ID: nht88-4.39

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 12/16/88

FROM: MILTON GURNY -- HEIN SMITH BEREZIN MALOOF AND SPINELLA

TO: JOAN CLAYBROOK -- NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD

TITLE: TITLE SCHWANEWEDE VS. MARBELL, INC., ET AL. OUR FILE NO. 34577

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 04/05/89, FROM ERIKA Z. JONES -- NHTSA TO MILTON GURNEY, REDBOOK A33(8), STANDARD 218, VSA SECTION 108(A)(1)(A), SECTION 108(A)(2)(A), VSA SECTION 108(B)(1)

TEXT: Dear Ms. Claybrook:

Could you please advise us whether a 1975 Chevrolet Impala was required by Federal Statute and Regulations to have a seat belt and a shoulder belt harnass.

Your cooperation in this regard will be appreciated.

Very truly yours,

ID: nht73-4.39

DATE: 07/30/73

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Barry Kulik

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of May 18, 1973, concerning the method of testing the sensitivity of seat sensors under sections S7.3 and S7.4 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208.

The relevant characteristics of the "person" referred to in these sections are found in the weight and dimension table of Section S7.1.3 of the standard. Our testing laboratory will, in all likelihood, be using test dummies purchased from the various commercial dummy manufacturers, whose weights and dimensions conform to S7.1.3 of the standard. Human volunteers could be used, but the dimensional controls are difficult to maintain and we do not regard liver persons as a practical means of testing sensors under the standard.

ID: nht68-1.46

DATE: 01/29/68

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Robert M. O'Mahoney; NHTSA

TO: Messrs. Gilbert; Segall and Young

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: In answer to your letter of December 15 I am enclosing a copy of the regulations published January 10 governing the importation of motor vehicles subject to the Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

You have advised us that Rolls-Royce prefers to affix the certification required by section 114 of P.L. 89-563 during manufacture of its passenger cars, and to install seat belts after importation of such cars into the United States. The regulations (19 C.F.R. 12.80(b)(iv) will allow Rolls-Royce to do so providing the informational label it prescribes is affixed to the windshield of these cars during shipment.

I hope this is satisfactory to your client.

ID: ES16-001603 Listou Trailer Response

ID: nht93-3.44

DATE: May 15, 1993

FROM: Lillie Rene Erwin -- 365089, TDC Mt View Unit H-1

TO: Andrew H. Card -- Secretary of Transportation

COPYEE: Illegible

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 7/21/93 from John Womack to Lillie Rene Erwin (A41; Std. 208)

TEXT:

I AM PRESENTLY INCARCERATEO IN THE TDCJ-ID PRISON SYSTEM AT GATESVILLE, TX. THE STATE OF TEXAS IS TRANSPORTING PRISONERS IN A MANNER DETRIMENTAL TO THEIR HEALTH. NAMELY PRISONERS ARE RENDERED VIRTUALLY HELPLESS EQUAL TO AN INFANT DUE TO BEING HANDCUFFED TOGETHER AND HAVING NO SAFETY DEVICES TO PREVENT INJURY IN CASE OF AN ACCIDENT. I AND OTHERS HAVE BEEN INJURED IN THIS MANNER. WE ARE MADE TO SIT ON A METAL SEAT THAT IS EIGHT TO TEN INCHES AND WE ARE THROWN ABOUT IN THE VAN AGAINST A METAL GUARD RAIL. THIS MAKES US VIRTUAL FLYING OBJECTS WHEN A NEGLIGENT DRIVER IS SPEEDING (OFTEN HAPPENS) AND WHEN THERE IS AN ACCIDENT.

I VERY MUCH NEED TO FIND OUT WHO TO CONTACT ME IN VOICING MY COMPLAINT. ANY INFORMATION THAT YOU CAN GIVE ME IS WELCOMED. THANK YOU.

ID: aiam1320

Dear Mr. Knight: This is in reply to your letter of October 16, 1973, requesting clarification of S7.2 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 301 (9-1-75) (Docket No. 70-20, Notice 2).; As you are aware, a proposed amendment to Federal Motor Vehicle Safet Standard No. 301 (9-1-75) was published on August 20, 1973 with an anticipated September 1975 effective date (Docket No. 73-20, Notice 1). In the event that the proposed amendment of loading conditions is adopted, the present passenger car requirement, that the vehicle be at its GVWR during testing, will be superseded by the requirement that the passenger car be loaded 'to its unloaded vehicle weight plus its rated cargo and luggage capacity weight, secured in the luggage area, plus the weight of the necessary dummies.' under these specifications, rear sear occupant weight will not be a factor of the test load condition unless a specific test requirement calls for dummies to be placed in designated rear seating positions. The proposed amendment would also make it unnecessary to firmly fix the dummies to the vehicle as is presently the case under S7.2.; We have also noted your views on luggage capacity weight and ar placing your letter in Docket No. 73-20 as a comment to be considered.; If you require any further clarification, please do not hesitate to le us know.; Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Chief Counsel

ID: nht69-2.24

DATE: 09/19/69

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Robert Brenner; NHTSA

TO: Bus and Truck Supply Co.

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of August 6, 1969, and August 15, 1969, in which you request approval of an alternative to the label locations specified in Section 367.4(c) of the Certification Regulations that will be effective as to vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 1969.

The location you have selected is not considered to be in the same general area, left side of the vehicle, as specified. In view of the fact that interested parties will be looking for the label in that general area, your proposed location, on the right side forward of the entrance door, is not approved. Please select another location that would be in the general area of the driver's seat and submit for approval.

The nomenclature on your label, as shown in drawing No. BS6111-007, does not fulfill the requirements of Part 367.4(g) of the regulations in that the required information is not presented in the order prescribed.

Your cooperation is appreciated.

ID: nht88-1.40

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 02/12/88

FROM: FRANK H. MILLER -- GERRY BABY PRODUCTS QUALITY ENGINEER

TO: ERIKA Z. JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL NHTSA

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 08/02/89 FROM STEPHEN P. WOOD -- NHTSA TO FRANK MILLER -- GERRY BABY PRODUCTS; RED BOOK A33; FMVSS 302

TEXT: Dear Ms. Jones:

This is in further reference to my communication to you dated October 19, 1987 and also to your response received December 3, 1987. Both were in reference to paragraph S4.2.1 of Safety Standard No. 302, "Flammability of Interior Materials".

I appreciate your response regarding the testing of threads used in the manufacture of seat cushions and testing them as a part of the component and now would like to know if the binding we use on the edges of the cushion should also be tested as a part of the material. We currently test it as an independent entity but it would ease our testing if it were to be done as a portion of a cushion assembly.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

ID: 21568.drn

Mr. James T. Castle
Fleet Manager, Transportation Services
Clemson University
Klugh Avenue, Box 345382
Clemson, SC 29634-5382

Dear Mr. Castle:

This responds to your April 10, 2000, request for an interpretation of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA's) prohibition on dealers selling new 15-person vans for transporting children to or from school or related events. You wish to know whether the prohibition affects children in custodial care facilities such as summer camps. Our answer is provided below.

In a telephone conversation with Dorothy Nakama of my staff, you explained that by "summer camp" you mean that in the summer, Clemson University hosts children in the twelfth grade and below who want to improve their athletic skills. The children live at Clemson dormitories. Because of distances involved, the children may have to be transported between various sites (e.g., dormitory and athletic field) on the Clemson campus.

Some background information may be helpful. NHTSA is authorized to issue and enforce Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs) applicable to new motor vehicles. Our statute at 49 U.S.C. 30112 requires any person selling or leasing a new vehicle to sell or lease a vehicle that meets all applicable standards. Accordingly, persons selling or leasing a new "school bus" must sell or lease a vehicle that meets the safety standards applicable to school buses. Our statute defines a "schoolbus" as any vehicle that is designed for carrying a driver and more than 10 passengers and which, NHTSA decides, is likely to be "used significantly" to transport "preprimary, primary, and secondary" students to or from school or related events. 49 U.S.C. 30125. By regulation, the capacity threshold for school buses corresponds to that of buses -- vehicles designed for carrying more than ten (10) persons. For example, a 15-person van that is likely to be used significantly to transport students is a "school bus." Persons selling or leasing new 15-person vans for such use must sell or lease a van that meets our school bus standards.

In the past, when reviewing a dealer's sale of a new vehicle, NHTSA looked at the nature of the institution purchasing the vehicle. In recent interpretations (see the attached July 17, 1998, letter to Mr. Greg Balmer of the YMCA), we noted that it was more appropriate to consider the extent to which the buses are used to carry children to or from school or related events. In the Balmer letter, we stressed that, even if a bus were sold to a facility that provides custodial care (i.e., to a facility that is not a "school"), if that facility were purchasing the new bus to use significantly to transport students to or from a school or events related to a school, a dealer knowing of this purpose would be required to sell a school bus.

Turning to your letter, you ask about vehicles that would be used to transport children in "summer camps." Based on the facts provided about Clemson University's "summer camp," we would not consider Clemson's "summer camp" as a "school" because apparently, no education is to be provided to the children. Since there would be no significant use of the vehicles to transport children to or from school or related events, a dealer knowing of this purpose that wishes to sell you a new bus (e.g., a 15-person van) would not have to sell you only a bus that meets our school bus standards.

Because our laws apply only to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles, we do not prohibit institutions such as your "summer camp" from using large vans to transport school children, even when the vehicles do not meet Federal school bus safety standards. However, each State has the authority to set its own standards regarding the use of motor vehicles, including school buses. For this reason, South Carolina law should be consulted to see if there are regulations about how children must be transported.

You asked for clarification of what "significant" means. There is no definitive answer to this question, but I have provided a basic guideline in an interpretation letter dated May 20, 1999 to Mr. Dennis Seavey of Plus Time New Hampshire (copy enclosed). The letter to Mr. Seavey explains that NHTSA considers "transportation provided to or from school on any two days during a week to be regular use and therefore 'significant.'"

In conclusion, we wish to emphasize that school buses are one of the safest forms of transportation in this country, and that we therefore strongly recommend that all buses that are used to transport school children be certified as meeting NHTSA's school bus safety standards. In addition, using 15-person vans that do not meet NHTSA's school bus standards to transport students could result in liability in the event of a crash.

I am enclosing NHTSA's publication: "School Bus Safety: Safe Passage for America's Children." This brochure explains the safety enhancements of a school bus that makes school buses safer than "conventional vans." There are small school buses available that seat 15 children. While school buses are more expensive than large vans, we believe that the cost difference is not so large that it should prevent facilities from acquiring school buses. The cost range for 15-person school buses is approximately $30-32,000, compared to $25-28,000 for 15-person vans. The longer service life for school buses will offset a part of this difference.

Our belief that vehicles providing the safety of school buses should be used whenever transporting children in buses is shared by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). At a June 8, 1999, public meeting, the NTSB issued the attached abstract of a special investigative report on nonconforming buses. The NTSB issued the report after investigating four crashes in 1998 and 1999 in which 9 people were killed and 36 injured when riding in "nonconforming buses." NTSB defines "nonconforming bus" as a "bus that does not meet the FMVSSs specific to school buses." Most of the victims, including eight of the fatalities, were children.

In the abstract of its report, the NTSB issued several Safety Recommendations, including the following that was directed to child care providers such as the National Association of Child Care Professionals, the National Child Care Association, and Young Mens' and Young Women's Christian Associations:

Inform your members about the circumstances of the accidents discussed in this special investigation report and urge that they use school buses or buses having equivalent occupant protection to school buses to transport children.

I am also enclosing NHTSA's February 1999 "Guideline for the Safe Transportation of Pre-school Age Children in School Buses." This guideline establishes NHTSA's recommendations for how pre-school age children should be transported in school buses.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's programs, please feel free to contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosures
ref:VSA#571.3
d.5/26/00

ID: nht91-6.48

DATE: November 1, 1991

FROM: Sandra Mesh-Witucki -- Paralegal, McGraw, Borchard, & Martin

TO: Mary Versailles -- Office of Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: Gettel

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 12-10-91 from Paul Jackson Rice to Sandra Mesh-Witucki (A38; Std. 208)

TEXT:

In recapping our telephone conversation, this case involves a 1987 Chevrolet Cargo Van Conversion which was involved in an accident in which a vehicle driven northbound in the same southbound lane struck the van head-on.

Allegedly, a rear seat passenger suffered a spinal fracture from the lap belt.

I have enclosed the requested information: GBWR weight of 4,138 before conversion; invoice of the original manufacture; invoice of original purchase.

I have not been able to get a weight or weight estimate for the van following conversion.

Please forward a certified copy of all rules/standards applicable to this van both before and after conversion, and any other information you feel may be of assistance.

If any fee is involved in procuring this information, pleas forward your bill which will be paid promptly.

If there are any questions or more information is needed, please call.

Thank you.