ID: nht87-1.59

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 04/03/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Tony U. Otani

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Tony U. Otani Adyna Corporation 6124 Candor Street Lakewood, CA 90713

Dear Mr. Otani:

This letter responds to your letter asking whether there are any regulations with which you must comply in producing an invention you call an Automotive Steering Wheel Stabilizing Aid. I regret the delay in this response.

You describe your product and include a picture. The article you describe is a thick urethane rubber pad that a motor vehicle driver can fasten to the thigh with a band or buckle. The top part of this pad is contoured to fit under the steering wheel. You state that a driver can use this pad to apply pressure to the steering wheel, holding the wheel steady so that he may drive on a long distance highway when the course is straight. The driver then has his hands free.

Your product falls within the jurisdiction of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) if it is an item of "motor vehicle equipment" as that term is defined in S102(4) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. Section 102(4) defines "motor vehicle equipment" in relevant part as follows:

. . . any system, part, or component of a motor vehicle as originally manufactured or any similar part or component manufactured or sold for replacement or improvement of such system, part, or component, or as any accessory, or addition to the motor vehi cle...(Emphasis added)

In determining whether an item of equipment is an "accessory," the agency assesses two factors: first, whether the item has no ostensible purpose other than use with a motor vehicle; and second, whether the item is intended to be used principally by ordi nary users of motor vehicles. Under this framework, your invention is a motor vehicle accessory.

While NHTSA currently has no standard applicable to the kind of accessory you describe, the agency does have authority to regulate your invention. Even in the absence of a standard, please note that if you decide to market this product, then under our re gulations and the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, you have the responsibility to conduct notice and remedy campaigns if you or the agency later find that your product has a safety-related defect.

We are concerned with the safety consequences of your product. This kind of product may encourage a driver to take his hands from the steering wheel while he is operating a motor vehicle, and therefore may increase the risk of accident involving a motor vehicle. For example, removing one's hands from the steering wheel makes a driver less efficient in responding to any unanticipated road event that may require a quick change in vehicle direction. Further, a driver who feels free to do something with his hands other than steer the vehicle may not be devoting full time and attention to his driving.

I ask you to give these implications your fullest consideration, and hope you find this information helpful in making your decision.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

Adyna Corporation 6124 Candor St. Lakewood, CA 90713

To:

Director National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 Seventh St., S.W. Washington, DC 20590

Dear Sir,

I have an invention (patent pending) and planning for the production of;

Automobile Steering Wheel Stabilizing Aid

as shown in the enclosed picture.

It made of special contoured pad, with gripping soft material such as urethane rubber, with fastening means to left leg such as clamps as shown, or a band with buckle.

Please let me know by return if there are any regulations we have to comply.

Very truly yours,

Tony U. Otani

P.S. The device will function as follows:

This device will help to drive on a long distance highways when in a streight course. The driver can simply lift up left leg to create pad contact to, the wheel to hold it. He can also simply reverse the course for a freedom of steering, It reduces vibra tion to hands and make driving easier and will not interfere steering action when dissociated.

It can be further modified with an alarming devise built in, with a pressure switch to actuate a buzzer. When the driver falls in sleep he would tend to release the leg force and thus to actuate the alarm.

ID: nht87-1.71

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 04/27/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Charles Schamblin -- Flag-It Fluorescent Signaling Device Co.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Charles Schamblin Flag-It Fluorescent Signaling Device Co. Post Office Box 1709 Bakersfield, CA 93302

Your letter of December 29, 1986, to Michael M. Finkelstein has been referred to my Office for reply. You also addressed a letter of January 9, 1987, to my Office. Because these letters concern the same matter, this response addresses them both. In the D ecember 29 letter, you asked about the appropriate color for your product, the Flag-it Fluorescent Signaling Device. The device, which you enclosed with your correspondence, is a rectangular green fluorescent strip, designed to be permanently attached to and hang vertically from the license plate frame on the front of a motor vehicle.

You state that you designed this device "especially to meet the requirements for fluorescent material in the front of motor vehicles." You ask for a "letter of certification" that your device can be used and sold in the United States.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has authority to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment. However, NHTSA does not approve nor certify motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, or endorse any commercial product. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer must certify that its product meets agency safety standards, or other applic able standards. Periodically, NHTSA tests whether vehicles or equipment comply with there standards, and may investigate alleged safety-related product defects.

Your product is an item of motor vehicle equipment under S102(4) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, and as such, falls under NHTSA's jurisdiction. However, none of our federal motor vehicle safety standards applies to your product.

Standard 125, Warning Devices, sets uniform design specifications for reflective warning devices used to warn approaching traffic of the presence of a stopped vehicle. As is apparent from the provisions regarding the scope and application of the Standard , Standard 125 applies to devices designed to be carried in motor vehicles and erected when needed to warn approaching traffic. It does not apply to warning devices designed to be permanently attached to a motor vehicle. Nevertheless, you may wish to use the colors specified in paragraph S5.3. They are the ones which the agency believes most appropriate for warning devices subject to the standard.

Standard 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, applies to reflective devices. While the agency notes that your product includes reflective material, Standard 108 covers aftermarket reflective devices only to the extent that the afterm arket device replaces required original reflective equipment. Because the kind of device you described is not subject to any Standard 108 requirement as original reflective equipment, it is likewise not subject to any such requirement as aftermarket equi pment.

Finally, please be aware that if you or the agency finds your product to contain a safety-related defect after you market the product, you are responsible for conducting a notice and recall campaign under S154 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Sa fety Act (15 U.S.C. 1414).

Further, you should be aware that State law may apply to equipment such as your signalling device You may wish to consult the State and local transportation authorities in the areas where you intend to market your product.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

December 29, 1986

Mr. Michel M. Finkelstein Associate Administrate for Research and Development National Highway Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street S. W. Washington, D. C. 20590

Dear Mr. Finkelstein:

I received your letter of December 22, 1986 concerning the Flag-It Fluorescent Signalling Device. Thanks very much for your interest and informing me concerning the device.

It is my understanding that reflecterized material can be used on motor vehicles through out the USA. The color red can be used only to reflect and be seen from the rear only.

Since the Flag-It device is designed especially to meet the requirement for fluorescent material in the front of motor vehicles. Using the color green on the device I presume no doubt be legal.

If you could send me a letter of certification that the Flag-It Fluorescent Safety Device can be used and sold in the USA I would appreciate concerning this matter.

Sincerely yours,

Charles Schamblin

SEE HARD COPY FOR ADDITONAL INFORMATION AND GRAPHIC ILLUSTRATIONS

ID: nht87-2.43

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 07/09/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Marzia Puccioni Jones

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Marzia Puccioni Jones Alpex Manufacturing Company 10926 "J" Street Omaha, Nebraska 68137

Dear Ms. Jones:

This letter responds to your letter enclosing a prototype horn/light and requesting information on its "legality". The horn/light is intended to be installed on the roof of a pickup truck or van. The light is located on the rear of the horn and would be visible to following drivers. The light comes on when the driver presses the horn button to sound the horn and goes off when the horn button is released. I regret the delay in this response.

You asked whether the horn complies with safety and other pertinent regulations; whether the light at the back of the horn must be red or amber; whether it is permissible to mount the horn on the cab of a pick-up truck or van roof; and whether the horn is "DOT-approved," or if it would be in violation.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issues safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment pursuant to its authority under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. However, N HTSA does not approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor does it endorse any commercial products. Instead, the vehicle safety act establishes a "self-certification" process under which manufacturer must certify that its product meets applicab le safety standards. Periodically, NHTSA tests whether vehicles or equipment comply with these standards, and may investigate alleged safety-related product defects.

There is only one standard which may apply to your product if it is installed on new vehicles. Standard 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, applies to vehicle lighting. As we understand your product, its light is not intended to ser ve as any of the lights required by the standard on a van or pickup. Therefore, the requirements directed to those types of lights would not be applicable. However, there is a general requirement that might affect your horn/light. S4.1.3 prohibits the in stallation of any light that would impair the effectiveness of any required light. The activation of the light on your product could lead following drivers to believe incorrectly that the vehicle equipped with your light is stopping. Repeated false stopp ing signals might reduce the driver's responsiveness to the activation of the vehicle's brake lights.

If your product is installed as aftermarket equipment, it would not be subject to any requirement in Standard No. 108. Standard No. 108 covers aftermarket lighting equipment only to the extent that the aftermarket light replaces required original lightin g equipment. Because there is no original equipment for the kind of light you described, the standard does not apply to your aftermarket product.

Regardless of whether your product is affected by any of our standards, please be aware that if you or the agency finds your product to contain a safety-related defect after you market the product, you are responsible for conducting a notice and recall c ampaign under S154 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 USC 1414).

Further, you should be aware that State law may apply to produce such as your horn/light. You may wish to consult the State and local transportation authorities in the areas you intend to market your horn.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones

Department of Transportation 12-18-86 Office of the Chief Counsel Ms. Erika Jones RM 5219 Nassif Bldg. 400 7th St. S.W. Washington. D.C. 2051O

Dear Ms. Jones:

Enclosed is a sample of a new born model prototype we would like to manufacture and market.

As the sample indicates the horns incorporates a light at the posterior of the horn. This light comes on only when the horn is sounded and stays on until the horn button is released.

We need some information from your office as to the legality of this horn. Would this horn comply with safety and other pertinent regulations? What color must the light be if in compliance red or amber? Where would you allow mounting of the horn as it is intended to be mounted on the cab of a pick-up truck or van roof? Is this horn DOT approved and would it be any violation?

In speaking to Mr. Roman Brooks of the Vehicle Safety Compliance Office, he indicated to submit a sample or drawing immediately for your prompt review. We would appreciate a swift reply as everything is in waiting pending your information. Thank you for your assistance.

Best Regards

Marzia Puccioni Jones ALPEX MANUFACTURING COMPANY

ID: 86-5.32

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 10/16/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Terry Woodman -- Orthotist, Winkley Orthopedic Laboratory

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

ATTACHMT: 9/6/88 letter from Erika Z. Jones to Robert Daugherty (Std. 213); 7/31/87 letter from Erika Z. Jones to Richard J. Maher; 2/5/88 letter from Robert Daugherty to Erika Z. Jones

TEXT:

Mr. Terry Woodman Orthotist Winkley Orthopedic Laboratory 740 Douglas Drive North Golden Valley, MN 55422

Dear Mr. Woodman:

This responds to your recent letter to Mr. Steve Oesch of my staff, asking for an interpretation of Standard No. 213, Child Restraint System (49 CFR S571.213). Specifically, you asked whether car seats designed for use by severely physically handicapped children are required to comply with the requirements of Standard No. 213. The answer to your question is yes.

Section S4 of Standard No. 213 defines a child restraint system as "any device except Type I or Type II seat belts, designed for use in a motor vehicle or aircraft to restrain, seat, or position children who weigh ?? pounds or less." No exception is made for restraints designed for use physically handicapped children who weigh 50 pound; or less. Further, section S6.1.2.1.1 of Standard No. 213 includes the following language. "A child harness, booster seat with a top anchorage strap, or a restraint designed for use by physically handicapped children shall be installed the center seating position of the standard seat assembly in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions provided with the system pursuant S5.6." This language makes clear that restraints designed for use by physically handicapped children are subject to the requirements of Standard No. 213.

We discussed this issue in some detail in a February 13, 1986, final to amending Standard No. 213 (51 FR 5335; copy enclosed). NHTSA had published a proposal that would have required all all child restraints except child harnesses to pass the 30 mile per hour (mph) frontal crash test of Standard No. 213 without attaching any tether strap. However, a number of commenters urged the agency to also exempt child restraints design for handicapped children from the proposed requirement to pass the 30 test without attaching any tether strap. These comments are discussed in 51 FR 5338. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) amended the final rule to provide that child restraints for use by physically handicapped children could attach tether straps during the mph test. As noted in the preamble to that final rule, "there is no alternative at present to the use of tether straps to provide the necessary upper torso support for physically handicapped children. Hence, any requirement to eliminate the use of tether straps on restraints for physically handicapped children would lessen the protection available for those children."

NHTSA knows of at least one manufacturer of child restraints for use by physically handicapped children that has incorporated a tether strap and certified that these restraints comply with all requirements of Standard No. 213. Since it is possible to offer these children the safe level of crash protection afforded to all other children, NHTSA believes there is no reason to permit physically handicapped children to be offered a lesser degree of safety protection in the event of a clash.

If you have any further questions or need more information on this topic, please contact Steve Kratzke of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

Enclosure

September 4, 1986

Office, Chief Council National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 7th Street S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Att: Steve Oesch NOA--32

Dear Mr. Oesch:

I have been told that I should contact your office regarding a ruling about wheel chair seating systems being used in cars as carseats for infants.

I have enclosed a picture of the system seat belted in the car and also a picture of it in a stroller. The system is designed to be used in a wheel chair or stroller on an independent base. As you can tell, this system is used with very handicapped children who need positioning support whenever sitting.

My question is this: Does adaptive equipment such as this system need to meet federal regulations regarding child seating systems for automobiles?

Could you please inform me of this. It would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

Terry Woodman Orthotist Winkley Orthopedic Laboratories

ID: 86-5.49

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 11/21/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Ms. Lisa Kreeger

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Ms. Lisa Kreeger Reichert, Strauss & Reed 2510 Carew Tower Cincinnati, OH 15202

Dear Ms. Kreeger:

This responds to your letters of June 27, 1986, and July 11, 1986, and your subsequent phone conversations with Stephen Oesch of my staff concerning the safety belt installation requirements for multipurpose passenger vehicles and buses. I regret the delay in our response and hope the following information is of assistance to you.

As Mr. Oesch discussed with you, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, sets forth the safety belt installation requirements for passenger cars, trucks, multipurpose passenger vehicles and buses. The standard, a copy of which is enclosed, regulates only the installation of safety belts and does not require their use. However, the Federal Highway Administration's Office of Motor Carriers has issued a regulation (49 CFR Part 392.161 that requires safety belt use by operators of trucks and buses involved in interstate commerce. Belt use is also governed by State mandatory use laws.

S4.2.2 and S4.3 of the standard set forth the safety belt installation requirements for new multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPV's). Our regulations (49 CFR 571.3) define an MPV as a "motor vehicle with motive power, except a trailer, designed to carry 10 persons or less which is constructed either on a truck chassis or with special features for occasional off-road operation." S4.2.2 and S4.3 of Standard No. 208 require the installation of a safety belt for each designated seating position in a MPV.

S4.4 of the standard sets forth the safety belt installation requirements for buses. Our regulations define a bus as a "motor vehicle with motive power, except a trailer, designed for carrying more than 10 persons." S4.4 of Standard No. 208 requires the installation of a safety belt at only the driver's designated seating position in a bus. The agency has set additional safety belt requirements for school buses with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000 pounds or less. S5(b) of standard No. 222, School bus passenger seating and crash protection, requires the installation of a safety belt at the passenger seats in those small school buses. A copy of Standard No. 222 is enclosed.

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

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

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

Dear Ms. Jones:

Pursuant to a phone conversation with a receptionist in your office today, I learned that my previous written request request for information had not been received or responded to. Enclosed is a copy of that request. I also spoke to Mr. Ash on July 1, 1896, asking for further information. As of this date I have not received a response from your agency.

Would you please send me a copy of the interpretation of Title 49 of the Code of federal Regulations, Chapter 571, Number 208, Section 4.4 If there are other sections that are applicable to either the bus (more than 10 passengers) or van (less than 10 passengers) seat belt requirement, please include those interpretations also. It is my understanding that in a bus, only the operator must wear a seat belt, while in a van, all passengers must wear seat belts, but I am hoping to find authority to confirm that understanding.

Thank you,

Lisa Kreeger Law Clerk

June 27, 1986

Erika Jones, Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 7th Street, S.W., Room 400 Washington, D.C. 20590

Dear Ms. Jones:

Today in a telephone conversation with Mr. Stephen Ash, learned that copies of formal interpretations of federal regulations be obtained from you upon written request. Would you please send me a copy of the interpretation of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter 571, Number 208, Section 4.4. If there are other sections that are applicable to the seatbelt requirements for leased buses that carry between 15 and 25 passengers, please include those interpretations also. It is my understanding that only the operator must wear a seat belt but I am hoping to find authority to confirm that understanding.

Thank you,

Lisa Kreeger

ID: nht90-3.89

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: September 10, 1990

FROM: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Steve Pickering -- Valley Sales Inc.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to undated letter from S.W.A. Pickering to S.R. Kratzke (OCC 4846); Also attached to photos (graphics omitted); Also attached to Report on Test of Sofa Bar according to FMVSS No. 210, submitted by Kenneth Lauer, P.E., April 1986 (text omitted); Also attached to Test Report Number 096441-89 dated 12-15-89 (Text omitted, test results are available in the file)

TEXT:

This responds to your letter to Steve Kratzke of my staff, asking how our safety standards would affect a product you are seeking to patent. This planned product is a molded plastic insert intended to be installed on the cargo bed of pickup trucks near the cab, and consists of two rear-facing seats. Throughout the rest of this letter, I will refer to this product as a "crossbed seat." You asked this agency to comment on the extent to which this crossbed seat would comply with several safety standards . I am pleased to have this opportunity to do so.

Before addressing your specific questions, some background information might be helpful. This agency has no authority to approve, endorse, or offer assurances of compliance for any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the Safety Act) establishes a process under which this agency is authorized to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Every manufacturer must then certify that each of its motor vehicles and each item of motor vehicle equipment complies with all applicable safety standards.

Since your product would be used as a seating position in a motor vehicle while the vehicle is in motion, each occupant position on the crossbed seat would be considered a "designated seating position" within the meaning of S571.3. Thus, if your product were to be installed as an item of original equipment on a pickup before its first sale to a retail purchaser, the designated seating positions on your product would have to comply with the requirements of Standard No. 207, Seating Systems; Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection; Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies, and Standard No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages. You indicated in your letter that you plan to install Type 1 (lap-only) safety belts at these seating positions to comply with Standard No. 208. This would be consistent with the requirements of Standard No. 208, which permits these designated seating positions to be equipped with either Type 1 or Type 2 (lap/shoulder) safety belts.

Your letter did not indicate that you had considered Standard No. 207 in your examination of the relevant safety standards. If you have not already done so, you should consider whether the seating positions on your planned crossbed seat would comply wit h the requirements of this standard.

You also identified two standards that you had considered with respect to your crossbed seat. The first of these was Standard No. 111, Rearview Mirrors. S6 of Standard No. 111 provides that pickup trucks may either meet the rearward visibility requirem ents applicable to passenger cars or have outside mirrors on both sides of the vehicle that provide visibility to the rear along both sides of the vehicle. These requirements would not necessarily preclude the installation of your crossbed seat in new p ickups.

The second standard you identified was Standard No. 202, Head Restraints. S4.3 of Standard No. 202 requires each "outboard front designated seating position" to be equipped with head restraints that meet the specified performance criteria. The seating p ositions on your crossbed seat are rear seating positions. Since Standard No. 202 does not require rear seating positions to be equipped with head restraints, you are free to choose whetber or not to install head restraints for your crossbed seats.

You should note that you would be considered a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment if you begin to manufacture these crossbed seats. As such, the Safety Act would make you responsible for conducting a notification and remedy campaign if you or the a gency were to determine that this product contains a defect related to motor vehicle safety or fails to comply with an applicable safety standard. A copy of an information sheet briefly describing these responsiblities and explaining how to obtain copie s of our regulations is enclosed.

If you have any further questions or need some additional information, please feel free to contact Mr. Kratzke at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

ID: 1985-03.38

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 09/03/85

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Jeffrey R. Miller; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Alan R. Kroner

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

U.S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Mr. Alan R. Kroner Republican Staff Illinois State Senate State Capitol Springfield, Illinois 62706

Dear Mr. Kroner:

Thank you for your letter of March 13, 1985, concerning Federal requirements for safety belts in modified vans and their effect on state safety belt use laws. I regret the delay in our response.

According to your letter, a handicapped individual purchased a van and had the front seat removed to permit him to operate the vehicle from his wheelchair. You first inquired whether the vehicle is required to be equipped with a safety belt under Federal law.

This agency has issued Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, that requires the installation of occupant restraint systems in passenger cars, trucks, buses, and multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPV's). A copy of the standard is enclosed for your reference. Depending on its seating capacity and use, a "van" would be classified under our regulations as a bus, truck or MPV. Regardless of that classification, the vehicle manufacturer is required to install a safety belt system for the driver's seating position. Belt systems may be required at other seating positions as well, depending upon the vehicle's classification. These requirements apply to any vehicle until its first sale to a consumer.

While our safety standards apply only to new motor vehicles, there are some statutory restrictions on subsequent alterations. If a van were modified after its first sale to a consumer, then section 108(a)(2)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. S1397(a)(2)(A)) would apply. That section provides, in pertinent part:

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

Accordingly, none of thoe commercial businesses could lawfully remove a safety belt installed in compliance with Standard No. 208, since such an action would "knowingly render inoperative" that safety device. This prohibition applies only to commercial businesses, not to individuals.

Vehicle owners may themselves remove a safety belt without violating Federal law. They would, however, have to comply with any State law on vehicle equipment.

Thus, in answer to your first question, a manufacturer of a van is required by Federal law to provide a safety belt system at the driver's position, and certain commercial businesses are prohibited from removing the belt.

You also requested our opinion as to whether the owner/driver of the modified van would be required to wear a safety belt under the new Illinois safety belt use law. We do not believe it would be appropriate for this agency to offer an opinion on that question, since it requires an interpretation of state law. You may wish to consult with the State Attorney General's Office or counsel for an appropriate State agency on the matter, as they are in a better position to discuss Illinois state law.

I appreciate your interest in safety belt usage and hope this information is of assistance to you. Sincerely, Jeffrey R. Miller Chief Counsel Enclosure March 13, 1985

Mr. Jeffrey Miller Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Room 5219 400 Seventh Street S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Dear Mr. Miller:

I have a question pertaining to the modification of a vehicle for the use of a handicapped individual. This individual is a parapalegic and confined to a wheelchair. He purchased a van, had a lift hoist installed and the front seat removed. He operates the van from his wheelchair. Is this vehicle required to be equipped with a seat belt under federal law? Illinois recently passed a mandatory seat belt use law. One of the exemptions granted under this new law (95 1/2 - 12 - 603.1 Ch. 8.) states that an individual is not required to wear a seat belt if the motor vehicle is not required to be equipped with seat belts under federal law. In your opinion would this gentleman be required to wear a seat belt?

Thank you in advance for your prompt reply. Sincerely, Alan R. Kroner

ID: 1985-03.42

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 09/10/85

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Jeffrey R. Miller; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Donald H. Giberson

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

September 10, 1985 Mr. Donald H. Giberson Assistant Director Division of Motor Vehicles Department of Law and Public Safety State of New Jersey 25 Montgomery Street Trenton, NJ 08666 Dear Mr. Giberson: Thank you for your letter of June 27, 1985, to Administrator Steed expressing your concerns about the safety of the "Litestar" motorcycle, and asking questions about the relationship of Federal regulations to it. The Administrator has asked me to respond to your questions. With respect to your first, second, and fourth questions, there is no such thing as a "Federally licensed motor vehicle manufacturer". However, a manufacturer of motor vehicles is required to file an identification statement with this agency containing the information specified in 49 CFR Part 566 not later than 30 days after it commences manufacture. A check of our records shows that Litestar of New Jersey has not yet filed an identification statement. The purpose of the requirement is to facilitate regulation of manufacturers under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. But no Federal approval or "license" is required for a manufacturer to produce vehicles subject to the Act. We do not currently have a list of manufacturers who have filed information statements. Your third question is whether a manufacturer may legally sell vehicles which do not comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. The answer is no; sale and offer for sale of a noncomplying motor vehicle are violations of Section 108(a)(1)(A) of the Act, (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1)(A)). It appears from the product literature you enclosed with your letter that the "Litestar" motorcycle is a motor vehicle and thus it must comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. In addition, any noncompliances or safety-related defects in those vehicles would be subject to the notification and remedy provisions of section 151-159 of the Vehicle Safety Act, (15 U.S.C. 1411-1419). Your fifth and sixth questions concern the powers of a State over motor vehicles and manufacturers subject to the Act and Federal motor vehicle safety standards. You asked specifically "Can a state legally refuse registration to vehicles constructed by licensed manufacturers which do comply with all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards". The answer to this is determinable under New Jersey law. Under the Act, Federal safety standards are standards to be met by a motor vehicle at the time of its sale to the first purchaser for purposes other than resale, and compliance with them is not intended as a prerequisite to State registration. Many States do, of course, condition eligibility for registration upon compliance with State standards. Under Section 103(d) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 1392(d)), if a State has a safety standard covering the same aspect of performance as a Federal safety standard, the State standard must be identical. But the Act does not prohibit a State from establishing standards in areas where there are no Federal safety standards, and if New Jersey has a condition for registration outside the areas covered by the Federal standards, it may refuse registration notwithstanding the fact that the vehicle may be certified as complying with all Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Your further question is whether a State may legally require a vehicle manufacturer to submit test data from an independent testing laboratory regarding the performance of the vehicle. If the area of performance is one that is covered by both State and Federal safety standards, a State may not impose burdens which differ in any significant respect from those of the Federal regulatory scheme. Thus, States may require manufacturers to submit available test data supporting their certifications so that the States may determine the adequacy of the data. States also cannot compel manufacturers to submit data only from independent test laboratories, since the Federal regulatory scheme is based on manufacturer self-certification. States may, however, undertake independent testing. If the area of performance is outside the coverage of the Federal standards, the answer would appear to be determinable under the explicit and implicit powers of the State. Finally, you have asked what type of dynamic tests should a vehicle such as the Litestar undergo to assure that it is roadworthy. The agency has had very little experience with vehicles configured like the Litestar, and is unable to offer any specific suggestions. You may be aware of the agency's research report "Motorcycle Handling" (DOT HS 804190, May 1979), prepared by Systems Technology, Inc., 13776 So. Hawthorne, Hawthorne, California 90250. David H. Weir of the company was Principal Investigator under the contract. He was assisted by Jon McKibben Engineering Co., 2172 Dupont Drive, Suite 18, Irvine, California 92662. These experts might be able to answer your seventh question, and address your other concerns. I hope this information is of assistance. If you have any further questions please let me know. Sincerely, Original Signed By Jeffrey R. Miller Chief Counsel

ID: 1985-04.28

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 11/15/85

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Kurth Ioth -- President, Bigway America, Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Kurth Ioth President Bigway America, Inc. 601 E. Yorba Linda Blvd. Suite 6 Placentia, CA 92670

Thank you for your letter of August 5, 1985, concerning a product you wish to import into the United States. You asked several questions about the application of our regulations to your product. I hope the following discussion answers your questions.

According to the literature you enclosed in your letter, the product is a device which prevents the normal operation of a vehicle until the driver's safety belt is fastened. The product is installed directly beneath the vehicle's accelerator. Until the driver's safety belt is fastened, a lock system prevent, the accelerator from being depressed. According to the drawing accompanying your letter, your product requires the installation of a new buckle and latchplate in a vehicle's safety belt system. To install the latchplate, the vehicle's safety belt must be cut.

Our agency has the authority under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA, however, does not approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products. Instead, the Vehicle Safety Act establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet our safety standards. In the case of an imported product, the importer is considered the manufacturer of the product for the purposes of our requirements. In addition to ensuring that your product complies with all applicable safety standards, you are subject to the requirements in sections 151-159 of the Vehicle Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with noncompliances or defects related to motor vehicle safety.

If your product is installed in a new vehicle prior to its first sale to a consumer, then the person performing the alteration would be considered a vehicle alterer under our certification regulation (49 CFR Part 567), a copy of which is enclosed. Part 567.7 requires alterers to certify that the vehicle, as altered, complies with all applicable safety standards. In particular, the installer of your device would have to ensure that the safety belt system still complied with all of the requirements, including the safety belt webbing strength requirement, of Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies; a copy of the standard is enclosed.

- Installation of your device in a used vehicle could be affected by section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Vehicle Safety Act. That section provides, in part:

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

Thus, a commercial business installing your product in a used vehicle would have to ensure that it did not knowingly render inoperative the vehicle's compliance with any of our safety standards by the installation of your device.

You also asked about our regulations concerning the importation of products. Section 110(e) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1399(e)) requires every manufacturer who offers a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment for importation into the United States to designate a permanent resident of the United States as his or her agent upon whom service of all processes, orders, notices, decisions and requirements may be made. In order for that designation to be valid, the following information must be submitted to the Office of the Chief Counsel:

1. A certification that the designation is valid in form and binding on the manufacturer under the laws, corporate by-laws, or other requirements governing the making of the designation at the time and place where it is made:

2. The full legal name, principal place of business and mailing address of the manufacturer:

3. Marks, trade names, or other designation of origin of any of the manufacturer's products which do not bear its name:

4. A statement that the designation shall remain in effect until withdrawn or replaced by the manufacturer.

5. A declaration of acceptance duly signed by the agent appointed, which may be an individual, a firm or a U.S. corporation; and

6. The full legal name and address of the designated agent.

In addition, the designation must be signed by one with authority to appoint the agent. The signer's name and title should be clearly indicated beneath his or her signature.

I hope this information is of assistance to you. If you have further questions, please let me know. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Enclosures

ID: 1985-04.39

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 11/25/85

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: EPL Incorporated

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. James L. Loden President, EPL Incorporated 200 Campus Drive, RD Pemberton Farms Research Campus Mt. Holly, NJ 08060

Dear Mr. Loden:

Thank you for your July 16, 1985 letter inquiring about the existence of any Federal safety requirements applicable to your projected sale of heated windshield wiper blades. You also asked if Federal testing or research testing or research is being conducted on windshield wiper systems.

Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, this agency has issued Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 103, Windshield Defrosting and Defogging Systems and No. 104, Windshield Wiping and Washing Systems, which are applicable to new motor vehicles. While these standards do not regulate the heating component of wipers, they do, among other things, require that a defrosting or wiping system clear a minimum percentage of a vehicle's windshield.

In addition, Standard No. 107, Reflecting Surfaces, also applies to new motor vehicles. This standard sets limits on the glare from certain metal components, including windshield wiper blades, in the driver's field of view. Its purpose is to reduce the likelihood that unacceptable glare from reflecting surfaces will hinder safe and normal operation of the vehicle. Copies of these three standards are enclosed.

If a new vehicle equipped with your blade did not comply with Standard No. 103, Standard No. 104, or Standard No. 107 due to some aspect of that blade, the sale of that car to the public would be a violation of the prohibition in section 108(a)(1)(A) of the Act against the sale of noncomplying vehicles.

As to used vehicles, you should be aware that section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Act prohibits manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and vehicle repair businesses from knowingly rendering inoperative equipment or elements of design installed on a vehicle under Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Care should be taken that the installation of your product would not have that effect. A rendering inoperative might occur if, for example, your blade were not large enough to enable the wiping system to clear a sufficient area of the windshield. We urge you therefore to ensure that the substitution of your blade for an original equipment blade provided by a vehicle manufacturer would enable the wiping or defrosting system to continue to perform as required by Standard No. 103 and No. 104, and would not produce unacceptable glare in the driver's field of view, as prohibited by Standard No. 107.

Copies of the windshield compliance test reports for Standard Nos 103 and 104 are available from the agency's Technical Reference Division. Copies of these reports can be purchased by contacting Mr. Robert A. Hornickle (202-426-2987).

I hope this information is helpful to you.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Enclosures

E P L Incorporated 200 Campus Dr. RD 1 Pemberton Farms Research Campus Mt. Holly, NJ 08060

July 16, 1985

Mr. Steven Oesch Office of Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Dear Mr. Oesch:

During a recent conversation, Edward Jetner, Staff Engineer for the Office of Vehicle Safety Standards, suggested I contact you for information on the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards as they apply to a new product we intend to manufacture.

Our company, EPL Incorporated, is starting to manufacture a heated windshield wiper blade. We call it "Thermoblade", and it is designed for use on motor vehicles of all types. Thermoblade is an important safety item as it prevents snow and ice accumulation on the wiper blade and enables it to clean the windshield and provide good visibility for the driver even under the most severe weather conditions.

Is the product we intend to manufacture covered by certain Federal Motor Vehicle Safety standards? Has any Federal testing been done, or are any of our Government's testing laboratories involved in any research and development on windshield wiper systems?

Any information you can give us which will help us launch our new product will be very much appreciated. Should you need more information, please call me at 609-261-6000.

Sincerely,

James L. Loden President