming that the dune buggies retain their capability for occasional off-road operation). These standards include the requirements to provide air bags for the driver and outboard front seat passenger. Sandrail is also required to submit to this agency certain information relating to its VIN in accordance with 49 CFR Part 565 Vehicle Information Number.

Sandrail is also required, within 30 days after it commences manufacture of motor vehicles, to file with us an information statement in compliance with 49 CFR Part 566 Manufacturer Identification.

I enclose a copy of a "New Manufacturers" information package which will outline our requirements for manufacturers.

If you would like more information on the Federal motor vehicle safety standards, or have any other questions, please contact the agency's Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosure
ref:500
d.7/22/99